Educational Assessment System Reform

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Emma Lewell in the Chair]

14:30

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered reforming the educational assessment system.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. Over the summer, another cohort of young people finished their exams, marking the end of a period that left many feeling overwhelmed, anxious or uncertain about the future. Young people are growing up at the sharp end of so many challenges. We can see that reflected in recent figures from NHS England: one in four young people are struggling with their mental health, and the number of 16 to 24-year-olds with a common mental health condition is up by more than a third in a decade.

We face an unprecedented a youth mental health crisis. I am proud to sit behind a Labour Government that recognise the scale of the challenge. Almost 1 million more pupils will have access to school-based mental health support this year, and 6,700 additional mental health workers have been recruited since last July. But we cannot ignore the impact that the exam system is having on children and young people’s mental health. We must go further.

Paddy, a YoungMinds activist, gave a striking account of his A-level experience. He said that:

“From the start of Year 13,1 found it difficult to think about anything other than exams. At school, I would hardly eat anything, as I was so focussed on studying. The exams massively heightened my OCD. It seemed to know these exams were incredibly important to me, and it went on the attack. The peak was the night before one exam, when I had a complete breakdown and could not stop crying. The pressure was enormous, and I felt like I was drowning in the sea of pressure. Two years after finishing my exams, I still have nightmares about them, imagining I’m back in the exam hall.”

Paddy’s experience is not an isolated example. Research from the YoungMinds Missing the Mark campaign reveals the profound impact that exams are having on children and young people. Over 60% of GCSE and A-level students struggled to cope during exam season, with many experiencing panic attacks, or even suicidal thoughts and self-harm, and taking time off school. At just 11 years old, year 6 pupils said that their SATS made them question their abilities for the first time in their lives, losing confidence and missing out on sleep as a result.

Let me be clear: I am not making an anti-exams argument. Exams help to level the playing field, and there will always be a place for them. But there is a clear imbalance in the system. Young people are simply sitting too many exams in a concentrated timeframe that puts unacceptable pressure on pupils and teachers alike. Reforms to GCSEs over the last decade have led to an eight-hour increase in exam time, with end-of-course exams nearly all taken over a period of six weeks in a single summer term. Sixteen-year-olds in England spend approximately 31.5 hours sitting their GCSE exams. Compare that to Victoria in Australia, where students in low secondary sit around four hours of centralised exams; in Alberta in Canada it is 10 hours, in Poland it is 12, and in the Republic of Ireland it is 16.

I argue that we are now seeing the fallout of those changes: a much less flexible system that is contributing to a deepening mental health crisis. Eight in 10 education leaders surveyed by the Association of School and College Leaders said that reformed GCSEs had created greater levels of stress and anxiety among their students.

The current system is not just damaging to wellbeing; it is failing to effectively assess the skills that young people need today. A focus on memory recall is pushing educators to teach to the test, covering content at pace at the expense of developing a depth of understanding.

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for the way in which he has tirelessly championed young people and their mental health since entering Parliament. Over the summer I held a number of workshops with young people and families with special educational needs, as well as schools, to understand their concerns about the ways the current system is failing young people. If the Government are to succeed in their worthy ambition of delivering more inclusive mainstream education—which we know is in every young person’s best interest, if we can deliver it well—would he agree that it is vital that we get our reforms to assessment right, and speak to it in an integrated way, to ensure that every young person can be set up to succeed and thrive at school?

[Josh Dean]

I could not agree more with the point my hon. Friend makes. I held a number of roundtables with parents and carers in my constituency over the summer as well. We were discussing the SEN challenges we face in Hertfordshire. At every session I held, parents and carers talked about the inflexibility of the system. Getting the reforms right to ensure that the system provides that flexibility and caters for all students could not be more important.

My hon. Friend is right to highlight that, because everything we have talked about so far disproportionately impacts the most disadvantaged. Schools in the most deprived areas spend more time preparing for SATs; 76% of children with SEND do not reach the expected standards at the end of year 6, which rises to 91% of pupils with an education, health and care plan. Students with a history of poor mental health are at particular risk, which is even more acute for care-experienced young people, given the prevalence of mental health conditions in that group. Young people deserve a fairer, more balanced approach to assessment, where wellbeing and academic success are not at odds with one another.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate and on his speech. Does he agree that it is an unacceptable feature of our education system that around a third of young people leave school without a recognised qualification, a grade 4 in English or maths? For many of those young people, the way that the system treats resits traps them in a cycle of demoralising continuous failure, just at the point when they should be discovering their passion—the thing they are good at—and should be preparing to get new qualifications and succeed in life? Does he agree that we need urgent work to stop that cycle of failure both upstream in schools and in post-16 education?

[Josh Dean]

Again, I could not agree more. Being trapped in that cycle of failure leaves a mark on young people. We want young people to leave school ready for work and life, and to thrive with confidence. A system that grinds them down cannot be correct. I could not agree more on the point of post-16. I have had a number of conversations about that over recent weeks. That is an area that desperately needs reform, so that we get our young people ready to thrive in life.

The independent curriculum and assessment review offers a vital opportunity to tackle that injustice and one of the upstream drivers of the youth mental health crisis, and build a system fit for the 21st century. No 11-year-old child should feel bad about themselves because of exams. SATs are used to rank the performance of schools; they are not supporting children’s learning.

Timed tests over four days in year 6 are neither a reliable way to capture a pupil’s knowledge and abilities, nor a way to monitor school standards. Assessment should support a pupil’s learning and be clearly separated from school performance metrics, because placing the burden of accountability on children at such a formative age cannot be right.

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is giving a powerful account of the inadequacy of SATs. Does he agree that the fact that so many secondary schools retest their pupils when they arrive shows that they do not have trust in SATs either?

[Josh Dean]

I cannot remember the numbers off the top of my head, but my hon. Friend is right to highlight the number of secondary schools that retest students because of the lack of reliance and belief that SATs accurately measure their ability. We urgently need to rethink our approach to assessment at the primary level, and all options should be on the table. I would be grateful if the Minister could address the concern around SATs in her response, and confirm the Department’s commitment to addressing them when the curriculum and assessment review concludes.

We need to rebalance the system, reducing the dominance of high-stakes, end-of-course exams for GCSE and A-level students. A diversification of assessment methods could reduce pressure on young people, allowing them to showcase a broader range of strengths and better prepare them for life after school. I would be grateful if the Minister could confirm whether the Department would implement such an approach, should it be recommended in the independent curriculum and assessment review’s final report.

Moving away from reliance on traditional exams and reducing the volume of exams that young people sit does not mean sacrificing rigour, as set out in Cambridge OCR’s “Striking the balance” report. It concluded that the overall volume of exams can be reduced without impacting the reliability of grades, and that greater consideration should be given to non-exam assessments. A well-designed, modular, multimodal system could be equally robust and offer fairer, more balanced ways to measure achievement. Universities across the country already do that to great effect and could offer a model to learn from for our school system.

More widely, a whole-school approach is essential to supporting children and young people’s mental health. An assessment system that balances wellbeing and academic success would be complemented by a curriculum, teaching and learning approach that promotes resilience and supports social and emotional learning. Will the Minister confirm that wellbeing will be a central focus in the Department’s approach when it comes to implementing the findings of the independent curriculum and assessment review and more generally?

I am under no illusions that reform of the assessment system is a silver bullet to resolve the youth mental health crisis. Young people sit at the intersection of many complicated challenges, and this must be part of a wider piece of work to support them. I recognise that it will take time and will need to be phased in, to avoid overwhelming the education system, in consultation with our educators. But children and young people are experts in their experiences. When they tell us something is wrong, it is our responsibility in this House to listen and act accordingly, not decide that we know better.

The last major reform of the assessment system took place a decade ago. We cannot miss this opportunity to get it right for young people. They need us to embrace ambitious reform now, not in another 10 years, to help tackle the youth mental health crisis and deliver a lasting assessment system that supports their wellbeing and their academic success and better prepares them for work and life.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Emma Lewell (in the Chair)]

Order. We will have to limit contributions to three and a half minutes.

09:49

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this hugely important debate and for the way he highlighted the mental health impact of exams on children and young people.

I have been contacted by further education lecturers in my constituency who are increasingly worried about the strain that the current assessment system places on both staff and students. Each year, young people are required to resit GCSE English and maths, often several times, even when they have shown real ability in their chosen vocational courses. Many of these students are capable, hard-working and determined, yet they are being judged on a single written exam that often bears little relation to the skills they will need for work or further study.

Those with learning difficulties, other disabilities or complex personal circumstances are particularly disadvantaged by this one-size-fits-all approach. As someone who worked as a university lecturer for many years before being elected to this place, I have seen how different students learn and demonstrate knowledge in very different ways, and the current model leaves too little room for that individuality.

Our local colleges work tirelessly to support our young people, often with fewer resources, larger class sizes and lower pay than schools. The pressure this creates for both students and staff is enormous, and it is clear that the current GCSE resit system is not giving young people the time or tailored support they need to succeed. We should be exploring fairer, more flexible ways for students to demonstrate their progress, such as modular assessments, more coursework or improved functional skills routes that focus on practical communication and literacy.

Too many young people are being held back by a system that measures only a narrow kind of success. Assessment is important, but it should be formative, build confidence and open up opportunity, helping every learner to move forward rather than leaving them stuck in a place. An overview of the assessment system is needed so that every student in Stratford-on-Avon and across the country can develop their skills and unlock their potential.

14:39

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. Ours is a one-size-fits-all system, and it should not be, because one size does not fit all. That was certainly the message I took loud and clear from the SEND roundtable that I hosted in Corby and East Northamptonshire when we brought parents, schools and others together.

SATs measure a school’s performance; they do not measure a child’s potential. The numbers speak for themselves: 56% of 10 and 11-year-olds say that SATs were the first time that they really worried about their abilities, 35% said that SATs made them feel ill, and 28% said that SATs made them feel bad about themselves. Let us be honest: exams are damaging young people’s mental health.

We are one of the most over-assessed countries in the world. In Finland they do not assess at all until 16, but their children still learn and their teachers are still trusted. If we are to have primary school assessment, there must be much lower stakes. High stakes exams are not the only way to see what a child can do. We need to put trust back into our teaching professionals. They know their pupils best—they see them learn, grow and shine every single day. I welcome the Government’s ambition to move from half of young people going to university to two-thirds going on to either university or an apprenticeship. That is the right direction. Not all are good at exams. I went down the apprenticeship route, and I know first hand that there are many routes to success.

Too often, our system tells young people that they have failed—“How did you get on in that exam?”, “I failed”—but that is not the way we should be doing it. Children might struggle through SATs, GCSEs and endless English and maths resits, yet once they get to work they start to thrive. That is not their fault; that is the system we have built. Our system risks teachers teaching for the test not for the child, and the whole of year 6 gets wiped out because of SATs.

I have heard children turning down opportunities for things like sport, or for time with their friends, because they say they need to study for their SATs. Clearly that is not right. Ten-year-olds should be outside playing, not losing sleep over league tables. I am looking forward to the full conclusion of the curriculum and assessment review, and I hope it is radical because tinkering at the edges will not do. We need an education system that lifts children up, not one that weighs them down, and one that measures potential, not pressure. It is time to build a system that helps every child to find their path, their purpose and, most importantly, their pride.

14:47

[Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con)]

It is good to see you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. Assessment in education is obviously one of the most important aspects of what we do in education. It gives children a chance to show what they have learned, what they can do, and we want that to be stretching, but also to be fair. Anything that measures our attainment is inherently somewhat stressful. We also want to prepare children for adult life, and part of that is learning to deal with stress and to make it work in a positive direction.

We obviously do not want exams to be overly stressful, and I commend the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for his work on mental health. He poses this as a mental health question, and it is true that there is an upward trend in mental ill health in children in this country and, by the way, in most other countries in the developed world, although they do not all have the same exam system as us. France and the United States have very different exam systems, with one largely a terminal exam system and the other not, but we see a pattern that is essentially the same.

A linear study and terminal exams give us some important things. They give us consistency, transparency, and comparability across the country. Because the exams come at the end we can synthesise knowledge, so it is not just a test of what someone happens to have learned for a test, but it is putting together different aspects of knowledge. It is not just one big exam. First, there are seven, eight, nine or 10 subjects, and typically two papers and multiple formats—multiple choice, short-form open questions, essay questions, orals and practicals in different subjects. Ironically, if we reduce the number of papers we would increase the high-stakes nature of tests that come at the end of study. It is possible that if we had continuous assessments, we might not get rid of stress but just stretch it out over a longer period because, as I said, any assessment inherently has some stress attached.

Let me talk briefly about younger children, because that issue is different. SATs are not public exams, and no child should ever be put under pressure coming up to SATs. SATs are a measure of schools, not pupils—I promise that when someone applies for a job or university in adult life, nobody will ever ask them what they got in their SATs. That is not what they are for. The biggest effect that they could have is what set a child gets into in year 7. But ironically, as the hon. Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) said, schools do that anyway. Even if we got rid of a high-stakes assessment at the end of year 6, there would still be one in year 7. I repeat that no child should be put under pressure about SATs. That is not their purpose.

I wanted to say a lot, but that is not going to happen in three and a half minutes. I briefly ask the Minister to confirm that Progress 8 is coming back. We have not been able to do Progress 8 for a couple of years because of covid and not having a baseline, but it is by far the better measure—much better than contextual value added or a raw score. Please will the Minister confirm that the Government are not looking at getting rid of handwritten exams done in exam conditions? Those are the best way to guarantee security of assessment and to ensure that handwriting development continues apace.

We should have an open mind on resits. The point about the policy is not to have more people sitting exams but to carry on studying English and maths. That in itself is a good objective, but we should be open about how it is achieved.

14:51

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) on securing today’s debate.

The assessment system is so broken that it is breaking our young people. It shows that those who can pass exams do well and those who cannot do not do so well. It assesses what people cannot recall or pull together as opposed to emphasising their strengths and building on their knowledge base, skills and talents. I have long researched this issue and believe it is time for the Government to be bold and welcome this review. The level of mental health issues, stress, trauma and anxiety among our young people is unsustainable. We have to change course. That is why I support the recommendation to scrap the SATs assessments, which place such pressure on our young people.

There are other forms of assessment that can continue to map a child’s journey. Assessment should be a continual process for educators, to stretch their pupils and ensure that students can move on to the next stage of their learning. That is what we should do: enable teachers to use their professional skills to maximise a child’s learning journey, stretch their creativity and give them a hunger to explore curiosity and critical thinking—the skills that are so needed in our economy today and which employers often say are so lacking among new starters.

Every child learns differently so the way they are assessed should reflect that diversity so that the fullness of their learning journey can be reflected in the assessments. I hope that we adopt a much more comprehensive form of assessment, in which we look at the diversity of how children express themselves. That should also be ongoing: people who can cram for exams have an advantage over those who process information and apply skills in very different ways. I say again in this Chamber that I recommend listening to the work of Sir Ken Robinson, which highlights how the education and assessment system must change.

Scrap the SATs. We do not need them in our education system. It is not right that young children should be so stressed. I have a challenge for the Government around GCSEs, given that children do not leave school any more. We need to think about how we prepare our young people for the next stages of life, showing that they have proficiency in their learning and encouraging children to stay with and enjoy their learning. If we are to prepare people for the rest of their lives, when they will not continue to sit exams, let us think about portfolios of assignments—learning journals and project work that reflects the reality of the society that we live in. Let us enable people to have those portfolios that they can use as evidence. That would involve the skills needed and mean we could assess better through a modulated system.

14:54

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this debate.

With severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and dyslexia, I struggled at school and hated exams. The current system of exam-based learning has a role to play in higher education, but it is far from perfect. Today I will focus on the changes we can make to the assessment system so that it is fairer on neurodiverse students because there is an attainment gap. The British Dyslexia Association found that in the 2023-24 academic year, just two in 10 students with special educational needs achieved a grade 5 or above in English and maths GCSE, compared with over half the students without SEND—that is an attainment gap of over 30%. Current assessments, such as GCSEs, are focused on an intense number of written exams, which favour good memory recall, fluent reading and writing and correct spelling in a high-pressure, timed environment.

When someone’s strength lies in creative thinking, problem solving or practical or artistic work, then exams are not testing or rewarding for their strengths. While assistive technologies can make a huge difference, they are not available for too many neurodiverse people. The BDA found that only one in five dyslexic pupils say they have access to assistive technology at school—that is shocking. The bigger problem is that too many neurodiverse kids do not have their needs identified at all. I come back to to dyslexia: 80% of dyslexics will leave school without their needs formally identified—unless, of course, they are lucky enough to come from a high income family, as 90% of children from households earning over £100,000 have a formal diagnosis, according to the BDA. That is just not fair. The result is not just an attainment gap, but damage to mental health. Seven in 10 people with dyslexia say it has made them feel bad about themselves—I know that all too well. Nearly eight in 10 say people assume they are not clever.

I have a list of demands for the Minister today—and they are demands, because things as they stand really are not good enough. One, identify and support needs for early universal screening and better teacher training on neurodivergence. I have written to the Minister to ask for a meeting on that and I am still waiting to hear back. Two, reduce the intensity and number of exams and have more coursework or continuous assessments where possible. Three, introduce and properly invest in more vocational and functional pathways. Yeovil college in my constituency is fantastic at that. Four, invest in access to assistive technologies and integrate it into teacher training and testing as early as possible. Five, get a designated mental health professional in every school who is trained to support SEND children with anxiety at school. Finally, look at removing spelling, punctuation, and grammar marks from non-English exams.

As listeners can tell, I struggle even reading my own speech. People are struggling on a daily basis and we need that support. If we act on this, we can finally move towards an education system that teaches and tests for the strengths in all of us. Surely that can only be a good thing.

14:58

[Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this crucial debate.

Teachers and parents alike tell me the same thing: there is too much pressure and not enough time to focus on children as people. We all want an assessment system that raises standards and helps children reach their full potential. Right now, the pressure it creates is doing the opposite. It is piling stress on pupils, parents and teachers, affecting confidence, wellbeing and learning and leaving too many children feeling like they are being judged and not supported. Too often schools feel like a conveyor belt, moving children along whether or not they are ready and sorting them by how well they cope—not by what they can do.

Our current system focuses on what children know without fully understanding what helps them learn. If we want to improve attainment, we have to look at the emotional, social and behavioural foundations that sit underneath it. When a child feels safe, calm and supported, they achieve more. That is what Nurture UK has been showing for over 50 years. It works with schools across the country helping teachers to assess and support children’s social and emotional development through tools such as the Boxall Profile assessment tool and interventions based on the six principles of nurture. These are rooted in the importance of supporting children to build secure attachments as a basis for lasting resilience and happiness in school. It is a low-cost, evidence-based way for schools to understand how pupils are coping and step in early when they need to.

Schools that embed nurture approaches see improved attendance, better behaviour, fewer exclusions and stronger progress. Just ask James Roach, CEO of the Inclusive Multi Academy Trust, who says that

“the impact of this approach is evident in the significant improvements we’ve seen in attendance, behaviour, and a reduction in exclusions.”

It is a simple truth: when we invest in children’s emotional and social wellbeing, academic outcomes rise. That is what we should be building into assessment reform. Through my work as chair of the inclusion and nurture in education all-party parliamentary group, I am working closely with Nurture UK, the charity leading this work, to explore how we can make these approaches part of everyday practice in schools. If we want higher standards, we need to give every child the right conditions to meet them. Emotional and social development should be recognised as part of learning, not left to chance.

I have three asks for the Minister. The first is to make sure that schools can assess pupils’ social and emotional development alongside their academic progress so that we understand what is helping or holding back learning. The second is to strengthen support around exams and results. Those moments can be overwhelming, so pupils need guidance and reassurance to get through them. The third is to protect the classroom and make it a safe and stable place, especially during times of pressure. Teachers need time, training and trust to nurture as well as teach. These are simple, practical steps that would lift wellbeing and achievement. If we get this right, we will have a system that works for children, parents and teachers—one that finally gives every child the space to do their best and thrive.

15:01

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this debate and for the personal story he told. That always helps us to focus on where we are and where we need to be.

The issue of educational assessment affects every single constituency within this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As every parent, grandparent and teacher knows, exam times are stressful, whether that stress comes from knowing that their child is not studying at all, thinking that they are studying too much, knowing that they are stressed out themselves or worrying that they will not reach their potential. All of it seems incredibly stressful and worrisome. I can still remember the advice that my mother gave to me—wee wise woman that she is, now 94 years of age—“Do your best, work hard and leave the rest to God.” I think that is where we all want to be. It did not do me any harm in my life.

At exam results time in my constituency, I always strive to tell my story. I am the MP for Strangford. I did my GCSEs; I did not do A-levels. The path to success does not always have to be academic. I say that with great respect to those who decide to go that way—I am not against that. It is about making sure that everyone has a chance. I know many businessmen and women who left school at 16 and are multimillionaires. Hard work and good character are their qualifications. My point is that people can achieve their goals in other ways. Exams are not the be-all and end-all. However, they are undoubtedly part of life, and rightly so. Any teacher will tell us that assessment is needed to ensure that a child is getting the help they need and understanding the things they need to.

We are all aware that there are more children with differing needs, and they may well require different assessments. Official stats show a significant rise in autism diagnoses among school-aged children, with the prevalence rate in Northern Ireland increasing from approximately 1.2% in 2009 to 5.8%. However, we know that a diagnosis of autism is an indication not of the level of intelligence, but that a different approach is needed to get the best from that child. That is the way to do it. It does not mean that they are less able; it just means that we need to do it a different way. That is what we need to look at: how do we tailor educational assessment to the large range of needs that mainstream education is dealing with? I believe that that begins with support for teachers in lesson planning to ensure that they can reach a full class that may have a range of very different needs.

The hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford raised some points about assessments being changed, but I believe that our entire approach needs to change. We need an approach that values vocational callings as well as academic ones, and in which children feel that they succeed not because they managed to pass maths, but because they learned their skills well—a system in which academic children can thrive and hands-on learning can be equal.

That will not come by changing exam structures, but by changing the system of education from the ground up. I know that it is the desire of teachers throughout this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to help children to achieve their best, find job fulfilment and be confident in their strengths. I look to my grandchildren—I have six of them, from the age of three to 16—and know that their futures, in each of their own unique ways, are bright. We need an education system that facilitates those ways. That is the change we all need to achieve.

15:05

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this important debate. I also thank the charity YoungMinds for its hard work and dedication to supporting young people’s mental health and wellbeing. I had the privilege of meeting its representatives at the Labour party conference, having previously attended its Missing the Mark event here in Parliament.

It has become clear to me, especially since becoming an MP, how frequently mental health issues appear across many different areas of policy, and how poor mental health in childhood can have knock-on effects on a young person’s future life chances. The impact that school assessments have on the future of our children should not be underestimated. I look forward to considering the upcoming schools White Paper to see how we can implement the changes we need to help our children.

In my constituency of Wolverhampton West, I hear time and again from parents and teachers about the need for improved SEND support. Almost 20% of pupils in our schools have identified special educational needs, and reports indicate that special educational needs are most prevalent in pupils as young as nine years old. Some 96% of headteachers have expressed concern that SATs have a negative impact on the wellbeing of their pupils. Is it not therefore time to consider whether we actually need these exams for our children? At secondary school level, 63% of students say that they struggle to cope in the lead-up to GCSEs and A-levels, and that figure rises to nearly 80% for those with special educational needs. Something needs to change.

When we talk about early intervention to protect our children, we need to consider the reform of the educational assessment system that all our young people go through, which could also alleviate pressures on key NHS and SEND services. How many times have we heard the phrase, “Prevention is better than cure”? As parliamentarians, we have real opportunities to deliver change and make tangible differences to the lives of so many. We need to adopt a joined-up approach to supporting our children—one that links a reformed, child-centred educational assessment system with a holistic strategy for supporting the mental health needs of our young people. We can then provide a future from which we will all benefit.

15:08

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing the debate.

The current assessment system is failing our children, our teachers and our society. A combination of factors is at play: the focus of school inspections and parental choice on arbitrary pass rates; the narrowing of the curriculum, which devalues creative and vocational subjects; the failure to maintain school funding, which leaves headteachers little choice but to run schools on a shoestring; the explosion in poor mental health and additional educational needs; the long-term impact of the pandemic on children and learning; and the move to digital, which is increasing the pace of life and risks leaving so many children behind.

I should be clear that assessments of progress are important. There is value in benchmarking our children against age-related expectations, using their progress to assess the quality of teaching and helping parents to find the right schools for their children. For most children, it is also reasonable to feel some level of stress. That is a natural part of life, and understanding how we respond to it helps us with our own coping mechanisms and helps us to deal with bigger stressful life events as we grow up. However, it is fairly obvious that some children are not going to meet the so-called normal expectations.

Let me tell the story of a very special child. To protect their identity, I am calling them Taylor. They could not do their alphabet when they started school; they failed their phonics, their key stage 1 test and their key stage 2 SATs. They were finally placed on the SEN register at around 11, but they were not supported. They were assessed as having a reading age of seven years and nine months at age 14, yet the school forced them to continue with a full eight GCSE programme. The school forced them to progress in English and maths knowing they were destined to fail. The mental health impact of failing everything throughout their whole childhood was so devastating, on top of covid and the other pressures on their young life, that they ended up out of school and out of hope. They ended year 11 with no qualifications and no school.

Their story is far from unique—500 children a day are referred to mental health services for anxiety and four in five education leaders say that reformed GCSEs have created greater levels of stress and anxiety. Just under half the children who fail to make the grade at 16 were judged as falling behind at the age of just five. Those children, when identified early, can be stopped from failing throughout their life. They are not stupid; they learn differently, and they need a more inclusive school, a better curriculum and a system that is based not on remembering stuff, but on applying their skills and talents to help them to meet their potential.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

I recognise that my constituency has a bad name in this area, because it was largely my predecessor MP who introduced the kind of memorising curriculum that my hon. Friend refers to. Does my hon. Friend agree that to preserve the mental health of our young people, and to maximise their human capacity, there is no point in just testing their ability to remember and regurgitate after two years? Instead, we should engage their creativity and critical thinking skills, and go back to some element of continuous assessment.

[Vikki Slade]

I absolutely agree. I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and allowing me to pause in my emotion. My constituent Kaisey did not pass her English and maths GCSEs. She got close, but she was forced to resit them at college where she went backwards. Now she is being blocked from progressing on her chosen course in animation, and her mum is being told that her daughter cannot access functional English and maths until she is 19, despite her passing the level 2 creative courses that would allow her to progress. A special school would allow her to take those functional courses. Her mum said:

“The resit crisis is leaving students feeling failures and is demoralising, especially to SEN students who may never be able to achieve a Grade 4”.

There is no reason why these children should be forced into a cycle of doom.

To go back to Taylor and what happened to him, he has now been scooped up by the brilliant special Linwood school, where the staff have rebuilt his self-esteem. He flew through his functional English, he is now on to maths, he has passed a home cooking BTEC, and he aspires to be a teaching assistant in a school for autistic children. I want to challenge the Minister on removing the forced retakes of English and maths GCSEs, having a more holistic range of courses and, as some of us just heard in the Dingley’s Promise roundtable, having reasonable adjustments in classrooms to help every child to learn and achieve better outcomes, and to improve their happiness.

15:13

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

Before the summer recess, I hosted a “Truth about SATs” parliamentary drop-in with educational reform group More Than a Score. It was a great event, with MPs from all sides of the House sitting down to take some mock SATs exams themselves. Lots of colleagues sat there quite relaxed, chatting to others and evidently fairly confident that these exams for 11-year-olds would not be too taxing. Then the worksheets arrived, and faces fell. That is why I hosted the event in the first place; I saw at first hand why over three quarters of parents think SATs harm children’s mental health, and why 93% of headteachers want the Government to review the entire system.

The spelling, punctuation and grammar exams are stuffed to the brim with questions such as “What is a fronted adverbial?” and “Circle the modal verb”, and questions about subjunctives, determinants, inverted commas, prepositions and past progressives. We all use these grammatical structures automatically, and of course children need to be able to use them in reading and writing, but these are things that intelligent, hard-working adults up and down the country have trouble identifying, and understandably so. Do we really need such an intensive focus on labelling these devices instead of using them? No one is saying that we should not have high standards, nor is anyone saying that grammar is not important, but there are serious questions about whether that is the best way to teach it.

In four—sometimes five—out of seven years of primary school, children are taking statutory exams. The results of those exams, as we have heard, are important to schools as they are used for accountability. Department for Education officials can use key stage 2 performance data when setting criteria for allocating additional funding, which leads to teaching to a test, focusing on a narrower curriculum with the hope that it leads to better scores for the kids, which schools—strapped for funding for years under the last Government—really need.

There is a real danger that the exams will put kids off learning for life. Cramming a student’s head full of fronted adverbials and the like is not a recipe for a love of literature and language, funnily enough. This is a key concern of teachers and parents who lament that a focus on spelling, punctuation and grammar tests does nothing to encourage students to think creatively about reading and writing. We need to be clear about what exactly we are testing across the different stages of education. Are we focusing too much on detailed knowledge in some areas when we should be increasing our assessment of broader understanding and skills instead? We now have a Government willing to properly look at the shortcomings of curriculum and assessment, and I really look forward to the outcome of the review. The interim report talks ambitiously about empowering teachers to foster a love of learning. I hope to see more of that thinking in the final report.

During my first year here I have had a lot of discussions around the importance of strengthening critical thinking skills earlier in the curriculum, as has been mentioned, particularly in this age we live in of online misinformation and the need to be able to tell truth from fiction from a much younger age than has perhaps been critical in the past. An ambitious and modern review would tackle these problems head on. Although the interim report gives a nod to critical thinking, I would like to see more of a focus there.

To conclude, we have a real need to balance assessment, which is necessary to achieve high standards, alongside a curriculum that gives children the freedom to build a curious and inquisitive relationship with learning.

15:16

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this important debate. For everybody in this room and every educationalist across the country, the aim is to get the best from every child at every age, from kindergarten through primary, secondary and whatever path they choose to take going forward, whether it is university or apprenticeships. However, where we are with our education system and our assessment system does not help us get to that point. As we have heard, our exam system is pushing young people to their limits. For some, exams are the right tool and they are excited by them—they are built for the exams and will show the best version of themselves—but for many, exams are not that vehicle.

Last summer, nearly two thirds of students sitting their GCSEs and A-levels said that they struggled to cope, with many reporting panic attacks, self-harm and even suicidal thoughts. Over a third of 10 and 11-year-olds said SATs made them feel ill, and more than half worried about their abilities for the first time. Those figures tell us something is profoundly wrong. Our assessment system is damaging the very young people it is meant to serve. We have created an environment where success is defined by performance in a few hours of high-stakes exams, rather than by sustained learning or genuine understanding.

Only around 5% of primary school leaders believe that SATs reflect a child’s true ability, and just 3% think that they accurately measure school performance. Exams are meant to measure learning, not resilience under stress. We need a system that uses a fairer mix of assessment methods, combining exams with course work, project work and modular or digital assessments to better reflect the diverse strengths of every student.

[Warinder Juss]

Does the hon. Member agree that exams do not even test resilience? I consider myself to be quite a resilient person, but I used to hate exams. Even though I retook my A-levels and succeeded in getting them, for years afterwards I used to have dreams about not having passed my A-levels, and I do not think that is an uncommon story.

[Iqbal Mohamed]

I absolutely agree. After my last exam at university, I promised myself that I would never take another exam. Before I became an MP—not since—I had nightmares where I believed I had an exam in the morning and had not revised, which is a common feeling among many.

This debate follows the House’s passing of Third Reading of the Mental Health Bill yesterday. I spoke about remembering the importance of centring young people’s wellbeing and mental health, and how we must create policy and legislation that fits them and their experiences and needs. A constituent recently told me that both her daughters have needed mental health support, primarily because of issues in school and the stress that came with that. The pressures of our education system are part of that picture, and cannot be ignored.

We have heard arguments about some of the benefits of exams, and we should try to find an adaptable hybrid model so that schools can adapt how they test and assess the ability of individual children rather than forcing them down a single, cookie-cutter, regimented process that does not show their capabilities, intelligence or resilience.

Teaching children about resilience has to come from real-world scenarios, and exams that concentrate stresses into two-hour chunks at the end of an academic year do not reflect the realities of life. We all experience stresses, and we should all try to deal with them, but I do not believe, as the hon. Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) mentioned, that they help strengthen children’s resilience.

With the independent curriculum and assessment review expected soon, we have a crucial opportunity to rethink how we assess young people. Reform must place wellbeing, creativity and fairness at its heart, because a child’s worth should never be defined by how they perform under pressure, but by the full range of their potential.

15:21

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing the debate. Leaders at the Derby college group told me that some of their students, including some with special educational needs, get trapped in a seemingly endless cycle of English and maths resits.

Those experiences put enormous pressure on students, contributing to the very poor mental health statistics that we have. I am keen for the Government to look at this issue. The Government are investing significantly in education and driving reform. I hope this debate will help them to consider how changes to the curriculum can improve young people’s mental health.

As a former music teacher, my perspective centres around creative subjects and the creative industries. One study by the American Psychological Association found that students taking music are one year ahead of their new non-music peers with regards to English and maths, so the higher uptake of creative subjects could go a long way towards helping young people pass their exams with less mental strain.

There is so much evidence for the positive contribution that the arts make to young people’s mental health, in addition to the broader importance of culture to our sense of self, national identity and the economy. The Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music runs the largest national survey of children, adults and teachers about music education. Its 2025 “Making Music” report demonstrates the immense benefits that music brings. Of respondents who currently make music, building confidence and supporting mental health were the third and fourth most important motivations.

The highest ranked motivation was that it was fun, which doubtless improves people’s mental health, too. Three quarters of music teachers surveyed described music lessons as extremely important for the mental health and wellbeing of their students, and employers are clear that they want creativity and critical thinking from their staff. These are precisely the abilities fostered through the arts, but too often they are the first casualty of curriculum pressures. Indeed, 40% of schools no longer offer GCSE music at all.

There are two big updates from the Government that many people are waiting for. The first is the final publication of the curriculum review. In it, many people would like to see greater priority given to creative subjects, which are undermined by aspects of the system at the moment. The English baccalaureate in particular has been identified as a barrier to full engagement with creative subjects. Many people are asking for the EBacc to be scrapped, and we should at the very least look to reform it.

The second announcement we are waiting for is the national centre for arts and music education. There is much excitement about this body, but some of the detail is yet to come. If the Minister could furnish us with some more information about that today, that would be very welcome. However, I was concerned to read recently that the Department has decided to cut the training bursary for music teachers, as well as those doing religious education, English and art and design. I have reached out to the Department about that, but if we could get some of the rationale behind it, I would be very grateful. Given that we have missed our target for music teacher recruitment for many years, we need to be mindful that the new national centre has the workforce to staff it.

As a former music teacher, I have seen at first hand the power of a creative education to change lives. Children coping with the most difficult circumstances, through music and the arts, can connect to something beautiful—something that transcends time and space and gives voice to their expression. I know the Government appreciate and understand that, and I look forward to working with the Minister to deliver life-changing opportunities to children and young people in every part of the United Kingdom.

15:25

[Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell.

Before being elected, I spent nearly two decades as a teacher. I know all too well the realities of working in a system that prioritises teaching to the test at the expense of a creative curriculum, broader educational experiences and, most importantly, pupil wellbeing.

As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for education, I recently led an inquiry into the loss of love of learning. It found that current assessment practices have a significant impact on students’ engagement with, and attitudes towards, learning. One submission highlighted that a system which frames learning through a lens of student deficit rather than progress ultimately ends up demotivating learners and narrowing their sense of possibility. When education is reduced to a means of securing exam results, we lose the intrinsic joy and value of learning itself.

One of the most powerful moments during the inquiry came when a group of primary school children from Wales visited Parliament to give evidence. They were genuinely surprised and, frankly, horrified to learn about the pressure and stress their peers in England face when preparing for SATs—and they were right to be shocked. In England, SATs preparation dominates much of the year 6 curriculum, leaving little room for creativity, exploration or deeper understanding.

Research from More Than a Score found that over three quarters of parents believe that SATs have a detrimental impact on their child’s mental health. More than a third reported that their children were not sleeping properly in the run-up to the exams. Of course, that pressure does not end in primary school. GCSEs and A-levels occupy multiple years of a young person’s life and subject them to immense stress.

According to YoungMinds, pupils sitting their exams last summer reported elevated levels of anxiety, self-harm and even suicidal thoughts. Current systems also disproportionately disadvantage pupils with special educational needs and disabilities—or additional learning needs, as they are known in Wales—as well as those experiencing mental health issues or growing up in a socioeconomically disadvantaged circumstance.

[Rachael Maskell]

I am grateful for what the hon. Member is saying. As well as widening inequality through the current assessment system, which we know occurs, does he not agree that it also stifles social mobility, holding many young people back from the opportunities they could have?

[Steve Witherden]

Yes, I agree 100%.

In 2025, more than 75% of pupils with SEND and over 90% of those with an education, health and care plan did not meet expected standards in their end-of-primary SATs. Many carry that label of failure into secondary school before they have even had the chance to flourish. As someone who is dyslexic, dyscalculic and was functionally illiterate until the age of 11, I know what it feels like to struggle within a system not designed for people like me.

Teachers in schools serving deprived communities consistently report higher levels of pupil anxiety and disengagement related to SATs, compared with their counterparts in more affluent areas. The current high-stakes, one-size-fits-all model is not only outdated; it actively perpetuates inequality. Like Wales, England should abolish SATs. They damage children’s mental health, impose unnecessary stress at a formative age and fail to serve as reliable indicators of pupil or school performance.

At GCSE and A-level, we must reduce our dependence on high-stakes, end-of-course exams or on-demand online assessments, which give pupils—particularly those who struggle under timed conditions—greater opportunity to succeed. For far too long, education policy has been shaped by an obsession with measurable outcomes, too often at the expense of the very learners who most need our support.

I look forward to the final report of the curriculum and assessment review and urge the Government to respond with both ambition and compassion. Let us move beyond high-stakes learning, reduce anxiety in our classrooms, and above all, restore joy, creativity and a love of learning.

15:30

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) on securing this important debate. He spoke passionately about the subject. Although I have no doubt that his personal recollections of education are more recent than my own, I not long ago lived through the trauma of summer exam season vicariously through both my daughters, and I am glad that is behind us now.

The effect of exams on the mental health of our children and young people is clear. The hon. Member eloquently laid out that problem and showed that other respectable education systems have found a way to minimise exam time. It is possible to do that, and incumbent on us to look at doing so. Education is about so much more than the grades a child receives. It is about empowering every child to become the best they can be, ensuring they leave school equipped with the life skills, confidence and resilience they need, to lead happy, healthy and successful lives, whatever path they choose.

Education is about so much more than teaching to the test. It should be about opening minds and lighting a spark, as the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) described so passionately. As the hon. Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) said, social and emotional development is also vital, and as important as academic achievement. At the heart of all this is ensuring that school is enjoyable. Most of us remember that one teacher who inspired us, who turned the light on and sparked a love of something, the one thing we did not mind getting up for in the morning.

I saw a perfect example of that during a recent visit to Stokenham primary school in my constituency. There is a forest school behind the school buildings where children learn through exploring their natural environment in a wonderful wooded area, beautifully demonstrating the importance of learning beyond the classroom, and the creative ways we can bring education alive. That is truly the highlight of the week for all the kids. It might also be music, drama, art or sport, textiles, food tech or woodwork. A holistic approach to education is vital because it nurtures social and creative skills that are just as important as the core subjects of English and maths. If a narrow approach to the curriculum is pursued, enriching experiences such as those risk being pushed to the bottom of the pile.

Lessons that foster interpersonal, creative and emotional skills have their place alongside traditional subjects that are measured in exams. Music has been shown to improve performance in maths, helping children to recognise patterns and sequences, improving memory and recall, as I am sure the hon. Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) will agree.

Standardised testing remains important. Exams play a vital role in maintaining high educational standards and provide a clear, objective measure of achievement. As the Sutton Trust highlights, anonymous, externally marked exams help to level the playing field for pupils from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. They act as a crucial equaliser for students who may not have support at home for coursework, and they are less susceptible to the biases that can arise in teacher assessments or oral exams.

We heard passionate speeches from the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds), the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) and other Members that SATs at 11 should not be included in standardised testing. As the Government’s interim report recognises, the current one-size-fits-all approach is letting down some students. Pupils start sitting exams from the age of 11, and their experience is clear: the system puts enormous pressure on our young people and their mental health. We must take the opportunity to think about how we assess their ability. That is clearly demonstrated in the surge in pupils resitting GCSE English and maths. This year, just under 400,000 students resat those subjects, accounting for 23% of all GCSE entries.

The current system that pushes young people to resit the assessments quickly after their first attempt is flawed. Over-16s are caught in a cycle of repeated resits, with the number of 18-year-olds resitting those subjects rising by nearly 20% from last year. Those students risk falling into a dispiriting cycle, feeling they have failed because they cannot pass the exam and being forced to redo it again and again. Understandably, that has a detrimental impact on their mental health, with repeated resits and a rigid assessment system contributing to heightened anxiety and stress. Alongside increasing support for those pupils to get through their English and maths, we must look at the viability of an alternative functional assessment that better fits ability.

We must also reconsider how certain other subjects are assessed in the first place. Evey child will want to pursue their own path, and in certain subjects such as those that are creative, technical and vocational, exams may not be the solution. Our assessment system must reflect that diversity and recognise the many ways in which children can best demonstrate their learning. As the hon. Member for York Central and my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella) said, we all learn differently, so why assess in just one way?

We also need to be mindful that one in every five students has special educational needs. As the Government’s interim report notes, the assessment system needs to be more inclusive, and that inclusivity must extend to those with higher levels of SEND, as highlighted by both the hon. Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern) and my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade). Currently, only 24% of children with SEND meet the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, compared with 62% nationally. That imbalance is unacceptable, and we must work hard to ensure that it is rectified.

Children with SEND deserve the same opportunities to succeed as their peers, and the assessment system must reflect their specific needs, enabling them to progress and thrive in their education, rather than be weighed down by exams that fail to accommodate their abilities. We must be creative in finding other ways to assess ability. My hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance), who has done valuable work on education for pupils with neurodivergence, spoke passionately about this, and I commend him for his work on the subject.

We also need to think outside the box when it comes to subjects such as music, drama, art and sports. These subjects develop crucial creative and emotional skills, yet they are not always best assessed through exams. They are the subjects that bring joy to education and transform schools into places where children are genuinely excited to learn. As the parent of a daughter who now works as a professional costume maker, I have seen the joy and passion that a creative career choice can bring. Given the love that people have for films, it is no less valid than a career in law, medicine, finance, or, dare I say it, politics.

All too often, however, such subjects are being squeezed out of our timetables due to budget cuts, teacher shortages and a curriculum that is often narrowed prematurely as schools are forced to focus on assessment. That is unfair, disproportionately affecting pupils from poorer backgrounds who do not otherwise have access to extracurricular activities to make up for the gaps. As a rural MP, I will say that the problem is exacerbated in rural constituencies, where students may not be able to attend after-school clubs if their only way to get home is on the 3.30 pm school bus. Limited or costly transport options should never be a barrier to creativity and involvement in sports. We must protect, not diminish, those subjects and ensure that every learner has the chance to excel on whatever path they choose.

The Liberal Democrats want children to be able to thrive in a system that allows them to play to their strengths and supports them in their weaknesses, a system that empowers children, where school is a joyful place that encourages children to follow their passions and get excited about their future. The Government’s interim report says that the system is broadly working well, and that exams can be an effective way to assess progress, but it is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work for every pathway, which is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for an assessment system that reflects the diversity of young people’s needs, especially for those with special educational needs.

Holistic teaching and creative subjects have their rightful place in our curriculum, and pupils’ choices should not be narrowed too early to focus solely on examined subjects. Children deserve an exam system that offers choice and equips them with the skills they need, no matter which path they choose to follow. We must find a more balanced approach to assessment: a way to truly assess the gifts and talents that all young people have—because they all do. A system that makes them start to feel like a failure at 11 is just wrong. We owe it to our children to do better and, as the hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) said, lift them up, not weigh them down.

I urge the Minister to take this opportunity to seriously consider broadening our curriculum, expanding the provision of extracurricular activities, and developing an ambitious assessment system that ensures young people leave school equipped with the skills, confidence and opportunity to succeed.

15:38

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this important debate and for his opening remarks. By almost any metric, the English education system is one of the best performing in the world. In the latest programme for international student assessment results, English pupils have continued to score significantly above the OECD average for mathematics, reading and science. England’s average PISA scores were significantly higher than those of SNP-run Scotland and Labour-run Wales. Assessments and exams have led to that. That is what is at stake here—that is what we are discussing, and we should be clear about that.

That success is owed to the foundations of a knowledge-rich curriculum and rigorous and thorough assessment across all stages of a student’s educational build-up. That success story means that the suggestions from Government Members of reforming the educational assessment system—or, alarmingly, scrapping it—need close scrutiny. When launching their review of the curriculum and assessment system in England last year, the Government made it clear that they were taking aim at the examination and assessment system.

[Vikki Slade]

I am just wondering whether the hon. Member was listening to all the speeches about the massive increase in mental health issues for young people. Does he acknowledge the link between that increase and the tightened restrictions and curriculum that he seems to be promoting?

[Saqib Bhatti]

I can assure the hon. Lady that I listened to every speech. As I make progress, I hope to answer her question; if I do not, I will happily take another intervention from her.

The examination and assessment system has ensured that children are learning the basic skills and knowledge needed to succeed in life, that children are improving their understanding in a knowledge-rich curriculum, and that England’s position as an educational world leader in international league tables is secured. The wealth of evidence showing the benefits of exams as a means of assessment is clear, even in the very review of the curriculum and assessment system that the Government commissioned. The interim report, published earlier this year, highlighted that national assessment and qualifications are “working well”, and that examinations such as GCSEs play an important role in driving high standards and ensuring fairness,

“reducing the risk that assessment of students’ performance is influenced by their gender, ethnicity or background.”

Even more encouragingly, polling conducted for the interim report made it clear that students themselves value the role of exams as an

“opportunity to demonstrate everything they have learned in their studies”.

That students themselves recognise the value of exams shows that they understand what this Government seemingly struggle to: that exams offer students of all backgrounds the very best chance to succeed. Our educational system is designed to be a tool of social mobility and to allow the most disadvantaged children to demonstrate their potential—something that replacing exams with coursework would fundamentally undermine. In an instant, every advantage that some children have, such as access to a laptop at home, a tutor or a subscription to an artificial intelligence service, and some children from other backgrounds do not would be baked into our assessment of educational attainment. Students would no longer be rewarded for hard graft in the classroom, which they demonstrate in answering an exam question, but rather for the perks that can access outside school and pass off as their own work.

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

I was a teacher of chemistry and science. Under the new curriculum that was instigated by the Conservative Government, young people had to learn 19 equations for physics, including mass, units and all of that. I can go to Google and ask for that, but as a scientist, what I need is scientific inquiry and the curiosity to ask, “Is this fact real?” Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the change to a knowledge-based system has cut back on the ability for young people to learn curiosity and scientific inquiry?

[Saqib Bhatti]

I do not agree with the hon. Lady. Students need assessment and examinations so they can measure up not just within England but against the international landscape that we operate in. By the way, I am sure that she was an excellent teacher who encouraged and nurtured the curiosity in her children, just as my chemistry teacher and my physics teacher did, but we should be clear about what is at stake here and what is at risk if there are changes to the educational system that we reformed, built and created.

Let me make some progress, and I hope that I can answer the question from the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade). The students who would lose out are the very ones the Government claim they want to protect—the very students in our education system we should all strive to empower. There is no denying that exams can be stressful, as we have all acknowledged. Students want to do well, and they are setting themselves up for future study and careers, so it is no surprise that they feel some pressure—a lot of pressure, even—during exam season.

As my right hon. Friend the Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) said, exams are by their very nature stressful. As a father, it is true that I want to protect my children from every stress and injury, but I also know that they need to go through that process to learn the resilience that they will need to go through life.

[Josh Dean]

The hon. Gentleman has talked a lot about stress. I acknowledge the point about resilience, which is why we need that in the curriculum, but would he equate stress to panic attacks, suicidal thoughts and self-harm? I would say that those are two very different things, and that desperately needs to be addressed in the system.

[Saqib Bhatti]

I will address that question in one second. As the interim report said, students relish the chance to demonstrate their knowledge and capabilities, despite the stress of exams. I was moved by the hon. Gentleman’s speech. He talks about panic attacks, and other people have talked about mental health and wellbeing, so let me be clear: if those things are observed and not accommodated by the current system, Opposition Members will happily look at suggestions and work on a cross-party basis, if we believe that that will improve the system while also protecting our children.

If the Government really want to tackle the challenges affecting student mental health on a day-to-day basis, we have been clear: this is not just about exam season, and we think that banning phones from schools would do far more to relieve many of the social pressures that face young people, and allow them to focus on their educational needs instead. I welcome support from the Government Benches for a proven mechanism that clearly leads to addressing students’ mental health. After speaking to teachers and other stakeholders we are clear about the positive impact that banning mobile phones would have on mental health—[Interruption.] I am happy to take a positive intervention on that.

It is deeply disappointing, if unfortunately not too surprising, that this seems to be the direction that the Government are taking with our education system, given the appalling record of their colleagues in the Welsh Government on education. Even the most disadvantaged children in England achieve better educational outcomes than the average student in Wales, thanks to the Welsh Government choosing ideology over evidence, and it is the students who suffer in the long term.

[Steve Witherden]

Would the hon. Gentleman agree that if we narrow the curriculum, take out the music and drama lessons, fill the curriculum and stack it to the rafters with numeracy and literacy-heavy subjects, all the pedagogies, and teach to the test, with exams, exams, exams, that will lead to better PISA results but not necessarily to better mental health for the students in the system?

[Saqib Bhatti]

Let me address that point directly. First, I am not sure that narrowing the curriculum to that degree would lead to better PISA results. I think the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) spoke about that, and I was nodding my head. I agree that we should have those investments in music that the Government have not committed to—[Interruption.] Let me finish, because it is important to recognise for the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden)—hopefully I have got his constituency right—that Wales, which is run by Labour, has much lower standards. That means less positive outcomes for children, which means less positive outcomes in the rest of their life. It is clear that those children are being let down by Welsh Labour.

We want extracurricular activities. That is why, when I visited Coppice academy in my constituency, which also has a forest school, I was heartened to see all the work that the kids are doing in those schools. Narrowing the curriculum is not what we are talking about. We are talking about something that is wholly rounded, but we must have a standardised and anonymised test system that allows a better level playing field for people from any background to be able to challenge and to thrive in life.

Let me return to the topic at hand. It is almost a month to the day that I welcomed the Minister to her seat, and we had a fantastically packed Chamber where we addressed special educational needs. I wrote to her after that debate, but I have still not had a response. Perhaps she could provide some clarity on the schools White Paper, say what will happen with the SEND reforms and also the curriculum review—I look forward to hearing from her on that, perhaps when she winds up the debate.

The world’s best-performing educational systems test to ensure that all students have a strong grasp of reading, writing and arithmetic in their early years, setting up children for future success at the earliest opportunity in their education. The widespread adoption of phonics testing in year 1 in England has seen English pupils rise up the international league tables, while the Welsh Government’s blind adherence to the widely discredited cueing method and its rejection of phonics testing has seen thousands of Welsh pupils leaving primary school effectively unable to read. Students and parents alike have plentiful cause for concern if that is the sort of education system that the Government want to create in England. I hope that the Minister can wholeheartedly reject the Welsh educational system—one in which thorough assessment of students’ progress has been replaced with a union-influenced aversion to testing in any form.

If the Government do go ahead with banning exams in favour of coursework and formal assessments, they could undermine every major achievement of our education system over the last decade and a half. Academies have changed the lives of their students through the initiative of their leadership. They are already being deprived of the freedoms that they have been used to in leading the way to school improvement and providing a knowledge-rich curriculum that has given every student the opportunity to access quality academic education. That is already being threatened with being dumbed down. If that were to happen, our education system would be left in an even sorrier state.

I hope that the Ministers listen to the views of students and parents. The Conservatives reformed education, and by the time we left, it was one of the best systems in the world. I hope we can keep it that way.

15:50

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing this debate. I know how much work he has done on supporting youth mental health, along with YoungMinds and its wider campaigns. I thank him for his championing of young people. I also thank everyone who took the time to write to the Government’s curriculum and assessment review. I was pleased to hear so many hon. Members talking about conversations they have been having with young people, especially families with children with special educational needs, and bringing their voices to the Chamber—particularly the moving story of Taylor and their experiences. I am glad to hear that they are now thriving.

So many of the contributions have focused on how our education system is not working for some young people. It is true that, on average, we have moved up the league tables, but we have also seen a growing gap for so many young people. It is a disgrace that only a quarter of disadvantaged young people get a grade 5 in their GCSEs. There are too many of those young people who do not get to access all the opportunities that come with it. We have heard time and again, in an absolutely packed Chamber here, how young people with special educational needs are being left behind. As a Government, we want high standards for every student, and no child to be left behind. We want that to be part of our education system.

[Sam Carling]

I wonder whether the Minister has the same experience as I do. When I speak to employers in North West Cambridgeshire, I hear time and again that young people do not have the skills for the workplace and that the education system has not left them with the right mindset and abilities. Is something going direly wrong with the metrics that the Conservatives have left us with when they talk about how we have had one of the best systems in the world?

[Georgia Gould]

One of the really damning statistics is how many young people are not in education, employment or training at the end of the education system. We cannot afford to leave any child behind. Every child needs the best start and to achieve at school. That is what this Government are focused on.

[Rachael Maskell]

Will the Minister look at how young people can develop a portfolio around their learning as you would with professional development as an adult and in employment, so that they can map that journey and use it as part of the assessment portfolio that they could gather as they move through their education?

[Georgia Gould]

The Government are absolutely committed to high standards in English and math and the core learning that young people have, but we also want to see young people have a broad experience at school. I have heard the passion of so many hon. Members talking about the arts. I am a former leader of Camden council, where we heavily invested in the arts to make sure that every pupil had access to learning an instrument and the power that brings. We heard about the collaboration and the joy that the arts bring, and the need to ensure that they are taught well and to a high standard. So, I am absolutely committed to that breadth of education and to making sure that that goes through the education system.

Before I talk about assessment, which is the main topic of discussion today, I want to stress that I hear the depth of concern about young people’s mental health—not just from Members here today, but from the young people that I speak to, who talk about the anxiety and stress of being a teenager and the pressures of the huge amount of information that they are getting, and say that we need to address that as a Government.

It is troubling to see any young person struggle with their wellbeing. It can impact every aspect of a young person’s life, from their relationships and confidence to their ability to learn and thrive in school, as we have heard today. Too many young people have struggled to access the support they need and therefore ended up with the kind of deep anxiety and unacceptable mental health concerns that we have heard about when they face challenges, such as when exams are coming up. We need to make sure that we have the right mental health support for young people when they face challenges.

We want to make sure that help is there early by providing access to specialist mental health professionals in every school and expanding mental health support teams. We estimate that 60% of pupils in schools and further education will be covered by a mental health support team by April 2026—up from 52% in April 2025. Our goal is for all pupils to have access to mental health support in school by 2029-30. To support education staff, my Department provides a range of guidance and practical resources on promoting and supporting pupils’ mental health and wellbeing. Across the system, we are recruiting 8,500 new mental health support staff to support both children and adults. We also recognise how important it is to listen to young people to understand their experiences and make sure that the support that we offer truly meets their needs.

Turning to assessment, it is important to state that well-designed assessments play a critical role in supporting young people to develop and demonstrate their achievement at school. As the curriculum and assessment review interim report states:

“Effective assessment is a crucial component of a high performing education system.”

Members will appreciate that I cannot pre-empt the conclusions and final recommendations of the review while it is still in progress. The review’s final report is due to be published in the coming weeks, at which point the Government will respond on the issues of assessment and accountability that Members have raised.

I want to address some of the concerns that have been raised this afternoon and give reassurance that many of these issues are being looked at carefully in the review. Starting with concerns about primary assessments, including SATs, these assessments help to make sure that pupils are building the core knowledge and skills they need to succeed as they transition to secondary school and throughout their lives. SATs are carefully developed to ensure that they are accessible, but I recognise that the experience can feel stressful for some young people, as we have heard today.

Schools should not be overpreparing children for these assessments and we must be mindful of the pressure that they can have on children. They should not lead to the kinds of stories that we heard today of children feeling that they had to give up different activities because of the stress and pressure they were feeling. It is incumbent on schools to ensure that young people have the skills and knowledge that they need, but also to continue to provide breadth. Members will know that the changes to Ofsted’s accountability make it clear that we want to see a wider focus on inclusion as well as a focus on attainment.

[Lee Barron]

My point is that it is not the schools and the way in which the schools are applying exams; the schools are doing what they can to protect the children. The problem is that the children know they are coming. The children feel the pressure point of the exams coming up. That is why they start to feel how they feel. The reason I can say that is that my daughter is 10, and she is the one who turned down going to the football because she has to revise for her SATs. Parents are trying to manage that situation. But that is the reality. They know it is coming. They feel the pressure point. It is not the school.

[Georgia Gould]

Sorry, I was not trying to suggest that it was, but it is important that, collectively, we create an environment where children know that this assessment is not a pressure on them as an individual, but part of a wider accountability, and that young people should continue to do all the things that bring them joy. That is part of the ongoing conversation we need to have. As I said, we know that there are areas where improvements can be made. We have heard that today. The Department will consider the review’s final recommendations alongside the voices of those calling for change.

As young people move through their secondary education, the stakes understandably become higher. That is why some people argue that if we removed exams, we would take away a lot of the pressure that young people face.

Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).