This prompt question is one I actually find really interesting, probably because of the fact that I was once a student and now I presently work as a teacher. And one thing I've come to realise is the fact that an exam doesn't generally show the complete intelligence capability of a person. Unfortunately, the tradition in school is that they tend to treat examination results as the most important evidence of knowledge, of which that isn't the case, and today I'd love to share my take on this, based on my experience as a once-upon-a-time student and presently a teacher, so without further ado, let's get to it.
The downside to how examination is exalted is that school authorities used to use the outcome of the exam as the yardstick to recognise and applaud the most intelligent students, but the truth is that shouldn't be the case and the yardstick to determine who's most intelligent, although this is my own personal opinion. Why do I have this opinion? The reason isn't Farfetch, and it's the recognition that some students just have an excellent retentive memory that helps them remember what they're being taught or what you've read and then reproduce that during exams. Being able to do this doesn't mean someone is intelligent; some students, on the other hand, might actually understand what they're being taught but not score high because they find it difficult to express their knowledge due to pressure from examination.
And that's not to forget students get terrible scores during examination, but when you ask them to demonstrate or say the answer to the question orally, you'll realise they actually understand the concept of what you're asking, even more than those who only memorise and reproduce what they've memorised, because on most occasions they're not able to explain the concept beyond what they've memorised. I remember how a student in my class did excellently when writing down the steps involved in troubleshooting a computer; however, when I placed a computer in front of her, she was just staring into the screen, but a student that was about average was able to do it unfinch.
My entire points about it don't mean I believe examinations are entirely pointless; far from it, they're actually also important, because they go a long way in helping us teachers decipher students' levels of understanding, critical thinking, problem-solving ability, preparation and much more, to name but a few. What I'm only saying is that examination can't be the singular criterion to determine a person's intelligence. And that's why I'm always clamouring that our education industry shouldn't focus only on examination but also explore grading students on practical aspects, alongside real-life applications of knowledge. That's the way I see my ideal way to qualify someone's intelligence.
Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to make the rules or laws on how these things are to be graded in the education industry, but when it comes to my own students, I personally use my own strategy alongside what the government proposed. Overall we must all know and come to the understanding that knowledge should be examined by what you can do with what you've learnt when the need arises and not if you can remember the definition you were taught.
All photos are generated using ChatGpt.