I have heard some fellow students say that the way exams at the K.U.Leuven are done need a serious rehaul. I can understand the sentiment behind this statement. I do believe that the type, frequency, and the manner of conducting exams or requirements have to be re-examined. But this does not mean that the whole system has to be rejected.

I know what it is like to be in a room with other students who are likewise nervously psyching themselves up for the oral exam as they are at the same time trying to assemble their thoughts for presentation to the professor. It is indeed difficult to concentrate given the number of people in the exam venue and also the fact that one is distracted by the student speaking before the professor. I also completely agree with those who point out that having to do regular assignments spread throughout the year or semester may be more helpful not only for students to gradually and thus more effectively absorb knowledge, but also for teachers to assess the progress of and when necessary correct his or her students. It appears too that compared to the situation in other educational institutions, there is a greater distance here at the K.U.Leuven between the learned professors and their “lowly” students and thus also more formality in their interactions. Friends have also related to me how arbitrary, biased, or unfair certain professors were during the oral exam when it came to the number of questions one gets, the number of minutes one is allowed to speak, and ultimately the mark one receives.

As I said, I too am of the opinion that exams at the K.U.Leuven have to be rethought. I think, however, that one cannot honestly say that all professors are abusive, that oral exams are totally subjective, and giving of marks completely arbitrary. Perhaps those who say these things experienced first hand the unfairness of some professors; others may have also suffered on account of the way things work at the K.U.Leuven. If this is so then they have the right to express themselves and to demand that important changes in the way exams are done be made. But for the sake of pinpointing the real problems and the things that are worth trying to change, let me consider some of these issues.

It should be pointed out that not all professors are unjust, arbitrary, and power-tripping individuals. I have been studying here for more than three years now and I have had teachers who explained the requirements of the course clearly at the beginning of the semester, sometime in the middle of it, and even a couple of weeks prior to the study block. There are perhaps professors who just make up requirements and there are those who simply cannot make up their minds about the matter -but there are also teachers who not only articulate very clearly what they expect from students but also explain the criteria that students have to meet so as to pass or get a good grade. If a professor does not do these things then it is the student’s right and obligation to ask the professor to do so.

Moreover, I do not think that oral exams are totally subjective. There certainly is a subjective aspect to it: teachers, like any individual also get tired, bored, or distracted. It seems too that sometimes some of them have their favorites. But even granting that some of these things can come into play during the exam, it does not mean that the oral exam is not a good way of evaluating a student. I was a teacher too in my home country and when I conducted oral exams I did see when a student was well prepared or was just bluffing his or her way through the exam. The oral exam gives the teacher the chance to probe and test the student’s knowledge; but let us not forget that it also gives the student the space and time to express what she understands and to correct her statements if and when necessary.

I should add that though grade giving can be purely arbitrary, I have had teachers who took notes of what you say during the exam and I suppose carefully thought about the mark to give based on the student’s response and how he or she answered the additional clarificatory questions. Of course, if one is not satisfied with one’s grade or even if one simply has questions about it, then one can (and should) approach ombudsman and/or the professor to ask for clarifications.

Now it is true that one can be treated unfairly during an exam and it may indeed be hard to prove this (unless there were witnesses who would be willing to back your claims before the appropriate authorities). I honestly do not see how this can be addressed apart from stressing the necessity of reporting any instance of ill-treatment and/or unfairness. If other students who feel they were victims of the same unfair teacher file a report too then perhaps a case against that teacher can be made. Given also the subjective elements that may affect the conduct and outcome of an oral exam, it would perhaps be a good idea (as some students have already suggested) on the part of professors to ask for other requirements as well. (And if teachers decide to do this, they should take into consideration the fact that students also have to meet the requirements of their other courses.)

Finally, I cannot but agree with the words of a former student: “It is time the students demanded that professors were accountable for exam results.” Nothing is going to change unless students ask for a manner of doing exams that they think is manageable and fair. However, I do believe that the K.U.Leuven already has a good “exam system.” It may only be a matter of making improvements on what we already have, which of course is possible only if students articulate what they think is right and if professors and administrators are willing to listen to and consider their concerns. |