There is a debate over which way is better to assess the student’s acquittance, with some saying the conventional exams would be perfect, while others argue that permanent assessment mostly suit to this phenomenon. In this essay, I will explore both sides and express my personal statements.
Traditional exams might play a crucial rule in many features. Fair and equal condition, initially, come into play. Traditional exams are considered fair because they take the same tests under the same condition. This means that every person is likely to be judged equally based on the things they require to do and objectively based on how well they perform at a specific time. Furthermore, it also does not require much time to be organized. Usually, major exams happen twice or once a year, so that organizers easily make the preparations and the needs that might be essential to the occurrence of the exam.
Continual assessment through projects and coursework is more efficient it evaluates the understanding of student over time, not for just one or two days. It actually encourages consistent learning, discipline and practical application of knowledge. Additionally, when exams are coming, most students feel high pressure while performing, which cause the mistakes to be done in the test. By permanent marking system, people may not encounter this kind of issues that disrupt them.
In conclusion, while both sides are crucial, I firmly believe that traditional exams would be optimal instead of continual assessment. Because, in permanent assessment teachers might evaluate the student higher ,who they adore, than the other one. However, this phenomenon are not likely to be occurred in conventional exam system.