The Nigeria Education News made an online finding about an unusual Continuous Assessment (CA) test conducted at the University of Ibadan where students of Computer Science were asked to write Python codes on foolscap sheets within one hour without access to computers. The story, which has since generated discussions among students and educators, raises questions about testing methods in Nigeria’s higher institutions.
According to details gathered, the test was part of CSC 231: Test 1, a course focused on Python programming. Students were instructed to provide written solutions to practical programming questions within the given timeframe. The unusual format left many wondering about the practicality of assessing coding skills in an offline setting.
One of the questions in the test asked students to distinguish between dynamically typed and statically typed languages, and to state where Python falls. The same question also required students to write a Python program that accepts a number and prints whether it is even or odd. Many students considered this part relatively straightforward but argued that writing syntax correctly without running the code was still a challenge.
Another section of the test involved handling data representation and analysis using NumPy. Students were provided with the scores of two students across four subjects Student A with [70, 80, 90, 60] and Student B with [85, 75, 95, 70]. They were required to represent the data as a matrix and then compute the average score for each student as well as the average for each subject. For students accustomed to interactive coding, doing such calculations by hand raised extra concerns.
In Question 2, students were tasked with creating a program for a university cafeteria’s discount system. The problem described a scenario where students receive discounts on meals based on the total bill amount. Bills of N5,000 and above attracted a 15% discount, bills between N2,000 and N4,999 earned a 10% discount, while bills below N2,000 had no discount. Students had to write a program that accepted a student’s name and bill, then computed the discount, final bill, and displayed all details.
Many students who sat for the test admitted online that this particular question was tricky because it combined conditional logic, arithmetic operations, and formatted output all written manually without the chance to debug. For programming learners, this was like solving mathematics with no calculator.
The most demanding part of the test appeared to be Question 3, which required students to write a Python function simulating an ATM machine. The task instructed students to create an atm_simulator() function that first prompts a user for a 4-digit PIN. With the correct PIN being 1234, students had to implement logic allowing only three attempts. If the PIN was entered wrongly three times, the program should output “Access Denied”; otherwise, it should print “Access Granted.”
The Nigeria Education News found that many students considered this question the toughest, as it involved combining loops, conditionals, and user input handling. Writing all of that on paper without testing the logic was stressful, and only students with strong recall of Python syntax could attempt it fully.
Reactions from the academic community have been divided. Some educators defended the test, arguing that it encouraged students to understand the logic of coding rather than relying solely on computers. Others, however, criticized the approach, suggesting that programming should be evaluated in real execution environments where errors and corrections can be addressed practically.
Several students who shared their experiences online complained that the test was unfair. They argued that while theoretical understanding is important, the essence of coding lies in problem-solving through actual implementation and debugging. To them, the test was more of a handwriting and memory challenge than a programming assessment.
On the other hand, a few voices praised the initiative, noting that being able to write correct code on paper without testing demonstrates a deeper mastery of programming concepts. For such commentators, the exercise was an old-school method that instills discipline and attention to detail.
The Nigeria Education News also gathered that similar practices have been reported in other Nigerian universities, where programming tests and exams are written without computers. This reflects both infrastructural challenges, such as insufficient computer labs, and institutional philosophies about how to balance theory with practice in computer science education.
The debate now centers on whether this method should continue. While students argue for more practical, computer-based assessments, some lecturers maintain that the pen-and-paper method ensures no student escapes with shallow knowledge. It also serves as a safeguard in schools where resources for mass computer-based tests are lacking.
Whatever side of the debate one chooses, the University of Ibadan test has spotlighted an important issue in Nigerian higher education: how best to teach and evaluate coding skills in an environment still grappling with infrastructural gaps. The students of CSC 231 will not quickly forget the day they wrote Python programs on foolscap sheets instead of computers.
