A newspaper opinion column carried the following piece by a university lecturer: 'High-stakes examinations place enormous pressure on young people. A nation...

(a) Two pieces of evidence the author uses to argue exams harm wellbeing [2]

Any two of the following, each worth [1]:

• 62% of secondary school students reported anxiety linked to exams.
• 15% described the stress as severe.
• Exam-related mental health referrals to counselling services have tripled in the past decade.

Each is a numerical indicator drawn from surveys or service records that quantifies the mental health impact of high-stakes examinations.

(b) Two reasons why administrators might prefer exam-based systems [4]

Any two of the following, each worth [2]:

1. Comparability: Exams produce a clear, numerical result that is easy to compare across students, schools, regions, and years. This standardisation supports national rankings, university admissions, and accountability frameworks [1+1].
2. Cost and efficiency: Exams are cheaper and quicker to administer than portfolio-based or continuous assessment, which requires ongoing teacher moderation, external verification, and management of multiple submission points throughout the year [1+1].
3. Simplicity of administration: A single standardised event on a fixed date reduces the complexity of managing assessment across thousands of schools. Timetabling, invigilation, and marking can be centralised [1+1].
4. Legal defensibility: Exam results provide an apparently objective measure that is harder for students or parents to legally challenge than subjective teacher judgements or portfolio assessments, reducing disputes and appeals [1+1].

(c) One gap in the reasoning from anxiety evidence to the conclusion that exams should be replaced [3]

Any one of the following, fully explained for up to [3]:

• The evidence shows exams cause anxiety, but some level of pressure accompanies most forms of assessment. The question is whether alternative methods would actually reduce stress or simply relocate it (e.g. continuous assessment anxiety, portfolio deadline stress, presentation nerves). No evidence is provided that alternatives produce better mental health outcomes [1-2].
• The lecturer has not demonstrated that exam anxiety is disproportionate to the challenge rather than a normal, even useful, human response to high-stakes evaluation. The correlation between exams and anxiety does not prove exams are the root cause; broader societal pressures such as parental expectations, competition for university places, and social media comparison may be the underlying drivers [1-2].
• The argument assumes exams can be "replaced" without acknowledging the practical difficulties: what would replace them, how would fairness and comparability be maintained, and what evidence exists that any proposed alternative achieves the same educational objectives with fewer negative consequences [1-2].

(d) Two perspectives on whether exam stress is harmful or beneficial [4]

Harmful perspective [2]: Excessive stress impairs cognitive performance (through anxiety, sleep disruption, and inability to concentrate), reduces enjoyment of learning, and can contribute to lasting mental health problems such as anxiety disorders and depression. Students who freeze under pressure may significantly underperform relative to their true ability, meaning exam results fail to measure what they claim to measure.

Beneficial perspective [2]: A moderate level of stress motivates revision, preparation, and disciplined study habits that students might not develop without deadlines and consequences. Learning to manage pressure is a valuable life skill that prepares students for professional demands, workplace deadlines, and performance expectations they will face throughout adult life.

(e) Whether replacing written exams entirely would produce better outcomes [5]

Level 3 (4-5 marks): Complete replacement is unlikely to produce unambiguously better outcomes for students. Written exams have genuine flaws: they compress assessment into a high-pressure time window, can penalise students who experience anxiety, and often reward memorisation over deep understanding. The mental health data cited in the source is a legitimate concern. However, alternative methods carry their own significant problems. Coursework can be plagiarised or receive excessive parental help, creating fairness issues. Teacher-assessed portfolios introduce subjectivity and potential bias (conscious or unconscious). Continuous assessment is time-consuming and difficult to standardise across large cohorts, and it replaces one intense period of stress with chronic, sustained pressure throughout the year. A mixed system combining some examination elements with coursework, projects, and oral assessment could capture a wider range of student abilities and reduce the excessive pressure of a single high-stakes sitting. The critical variable is design: a well-constructed exam that tests analysis and application is more educationally valuable than a poorly designed portfolio. Reforms should target how exams are designed, weighted, and supplemented rather than eliminating them entirely.