Description of Task Force

This task force researches the area of assessment with an in-depth empirical understanding of assessment related specifically to school teachers’ conceptions of assessment in the Singapore context (both inside and outside the school classroom). It focuses on teachers’ ongoing, sustained professional development in the area of assessment literacy (e.g., quality task design, well-developed rubrics, competent use of assessment criteria, standards for quality feedback to support student learning, and statistical analyses for research) of 21st century skills and competencies. For purposes of research in this area, assessment is broadly defined as assessment of all areas: languages, mathematics, science, social studies, and the arts.

In several meetings this semester, members in the group identified one or more possible areas for sustained and coherent research. One area is assessment literacy; we think this area is deeply relevant and necessary for Singapore school teachers. We hope research in this area will reveal valuable insights in assessment for teachers and administrators in Singapore.

List of team members:

List of team members' publications related to the research theme:

  • Luo Wenshu
    • Luo, W. (2014). Item analysis. In Leong, W. S. Cheng Y., & Tan, K. (Eds.), Assessment and learning in schools (pp. 81-90). Singapore: Pearson.
    • Luo, W., Lee, K., & Koh, I. C. H. (2015). Do competitive performance goals and cooperative social goals conflict? A latent interaction analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 39, 186-192.
    • Luo, W., Paris, S. G.,Hogan, D., & Luo, Z. (2011). Do performance goals promote learning? A pattern analysis of Singapore students' achievement goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(2), 165-176.
    • Luo, W., Watkins, D., & Lam, R. Y. H. (2009). Validating a new measure of self-complexity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 381-386.
    • Luo, W., & Watkins, D. (2008). Clarifying the measurement of a self-structural process variable: The case of self-complexity. International Journal of Testing, 8(2), 143-165.
    • Luo, W., Lee, K., Ong, J., Wong, H. M., & Foo, S.F. (2014). Implicit theories of ability, homework behavior, and achievement. In Assessment Innovations in the 21st Century (pp. 3.4.2 (1-9)). Singapore: 40th IAEA.
    • Luo, W. (2015, June). Parenting practices and student math self-efficacy, usefulness and homework behaviors: An examination of the control-value theory of achievement emotions. Paper presented at Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference 2015, Singapore.
  • Gavin William Fulmer
    • Fulmer, G. W. (2011). Estimating critical values for strength of alignment among curriculum, assessments, and instruction. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36(3), 381–402. doi: 10.3102/1076998610381397
    • Fulmer, G. W., & Polikoff, M. S. (in press). Tests of alignment among assessment, standards, and instruction using generalized linear model regression. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, & Accountability.
    • Liu, X., & Fulmer, G. W. (2008). Alignment between science curriculum and assessments in selected New York State Regents exams. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 373–383. doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9107-5
    • Liu, X., Zhang, B. H., Liang, L. L., Fulmer, G. W., Kim, B., & Yuan, H.Q. (2009). Alignment between the physics content standards and standardized tests: A comparison among US-NY, Singapore, and China-Jiangsu. Science Education, 93, 777–797. doi: 10.1002/sce.20330
    • Polikoff, M. S., & Fulmer, G. W. (2013). Refining methods for estimating critical values for an alignment index. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6(4), 380–395. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2012.755593
  • Kelvin Tan Heng Kiat
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2004). Does student self-assessment empower or discipline students? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 651–662.
    • Tan, K. H. K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: A phenomenographic study of grade descriptors. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(3), 267–282.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2007). Conceptions of self-assessment: What is needed for long term learning? In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment for higher education: Learning for the longer term. London, UK: Routledge.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2008). Qualitatively different ways of experiencing student self-assessment. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(1), 15–29.
    • 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. (2009). Variation theory and the different ways of experiencing educational policy. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 8(2), 95.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2011). Assessment reform in Singapore – Enduring, sustainable or threshold? In R. Berry & B. Adamson (Eds.), Assessment reform in education: Policy and practice (pp. 75–88). London, UK: Springer.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2011). Assessment for learning in Singapore – Unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 10(2), 91–103.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2013). A framework for assessment for learning: Implications for feedback practices within and beyond the gap. ISRN Education, 1–6.
    • Tan, K. H. K. (2013). Variation in teachers’ conceptions of alternative assessment in Singapore primary schools. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 12(1), 21–41
  • Daniel Tan Kim Chwee
    • Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Taber, K. S. (2005). The ionisation energy diagnostic instrument: A two tier multiple-choice instrument to determine high school students’ understanding of ionisation energy. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(4), 180–197.
    • Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 283–301.
    • Tan, K. C. D., & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75–83.
    • Tan, K. C. D., Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., & Mocerino, M. (2010). Kinetics of acid reactions: Making sense of associated concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(4), 267–280
  • Wong Hwei Ming
    • Paris, S. G. & Wong, H. M. (2010, May). Assessing beginning reading skills with a smart pen technology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, Colorado.
    • Wong, H. M. (2009, June). The perceptions of Singaporean students towards self-assessment. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education - Redesigning Pedagogy: Designing New Learning Contexts for a Globalizing World. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
    • Wong, H. M. (2009, November). Self-assessment: What is it to students and teachers? Paper presented at Australian Association for Research in Education: International Education Research Conference, Canberra, Australia.
    • Wong, H. M. (2010, November). “I know myself better now”: Student perception of self-assessment. Paper presented at Australian Association for Research in Education: International Education Research Conference. Melbourne, Australia.
    • Wong, H. M., & Paris, S. G. (2010, May). Formative assessment of literacy and numeracy in primary grades. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, Colorado.

List of projects from this research group:

  1. A Comparability Study of Two Language Tests of English: The General English Proficiency Test (Advanced) and the Internet-based TOEFL
  2. CRP 25/05 KKH: Improving Teacher Assessment Literacy through Professional Development in Redesigning Classroom Assessment Tasks: A Longitudinal Intervention Study of Singaporean Teachers’ Assessment Practices
  3. KRF-B00035: Developing Diagnostic Instruments in Science Education
  4. MOE000ETQ12000773: Development of Exemplars and Validation of the Speaking and Spoken Interaction Proficiency Descriptors.
  5. MOE CPDD-New Chinese Lang Curr R58702006: Evaluation Study of the New Chinese Language Instructional Materials Implemented in Singapore Secondary Schools
  6. OER 18/08 ZHE: Investigation of Students’ Difficulties in Understanding Fundamental Thermodynamic Concepts in Everyday Contexts
  7. OER 3/12 KKH: Understanding Singaporean Teachers’ Conceptions of Assessment
  8. OER 36/12 ZHE: The Impact of Short-cycle Formative Assessments on Students' Conceptual Understanding and Beliefs of Learning among academically Lower Achieving Secondary School Students in Science
  9. OER 11/13 TPL: PERI Summative Evaluation Follow-up Study (2014): Quantitative Survey
  10. OER 14/12 HS: The Impact of Community-based Teacher Learning on Student Learning Outcomes
  11. OER 59/12 TPL: Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (ATC21S) Singapore Trials: Collective Creativity and Collaborative Problem-Solving Competencies among Secondary School Students
  12. OER 33/12 SA: From the Bottom to the Top: Investigating Learning Strategies and PISA Mathematics and Science Outcomes of Students of Differing Abilities in Singapore
  13. OER 51/12 TWT: Examining Normal Academic/Technical Students’ Science Learning from a Sociological and Cultural Lens
  14. RP 8/00 TKC: Development of a Diagnostic Instrument to Evaluate Students’ Conceptions of Ions and Ionisation Energy
  15. RP 27/98 TKC: Development of a Diagnostic Instrument to Evaluate Upper Secondary Students’ Conceptions of Qualitative Analysis in Chemistry
  16. SUG 19/12 GWF: Exploring Assessments for Learning Progressions on the Force Concept