Our submission to the government’s independent curriculum and assessment review says the average GCSE student sits 31.5 hours of exams, usually over a period of three to four weeks at the end of Year 11.
 
It says: “The extent of the current reliance on terminal exams is unnecessary and damaging to many young people. We would not recommend a return to a fully modular system, where students can resit every module every term. However, a balanced approach is possible.”
 
For example, students could be allowed to take papers within a qualification at the end of Year 10 rather than having to take the whole qualification in Year 11.
 
A survey of secondary school teachers in England conducted by Teacher Tapp on behalf of ASCL earlier this year uncovered a worrying picture of the impact on students of the current GCSE system. More than three-quarters of respondents reported seeing mental health issues related to exam anxiety in their Year 11 students.
 
ASCL’s submission to the curriculum and assessment review also recommends:
 

• The development of new gold-standard assessments in literacy and numeracy, distinct from GCSEs in English and maths, taken by all pupils and which a majority of learners should be able to achieve by the end of secondary school. Currently a ‘forgotten third’ of 16-year-olds do not achieve at least a Grade 4 ‘standard pass’ in GCSE English and maths each year – potentially damaging their life chances. Many of these students are disadvantaged learners or have special educational needs.
• Scrapping the current “demotivating” and “humiliating“ government requirement for this forgotten third to retake GCSE English and maths in post-16 education until they have achieved at least a Grade 4 – which most continue to fall short of attaining.
• Strongly urging the government to keep applied general qualifications – such as BTECs – many of which the previous government planned to scrap.
• Reduce the burden of SATs taken by pupils at the end of primary school as the current system creates too much anxiety and stress for children when its purpose is largely to judge the performance of schools.
• Removing the English Baccalaureate as a performance measure of schools as its narrow focus on a particular set of subjects has been to the detriment of other subjects, particularly the creative arts and technology. In order to incentivise the take-up of arts and creative subjects, we would support including them in secondary school performance measures (Attainment 8 and Progress 8).
• Urging the review to recommend dedicated funding from HM Treasury for extra-curricular opportunities for disadvantaged learners. This would help to narrow the disadvantage gap, as it would enable schools and colleges to provide greater access to opportunities for disadvantaged young people.

 
Tom Middlehurst, ASCL’s curriculum and assessment specialist, said: “England’s education system works well for the majority of children and young people – but there are problems which the curriculum and assessment review has the opportunity to address. One of these is the excessive and unnecessary burden of assessment on young people taking GCSEs which can be extremely damaging, and which must be reduced. We have to move away from the notion that GCSEs are a rite of passage to be endured.
 
“In particular, we must do better for the forgotten third of students who struggle with the gateway qualifications of GCSE English and maths – many of whom are from disadvantaged backgrounds or who have special educational needs. Our submission to the curriculum and assessment review is aimed at improving the system so it works better for these young people. Every child deserves the best possible opportunities we can give them. This is imperative not only for them but for our society.”
 
You can read our full submission here.