I am not a perfect person.
However, I do strive to be one in certain aspects of my life. Now, it's up to you, dear reader, to decide if that is one of my faults or one of my good qualities; but, consider this thought which came to me as I walked home from my history exam.
Exams are meant to test our knowledge on the particular subject (in my case, 1100 years of Russian history). But what exams also test you on is how much knowledge you can bring up in a specific span of time. What I would like to know is whether or not that is really fair. Some people can remember things faster then others. You can study the same amount of time as some other person. However, this other person may be able to finish his/her exam thirty minutes before you do. So, here is what I'm asking: should there be a time limit on exams?
Think about it. Would it be good or bad if Universities had system where a student goes to specific room at around, oh let's say, 10:00am, is given an exam and told he/she has until 6:00pm to finish it? The exams might be a little longer, but the student can leave whenever he/she wants. And the best part of it is that they have enough time to write the exam, review it and not get stressed out from the phrase "time is running out."
No, this is not an excuse for any possible bad results..........yet.
BTW, I should have a comments board up very soon.