Higher Diploma in Teacher Training
A STUDY ON CURRICULUM & ASSESSMENT
METHODOLOGIES CURRENTLY PRACTISED IN SRI
LANKA & AUSTRALIA
By
Aysha Mohideen
Student Reg No : D40Y19B1071
01/01/2020
aiki_07@yahoo.co.in
First Semester- 2019
Metropolitan College
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
1
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
CONTENT
OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Background ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Curriculum and assessment types in Australian schools.............................................................................. 6
Curriculum and assessment types in Sri Lankan schools............................................................................. 8
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................... 13
Looking into the impact of curriculum based assessments in Australia .................................................... 14
Looking into the impact of curriculum based assessments in Australia .................................................... 17
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 20
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 22
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
2
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
OBJECTIVES
____________________________________________________
1. To investigate the methods of assessments of curriculums currently
practised in schools in Sri Lanka and Australia.
2. To study the curriculums practised in Australia and Sri Lanka
3. To study the impacts of the different curriculums practised in schools
in Sri Lanka and Australia on the teaching and learning process.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
3
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
Background
Understanding and remembering what is taught in a
classroom play an essential role in education. Young minds want to
retain information that has been discussed and explained during their
lessons. Nevertheless, how can a teacher know if her students have
understood what was taught during lessons? Therefore, it is
necessary to implement strategies to find out how far the student was
able to recall and apply his understanding of what was taught in the
classroom. Assessments play an essential role in such circumstances.
According to the Glossary of Education reforms on
„Assessments‟ updated on 11th October 2015,(Great Schools
Partnership,2015), states that “The term assessment refers to the
wide variety of methods or tools that educators use to evaluate,
measure, and document the academic readiness, learning progress,
skill acquisition, or educational needs of students”. Hence
according to this statement, assessments do not only look into how
much the student understood but is also a vital tool to find out the
educational need of a student and his interest in a plethora of the
subject matters. Hence, for better assessment skills, understanding
of the curriculum plays a vital role.
Three types of assessments are performed in a classroom
setting, namely Diagnostic assessments, formative assessments and
summative assessments. Diagnostic assessments give an idea what
the student understands in a subject matter while formative
assessments are conducted during the teaching and learning
process. On the other hand, Summative assessments are done after
a year of study or on a subject matter. The different types of
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
4
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
assessments are vital in understanding a student‟s strength and
weakness in the subject.
There are different strategies used to conduct the above-said
assessment types. When it comes to diagnostic assessments, the
educator may necessitate a written paper or an oral question-answer
session on enrolling a candidate to a new stream of work, while a
formative, assessment may involve quizzes and flashcards during
the teaching time during a particular lesson. Summative
assessments are formal assessments that need to meet specific
criteria‟s that maintain a standard. The student may be required to
sit for a written paper compiled in the same school or the question
paper can be from a different school or even a different country
that practices the same curriculum. This method would enhance the
performance of the student and make the qualifications more
standardised.
Let us look into the different curriculum and assessment
methods carried out in schools globally to educate young minds.
Canadian schools follow the curriculum designed by
the National Center of Education and Economy since Canada has
no national curriculum designed for its schools. Canada and the
USA have almost the same assessment methods practised in
schools throughout the country. Canada and USA practices both
non-test and test-based methods to examine the intelligence levels
of the students in schools. The Canadian school's system conducts
two necessary standardised tests namely, „The Canadian
Achievement test‟ (CAT), and the „Canadian test of basic skills‟
(CTBS) that focuses on Mathematical skills, reading and
Languages. Apart from these, the teacher made question papers are
used in Canadian and American schools to evaluate a child‟s
progress (Saklofske & Janson, 1990).
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
5
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
The primary schools of Germany carry out a competence
oriented assessment method where the teacher in charge observes
the students and writes a report with the strength and weakness of
the child in mind (Doe, J.2018). On the other hand, the super
Global High School (SGH) in Japan assess students on
unconventional tutoring methods that include assessments on
projects, formative assessment techniques including rubrics and
assessments based on performance (Tokyo Gakugei
University,2017).
Nevertheless, this study focuses on the different curriculum and
assessment methodologies practised in Australia and Sri Lanka and
its impacts on teaching and learning.
Curriculum and assessment types in Australian schools
Australia, an island continent, is one of the most sought after
destination for education. It follows a federal system for schools
that is looked into by the state and tertiary government. The state
schools in Australia from the primary to secondary follow a
national curriculum formulated by the Australian Curriculum
Assessment and Reporting Authority. Schools in this country
follow a plethora of assessment forms such as formative
assessments, formal assessments, informal assessment, Diagnostic
assessments, and Summative assessments (Federation University
Australia, 2018).
According to J Joy, Cumming, and Maxwell (2004), on
the article „Assessment in Australian schools: current practice and
trends‟ mentions the importance of curriculum in the role of
assessments in an Australian school. It states that “The role of
curriculum in assessment relates to the outcomes of two key
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
6
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
national strategy documents: the Hobart Declaration and the
Adelaide Declaration. The Hobart declaration on schooling (AEC,
1989) provided a set of common and agreed national goals for
schooling in Australia supported by the state, territory and
Commonwealth ministers (a group known as the Ministerial
Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs
(MCEETYA).”
According to this report, students of secondary school have
to face both internal assessments set by the school and then an
external assessment that students need to take at the end of the
course. In individual states like Queensland, one of the latest
assessment technique is the „ Moderation‟ that involves
assessments carried out by teachers of the school and are doublechecked by external moderators (J Joy, Cumming & Maxwell
G.S.,2004).
According to an article by Parliament of Australia on
„Improving School Performance‟ by Marilyn Harrington (Social
Policy) published in 2013, mentions the drop in grades of school
performance on years 3, 5 6 & 7 students and so the importance of
assessing them using „The National Assessment Program –
Literacy and Numeracy‟ (NAPLAN). NAPLAN assess the students
on essential skills such as reading, spelling, writing, numeracy, and
grammar. The format of this assessment requires a short answer
and multiple-choice based questions.
The National Assessment Program (NAP) (Santiago etal,
2011), also conduct a three-yearly sample assessment in subjects
like citizenship, science, civics and Information technology. The
NAP also conducts assessments for international students such as
„Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)‟ and
„Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)‟
(Santiago etal, 2011).
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
7
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
According to the report published by OECD
(Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development),
Australia on „OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in
Education‟ in 2011 states that “Secondary school-level assessment
practices are varied, ranging from laboratory experiments, essay
writing, research papers, presentations, demonstrations, projects,
assignments, tests and school-based examinations”. It further
states, “Schools have the responsibility for determining
assessments that best suit the students, including qualitative and
quantitative assessment. There are some school-designed, year
level assessments. These assessments are often referred to as
“common tests” and generally focus on students in the middle
years of schooling”.
Hence, understanding and following the curriculum
implemented by the federal system goes hand in hand in carrying
out methodical evaluation on students.
Curriculum and assessment types in Sri Lankan schools
Sri Lanka is an island in the Indian Ocean, and it has
implemented one of the criteria‟s of the millennium goals. That is
to establish free education to the country. Sri Lanka‟s free
education system has indeed increased the overall literacy of the
country, and today it showcases a literacy rate of 92 % which is
higher than expected for a third world country (Ministry of
Education,2019).
State schools in Sri Lanka are under the Ministry of
Education, and they design the needed curriculum that targets
university entrances. Schools following the international
curriculum work independently under the relevant international
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
8
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
body they collaborate. The Government has made schooling
compulsory from the age of 5 years to 13 years and not attending
school may lead to legal interference.
Figure 1 below shows Sri Lanka's net enrollment rate (NER)
to education.
Figure 1: Comparison of different level of education in Sri Lanka
Sri Lankan School education system whether state schools or
international schools follows all three-assessment methodologies.
Enrollment of students to schools requires diagnostic assessments
to understand the student‟s education level that plays a vital role in
assessing the child‟s background of the subject matter.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
9
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
The curriculum designed by the education ministry is followed
by state schools and shows the efficiency of the curriculum on
fourth graders. According to the report on „Sri Lanka Education
Sector Assessment Achievements, Challenges, and Policy Options‟
(2017) states that, “In the early stages of education, learning
achievement in Sri Lanka seems relatively good. For example, a
2009 national assessment of grade 4 students conducted by the
National Education Research and Evaluation Center (NEREC)
found that a large proportion of grade 4 students were able to
master the essential learning competencies expected by the national
curriculum”. Hence good education quality on the primary level is
displayed.
The curriculum caters to hands-on experience of the subject
matter on the primary level and carries out assessments based on
what the students learned regularly. At the end of the chapter,
students are subjected to formative assessments to gain insight if
the topic was understood and to bring to the notice of the weak
areas of students as a whole. Formative assessments are done by
having quizzes, open-book tests, short written tests and some were
assignment based. Hence, the primary school curriculum carries
out formative assessments that help the student gain an insight into
the subject matter.
According to a report on the „Education First Sri Lanka‟ by
the Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka published in January 2013
states that the primary curriculum comprises of key stage 1: Grades
1& 2 and mentions that “The main learning mode is the guided
play with secondary emphasis on active learning and a minimum
emphasis on deskwork”. It further states that key stage 2 comprises
grades 3 & 4 that mentions “Equal importance is given to all three
modes of learning, play, activity-based learning, and deskwork”.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
10
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
According to this report, grade 5 classes are subjected to desk
work gearing them to go for higher classes.
Figure 02 shows the general structure of Education in Sri Lanka.
Source: (Education first Srilanka, 2013)
Figure 2: General structure of education in Sri Lanka
The Secondary Schools in Sri Lanka follow the curriculum
that caters to university education that follows a summative
assessment method to select students for university entrance.
Hence, in this context, assessments are designed on the curriculum
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
11
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
implemented and played a huge role in preparing students for
higher classes. Sri Lankan school-based assessments (SBA) are
therefore given great importance by both parents and teachers
aiming at moulding students to sit the year-end examinations.
Students in state schools are moulded to answer direct
questions that target the public examination in grade 11. Sri Lankan
students have a choice to sit the local G.C.E. Examination (
General Certificate of Education) that is held yearly by the
Ministry of Education Sri Lanka, or some may opt the international
public examination held by international bodies like the Cambridge
or Edexcel Pearson boards including the International
Baccalaureate. Either way, students are compelled to face a
summative assessment at the end of grade 11. The format for
summative assessment is usually a written paper with long and
short answers along with some multiple-choice questions.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
12
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
DISCUSSION
________________________________________________________________________________
Now let us look into the impact of the different curriculum
and assessments on learning and teaching.
Charles Caleb Colton said, “Examinations are formidable
even to the best prepared, for the greatest fool may ask more than
the wisest man can answer”. The above statement shows that
assessments cannot curtail a student‟s knowledge of the subject
matter. That is a student cannot be assessed one hundred per cent
by the use of school-based assessment methods.
R.N.A. De Silva, from the Overseas School in Colombo,
states in his article on „time to assess our assessment process‟ that
“Norm-referenced tests are designed to compare and rank the
candidates concerning one another. An average is determined
through statistical means and each candidate‟s performance is
compared with this average thereby awarding a letter grade such as
A, B, C, D & E according to the set grade boundaries”. These
grading systems are designed under „normative‟ and „criterionbased‟. Normative grades systems analyse student performance
using a normal distribution curve where the average students fall
into the middle category and the highest and lowest scorers are at
the two ends of the graph.
On the other hand, criterion-based grading sets up a
standard that students need to aim to achieve a particular result.
This type of grading system compares the students‟ performance
with how much target he can achieve rather than comparing the
student with other students because the competition lies within the
student himself and not with others around him making it a healthy
competition.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
13
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
Looking into the impact of curriculum-based
assessments in Australia
Assessment is a tool used to identify the depth of
knowledge the students gained during their study (Yong &
Lim,2008), making it essential to understand the role of teachers in
the process of teaching and learning. According to the study by
Mansoor, Leng, Rasul, Raof & Yusof (2013), on „The benefits of
school-based assessments‟, it states that “change in the assessment
system has further lead to a paradigm change in the teaching and
learning processes of all primary schools that deserve the attention
of academicians, educators and researchers, including stakeholders.
Therefore, the role of teachers in this new assessment system is
vital; teachers have to have a variety of teaching approaches and
assessment techniques that have a direct impact on the assessment
outcomes”.
Nevertheless, there are strengths and weaknesses in using
assessments to judge a student‟s performance. Let us look at the
strengths and weaknesses of the assessment processes in Australian
schools.
According to the report published by OECD (Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development) Australia (2011), the
report states, “The set of assessments also provides a structure for
potentially integrating accountability and instructional
improvement from early education through secondary completion.
A-E reporting requirements link ongoing classroom instruction and
grading with existing standards and offer a mechanism for linking
individual student accountability, classroom instruction and wider
accountability”. It further states, “This set of assessments results in
a coherent system of assessments of learning that potentially can
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
14
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
provide a comprehensive picture of student performance relative to
Australia‟s goals for student learning”.
The OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (2011) states that the tools teachers use in the
classrooms to carry out their teaching made according to the
curriculum has added value to the teaching methods making it
more efficient. Formative assessments in Australia have shown
significant benefits to the students in their learning process as the
students get immediate feedback from their results, making it easy
for the students to know where they stand in the subject matter.
This output is a benefit of the assessment styles used in Australian
schools.
According to the study carried by Cumming & Maxwell
(2004) on „Assessment in Australian schools: current practice and
trends‟ talks on the three impacts on School-based assessments that
states “First, statements have evolved that embed the right to, and
principle of, school-level implementation of curriculum
frameworks and assessment activities to suit the community.
Second, statements by authorities on appropriate assessment embed
the principle that assessment of student performance should
incorporate multiple inputs of data”.
It further states, “A third impact has been the professional
development effects of peer moderation and curriculum
development activities. These provide an opportunity for teachers
to meet and talk, to see examples of student work and assessment
tasks from other schools, to participate in focused activities on
assessment and to continue to negotiate a mutual construction of
standards of performance”.
The National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy
(NAPLAN) of Australia has played an immense role in recognition
of student‟s standards by the global market. According to the
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
15
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
article published by Marilyn Harrington in the Parliament of
Australia journal on „Improving school performance‟, states that
“The annual assessments presents as an important means of
ascertaining student progress and the effectiveness of teaching
strategies, identifying student needs and reporting student
progress”. The NAPLAN testing criteria has gained a negative
perspective on students and the schools carrying it out. The article
by Marilyn further states, “Australian and international evidence
that shows standardised testing and „league‟ tables can present a
narrow view of school performance. They are also open to
misinterpretation, can distort pedagogical practice, and can
adversely affect student wellbeing”.
Another critical benefit of assessments carried by teachers
at school shows the reliability of teachers in marking the
assessment. Since the teacher-student relationship is long term, the
teacher has a good insight into the students‟ performance and there
is enough time allotted for observing students, giving the teacher an
in-depth understanding of the overall student performance.
Therefore, teacher-based assessments help to understand students‟
performance better when compared to external examinations
(Santiago, 2011).
However, though assessments as a whole have its pros and
cons, the implementation of School-based assessment has its
advantage when compared to external assessments carried by the
state.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
16
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
Looking into the impact of curriculum-based assessments in Australia
When we study the impact of assessments in Sri Lanka, the
Sri Lankan education system is too exam-oriented so much that the
students are taught to face the summative exams instead enhancing
proper learning skills. Schools in Sri Lanka that work on statedesigned curriculum mould the students to face the OL (Ordinary
Level examination) and the AL (advance level examination);
leading students to be very stressful and teachers to carry an
additional burden on their workload.
Summative assessments on public examinations in Sri
Lanka has developed a negative image in the recent past with
flawed exam papers and disoriented questions that bonus marks
had to be given to the students, creating a low credibility of the
examination board to the eyes of the public and brings down the
standard of the exams for which students come with high hopes.
On the other hand, the assessment skills of teachers in Sri
Lanka need to improve in order to carry out the teaching profession
successfully. According to the article on „Study on evaluation &
the assessment system in general education in Sri Lanka‟
conducted by the National Education Commission in 2014 states
that “The bulk recruitment of teachers has made it impossible for
any institution to provide a higher order of teaching-learning and
assessment skills to any teacher. As a result, currently, even a
trained teacher has no assessment or test item writing skills”.
It further states that “The same old fashion of factual
content dominate the question papers and test papers in schools and
public examinations are sustained and the Department of
Examinations does not recognise the need for a drastic change to
meet the challenge of preparing of students to meet the knowledge
economy or the global changes”.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
17
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
The Sri Lankan higher secondary schools have a very
constraint curriculum designed by the Ministry of Education that
caters them to face the first year of university education, putting
more strain on both teachers and students that eventually leads to a
lack of interest in the students‟ performance. Burdening the
students has resulted in many issues in the teaching field.
Curriculums are designed to meet University standards and
not necessarily the student in mind,adding more pressure to little
minds. Students attend school and they need to get additional help
after school to reach the required standard, ripping off the
childhood of the student; thus creating more competition among
students and parents. The students are therefore exposed to lots of
stress. The students, therefore, face many consequences such as,
Teach to test syndrome, rushing to finish the syllabus and Learned
paralysis (Lim, 2009).
According to the article on „Assessment in Malaysian School
Mathematics: Issues and Concerns‟ by Lim and Sam (2009)
elaborates on the consequences faced by the students. The article
talks on the „teach to test syndrome‟ by stating that “Teachers tend
to focus only on contents and skills that will be tested in the public
examinations. Teachers and students will not “waste time” on
either exploring or learning new content areas or skills not tested in
the syllabi. Students are made to memorise the “model answers” to
expected examination questions”.
It further talks on the rushing to finish the syllabus by stating,
“Finishing syllabus becomes the sole responsibility of the teachers.
Teachers have to make sure that they complete teaching the content of
the assigned syllabus so that they have ample time to revise with their
pupils before the public examinations. It was a common practice for
teachers to finish the syllabus three to six months ahead of the
examination date”.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
18
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
The article also mentions the learning paralysis as those
students who “do not possess soft skills. They are predictably
hesitant and diffident and not forthcoming with ideas. They lack
creativity and innovative skills. They lack the interpersonal skills to
bring into play the unique diversity that characterises our nation.
They do not demonstrate a capacity for thinking”.
Another major issue in assessing students is the quality of
assessments carried out. The report on „Study on evaluation &
assessment in general education in Sri Lanka‟(2014), states that
“Quality of assessment of learning is stereotyped paper-pencil tests
and teachers need to be trained in the utilisation of various
assessment modalities in workshops with activities”.
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
19
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
CONCLUSION
______________________________________________________________________________
Keeping these in mind, we can conclude that the Sri Lankan
curriculum has been a failure when compared with the curriculum
and assessment strategies implemented in the Australian education
system. Sri Lankan education is taking a toll on students and
parents. The massive exam-oriented curriculum has failed to offer a
more compromise dynamic system that deviates from the
traditional teaching methods. The conventional exam system and
the massive content on the curriculum have led to a devaluing the
school system and opening avenues for tuition classes that have, in
turn, led students to depend on the tuition culture and degrade the
school system.
Students surpassing the above said negative clouds, however,
manage to enter universities and get themselves graduated but to no
avail. As these students after that, remain unemployed as they lack
the critical and analytical skill, the curriculum failed to provide in
order for them to gain employment skills. Hence these students
become an example of parrot style learning system that takes them
nowhere in this competitive skill-oriented world.
Apart from these, the public exam conducted by the ministry
of education at the end of grade 11 and 13 has gained disregard for
the lack of transparency and dropping standards. Overall the Sri
Lankan education system has to turn the tables over to meet the
global framework of skill-oriented education.
Therefore, we can conclude that the curriculum and assessments
go hand in hand. Teachers, too like students, need to get an
understanding of the curriculum for proper influencing of
knowledge. Overall teachers need to have proper training on the
curriculum before it is taught to students. According to this article,
teachers lack that knowledge. However, Sri Lanka is working
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
20
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
towards creating a successful curriculum.
According to „Sri Lanka Education Sector Assessment
Achievements, Challenges, and Policy Options‟ the article states
that “The objective is to reflect modern international trends in
curriculum practice better; effectively disseminate curriculum
goals, values, and aims to stakeholders; orient the education system
more closely to the world of work, and support schools as the
curriculum is upgraded”.
Therefore, the curriculum needs to be designed keeping the
average student in mind and not necessarily the entrance to
university. Classroom time should be spent in a productive way
enhancing the learning skills of the student and not targeting public
exams.
Well-designed curriculum and proper teacher-student
interaction along with goals on educating the student rather than
targeting exams can yield auspicious study time and include skilloriented education meeting global framework.
\
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
21
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
REFERENCES
1. De Silva, R. (2016). Time to assess our assessment process.
Retrieved from
http://www.moe.gov.lk/english/images/Branch_News/ResearchandD
ev./assessment_article.pdf
2. Doe, J. (2018, December 20). Assessment in Primary Education - Eurydice - European
Commission. Retrieved September 21, 2019, from Eurydice - European
Commission website: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/nationalpolicies/eurydice/content/assessment-primary-education-18_en
3.Dundar, H., Millot, B., Riboud, M., Shojo, M., Aturupane, H., Goyal, S., & Raju, D.
(n.d.). D I R E C T I O N S I N D E V E L O P M E N T Human Development Sri
Lanka Education Sector Assessment Achievements, Challenges, and Policy Options.
Retrieved from
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/27042/97814648105
27.pdf?sequence=2
4.Educati on First Sri Lanka Ministry of Educati on Sri Lanka i. (2013). Retrieved from
http://www.moe.gov.lk/sinhala/images/publications/Education_First_SL/Education
_First_SL.pdf
5.Federation University Australia. (2018, October 31). Types of assessment. Retrieved
September 20, 2019, from Federation University Australia website:
https://federation.edu.au/staff/learning-and-teaching/teachingpractice/assessment/types-of-assessment
6.Great Schools Partnership. (2015, November 10). Assessment Definition. Retrieved
September 21, 2019, from The Glossary of Education Reform website:
https://www.edglossary.org/assessment/
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
22
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
7.Harrington, M. (2013). Improving school performance
– Parliament of Australia.
Retrieved September 23, 2019, from Aph.gov.au website:
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamenta
ry_Library/pubs/BriefingBook44p/SchoolPerformance
8.J Joy Cumming, & Maxwell, G. S. (2004). PROFILES OF EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS WORLDWIDE Assessment in Australian schools:
current practice and trends. Assessment in Education, 11(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000209010
9.Lankacom Super User. (2019). Ministry of Higher Education - Overview. Retrieved
September 28, 2019, from Mohe.gov.lk website:
https://www.mohe.gov.lk/index.php/about-ministry/overview
10.Lim, C., & Sam. (2009). Assessment in Malaysian School Mathematics: Issues and
Concerns. Retrieved from
http://www.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/math/apec/apec2009/doc/pdf_20-21/LimChapSampaper.pdf
11.Mansor, A. N., Leng, O. H., Rasul, M. S., Raof, R. A., & Yusoff, N. (2013). The
Benefits of School-Based Assessment. Asian Social Science, 9(8).
https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n8p101
12.Pujitha, S. (2015). AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE NATURE OF THE SCHOOL
BASED ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTED IN G.C.E. (O/L)
CLASSES Interim Report. Retrieved from
http://nie.lk/pdffiles/other/SBA_GCEOL.pdf
13.Saklofske, D., & Janzen, B. (1990). SchooI-Based Assessment Research in Canada.
McGiII Journal of Education, 25(1), 5. Retrieved from
http://mje.mcgill.ca/article/%20viewFile/7896/5825
Santiago, P. (2011). Evaluation and Assessment Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.oecd.org/australia/48519807.pdf
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
23
Reg No : D40Y19B1071
14.STUDY ON EVALUATION & THE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN GENERAL
EDUCATION IN SRI LANKA NATIONAL EDUCATION COMMISSION
NAWALA ROAD, NUGEGODA SRI LANKA. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://nec.gov.lk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/3-Final-.pdf
15.The Educational System of Sri Lanka. (2019). Retrieved October 2, 2019, from
Fulbrightsrilanka.com website: http://www.fulbrightsrilanka.com/?page_id=609
16. Tokyo Gakugei University. (2017, September 28). (PDF) Assessment for learning
practices in Japan: Three steps forward, two steps back. Retrieved September 21,
2019, from ResearchGate website:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320085700_Assessment_for_learning_pra
ctices_in_Japan_Three_steps_forward_two_steps_back
17.Yahya, S., Anaf, Sulaiman, P., & Yamin, B. (2014). Difference and Similarity of
Continuous Assessment in Malaysian and Nigerian Universities. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5e41/10c84677c80e63dd06fae35be3959fd927c5.p
df
Aysha Mafrooha Mohideen
24
Reg No : D40Y19B1071