National examinations are not merely academic exercises. They influence the futures of thousands of young people, determine access to further education and employment, and shape the priorities of schools across the country. Given their considerable social and educational importance, the governance of national examinations must be independent, transparent and accountable.
They should not be controlled by a university.
Universities undoubtedly possess considerable academic expertise. Academics contribute valuable subject knowledge, research experience and an understanding of standards within higher education. Nevertheless, expertise should not be confused with ownership or control. A university is one stakeholder within the education system. It should not become the institution that effectively determines the national assessment framework for students who may never intend to pursue university studies.
The primary function of national examinations should be to assess educational attainment fairly and consistently. Their purpose should not be limited to selecting candidates for university admission. Students completing compulsory and post-secondary education follow very different pathways. Some continue to university, while others enter vocational education, technical training, apprenticeships or employment. A genuinely national examination system must recognise and respect all these choices.
When national examinations are controlled by a university, there is a legitimate concern that the assessment system may become disproportionately influenced by the requirements of higher education. Syllabi, examination formats and grading standards may gradually reflect what universities expect from prospective students rather than what the country expects from its education system as a whole.
This is not necessarily the result of deliberate bias. It is a structural problem. Institutions naturally view education through the perspective of their own mission, priorities and experience. A university will understandably emphasise academic preparation, theoretical knowledge and readiness for undergraduate study. However, these are not the only valid outcomes of education.
Malta needs an examination system that values academic knowledge while also recognising practical intelligence, creativity, communication, problem-solving and technical competence. The country cannot continue to speak about parity of esteem between academic and vocational education while maintaining structures that appear to place one route above all others.
There is also an important question of conflict of interest. The same institution should not hold excessive influence over both national certification and access to many of the programmes for which that certification is required. Even when procedures are conducted professionally and ethically, the concentration of authority can undermine public confidence.
Good governance is not only about preventing improper conduct. It is also about designing institutions in a way that avoids the appearance of undue influence. Students, parents, teachers and educational institutions must be able to trust that national examinations are administered solely in the public interest.
An independent national assessment authority would provide a clearer separation of responsibilities. Such an authority should be publicly accountable, adequately resourced and professionally led. It should include experts from schools, further and vocational education, universities, industry, assessment, psychology and curriculum development.
Teachers must also be given a meaningful voice. They work directly with students and understand how examination policies affect classroom practice. When examination systems are designed without sufficient input from educators, teaching can become increasingly dominated by the demands of the examination paper rather than by the broader developmental needs of students.
Employers and vocational institutions should also contribute to the national conversation. Malta regularly discusses skills shortages, employability and the changing demands of the labour market. Yet an assessment framework primarily shaped through an academic lens may not adequately reflect the competencies required in modern workplaces.
Independent governance would not mean removing universities from the examination process. Universities should remain important partners. Academics can contribute to syllabus development, standard-setting, examiner training, moderation and quality assurance. Their expertise is indispensable, but it should be exercised within a broader and more representative framework.
No individual stakeholder should dominate a system that belongs to the entire country.
The need for reform becomes even more evident when one considers the pressure examinations place on young people. National examinations often become defining experiences in students' lives. Results can affect their confidence, mental wellbeing and perception of their own abilities. For this reason, assessment policy must be guided not only by institutional requirements but also by educational psychology, inclusion and student development.
Examinations should challenge students, but they should not reduce intelligence to the ability to reproduce information under pressure. Assessment should increasingly include different methods through which students can demonstrate their knowledge and competence. This may involve coursework, practical assessment, projects, oral presentations and appropriately regulated continuous assessment alongside written examinations.
Such reforms require national leadership. They cannot be driven primarily by the admission needs of any single institution.
Malta should therefore consider establishing or strengthening a fully independent national examinations authority with a clear legal mandate. Its governance structure should reflect the diversity of the education sector and include appropriate mechanisms for external scrutiny, publication of standards and transparent appeals.
The debate should not be framed as an attack on universities. Malta's universities are essential national institutions, and their contribution to education, research and professional development must be respected. The issue is not whether universities possess expertise. They clearly do. The issue is whether they should exercise control over a national system that affects every educational pathway.
National examinations are public instruments. They belong to students, families, educators and society. They should reflect the country's educational vision rather than the priorities of one institution.
If Malta is serious about creating an inclusive education system, promoting vocational learning and recognising different forms of ability, then the governance of national examinations must evolve. Universities should contribute, advise and collaborate, but they should not control.
An independent examination system would not weaken academic standards. On the contrary, it would strengthen legitimacy, increase public confidence and ensure that assessment serves the interests of the whole country.
The future of Malta's students is too important to be placed in the hands of any single institution.
Dr Katya De Giovanni is a warranted Organisational Psychologist