Does anyone really enjoy exams? We have all sat them - from school assessments to driving tests - and could all share a host of anxiety-inducing memories that have stayed with us to this day (I failed my first driving test before we had even left the test centre car park, dear reader).

Not only are exams stressful, they are also imperfect, with some arguing that results are not always a true reflection of what a child is capable of. And yet, despite all the problems that exams bring with them, they somehow endure.

So, what is it about exams that has allowed them to stand the test of time? One advantage is that they play a valuable role in ensuring equity for all pupils.

A little history on examinations may be a helpful starting point. In ancient China, during the Sui dynasty, around the year 605, what was reportedly the first national organisation of written examinations emerged, with the purpose of recruiting for the Chinese civil service. This system secured greater equity, given that it broadened government recruitment beyond the narrow confines of rich families and patronages.

That examinations were created to offer greater social mobility and to secure equity is a surprise. But their relative anonymity, along with the controlled conditions (the Chinese civil servants were sealed in “examination cells”) remain at the heart of exams today.

Exams are often written off because they are impersonal and anonymise our pupils. Ironically, however, it is their impersonal nature that makes them so effective. They reduce the many natural teacher biases that can blight pupil assessment. And bias is an uncomfortable reality in education. Research has found that some ethnic groups are systematically undergraded while others are systematically overgraded.

What’s more, such assessments can have a knock-on effect for pupil groupings, leaving some pupils stuck in “low sets”, which studies suggest may make it less likely that they will go on to achieve their potential at school.

Standardised tests, for all their faults, offer us national standards and structures that minimise bias.

Of course, there are also ways to reduce bias within teacher assessment. For example, you can attempt to anonymise assessments or provide rigorous standardisation sessions, with multiple teachers applying specific criteria. But this requires rigour and time, along with training to do it well. And even with such measures in place, teacher assessments are still unlikely to prove as equitable for pupils as sitting in an exam hall.

The Covid pandemic may have made the inflexibility of the current exam system more apparent. But it has also shown the difficulty of mobilising effective teacher assessment that is fair and avoids biases against pupils who may already be disadvantaged.

As calls for change to national assessment grow louder, we must ensure that any future changes are equitable for all pupils. Changes to assessment are easy to propose but hard to implement well and fairly. We must ensure that any exam replacements are not gamed and that the importance of equity is right at the heart of any proposals.

Alex Quigley is national content manager at the Education Endowment Foundation. He is a former teacher and the author of Closing the Reading Gap, published by Routledge

This article originally appeared in the 21 May 2021 issue under the headline “Exams aren’t perfect but they are at least fair”