ARTICLE REVIEW

Base on the article provided, state your opinion on the effectiveness of School Based
Assessment.

NAME: HAFIFAH BINTI KUSIN

MATRIC NUMBER: 2020.8.EDU02.002

COURSE/PROGRAME: MASTER OF EDUCATION (MED)

SUBJECT: EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT (EDA 1130)

LECTURER: DR AHMAD ZULFADHLI KHAIRUDDIN

Nor Hasnida Che Md Ghazali, “The implementation of School-Based Assessment
System in Malaysia: A study of teacher perceptions”, GEOGRAFIA Online Malaysian
Journal of Society and Space, 12 issue 9 (104 – 117), 2016.

Abstract
The article, “Implementation of School -Based Assessment System in Malaysia: A study on
teacher perceptions”, by Nor Hasnida Che Md Ghazali was to evaluate the implementation of
SBA in schools in preparing a summative report on the effectiveness of this system as it has
always been an increasingly important impact for middle school students. countries like
Malaysia. The authors argue that the school -based assessment system is a holistic assessment
system in line with the National Philosophy of Education. The authors conducted their own
study of 776 primary and secondary school teachers by the Daniel Stufflebeam CIPP
assessment format. The study has been conducted for almost two years. The results show that
the system has a relationship between three dimensions (inputs, processes and products).

Overview
In her writing, the author states that it has become a trend in the assessment system is now
changing to formative assessment in some countries. A large number of literatures on
formative assessment comes from developed countries because they have done it long ago. In
Australia SBA was started in the late 1960s (Mercurio, 2008) and in Finland as well as
Sweden, its implementation was started in the early 1970s (Darling-Hammond and
McCloskey, 2008). The authors found that, research about the SBA is not yet widespread.
Most research is focused on the evaluation process itself, including the attitudes of teachers
(Majid, 2011), or an assessment of the system itself that is identified interest SBA (Mansor et
al. 2003). Up to now there has been no study related to the fourth dimension SBA
assessment.

CIPP Model

The CIPP model has been used to evaluate various educational programs and projects from
various disciplines (Stufflebeam, 2003). CIPP contains four components namely context
(what needs to be done), input (how it should be done), process (how it should be done) and
outcome (whether it works). The main purpose of this evaluation is made to relate the goals,
context, inputs and processes to the outcomes of the program. In addition to determine the
suitability of the environment in helping to achieve the goals and objectives of the program.
This CIPP also aims to improve a program and not to prove the truth. Therefore, the CIPP
model is widely used by researchers including authors in evaluating the effectiveness of
programs and curricula in institutes of higher learning in and outside the country.
This CIPP model has been designed for the purpose of improvement as well as
decision making related to a course, program or curriculum (Ghazali, 2010; Singh, 2004;
Stuffllebeam & Shinkfield, 1985). Muhammad (1997) has used the CIPP model to evaluate
the effectiveness of the Diploma in Education program at the Faculty of Education,
University of Malaya through a qualitative study. Azizi (2001) has used the CIPP model to
evaluate the Life Skills Curriculum in Malaysian secondary schools. Using this model, she
has managed to identify some of the weaknesses and strengths of a variable in each
dimension. The results of the study were used to decide to continue the implementation of the
subject curriculum as well as some suggestions for improvement in the future. Based on these
arguments then it can be taken into account why the author uses CIPP in conducting his
research.
Based on the CIPP dimension, context assessment refers to the systematic process of
obtaining information about the setting of new program objectives or for translating needs
into objectives as well as modification or validation of existing objectives to guide decision
planning (Stufflebeam, 1971). This stage is very suitable for the formulation phase of a
training program (Reeves, 1994). Methods of collecting data for this purpose can be in the
form of surveys, interviews, document reviews (Dalkey and Helmer, 1963) or through focus
groups, websites, journals or standardized tests (Clinton, 2001). Input evaluation, on the other
hand, focuses on the planning, strategies, procedures and resources involved in helping to
achieve program goals and objectives (Stuffbeam et. Al, 2003; Ornstein & Hunkins, 2009).
Data for input assessment can be collected using surveys, interviews, websites or journals
with most of the data coming from existing documentation (Clinton, 2001).
The next step is process evaluation focused on program implementation (Stufflubeam
et al.2003; Ornstein & Hunkins, 2009). Evaluation of this process is important to see if what
is being implemented and what is planned. This information needs to be known from time to
time to control the implementation of the program. This is related to efforts to improve the
effectiveness of the program. Interviews are the best method of collecting data for process
evaluation. Product evaluation focuses on the results of the program after it is implemented.
This evaluation looks at whether the goals, objectives and learning outcomes of the course
are achieved at the end of the course. Product evaluation also looks at aspects of student
achievement including the number and percentage of passes and failures in either theory or
clinical competence.

The assessment system in the Malaysian educational context

An agreement was made by the Cabinet in a meeting on 17 December 2010 to make

improvements to the national assessment system. The general public is aware that the
assessment system in Malaysia is more geared towards public examinations. In 2011, the
SBA consisting of both assessment, formative and summative was formally implemented on
Year one students. Findings from the handbook issued by the Ministry of Education Malaysia
(MOE), have clearly explained that the implementation of SBA covers two main aspects of
assessment, namely the academic component (school and centre assessment) and non
-academic components (physical activity, sports, assessment, co -curriculum and
psychometric assessment). It is a form of assessment that is planned, administered, marked
and reported by the subject teacher according to the guidelines of the Malaysian
Examinations Board.

The present study

In this study, the authors made an assessment of the context of the changes involve two
factors; types of schools (urban and rural) and schools (primary and secondary). For the input
evaluation dimension, the authors have focused on the first three order factors namely the
material needs and personal needs of the SBA, the suitability of personal qualifications and
the suitability of physical and ICT infrastructure. While the dimensions of the assessment
process covers twelve factors of the first order; beliefs, feelings, readiness, understanding,
courses, internal training, administration, challenges, simplicity, monitoring, role and
importance of SBA. For product evaluation, it includes three factors, namely, the first order,
attitude, knowledge and motivation of students towards learning.

Methodology
The authors have used quantitative methods to help the exploration of the study in more
depth and comprehensively. Data collection was conducted through questionnaires and
document analysis. Sampling was taken at random. Selecting the background, population and
sample depends on the objectives and questions of the study (Othman, 2009). A total of 2500
questionnaires were distributed to respondents in primary and secondary schools in one of the
states in the northeast of Peninsular Malaysia. However, only 776 questionnaires were
obtained because there were many items that were not answered.
The number of samples collected was sufficient to apply the procedure of calculating
the probability of the mean standard error also known as the mean standard deviation (SEM;
Standard Error of the Mean). Dimensional relationships were analysed using SEM. SEM is
also capable of correcting measurement errors by providing error variance estimates that
cannot be calculated by traditional multivariate procedures (Byrne, 2010). The standard
deviation is considered to be one of the best spread measures, which measures the value
spread from the centre value. Standard error is used mainly to check the reliability and
accuracy of estimates and so on, the smaller the error, the greater is the reliability and
accuracy.
The questionnaire used was designed by the researcher based on the CIPP Model.
Researchers are more focused on instruments from Asian countries such as Hong Kong,
Singapore, Australia and Malaysia to ensure that the items are appropriate to the Asian
context. For the validity, reliability and practicality of the instrument then the researcher has
asked for the instrument to be certified by experts in horticulture and evaluation. Then
through a translation process and finally checked for reliability of its internal consistency,
followed by independent exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using primary component
analysis (PCA) with a rotation called Direct Oblimin performed on the questionnaire.
Independent exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to identify some factors
or components that exist in the set of questionnaires that have been formed. The objective of
factor analysis is to reduce the dimensions of the original data to a number of smaller
components and to be more easily and meaningfully interpreted (Duntemen, 1980; Lewis-
Beck, 1994 & Field, 2006). In statistics, main component analysis (PCA) is a technique used
to simplify a data, by transforming linearly so that a new coordinate system is formed with as
much as possible to maintain maximum data variance. Finally, the researcher was able to
produce 68 items out of 71 items.
The answers were collected through a distributed questionnaire, reviewed by
researchers and analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). Of the 776
samples, 9 cases were removed and some items with low standard estimated values were also
eliminated. Finally, 38 items were retained and all six measurement models showed data
suitability, validity and reliability. Namely input dimension, process 1, process 2, process 3,
challenge and product dimension.
This study involves a two -stage approach to SEM analysis that includes evaluating
CFA and analysing SEM. So, of the six models that have been built earlier, some have been
eliminated. This is because all unimportant paths are eliminated one by one to examine the
best solution (Byrne, 2010). The elimination of constructs can alter the sample moment
concentration and degree of freedom, and subsequently cause large differences in X2 (Byrne,
2010). Finally, the structural model was then evaluated again with 26 variables.

Evaluation
Overall, the researcher’s findings indicate that the CIPP model is partly very helpful in
explaining the relationship between the evaluation dimensions in the SBA. The SEM results
also show that the model explains a fairly high variance. Among the attitudes and skills of
teachers also have a strong significance with the attitudes and motivations of students. When
teachers have a positive attitude and have skills in assessment, students ’propensity for
positive attitudes and students’ motivation can be enhanced. According to the researcher,
research conducted by ARG (2002), whenever several processes are implemented, such as
providing explanations of purpose and constructive feedback or developing students ’self
-assessment skills and criteria for learning, it can increase student motivation. Therefore,
these findings can confirm the previous study that the process is closely related to the
product.
The results of the analysis of this study successfully answer the question and the
purpose of this study. This study can provide some support on the effectiveness of SBA
implementation in schools. In addition, this study also supports the developed models namely
CIPP model, formative assessment model and SCAP model. However, this study only
involved teachers and did not involve students. This study also the data obtained are from the
perceptions of teachers without observing their actual practice. The study also found that
some items included in the survey were eliminated during the CFA and SEM procedures to
obtain a suitable model. Therefore, this study needs to be continued to obtain more
comprehensive findings on the effectiveness of SBA implementation in schools on teachers,
parents, students, administrators and any stakeholders. On the part of teachers, it is necessary
to make observations of their actual practice. Only then can a more accurate and in -depth
assessment of the implementation of the SBA be made.

Implication
Implications for this study that have been conducted, the researchers found that the strong
relationship between inputs and processes suggests that the resources and procedures
supplied to schools should support the effective implementation of SBA. The same goes for
process and product dimensions. However, researchers argue that administrators at the school
and ministry levels need to examine the inadequacy of the monitoring and moderation
process in ensuring a strong relationship with students ’attitudes and motivations. In the
quality assurance process set by the ministry, these two processes are very important.
Training should also be given to all teachers on this matter.
The implementation of this SBA can be seen to have the potential to move forward to
achieve a level of education comparable to developed countries. In the beginning there is
undeniably some drawbacks but when we look at something new from a positive angle
slowly, society will start to accept it when good results can be seen. Therefore, to further
strengthen this SBA, the implementers must be committed to their duties and responsibilities.
All parties must play their respective roles so that the implementation of this SBA has a
significant impact on the learning of today's children as intended by the MOE. The
development of teachers ’attitudes, skills and knowledge in formative assessment is by no
means a straightforward process and Heritage (2008) believes that these three components are
key components in implementing formative assessment effectively.

References
Azizi Hj. Yahaya. Penggunaan Model Kontek. Input, Proses, dan Produk (KIPP) dalam
Penilaian Program Pembelajaran. Sejauhmanakah ia relevan? International Conference
on challenges and Prospects in Teacher Education, Concorde Hotel Shah Alam. 16 & 17
July 2001
ARG (2002) Assessment for learning; 10 Principles. Assessment Reform Group, University
of
Cambrage.
Dalkey NC, Helmer O (1963) An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of
experts. Management Science 9(3), 458-467.
Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia. (2014). Panduan Pengurusan Pentaksiran Berasaskan
Sekolah. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Majid F (2011) SBA in Malaysian Schools: The Concern of the English Teacher. Jurnal of
US-
China Educatiaon, Review 8(10), 1-15.
Mansor AN, Ong HL, Rasul MS, Raof RA (2013). The Benefits of School-Based
Assessment.
Asian Social Science 9 (8), 101-106.
Mercurio A (2008) Re-imagining school-based assessment at the upper secondary level,
SACE Board of South Australia.
Othman Lebar. (2009). Penyelidikan Kualitatif. Selangor: Univision Sdn Bhd.
Scriven,M. (1967) The Methodology of Evaluation. In R.E. Stake (Ed.), AERA monograph
series on curriculum evaluation, No 1. Chicago: Rand McNally

Stufflebeam, D. L., Herold & Beulah, M. K. (2003). The CIPP Model for Evaluation. Annual
Conference of Oregon Program Evaluators Network (OPEN).
Stufflebeam, D.L. & Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic Evaluation. Boston: KluwerNijhoff.
Stufflebeam, D.L. (1971). Education Evaluation and Decision Making. Itasca, Illinois: F.E.
Peacock Publisher, Inc.
Stufflebeam. D.L. (1971). The relevance of CIPP evaluation model for educational
accountability. Journal of research and development in education 5(1): 19-25
Warju. (2015). Educational Program Evaluation using CIPP Model. Innovation of
Vocational
Technology Education. Invotec XII:1 (2016) 36-4.