Education Matters: Rethinking Assessment

In our previous discussion, “Education Matters: Redefining Success in Education”, we critically examined the issues within Nepal’s education system, including the harmful Scoreboard Syndrome and the urgent need to redefine success beyond academic achievements. We advocated for a shift towards recognizing diverse student abilities and interests and emphasized the need for privacy laws to safeguard student data. Building upon that foundation, this article delves deeply into the assessment practices within Nepal’s education system. We will scrutinize the limitations of current testing practices and champion an evolution towards regular, integrated, and fair assessments that genuinely reflect the learning and teaching process. 

The State of Testing in Nepal, Present and Past 
Growing up in the 90s in Nepal, our testing environment in a public school would look very unconventional from modern-day practices. Teachers conducted assessments in this unique setup where a single chair in the playground became a stage for each student. We were called one by one to read a passage aloud far from the students sitting in a circle waiting for their turn. Decades later, I reflect on those times with nostalgia and a newfound understanding of their value – an organic, holistic, and personalized approach to assessment. They instilled a sense of accountability and responsibility, promoting growth and understanding rather than competition, which gradually dissipated as we progressed, making way for high-stakes, rigid, and impersonal testing methods.  

In high school, the frequency of tests dwindled. For grades 9 and 10, we only had mid-year and final exams that bore no impact on SLC—the so-called “Iron Gate”. Preparation for this crucial test primarily involved rote learning, with students resorting to cheat sheets, hidden notes, or switching to less regulated exam centers for an advantage. I recall the story of Hari Bansha Acharya, and the incident of his group when they were in one of such centers away from his home institution in Kathmandu. Nobody worried about what came after the SLC, all that mattered was passing it.

College was a whole different scene. It was as if we had entered a free society, devoid of parental or teacher supervision. Unmonitored attendance, lack of interim exams/assessments, no obligatory interactions with faculty, and no required coursework characterized the college environment. The year-end exam held the reins to our future, making the entire educational journey a high-stakes gamble. The classroom experience would be far from interactive; most instructors came with prepared notes, often years old, and simply read them aloud for students to dictate while student queries were met with hostility. On top of that, student politics mirrored the national political landscape, adding to the theatrical atmosphere. The primary focus wasn’t on the learning or teaching process but rather on enjoying college life and passing the final exam at any cost.  

During my MA at TU, a new testing system was implemented. It comprised a final exam accounting for 80% of the total score, with the remaining 20% derived from a project, similar to a formative test assigned by the course instructor. Unfortunately, this change was exploited by student politicians who often colluded with instructors to leak potential exam questions. I remember my younger brother pursuing MBS, making several early morning dashes to campus to collect illicitly distributed answers from the Free Student Union (FSU). The final exams posed a significant challenge as the exam consisted of five subjective questions. If, for any reason, these questions deviated from our prepared material, failure was almost inevitable. 

The story of Nepal’s assessment practices reveals a transformation from personalized, interactive early experiences to a high-stakes, infrequent testing system. The initial open-air assessments emphasized holistic development and comprehension, creating an immersive learning environment that extended beyond mere evaluations. The shift to an impersonal and high-stakes testing environment disrupts the continuity of the learning process and undermines the true essence of education. With the focus shifted towards rote learning and scoring, rather than genuine comprehension and understanding, it becomes imperative to critically reassess and reform Nepal’s testing methods. A return to the engaging, regular, and comprehensive nature of earlier assessments can rekindle the true spirit of learning. 

The History of Student Testing in Global Scenario
Tracing the roots of student testing, we are taken back to the earliest formal written exams in the U.S., originally intended for sorting and classifying students and monitoring school effectiveness, according to the Handbook of Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning (Bloom et al., 1971). As early as the late 19th century, a robust form of student testing had already been established, with pioneers like Sir Francis Galton in England and J. McKeen Cattell in the U.S. embarking on studies to measure individual differences in mental ability. Notable progress happened during World War I when a group intelligence test was developed for the Army. This era also marked the advent of multiple-choice questions and their variants that transformed the landscape of educational testing. 

Technology developments in the 1950s further revolutionized the field with inventions like automatic scoring machines, allowing large-scale processing of tests at a reasonable cost (Lessons from the past: A brief history of educational testing in the United States, Office of Technology Assessment, 1992). Despite this progress, the testing system faced backlash over time due to misuse and has had continually refine and balance content, memory, and skill evaluation in the test (Educational Assessment: A Brief History by Dabid L. McArthur). This historical snapshot, as comprehensive as it is, has woven threads of various settings of testing use and incorporation of rigorous methods for result interpretation, paving the way for a more complete science of educational measurement (Bloom et al., 1971). Looking at the current state of student testing in Nepal, we can conveniently say that we are in the pre-World War I era. 

A Global Perspective on Assessments’ Significance and Implementation 
In the K-12 education system in both Europe and America, student assessment is a multifaceted process. It uses a variety of tests to measure student learning and progress, which are crucial for several reasons. Regular formative assessments such as quizzes, group projects, oral presentations, or classwork reviews, provide ongoing feedback to enhance learning while it’s taking place. These assessments are generally low-stakes and help teachers modify their instruction based on students’ needs. Unit tests, often created by teachers, are typically employed at the end of chapters or units to evaluate students’ grasp of specific content. They hold higher stakes than formative assessments but are still considered medium stakes, as they contribute to a student’s final grade but typically don’t determine progression to the next grade. Final exams, generally occurring at the end of a semester or school year, cover a broader range of material and carry significant weight in determining a student’s overall grade. These are high-stakes assessments as their outcomes can substantially affect a student's academic future. 

In addition to these assessments, students in the US often take school district exams and state exams. These standardized tests measure proficiency in core subjects like Math, Science, and English. These exams are high stakes, as the results can influence school funding, teacher evaluations, and in some cases, student promotion or graduation. 

Furthermore, many countries adopt varied testing practices, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducted by the OECD, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and the International Baccalaureate (IB) Examinations, which provide international comparison opportunities. Substantial investment is made in these countries to ensure the validity, reliability, and fairness of assessments. For instance, the US invests in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), while the U.K. focuses on the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) and A-level examinations. Investments even extend to pre-employment assessments, assisting in informed hiring decisions. 

Thus, worldwide, the roles and types of assessments are multifaceted. They are used to evaluate a learner’s understanding, provide improvement feedback, and ensure accountability and quality assurance in educational systems. They inform curriculum development, enabling educators to refine their methods and curricula, set educational benchmarks and standards, and even facilitate the selection process in higher education or hiring decisions. 

The Path Towards Multidimensional, Integrated, and Personalized Evaluations in Nepal
In Nepal, the education system is entrenched in a monotonous routine, testing only students’ knowledge recall. Many blame the system’s issues on distractions from technology or an alleged decline in student diligence. However, cognitive science disputes these notions, suggesting that adolescents often exceed parental intellect. My conviction is that we, and subsequently, newer generations, are more capable than our previous selves. Now, returning to the topic of testing. What are our tests measuring? Regardless of the educational level, our assessments, as Kirschner, Hendrick, and Heals note in their recent book “How Teaching Happens…”, often do not necessitate understanding to answer correctly. Our singular focus on high test scores overlooks the importance of comprehension and the application of learned knowledge. 

If cheating is a prevalent issue, why not incorporate open-book tests? This approach would teach students to verify and compile information from authentic sources, construct balanced answers, and appropriately cite their references. Clearly, our assessments must evolve beyond grading mechanisms and become pivotal to the learning process. Lessons from Nepalese educational history and global practices highlight the need for regular, integrated, and personalized assessments. Such assessments should be capable of evaluating beyond subject proficiency to encompass students’ learning objectives, teachers’ pedagogical goals, and broader institutional efficacy. 

Instead of solely penalizing students, let’s assess teachers, schools, and administrators, holding them accountable to maintain certain standards. A blend of formative and summative assessments can foster improvement in student learning and teaching quality. Formative assessments aid in mastering objectives by providing regular feedback, facilitating instruction pacing, and motivating learners to invest effort at appropriate junctures. 

Seamlessly integrating these assessments can minimize academic misconduct, encouraging understanding and holistic growth over rote memorization. Continuous, immediate feedback from these assessments allows for swift identification and rectification of academic weaknesses, enabling students and educators to adapt their strategies to the best possible outcomes. Introducing these elements in our system kindle immersive environments, effectively merging traditional and contemporary, low-stakes and high-stakes assessments. This balance would refocus emphasis on genuine comprehension, understanding, and holistic growth.  

Scientific and Fair Assessment 
The shift towards multidimensional, personalized evaluations necessitates a focus on scientific and fair assessment methods. These methods ensure all students, regardless of their background or circumstances, have equal opportunities to display their understanding and abilities, fostering equity and inclusivity in educational systems. Scientific assessments, grounded in meticulous research and measurement principles, strive to provide reliable and valid results, accurately reflecting students’ capabilities, and achievements. They are subject to rigorous design, pilot testing, and psychometric analysis (especially for summative assessments) to validate their quality and authenticity (OECD, Strength through diversity: Education for inclusive societies, 2020). This is a stark contrast to current practices in Nepal. It is crucial that we apply the same stringent testing and evaluation process to measure teacher effectiveness, school quality, and administrative competence. 

Simultaneously, fair assessments accommodate the array of student needs and characteristics, taking into account diverse learning styles, cultural backgrounds, and accessibility requirements. These assessments aspire to eliminate bias, fostering an inclusive environment where every student can unveil their full potential (OECD, Strength through diversity: Education for inclusive societies, 2020; Conception of educational equity by Levinson, Geron, Brighouse, 2022). 

Globally, education systems like Finland’s, exemplify these practices, adopting a holistic approach to assessment where qualitative feedback takes precedence over grades. Teachers utilize varied assessment methods to evaluate students’ comprehensive skills and understanding (World Economic Forum, 2018). Similarly, New Zealand’s system emphasizes formative assessment practices that support student learning through ongoing feedback, employing an assortment of tools that prioritize scientific rigor, fairness, and overall student development (Classroom Assessment in Policy Context by T.J. Crooks). 

The Need for Balanced External Verification 
In the world of education, internal school-level assessments play a vital role in monitoring student progress and incorporating external verification processes is equally important. Local, state, and federal governments in Nepal should implement a balanced approach to testing, to create a comprehensive and equitable evaluation system. By establishing clear expectations and standards, these assessments can guide curriculum development and instructional strategies. Moreover, the feedback from external assessments can identify gaps in student learning and areas for improvement in teaching, thereby informing interventions and educational reforms. 

It is worth mentioning that the implementation of external verification should be done in a way that minimizes disruption to the teaching and learning process. To this end, testing should not be overly frequent or burdensome, and the focus should be on supporting student learning rather than measuring it. The use of technology, including online assessments and digital scoring, can streamline the process and provide timely, actionable feedback. 

Overall, external verification offers an indispensable layer of oversight and quality control in education. By implementing a balanced, seamless, and non-disruptive approach to testing, educational systems can ensure that all students receive a fair, high-quality education that prepares them for the future. While there may be challenges in implementing this system, the benefits in terms of fairness, accountability, and improved educational outcomes make it a worthwhile pursuit. 

A Call to Action 
Indeed, it is time to rethink and reinvent the education system in Nepal, particularly its assessment practices. Inspired by both historical lessons and global advancements, the need for the hour is to integrate regular, personalized, and fair assessments seamlessly into everyday teaching and learning activities. Instead of high-stakes, infrequent exams that breed stress, competition, and potential misconduct, our assessments should naturally encourage genuine understanding and holistic growth. They should be an organic part of the academic process that genuinely reflects students’ understanding and progress, not an occasional event drenched in undue pressure. 

Let us envision a transformation of the existing system, starting with a reconceptualization of the results announcement day, from an event symbolizing competition and stress to a genuine celebration of learning. The responsibility of teachers should evolve from being gatekeepers of academic success to facilitators of learning, growth, and understanding. It is vital that we reclaim the engaging and personalized assessments of the past and strive to alleviate the pressure currently exerted on students. Ultimately, our goal should be to foster an environment that prioritizes comprehension, understanding, collaboration, and joy in learning, truly embodying the essence of education. Together, we can kindle the true spirit of education in Nepal. 

Thank you for your time and for engaging in this important discussion on our education system and the discussion around it. Your participation is invaluable in driving meaningful change. I’m excited to continue this conversation in my upcoming article, “Education Matters: Nepal’s Curriculum and Global Perspectives”, where we’ll explore Nepal’s existing curriculum with global models, highlighting alignment and divergence, and suggest ways to align Nepal’s education with worldwide standards.