Formal examinations are the only effective way to assess a student's performance. Continual assessment such as course work and projects is not a satisfactory way to do this. Do you agree or disagree?

In the process of an interview, most of the authorities conduct some experiments to evaluate candidates. It is commonly believed that formal examination can evaluate candidates effectively rather than continual assessment or projects. I agree with the statement that the formal checkup is more effective than other methods. Analysing the effectiveness of formal questioning than other ways, as well as straightforward measuring one's comprehensive ability.

Firstly

, during the interviews, examiners have to deal with and meet a lot of candidates that taking excessive time and stress.

For instance

, in the formal experiment, some specific questions can get needed information from interviewers that evaluate them adequately.

Hence

, it is effective to choose a matched person and reduce the waste of time to some extent.

Thus

,

this

traditional method is an adequate way to assess the student's performance.

Secondly

, the orthodox evaluating system can assess the student's ability comprehensively.

For instance

, in a formal test, students are given multiple assignments to solve. The examiners can measure their performance from several points of view.

Hence

,

This

is a quality that the official exam does have, but other tests don't have. To conclude,