Pens down, please!

With the menacing spectre of the exam season about to torment the sleeping patterns of many students, it is as good a time as any to start questioning whether the hours of adrenaline-fuelled stress are really that helpful to higher education. Certainly, the hectic ritual of cramming vast amounts of information into our grey matter does seem wasteful in an age of Google and Wikipedia. What is more, the whole process of rapidly regurgitating prepared notes onto an exam paper appears trifling when much of this knowledge is duly forgotten within a few years.

However, most students tend to shy away from such reflections. They do so by boasting that participating in an exam is an essential stepping stone to getting a highly graded degree; something that will presumably bolster one’s chances of a prosperous future.

This is a short sighted attitude. Students and examiners alike need to rub their eyes and refocus on whether high class degrees can still be attained without recourse to frenzied ‘wristathons’. I am optimistic that they can. And with this unbridled sense of optimism in mind, I have three proposals for how to facelift the university exam system to suit the needs of the 21st century graduate.

The first proposal is strikingly simple: an oral exam should be in place for every subject. At a time when ideas are increasingly spread via lectures, interviews and discursive forums like TEDtalks and FORA, students need to be able to show their mastery of the subject through the spoken word, not just the written one. The only way of ensuring that these oral skills are embedded in all students is if they are examined. An exam would force many students out of their comfortable shyness, creating confident and lucid communicators. The assessment of tutorials is a handy start, but by no means everything. It is only by oral examination that students cannot escape having to stand and deliver.

The second proposal is more controversial: exams should be word processed, not hand written. Blasphemous as this may sound, there is no reason to continue using pen and paper at university other than a deference to tradition. Its use at school is understandable - everyone needs to learn how to write at speed - but if we have not already learnt how to write at speed after a decade of high octane school exams, we never will. Besides, anyone with eyes in their head must have noticed that written work in every walk of life is now submitted electronically. Just think of scientific journals, newspaper articles, business reports and Facebook posts. To share any idea in today’s world, be it professional, academic or social, it is essential to have a great deal of competence with the typed word.

Furthermore, an exam written via word processing encourages more editing of your own work as you go along, giving the graduate a degree of autonomy over their academic output. And with equal opportunities being a vital component in a fair exam system, word processing would rectify the disadvantage of dyslexics who struggle with spelling by giving them the ability to use spell check.

The third proposal is strongly linked to the second: time restrictions should be relaxed. Presently, the system is centred on the need for speed. But research in cognitive psychology has shown that too much focus on speed and productivity actually narrows thought and inhibits creativity. The emphasis can easily be taken off speed by giving a much greater time span to complete the exam assignment while simultaneously creating a maximum word count in order to ensure quality rather than quantity. This would allow two things: first, that the contentious issue of extra time would be put to rest; second, it would encourage students to get their ideas across in as few words as possible, an invaluable skill when attention spans are under siege from rapid internet connections and fast-paced modern lifestyles.

If Edinburgh’s universities were to adopt proposals to this effect, purging exams of the stultifying effect of rote learning, it would inevitably cultivate greater creativity, flair and innovation in their students. The great texts of the enlightenment were not scribbled under time pressure, nor should our exams be.