School Based Assessment: Will it Really Change the Education Scenario in Bangladesh?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Bangladesh, the system of assessment has always been guided by curriculum though the system only covered learners’ ability of memorization and comprehension skills. Other categories of skills in the knowledge like application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation are hardly included in the assessment. Besides, some of the essential qualities such as oral presentation, leadership, tolerance, co-operative attitude, school behavior, co-curricular activities, and social values are not included in the assessment system. As a result, learners’ trend to rely heavily on their memorization skill leads them to become crippled lacking required excellence to contribute fruitfully to the society. The government of Bangladesh has timely envisaged the reservation of its education system and has justly adjudicated the School Based Assessment (SBA) aspiring learners’ holistic development. SBA has been implemented in junior secondary levels of general education in June, 2007. This paper reveals the current situation of the recently applied assessment system through a study of a group of teachers of secondary level and SBA trainers. It will discuss the issues that emerge from the arguments of the scholars that they hold regarding SBA and its potentiality in the context of Bangladesh.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".