Exams are the best way of assessing a student’s level. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The Darwin's theory - Survival of the fittest came into existence with the observation that nature has bestowed all living beings with a few special

skills

of their own, these

skills

are of paramount importance in the race for survival and these

skills

are tested by mother nature from

time

to

time

.

Similarly

,

this

theory has been implemented in the human world in the way of

exams

, but the question arises, are

exams

an appropriate method of testing human

skills

or knowledge which will benefit the examinee in living a better life or help in the evolution of human beings. To better articulate the question of are

exams

the best way of assessing a

student

's level, one should

first

understand the process of an examination, it is usually taken after a stipulated

time

after the course has begun, a specific

time

is allotted to remember the course learnt and answer a few questions asked from the vast syllabus that would have been covered by the examiner. While at the face of it, it does seem like a decent enough methodology to test a human being, but if we dissect the method even a little we would a plethora of errors in

this

method. To start with

exams

are more of testing the memory and retention rate of a

student

than the actual test of his

skills

or learning. It doesn't test the implementation technique learnt by the

student

which will actually help the

student

in the real world while dealing with real problems. As

exams

are an activity which has a

time

constraint it can impact the recall rate of the

student

which is different for different students as proved by the Human Behaviour study done in Harvard Business school.

Hence

I believe that

exams

are not the best way to accessing a students level.