Exams - good or bad?

[Bugz]

Are exams good or bad to have?

Discuss.

 

[Huntingtons]

whats the idea to have a proof that you can read up on a subject prior to the test? its not hard to spent 3-4 days reading up on what you've learned the last couple of month/years. doesnt prove anything.

 

[CorNokZ]

Are exams good or bad to have?

Discuss.

I've been pretty decent all through out the year, but my oral exams so far have been terrible cause I get so damn nervous! I have no problems with written exams, as I am much better to express myself with writing than I am oraly(ask anyone I've been on vent with )

 

[leviathane]

they're good, but England has faaaaar to many, it's like every couple months, here kids heres a quick test for you to do.

 

[Mey]

Exams prove nothing more than rote learning. Testing should be more practical involving oral presentation of material and discussion with peers/teachers. This is of course if we want to invoke a world of young thinkers who further the field of study, rather than simple mind numbingly stupid Zombies who know only what they have been told and have no real complex knowledge of the subject in which they are studying. Or how to even interact or engage with the material.

 

[leviathane]

idd, they really should have some oral tests, cos i suck in written tests compared to oral.

 

[Bugz]

I only thought of bringing this up after a kid in my year has spent the last 3 months constantly revising.

Sure, he'll get good grades, but all he has done is stored the information in his head. =/

 

[Mey]

I assume your like GCSE or something? Ye' your probably right.

I know for my uni exams I learnt the meterial then spent ages talking to people about how it could be applied to x/y/z, what are the implications of this and so on. And tbh that was the best kind of revision i had ever done for years.

 

[kirennia]

It proves you're either:

a)Dedicated
b)A sponge

Although either could help for a job, they don't show a natural ability. I'm pretty sure for example, most creative musicians if asked to do a technical exam on music would fail badly.

Any creativity in a degree would not help you in an exam yet in a standard subject, coursework would help you shine through.

Personally, after being a programmer in my first year, having to write down code in an exam was horrendous. What a complete waste of bloody time. Yet in my coursework I was second in the year to a guy who had been programming for the last 4 years (I started fresh). I'm pretty sure however in the exam parts I'm going to be in the lower 50%.

What does this tell you? A sponge is great for exams but any creativity will come from more of a natural ability in a subject. If anyone is a good employer, this will mean a lot; if not, exam results actually matter (which sadly makes up the majority of employers).

 

[GReaper]

My main concern about exams and education in general is that it's all geared towards becoming an exam factory. There's a point at where they suck out the fun from learning.

They're always at the worst times of the year as well - hayfever season for summer exams.

 

[echome]

Why even go to school? - You could just get become a standard worker at your local factory and still make profit to the state.

If you don't like how the system works, try to change it or flow with it.
No one forces you to take a long education but yourself...

Just be glad you got the option, not like many many other people in this world.

 

[Coldbeard]

It's a necessary evil!

 

[Mabs]

exams are shite and pointless

they dont test how good you are at a given thing, they test how well you can parrot out information you have learned so you can pass the exam.

 

[Jeremiah]

Theres nothing wrong with exams, they are pretty good at judging someone's level of understanding. These days tho, most are just too predictable. They dont encourage applied knowledge, instead they just always follow a pattern like last years exam, and the year before.

Thats why they need to be used in conjunction with continual assesment, as well as some pratical demonstration of knowledge (where applicable ofc!).

When I was at uni, they held all exams at the end of the year, so you'd be tested on stuff you learned up to a year ago. This was still at the time when handouts werent given out, so you needed to rely on your notes. Now that was fun

 

[Vladamir]

I don't like exams and i prefer coursework, but i seem to do better in exams

 

[Mikah75]

whats the idea to have a proof that you can read up on a subject prior to the test? its not hard to spent 3-4 days reading up on what you've learned the last couple of month/years. doesnt prove anything.

hmm quite ignorant view i think
ofcourse theres point in exams, people are good at certain area's of expertise and deserve to get a chance to study them further and have a known award from it
and careers for e.g. doctors and nurses, would you want an unqualified and untested person pocking your insides?
some people dont like them, but they arn't there for fun
they're essential

 

[Vladamir]

and careers for e.g. doctors and nurses, would you want an unqualified and untested person pocking your insides?

Coming from you that put a massive smile on my face

 

[NikonL]

I much prefer my college course, in which there are no exams, it's all about completeing assignments to get certain pass criteria. much better way of doing it. a lot harder work than exams, but it actually teaches you.

 

[CorNokZ]

No one forces you to take a long education but yourself...

You clearly haven't met my mom

 

[Huntingtons]

hmm quite ignorant view i think
ofcourse theres point in exams, people are good at certain area's of expertise and deserve to get a chance to study them further and have a known award from it
and careers for e.g. doctors and nurses, would you want an unqualified and untested person pocking your insides?
some people dont like them, but they arn't there for fun
they're essential

i didnt say anything like that. tests are a great thing but they need rework. you prove nothing by studying and everything by having alot of knowledge. therefore i believe that tests should have more broad subjects.
in Denmark they recently changed some exams to 24 hours prep. these tests leave nothing for the smart people who can prove they have alot of knowledge that goes above the subject. now anybody who care to read for 24 hours do the same thing but it doesnt prove that it will help them in any way. i dont hate tests, i, quite apathetic when it comes to tests

 

[leviathane]

You clearly haven't met my mom

i have she's easy

soz couldn't be helped

 

[noblok]

My view on exams is without a doubt tainted by my field of study (philosophy), but here goes. I don't agree that exams don't allow for creativity. In fact, if I answer a question perfectly I expect no more than 60%. If you want higher grades, you are expected to show that you have really thought it through by linking it to other things or by crticising it, which is basically what you do when writing a paper (a creative activity).

I also think the knowledge-creativity dichotomy is wrong for another reason. I believe people need to be acquainted with a certain way of thinking if they want to show their creativity. Creativity is always creativity in a tradition: be it as a refining of the tradition or criticism against it. This is obvious for something as philosophy: you need to be acquainted with the standard problems, 'solutions' and vocabulary (more a set of concepts than a collection of words) if you want to write something remotely interesting. People without knowledge of the tradition usually have boring and shallow views (excluding perhaps a few very intelligent individuals). This background knowledge is like a toolbox: it gives you ways of reasoning, ways of analysing a problem and a conceptual field to look at certain problems. How you use those tools is up to you - you can even say the tools are no good and need to be replaced -, but without them you won't get far.

I believe the same thing goes for other disciplines. When you analyse (or even write) a poem you need to be acquainted with other poems and their interpretations. When you know the conceptual and connotational fields of certain important words and sounds, your interpretation will be a lot deeper and more interesting. When you want to solve a mathematical problem you not only need to know certain mathematical laws, but you also have to be acquainted with other mathematical problems and their solutions. Obviously the solution won't be identical, but they may be similar: your background knowledge introduces you into a certain way of problem-solving that is distinctive for mathematics.

 

[CorNokZ]

i have she's easy

soz couldn't be helped

First Bugz and now you?

Anyone else wanna have a go at my mom, lol?!

 

[Huntingtons]

First Bugz and now you?

Anyone else wanna have a go at my mom, lol?!

nobody wants, but when a person is drunk its hard to avoid those situations

 

[Everz]

hate em, did so shit in my stats and chemistry today cos literally forgot all the equations and so forth.. i hate this feeling of like ive blown my chance :/

 

[old.Tohtori]

Exams(written) mean only one thing: You have a memory.

Oooooh!

Context real situation tests(which could test your real life application of knowledge) would be good, but only for testing if you learned anything.

Basicly tests are just a measure stick for you to flaunt around or to help you get to, well, a place with more tests.

Your basic "My peen is bigger then yours" attitude that humanity devolves around

 

[Huntingtons]

Exams(written) mean only one thing: You have a memory.

Oooooh!

Context real situation tests(which could test your real life application of knowledge) would be good, but only for testing if you learned anything.

Basicly tests are just a measure stick for you to flaunt around or to help you get to, well, a place with more tests.

Your basic "My peen is bigger then yours" attitude that humanity devolves around

written tests require alot more than oral though. memory sure, but thats what knowledge is to remember stuff - using it is intilligence. you're assuming they're only on the 2 phases of the taxonomical levels (account and analyze). in order to obtain full use of your knowledge you need to discuss as well which most people dont knw how to.

 

[old.Tohtori]

written tests require alot more than oral though. memory sure, but thats what knowledge is to remember stuff - using it is intilligence. you're assuming they're only on the 2 phases of the taxonomical levels (account and analyze). in order to obtain full use of your knowledge you need to discuss as well which most people dont knw how to.

I'm assuming nothing, since i haven't done tests in ages(12 years or so) and don't plan on doing so in the future. But we're talking tests, as generic as it may be.

But the bold part on the quote kinda is what i said. It's not knowledge/intelligence, just remembering stuff, if you don't show how to use it in real life.

 

[Huntingtons]

I'm assuming nothing, since i haven't done tests in ages(12 years or so) and don't plan on doing so in the future. But we're talking tests, as generic as it may be.

But the bold part on the quote kinda is what i said. It's not knowledge/intelligence, just remembering stuff, if you don't show how to use it in real life.

well, my point was that knowledge is remembering stuff - intilligence is put it to use. in dk its not enough to remember stuff, you need show you can use it (in tests that is), might be different up north!

/edit

we might just be misunderstanding eachother

 

[old.Tohtori]

we might just be misunderstanding eachother

Probably yes, ah well, that's how nice flamewars are born

We were actually speaking of the same thing, just in different ways and terms.