Connect with us

Education

‘They are making young people ill’: is it time to scrap GCSEs? | GCSEs

Published

on


It’s approaching 8.30am on a Wednesday in June and 140 grim-faced teenagers are making their way into an exam hall. Today it’s GCSE maths paper 2 (calculator). A posse of smiling staff encourage and cajole: “Good luck, hope it goes really well.” “Bags at the back please!” “Use a black pen only.” A few stragglers reluctantly make an entrance. “Find your seats quickly, please. Good luck!”

Once everyone is seated, there’s the exam prayer. (This is Urswick school, a mixed Church of England secondary in north-east London.) “Heavenly father, be with me as I take this exam, keep my mind alert and my memory sharp, calm my nerves and help me concentrate.” Some candidates bow their heads, others stare glumly into the distance. Then, a few final words of encouragement. “So, year 11, this is your time to shine. Good luck – you have an hour and a half. You may begin.” And they’re off. Welcome to the 2025 summer exam season.

GCSEs – the qualifications taken by 15- and 16-year-olds at the end of their secondary education – are well under way in assembly and sports halls across England, Wales and Northern Ireland. But so too is a growing debate about whether it might be time to reform, or even abolish, the exams that have shaped young people’s fortunes for almost four decades. The government’s national curriculum and assessment review, including potential reform to GCSEs, will be published later this year. Not a moment too soon, for many.

The GCSE – or general certificate of secondary education – was introduced in 1986, replacing the two-track “sheep and goats” system of O-levels and CSEs (certificate of secondary education). Since then they have undergone several changes, most significantly under David Cameron’s government and the then education secretary Michael Gove, who wanted a more “rigorous” set of qualifications. He increased content, and replaced modules and coursework with end-of-course exams, graded by a number (from 1 to 9, with 9 being the best) rather than a letter.

Critics have argued there are too many exams: students in England typically sit between 24 and 31 hours of exams in year 11, which is double, even triple, the totals for countries such as Ireland (16) and Canada (10). They say the curriculum content is vast and unwieldy – teachers struggle to cover it in the allotted time and pupils struggle to master it – and the high-stakes nature of the assessment creates excessive anxiety and stress for teenagers, more of whom now experience poor mental health, particularly since Covid.

They are worried about the narrow academic focus, the danger of teaching to the test and the alarmingly high failure rate. Every year, about a third of GCSE pupils across England finish year 11 without achieving a grade 4 pass in English and maths. Then there’s the fact that children in England are now required to remain in education or training until they’re 18, making GCSEs at 16 kind of redundant.

The roll call of industry leaders who would like to see them scrapped is growing. Among them are the former Ofsted boss Sir Michael Wilshaw and Kenneth Baker – the former education secretary who introduced GCSEs. They join institutions that have spoken out against the exams, such as Eton college, Bedales school, St Paul’s girls’ school and the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. Many teachers, parents and pupils still under the GCSE cosh would concur.

“While there is a place for these sorts of exams”, Blair wrote in the Telegraph in 2022, “we cannot rely on them alone: they only measure certain skills, they do not always do this accurately, and they invite narrow teaching styles aimed at passing tests rather than building other key aptitudes.”

Writing in the Guardian earlier this year, Simon Jenkins condemned what he described as the destructive cult of the exam, warning it was harming young people. “Just say it,” he urged. “Spit it out. Abolish GCSE. It has nothing to do with young people or their advancement. It has everything to do with quantifying, measuring, controlling and governing their preparation for life.”

Then there’s the chronic unfairness of the system. Covid fuelled the attainment gap between rich and poor pupils; now a boom in private tutoring is adding to the sense that there’s a two-tier system, with wealthier families able to pay to secure their children advantages that poorer families cannot afford. According to a 2023 Sutton Trust survey, almost half (46%) of pupils in London received private tutoring, compared with 30% for England as a whole.

“GCSEs are failing the fairness test,” says Lee Elliot Major, a professor of social mobility at the University of Exeter. “We must face up to the stark truth that they reward children not just for what they know, but for the resources their families can draw upon – whether it is extensive help via the booming industry of private tutors or the middle-class assumptions embedded in our curriculum that alienate and disadvantage those lacking a particular cultural capital.

‘Failure is baked in.’ Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Guardian

“We’ve created an exam system that perpetuates privilege from one generation to the next. Our meritocratic elites, obsessed solely with narrow academic memorisation tests, are losing the bigger political battles over our failure to nurture all talents in society.”

Ben Davis, headteacher at St Ambrose Barlow Roman Catholic high school in Swinton, Salford, is among those who want change. “GCSEs have run their course and are not fit for purpose. I’d go so far as to say they are making young people ill and they impoverish teaching.”

They are not inclusive, failure is “baked in” and “there is a disconnect between GCSEs and what employers need and expect,” says Davis. They should be replaced, he suggests, with a single diploma-based system for all young people, so that vocational, life skills, apprenticeships and academic qualifications sit alongside one another and pupils can combine these in the way that suits them best.

Sammy Wright, head of school at Southmoor Academy in Sunderland and author of Exam Nation: Why Our Obsession With Grades Fails Everyone and a Better Way to Think About School, agrees the system is ripe for change. “The short answer is that GCSEs are designed to fit an academic trajectory. The model of learning they follow dovetails neatly with A-levels and then university, but that isn’t what many kids do.

“Essentially, GCSEs ask children to try an academic pathway, and then only when they fail do they offer a different version of what education might be. My favoured alternative,” he says, “is a passport qualification, where instead of discrete grades, they get an overall mark, within which there are many different elements. But this is long-term, it must be thought through and not rushed. It’s a decade’s work, really.”

It is a huge challenge, says Dr Mary Richardson, professor of educational assessment at UCL’s Institute of Education, “because GCSEs are (a) not ‘bad’ assessments at all; it is the culture they support and breed that is our major societal challenge, and one which I feel adds little value to both education and to the lives of teenagers. And (b) they are part of a massive, corporate assessment industry.

“I’ve been castigated in the past for suggesting that we should review national testing of this kind at 16, mainly because there are thousands of jobs that rely on this aspect of our education system. However, if we could invest more money in teacher education, and supporting teachers to assess in schools, then that is a way to reorientate all that expertise in assessment. And by that I mean a really rich type of assessment that adds value to learners and learning, not simply a one-off test situation with limited context.” Maybe, but concerns would doubtless persist about the reliability of and potential for bias in any teacher assessment-based system.

Former education secretary Michael Gove, who made changes to GCSEs as he wanted a more ‘rigorous’ set of qualifications. Photograph: Jon Super/AP

No prizes for guessing what Britain’s strictest headteacher thinks. Katharine Birbalsingh, who founded the high-achieving Michaela Community School in the London borough of Brent, is a firm supporter of GCSEs. She approved of Gove’s changes and thinks it’s important for children to face challenges such as exams, to help build the resilience that will get them through the vicissitudes of life.

“Look, GCSEs are not perfect. I would be the first one to say that. All exams have problems. But exams hold institutions to account. It’s not just about holding the children to account. Most of it is about holding the entire system to account.

“There needs to be something to set the standard. It’s also the case when it comes to employers that they have some sense of how the child has done. Otherwise it’s just a free-for-all where everybody’s just making up whatever they’re doing.”

Richard Brown, headteacher at Urswick, may not see eye to eye with Birbalsingh on everything, but he does agree that GCSEs should be retained, with some changes. “At the end of the day, this is an outcomes-driven business,” he says ruefully. This is his last summer of exams before retirement. “Personally I would not get rid of GCSEs. They are such a powerful brand and children do thrive on the challenge of them.

“I can just about remember when I took exams and I’m sure I was nervous, but I went in and did it. That’s grit and resilience, isn’t it? That’s what schools have to look at and make sure their youngsters can deal with setbacks.”

We are chatting in his office, reflecting on his 40 years as a teacher. Over in the exam hall, maths paper 2 draws to an end. It seems to have gone reasonably well, though the question on angles caused some problems. “It was OK,” says Scarlett cautiously. “A lot of predicted topics came up.” “Challenging questions but nothing I couldn’t overcome,” Kelvin adds confidently. “Topics that I didn’t revise came up but I used my foundation mathematical knowledge to work it out,” says Fatou. “Perfecto!” breezes Joshua.

And so the annual ritual continues. The see-through pencil cases, the clocks, the rows of desks, the last-minute revision and prompt cards, and the final reassuring words from ever-attentive teachers who are desperate for their students to do their very best. Maths paper 2 is over but there’s maths paper 3 still to go, plus religious studies, history, French, English language, geography …

Elsewhere in Urswick’s bright, modern classrooms, year 10s are well on their way through their GCSE courses, preparing for next summer’s exam season. The debate will go on, but in all likelihood, so too will the exams. In some shape or form. For the time being.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

How AI Interviews Are Changing Job Hunting Forever

Published

on


The job search landscape is evolving at lightning speed, and nowhere is this more evident than in the rise of AI-powered interviews. In 2025, more companies are turning to artificial intelligence to screen, assess, and even interview candidates—often before a human ever gets involved. As someone who recently went through a fully automated, remote AI interview, I can say firsthand: the future of job hunting is here, and it’s changing everything.

What Are AI Interviews?

AI interviews use artificial intelligence to conduct, analyze, and score job interviews. Instead of speaking with a human recruiter, candidates interact with a computer program—often via video, chat, or even voice calls. The AI evaluates responses based on keywords, tone, facial expressions, and more, providing employers with data-driven insights into each applicant.

My Experience: The Fully Automated AI Interview

When I applied for a remote marketing position at a global tech company, I was invited to complete an “AI-powered video interview.” Here’s how it worked:

1. The Setup

I received a link to a secure interview portal. The instructions were clear: I’d be asked a series of questions, have 30 seconds to prepare each answer, and 2 minutes to respond. The entire process would be recorded and analyzed by the company’s AI system.

2. The Interview

The AI interviewer greeted me with a friendly, pre-recorded message. Then, questions appeared on the screen, such as:

“Describe a time you solved a difficult problem at work.”

“How do you handle tight deadlines?”

“What motivates you in a remote work environment?”

I recorded my answers, trying to maintain eye contact with the webcam and speak clearly. The AI tracked my facial expressions, voice tone, and even the speed of my responses.

3. The Analysis

After I finished, the AI instantly analyzed my performance. I received a summary report highlighting my communication skills, confidence, and emotional intelligence. The system also flagged areas for improvement, such as using more specific examples or varying my tone.

4. The Follow-Up

Within days, I received an email from a human recruiter, inviting me to a live video interview. The AI interview had served as the first screening step, saving time for both me and the company.

How AI Interviews Are Transforming Job Hunting

1. Faster, More Efficient Screening

AI interviews allow companies to screen hundreds of candidates quickly, without scheduling conflicts or time zone issues. This means faster feedback for job seekers and less waiting.

2. Reduced Human Bias

AI can help minimize unconscious bias by focusing on objective data rather than first impressions or personal preferences. However, it’s important to note that AI is only as unbiased as the data it’s trained on.

3. Consistency and Fairness

Every candidate gets the same questions, time limits, and evaluation criteria, making the process more consistent and transparent.

4. Remote and Accessible

AI interviews can be completed from anywhere, making job opportunities more accessible to people regardless of location or mobility.

Tips for Succeeding in an AI Interview

Practice with AI interview simulators (many are available online).

Speak clearly and confidently; avoid monotone delivery.

Maintain eye contact with the camera, as the AI may track engagement.

Use specific examples and structure your answers (e.g., STAR method: Situation, Task, Action, Result).

Check your tech setup—good lighting, a quiet space, and a stable internet connection are essential.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Are AI interviews replacing human recruiters?

A: Not entirely. AI interviews are usually the first step, helping to shortlist candidates. Human interviews still play a crucial role in the final hiring decision.

Q: Can AI interviews be biased?

A: While AI aims to reduce bias, it can inherit biases from the data it’s trained on. Companies are working to make AI systems more fair and transparent.

Q: What if I’m not comfortable on camera?

A: Practice helps! Many platforms offer practice questions. Focus on being yourself and answering clearly.

Q: How can I prepare for an AI interview?

A: Research common questions, practice your responses, and get comfortable with the technology.

Conclusion

AI interviews are revolutionizing the job search process, making it faster, more efficient, and potentially fairer. My experience with a fully automated, remote AI recruiter was both challenging and enlightening. While it felt strange at first to “talk” to a computer, I appreciated the instant feedback and the convenience of interviewing from home.

As AI technology continues to evolve, job seekers should embrace these changes, prepare accordingly, and view AI interviews as an opportunity to showcase their skills in a new way. The future of job hunting is here—are you ready to meet your next recruiter, even if it’s a robot?



Source link

Continue Reading

Education

Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation — Campus Technology

Published

on


Register Now for Tech Tactics in Education: Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation

Tech Tactics in Education will return on Sept. 25 with the conference theme “Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation.” Registration for the fully virtual event, brought to you by the producers of Campus Technology and THE Journal, is now open.

Offering hands-on learning and interactive discussions on the most critical technology issues and practices across K–12 and higher education, the conference will cover key topics such as:

  • Tapping into the potential of AI in education;
  • Navigating cybersecurity and data privacy concerns;
  • Leadership and change management;
  • Evaluating emerging ed tech choices;
  • Foundational infrastructure for technology innovation;
  • And more.

A full agenda will be announced in the coming weeks.

Call for Speakers Still Open

Tech Tactics in Education seeks higher education and K-12 IT leaders and practitioners, independent consultants, association or nonprofit organization leaders, and others in the field of technology in education to share their expertise and experience at the event. Session proposals are due by Friday, July 11.

For more information, visit TechTacticsInEducation.com.

About the Author



Rhea Kelly is editor in chief for Campus Technology, THE Journal, and Spaces4Learning. She can be reached at [email protected].





Source link

Continue Reading

Education

9 AI Ethics Scenarios (and What School Librarians Would Do)

Published

on


A common refrain about artificial intelligence in education is that it’s a research tool, and as such, some school librarians are acquiring firsthand experience with its uses and controversies.

Leading a presentation last week at the ISTELive 25 + ASCD annual conference in San Antonio, a trio of librarians parsed appropriate and inappropriate uses of AI in a series of hypothetical scenarios. They broadly recommended that schools have, and clearly articulate, official policies governing AI use and be cautious about inputting copyrighted or private information.

Amanda Hunt, a librarian at Oak Run Middle School in Texas, said their presentation would focus on scenarios because librarians are experiencing so many.


“The reason we did it this way is because these scenarios are coming up,” she said. “Every day I’m hearing some other type of question in regards to AI and how we’re using it in the classroom or in the library.”

  • Scenario 1: A class encourages students to use generative AI for brainstorming, outlining and summarizing articles.

    Elissa Malespina, a teacher librarian at Science Park High School in New Jersey, said she felt this was a valid use, as she has found AI to be helpful for high schoolers who are prone to get overwhelmed by research projects.

    Ashley Cooksey, an assistant professor and school library program director at Arkansas Tech University, disagreed slightly: While she appreciates AI’s ability to outline and brainstorm, she said, she would discourage her students from using it to synthesize summaries.

    “Point one on that is that you’re not using your synthesis and digging deep and reading the article for yourself to pull out the information pertinent to you,” she said. “Point No. 2 — I publish, I write. If you’re in higher ed, you do that. I don’t want someone to put my work into a piece of generative AI and an [LLM] that is then going to use work I worked very, very hard on to train its language learning model.”

  • Scenario 2: A school district buys an AI tool that generates student book reviews for a library website, which saves time and promotes titles but misses key themes or introduces unintended bias.

    All three speakers said this use of AI could certainly be helpful to librarians, but if the reviews are labeled in a way that makes it sound like they were written by students when they weren’t, that wouldn’t be ethical.

  • Scenario 3: An administrator asks a librarian to use AI to generate new curriculum materials and library signage. Do the outputs violate copyright or proper attribution rules?

    Hunt said the answer depends on local and district regulations, but she recommended using Adobe Express because it doesn’t pull from the Internet.

  • Scenario 4: An ed-tech vendor pitches a school library on an AI tool that analyzes circulation data and automatically recommends titles to purchase. It learns from the school’s preferences but often excludes lesser-known topics or authors of certain backgrounds.

    Hunt, Malespina and Cooksey agreed that this would be problematic, especially because entering circulation data could include personally identifiable information, which should never be entered into an AI.

  • Scenario 5: At a school that doesn’t have a clear AI policy, a student uses AI to summarize a research article and gets accused of plagiarism. Who is responsible, and what is the librarian’s role?

    The speakers as well as polled audience members tended to agree the school district would be responsible in this scenario. Without a policy in place, the school will have a harder time establishing whether a student’s behavior constitutes plagiarism.

    Cooksey emphasized the need for ongoing professional development, and Hunt said any districts that don’t have an official AI policy need steady pressure until they draft one.

    “I am the squeaky wheel right now in my district, and I’m going to continue to be annoying about it, but I feel like we need to have something in place,” Hunt said.

  • Scenario 6: Attempting to cause trouble, a student creates a deepfake of a teacher acting inappropriately. Administrators struggle to respond, they have no specific policy in place, and trust is shaken.

    Again, the speakers said this is one more example to illustrate the importance of AI policies as well as AI literacy.

    “We’re getting to this point where we need to be questioning so much of what we see, hear and read,” Hunt said.

  • Scenario 7: A pilot program uses AI to provide instant feedback on student essays, but English language learners consistently get lower scores, leading teachers to worry the AI system can’t recognize code-switching or cultural context.

    In response to this situation, Hunt said it’s important to know whether the parent has given their permission to enter student essays into an AI, and the teacher or librarian should still be reading the essays themselves.

    Malespina and Cooksey both cautioned against relying on AI plagiarism detection tools.

    “None of these tools can do a good enough job, and they are biased toward [English language learners],” Malespina said.

  • Scenario 8: A school-approved AI system flags students who haven’t checked out any books recently, tracks their reading speed and completion patterns, and recommends interventions.

    Malespina said she doesn’t want an AI tool tracking students in that much detail, and Cooksey pointed out that reading speed and completion patterns aren’t reliably indicative of anything that teachers need to know about students.

  • Scenario 9: An AI tool translates texts, reads books aloud and simplifies complex texts for students with individualized education programs, but it doesn’t always translate nuance or tone.

    Hunt said she sees benefit in this kind of application for students who need extra support, but she said the loss of tone could be an issue, and it raises questions about infringing on audiobook copyright laws.

    Cooksey expounded upon that.

    “Additionally, copyright goes beyond the printed work. … That copyright owner also owns the presentation rights, the audio rights and anything like that,” she said. “So if they’re putting something into a generative AI tool that reads the PDF, that is technically a violation of copyright in that moment, because there are available tools for audio versions of books for this reason, and they’re widely available. Sora is great, and it’s free for educators. … But when you’re talking about taking something that belongs to someone else and generating a brand-new copied product of that, that’s not fair use.”

Andrew Westrope is managing editor of the Center for Digital Education. Before that, he was a staff writer for Government Technology, and previously was a reporter and editor at community newspapers. He has a bachelor’s degree in physiology from Michigan State University and lives in Northern California.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending