It used to be assumed that an examination was a useful test of subject knowledge and a reasonable guide to a child’s progress at school. Even the worst child knew that the exam grade spoke a kind of truth. But recently critics such as the General Teaching Council have suggested that English children are the most examined and tested in the world, leading to rising anxiety and stress. And the tests themselves are seen by some as distinctly unhealthy examples of cramming useless knowledge into otherwise healthy children. This has led to a renewed emphasis on different methods of assessment (formative rather than summative) and the growth of approaches (increasingly endorsed by OFSTED) designed to help the child learn how to learn rather than learn how to pass the exam. So who is right? Is there a point to exams – and the subjects they assess - in a virtually full employment society? Do exams restrict the development of the child’s ability to think in favour of rote-learned knowledge that is forgotten as soon as the exam is over? And how should children be assessed on their progress – or should they just do it all themselves?
 | Dr Shirley Lawes researcher; consultant and university teacher, specialising in teacher education and modern foreign languages; Chevalier dans l’ordre des Palmes Académiques |
| |
 | Dr Eric Macfarlane OBE educational consultant; author, The Making of a Maverick |
| |
 | Tony Neal chair of policy and research committee, General Teaching Council for England; author, Managing Targets and Managing Value Added |
| |
| Chair: | |
 | Dr Mark Taylor vice principal, East London Science School; London convenor, IoI Education Forum |
| Dr Mark Taylor vice principal, East London Science School; London convenor, IoI Education Forum | |
| |
 | recommended by spiked |
