EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
Today is the Bulgarian language matriculation exam. It's a good time to mention their pros and cons:
1. Under certain circumstances, the matriculation exams could serve as a benchmark for the quality of public education. The problem is that the complexity and content of the tests change every year, and their grades are almost as poor a guide as those in the notebooks
2. The criteria for what is important for a young person graduating from school are determined centrally. A group of specialists decide what knowledge is important and what is not, they set the right and wrong answers. They also regulate “what Yavorov said”.
3. Like any other process controlled by politicians and officials, the exam process is particularly susceptible to corruption. Copying, issuing topics, teacher assistance, etc. And as with other state regulators, when there is proven repeated failure, there are no changes due to the legal monopoly.
4. However, taking exams (even those administered by the Ministry of Education) fulfills at least one function of formalized education – signaling. The learner shows not so much knowledge as consistency, diligence, and the ability to complete a certain task. A big problem with our education is that most excellent students are actually just signaling, because what they have learned often has little practical value.
5. The solution to the question of how to find out how much students know has long been found. And it is the competition between various companies and non-governmental organizations that offer tests and systems for assessing knowledge. Example.
6. In fact, tests and standardized exams are not the best (or only) way to assess knowledge and skills. Quite rightly, when applying to American and British universities, exams are only part of the assessment – extracurricular activities, recommendations, interviews, participation in seminars, competitions and conferences are also taken into account.
