Essay on should examination be done away till 9th standard
Answers
Answered by
12
Over the past two decades there have been frequent calls to abandon exams.
The major criticisms of exams in schools and universities tend to relate to either the misuse or overuse of exams, and not to the sensible use of exams in partnership with other assessment tasks such as presentations, research reports, creative responses, essays, reflective journals etc.
Rethinking the way in which some exams are delivered does not require us to abandon all exams in favour of other assessment tasks. This is akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Exams allow students to demonstrate their breadth of knowledge across a particular subject. This is more difficult to achieve with other forms of assessment.
Students also demonstrate their ability to retrieve and apply knowledge on the spot: a skill necessary in many professions.
But we need to look at what the evidence tells us about when exams are effective – and when other types of assessment are more suitable.
In debates about exams, the same myths are often brought up again and again. Here’s what the research tells us about three of the most common exam myths:
Myth 1: exams only test for the recall of facts
One of the most common arguments offered against exams is that they test for rote recall only and not for deeper understanding.
Like others, we have experienced the frustration of sitting for an exam that focuses almost exclusively on the recall of isolated facts. Research shows that such exams are more common when teachers either write questions quickly or rely on published tests from testing banks. In both cases, the teacher has less opportunity to review whether or not the questions require deep understanding and higher-order thinking, which require the learner to both hold a strong body of disciplinary knowledge and be capable of applying it.
The solution is not to abandon exams, but to change how poorly designed exam questions are written.
A well-designed exam will assess the application of knowledge to real-world scenarios, the synthesis of knowledge across sub-topics, the ability to think critically, or to solve well-defined problems within a discipline.
These higher-order processes depend entirely on the question being asked. According to research, even quite short professional development programs for teachers are effective in changing the way they write exam questions.
Exams should not be used to assess the recall of meaningless facts: this is a misuse of the format.
Myth 2: Google renders exams irrelevant
A second argument sometimes offered against exams is that everything can be found on Google anyway.
The implication, of course, is that we no longer need knowledge in our brains when we have phones in our pockets.
A variant of this argument is that internet access should always be permitted during exams as this mirrors our experiences in real life.
These arguments are problematic for two reasons.
First, research shows that people without knowledge in a particular field are surprisingly poor at finding accurate information on Google. They are more likely to find and believe conspiracy theories, for example, less likely to know what search terms to use, and less likely to reason logically about the information they find.
Second, looking up information on Google is not the same as accessing a pre-existing network of knowledge in the brain.
Pre-existing knowledge is critical because it guides the way in which we interpret new information and underpins critical thinking and problem solving.
Even if a student is taught generic skills in critical thinking and analysis, a wide breadth of knowledge is also needed to know what arguments are relevant in a particular domain and how they might be applied. This breadth of knowledge cannot be obtained simply by Googling.
It is precisely because our teachers, surgeons, scientists and building engineers have an established network of knowledge in their fields, held in long-term memory, that they are able to instantaneously apply this knowledge in the workplace, critically assess the validity of incoming information, and solve emerging problems on the run
The major criticisms of exams in schools and universities tend to relate to either the misuse or overuse of exams, and not to the sensible use of exams in partnership with other assessment tasks such as presentations, research reports, creative responses, essays, reflective journals etc.
Rethinking the way in which some exams are delivered does not require us to abandon all exams in favour of other assessment tasks. This is akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Exams allow students to demonstrate their breadth of knowledge across a particular subject. This is more difficult to achieve with other forms of assessment.
Students also demonstrate their ability to retrieve and apply knowledge on the spot: a skill necessary in many professions.
But we need to look at what the evidence tells us about when exams are effective – and when other types of assessment are more suitable.
In debates about exams, the same myths are often brought up again and again. Here’s what the research tells us about three of the most common exam myths:
Myth 1: exams only test for the recall of facts
One of the most common arguments offered against exams is that they test for rote recall only and not for deeper understanding.
Like others, we have experienced the frustration of sitting for an exam that focuses almost exclusively on the recall of isolated facts. Research shows that such exams are more common when teachers either write questions quickly or rely on published tests from testing banks. In both cases, the teacher has less opportunity to review whether or not the questions require deep understanding and higher-order thinking, which require the learner to both hold a strong body of disciplinary knowledge and be capable of applying it.
The solution is not to abandon exams, but to change how poorly designed exam questions are written.
A well-designed exam will assess the application of knowledge to real-world scenarios, the synthesis of knowledge across sub-topics, the ability to think critically, or to solve well-defined problems within a discipline.
These higher-order processes depend entirely on the question being asked. According to research, even quite short professional development programs for teachers are effective in changing the way they write exam questions.
Exams should not be used to assess the recall of meaningless facts: this is a misuse of the format.
Myth 2: Google renders exams irrelevant
A second argument sometimes offered against exams is that everything can be found on Google anyway.
The implication, of course, is that we no longer need knowledge in our brains when we have phones in our pockets.
A variant of this argument is that internet access should always be permitted during exams as this mirrors our experiences in real life.
These arguments are problematic for two reasons.
First, research shows that people without knowledge in a particular field are surprisingly poor at finding accurate information on Google. They are more likely to find and believe conspiracy theories, for example, less likely to know what search terms to use, and less likely to reason logically about the information they find.
Second, looking up information on Google is not the same as accessing a pre-existing network of knowledge in the brain.
Pre-existing knowledge is critical because it guides the way in which we interpret new information and underpins critical thinking and problem solving.
Even if a student is taught generic skills in critical thinking and analysis, a wide breadth of knowledge is also needed to know what arguments are relevant in a particular domain and how they might be applied. This breadth of knowledge cannot be obtained simply by Googling.
It is precisely because our teachers, surgeons, scientists and building engineers have an established network of knowledge in their fields, held in long-term memory, that they are able to instantaneously apply this knowledge in the workplace, critically assess the validity of incoming information, and solve emerging problems on the run
Similar questions