A common belief is that nowadays matriculation exams are the most reliable way of testing a student's knowledge. Students all over the country are tested each year in several Bagrut exams on their success in answering a few questions in various topics(phr.) such as chemistry, mathematics, history and much more(ww. - others). While some believe Bagrut exams are the best indication of knowledge, I believe that it is not correct.
For instance, each year a Mikud is published. The Mikud limits the amount of topics each year students are tested on in a Bagrut exam. Students can pass the tests without knowing several topics. Each year students are tested on different subjects. Therefore, those tests cannot possibly measure knowledge if each year students are tested on different subjects. Meaning different students can get different grades in the same subject without studying the same topics.
Furthermore, each Bagrut exam is a single exam. In other words, student's knowledge in a subject is measured in a single test, which they can easily fail due to many reasons, that have no connection to their knowledge. Thus even the most intelligent student can fail that so claimed "knowledge test" just because of feeling sick or having a blackout while answering the test.
In conclusion, the matriculation exams are not the best way of measuring knowledge. In my opinion, in order to measure knowledge there should hold research papers(phr.), which measure not only the theoretical knowledge that can be learned by heart, but also how well students implement their knowledge.
