What exams do and don’t do

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 25/03/2024 (747 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Once again, the persistent question — to have provincial exams or not — has been brought back into the spotlight by the provincial government changing its mind from banning them to reinstating them shortly afterward.

Both decisions were obviously made for political reasons, as opposed to educational ones. What is so often overlooked in this polarizing debate, driven by myths and misconceptions, is that large-scale assessments have lost both their political and educational value. Relatedly, the debate over exams almost completely overlooks some of the positive improvements that have been made in the areas of evaluating students’ achievements in the last two decades.

I would have less problem with the changing of a decision regarding provincial examinations if it had not become such a predictable and politically partisan issue with the PCs uncritically supporting them and the NDP likewise disavowing them.

It seems to me if there is one issue where a civil and informed non-partisan dialogue should take place it is our children’s education. And, if that discussion now happens after a temporary reinstatement of the provincial exams, that decision could prove to provide positive benefits for children, teachers and schools.

As for the reasons given and the uses to which the exams are put, they both remain questionable, even as they stubbornly persist. There is no evidence, beyond strongly held beliefs over decades, that shows that writing exams in high school prepares young people for them in post-secondary education, or that exam anxiety is reduced by previous experience.

There is equally no evidence that shows not writing exams in high school greatly affects achievement and performance in university. Many past successful university graduates never wrote a provincial exam prior to proceeding to university.

Finally, there is not irrefutable evidence that if someone performs well in high school exams that they will succeed in university.

There is a lot of evidence that many students having average marks in high school thrive in university, often outperforming their higher achieving classmates. I suspect this has a lot to do with maturity, motivation, and focus rather than some predetermined measure of ability based upon an exam event.

There is also a lot of evidence, despite efforts to the contrary, to suggest that large-scale universal exams discriminate culturally and linguistically — it is extremely difficult to develop culturally sensitive tests and tests that don’t challenge those whose first language is not English or French.

In spite of these realities, one can only speculate why some people still support exams.

Perhaps, believing and promoting the myths is just easier than dealing with the inevitable uncertainty that accompanies any judgments about people’s past achievements and future abilities. The myths may let parents of the hook — if their children don’t do well, it’s not their fault or their child’s. It’s the fault of teachers and the school — but it’s an escape that the rest of us would never grant them, as we inevitably ask ourselves what parenting, including our own, had to do with children’s actions.

We can equally speculate why some schools and post-secondary institutions like exams.

They can serve to reduce the need and effort to make more holistic-informed decisions about children’s achievements. They imagine certainty and closure — a simple, efficient, seemingly objective, and effective way of determining what students deserve and whether they are ready for post-secondary studies.

In that sense, exams become gatekeepers, allowing, or denying entrance into other pursuits. Sadly, they are not up to the task and, by embracing this use of exams, we greatly enhance our chances of treating people unfairly or undeservedly.

Fortunately, we know about the fallibility and inappropriate application of exam scores, and most schools and universities rely on them less and less. Many post-secondary institutions have abandoned large scale entrance exams altogether, finding that school generated assessments serve them well and reduce legal conflicts.

Many schools now have student-led conferences which have a student presenting their work and commenting on their achievements to their parents with teachers present. There is an emphasis on personal student responsibility and teacher testimony combined with the sense that student success is a team enterprise requiring the support of all.

Most high schools and universities now offer alternatives to written exams such as interviews, oral tests, presentations, demonstrations, and exhibitions which are conducted and judged by either an individual professor or panels of same. They are not just accommodations for anxious students or other-abled students but also have been adopted on a larger scale, sometimes upon request of students.

If the time, energy, and effort now put into developing, administering, and marking exams were put into supporting teachers in more beneficial ways of evaluating, we would probably wonder why it took us so long to get here.

All told, there is now enough uncertainty about the validity and reliability of exams, and even less for high stakes, wide scale exams, that I believe that, if provincial exams are offered, students and parents should have the choice of opting out and requesting different forms of evaluation.

At the very least, although the term “modernization” has now taken on negative connotations, the province is right to signal that there is a need to bring evaluations of student achievement and potential in line with current thinking as well as to find other ways of evaluating the school system.

John R. Wiens is dean emeritus at the faculty of education, University of Manitoba.