In the last 20 years, the assessment of students has undergone a major transformation. Many educational institutions no longer use formal examination as a means of assessment as they believe formal examination results are an unfair indication of a student’s ability. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Modern techniques and ideologies have changed the concept of evaluating the knowledge of students. Rather than conducting the subjective exams at the end of the year, a criterion of practical assessment is being widely accepted. I agree with the statement that formal tests are not the right way of examining a student’s calibre.
There are notable drawbacks of the assessment through the conventional method of final examinations. Firstly, sometimes many otherwise intelligent students do not perform well in exams because of utter nervousness and phobia of exams. Sometimes, pressure from parents and teachers to top in the class also impacts their performance. It is commonly seen that some students usually have a vast knowledge of their course therefore, carry out practical tasks very well, however, are unable to express themselves in the right words during the theoretical part of the exam because they are not efficient at cramming things in exact words.
Furthermore, it is unfair to judge a student merely in three hours about the studies which he has completed in a year. Therefore, transformation in the assessment criterion of students is a remarkable step by certain academic institutes. Since more a practical approach in the examinations and evaluation based on the overall performance of a student throughout the year instigate the more interest in students towards their curriculum.
To core out, I strongly believe that modifications in assessing the student’s capabilities were the need of the hour as it is unjust to judge a student’s capacity only through a three-hour exam but not how he has performed throughout the year.
