The cancellation of this year's Leaving Certificate has, inevitably, resulted in many unexpected issues.
The calculation of grades by teachers is a daunting task, particularly using data from tests and mocks that were never intended for this purpose.
As a former secondary teacher, I have found myself wondering whether I could have accurately predicted my students' grades.
With a lack of alternatives for the class of 2020, however, I trust in the professionalism of our teachers.
I have confidence in the collaborative review process, and I expect that the national standardisation of grades by the Department of Education and Skills will be done with the highest rigour of statistical analysis available.
We should take this opportunity to consider if our current exams are truly fit for purpose.
One of the reasons people are loath to consider alternatives to our high-stakes system is the image of objectivity and equality it portrays. Unfortunately, the Leaving Certificate may not be as fair as we think.
School size and Deis status affect the likelihood of students taking subjects at higher level and the average overall points achieved.
Grinds have almost become a norm of sixth-year education, but not all students have the opportunity to avail of private tuition.
Students choose their subjects not based on their passions or interests but on their likelihood of achieving in the points race to third level. All is not fair in Leaving Cert learning.
A study by Dr Denise Burns found the majority of Leaving Certificate exams assessed lower-order thinking skills, such as memorisation, as opposed to higher-order skills of analysing or evaluating.
While knowledge of facts is important, at the completion of their compulsory education we should hope our young people can synthesise, apply and even create knowledge. Yet, we don't assess or reward them for these skills.
Taking maths as a particular example, it is an unwelcome truth that girls have been far less likely to achieve A and B (now H1, H2 and H3) grades in the last 10 years than was previously the case.
This is not due to girls having less ability, but may be due to how the tests are written and how boys are more likely to study physics and applied maths and may hence have an advantage with certain elements of the papers.
More research on these issues is required, but we cannot overlook the biases in our present system.
Looking to our European neighbours, not many have a terminal high-stakes exam worth 100pc.
In the Netherlands, tests held over the final years of secondary school are written and corrected by teachers and count for 50pc of their end grade with a final exam.
In Germany, school exams from the final two years count for 70pc of the overall grade with the Abitur (their Leaving Cert equivalent) making up the final 30pc.
The International Baccalaureate has a main exam worth 80pc with an additional research project worth 20pc.
In this system, however, continuous assessment is incredibly important for students since it is used to predict entry grades for university.
The final exams have been cancelled in many countries, but it has not resulted in chaos or uncertainty.
There are, naturally, concerns about potential biases of teachers correcting their own students' work.
In the UK, many flaws have been pointed out in their predictive grading system where teachers suggest in October how students might do the following summer.
Students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, black and Traveller children are more likely to be given an underestimation of their grades, with students from Asian backgrounds often awarded an over-estimation.
Fortunately, we have one of the most qualified cohort of teachers in the world, who now graduate at Masters level in order to be certified.
We also have well established and connected professional development services and teacher associations that regularly offer learning opportunities.
Teachers are the primary agents of change in the classroom and our teachers are well-placed to learn to write and assess their students' learning.
Reviews could address instances where teachers may under- or over-calculate their learners' achievements.
A phased introduction of a revised assessment system could be planned, with 10pc of continuous assessment for the sixth years of 2023, 20pc in 2024, and so on.
These continuous grades could also be used for students who are unexpectedly ill or bereaved at exam time.
Education is not about grades; it is about preparing our young people for the challenges they will meet in the world.
We can incorporate other ways of assessing learning that truly reflect what students know and can do that will be fair and demonstrative of their experiences outside of school.
It's time to re-think the Leaving Certificate.
Dr Aoibhinn Ní Shúilleabháin is assistant professor in the UCD School of Mathematics & Statistics and programme director of BSc in Mathematics, Science and Education