Exams and Conservatism

Exams and conservatism may not seem to have much in common at first glance, but there are some striking similarities and implications of this comparison particularly with respect to tradition, stability, and resistance to change. As a case in point, exams, like conservatism, often place a high value on tradition and established practices Traditional forms of assessment such as written examinations or standardized tests have been used for generations and continue to be trusted as a reliable means of evaluating academic achievement. Similarly, conservatism places a premium on traditional institutions, customs, and values, placing greater priority on continuity than on rapid transformation. Both exams and conservatism share an emphasis on continuity over rapid change. Exams provide a formalized way for individuals to demonstrate their knowledge and skills, thus sustaining academic standards and the stability of educational systems. Likewise, conservatism seeks to preserve social stability and order, allowing traditional hierarchies, institutions and values to endure. Both are also often resistant to change in education, despite calls for greater innovation and adaptation to evolving educational needs, there is often resistance to alternative forms of assessment and pedagogy. Similarly, conservatism tends to be marked by a reluctance to embrace rapid social or political change, preferring either incremental reform or the preservation of the status quo and both have been associated with a resistance to change in their respective contexts. Thus, while exams are often seen as tools for meritocracy which allow individuals to be judged on their knowledge and skills rather than their background, and certainly are intended as such alongside their function in maintaining educational standards, they may be seen as serving a more conservative end if they in fact lead to the reinforcement of social inequality, as some (for example, Giroux and Schmidt 2004) have argued. Those in favor of exams might argue that, like rankings, exams help identify those who are most skilled and qualified for a given position or career. From this perspective, exams can help to ensure that those who are most qualified gain access to the best resources and support. At the same time, critics contend that exams may simply serve to perpetuate elitism by allowing those who have access to the top resources and support to succeed. In much the same way, conservatism can serve to uphold traditional hierarchies and privilege, potentially reinforcing and reifying inequalities within society. It should be noted, of course, that both exams and conservatism are not without their critics or calls for reform. Critics of exams vehemently point out that exams are not necessarily the best of way of determining whether a student has truly grasped the material-not to mention that they fail to prepare students for the same real world challenges those on the left have accused conservatism of attempting to shield everyone from. Alternatives range from inquiry- based and experiential learning to more meaningful and authentic means of Assessment. Conservatives, of course, are generally and increasingly seen as Resistance to both social progress and inclusivity, imploring the observation that they Seem to need to “get with the times”-a claim that fails to understand many of the Values and underlying realities of conservatism as a social and political ideology In Sum, exams and conservatism operate in different spheres (education vs. Politics and Social ideology) but share more than a few themes that center around tradition, Stability, resistance to change, and ongoing and vigorous debate over central tenets of their place in society and the lives of individuals within it.

- Adhavan E