The government’s Curriculum and Assessment Review outlines recommendations to strengthen curriculum and assessment. Its analysis of GCSEs highlights several areas for development. In this article, Dr Hannah Wilkinson, Professor Kevin Woods and Aletia Daly highlight how their research identifies additional issues related to fairness, inclusion and student voice that warrant further consideration to support a more equitable and responsive GCSE assessment system.

• Flexible assessment formats such as modular, open-book or non-timed exams could better support learning demonstration and inclusion.
• The Review presents student views as coherent, despite complex and sometimes contradictory evidence and limited detail on who participated.
• Systematic, national feedback mechanisms are needed to capture student experience more accurately.

Fairness across subjects

The Review states that many young people felt exams were fair and gave them the opportunity to demonstrate everything they had learnt. However, when taking a more nuanced approach to collecting student views, findings from our research, indicated differences depending on the subject in question.

Our survey data indicated that, for Mathematics, 39% of students advocated for the current exam approach to remain as it is. In contrast, only 15.6% said the same for English, with 47.8% of students preferring an open-book exam. Many commented that the cognitive demands of recalling extensive quotations were difficult and negatively affected their performance.

As the Review considers the cognitive demands placed on students in relation to memorising scientific and mathematical content, and indicates further work in this area, we advocate, based on our research and engagement with young people, that similar consideration should be extended to English materials.

With growing emphasis on preparing students with media and digital literacy, there would be merit in placing greater emphasis on critical thinking in exams and reducing the rote-learning burden associated with memorising core texts. This would allow teachers to dedicate more time to supporting these important skills, rather than focusing heavily on test-taking skills.

Flexible and inclusive assessment

The Review identifies student concerns about the suitability of current GCSE assessments. Its survey found that 51% of students felt examinations narrow learning because of the focus on exam preparation. These findings align with our research, which found limited support for maintaining the current GCSE structure (21.3% for Science; 39% for Maths; 15.6% for English).

Students highlighted that assessment needs vary by subject. For Mathematics, many supported the existing approach, noting that alternatives such as coursework would not be suitable. Whereas in Science, students expressed interest in modular or open-book exams and extra time for anyone who wants it, particularly to reduce the demands associated with remembering equations and formulae.

These concerns sit alongside broader structural issues highlighted in the Review, including persistent socio-economic attainment gaps. System-level factors such as the volume of required content also create barriers to equity. Students in our research rated the content load as “extremely big” or “big” at 74% for English, 55% for Mathematics and 79% for Science.

Previous evidence demonstrates that excessive content is associated with shallow learning and students feeling overwhelmed.

Taken together, this evidence supports the need for greater flexibility in GCSE assessment to reflect the diversity of learners’ experiences. Although the Review proposes reducing overall exam time by at least 10%, without changes to curriculum content or assessment design, shorter exams risk further increasing time pressure.

Student voice 

We welcome the Review’s commitment to involving learners and parents/carers in discussions about assessment. It indicates that the views of students around their experiences are complex and there is no single, shared student viewpoint. For example, the finding that 51% of GCSE students reported struggling to cope during exam periods, echoing wider evidence that GCSE assessment is associated with stress and concerns around wellbeing.

Our findings reinforce a nuanced landscape of experience. For instance, 47% of students favour an open-book English exam and 48% prefer teacher assessment rather than exclusively external marking. It is clear that student perspectives are varied rather than uniform.

However, when drawing its conclusions and forming recommendations, the Review does not fully engage with this complexity. The summary presents student views as relatively coherent, despite evidence within the Review itself indicating variation and contradiction. This is also reflected in how concerns about stress and fairness are framed: the Review notes that evidence of a link between exams and wellbeing is “contested”, yet does not explain how this shaped its recommendations, and reports that students value exams because they view them as fair, even though 39% did not describe their assessment as at least “quite fair” and 21% offered no view.

The lack of detail about who contributed to the Review further limits interpretation. Without information about the characteristics of participating students, it is difficult to judge whose views are represented or to understand how far they reflect the wider GCSE cohort. Without this insight, there is a risk that policy decisions may be based on a partial or oversimplified understanding of student experience.

Policy pathways towards fairer assessment

These limitations highlight the need for more systematic approaches to capturing learner feedback. Small, isolated consultations offer only a partial view and risk reinforcing assumptions of simplicity where the evidence suggests complexity. We argue that routine, large-scale feedback mechanisms would provide more reliable and representative insights, support trend analysis over time, and help identify emerging issues earlier.

Such approaches would also strengthen the UK’s compliance with its UNCRC commitment to involve children in decisions that affect them.

Based on our findings, evidence and analysis, there are multiple actions that the Department for Education can consider as they develop a new curriculum and devise how assessment will be taken forward:

• The Department for Education along with assessment bodies should support schools with the inclusion of open-book exam components, particularly for content-heavy subjects such as English, to reduce cognitive load.
• They should look to expand the range of assessment formats (modular exams, coursework components, open-book approaches, or optional extra time).
• Review subject content volumes to ensure assessments are manageable and promote deeper learning.
• Government should establish a national, routine mechanism for gathering student feedback on assessment. This feedback should be integrated into regular review cycles.
• The use of recurring surveys can track trends and identify emerging issues.

By building these evidence informed policy actions into assessment and curricula, government can ensure that student voices are recognised and assessments are fair and equitable.