Do you think time limits in exams are unfair?

I think this is the case, at least in regard to writing-based exams like English and History where essays are required. Should the focus not be on whether or not you know the information and can articulate a good argument around the facts, rather than a race to see how fast you can get it all down?

Surely a fairer system would be to give the student a limited amount of paper. That way everyone is on the same page, so to speak. At the moment, the advantage is had by people who can write quickly and order their thoughts quicker than others.

Reply 1

kat2pult

18

Firstly, the paper system is nonsense due to people writing in different sizes. You can also practice writing faster and neatly/legibly.

Secondly, the system currently used is fine and has been for years and years and years. If you have the knowledge already, writing essays doesn't take a long time and you certainly have enough time to write down all relevant information, in addition to proposing an argument.

Reply 2

aspiringwhatever

14

Original post by kat2pult

Firstly, the paper system is nonsense due to people writing in different sizes. You can also practice writing faster and neatly/legibly.

Secondly, the system currently used is fine and has been for years and years and years. If you have the knowledge already, writing essays doesn't take a long time and you certainly have enough time to write down all relevant information, in addition to proposing an argument.

No, it's not fair. I write super fast, like super duper fast and I still have problems finishing my exam on time. Therefore people who have a normal writing pace are screwed. Like in one of my exams I had to do about 10 eight mark questions and about 10 four to five marks questions in 1 hour and 15 minutes. Please tell me how that is reasonable? I knew all of the material really well due to a photographic memory and as I already mentioned I write super fast and I still wrote until the last second. Nobody else in my class finished, and no one is dumb in my class.

EDIT: Oh right I am being negged because I write fast and have a photographic memory. How mature :rolleyes:

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 3

Ocassus

12

Quality not quantity..

Reply 4

overtherainbow

10

in the real world you dont get as long as you want to do a job and people with slower writing speeds in jobs would still be expected to finish in the same time as someone else...

admittedly some of the time limits in exams are too short to start with but as long as you want is stupid- it then becomes a test of endurance

Reply 5

charcharchar

14

I think if you plan, then its fine as you know exactly what you're writing. However, its different for every person. Personally, I find exams like history extremely hard to finish within the time limits, for example, last week I did an AS retake and had 1 hr 20 minutes to write two essays... SCARY!

Reply 6

kat2pult

18

Original post by aspiringwhatever

No, it's not fair. I write super fast, like super duper fast and I still have problems finishing my exam on time. Therefore people who have a normal writing pace are screwed. Like in one of my exams I had to do about 10 eight mark questions and about 10 four to five marks questions in 1 hour and 15 minutes. Please tell me how that is reasonable? I knew all of the material really well due to a photographic memory and as I already mentioned I write super fast and I still wrote until the last second. Nobody else in my class finished, and no one is dumb in my class.

Perhaps you are writing a lot which isn't actually relevant? You have to choose which are the most important and relevant points, not just throw in everything that can be slightly relevant.

I was always told to spend about a minute or 2 per mark awarded for the question.

Reply 7

Mm_Minty

17

It is kind of unfair to people who write and proof-read slowly (like me XD) but limited paper would fail.

Even if you moved it to computers it'd be unfair to those who write in more details, or write long-winded arguments.

Reply 8

oli_G

12

the current systems fine. the more prepared candidates tend to have no problem with the time limit- as they know the stuff. also, if someone has a problem with writing speed this is usually accounted for in extra time etc.

Reply 9

Rachel08

11

I think there do need to be timelimits, however I think some of them are getting ridiculous.

Some of them are fine e.g. maths, 1hr30, as most people can finish within that time and still have a minute or two to check.

A particularly ridiculous one was my AS history exam 1hr15 for 2x12 mark and 2x24 mark essays.

For history this year, I have 2x45 minute essay in 90 mins, not easy...

Reply 10

Jedicake

9

Potentially another way could just be to shift the balance back to coursework (or at least a bigger proportion), i.e. more CAs. This way you have a reasonable time to do work.

Reply 11

aspiringwhatever

14

Original post by kat2pult

Perhaps you are writing a lot which isn't actually relevant? You have to choose which are the most important and relevant points, not just throw in everything that can be slightly relevant.

I was always told to spend about a minute or 2 per mark awarded for the question.

No, I only write what is relevant. But in A2 you have to write a lot to get 8 marks :wink:

they even give you about a page to write on. So yeah, it is unreasonable.

Also the exam is out of 80 marks and you have 75 minutes, so you have less than a minute per mark without even considering reading.

EDIT: Seriously what is offensive about this? Or do you just feel like negging me?

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 12

username451311

12

I think they give students enough time in exams to do what they are supposed to do and get good marks for it. This scheme has been used for years and I don't think it should change.

Reply 13

Radekal

8

So do you suggest exams taking weeks, just because some guy would be like "I'm still thinking about it"

It wouldn't work.

Reply 14

ellie_flower

11

Original post by Jedicake

Potentially another way could just be to shift the balance back to coursework (or at least a bigger proportion), i.e. more CAs. This way you have a reasonable time to do work.

and then for some people to cheat...

Reply 15

ShengXin

Limited paper is really not a good idea.. I have huge handwriting, in my GCSE history I wrote 17 A4 pages... I came out with an A*, though I totally believe with quality not quantity, but if someone with small handwriting wrote out a page of my writing it would take probably less than half of the page!

Reply 16

Joell3

7

Of course it's fair, everyone has the same amount of time and people who need extra time due to a learning difficulty are allocated it. The focus is on the best selection of information you can write in the time, not on quantity. The exam board aren't expecting you to write down every single thing relevant to the topic the question is focusing on and if you're doing that then you're doing it wrong... it can't be considered unreasonable full stop because everyone's in the same boat and has to do the exam in the same amount of time and therefore you are at no disadvantage, UMS also comes into play to ensure fairness in the distribution of grades.

Reply 17

NottinghamYouth

Why do some people get extra time?

What is the deffinition of dislexia/dispraxia.... Surely everyone would have one or the other to a degree.

Is it therefore fair that some people who struggle to write/think fast don't get extra time, yet the people who have been classified as "in need" of extra time do?

Returning to the real world no-one will give you extra time/ make allowances in a job because you have "special needs". I know one guy who refused to put he was dislexic on his UCAS application to be a doctor.

Life's unfair. (Oh and on that is why should I have to pay for uni, and other people get to go for free when they can come out with the same degree and get the same job. For the "squeezed middle" and normal people life's a bitch.)

Sorry for the rant.

Reply 18

Jedicake

9

Original post by ellie_flower

and then for some people to cheat...

Hence why I say CAs, the new coursework measure designed to prevent cheating. (Although not removing it, it drastically reduces it, as it is like an exam - it is controlled.)

Reply 19

talulah4

4

Maybe introducing a word limit rather than a time limit could have benefits. Of course, there would still need to be some sort of time limit because otherwise it could go on for a ridiculous amount of time...but I think somethin should be done to make time limits a little easier to deal with. Maybe 10 minutes reading time before you're allowed to write anything so you know what's coming and you can develop ideas a little bit before you reach the question

Do you think time limits in exams are unfair?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you