This argumentative article is based on a fundamental assumption that three very traditional procedures related to the elaboration of school exams have led to problems which affect both the validity and the reliability of these instruments. Throughout this text, the three procedures are named by means of labels, able to describe them straightforwardly, aiming to provide an instant identification of their principles. Due to their key importance, each of these procedures is presented in a specific section, where their bases, the beliefs related to them, the sustaining contexts and the harmful implications regarding the validity of the school exams are presented. In summary, this study assumes the following as being mistaken procedures: (1) �The-attempt-to-encompass-it-all�, or �The more, the better� principle, (2) �The essence-isin- the-average-performance�, or �The virtue stands in the middle� principle, and (3) �Thetest- is-a-work-of-free-creation�, or �Loose Creation� principle. The stated arguments aim at calling attention to the usual beliefs, habits and processes of the school practice, which have been a pitfall for the school exams to work effectively as an instrument for the diagnosis of the knowledge and learning of the students. The conclusions drawn from the arguments presented in this text allow us to think over these usual practices, as well as guide us to the possibility of new practices, more appropriate for the elaboration of valid and reliable school exams. Key words: school exams, education, validity, reliability, content matrices.

Username
Password