At 14, children are still in the process of discovering themselves. The National Evaluation places them too early into a ranking system.

June arrives, and Romania once again enters a collective state of tension. Approximately 173,000 14-year-old students will sit the National Evaluation at the end of 8th grade – the exam that determines entry into high school. For many families, this moment comes to define the very idea of academic success.

At 14, a child’s educational future is compressed into two standardised tests: Romanian language and mathematics.

The issue is not the existence of an assessment. Any healthy education system needs clear standards and benchmarks. The real issue is what we choose to assess and what message we send children about their own value in a ranking system where every decimal point can decide their future.

In a world that looks radically different from the 20th century, Romania continues to assess children through a model designed for another reality. At the end of lower secondary school, students are still evaluated within a logic very close to that of 50 years ago. For the generation of their parents and grandparents, this type of exam – the “First Stage” – worked in a certain historical and social context. But since then, the world has changed fundamentally: we live in the age of artificial intelligence, autonomous machines, rapid transformations, and constantly evolving professions.

OECD studies and PISA results clearly indicate that the Romanian education system no longer responds to the needs of today’s society. Therefore, the question is not whether we need assessment, but whether we are measuring what truly matters for these children’s future.

Around the National Evaluation, the final years of lower secondary school are reorganised: family schedules, tutoring, holidays, anxieties, and sometimes even the way children begin to see themselves. In many cases, adolescence becomes a period of constant preparation for admission, rather than a stage of discovery, exploration, and development.

At 14, a child may have extraordinary abilities in communication, creativity, leadership, coding, design, problem-solving, or teamwork. They may demonstrate autonomy, emotional intelligence, and the capacity to build projects or apply what they learn in real-world contexts.

One of the greatest losses of this model is that many valuable children come to believe, at 13–14 years old, that they are “not good enough” simply because they do not perform perfectly within a very narrow type of assessment. Some adolescents bloom academically earlier, others later. A healthy system does not confuse different developmental rhythms with lack of value or potential.

At the same time, the world these children are entering has changed profoundly. Beyond solid academic knowledge, society and universities increasingly seek individuals who can think critically, communicate clearly, collaborate, learn continuously, and navigate complex and unpredictable contexts.

And this raises the essential question: are we measuring enough of what truly matters?

Performance at a Given Moment versus True Potential

One of the major limitations of the National Evaluation is that it primarily measures momentary performance, obtained under pressure, and far less progress, autonomy, the ability to argue, or how a child applies what they have learned.

Dana Papadima, Educational Director at Avenor College, highlights the difference between traditional assessment and modern educational models:

“The issue with the National Evaluation is not that an exam exists, but that it ends up disproportionately defining a child’s value at a stage when they are still developing. In reality, at 14 we should be assessing much more than the ability to correctly reproduce content. We should look at progress, autonomy, the way a student thinks, argues, collaborates, and transfers what they learn into real-life contexts. In high-performing international systems, assessment is continuous and diverse: interdisciplinary projects, portfolios, presentations, personal reflection, and applied learning. Because the world these children are entering will not reward only strong memory, but the ability to adapt and learn continuously.”

In many international education systems, including the British one, students continue to follow a broad general education until the age of 16. They study a wide range of subjects and develop multiple competencies before choosing their areas of specialisation.

Assessment remains rigorous, but it is more diverse and closer to the real complexity of adolescent development. External examinations are complemented by projects, communication skills, applied sciences, personal reflection, and the ability to transfer learning into authentic contexts.

The model is based on a simple yet essential premise: at 14, you are still discovering who you are and what you can become.

What should we actually measure?

Diana Segărceanu, Executive Director of Avenor College, believes that the real goal of modern assessment is to maintain a balance between academic rigor and the holistic development of the child:

“Children need clear academic standards and rigorous assessment. But in a healthy education system, an exam should not reduce a teenager’s value to two grades and a few hours of pressure. At 14, children are still building their identity, discovering their strengths, and learning to trust their own potential. School should help them not only achieve results, but also understand who they are, how they think, what they can build, and how they can continue learning in a constantly changing world.”

We invite you to read the full article on the Edupedu platform.

Avenor actively contributes to the conversation around education in Romania by promoting best practices and collaborating with relevant editorial partners in the field of education. We aim to bring greater clarity and perspective to the dialogue between schools and parents, supporting informed and responsible decisions regarding children’s educational journeys.