Is there a backlash to e-Assessment?

The UK social media ban for under-16s announced this month is a huge policy shift for British society. It’s enabled by a surprisingly quick shift in the UK government’s position and politicians’ minds, including much of society. An Australian-style ban was pushed early in 2026, but met resistance from Number 10. And of course, many argue that prohibition doesn’t work. But why does this ban impact e-assessment and digital assessment?

The emerging ed-tech backlash across wider society and backlash to areas of e-assessment has made me consider the sector’s health and direction. The backlash may help parents in the short-term. But advocates for more (digital) formative assessment, to lighten the cliff-face issue of high-stakes exams, may find their efforts stymied.

The UK’s ban on phones and socials will require a re-think on formative digital assessment within schools. 

There are two movements in play. Firstly, many institutions are struggling with the impact of AI on trad assessment delivery. But the better ones are exploring a basket of assessment instruments – many of them formative in nature. However, if society and the law restricts digital tools and usage, could learners be doubly disadvantaged? If society and law berates and restricts ed-tech respectively, that’s a poor environment for change and investment. Not forgetting, an increasingly gloomy public discourse.

Secondly, what if the cost of moving to better assessment tools or transformation is insurmountable? 45% of the UK’s higher education institutions are running on deficits. A similar percentage of UK awarding bodies do not generate a surplus or profit. Are they unable to afford to change their assessment regimes to the extent needed?

If 45% of UK universities and awarding bodies don’t generate a surplus, how can they afford to change their assessment regime?

There are acute structural and financial issues with future assessment delivery. Digital transformation to protect from (and embrace) AI simply cannot be funded with existing financial commitments and structures. Higher education and awarding body sectors are slow to merge and acquire. The cadence, volume, and nature of deals is unreflective of the commercial world. The sector is caught in a moment of wider societal change without the funds or strong management to take full advantage.

The assessment sector is caught in a moment – tried-and-trusted instruments are now shaken by societal changes and AI’s rapid encroachment. But how can they transform?

I fear many in higher education will continue a whack-a-mole approach to exam security and fudge assessment supervision. Subject matter expert goodwill may be exhausted. Grade inflation ignored. A muddle-along while accepting the brickbats, as long as league table ratings hold up and funding flows.

Digital transformation of the assessment toolkit may be beyond some institutions

I’ll push slightly harder and say that some UK awarding bodies will continue with sub-optimal practice that regulation neither has the time or resource to correct. The regulator has gained some notable enforcement wins. But to flush out poor assessment practice, they need a wider remit and appropriate funding. Unfortunately, they cannot mandate better (digital) assessment practice.

As assessment changes, regulation can push out poor practice, but it can’t sponsor and usher in the sector transformation we desperately need.

What could be the output of a backlash? Without change, assessment validity will erode. Malpractice scandals will snowball and diminish assessment currency. Employers will mis-trust credentials and qualifications. Scaremongering and conflation on AI improvements with tech-enabled malpractice only adds to the backlash.

How can the sector fight back? Many successful formative digital assessment projects have been deployed in schools over many decades. And there are plenty of summative ones as well. Those successes must be leveraged and showcased. Conversely, the encroaching use of AI tools shouldn't be dictating the pace of assessment change, despite legitimate concerns. It has brought change into tight focus, but that can be a problem for a sector with a reputation for moving slowly. Good strategists should be figuring this out, coupled with keeping away from ‘AI-as-an-accessory’.

Thankfully, the assessment sector is competitive. Well-funded institutions and exam owners can transform their assessment operations. But the bigger question is, can they drive wider-sector change? I have my doubts. The short-term noise of phone bans and AI hysteria will no doubt pass. The sector will ride it out and integrate the better elements. But the operational and financial ability to transform in a slow-moving, conservative sector may be beyond many.

Navigating mainstream hostility and financial restrictions will keep many in the assessment slow lane. The impact on learners, employers, and others is unspoken. A strategy yet to be written.