We test language like it's math — then wonder why students hate writing.
The Traditional Rule:
Mastery of grammar, punctuation, syntax, and spelling must be demonstrably tested under time pressure to prove one’s linguistic competence. Standardized language exams are the fairest way to measure literacy, intelligence, and academic worth.
Why It’s Broken:
Because exams don’t measure language — they measure obedience to convention. They reward rote memorization, fear-driven caution, and regurgitation of outdated rules over expression, originality, and clarity. They teach students to write with their backs straight, mouths shut, and fingers trembling — instead of with joy.
In schools, a student who says, “Me and my mom baked cookies” loses marks.
A student who writes, “The subject’s qualitative synthesis elucidated
the culinary endeavor undertaken by maternal and filial agents” — gets a
gold star.
Guess which one actually communicates?
Absurdities and Contradictions:
Creativity is punished:
Try writing “He brung the thunder” in a literature exam — even if it’s brilliant, rhythmic, and clear. Zero points.Passive voice is rewarded:
“The experiment was conducted” scores higher than “We did the test,” because formality trumps clarity.Foreign learners are double-punished:
First for not knowing the idioms, then for trying to use them correctly but not academically.Spelling matters more than insight:
Write a profound essay but spell “privilege” as “priviledge”? That red mark will hunt your dreams.Multiple choice reading comprehension:
“What is the main idea of the paragraph?”
A) What you actually thought it was.
B) What they think you should’ve thought it was.
C) None of the above, but still wrong.
Real-World Evidence of Harm:
Students with dyslexia, ADHD, or diverse learning styles are disproportionately penalized in language exams for “careless” mistakes that have nothing to do with comprehension or communication.
Whole generations are raised to believe that if their grammar isn’t correct, their ideas don’t matter. This is how language becomes a gatekeeping tool for elitism, not empowerment.
In the UK, students fail their GCSE English not because they can’t think — but because they can’t decode the examiner’s idea of the “right” answer.
In the US, SAT and ACT essays force students into 5-paragraph prison cells, stripping language of color, emotion, and agency.
British vs. American Variants:
UK exams stress formality, proper register, and Queen-approved vocabulary.
US tests reward structure, spelling, and the bizarre rubric of “tone consistency,” even when the tone is dead on arrival.
In both cases, students are told what to write, how to write it, and what words to never, ever use. (No contractions. No fragments. No style. No life.)
The Reform Proposal:
Redefine assessment goals: Stop testing language as a formula. Test it as a tool of communication and creativity.
Allow flexible grammar in context: A child who writes “I runned fast because I were late” shouldn’t be marked wrong — they should be understood as having logic but lacking conformity.
Incorporate dialect and spoken registers: Let students use the language they speak — not just what’s printed in a dusty grammar book.
Celebrate voice over rigidity: Reward personal style, humor, vivid phrasing, and bold wordplay — the stuff of real writers.
Make room for error: Spelling and punctuation mistakes should not erase the value of an idea. They should invite gentle revision, not shame.
How It Would Work in Practice:
| Old Exam Rule | Reformed Alternative |
|---|---|
| “No sentence fragments.” | “Fragment? Or poetry? If it works — it works.” |
| “Use formal tone.” | “Use effective tone. Adjust for audience.” |
| “Always write in full sentences.” | “Start with a bang. Break rules for impact.” |
| “Avoid personal pronouns.” | “Own your argument. Use your voice.” |
| “Mistakes lower your grade.” | “Mistakes open conversation — let’s discuss.” |