Ireland’s education system has long been a rite of passage for teenagers preparing to transition into adulthood, academic pursuits, and professional life. For decades, students have sat the Junior Certificate as a precursor to the all-important Leaving Certificate, a set of examinations that can determine the trajectory of a young person’s path into higher education. The Leaving Cert once carried an almost sacred aura: if you performed well enough, you could enter the college and course of your choice. However, recent government proposals to reform this system, namely continuous assessment (CA), among other adjustments, have raised concerns among parents, teachers, and crucially, the students themselves. Critics argue that these measures do not solve the underlying issues of rote learning, memorisation, and exam pressure. Instead, they may inadvertently reinforce them while placing additional strain on students, ultimately risking the future success of college entrants.
The arguments in favour of continuous assessment are, on the surface, quite compelling. Advocates note that shifting away from exclusively final examinations would allow students to demonstrate knowledge in a more organic, less stressful way, reducing the intense pressure associated with a single set of terminal exams. One might assume that by evaluating students incrementally, the system would offer a fairer measure of genuine learning over time. However, the proposed structures do not entirely alleviate reliance on cramming or memorisation, they do quite the opposite. The mechanics of this CA-based approach, where coursework marks and project results are integrated into final grades, can introduce new stress points during the academic year. Continuous assessment sometimes turns into continuous testing, and with this comes a sense that students are constantly marked and scrutinised.
“Continuous assessment sometimes turns into continuous testing, and with this comes a sense that students are constantly marked and scrutinised”
It is important to remember that the aim of introducing more diverse forms of assessment into the Leaving Cert has, at its heart, an admirable goal: to encourage deeper engagement with course material and to provide students with a balanced and creative framework for demonstrating knowledge. Ideally, such changes would foster critical thinking, research skills, collaborative work, and other qualities valued in a modern workforce and in higher education. However, critics point out that the government’s approach appears hasty, underfunded, or lacking in the level of support teachers and schools need.
“The government’s approach appears hasty, underfunded, or lacking in the level of support teachers and schools need”
In early 2023, members of the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland (ASTI) staged demonstrations outside the Dáil, highlighting logistical and financial burdens of the proposed reforms, while some student groups also gathered to demand clearer guidance on continuous assessment criteria. These concerns were amplified in an article published by TheJournal.ie in April 2024, titled ‘ASTI votes to resist Leaving Cert reform amid ‘widespread concern’ over impact of AI’. According to the piece, delegates at the ASTI annual conference voted overwhelmingly against plans to award a minimum of 40% of Leaving Cert marks through continuous assessment projects that may take place outside school time. They warned that this one-size-fits-all approach would ‘inevitably widen the social divide,’ especially in light of emerging tools like generative AI software, such as ChatGPT. ASTI representative John Conneely highlighted a ‘lower validity’ when assessments are heavily weighted toward work performed outside the direct supervision of schools, arguing that it risks undermining the ‘entire assessment process.’ Conneely further cautioned that students with more resources might gain an unfair advantage, as they could rely on AI or external tutoring to bolster projects and coursework.
Another source of tension stems from the fact that many aspects of the Leaving Certificate’s reforms mirror issues found in the Junior Certificate reforms. Since the Junior Cert was restructured into the Junior Cycle in 2022, placing a stronger emphasis on classroom-based assessments (CBAs) and new forms of projects, educators have been forced to reshape their teaching methods. While many teachers have embraced the new approach, others have raised concerns about unclear guidelines, heavy marking loads, and insufficient support. Students have similarly expressed confusion about how to manage multiple assessments throughout the year whilst juggling extracurricular activities and day-to-day schoolwork. The government’s proposed path forward for the Leaving Cert seems to repeat several of these pain points, leaving a question of whether lessons from the Junior Cert reforms have truly been learned.
Ireland’s points-based system for college entry reigns supreme. Universities and Institutes of Technology largely base their admissions on CAO (Central Applications Office) points, which are derived from Leaving Cert results. This system incentivises a narrow approach to learning where the subject’s points matter far more than in-depth understanding and genuine intellectual curiosity. Students, inevitably, tend to focus on picking subjects they believe will net the highest points, rather than those that might stimulate their interests or talents. Furthermore, post-Covid grade inflation that saw artificially high results is now being gradually tapered off, creating additional uncertainty and concerns around fairness for current and future Leaving Cert candidates. Even if the government tries to encourage more continuous assessment in each subject, the overarching competition for CAO points looms large.
“Students, inevitably, tend to focus on picking subjects they believe will net the highest points, rather than those that might stimulate their interests or talents”
In the face of these challenges, it is worth asking whether Ireland is prioritising the right values in education. Preparing for a future in which technology, creativity, and analytical skills matter more than ever, it is questionable whether a system so heavily rooted in final examinations and memorisation can truly equip students for college. University life demands a capacity for self-directed learning, time management, critical thinking, independent research, and collaborative projects, none of which are tested adequately by memory-based assessments. The government’s efforts to make coursework count toward final grades aims to develop these competencies. But if this is not supported by fundamental shifts in teaching methods, such as smaller classes, improved teacher training, and a reduced emphasis on examinations, students may not reap the intended benefits.
Furthermore, the psychological strain imposed by the Leaving Cert is another factor that seems insufficiently addressed in the proposed reforms. For many Irish teenagers, this period of academic pressure coincides with an already challenging stage of personal development. According to the 2019 ‘My World Survey 2’ by University College Dublin and Jigsaw, around half of young people reported clinically elevated levels of anxiety or depression, a problem often linked to academic pressures. Continuous assessment might remove the all-or-nothing anxiety associated with a single set of final examinations, but only if the workload is distributed effectively. If schools simply spread the same amount of content over more frequent evaluations, students could find themselves in a perpetual cycle of mini high-stakes periods of stress.
Ultimately, the government is at a crossroads. On paper, introducing continuous assessment and moving away from a single high-stakes exam might seem like a step in the right direction. Yet as critics note, the devil is in the details. Without overhauling the very culture of exam-centric, memory-based learning and providing the necessary support structure to schools, the reforms could result in little more than added complexity. The essential issue of whether students are truly developing the depth of knowledge, critical thinking, and resilience needed for higher education remains unresolved.
