The public opinion on student evaluation is currently characterized by divided approaches. While exams provide an objective assessment of academic performance, plenty of individuals criticize them as inefficient. The truth lies somewhere in between: exams should not be abolished but improved and adapted.
Examinations have become an integral part of modern education systems. This is not surprising: exams are anonymous, thus resulting in the prevalence of meritocracy, while removing personal bias. Since exam papers are graded without the examiner knowing the student’s identity, performance is judged purely on knowledge rather than background or personal connections. This method has traditionally allowed institutions to select students based on their standardised exam score. Hence, equality in admission processes is ensured.
In spite of being objective, many people also highlight the psychological pressure exams place on students. Specifically, they mention the lack of creativity, the spike of negative emotions, and an overall dissatisfaction among students. As a result, some students who understand the material may still perform poorly under intense exam pressure. While examinations should remain part of the assessment procedure, they require adaptation. For example, Scandinavian countries established a framework that combines final examinations with coursework or research projects in order to evaluate both knowledge and creativity. That does not mean we should reinvent the wheel, but rather invent a more thoughtful approach, so as not to solely rely on a singular exam.
All things considered, exams should not be subject to demonization. Instead, a modernized educational policy could be proposed to bring us one step closer to an equitable assessment system. This way, we will effectively satisfy both sides of the debate, while preserving the objectivity requirements and the well-being of students.