Arguments in Favor of Continuous Assessments
Continuous assessment is a system of evaluating students through regular tests, assignments, presentations, and class participation over time rather than relying solely on final exams. Proponents argue that this method provides a more comprehensive and realistic measure of a student’s progress and understanding.
Firstly, continuous assessments reduce the pressure associated with high-stakes final examinations. Students are evaluated consistently throughout the term, which helps to ease anxiety and promote steady learning. For many learners, particularly those who do not perform well under exam pressure, this method can better reflect their actual capabilities.
Secondly, continuous assessment encourages active engagement in the learning process. Instead of cramming during exam periods, students must stay involved in classwork, submit assignments on time, and engage in discussions. This leads to deeper understanding, better retention, and improved critical thinking skills.
Moreover, this method allows teachers to detect learning difficulties early. By monitoring progress continuously, teachers can offer timely intervention or personalized support to students who are lagging behind, thereby improving academic outcomes.
Lastly, continuous assessments promote fairness and inclusivity. Since marks are distributed over several activities and not based on a single event, students with different strengths—such as presentations, teamwork, or writing—have equal opportunities to showcase their skills.
Arguments Against Continuous Assessments
Despite its advantages, critics argue that continuous assessment has drawbacks that make it less effective or equitable in certain contexts. One of the major concerns is the risk of inconsistency in grading. Since multiple assignments and tests are involved, differences in how teachers assess can lead to inconsistencies and bias, especially in subjective areas like essays or presentations.
Another criticism is that it places a heavier workload on both students and teachers. Students may feel overwhelmed with regular assignments and projects, while teachers must invest more time in preparing, grading, and giving feedback continuously. This can lead to burnout or reduce the time available for lesson planning and student mentorship.
There is also the risk of academic dishonesty. With take-home assignments and frequent tasks, students might be tempted to plagiarize or receive help from others, thus compromising the integrity of the assessment. In contrast, final exams are typically supervised and therefore more controlled.
Furthermore, continuous assessment may disadvantage students who struggle with managing time or juggling multiple subjects. A student who is capable of performing well in a controlled exam setting may underperform due to the sheer volume of weekly tasks, leading to misrepresentation of their true academic potential.
Finally, in environments where educational resources are limited—such as lack of access to technology, learning materials, or stable home environments—continuous assessments may not be equally fair to all students, especially in underprivileged communities.
Conclusion
Both continuous assessments and final exams have their merits and limitations. Continuous assessment fosters regular engagement, personalized feedback, and a broader evaluation of skills, while exams offer structure, standardization, and a level playing field. The best approach may be a balanced blend of both—where regular assessments support learning throughout the term, and final exams serve as a formal benchmark. The key lies in implementation, fairness, and adaptability to the needs of diverse learners within Nigeria’s educational system.
