CRITIQUE OF FORMAL EXAMINATION

IS IT ADEQUATE IN THE TEST OF KNOWLEDGE?

Nwanyanwu Christopher

According to Aristotle, “all men by nature desire to know”. This is an indication that man has the spirit of
knowing things as many as he can. From birth man is exposed to certain knowledge, about the society which
includes cultural heritages. All these come in form of the informal education which a child receives from the
family and from the peers. As he grows, he is enrolled into the formal education arena where he is being
taught by people outside the family as the case may be and perhaps those he may not have met before. This
formal education which has different stages is geared towards impacting some knowledge to him. This brings
to our mind the western school system where we have the Nursery, Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, etc. In all
these stages of learning and impacting knowledge, there is a method through which the knowledge being
impacted is evaluated. This method has its aim of assessing the knowledge being impacted to the students so
far. This evaluation method is what we see today as Examination.

Examination is basically of two forms namely: Written and unwritten (oral). In the written examination, the
students are meant to answer some question by putting it down on a given piece of paper, after which it is
collected from them by the examiner. In the oral examination, the students are meant to give the answers to
the questions by words of mouth. In all these forms, there is some kind of supervision and timing. Such that
they are expected to answer the question(s) within a period of time. At the end of the examination, the
examiner evaluates the student and award some marks “depending on what they have written” At the end of
the session, the student is given his results, which shows his having passed or failed the evaluation of
examination.

The benefit of this evaluation is such that the knowledge of the students about what they were taught is
ascertained. It is through it that what the students claim to know is proved. If the student failed the
examination, it shows that he does not have the knowledge of what was taught. If he passes, it means that he
actually understood what was taught. Also, examination makes students to be very dedicated in their studies
as they are aware that at the end of the day, they will be tested. This will manifest itself in the way they
prepare for the examination. Again the fear of facing the consequences of not passing which is mainly
repeating the stage (class) will spur them to do their very best to pass the examination. They will meet with
those who know to teach them and those who know will prepare well, all in an attempt to pass the
examination.

But is examination the true test of knowledge? This question is very vital as examination is taken to be the
only way of evaluating the knowledge of students. Although it seems to be good, there some inadequacies
noticeable in it.

The case of the student writing the examination under an uncondusive atmosphere maybe a poorly ventilated
place, or without seats which inevitably affects his thinking at least for the average student, and at the end of

1
the day he fails the examination. Does it mean that the student does not have the knowledge of what was
taught? Even if the atmosphere is conducive, what about the tension the student has? What of the poor health
of the student? What about the situation of the mind at that point of examination? If all these affect his
performance in the examination, does it mean that he does not have the knowledge? Perhaps no! Again what
about those who cheat during the examination and pass at the end of the day, does that mean that they have
the knowledge of the course or subject matter? What about those who memorize the answers or the notes
only to pour it out as they have memorized it and pass at the end of the day, does it mean that they know the
subject matter? What of the student being faced with what he has never been taught before and subsequently
failing it at the end of the day? With all these instances does it mean that the student does not have the
knowledge of the subject matter? NO!

Apart from the student factors, the examiner’s factor is also included in the inadequacies of examination.
What can we say about the examiner who sentimentally examines the students such that his “friends” will
pass while his “enemies” will the never pass? What of the case of the examiner who hurriedly examines the
student and fails him whereas the student would have passed? What of the case of the examiner delegating
others to examine the students on his behalf, and maybe one who would have passed under him now fails?
Do the effects of all these mean that the student does not have the knowledge of the subject matter? NO!

It is therefore evident that while examination is important, it is also inadequate in evaluating the knowledge
of the students. What shall we do?

At the moment there is no other avenue for testing knowledge except through examination. And it comes
with its problems. We cannot thence abandon it, but to still make use of it. The only thing to be done is for
the students to put more effort in their preparation for the examinations. The students will have to prepare for
the examination in all aspects so that they can be fit for it both in mind and in body. Of course it also means
by extension that any thought not relating to the examination should be expunged from the mind so that full
concentration will be attained. This can go a long way to assist the students in passing their examinations.

Moreover, the examiners should endeavour to evaluate the students without any sentiment so that we can
have reliable truth with regards to whether the student actually has the knowledge of the subject matter.

Finally, there is nothing to be done as to providing another means of evaluating knowledge. To that effect,
any student that wants to show that he has the knowledge of any subject matter should do well to prepare for
the examination, because outside it the knowledge claim of a particular subject matter may not be
ascertained. Until a new method of evaluation comes into existence, examination shall continue to be used.
Thus, all to be evaluated with it should prepare very well. Even though outside the examination one can
prove the knowledge of the subject matter. Yes it can be true. But when one is called upon to proved it
formally, he should also show it, for failure to do this will undermine the claim of knowledge of the subject
matter.