Exams aren't fit for purpose

[littlequestion]

I have two DC and both are doing exams - one A levels and one GCSEs. The older only had a few, low-key exams for his GCSEs so this is the first time for proper exams in my house.

I honestly can't believe how dreadful, stressful and ultimately pointless these exams are - they are not fit for purpose.

The amount of content they have to learn is insane. What on earth is the point of learning 15 poems almost off by heart? What skill does that teach? Most importantly, how is it useful for life?

My other bugbear is that the exams just don't give them enough time. If you've studied a subject in massive depth for two years, why not give candidates enough time to write a considered essay instead of having to rush it and decide what are going to leave out? Why not give them enought time to check their work?

That's what I do in my job - I don't just dash something off and hope for the best. I don't mean exams shoiuld take half a day, but an extra half-hour of planning/ checking time built in would make the world of difference.

I personally think it’s good to get a little pressure of the exams, and children are entirely capable of learning and even learning so much more.

@TeenDivided I don't remember lessons just being about "teaching time" though. Some lessons were about "doing" (ie some coursework/written work).
Of course that was a long time ago that I was at school.

@redskylight I am convinced I have just blanked any poetry from my mind. I must have hated it that much 😂
Ironically at that age I loved writing 'nonsense' poetry - "Ode to the Dried Up Tip-Ex" was a classic.
In my 20s I had a poem published in my local paper - it was about how bad the town smelled. Clearly serious War stuff was wasted on me.

What would you want in place? You are completing with the world and most countries have exams - we all had them and survived- you can resit etc.

China has a 12 hour exam with everything and your score determines your future- now that's pressure

I love how the "system" has too many A's and B's so the exams have to be made harder to get the "right" distribution of A's, B's, C's, etc with the mechanism being greater time pressure and more difficult questions with prescribed answers aren't really testing your knowledge and thinking skills but merely how well you test to the test.

@Alargeoneplease89 as I've said a mix of coursework, shorter module exams and then a final exam.
If for some reason a child can't do the final exam (ie broken arm, family tragedy, illness etc) the final grade can be based on the coursework/module grades.

Yes it's a shit system. They are at their youngest when they sit the most exams. By A-level they are 2 years older and sitting fewer exams. By university they are older still and have a mixture of coursework and exams. GCSEs could not have been better designed to stress and cause mental health issues if they tried.

The whole notion that your ability is measured on a particular day by a timed test is not representative of anything in real life either. So people good at sitting exams are valued highly even though in the workforce it's not a useful skill. It's madness

They don't have to learn the poems off by heart. Often there's that assumption but the most important thing in the GCSE english exams is the understanding of the texts, not the memory of quotes. Exams aren't designed to trip people up and yes, they aren't a proper measure of intelligence, but a lot of consideration has gone into how they are created. Best of luck to both your kids, make sure they don't stress too much about memorising absolutely everything!

I agree with coursework - I was actually shocked they removed it. I had coursework as part of my gcses and looking at my son's gcse options and seeing no coursework was new to me.

In the Netherlands there are exams in every subject every year ( admittedly multiple choice) ~ if you don’t get the grades, you have to resit the year. It’s a huge incentive to work hard and you can’t move on if you haven’t got the basic knowledge. They do have different ‘ tier’ schools so SEN is accommodated there. But I’m just saying high pressure exams are a feature of global life.

As for GCSE Eng Lit ~ you don’t need to learn 15 poems by heart. The key poem is printed on the paper and can be used for quotes. You then compare it with another of your choice ~ you/ your teacher will recommend the 4/5 to study in detail. And quotes can be a single word or a two word phrase. You literally need one or two from 4/5 poems.

This is the same with the novel or Shakespeare ~ you’re given a passage to analyse and you need to add in 2/3 extra quotes ( you have about 20 mins to analyse the rest of the work apart from the passage). Again, teacher should give you those ‘power quotes’.

I can’t work out whether teachers are ‘over teaching’, scaring students or parents just aren’t clear on what’s required. But in years of teaching this I can tell you students can do it ~ and with the right teacher, can really enjoy it.

Agree with the time thing: my daughter likened it to Bake Off when they have two hours to bake a dish which leaves them having to use the freezer to cool things off and everything being bit sloppy and rubbish. If you want to bake an amazing cake, you need as long as you need - and the the same with writing an amazing essay. I think the 24 hour exams they give them at uni are fairer.... but I suppose people would cheat.

Finland has topped the league tables for education for a good few years now. They did away with so many exams and restructured the entire system and they are flying.

I think they aren't doing so well now?

OP - I completely agree. As a recent STEM graduate, I can quite honestly say never since my GCSEs have I had to learn 20 maths/physics equations, 15 poems, 3 novels etc etc all off by heart! I honestly think they are becoming a memory/stamina test.

Yes! Imagine taking the 高考 in china instead of GCSEs. If you fail, that's it, you will not be able to go to university at all
GCSEs are pretty decent in comparison even if they are still stressful

I've always thought we need to move to some kind of "modular" system like at Uni, where you take a succession of short "term length" modules over several years, to build up to a "school leavers" grade which is based on 3/4 years worth of modules. Each module could have different components making up the end mark for it, such as based on homework, coursework and an end of term exam. You have to "pass" the simpler/basic modules in each subject to be able to move up into higher standard modules for that subject, but otherwise, they can be started/taken at any time over the 3/4 years. By doing that, the "exam" content will be less and will be taken much sooner after the content has been taught. Pupils who struggle could just keep taking the simpler/basic modules until they pass them and end up with a "lower pass" grade as long as they've passed basic literacy and numeracy modules which is an absolute essential. When they move to sixth form or college, the admission criteria for the various different courses would be based on the modules they'd passed, so if you wanted to do, say, Physics to A level, then you'd need to have passed all the earlier Physics modules, but if you wanted to do a general engineering course at college, then maybe just the "middling" modules for chemistry, physics and maths to prove a sound knowledge of those subjects, but not to the highest level. I'm sure a system of modules would really help the struggling pupils as they can actually achieve something that counts along the years rather than getting left behind, and they could continually re-do the essential basic modules as long as it took to pass them rather than just being left behind as the class moves through the years and they get more and more lost.

Teacher here. We agree

I totally agree with you. It only tests memory skills. I think it's very helpful for example if you are studying medicine at university - yes you need to be able to prove that you know what bones are what, but for most subjects there is a better way to learn.

I was the last year doing O levels and very jealous when they introduced GCSE's with coursework. My understanding was one of the reasons for introducing coursework was to level the playing field between boys and girls as traditionally boys did better under exam conditions - not sure how true this. I couldn't understand the reasoning for culling it, surely someone could have revised the system to ensure the coursework element was more robust. Modular options appeals to, breaking them down so it's not such a slog after 2/3 years.

I'm in Finland, my 12 year old has had 43 (module) exams this year alone. Matriculation exams at the end of high school are huge, at least 5 exams (6 hour exams!)

Don't believe everything you read in blogs and articles. They also get a lot of homework from day one.

No, they were doing well. Post the restructure they have dropped through the ranks. Looks like it was a mistake and definitely shouldn’t be copied.

I'm in Wales so it's s lightly different system but still feel like many more exams than I sat at same age.

However I am pleased DD2 missed the big shake up up they have coming for GCSE in few years time as I'm not sure it will be better and suspect first few years will be difficult - though they do seem to want to move to more mixed assessments in some subjects.

@janeinthewild GCSEs aren't exams for university though so you can't really compare.

Yes, lots of other countries have much tougher exams in comparison to us- look at China and Japan and we complain about the UK.

We will fall behind if we keep cancelling everything that upsets our children - look at the SATs (those questions that were complained about were easy - yes my daughter sat it im not a media sheep!)- we need more resilience in our young people and more supportive parenting in a positive manner. My child has started his gcses and we always reinforce that he can always resit, not the end of the world/lots of opportunities in this country attitude... rather then you poor lamb/we're doomed(Fraiser voice)/ boohoo/failure attitude.

Yes, I fully agree. We need to compete against other countries in the global marketplace and we need to stop "nannying" our children and patting them on the head whenever things get tough. Life IS tough, the sooner they get used to it, the better.

I also agree with your comments about the SATS and can't believe the furore about them being too hard - they weren't! If the kids couldn't answer the questions, then they're being very badly taught! As for a few teachers commenting that they themselves would struggle, well, words fail me!