Express & Star

Blog: Putting examinations to the test

Education blogger Kit Fields thinks now is a good time for the country to think about the purpose of examinations.

Published

Education blogger

Kit Fields

thinks now is a good time for the country to think about the purpose of examinations.

You may have seen on the news on how examiners and teachers may have colluded to help young people to predict examination questions, and thereby increase their chances of attaining high scores.

This got me thinking about the purpose of examinations and indeed of assessment as a whole. There is no doubt that young people enhance their life chances by passing exams and achieving the best grades. Schools are assessed themselves by the extent to which their pupils achieve high grades.

What we have always called examination boards receive fees from schools if they select their syllabuses and exams. It does look like everybody does well out of the success of pupils.

I remember too, that years ago, certain exam boards were believed to be easier in some subject areas. Schools therefore, not surprisingly, selected boards they perceived to be easier.

Add to this confusion some arguments about how accurately examinations do differentiate pupils from each other. Sometimes a very small difference in percentage scores can mean a difference of two grades. Sometimes large differences in scores separate levels of performance.

Hayfever sufferers can be disadvantaged, and any random event can impact upon individuals. Some people may have an off day, others maybe very well focussed. All of these really matter if our assessment system is designed to identify levels of attainment only.

Clearly we do need to do identify potential and successful learing, but we also need assessment to inform the learner of how they can improve, to inform the teacher if what has been taught has been learnt. Assessment can show progress too – and although some pupils make immense improvements they may not actually attain the higher levels. Should we measure and inform progress, or simply give grades according to how well an individual has performed at a given point in time?

I do remember acquiring a swimming certificate for completing 30 yards (that shows my age – it's about 25 metres). Nobody entered me for that test until I was ready. Some people were able to prove their ability earlier in the process than me, and some later. Many schools now enter pupils for examinations earlier than they would have done in the past, and many support pupils who take them a little later.

Furthermore, how many jobs or future study routes demand instant recall of information? Most of us are faced with tasks that demand skills and knowledge to be put to use. Some aspects need researching, and in fact most employers I speak with want new recruits to be able to learn. Exactly what they have learnt is often immaterial.

Being able to learn and demonstrating learning is in fact showing potential. So, should we assess what is known, or the ability to find an answer and apply that knowledge in real world situations.Are examinations 'real world'?

Perhaps this mini-crisis could spark a full enquiry into the place and puposes of assessment, as well as the rules which govern them. I'd love to know what people think!

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.