Universities employ contrasting assessment systems, either concentrating examinations at the end of a term or distributing assignments and tests across a semester. Clearly, each approach shapes students' learning behaviour in different ways. While both have merits, I prefer continuous assessment because it generally supports sustained engagement and fairer evaluation.

First, end-of-term examinations undoubtedly offer clarity and efficiency. Specifically, students can focus on learning without frequent deadlines, and institutions generally benefit from standardised marking under controlled conditions. Admittedly, this system may reward those who perform well under pressure and can integrate large volumes of content. However, it often encourages short-term rote learning and places excessive weight on performance during a brief period, where illness or anxiety can undermine otherwise consistent effort.

By contrast, assessments spread throughout the semester clearly promote regular study habits and deeper understanding. Moreover, frequent assignments provide ongoing feedback, thereby allowing students to identify weaknesses and improve progressively. Furthermore, this approach also reduces the risk associated with a single high-stakes exam. Nevertheless, continuous assessment may increase workload stress and could disadvantage students juggling employment or family responsibilities if deadlines cluster poorly.

Overall, I prefer assessment spread across the semester. Indeed, despite organisational challenges, it undoubtedly reflects sustained learning and diverse abilities rather than exam-day performance alone. Therefore, a balanced schedule with varied tasks likely encourages consistent effort, supports skill development, and produces a more accurate picture of academic achievement.