Monday morning, school assembly. The head teacher stands up at the front of the room with a frown on her face. "I have a very important announcement," she tells the school. "No more exams!"

That is the idea behind a new book by Sammy Wright. An English teacher for 20 years, the author is now head of a large secondary school in Sunderland. When exams were cancelled during the pandemic, he began wondering what education was really for.

According to his new book, Exam Nation, schools should teach pupils how to be happy - not just how to pass tests. The focus on grades means that exams end up "as a ranking device for saying who are the winners and who are the losers".¹

Sammy Wright is not the only teacher to question the value of testing. Two respected academics reviewed all the research on "high-stakes" final exams, where the result of a single test has a big impact on a student's overall grade.

They found that this kind of testing does not help students retainTo keep hold of something. information, nor does it reliably measure a student's ability. Rather it encourages superficialOn the surface only. ways of learning, causes high levels of stress, is open to cheating, has little relevance to the workplace, and may also increase inequality.²

Not everyone agrees. One person in favour of tests is the former education secretary Michael Gove. He argues that exams are still vital, because they "build character, strengthen mental and emotional resilience and help to overcome society's inequalities".³

The alternative options to exams have their own problems. Coursework is said to make cheating easier, continuous assessment is criticised for preventing deep learning, and teacher-only assessment is thought to disadvantage poorer and ethnic-minority children.

Despite these differences, there is still plenty of agreement. For example, both sides agree that exams cannot tell you a student's value as a person: whether they are kind or honest, or loyal. What is more, a young person's future should not be decided by a single pass or fail.

Different countries test pupils in different ways. For example, in parts of Australia, 75% of the final grade is based on coursework, while in New Zealand 50% is based on teacher assessment. In Norway, only 20% of pupils sit each subject's exam, and they are chosen by a lottery called trekkfag.⁴ So there is no one correct way of testing school children.

Over the past few years, English schools have risen up the international rankings for maths, reading and science.⁵ At the same time, many schools are short of money, meaning they have had to cut back on teachers' pay, building repairs and extra-curricular activities.⁶

For now, students will keep having to sit exams. But exams should not be the only things that matter. At Sammy Wright's school, one of the targets is "enjoyment". He believes that learning to enjoy life is a better lesson than getting the right grades.

As the author explains: "School should teach you skills for living and loving and caring and being a member of society and understanding the world that you're in."⁷

Should we abolish exams?

Yes: Exams are not a reliable measure of ability. They cause stress, do not help students retain information and may increase inequality. They need to be replaced.

No: Exams may not be perfect, but other methods of assessment are just as flawed. Testing is the best method we have for giving pupils an equal chance to do well.

Or... Exams can be a useful academic measure, but they are not the main purpose of education. Schools should teach students how to enjoy being alive.

FOR YOUR SUMMER READING CHALLENGE CLUE GO TO STEP SIX IN THE SIX STEPS TO DISCOVERY BELOW.