IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/iza/izawol/journl2025n517.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The merits of teacher assessment versus external exams to measure student achievement

Author

Listed:
  • Oliver Cassagneau-Francis

    (University College London)

  • Gillian Wyness

    (University College London,UK; London School of Economics, UK, and IZA, Germany)

Abstract

There is little to no consensus in the academic literature over whether centralised, standardised exams are better for students than teacher assessments. While a growing body of evidence from economics highlights bias in teacher assessments, educationalists and psychologists point to the harm caused by high-stakes exam-related stress and argue that exams and teacher assessments generally agree very closely. This lack of academic consensus is reflected in policy: a wide variety of assessment methods are used across (and even within) countries. Policymakers should be aware of the potential for inequalities in non-blind assessments and consider carefully the consequences of relying on a single method of assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Oliver Cassagneau-Francis & Gillian Wyness, 2025. "The merits of teacher assessment versus external exams to measure student achievement," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 517-517, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izawol:journl:2025:n:517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://wol.iza.org/articles/the-merits-of-teacher-assessment-versus-external-exams-to-measure-student-achievement
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iza:izawol:journl:2025:n:517. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Institute of Labor Economics (IZA) (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.