My tale of me - Chris Jenkinson

As a life sciences student at the University of Manchester the way I was assessed in almost all modules I studied was through exams, and only exams. Yesterday, in my capacity as Academic Affairs Officer, I had the opportunity to talk to course representatives from life sciences and one of the topics we spent a fair amount of time on was whether exams are really the right way to test someone’s understanding of the subject matter, and if not, how they as representatives could go about changing the assessment system so they do test understanding.

I’ve already got strong opinions on the issue, so I sat back and enjoyed the discussion, occasionally clarifying some facts or asking some questions. It was significant that no one was that in favour of exams, other than in recognition that other methods of assessment take longer to mark and staff time is limited.

The two preferred methods suggested (though there were others) were more coursework essays spread throughout the semester, and more assessed group work or presentations. Someone made the point that in most careers, when people are asked to research a topic they are unlikely to spend crazy hours close to the deadline frantically cramming and then write a report in two hours without reference to the subject. Others talked about how, upon reflection the day after an exam, they’d already forgotten a fair amount of what they had just revised.

I’d be interested to hear what other students think about exams as a method of assessment. Do they work? What are they for? How would you prefer to be tested on your understanding of a subject?

Kate Little, a course representative in the School of Law (with a new blog), is running a campaign called “I’m Hungry for Exam Feedback”, to get the University of Manchester to give personalised feedback on exam scripts - support her and the campaign by joining the Facebook group or emailing her. Here’s my thoughts on the issue of exam feedback.

With the January 2009 exams just around the corner and thousands of University of Manchester students revising for important exams, it is worth reflecting on how exams do and can help students develop. With all the hours spent on revising over the Christmas and New Year period, a great deal of work is put in by students.

What happens after completing the exam? Often, a unit done in one semester will be related to another unit in a following semester, or the next academic year. A good writing style is important for all essay-based exams, whatever the subject. Knowing our strengths and weaknesses helps us improve. Perhaps when revising a particular student knows they need to focus more on one area of the subject matter, but less on another.

If you are a first year, it’s very likely these are your first exams at university. Wouldn’t it be helpful to know whether you’re on the right lines and what you need to do to improve for next time around?

A mark is just an average of how you performed in a particular unit - it is a two-digit number which is intended to summarise a semester’s worth of work. Just a mark does not help that much with helping students develop. Does a mark of 57 mean you’re doing the same in all questions, or does it mean you’ve got a pretty solid grip of one area but are let down by other areas? Does a mark of 65 mean you’re fine for a 2:1? Or does it mean that you’re getting outstanding marks in one section of the exam but are just scraping a pass in another?

It’s difficult to tell what it means - which is why I agree with Kate’s campaign to get feedback on exams. It might be difficult to accomplish, but it is well worth doing. Students want to know how they are doing, not just on coursework throughout the semester but on all work we do - including exams. It helps us learn - isn’t that what universities are all about?

Alan Johnson’s recent announcement to axe maths GCSE coursework and have all other coursework done under strict supervision is a major step backwards. The concept that years and years of study can be compressed into a one-hour exam is not only unfair towards students but it leads to schools teaching how to pass an exam, rather than inspiring students in their subject.The boring repetition of material dulls children’s minds and instead of enthusing them to continue with higher education causes them to drop out at sixteen with a few GCSEs or in worrying high numbers of cases, with no GCSEs at all.

If our education system treated young people as adults letting them work on their own and made them want to learn more about their subject, more would stick with education. New Labour can crow “education education education” but at the end of the day with youth crime on the rise, what do they have to show for it?