Exploring Primary School Teachers’ Conceptions of “Assessment for Learning”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents primary school teachers’ conceptions of ‘assessment for learning’ in government schools in Brunei Darussalam. The Ministry of Education in Brunei introduced a 21st century education system (codenamed SPN21) in 2007 and one of the initiatives brought by SPN21 was the implementation of School Based Assessment for Learning (SBAfL). Prior to SBAfL, assessment in primary government schools was highly examination oriented, which placed a great emphasis on ‘assessment of learning’ rather than ‘assessment for learning’. The current study sought to explore teachers’ experiences in implementing SBAfL in government primary schools in Brunei. A qualitative approach to research using phenomenographic methodology was applied to provide in-depth insights into the ways in which these teachers applied assessment for learning in their lessons, having been teaching for many years in an education system that was highly examination oriented. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used as the main data collection instrument. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed to form categories of description depicting the qualitatively different ways in which these teachers experienced assessment for learning (SBAfL). A total of four categories of description emerged from the data analysis, and the findings suggest variations in the ways in which assessment for learning is conceptualised by the teachers, which in turn, may affect the effective implementation of SBAfL in promoting a 21st century education system in Brunei.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".