It is well known that the main and most primitive way to evaluate student’s performance, is doing exams. There exists a huge amount of exam types, but in general, all of them have been criticised by the student community. Nowadays, some other ways of evaluation are being proposed in which a more dynamic and practical approach is followed. The question is, do we really need to put so much effort in such specific dates? Are they really so effective?
On the one hand, tests and examinations will be useful to evaluate the global knowledge achieved by the students. It means that it will allow to check their degree of comprehension from a general point of view. Furthermore, it could be useful to ensure that all the students are evaluated separately, so they will not be able to cheat, or at least it will be more difficult to do.
Additionally, exams and tests help students get motivated and to do their best. From my own experience, there are also extra implicit advantages because it obliges to do a perfect scheduling and not to study the subjects in an unbalanced way, giving priority to those which you like the most.
On the other hand, this kind of evaluations usually does not reflect the reality due to the high level of pressure that the students are exposed to. Sometimes, those students that have prepared the lessons correctly, in a well organised and structured manner, do not achieve excellent marks due to that. Paradoxically, it is really common that those students that achieve higher marks are not those who have studied the most or those who had a better comprehension of the subject. Nerves are commonly the arch enemy of a good student.
In conclusion, is there really such a big need for exams at schools? Is there really no other way to evaluate how effective are the teaching methods? That is definitely a difficult and controversial question, but I am deeply convinced that, one more time, a middle point would be the best alternative. A balanced approach between continuous practise evaluation and exams should be followed. Perhaps it sounds really similar to what it is done nowadays, but the difference is the weight that is assigned to each part. As I see it, a final exam should be done, but its value should be considerably lower, avoiding long, stressful sessions, giving a more enjoyable side to education. 
It is well known that the main and most primitive way to evaluate  
student’s
 performance, is doing exams. There exists a huge amount of exam types,  
but
  in general
, all of them have been  
criticised
 by the  
student
 community. Nowadays,  
some
 other ways of evaluation are  
being proposed
 in which a more dynamic and practical approach  
is followed
. The question is, do we  
really
 need to put  
so
 much effort in such specific dates? Are they  
really
  so
 effective?
On the one hand,  
tests
 and examinations will be useful to evaluate the global knowledge achieved by the  
students
. It means that it will  
allow
 to  
check
 their degree of comprehension from a general point of view.  
Furthermore
, it could be useful to ensure that all the  
students
  are evaluated
  separately
,  
so
 they will not be able to cheat, or at least it will be more difficult to do. 
Additionally
, exams and  
tests
  help
  students
  get
 motivated and to do their best. From my  
own
 experience, there are  
also
 extra implicit advantages  
because
 it obliges to do a perfect scheduling and not to study the subjects  
in an unbalanced way
, giving priority to those which you like the most. 
On the other hand
, this kind of evaluations  
usually
 does not reflect the reality due to the high level of pressure that the  
students
  are exposed
 to.  
Sometimes
, those  
students
 that have prepared the lessons  
correctly
, in a  
well organised
 and structured manner, do not achieve excellent marks due to that.  
Paradoxically
, it is  
really
 common that those  
students
 that achieve higher marks are not those who have studied the most or those who had a better comprehension of the subject. Nerves are  
commonly
 the arch enemy of a  
good
 student. 
In conclusion
, is there  
really
 such a  
big
 need for exams at schools? Is there  
really
 no other way to evaluate how effective are the teaching methods?  
That is
 definitely a difficult and controversial question,  
but
 I am  
deeply
 convinced that, one more time, a middle point would be the best alternative. A balanced approach between continuous  
practise
 evaluation and exams should  
be followed
. Perhaps it sounds  
really
 similar to what it  
is done
 nowadays,  
but
 the difference is the weight that  
is assigned
 to each part. As I  
see
 it, a final exam should  
be done
,  
but
 its value should be  
considerably
 lower, avoiding long, stressful sessions, giving a more enjoyable side to education.