I teach courses that have NO EXAMINATIONS. The students are required to do 5 individual and 1 group projects. I get a much more SATURATED grade distribution. It tends towards higher grades, since giving plenty of time to somebody tests only certain skills. I call it LOW FREQUENCY RESPONSE. However, the projects are difficult enough that, there is still a strong sense of DEADLINE, even if the allowed project time is THREE WEEKS.

Alternatively, I started teaching an elementary C programming course last semester, in which, I tried ALL THREE types of assessments: (1) PROJECTS, which are 2, 3 week long large C programs, (2) EXAMs, which are 2 hour super-simple scripts that the students had to develop IN THE CLASS, (3) and. EXAMs, which are 30 minute multiple-choice tests.

I call these HIGH FREQUENCY RESPOSE for (3) , and MID-FREQUENCY-RESPONSE (2), and (1) is the LOW-FREQUENCY response. Excuse me for thinking like an electrical engineer :) But, our brains are neuro-chemical circuits with frequency responses :)

In other words, PROJECTS alone did not show the skills of the students to perform certain things QUICKly, which is very important in the industry when they get hired. However, PROJECTs DID show their skills in developing something HIGH QUALITY. Alternatively, (2) tested their skill to write a program in real-time, which forced them to practice their skills in developing QUICK. (3) simply tested their "concept knowledge."

I am claiming that, all three are necessary. This is from experience. I had many students find internships after this class, and thanked me for doing this, although, they didn't really necessarily like it during the class !

When a person,here I mean the learner,is not under some sort of tension or duress,he/she will takes things easily.Intended results will not come out under such circumstances.People give results under some sort of duress.Another point is a learner at that particular age/class is expected to learn subjects/s & their levels goes on increasing higher as learner proceeds. in higher classes. He may not understand ALL of which had been taught to him,but as he goes higher up,he will understand more of what he had learnt in the lower classes.This phenomenon is experienced by all of us.Such an increase in knowledge is possible only if the learner was under the compulsion of giving regular exams. If the compulsion is absent,time,energy,money placed in by teachers,Institutions would go waste.

On the other hand,if say students (as would the elders) would want to do away with say theory exams,a better option would be to think over in terms of practical tests. But a question here is that not every subject can have practical tests,& some of the practical tests may lengthen over a long time period.

I teach courses that have NO EXAMINATIONS. The students are required to do 5 individual and 1 group projects. I get a much more SATURATED grade distribution. It tends towards higher grades, since giving plenty of time to somebody tests only certain skills. I call it LOW FREQUENCY RESPONSE. However, the projects are difficult enough that, there is still a strong sense of DEADLINE, even if the allowed project time is THREE WEEKS.

Alternatively, I started teaching an elementary C programming course last semester, in which, I tried ALL THREE types of assessments: (1) PROJECTS, which are 2, 3 week long large C programs, (2) EXAMs, which are 2 hour super-simple scripts that the students had to develop IN THE CLASS, (3) and. EXAMs, which are 30 minute multiple-choice tests.

I call these HIGH FREQUENCY RESPOSE for (3) , and MID-FREQUENCY-RESPONSE (2), and (1) is the LOW-FREQUENCY response. Excuse me for thinking like an electrical engineer :) But, our brains are neuro-chemical circuits with frequency responses :)

In other words, PROJECTS alone did not show the skills of the students to perform certain things QUICKly, which is very important in the industry when they get hired. However, PROJECTs DID show their skills in developing something HIGH QUALITY. Alternatively, (2) tested their skill to write a program in real-time, which forced them to practice their skills in developing QUICK. (3) simply tested their "concept knowledge."

I am claiming that, all three are necessary. This is from experience. I had many students find internships after this class, and thanked me for doing this, although, they didn't really necessarily like it during the class !

I have written many exams as may of us have. Individually if an opinion is sought I am not at all impressed with any of the exams. It only tests the endurance of pain and stamina of a student just like field sports. While a loser in sports can be called a sporting person and is very very necessary, in education it only demoralizes the average student and makes the meritorious student vain.

We can all accept that life is a game.

Game is a game to be enjoyed and participated with onlookers cheering and makes all happy., But in the game of education there are no onlookers,nothing to cheer about but only tension and anxiety for the examinees to get a good score In a sporting game one excels and want to do better and better and the standards are set higher. While In the education field once low marks are scored it can't be erased practically for life..Marks improvement is done in some cases but it carries a stigma along with it.

One may wonder my comparison of the study examinations with sports.Being an ardent lover of sports and having a good academic background I feel no wrong.

In real life for bread winning which includes teaching and working nowhere exam like situation arises. A boy who does very well in quiz competition is mentally very smart for that type of exercise unlike real life problem quizzes. Here quiz is also a game. As long as it is considered a game everything is fun and enjoyable. But when it assumes the role of competition test on knowledge which will decide ones' career then there is a distortion in the minds of all who are tested.

Do parents or lovers test their dear ones in short periods of performance? Long duration performance is what all accept and expect; and not by the tests done in impulses.

One cannot deny that the present system of examinations is fool proof regarding its credibility and acceptance by all as it is expected to be done fairly. The examination paper results goes beyond nationality, caste creed etc and all are neutrally and fairly evaluated, and in that sense it is the best system devised so far,

But.... when real life problems are considered, a persons' life quality is involved, the manner in which all works are executed,the examination system is very far from it. What do we do ? Let the question sink in many and we can perhaps have a wonderful debate on the same to continue further.

Whether we like it or not the results of the examination decides the first entry into a profession or job in most countries invariably . Considering the present job situation it is generally not to the students choice. This is a major flaw and all students become guinea pigs in the world's professional platform,

Exceptions are there definitely in the areas of intensive research and new upcoming technologies where the meritorious as evaluated by the present examination systems stand out well. This percentage is very small. We also should not forget that creativity is not from scoring high marks alone.

Actually I feel sorry for the outburst of my emotion a bit crude and rude on the examination system followed at present.

Nowadays students of the internet age ,mainly because of their future job uncertainties, coupled with change over to the world language that is English, find themselves insufficiently motivated. As the examination system is tough and demanding for their standards they do have a lot of problems. But all of them I feel are inherently capable workers and can rise up to the challenges of what a job can demand. But due to relatively low markings from the present examination systems they are left high and dry.

I have actually spoken on their behalf and exposed my negative feelings. It is always nice to be polite and elegant in ones expression which I value; but the plight of the majority of the non performing students examination wise overwhelms me.

Is this world shining bright for those who do relatively well in the examination only when we all know real life work requirements are very different? Is knowledge that is being taught meant only for excellence? Knowledge is essentially taught for everyone's survival and human upliftment. When examination system based only on marks system can decide the future of a person it is flawed.

Nowadays neither the parents nor the student child understand their future educational requirement. The district and the state can only facilitate and help to provide financial assistance for the needy but no guarantee of job.Though we keep saying that teaching should reach the lowest grade student, the teacher cannot set up different examination papers in the present system.

Doing away with exams concept has arisen due to some of the reasons mentioned above. If one can grade the types of work to be done with the corresponding grades achieved in the examinations, it will be one revolutionary way of circumventing the above problem and instilling confidence in the average students ;and (s) he will breathe lightly during (s) his educational stint.

I tend to view examinations as a way to test what the student does not know not what the student knows. With this in mind I teach courses where the grading is based on projects (as Tolga does but only three and each is individual), which I guarantee that cannot be done by solely searching till the end of the Internet.

I also think that specially designed projects can test skills which no examination can. such as in depth reasoning (which cannot be done in 2 hours or so of examination) and provides certain assurances that the student is not doing rote learning. The only drawback is to verify that the student was the one doing the job(which takes an interview to determine).

Dear Sundaresan Muthuswamy: I don't feel that you have to make apologies for expressing your own views and emotions on this subject, on the contrary, as my very question is very provocative and actually intended to reveal hidden and unwarranted assumptions about this one aspect of "our" (?) educational systems.

In fact, you gave your own justification: "I have actually spoken on their [i.e. nowadays students'] behalf and exposed my negative feelings." I think you are a wise and courageous man to share your worries with us, and I thank you for your contributions so far (hopefully more to follow ...).

Having said this, I have to admit that I wasn't sure at all, whether the phenomenon I asked about was really universal, i.e. to be observed all over the world. It might have been a particular issue here in Europe or in the States, as an outgrowth of the Testing and Standardization Industry (founded some 100 years ago in France) .

Thus it is extremely worthwhile for me/us to hear that it has indeed 'infected' the whole world, so it is something everybody should at least think (if not worry) about for a moment.

There is already a public debate about similar issues here in Germany, ignited by a very provocative book of a well-known philosopher here: "The Betrayal of our Educational System to our Children". Sadly enough, many stakeholders do *not* feel motivated to rethink their premises, but rather start immediately to defend the status quo ...

@ Paul VossenL-

Thank you sir very much for the kind comments.

Sometimes I feel inspection and quality control methods involving rugged testing, sampling plan, 3 sigma levels, tolerances, 100 percent inspection etc are very fool proof systems. It definitely ensures very satisfactory reliability beyond doubt.

When we talk about students; are the industries, academies, laboratories and the whole lot if permitted want to treat them in a manner as to how quality product are derived? I suspect so if they are left to their own sweet will.

Products are inert and made to specifications on a set standard, but students are evolving dynamic human beings who have the will; and if nurtured will rise to greater heights. Slaves were sold and tested by man in the earlier days and even now clandestinely in some pockets of the globe, Humans with greed and power can go to any extent. Well this is the limit one can say about the negative aspects of testing students.

From the onset of civilization the wise teachers used to test the students on their skills and is the order of the day till now.. But now in an expanding world added to the diversities and vast accumulation of knowledge, larger number of students, languages etc, the examination system has become routine and no real life in it. Added to this the nature of competition it is becoming harder and harder for the sole purpose of filtering the intelligent from the mediocre.

The human element or touch between the teacher and student is slowly deteriorating.

Yes, we have to rethink on our system as said by Sundaresan Muthuswamy. WE say that change is the inherent thing but are we changing w.r.t. our Exam Systems? Here in India also the same system is being follwed and no Policy makers are ready to think.

In my younger days I used to argue on the side of meritorious students and as far myself had no problem result wise. But when one comes outside in the external world we see many students who are marginalized and especially being a teacher now, I see they have no spokesman on their behalf.

Having worked so many years with technical experience in perhaps one of the highest technological institutions in my country I have been with and seen great personalities working contemporary then.

Leaving the pure aspect of technical research which definitely needs very bright students their population will range maximum 1 to 2 percent on whose efforts technological innovations and inventions are expected. However there are also many, many industrial applications where the brightest students are not involved.

Brightness in students is definitely measured by examinations no doubt.

The entire examination systems followed as of now has gathered so much momentum and inertia and is being carried on for ages. Arguments like mine will be futile.

I only want an awareness to be built up among the bright intellectuals to reflect back and really see that , what is really there in an examination system that tests one in real life outside. Let us leave out the practical examination system because the maximum marks scored will be by the less bright ones and also its percentage does not reflect much in the present grading system.

Getting more marks is inspiring and is only for glory and fame and for getting a job; but never it has been for the sole purpose of knowledge by the majority.

I don't think so. I am moving toward no exams in many of my classes. The only exams that I currently give are practical finals. I do include online quizzes, students are able to take them multiple times. I use them primarily as study tool, and a means for students to identify their knowledge or skills gaps. Students are only given grades for assignments/labs when they are at an "A" level.

Students have responded positively to these changes. Many have embraced the changes; however, there are some who can't handle not having the continual grades.

Frankly the answer to the thread keeps oscillating to me from very less exams with practicals versus the present exam system which is followed by majority. Whatever Mr.James has said and is following is a very positive step but it can be done only where the university/college has a high reputation and standard and would not be misused.

Since education involves ones future this discussion is very important. Someone who matters must take a bold lead which will ensure fairness and facilitates towards harnessing the potentially good students.

It is needless to stress that there should be total integrity and dedication from the teacher which is ably supported by the management. Sans this the system of no examination will fail. As education system is being commercialized this requirement is a tall ask.

Universities which have a proven record of excellence can at their discretion opt for What Mr James has said and it will be fine.

The majority colleges which do not fall within the prerequisite standard should keep following the present examination system or in other words to be POLICED to ensure at least minimum fairness is meted out to all students. After all no university or college can ever afford to bother about its past students except for the real loving teachers who follow their students to the end of the globe.

Even after forty years after graduation I still get occasional mild nightmares like I have only a few days for the exam and I am still not prepared to do the exams, some left out portions and my inability etc; etc.. Luckily after waking up I am relieved to know that I am safe. This is happening to an individual who has no reason to grumble education and job wise.

Now one can understand the true plight of genuine students who due to lack of proper teaching,playfulness, difficult situations for studying due to social and economic causes, job uncertainties, failures in tests, sickness, etc will be dreaming and never told. The causes is exams written all over. What sort of confidence can anyone including the teacher instill?

Lifelong the student will rue and as time goes he will learn to forget but the sporadic dreams however incoherent it may be will continue to haunt him. This is the legacy that the exams can give to most of the average students and below .( min 1 sigma level).

As a new researcher to the field of Educational Psychology and a current student myself I can see examinations being a double-edged sword. Particularly in the case of the American school system where they are using standardized test scores to evaluate everything from how effective the school is (which determines how much funding they get) to how much salary the teacher will earn. In cases like this where the motivation for using a assessment is finacial, either on the part of the teacher personally, or on the part of the school as a whole, I think that it actually corrupts the education because then the teachers becoming focused on teaching to the test and explaining the answers through rote memorization rather than actual comprehension and cognition.

When used effectively, examinations can provide important learning opportunities for students. From my perspective, the problem is not testing but rather the fact that most teachers know so little about assessment.

Johnathan, I would argue that state and federally mandated testing is not characteristic of legitimate educational assessment because it has questionable validity. Moreover, I am not convinced that the aim of such testing is to assess learning outcomes, which is a central feature of legitimate testing. Instead, it seems designed to wrest greater and greater control of education from teachers, parents, and local communities.

(copied from the discussion on "Are students grade-seeking or competence-seeking?". Gloria Latham asked: What if universities weren't required to provide grades or scores?")

This question reminds me of my own question, several months ago: "Would education really break down if there were no examinations anymore?"

There were several interesting answers, not too much however, which confirms my hypothesis, that examinations-in-education-in-conjunction-with-grading are deeply rooted in the rituals of almost all cultures (nations), so that even the act of imagining alternatives (Gedanken-Experiments) is asking too much.

Of course, education or something like that would NOT break down if there were no examinations! Of course, the core business (oops, some may not like this metaphor) of universities is NOT to provide grades or scores, whether based on examinations or not.

I am sure, if we decided together, on the basis of sound research (and there IS already a stock of valuable research on this important issue, but most of us ignore it) that examinations and grades are obsolete, we are competent and skilled enough, to propose a handful of quite distinct alternatives, which would be equally effective and efficient if not better. In other words: if universities weren't required to provide grades or scores based on some sort of examination, other ways to fulfill the same task would be found and installed ?

But this reaction would NOT be a answer on the hidden question behind the original question. That hidden question is: why do universities think and behave as if it is their duty to provide examinations and grades?

My hypothesis (and again I am sure that there will already be educational theory and research backing up this hypothesis) is, that - long ago already - the field of education has allied with both government and business to provide some sort of symbolic information (data) which can be used by government and business for purposes of selection based on individual quality instead of societal status.

In other words: academia is taking over a duty/job that originally belongs to government and industry. In return, they get money and perhaps some better status. Thus it's a (Faustian) deal, well hidden behind the facade of rituals (examinations, certifications, accreditations, ...). You can (try to) change the form of rituals, which will be tough enough, and still leave the real culprit untouched.

This is, BTW, just one of the reasons, why age-old didactic principles like the Socratic Dialogue are hard to implement nowadays: they stem from a time and culture where this alliance between education and 'the rest of society' was not yet so tight and strong as it is in our ages.

A good thesis and probably true. In Australia at least, this original purpose, which is a sorting process for the industrial machine, has been surplanted somewhat by the purpose of providing fodder for political posturing. In many ways the sorting process of education has been relegated to second place.

Dear Paul Hubert Vossen,

When students are prepared for examinations and not for lifelong learning then surely examinations are a problem.  Should there be a difference between the terms test and examination? After all the test or examination is there to assess the process of learning, or better still the student may know the stage of development s/he has arrived to be able to continue on the next step of advancement in the learning process.

Regards

Carmen Camilleri

Dear Carmen

Thanks for this reply of yours after one year silence of this thread. Yes, I assume most people see a distinction between test and examination. At least I do. The difference lies in 'context of application and purpose of use', much less in abstract basic features of both instruments.

The term examination is strongly associated with formal certification for some purpose, be it in regular education or more general societal contexts. Most of the times it results in some sort of licence to offer certain services and call oneself so or so (e.g. being a lawyer, being a physician, etc.), to use some device or practice some procedure (e.g. driver licence), or generally to ascertain publicly that one has got a certain skill or competence (e.g., a PhD). Examinations may differ greatly in depth and breadth, and may or may not be based on sound and fair principles of testing and objective rules and procedures. The kind and quality of examinations is usually based on formal accreditation and social negotiation.

Tests are much more science-based, empirical or technical, and have a much narrower scope than examinations. Moreover, the terms 'test' and 'testing' are not only used for demonstrating specific qualities of people ( as in intelligence test), but also of material things or physical processes (mainly in natural sciences and engineering). The precise characteristics of tests and methodologies of testing are usually strictly rooted in relevant empirical theories and bound to explicit statistical or other mathematical methods and techniques. Think e.g. of psychometric tests of competence or skills, audiometric tests (or hearing), material tests (e.g. stiffness, elasticity), etc. There is no place for subjectivity or other features which would make tests dependent upon human judgement or social agreement as in the case of examination.

Of course, in daily life and natural language contexts, terms like examination and test will be used carelessly and sloppy, so that the clear distinctions are blurred away, but in serious discussions about tests and examiations in e.g. education one should always make those well-established (and appropriate) distinctions.

Or so I believe.

Last week I was talking to my MBA students on the same line. I must appreciate Paul for this discussion. We have to break rules and start from our own subjectts. I think there should not be assessment on the level of learning. It should be training the students about application of the knowledge at Higher Education.

Dear Paul,

I made that question of tests and examinations referring to the fact that students do undergo stress regardless of being a test or an examination. The problem then would be how they manage to cope with that stress. So I believe that tests/examinations may limit the productivity of the students' function even more when they have other personal problems when doing the tests or examinations.

Regards

Carmen Camilleri

This is indeed an important problem of any sort of real-life situation in which someone has to show and provide evidence that he or she has mastered some skill or competence and so is capable of behaving adequately in a number of selected typical situations, be it in education, on the job or even personal life (e.g. getting a driver licence).

This stress is biologically (sometimes also culturally) coupled with an in-born avoidance of failure, "doing bad", in the face of others who are supposed to be or recognized as "authorities" or "leaders" or "gate-keepers" (fill-in what you like).

Some people learn to cope with that stress in a positive, constructive way, but most human beings will suffer from it until the end of their lives.

Of course, young people on their way to a good place and role in society hoping to start up a happy and fulfilling life show an increased level of this type of stress.

There were some reports here on ResearchGate (sorry, I don't know anymore which discussion thread(s) it was) of extreme stress at schools and universities in some Asian countries just because of tests,  examinations and the like, sometimes - sadly enough - leading to suicide.

What can we do about it? Whenever you can decide yourself about the contents and procedures of teaching and classroom-based assessment, you may be in a favorite position to minimize this kind of stress (see the many suggestions and ideas put forward by Mark Gould, see above).

However, large-scale high-stakes examinations (sometimes also called tests) have usually been standardized and institutionalized by official societies and political bodies, and it will be utterly difficult (nearly impossible) to circumvent their regulations. See the recent uproar in USA regarding the Common Core act.

Personally, I have never encountered the argument that education would break down without examinations, so I suspect that this is a specious question.  Most experienced teachers know, I believe, that examinations are appropriate in some courses but not in others.  I currently am teaching, for example, a course on child development, and it has no exam, just a term paper.  Last fall, on the other hand, I taught a psycholinguistics course, and it had both a midterm and a final.  The form of assessment is related to the different learning objectives and the different material.

I would suggest that a more pointed question is whether education would break down if there were no assessment.  Actually, this is a question that can at least be considered through the available research.  In the States, grade inflation as been a serious issue in our public schools for about 40 years; over the last 25 or so, it has become a serious issue in our universities.  Grades keep going up, yet the amount of knowledge that students possess appears to be going down or, at best, is static and unaligned with grades.  Consider PISA scores.  In 2000 the mean USA score in reading was 504, in math and science 493.  In 2012, the mean USA score in reading was 498, in math and science 489.  Then consider that Arum and Roksa (2011) reported a positive correlation between student evaluations of teachers and the ease of courses.  The most straightforward way to make courses easy is to eliminate legitimate assessment.  We also have NAEP data showing that reading and math scores in our public schools have not improved since 1971.  

These data, along with research showing that most students tend to apply themselves more when their courses have some form of assessment, suggest that education would not break down without assessment, but it certainly would be a questionable form of education.

Dear Paul,

I can give you my experience when I was in the Secondary School.

I remember that this issue was raised in the 1960's. My group initiated during the first years with first term and second term examinations. However, for one or two years we did not have mid-term examinations. I remember my friends saying that they will take it easy during the first term and they will study for the second term exam.  What happened was that they were more stressed for the 2nd term exam.  However, things had to be reversed back to normal, having both first and second semeter exams because students were taking things easy and studying left for the end. 

However, this was a context where we started off with examinations and so this change might have been a relief for some time.  On the other hand, what would happen if students start off without examinations and taught from childhood to become lifelong learners? 

Regards

Carmen Camilleri

@ James: In this form, I didn't either (i.e. didn't encounter the argument etc.). Nevertheless I don't feel like this question being specious. I tried to formulate and then question a (negative) rationale for what occurs all over the world in all kinds of forms, and I am surely not the first to question (or criticize) it. It is the proliferation of assessment, evaluation, certification, etc. p.p. There's even a strong tendency for putting all those forms of mutual judgement into a hierarchy: evaluation of evalution and evaluators: testers may become certified, the certification body has to be accredited, accreditation bodies are officially acknowledge or installed by government, etc. Some people find it utterly hilarious, I read some wonderful reaction to those tendencies. Where is the end? Why do we like these games? Those (and many others) were my questions on the background. I just wanted to formulate it in a way which graps the attention.

Just for the record (but beside the point of my original question): I am a fan of any sort of assessment integrated in the process of instruction, education, teaching. That's why I called one of my current projects ATLAS, where TLA stands for Teaching-Learning-Assessment. See also my website about the PASS reference model and its rationales.

James, grade inflation is a serious problem, at least in the eyes of the beholders. It would be nice to see a discussion on it. I expect to see quite different reactions and responses to such a question: How accurate and valid is the phenomenon? Can you compare such data reliably over time? Is it really a problem? Is the problem inherent to having a grading system at all? Or only of particular grading systems in particular contexts? Etc. etc.

Examinations does help  in making many easy going and reluctant  students who are a sizeable percentage to learn, if I can say so by 'gun point'. Most of them are not really excited to learn, but perhaps learn to earn a licence namely a degree for getting a job. Most of these students have many other talents and do reasonably well in a job which they manage to acquire. In course of time they deviate and possibly find a job to their liking and do well. This is a story perhaps well told with positive intent, but the aspirations as to what the teacher had never really get fulfilled. The bright ones, no problem at all , and they really dont need exams to certify their real worth. Somehow a strong system has been setup which is hard to erase.

Only bold measures  taken can  make learning a passionate pursuit and serve the students for the true cause intended. In a world which is fast changing  technology wise with constantly changing demands it is hard for anyone to take fresh risks though a change is warranted. We should perhaps introduce pockets of selective education without examinations  in a small scale and review the whole thing.

Paul, I would suggest that the focus on evaluation/assessment that we have witnessed over the last 40 years or so is related to political efforts to end community-based education.  I also would suggest that the rationale is related to a desire to gain more control over the substance of education and, of course, control over the huge sums of money that the developed world invests in education.

James, I have seen it written that the goal of creating an education market for government money drove a lot of the curent reforms in the USA. Would you agree?

Yes, I would.  I also would argue that reform movements since the late 1970s/early 1980s have been designed to eliminate community-based education and give control to politicians and bureaucrats.

James, this would surely happen. examination is the perfect check point to  monitor performance. although other parameters do exists but the performance of students in pressurized environment of exams makes  the students stronger (case hardening) , durable to work efficiently in life.

Singh, I'm not sure I follow your argument.  Taking exams makes students stronger?  Isn't the opposite equally true, at least for those children who do not do well on tests?  Wouldn't their poor performance make them weaker, robbing them of self-confidence and locus of control?  Moreover, from a social perspective, do we really want students to be "case hardened" rather than empathetic and kind?  Perhaps my experience is flawed, but it seems to me that the quality of life in America has declined as the population has become increasingly self-centered, narcissistic, and unkind.

No it will not because i am sure were other means used in examining students before the advent of examination and i am sure there will be other means if examination is no more

Oluwafemi, in ancient Greece, after a young man had finished his rhetorical training, he was required to undergo a rigorous examination, called a dokimasia, by city leaders.  This examination raises the question of when the "advent of examination" began.  I would suggest that examination of one kind or another has always been a part of education.

Doctors also perfom examinations of their patients, so the word is not the issue. It is what it has come to mean in education specifically. I guess the real question is - is there a better way of examining for learning than what has come to be meant by 'examination'?

@ George Stoica :: The question is what concrete problems of teaching (lecturers) and learning (students) are effectively and efficiently solved by examinations (of whatever type, at whatever time). May I assume that your belief is based on (personal) experiences that without examinations something of value for the whole process of teaching would be missing, because there is no viable alternative? And if so, what value(s) are we talking about? If your belief is sound, then we should stick to it, never mind how old fashioned it may appear to other people.

On the other hand I wonder why free instructors regularly turn up using methods of teaching and assessing that they were exposed to during their student years and/or which are particularly enabled and promoted by current fashions and technologies. How free is this? Can we think of alternatives - perhaps "old fashioned" ones which were very successful once upon a time, but have been forgotten in the turmoil of technology-driven and commercially-driven innovations?

Many people do not take exams well, especially as currently structured, yet may understand material better and use it better than many of those who "fit the mold."

Also, "learning disabled" may be a misnomer for many people who learn a lot more and are better performers out of school, but again do not  "fit the mold." 

The positive part in an examination system is that it creates a partition among students who are really eager to learn and have learnt and the  IQ possessed by them and is definitely a valid selection process towards higher education and research. Applied research   should include the mediocre ones also as they will learn better as time progresses and motivation received.

Unfortunately the employing industries and related job oriented organizations are in a dilemma as to who they could give employment.Though every employer knows their requirements very well the new student job seekers namely the young minds have to be really nurtured to bring out their hidden capabilities or talent, and this is  a majority one is dealing with.

Cut of marks as secured in an examination for eligibility to write written tests is the real villain for most of the student community. Reservations practiced in some countries is an indirect influence, but it causes a society divide and is unhealthy.All employers can never have the so called humanitarian considerations for helping the needy students with less marks as it would set a dangerous precedence chaotic like.

It all boils down to the education system and the examination methods   of awarding marks and degrees which is well thought over which gives a stamp of recognition to the aspiring and perhaps to  all the deserving students most. As commercial aspects and  performance of students with a market value are the driving factors the whole system of examinations is  now skewed.

Bold step by step  methods of reforming and revamping the education system by well established and renowned expert panel of advisers alone can come up with a rightful solution for  all the needy and aspiring students seeking to survive in this ever competitive world.

I believe that a neatly implemented Continuous Evaluation system brings down the so-called 'Tyranny of Exams' and personally wish for a time when exams in the current form (What I see around in my land) ceases to exist.

@ Chinchu C Mullanvathukkal · ::: Thanks a lot for bringing up the phrase "Continuous Evaluation" in this context. Indeed, Continuous Evaluation has been long advocated for Software/System Design (cf. Lewis 2008), for quite a simple reason, which also applies to educationatal testing: if you test at the end, it's already too late.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1420080733

@ Sundaresan Muthuswamy ::: I was already waiting for your insightful reply. Thank you so much. Yours, Paulus

@ Paul Sir:

Continuous Evaluation has been experimented with in Kerala state of India with feedbacks indicating that implementation has to be meticulously planned. My experience with students tell me that there is much hope for Continuous Evaluation in making lives better for the children.

http://www.mierjs.in/ojs/index.php/mjestp/article/view/72/48

Assessment in Queensland High Schools has been by continuous assessment up to grade 12 level for about 20 years. There was a moderation process and a statistical process to reduce anomalies. It worked, at least as well as any other large scale system. Unfortunately there has been a backlash in the last year or 2 to return to a large scale common examination to minimise 'cheating' and, in the minds of those who are pushing this system to reintroduce rigour to the physics and mathematics curriculum. The Queensland government has accepted that there needs to be a common examination and one will be introduced in a few years. The people who have been tasked with developing the common assessment system have a record of quality design, so I am hopeful that they will create something that does not constitute a backward step in our system.

Dear George,

Guess you are referring to the paragraphs:

"On the other hand I wonder why free instructors regularly turn up using methods of teaching and assessing that they were exposed to during their student years and/or which are particularly enabled and promoted by current fashions and technologies."

"How free is this? Can we think of alternatives - perhaps "old fashioned" ones which were very successful once upon a time, but have been forgotten in the turmoil of technology-driven and commercially-driven innovations?"

Sorry for being somewhat vague or ambiguous here. What I meant was following. If the established educational system in a country ~ down to the level of faculty and teachers ~ has once fixed its way of checking how well learners do, well then it will be highly probable that individual teachers will "learn and adapt to the rules" and highly unprobable that anything different will emerge. As a means of avoiding the risk of inferior teaching/learning practices this sounds rational, but it also means giving up the chance or opportunity to find - perhaps unexpectedly - better ways! Thus we will see the same patterns of instruction and inquiry passed along from generation to generation; even technology and commerce can only change that marginally, no matter how much hype will be made about this or that novel approach or medium. Nevertheless, we *are* exposed to this never-ending load of technology-driven and commercially-driven innovations, and we are well aware that we are just scratching the surface (of educational systems' basic premises and presumptions) and that we will never be able to catch up with that all because of sheer lack of resources.

You may take this for a pessimistic view on the politics and business of education. I would rather call it a more or less plausible hypothesis, for which there are at least some supporting facts (e.g. the debates about TV, video-equipment, computers et al in the schools, which can afford it anyway), and perhaps also personal experiences of those teachers who have tried out different ways.

Let me give one example from my own biography. When I started lecturing - very late in my career - I was immediately confronted with one of the most difficult types of assessment: that of authentic assessment of authentic assignments performed by teams of students. While the students played the role of software developers, I had to play the role of a customer who sets the stage (by software requirements), at the same time that I had to fulfill the role of a teacher and assessor. For me however there was another problem that troubled me: how on earth should I score and grade individual students if all evidence that I had was at the level of the team? Asking my contact person (full-time professor) didn't bring me any insight at all: "Do whatever you feel all-right, but here is my recipe and advise: all team members get the same grade!" Soon however, there were cases, in which I couldn't rightfully follow his advise, e.g. because of free riders in a team. Extensive literature search on the web didn't reveal any plausible general approach and solution of this so-called Team-Mate-Dilemma. What I found were scattered reports of an ad-hoc nature with many flaws. Thus I started my own research and experiments which finally (after many years!) led to a satisfying solution (now part of my assessment system called PASS). The important lesson here is: If I hadn't been fool enough to invest so many of my energy and time in working out a principled solution of the TMD, it would have never happened, and I would have stuck to the easy way-out recommended by my contact person: rule-based, not insight-based.

Don't think that such phenomena are the exclusive hallmark of our educational systems. We have the same patterns in empirical research. I just mention two more or less famous examples:

• Although it has been extensively criticized for decades (e.g.: Kline 2013), significance testing is still sold (taught) to almost all students in physical, social and behavioral disciplines as the only respectful way of doing inductive statistics. From generation to generation.
• Although the beauty and effectiveness of a Bayesian approach to statistics has been demonstrated again and again (e.g.: Bertsch McGrayne 2012), most students and researchers are only well enough acquainted with the more 'traditional' approaches so as to be able to apply them. From generation to generation.

the refs

http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Significance-Testing-Statistics-Behavioral/dp/1433812789

http://www.amazon.com/Theory-That-Would-Not-Die/dp/0300188226

@  Paul Hubert Vossen

Thank you very much for the sensitive remarks and who can forget you?

Interesting thought. I meant it is an excellent question. What I would like to see is:

Removing the state test ( or common core), What result will happen? Will the teaching improve knowing there is no pressure with the state test?

I have been teaching for 33 years. I always give some kind of assessment. If we are talking about any evaluation ( or tests/exams)  in the class, I will be wondering how to measure their progress? For myself, I do learn better knowing that there is no examination.. We need to give a grade..

I would like to see some kind of study with this question... Again, excellent question.

@ Keith Mousley ·::: I couldn't agree more, there should be some kind of study to find out the positive or negative or mixed or .... null effects of e.g. the Common Core initiative. Just having a belief or opinion about CC doesn't say so much, unless one confuses voting with knowing.

The problem I see here is that - as far as I know - the state tests are already in place, so we are talking about evaluation after the fact. And as we kniow very well: Removing facts may be even more cumbersome than establishing them in the first place. But still we shouldn't give up hope, although research of this kind is extremely difficult (program evaluation) and prone to being designed and used in favor of those who mandate it (all kinds of biases, knowingly or not).

Dear George,

How useful are examinations (or tests) in your field BEFORE final examinations (in edu-parlance: formal evaluation vs. summative evaluation)? I remember from my days as a student of mathematics that a lot of time was reserved for exercises at home and in class, which I now recognize as a kind of formal evaluation. Do you agree?

Kind regards

Paulus

OK, I understand. Are those tests and midterm exercises formally checked and feedback given? If yes, this amounts ~ modulo the number of participating students ~ to a lot of extra work for teachers/assessors, on top of genuine lecturing. How do you handle this?

How is understanding 'measured': counting the number of correctly solved assignments and dividing by the total number of assignments, possibly weighted according to difficulty? If so, the presumption here is, that there will be only a single quality criterion with only two quality levels: correct or not correct. [ In PASS, I have dubbed this assessment profile A2: 2-level Analytic assessment, analytic insofar as there are many exercises (there are 3 other profiles). ]

Understanding will probably be somewhere in the middle of Bloom's hierarchy of learning (cf. Krathwohl 2002).

Last question: what grade scale (cf. Stevens 1946) do you use, and is it strictly 'quantification': zero defined, unit defined (ratio scale)? I rather believe that grades (as symbols) can offer no more than an ordinal measure of competence, the lowest level of measurement (fine for selection purposes, but not for mental testing or psychological research in general).

@George Stoica · 

Mathematics and related statistics are best evaluated through exams and score sheets. Maths  obviously is the language of any engineering sciences and is always a definite requirement for further research. It also distinguishes the intelligent students from the rest.

However the majority  of engineering applications and the technology growth in all the industries and allied fields a mediocre student and even below could do better than the intelligent ones from maintenance to innovative developments as in real life there are no maths tests but enough literature and books for the relatively slow learners to perform very well. In fact the world is going on thus. But the difficulties and humiliations faced by students with so called low mark levels suffer immensely and some are even totally deprived..

@ George Stoica 

Thank you. It is a very fair and humane method of evaluation. Very few teachers are so.

Dear George : I fully agree with Sundaresan (see comment above). It means, you are using interim tests (of any sort available) and close observation as a means to judge the progress of students. Psychometricians would call this 'longitudinal testing', a much better name IMHO than 'formative evaluation' or 'continuous evaluation', although by and large the same is meant.

By longitudinal testing you can detect changes over time, tendencies, even up and downs depending e.g. on the workload and other external factors impinging on the students. The richer the form of longitudinal testing, i.e. not just right-wrong exercises but also close observation on a one-to-one basis, the more reliable and valid the final judgements will turn out.

But beware, teachers: giving feedback and support to students in this way is itself a form of (remedial) instruction and thus including the results of longitudinal tests into the final grade may seem a problematic (distorting) issue. The question that each instructor has to answer for himself is: do you want the fact of being a slow learner to show up in the final mark / grade or not?

The problem you describe in your last section Paul is judgement rather than measurement. In some sense it doesn't matter how the student got to the point they did. Whether one received more help to get to the same point as the other doesn't affect the measurement of that point. So really the problem is one of predictive power of the grade and equity, and these cannot be measured by the single measure you describe. A solution could be to adopt a second measurement or grade that describes something like a student's IQ. I don't really mean IQ but something with a predictive component based on a student's ability to arrive at a desired endpoint with little help.

The whole system of education actually revolves around the student ,the teachers the  job executors, the parents being  the sponsors and the environment dictated by the management which has arisen to the holy cause of education with the name, fame and money as the motivators.

Whatever we do I have a feeling in the local region around me , I have seen the student psychology plays a tremendous part and no amount of planning by the ardent teachers really works to their expectations. I feel the students of the present era are carried away by the internet and cell phone culture which though has a tremendous potential in education system are being misused by the student majority. Actually it is a boon to the young  teachers who were earlier students and even to the older ones alike.

The students are tied down by the disciplines enforced by their school teachers and reprimanded by their over ambitious parents all along and when they enter the college the professional and academic institution let loose their frustration in full; of course oblivious of the disciplines to be followed soon after graduation when they seek employment. They know instinctively that work environment is no fun as fun is never tolerated in a work place.

When they meet various new students from different schools of thought and learning a friendship develops where they let loose their expression for freedom.The syllabus drawn from various considerations including the compression of knowledge gained over decades and the need to be along the state of art made by ambitious educators in the name of excellence is the actual villain to the majority of students.

High IQ students, evolved students through the genes upgrading itself all come to the rescue to  the lucky few and they set their benchmarks lauded by all and institutions like MIT , Cal-Tech. Stanford   etc etc can all boast off.

Unless the present education system   increases the time tenure mixed with meaningful exams and grading system and  bifurcation on the capabilities of each student towards a particular capability as identifiable by the future employing agency, the whole system will remain skewed as we see of now.

Sundaresan  -

I'm sure you have many good ideas, but one thing seems apparent in your answers that I think you might want to reconsider:  You seem to assume a 'perfect correlation' between student performance on exams and actual understanding of the material.  I think that assumption is too strong.  There should definitely be a positive correlation, but it may be weaker than many assume. 

People's brains often work differently than others, not necessarily better or worse.  Also, some people may have exam phobias.

Relatedly, but on a somewhat different topic, think of an exam that measures creativity.  How would you do that? 

Cheers - Jim   

PS  -  I once heard that "School is a conveyor belt to conformity."  Some people may work very hard, long hours to handle that, but still be "A left-handed person in a right-handed world."  

@James R Knaub

i take your suggestion as a further understanding to me on this interactive effort.

I understand there are many students who know  how to score more marks by mere  memorization of certain difficult topics and really do not understand the subject as is generally exposed in a viva- voce exam if taken with a purpose.

There are two things that always clash each other one is more marks scored versus proper understanding. The third factor being their placement in proper  job related establishments so that they start of  safely and contribute the best they can.

Every parent and teachers of each student think their wards are capable and have a lot of hope. There is always a policing agency in the form of marks scored and interviews  which decide the students future. All along we all know the student does not remain the same and most bring out their talent in some form or the other and shine well. But the brief tenure during the students stay in a college passes off in a jiffy and  their performance secured becomes a permanent record to be quoted throughout ones lifetime. This hurts one and all who loves all.

Creativity is a GOD  given boon to all of us and it strikes each one of at different times. The obviously creative person is easily identified with innate talent by his side and their future none can stop. Some people are born to shine and  give inspiration and hope to the people down under perhaps triggering excellence and desire to become great. Nurturing creativity and promoting it is more well said than done as it is only those exceptional few individuals teacher like can imbibe this  quality  to a student community.

Perhaps, as I suggested at another discussion platform some time ago, perhaps the real culprit may be this obsessive record keeping by educational institutions and authorities, records handed over to the students who again forward it to their future (prospective) employers.

My hypothesis was, that this is an unfair burden and responsibility placed on educational institutions by means of a kind of tacit (?) 'social contract' between industry in a broad sense (all those looking for employers) and society at large (source of potential employers).

Insofar we are dealing with vocational training in fully industry-subsidized, or even industry-owned academies this may be a correct and justified and acceptable system of mutual dependencies.

However, if we are talking about general state-owned and largely or fully state-subsidized education this tacit 'social contract' is severely misplaced because the service provider (i.e. the educational system c.q. society at large) pays the service it offers to the service recipient, not the other way around!

• Here, of course, 'service' is the assessing and screening of students as to their knowledge and skills, hard as well as soft ones, which as everybody knows is a really tough and expensive 'business'.
• In my mind at least, service is a commodity that is offered by the service provider to somebody who is in need of this service, and is willing to pay for it (which is I always thought a basic premise of capitalism of any flavor).

Thus the valid question might be: how did this contra-intuitive social contract came about, and are both partners aware of its contra-intuitive character, or is one party exploiting the other one without the latter's awareness?

Anyway, I have learned from that discussion some time ago, that at least one country (Spain) has chosen not to rely too much (if at all) on university's records and has installed its own industry system of assessment for employer selection. Of course, there may be other specific reasons for this deviation of common practice, e.g. a general mistrust in the quality of the educational system in question, but anyway the perverted 'social contract' I mentioned above is avoided in this way. 

Education per se will not breakdown, but employability might. Examinations did not exist during the time of Socrates yet the education was rigorous enough to produce eminent philosophers and thinkers. Examinations provide a way to rank-order labor resources. Especially in cases where education signals employabiity.