Should schools abolish exams?

Diana Ciulacu
11G

Obviously, there are both pros and cons but exams have been around for as long as anyone
can remember and i do not think that abolishing them would be a good idea.

To me, learning is split into two levels: understanding and application. Understanding is
knowing the basic information. Application is being able to apply that understanding to your
life and career field. Exams focus on the understanding level. And that's okay- that grade
gives a benchmark to see where your level of understanding goes and what you need to
improve on.

Many courses make it the biggest portion of grading in a class and I think it leads to a
toxic and unhealthy behaviour. Exams are not only detrimental to a student's physical health
but mental health too.During exams, students are pressured to constantly study and revise
notes which leads to either overeating or undereating. When overeating, the lack of time
doesn't give space for physical exercise, leaving the students in terrible health. In other cases,
undereating can result in the loss of nutrients in the body. The students can forget to eat due
to stress and will lose energy, and fall sick. Students can also get mentally ill due to exams.
The stress from expectations to do well in exams is overbearing and can cause their mental
state to go crazy. In addition, they will constantly compare themselves to other students, and
seeing the other students do better, will lower their self-confidence and esteem to do well in
real life. This can also cause traumas over tests and grades in the future.

They do not define one’s skills and capabilities. Thomas Edison once said: “Tomorrow is
my exam but I don’t care, a single paper can’t decide my future” and we all know what
Edison achieved is his life, other successful people followed such a path and if they cared
much about exams, they surely would not have achieved what they did.

On the flip side, if you have exams that encourage learning the application of what is
taught to problems at hand, there will probably be better understanding and retention of the
material. This works better with a larger number of smaller tests to check a students skills,
instead of 2 exams of terror. In this manner, the exams provide a benefit, as the teacher finds
out what concepts need to be taught better and students are really forced to spend time
understanding the material before the test.
I'm a supporter or small-scale testing, to make sure the student is on track, but not huge
exams that carry as much weight as the choice of university, for example.
The problem lies there; it's a snapshot. Appropriate on the small-scale, where gaps in learning
can be found and amended appropriately. Once you increase that to a nation-wide exam,
where a single mark can determine your university for the next four years, then it starts to get
a bit silly.
The coursework model is a good starting point, where students are guided by their teachers
over a long period of time on how to plan, write and submit projects of their own choosing.
This allows much more room for self-expression, as well as an opportunity to display key
skills like independent learning and organisation.
However, I still believe that the structure of exams is flawed and definitely could use
improvement, gravitating towards open-book exams where appropriate, and perhaps
downscaling the volume of knowledge required per exam.