A Semester in 90 Minutes?
When I arrived in Germany last November to begin my second master’s in Economic Behaviour and Governance (EB&Go) at the University of Kassel, I expected cultural differences.
New academic habits. New teaching styles. Maybe even a different dynamic of a relationship with professors.
What I did not expect was how different the assessment system would feel.
In several (safe to say most of the) courses, the entire grade depends on a single written exam at the end of the semester. After months of lectures and preparation, everything comes down to a 90-minute test.
For some students, this system represents freedom. For others, like me, it raises an uncomfortable question: Can one exam really measure a semester of learning?
This blog is not meant to condemn the German system. My experience here is still limited. Instead, it is an attempt to understand it by comparing it with other assessment models and exploring the philosophy behind each.
A Different Academic Culture
Before coming to Germany, I studied in Bangladesh. The system there also relied heavily on final exams, but it included multiple layers of assessment.
In a typical course:
- 10% came from class attendance
- 20% from term tests during the semester
- 70% from the final written exam
The final exam was important, but it was not the only moment that mattered. Students accumulated grades throughout the semester.
The German model I encountered felt different.
In several courses, there are lectures throughout the semester, sometimes accompanied by optional short assessments. But the final grade is determined entirely by the Klausur – the final written exam.
In practical terms, this means months of learning are evaluated in a single sitting.
The Appeal of the System
To be fair, many students appreciate this approach.
Some of my classmates actually prefer it. Their reasons are understandable.
First, it provides flexibility. Without frequent assignments or presentations, students can organize their time more freely. Many use this freedom to work part-time or pursue other commitments outside the university.
Second, there are fewer deadlines during the semester. Students are not constantly submitting assignments or preparing presentations.
Third, the system encourages independent study. Rather than being continuously monitored, students decide when and how to engage with the material.
In many ways, this reflects a long-standing tradition in German higher education. Universities historically emphasized academic independence and intellectual autonomy.
Students in this country are expected to manage their own learning.
From this perspective, the final exam simply verifies whether that learning has taken place.
Why the Klausur Persists in Germany
The prominence of the final written exam in German universities reflects a combination of historical traditions and practical considerations.
German higher education has long been influenced by the educational philosophy associated with Wilhelm von Humboldt, who envisioned universities as spaces for independent intellectual development rather than structured instruction.
Students were expected to take responsibility for their own learning, while professors focused on advancing research and delivering lectures.
Within this model, the final exam served primarily as a verification of mastery, rather than a continuous monitoring process.
Practical factors also play a role. Large lecture courses often enroll hundreds of students, making continuous assessment through assignments, presentations, or projects difficult to administer. A single written exam can be graded more efficiently and applied consistently across large cohorts.
For many students, this autonomy is precisely what makes the system attractive.
Yet the same structure that provides flexibility can also concentrate academic evaluation into a single high-stakes moment – a trade-off that continues to shape debates about assessment in German universities.
The Risk of a Single Moment
Despite these advantages, the system can also feel risky.
After two or three months of lectures and preparation, everything basically depends on a single test lasting about ninety minutes. If that test went well, the entire course would be successful. If it went poorly, the semester’s work might not be reflected in the final grade.
This creates a certain tension.
A student may fully understand the material but still face problems on the very day of the exam. Illness, fatigue, anxiety, or simply a bad day can affect performance.
This raises a broader question: Should academic evaluation rely so heavily on a single high-stakes moment?
Anxiety, Performance, and the “One-Exam” Risk
Psychological research offers another perspective on this issue.
A meta-analysis of 238 studies showed that high-stakes exams increase test anxiety and that higher anxiety levels are often associated with lower academic performance. It also found reliable negative relationships between test anxiety and exam results.
This matters because in a system where a single exam determines the entire course grade, anxiety becomes part of the evaluation itself.
Put plainly: if you judge someone largely by their performance on one stressful day, you conflate knowledge with (a) how well they perform under pressure, and (b) how their situational factors behaved that day. That’s a problematic conflation for programs aiming to assess deeper skills like critical thinking or policy analysis.
What Educational Research Suggests
Educational researchers have debated this question for decades.
There’s strong, long-standing evidence that frequent formative feedback benefits learning. Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam’s influential review argues that classroom assessment practices that produce ongoing feedback lead to measurable learning gains. In short, students learn more when assessment is a dialogue, not a single judgment.
David Boud and Rebeca Soler extend this into the idea of sustainable assessment: good evaluation should build learners’ capacity beyond the course, not just measure a performance on a single day. When assessment supports long-term skills (self-regulated learning, reflection, transferable problem-solving), it becomes a learning tool rather than only a measure.
These perspectives do not necessarily reject exams altogether. Instead, they suggest that learning may be better supported when assessment occurs throughout the learning process.
Different Systems, Different Philosophies
Different countries have adopted different solutions to this challenge.
In the United Kingdom, universities such as the University of Oxford often combine exams with coursework. Essays, presentations, and assignments may account for a significant portion of the final grade.
The Netherlands has also embraced mixed evaluation models. Institutions like Erasmus University Rotterdam frequently use midterm exams, group projects, and assignments alongside a final exam.
In the United States, continuous assessment is even more common. Universities such as Harvard University often evaluate students through quizzes, participation, assignments, midterms, and final exams.
These systems distribute evaluation across multiple points in the semester.
The German model, by contrast, often concentrates evaluation at the end.
Rather than viewing these systems as simply better or worse, it may be more useful to see them as reflections of different educational philosophies.
The German approach emphasizes academic independence. Students are trusted to organize their learning and demonstrate mastery at the end.
Anglo-American systems tend to emphasize continuous engagement and feedback. Students receive multiple opportunities to demonstrate progress.
Each model has strengths.
Continuous assessment can encourage consistent study habits and provide feedback. However, it also creates frequent deadlines and administrative work for both students and professors.
High-stakes exams reduce bureaucratic complexity and allow greater flexibility during the semester. But they also concentrate academic judgment into a single moment.
A Personal Reflection
As someone still adapting to the German academic environment, my perspective remains incomplete. Over time, my opinion may change as I gain more experience with the system.
Yet the contrast between different assessment models remains striking.
For some students, the German approach represents freedom and autonomy. For others, it introduces a sense of uncertainty, where months of effort depend on a single test.
Both perspectives are valid.
Ultimately, the debate is not about whether one country’s system is right and another’s is wrong.
It is about a broader question facing universities everywhere:
How should learning be measured in higher education?
And perhaps more importantly: Should a semester of intellectual effort be judged in ninety minutes?
Photo by Jeswin Thomas on Unsplash
