In the light of the huge problems surrounding exams this year, I would like to propose that we move to a modular system of examining pupils. I have thought for many years that we could use a system similar to that of examining the playing of musical instruments, swimming, dancing or gymnastics, where students take an exam at a particular level when they are ready. The huge problem with exams is that it produces failures and fosters a failing attitude in many students. While these exams could be failed and should be rigorous, and marked or moderated independently, the presumption would be that a student would take them when they have a realistic expectation of achieving a good pass. The tests/exams would test a bite sized portion of the curriculum. The students would then almost always leave with a sense of achievement at that particular level. The exams could be offered far more often than once a year. I would suggest at the end of each term. They would only be about an hour long and could therefore be fairly easily timetabled. There would be levels that would coincide with, for example, a level 4 sat in maths and would therefore have a meaning, but the achievement need not be reached at any particular age. At the end of secondary school there would be a level equivalent to a grade C GCSE (I’m not familiar with the new numbered system). Some students would have achieved much higher levels by then. Those who had not reached this level would know which modules they still needed to work for and this should be made possible post 16 for those who might be slower to mature. It would also mean that students with learning difficulties could still have some certificates of achievement to boost their confidence and prove them capable of some types of employment. This would obviously have implications for the timetabling of lessons. I think teachers could work with this. Secondary teachers are used to having sets in different subjects and in primary schools such timetabling has been used for example with the Ruth Miskin literacy scheme very successfully. There would also be the advantage that teachers would not need to cater for such large differentiation in individual lessons, which is hard work in itself. It would need to be introduced slowly, perhaps maths first, to give teachers time to work with it. I also think that this would work better if we reorganised the school year into 6 half terms of about 6 weeks based around December 25th. Christmas Day would always be in a holiday, but Good Friday could be a religious observance day for those who attend church, just as Eid is for Muslim pupils. Easter Monday would mean a day less holiday elsewhere, but that is not insurmountable. It would be much easier to deliver a module or indeed the current curriculum, if the half terms were even, instead of some being more than 8 weeks and others barely 5.
1682-11