Some people believe that it is fairer to assess a student’s ability based on their performance during the whole course rather than giving a formal examination at the end of the course. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words

A group of people think that the assessment of a learner’s capability based on his/her activeness on classes, is fairer than evaluating by using tests. I completely agree that

this

is the best way to measure the real abilities of the students.

Firstly

, the observation method is more flexible, since it shows a student from different frames and accumulate impressions from lesson to lesson, while a formal examination is just the evaluation of the knowledge at a specific moment.

Moreover

,

this

method illustrates not only the knowledge level, but

also

some skills and talents. Observation is taken as the main tactic in the Minerva school at KGI, where performance of the individuals is evaluated by artificial intellect and fly towards the professor. The university system makes analysis of the learner’s response and gives

their

objective case of they

them

fair marks to the professors, so simply justify the lessons. Another point to consider is that random uncertainties can happen on examination day,

such

as the exam taker feeling unwell, having a bad day or just personal problems. The students might forget the answer for the question for which they could answer if they were not worried.

For example

, I have been participating in national and international olympiads for a long time, but despite my experience, I always feel a huge pressure and get lost.

That is

why people think that the examination is constructed from 50% fortuity and the 50 % brain. In conclusion, to assess a student’s ability, the observation is a way fairer than standardized tests, since tests are inflexible and do not attach importance to accidental incidents.