The bloopers made by students who sat for their history O-level last May made for fascinating and hilarious reading but the matter cannot and should not be taken lightly.

Some of the replies given were outright comical, such as that Napoleon Bonaparte was a Maltese leader from the 1950s and 1970s and when Gerald Strickland was confused with Dom Mintoff.

These gaffes overshadowed the overall pass mark of 61.4 per cent, which was considerably better than that of 54 per cent just a year earlier and quite good when you benchmark it against the pass mark posted by other countries. For example, the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress report found that only 18 per cent of eighth graders (age 13-14) in the US were at least proficient in US history. And the GCSE O-level pass rate for history in the UK is also just above the 60 per cent mark.

One problem with analysing the figures is that they are based on such a small number – 233 students out of the 5,830 who sat for Matsec in May – that even small slips end up skewing the percentages.

That notwithstanding, the report gives detailed information about the lack of context provided in the answers. History is not meant to be a dry list of dates and names recited from memory but, rather, an analysis of the consequences – intended and otherwise – of events, from the positive and negative ones of the Industrial Revolution and slavery, to the impact of the drydocks on Malta’s economy. It is also meant to connect the dots between seemingly unrelated events and trends. In years to come, would we be able to discuss Donald Trump’s election without understanding populism?

There are a few other factors that deserve attention, even though they might not be as eye-catching. One is that the examiners’ report fails to explain how the pass rate was rising even as they noted a worrying pattern of lack of essential historical knowledge and basic linguistic skills.

The history report is only one of several drawn up by Matsec examiners. Overall in 2016 (May and September), the pass rate of candidates stood at 85.7 per cent when grades one to seven are considered and 68.5 per cent when focusing on grades one to five.

The report notes that percentages have been fluctuating in a seemingly random manner across the years, with this year’s rates being the highest since 2004.

There were five subjects out of the 32 available that had overall pass rates below 60 per cent (grades one to five). Very worrying is the fact that students fare so badly in maths (59 per cent) and social studies (57.8 per cent).

So, yes, there is room for concern when we realise that a student who somehow went through several years of secondary schooling and as many years of watching films and hearing anecdotes without remembering who Napoleon was and that only 233 students find history interesting enough to choose as a subject.

How much of this shortcoming is the students’ fault, to what extent are teachers to blame and can fingers be pointed at the syllabus?

What could help? Just check out the University of Malta’s Think video on the Great Siege to see how creative learning methods are evolving. The provision of tablets was meant to encourage students to delve deeper into subjects, tapping into the extraordinary information now available online.

So things are not as bad as they may look. Even if Napoleon might turn in his grave.