It’s examination season across various universities in Kenya, and as an academic, I find myself increasingly disillusioned with the current assessment practices. The frustration lies in the glaring disconnect between the purpose of education—equipping students with knowledge and skills—and the way we measure their academic progress. Here’s why this disconnect is not just problematic but outright detrimental.
The Imbalance in Assessment Weighting
Picture this: an academic spends 10-15 weeks engaging students in lectures, discussions, assignments, projects, and Continuous Assessment Tests (CATs). These activities are meant to reinforce learning and foster a deeper understanding of course material. Yet, all this effort contributes only 30-40% to a student’s final grade. The bulk of the grade—often 70%—rests on a two-hour examination.
This system rewards short-term memory over long-term understanding. For instance, a student might spend the night before the exam cramming concepts and score 50/70 in the final exam, even if they performed poorly in weekly assessments. On paper, this student passes. But have they internalized the knowledge or developed the skills necessary for their field? Unlikely.
The Real-World Impact of Knowledge Gaps
This flawed assessment model has far-reaching consequences. A student who barely scrapes through based on crammed knowledge graduates and enters the workforce, where they are expected to demonstrate competence. The gap between their theoretical understanding (if any) and practical application becomes evident. Employers are left questioning the value of university training, and the blame falls squarely on institutions that prioritize rote learning over skill-building.
A System Rooted in Outdated Practices
Decades ago, when digital resources were scarce, memorization was necessary. Students were required to regurgitate information in exams because it was the only way to ensure knowledge retention. This approach might have made sense in an era when access to information was limited.
Today, however, we live in an age of abundant resources. Information is readily available, and AI tools have revolutionized how quickly and efficiently we consume it. The question then arises: why do we still assess students primarily on their ability to cram and reproduce information? Shouldn’t we instead evaluate their capacity to apply knowledge and develop skills that align with modern-day demands?
Moderation of Examinations: A Double-Edged Sword
Another contentious issue is the practice of examination moderation. As educators, we design assessments based on our understanding of the curriculum and the specific needs of our students. We tailor our methods to ensure that learning outcomes are met comprehensively. Yet, this autonomy is undermined when another academic—unfamiliar with the unique dynamics of our classes—declares our exams inadequate or unsuitable.
While moderation can serve as a quality control mechanism, it often leads to frustration and unnecessary bureaucracy. In top global universities, faculty members are rigorously vetted to ensure they are experts in their fields. Once hired, they are trusted to design and administer assessments that align with their training methods. Peer moderation of exams is virtually nonexistent because these institutions trust their faculty’s judgment. Why, then, do Kenyan universities insist on micromanaging educators?
The Need for a Paradigm Shift
Kenyan universities must prioritize students’ interests and adapt to contemporary realities. The current assessment model is antiquated and fails to prepare students for the challenges of the modern workforce. Here are some steps that can drive meaningful change:
-
Reevaluate Grade Weighting: Reduce the reliance on final exams and increase the weight of continuous assessments, projects, and practical tasks. This approach encourages consistent effort and deeper engagement with the material.
-
Focus on Skill Development: Shift from rote learning to competency-based education. Assess students’ ability to analyze, synthesize, and apply knowledge rather than merely recalling it.
-
Leverage Technology: Incorporate digital tools and platforms into the learning and assessment process. This not only makes education more interactive but also aligns it with the digital skills required in today’s job market.
-
Empower Educators: Trust lecturers to design assessments that reflect their teaching methodologies. Moderation should be collaborative rather than prescriptive, with a focus on improving—not undermining—the educator’s efforts.
-
Align with Global Standards: Learn from universities that produce industry-ready graduates. Adapt best practices from these institutions while considering the unique needs of the Kenyan education system.
The Role of the Commission for University Education (CUE)
The Commission for University Education (CUE) has a critical role to play in driving these reforms. By revising policies on assessment and empowering universities to adopt progressive practices, the CUE can ensure that Kenyan graduates are not just academically qualified but also practically skilled. It’s time for the CUE to address the systemic flaws in the current model and champion a student-centred approach to education.
The purpose of higher education is not merely to produce graduates but to nurture well-rounded individuals capable of contributing meaningfully to society. Kenyan universities must rise to this challenge by reforming outdated assessment methods and aligning their practices with global standards. Only then can we bridge the gap between academic training and real-world expectations, ensuring that our graduates are not just employable but exceptional?
