Exams in a classroom setting: When is it useful?

Examinations still receive a lot of criticisms, though it was used for so

many years. In fact, exams are the subject of debates nowadays. Critiques
insist that exams should be outlawed in favor of other forms of assessments. It
is true that exams cannot be the solitary basis for measuring the intellectual
ability of students because of its limitations. However, as this paper argues,
exams should not be revoked as it is a useful device that helps teachers in
measuring the students intellectual ability when the conditions of validity are
met.
Examination is not just an assessment but a form of measurement a
process that involves numbers rather than mere observation. The use of
numbers ideally reduces the subjectivity of any observation, thus making
exams a more dependable process. However, extraneous factors such as
individual differences, constant student environment transactions, emotional
factors, practice, coaching, test complexity, mode of administration, and
cheating influence the students performance during exams. These limitations
prove that exams cannot be the solitary basis for measuring the intellectual
ability of students.

On the other hand, exams, despite numerous criticisms, can be very

useful if used properly. It can be said to be used properly if and only if it is
valid. Valid exams are those that are successful in measuring what they are
supposed to measure. For instance, a teacher should not give a computational
exam if she wants to measure the reading comprehension ability of students. In
light of this, the test constructor must be knowledgeable about the different
kinds of exams and their corresponding purposes.
There are generally two types of exams: subjective and objective. Essays
are under the subjective one while multiple choice, true or false, identification
and matching type items belong to the objective one. Each one of these kinds of
exams has specific uses but one may be better to use than others depending on
what the exam is intended to measure.
The usefulness of exams can be analyzed by comparing it to the methods
used by the miners today. Long ago, miners used the underground tunnelling
method, a time consuming and costly process to get ores from the
underground. This is better said as a trial and error way as this does not
guarantee the success of miners to obtain ores. But nowadays, diamond
drilling allows the miner to predict the exact amount and location of any ore
from the samples obtained by diamond drills. Diamond drills make the work of
miners a lot easier. The process itself represents examination, the miner
2

represents the teacher, and the ore samples represent the samples of
intellectual ability of students. Exams, like diamond drills are tools that are
available for teachers in measuring intellectual ability. However, exams do not
readily mean anything. The teacher still has to evaluate and interpret the
scores. This evaluation will lead to a better understanding of the intellectual
ability of students, always taking note of the objectivity of any judgment.
Truly, the success of any intellectual measurement process still lies in
the hands of the test constructor and it would be better if educational systems
around the world would put a greater weight in informing and practicing test
makers and teachers about this crucial part of educational measurement. In
doing so, a greater success in the fundamentals of the educational process
itself will be established.