Continuous Classroom Assessment At Primary Level

Imtiaz Ali*, Manzoor Hussain Shah**, Aijaz Ahmed Gujjar***
* Research Scholar, Preston University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
** Head of Education Department, Hazara University Manshera,Pakistan.
*** Associate Professor, Department of Education, Sindh Madressatul Islam University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Periodicity:April - June'2014
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.11.1.2670

Abstract

This study was designed to analyze the continuous classroom assessment at primary level in Pakistan. Findings of the study revealed that the students' achievement of single class teacher in the subject of English, General science, Urdu and mathematics were almost on average and rubric observation during continuous classroom assessment ranked single class teacher performance asn fair. Overall, subject teacher students’ achievement in English, General science, Urdu and Mathematics was better as compared to single class teacher. In addition to this, rubric observation during continuous classroom assessment ranked as subject teacher performance was reported very good in the area of students' instruction, writing test items on the writing board, time management, class environment, use of instructional recourses and student record keeping during and after assessment. It was recommended that at primary level, there is need of subject wise teacher to teach students more effectively. It is also recommended that primary teachers should be familiar with the new curricular terms such as Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) used in curriculum 2006 and they can be trained to develop and use the new assessment tools that is, rubric in the classroom.

Keywords

Continuous Classroom Assessment, Rubric, Single Class Teacher, Subject Teacher, Primary Level.

How to Cite this Article?

Ali, I., Shah, M. H., and Gujjar, A. A. (2014). Continuous Classroom Assessment at Primary Level. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.11.1.2670

References

[1]. Ainsworth, Larry & Viegut, Donald (2006). Common formative assessments, How to connect standards-based instruction and assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA Corwin.
[2]. Airasian, P.W. (1991), Classroom assessment. New York. Mc Graw Hill.
[3]. Andrade, H. L., Ying, D., & Xiaolei, W. (2008). Putting Rubrics to the Test: The Effect of a Model, Criteria Generation, and Rubric-Referenced Self-Assessment on Elementary School Students' Writing. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 27(2), 3-13
[5]. Black, P., and William, D. (2004). Inside the Black Box: Phi-Delta Kappan, 86(1):9-21
[6]. Cohen, D. K. (2003). Teaching practice: Plus ça change . In P. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
[7]. Dhankar, R. (2003) “The notion of quality in DPEP pedagogical interventions.” Education Dialogue. Volume 1:1, Monsoon 2003. 5-34.
[9]. James, D. (2003 ). Making the graduate. Perspectives on student experience of assessment in higher education. In Ann Filer (2003 ).Assessment: Social practice and social product. London: Rutledge
[10]. Lee, E., & Lee, S. (2009). Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Class Engagement Behaviors and the Achievement of Lesson Objectives by Students with Mild Mental Retardation and Their Typical Peers. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44(3), 396-408.
[11]. Lewis, A. C. (1997), Changing assessment, changing curriculum. Education Digest. Pages 12-17
[13]. Nunes, A. (2004). Portfolios in the EFL classroom: disclosing an informed practice. English Language Teachers Journal, 58(4).
[14]. Paris, S.G., Lawton, T.A., et al. (1991), A developmental perspective on standardized achievement testing. Educational Researcher. 20(4) page 409
[15]. Palomba, C.A. & Banta, T.W.(1999). Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
[16]. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). (eds). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academy of Sciences. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
[17]. Powell, A., Farrar, E., and Cohen, D. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
[18]. R.O. Ohuche (1998). Optimal Computer Solutions in association with Nigerian Academy of Education, Faculty of Education, University of Lagos
[19]. Rueda R & Garcia E (1994). Teachers' beliefs about reading assessment with Latino language minority students. Research Report 9. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning a t the University of California at Santa Cruz.
[20]. Stiggins, R. (2001). Student-Involved Classroom Assessment (3rd Ed.). New York: Merrill.
[21]. Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd Ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.