Is there a better way than exams to assess young people?

How about some radical thinking to save us from another debacle with exam results at the end of each academic year?

This year was exceptional but the real thinking that might challenge the way we do things has yet to be addressed.

When, in the rest of your working life, have any of you been sat in a room in silence with no access to anyone, anything or any resources at all and had to solve a working problem? How realistic is the exam system?

I fully understand that comprehension of subject matter is important but there has to be a better way than just doing what we do, ‘because that is what I did so it must be the best way’. That is nonsense.

Trusting teachers is obviously a challenge to the decision makers which is why continuous assessment went out of the window and the focus on end-of-course exams became the gold standard.

At a stroke boys performed better and the gender gap in results closed because all exams favour boys and disadvantage girls.

How about moving away from end-of-year exams and have a module system with both teacher ongoing assessment and a short end-of-module exam?

The papers would be set by the examining boards and would be externally moderated. Suddenly, we have a system that shows both genders off to the best of their aptitudes and would give universities a sound, known objective assessment on which to offer places to students.

A-level students would know where they stood and that has to be a good thing. Would this be such a bad idea for GCSE students as well?

There has to be a better system than sitting students in a room in silence and expecting them all to perform to their best and making this the basis for decisions that will affect the rest of their lives.