Is it time to review examinations

With last year’s results behind us, is it time to reflect on the impact our one-size-fits-all exam system has on our young people? Has our insistence on these narrow tests contributed to students in UK schools having some of the poorest mental health outcomes in the world?

In 2019, the UK ranked 69th for ‘life satisfaction’ for 15 year olds, out of the 72 countries that participated in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) programme for international students assessment (Pisa). This follows on from the UK’s 2015 ‘life satisfaction’ results which witnessed a startling decline when reforms to course assessments moved away from modular assessment and back to final examinations.

In The Good Childhood Report (2022) from the Children’s Commissioner, two thirds of the 2000 10-17 year-olds surveyed, reported feeling stressed about homework and examinations, the highest factor to impact negatively on their wellbeing. For lower scoring students with SEN the negative impact on their wellbeing is often exacerbated, 19.3% of students with SEN reported higher rates of anxiety and stress compared to 12.8% of low-scoring peers.

The assessment of all children presents a dilemma, let alone for those with special needs. This year’s post Covid readjustments meant an overall decrease in achieved grades across the board, so how equitable is the system, or is it just the luck of the draw? Performance in these tests can determine a young person’s future, and those who do not perform to a certain level are to some extent branded failures, creating a self-esteem deficit that is difficult to erase.

Exams measure aptitude in taking exams. They rank skills such as the retention of facts and the performance of linear tasks under pressure, which in many cases have no bearing on what a young person needs to navigate the world. Many neurodiverse individuals struggle with working memory performance and the anxiety created by the examination process itself. ‘Reasonable adjustments’ rarely level the playing field. Additional time, movement breaks, prompts or a scribe, do not address the fundamental shortcomings of the system itself.

With such a narrow focus on what ‘success’ looks like, we can fail to identify untapped talents. Many neurodiverse individuals have highlighted the limitations of exams as indicators of success – Steve Jobs dropped out of college in his first semester with a poor Grade Point Average (GPA), but went onto found one of the most innovative and successful corporations in the world.

The present system is limiting. Reducing the curriculum to easily quantifiable elements provides a simple ranking structure so schools can be ‘compared’ in league tables. But surely the best measure of a good school is its ability to enable each student to reach their full potential? Exams do not have the flexibility required to allow us to appreciate the potential of an individual, unless they fit into that predetermined box, which many neurodiverse young people do not. Exams cannot measure attributes like creativity or curiosity – this will require us to think outside that box.