Abstract
This article examines the meanings and impact of ‘Assessment for Learning’ initiatives in schools against the back drop of assessment reform in Singapore since 1997. It is argued that Assessment for Learning’ is understood in different ways, and these different meanings do not always benefit students’ learning. The different meanings of ‘Assessment for Learning’ in Singapore are unpacked, and three areas for improvement for Assessment for Learning are suggested—clear standards for effective feedback practices, assessment for sustainable learning and assessment for integrating holistic learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akister J. (2003) Designing and using a patchwork text to assess social work students undertaking a module in Family Therapy. Innovations in Education and Training International 40(2): 202–208
Barnett R. (2007) Assessment in higher education: An impossible mission?. In: Boud D., Falchikov N. (eds) Rethinking assessment for higher education: Learning for the longer term. Routledge, London, pp 29–40
Black P., Harrison C., Lee C., Marshall B., Wiliam D. (2003) Assessment for Learning: Putting it into practice. Open University Press, Berkshire
Boost to Morale on Maths and Science. (1997, September 26). The Times Educational Supplement, p. 1.
Boud D. (1995) Assessment and learning: Contradictory or complementary?. In: Knight P. Assessment for learning in higher education. Kogan Page Limited, London
Boud D. (2000) Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Higher Education 22(2): 151–167
Boud D. (2007) Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In: Boud D., Falchikov N. (eds) Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. Routledge, London, pp 14–25
Buckles S., Schug M., Watts M. (2001) A national survey of state assessment practices in the social studies. Social Studies 92(4): 141–146
Cheah Y. (2003) English language teaching in Singapore today. In: Ho W., Wong R. (eds) English language teaching in East Asia today: Changing policies and practices. Eastern University Press/Times Academic Press, Singapore, pp 351–373
Darymple R., Smith P. (2008) The patchwork text: Enabling discursive writing and reflective practice on a foundation module in work-based learning. Innovations in Education and Training International 45(1): 47–54
Duzzy R. (2002) Writing books: A project for seventh and eighth grades. English Teachers’ Journal 54: 50–55
Filer A. (2000) Assessment: Social practice and social product. Routledge Falmer, London
Fu, G. (2010). Speech by Ms Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State, Ministry of National Development and Ministry of Education, at the PERI Holistic Assessment Seminar 2010 on Tuesday, 13 July 2010.
Goh, C. T. (1997). Shaping our future: Thinking schools, learning nation. Singapore Government Press Release. Speech by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong at the Opening of the 7th International Conference on Thinking, 2 June.
Gopinathan S. (1999) Preparing for the next rung: Economic restructuring and educational reform in Singapore. Journal of Education and Work 12(3): 295–308
Gregory K., Clarke M. (2003) High-stakes assessment in England and Singapore. Theory into Practice 42(1): 66–74
Gulikers J., Bastiaens T., Kirschner P. (2007) Defining authentic assessment: Five dimensions of authenticity. In: Haves A., McDowell L. (eds) Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education. Routledge, New York, pp 73–86
Hawe E. (2002) Assessment in a pre-service teacher education programme : The rhetoric and the practice of standards-based assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 30(1): 93–106
Hogan D., Towndrow P., Koh K. (2009) The logic of confidence and the social economy of assessment reform in Singapore: A new institutionalist perspective. In: Grigorenko E. Assessment of abilities and competencies in the era of globalization. Springer, New York
Koh K., Luke A. (2009) Authentic and conventional assessment in Singapore schools: An empirical study of teacher assignments and student work. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 16(3): 291–318
Lee, H. L. (2004). Our future of opportunity and promise. Singapore Government Press Release. Address by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the 2004 National Day Rally at the University Cultural Centre, National University of Singapore, 22 August.
Lim E., Tan A. (1999) Educational assessment in Singapore. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 6(3): 391–404
Ng P. T. (2005) Students’ perception of change in the Singapore education system. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 3(1): 77–92
Ng P. T. (2008) Educational reform in Singapore: From quantity to quality. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 7: 5–15
Ovens P. (2003) A patchwork text approach to assessment in teacher education. Teaching in Higher Education 8(40): 545–562
Ramaprasad A. (1983) On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science 28: 4–13
Sadler D. R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18: 119–144
Sadler D. R. (2007) Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria. Assessment in Education 14(3): 387–392
Sadler D. R. (2009) Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education 34(7): 807–826
Sellen, R., Chong, K., & Tay, C. (2006). Assessment shifts in the Singapore Education System. Paper presented at the 2006 Annual IAEA Conference, Singapore.
Seow A. (1996) How to respond to students’ writing. Teaching and Learning 17(1): 78–85
Silver R., Lee S. (2007) What does it take to make a change? Teacher feedback and student revision. English Teaching: Practice and Critique 6(1): 25–49
Snyder B. R. (1971) The hidden curriculum. Alfred A Knopf, New York
Tan C. (2006) Creating thinking schools through “Knowledge and Inquiry”: The curriculum challenges for Singapore. The Curriculum Journal 17(1): 89–105
Tan K. H. K. (2007) The case for qualitative approaches to assessment. In: Tan K. H. K. (eds) Alternative Assessment in Schools: A qualitative approach. Pearson Education South Asia, Singapore
Tan K. H. K. (2009) Meanings and practices of power in academics’ conceptions of student self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education 14(4): 361–373
Tan, K. H. K., Koh, K. (eds) (2008) Authentic assessment in Schools. Pearson Education South East Asia, Singapore
Tan K. H. K., Prosser M. (2004) Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: A phenomenographic study of grade descriptors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29(3): 267–282
Tan, L. C. (2008, December 18). PSLE T-score indicates relative performance. My Paper.
Tierney R., Simon M. (2004) What’s still wrong with rubrics: Focusing on the consistency of performance criteria across scale levels. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation 9(2): 1–10
Tompkins G. (1990) Teaching and writing: Balancing process and product. Merrill Publishing Co, Columbus
Torrance H. (2007) Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post-secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education 14(3): 281–294
Webb M., Jones J. (2009) Exploring tensions in developing assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 16(2): 165–184
Winter R. (2003) Contextualising the patchwork text: Addressing problems of coursework assessment in higher education. Innovations in Education and Training International 40(2): 112–122
Wolf T., Stevens E. (2007) The role of rubrics in advancing and assessing student learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching 7(1): 3–14
Zamel V. (1985) Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly 19: 79–101
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tan, K. Assessment for learning in Singapore: unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educ Res Policy Prac 10, 91–103 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9096-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9096-z