Assessment Synergies and Tensions in Singapore

• In Event: Synergy and Tension Between Large-Scale and Classroom Assessment: International Trends

Abstract

Objective: To draw on policy and research to describe the tensions and synergies between large-scale assessment and classroom teaching, learning, and assessment in Singapore.

Perspective and Findings: Singapore has an examination oriented educational system, and has enjoyed international success in international assessments, including TIMMS and PISA. The confluence of success in international assessments and the use of meritocracy as a grand narrative for social order and ranking (Author, 2015) entrenches ‘assessment’ as an institutional authority of standards, teaching (performativity) and classroom learning (Author, 2014).

Admission to each level of education is guarded almost solely by examinations, rendering them high stakes. Students sit for national examinations at the end of primary six, secondary four, and the second year of pre-university. These highly competitive examinations serve as school placement assessments for secondary school, pre-university and university schools/course, respectively. Assessment backwash results in school-based assessment at all levels focusing on preparation for national examinations, (Author, 2011). As early as primary one, students are taught how to “scaffold” their language compositions with memorised phrases and suggested formats in adherence to scoring rubrics. Such is the reliance on examinations that the Ministry’s recent announcement of removing school mid-term examinations in odd numbered years led to parents requesting tuition agencies to enact mid-year examinations for their children (Chua, 2018).

Strenuous efforts have been made to balance high stakes summative assessment with more formative uses of assessment in schools. In 2008, the Singapore Ministry of Education (MOE) introduced ‘Holistic Assessment’ for primary schools to place greater emphasis on skills development and to ease assessment stress on students. Primary schools were encouraged to provide more qualitative feedback for improvement and to design bite-sized assessment as an alternative to one-off examination(s) in order to reduce stress. However, teachers report difficulty in couching feedback in language that could be understood and acted upon by students. Likewise, converting an assessment task into bite sized episodes seemed to create more frequent occurrences of assessment, and consequently more stress for students and teachers (Author, 2015).

Attempts to introduce Assessment for Learning (AfL) in secondary schools and pre-universities remain mixed. Teachers value AfL but perceive a lack of assessment literacy and opportunities to practice it (Deneen et al., 2019). In contrast, summative assessment is valued less than formative assessment, but teachers claimed to be more proficient in it and use it more than formative assessment. It would seem that Singaporean teachers are still struggling to balance formative uses of assessment in schools and preparation for high stakes summative assessment. In its latest policy initiative, the Singapore Ministry of Education announced the removal of mid-year examinations in odd numbered years in primary and secondary schools (MOE, 2018).

Significance: Despite a history of large-scale assessment, educators in Singapore remain hopeful that ensuing opportunities for more curriculum time and less frequent examinations would enable more formative uses of assessment in the classroom.

Author

• Kelvin Tan, National Institute of Education - Nanyang Technological University