Abolition of Key Stage 1,2 and 3 Examinations

To many, the prospect of living up to the increasing pressures of school life is very daunting, overwhelming and demoralising. Some people may argue that a key factor to this horrible picture is due to public examinations. As a result of this many people look at the SATs in KS1, 2 and 3 as non-beneficial. However, some may also claim they provide an accurate evaluation of students. Drawing a conclusion to this debate is going to be contentious either way, as both sides fire truthful, persuasive and substantial arguments.

To begin with we have to understand what the real purpose of these exams is, in order to conclude whether they are “good” or “bad”. Intrinsically, these exams merely test the rote learning of students. This is because students can easily pass the exams by just cramming and memorising facts in a short period of time. We believe that this is wrong as it does not test their understanding of the subject. Therefore, students who are not studious throughout the year may be able to thrive better than the studious students, in the exams because they have good memories but don’t actually understand the subject and have the correct thought process. Consequently, these exams do not paint an accurate picture of the student’s abilities and this is unfair on the student’s behalf.

Conversely, some people may claim that exams actually test the ability to apply knowledge which tests their understanding. They are not simply spoon fed the facts and asked to recite them in the exam, as the proposition has falsely argued. They learn facts which they can then take the principle to show their understanding of the topic. For that reason, these exams do provide an adequate evaluation of students.

In contrast public examinations at a young age create undue pressure on pupils. This pressure of the shoulders for a sustained period can lead to detrimental effects. It can even lead to breakdowns. This is because of the intense learning exams require, the unnecessary significance of them, and the fear of failure. As a result of this, this increases stress levels and even leads to mental breakdowns, in several cases.

On the other hand, the proposition’s stance on exams as unnecessary pressure is a complete farce. The pressure put on them is not excessive as this shown by the vast majority of pupils who do cope. In a way the pressure put on them prepares them for the pressures in working life.

In conclusion, this debate has analysed the costs vs benefits of abolishing some public examinations. Due to the detrimental effects exams create, my stance is against the SATs. I feel that the pressure exams create is more important than how it tests their ability, as there are other means of this (i.e. interviews). Finally, do exams identify true ability? NO. Do exams create undue pressure? YES. Exams, exams, exams… Are there too many exams? YES. Therefore I think we should expunge excessive exams!