Unfortunately, however, I think exams are probably here to stay. So in the meantime, which mode of testing is superior?
In-person exams have a place for some subjects, those with a practical focus, for example. Practical exams for health science students and recitals for performing arts students make sense - allowing students the opportunity to prove their ability to perform in situations they may face in their future employment.
I'd argue that schools should put an element of trust in their students to adequately prepare and perform in exams
I understand the value of in-person assessment for invigilation and monitoring purposes, but I'd also argue that schools should put an element of trust in their students to adequately prepare and perform in exams.
This kind of exam is something we took for granted in pre-COVID times, barely batting an eyelid when faced with the prospect of exam halls and invigilators, hard chairs and accepting working for hours at a time without a break.
And when we couldn't be around other people anymore, 24-hour exams arrived on the scene and I think if we need to have exams, this should be the way to do it.
Starting your exam at a time which works for you, with a cup of coffee at your side and in your pyjamas if you must - I think is a good compromise to traditional exams. The fact these allow you to maintain social distancing is just an added bonus really.
I think bearing in mind that everyone works at different rates and in different ways, 24-hour exams are probably the closest we'll get to acknowledging that.
Largely, however, I don't think a student's ability or readiness for the workplace can be assessed with exams. Why should a couple of hours in an exam hall determine your overall ability when you can much better assess someone's knowledge and acquired skills over the course of the year?
Why not test someone's written communication skills with an essay or their ability to work in a team on a project? Those are skills our future employers are looking for, but our ability to answer 60 questions with no access to materials in an anxiety-inducing environment? Not so much.
Carly Horne- Head of Culture
I would like at this point in time to say, I hate exams! I much prefer doing coursework, she says writing an article which is providing procrastination for her assessment due next Tuesday... but we won't mention that.
I feel as though 24-hour take-home exams are the bane of my life but they do have a lot more pros than cons, in my opinion. For one, I don't have to necessarily revise as they tend to be open-book exams, so I can spend time on other modules if I so wish. Another pro is that they tend to be open book - so I can look through my notes, I can spend time planning my essays longer than I would in an exam and I can have as many breaks as I so choose.
Many, many pros. Yet, it is a stressful 24-hour period due to only focussing on one assessment and not having the luxury to say "I can come back to this tomorrow." But, going back to the pros, I can have breaks when it gets too much for me and the stress only last 24-hours, not two weeks like my current assessment is.
You can focus on what you have to answer. You can plan your time, your breaks, and your meals for that one day
In-person exams also stress you out for a very long time, as you have to revise. You have to make sure you have revised everything. You need to make sure you have left no stone unturned because you don't know what they will ask. With 24-hour exams, you can read the question and then look at your work from lectures and seminars. You can focus on what you have to answer. You can plan your time, your breaks, and your meals for that one day.
Altogether, 24-hour exams are a lot nicer than in-person exams even though the stress feels more intense at that particular moment in time.
Katie Siddall- Head of Sport