ASSESSMENT
ADIBAH BINTI ABDUL LATIF
CENTRE OF QUALITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT (QRiM)
SCHOOL OF EDUCATIONFACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
ACTIVITY 1
• Please write down one thing that you want to knowabout the process of assessment related to your jobscope.
(5 Minutes)
“Assessment is at the heart of student experience” Brown and Knight (1994)
“If you want to change student learning then change the method of assessment”
Brown, Bull & Pendlebury (1997)
• Educational measurement and evaluation areessential to sound educational decision making
• Should be based on accurate, relevantinformation and that the responsibility ofgathering and imparting that informationbelongs to educators
• Will affect many people for example, parent’sor only a single person
Introduction
TESTING
• A tool to determine student’s ability to completespecific tasks or demonstrate mastery of a skill orknowledge of content
• The most critical basis in ensuring the validity ofstudents interpretation score
• Examples: Q&A session in class, assignment,performance task, test, quiz and final exam
MEASUREMENT
• A systematic process of assigning numerals(quantitative) to the test administered.
• It can be in raw scores, percentile, standard score,etc.
• Examples: Assignment marks, total sore in a finalexam, mean of PLO, KPI score, mean of elppt, rankingscore.
22 July 2019SPP2032::Educational Measurement and
Evaluation
MEASUREMENT
1
2
n
O
O
O
1
2
n
x
x
x
Ability Score
EVALUATION
• The process of describing, obtaining, and providinguseful information for judging decision alternatives.This process allows one to make a judgment aboutthe desirability or value of something.
• Examples: ABCD, Pass and Fail, HL,TM,MM,Description from the value (Baik, Cemerlang,Sederhana), Description of P1 to P5 in e-LPPT.
ASSESSMENT
• The process of gathering information to monitor andreflect the progress in learning and teaching and tomake educational decisions if necessary.
• Examples: Dr A found out that her students areexcellent in formative assessment, but they cannotperform well in their final exam. What to do?
• Dr B realises that there are two groups ofability/level of skills in his class. How can he do tomake sure the learning environment can helpstudents’ learning?
ACTIVITY 2
• Provide three situations related to testing,measurement, evaluation and assessment. Discuss ingroups and other groups will guess the answer.
(20 minutes)
Dimensions of Difference Between Assessment and Evaluation
• Timing
• Focus of Measurement
• Relationship Between Administrator & Recipient
• Findings, Uses thereof
• Ongoing Modifiability of Criteria, Measures thereof
• Standards of Measurement
• Relation Between Different Objects of A/E
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Timing
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Focus of Measurement
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Focus of Measurement
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Administrator/Recipient Relationship
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Administrator/Recipient Relationship
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Findings, Uses Thereof
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Findings, Uses Thereof
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Ongoing Modifiability of Criteria, Measures
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Formative: Ongoing to Improve Learning
Summative: Final to Gauge Quality
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Ongoing Modifiability of Criteria, Measures
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Fixed: To Reward Success, Punish Failure
Standards of Measurement
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Process-Oriented: How Learning Is Going
Product-Oriented: What’s Been Learned
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Fixed: To Reward Success, Punish Failure
Absolute: Strive for Ideal Outcomes
Standards of Measurement
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Fixed: To Reward Success, Punish Failure
Absolute: Strive for Ideal Outcomes
Comparative: Divide Better from Worse
Relation Between Objects of A/E
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Fixed: To Reward Success, Punish Failure
Absolute: Strive for Ideal Outcomes
Comparative: Divide Better from Worse
Coöperative: Learn from Each Other
Relation Between Objects of A/E
Assessment n Evaluation (various sources, but especially Dan Apple 1998)
Reflective: Internally Defined Criteria/Goals
Prescriptive:External-ly Imposed Standards
Diagnostic: Identify Areas for Improvement
Judgmental: Arrive at an Overall Grade/Score
Flexible: Adjust As Problems Are Clarified
Fixed: To Reward Success, Punish Failure
Absolute: Strive for Ideal Outcomes
Comparative: Divide Better from Worse
Coöperative: Learn from Each Other
Competitive: Beat Each Other Out
Summary of Differences
Dimension of Difference Assessment Evaluation
Timing Formative Summative
Focus of Measurement Process-Oriented Product-Oriented
Relationship Between Administrator and Recipient
Reflective Prescriptive
Findings, Uses Thereof Diagnostic Judgmental
Ongoing Modifiability of Criteria, Measures Thereof
Flexible Fixed
Standards of Measurement Absolute Comparative
Relation Between Objects of A/E Coöperative Competitive
• Discuss some test/task that called as evaluation andcalled as assessment.
• Can evaluation and assessment happen concurrentlyin one test/task?
• Are there any differences between summativeassessment and evaluation?
PRINCIPLE OF ASSESSMENT
• Well-aligned with educational learning outcomes.
• Assessment should be valid and reliable
• Formative assessments needs to scaffold students inthe summative assessment
• Student should receive feedback on their work intimely manner.
• Assessment should be inclusive and equitable for allstudents
• Assessment is not used to threaten and intimidatestudents.
• Assessment should help student mastery learning.
TYPES of ASSESSMENT
■Assessment Of Learning (AoL)
■Assessment For Learning (AfL)
■Assessment As Learning (AaL)
Purpose of the Test
Measure of maximum performance
To determine the students’ ability
The students are motivated to obtain as high a score as possible
Examples:
IQ test
Subject/course testAptitude/achievement test
Purpose of the Test
Measure of typical performance
To measure students’ interest, personality and attitude
Responses are classified thru the preset criteria, not the highest marks
Examples:Affective Test
Personality TestCareer Test
TYPES OF TEST
PLACEMENT
Befor the class
FORMATIVE DIAGNOSTIC SUMMATIVE
On going during the process oflearning.
At the end of the course
Takes up where the formative leaves off
Norm Referenced Test and Criterion Referenced Test
41
Norm Referenced Test
Criterion Referenced Test
HOW YOU MEASURE YOUR VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF YOUR TEST?
43
HOW YOU CHOOSE YOUR ITEM IN YOUR ITEM BANK?
• VALIDITY (KESAHAN)
• Measuring what should be measured
• The appropriateness of the interpretations made from test scores and other evaluation results with regard to a particular use.
CHARACTERISTIC OF A GOOD TEST
CONTENT VALIDITY
• Most related with achievement test
• The test represent the topic and cognitive process
towards the syllabus.
• Does it measuring learning objectives? –cognitive /
affective / psychomotor
• Table of specification
• Subject matter expert
KUALITI INSTRUMEN
1. KESAHAN KANDUNGAN (CONTENT VALIDITY)
Boleh dilakukan melalui semakan pakar dalam kursusberkenaan dan juga melalui Jadual Spesifikasi Item(JSI).Kesahan kandungan adalah sesuatu yang bersifatkualitatif.
KUALITI INSTRUMEN
2. KESAHAN KONSTRUK
Merujuk kepada kecukupan dan ketepatan item dalammenguji sesuatu pembolehubah / konstruk yang dikaji.
Contoh: Cukupkah item yang digunakan dalam mengujipengetahuan pelajar dalam kursus anda?
Dilakukan secara kuantitatif. Menggunakan RawVariance Explained by Measure.
KUALITI INSTRUMEN
3. KEBOLEHPERCAYAAN
Merujuk kepada kebolehulangan ujian untukditadbirkan kepada pelajar lain yang homogen denganpelajar yang sedang diuji.
Menggunakan analisis kebolehpercayaan Item.
RELIABILITY
Test-retest reliability.
• reliability coefficient is obtained by administering the same test twice and correlating the scores.
• an excellent measure of score consistency as one is directly measuring consistency from administration to administration.
RELIABILITY
Split Half Test
• Coefficient is obtained by dividing a test into halves, correlatingthe scores on each half, and then correcting for length (longertests tend to be more reliable).
• The split can be based on:
odd versus even numbered items, randomly selecting items,or manually balancing content and difficulty.
• Advantage: only requires a single test administration.
• Weakness: - the resultant coefficient will vary as afunction of how the test was split.
- not appropriate on tests where speed is a factor
RELIABILITYInternal Consistency
• Internal consistency focuses on the degree to which the individual items are correlated with each other and is thus often called homogeneity.
• The Coefficient is determined by
- Cronbach’s alpha,- Kuder- Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20)- Kuder-Richardson Formula 21 (KR-21)
• The advantages: only require one test administration and they do not depend on a particular split of items
• The disadvantage: They are most applicable when the test measures a single skill area
RELIABILITYAlternate Form Reliability
Most standardized tests provide equivalent forms that can be used interchangeably.
These alternative forms are typically matched in terms of content and difficulty.
Scores on pairs of alternative forms for the same examinees are correlated to provide a measure of consistency or reliability.
Kebolehpercayaan Item
98% pengulangan keputusan boleh Berlaku jika ditadbir kepada kumpulan
Pelajar lain
PENGENALAN
• JSI ialah satu jadual yang menunjukkan perwakilansecara grafik berkaitan silibus pelajaran dengan hasilpembelajaran topikal (TLO) dan selari dengan hasilpembelajaran kursus [CLO]
PENGENALAN
• JSI juga menunjukkan jumlah item dan pembahagianmarkah untuk setiap item. Jenis item juga bolehditentukan.
PENGENALAN
• JSI dirancang oleh pensyarah sebagai asas dalampembinaan ujian samada peperiksaan akhir tahun /peperiksaan pertengahan tahun / ujian / kuiz.
PENGENALAN
Kubiszyn & Borich, (2003) emphasized the followingsignificance and components of TOS:
1. A Table of Specifications consists of a two-way chartor grid relating instructional objectives to theinstructional content.The column of the chart lists the objectives or"levels of skills" (Gredlcr, 1999) to be addressed;The rows list the key concepts or content the test isto measure.
TUJUAN JSI
• Menjamin content validity
• Memastikan sample item yang representative secara adil.
• Ujian memfokuskan kepada kandungan yang penting
• Menentukan pemberat / masa yang akan ditetapkan dalam kuliah.
TUJUAN JSI
• JSI juga dapat membantu pensyarah sebagaipanduan dalam perancangan menetapkan topik yanglebih penting, masa yang diperlukan untuk topiktertentu dan apakah tugasan / projek yang bolehdilakukan untuk membantu pelajar belajar topiktersebut lebih bermakna.
TUJUAN JSI
According to Bloom, et al. (1971),"We have found it useful to represent the
relation of content and behaviors in the form of a two dimensional table with the objectives on one axis, the content on the other”.
TUJUAN JSI
2. A Table of Specifications identifies not only thecontent areas covered in class, it identifies theperformance objectives at each level of the cognitivedomain of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Teachers can be assured that they are measuring students' learning
across a wide range of content and readings as well as cognitive
processes requiring higher order thinking.
TUJUAN JSI
3. A Table of Specifications is developed before the test is written. In fact it should be constructed before the actual teaching begins.
TUJUAN JSI
The cornerstone of classroom assessmentpractices is the validity of the judgments aboutstudents’ learning and knowledge.
A TOS is one tool that teachers can use tosupport their professional judgment when creatingor selecting test for use with their students.
TUJUAN JSI
In order to understand how to best modify a TOSto meet your needs, it is important to understand thegoal of this strategy: improving validity of a teacher’sevaluations based on a given assessment. Validity isthe degree to which the evaluations or judgments wemake as teachers about our students can be trustedbased on the quality of evidence we gathered(Wolming & Wilkstrom, 2010).
TUJUAN JSI
A Table of Specifications helps to ensure thatthere is a match between what is taught and what istested. Classroom assessment should be driven byclassroom teaching which itself is driven by coursegoals and objectives.
Tables of Specifications provide the link betweenteaching and testing. (University of Kansas, 2013)
KELEBIHAN JSI
Ujian yang sahdan bolehdipercayai
Ujian yang adildan seimbang
Keyakinanpelajar
terhadap ujian
Sample ujianyang
representative
Pemberat yang sesuai bagisetiap topik
LANGKAH PEMBINAAN JSI
• Enam langkah utama ialah:-
1. Menganalisis objektif pembelajaran
2. Mengkaji sukatan / topik pelajaran
3. Penekanan keutamaan topik dalam ujian
4. Menentukan masa yang digunakan untuk sesuatutopik
5. Menentukan jenis soalan
6. Menentukan bilangan soalan
FORMULA
Formula A
Relative weight for the importance of content =
( The number of the TLO / class period for one topic ÷TOTAL number of TLO/ class period ) ×100%
(3/10)*100 = 30
Relative weight of the subjectTLO / Hours spentContent
%303Topic 1
%101Topic 2
%101Topic 3
%202Topic 4
%101Topic 5
%202Topic 6
100%10Total TLO / class periods for teaching the unit
FORMULA
Formula B
Relative weight for the item =
(% of weight in each Bloom level x total
item of the test)
(0.3*20)= 6
Objectives
Totals 100%
Topics
Knowledge and
Comprehension
30 %
Application
and Analysis
50%
Evaluation
and
Synthesize
20%
Totals 100%
Topic 1 (30 %)
Topic 2 (10 %)
Topic 3 (10 %)
Topic 4 (20 %)
Topic 5 (10 %)
Topic 6 (20 %)
Weight for item 6 10 4 20
FORMULA
Formula C
Identify the number of questions in each topic for
each level of objectives =
(The total number of test x relative weight of the
topics x relative weight of Bloom level)
(20*0.3*0.3)= 1.8
Objectives
(Totals 100%)
Topics
Knowledge and
Comprehension
30 %
Application
and Analysis
50%
Evaluation
and
Synthesize
20%
Totals 100%
Topic 1 (30 %) 1.8 (2) 3 (3) 1.2 (1) 6
Topic 2 (10 %) 0.6 (1) 1 (1) 0.4 (0) 2
Topic 3 (10 %) 0.6 (1) 1 (1) 0.4 (0) 2
Topic 4 (20 %) 1.2 (1) 2(2) 0.8 (1) 4
Topic 5 (10 %) 0.6 (0) 1 (1) 0.4 (1) 2
Topic 6 (20 %) 1.2 (1) 2(2) 0.8 (1) 4
Number of questions 6 10 4 20
Kajian Kes
Jumlah jam kredit yang ditetapkan adalah tidak tepat. Apabila dijumlahkan hanya mendapat 38 jam sahaja
CADANGAN
• Kuiz, test, dan peperiksaan akhirdirangkum dalam satu CLO sahaja.
• CLO lain memfokuskan pentaksiransecara praktikal dan kemahiran generik
Kajian kes
Bagaimanakah sebenarnya bilangan item ditetapkan?Berasarkan jam kuliah? Pemberat CLO? Ini kerana jumlahItem yang sama sahaja bagi jumlah jam kuliah yang berbeza
CADANGAN
• Aplikasikan formula yang dicadangkan
• Masukkan hanya topik yang paling signifikan terutama bagi soalan berbentuk subjektif
Kajian Kes
Tidak salah sebenarnyabagi peringkat sijil / diplomauntuk mempunyai CLO / aras item yang melebihiaras Aplikasi
CADANGAN
• Gunakan satu sahaja CLO bagi mengukur PLO1 (Pengetahuan)
• Aplikasikan konsep penjajaran konstruktif.
Kajian Kes
Soalan MCQ bukanlah dibina untuk aras mudah sahaja.
Malah bagi ujian berbentuk sumatifseharusnya memenuhi konsep normal distribution
CADANGAN
• Tidak semua CLO perlu diukur dengan peperiksaan
• Bina satu CLO khas untuk pengetahuan (PLO1)
CADANGAN
• Pensyarah perlu dapat membezakan apa yangdimaksudkan dengan item jawapan pendek,respon terhad, respon terbuka dan soalanberstruktur.
Bagaimana penetapan dan pemilihan topik bagi ujian berbentuk esei?Adakah perlu melibatkan semua topik?Bagaimana dari segi aras kesukaran?
Kajian Kes
Instead of letakkan bilangan item, letakkan nombor soalan,Contohnya soalan 1 (a), 1(b), 2(a),
Kajian Kes
MASA UJIAN
Carey (1988) pointed out that the time available fortesting depended not only on the length of the classperiod but also on students' attention spans.
MASA UJIAN
Linn & Gronlund (2000):
1. A true-false test item takes 15 seconds to answer unless the student is asked to provide the correct answer for false questions. Then the time increases to 30-45 seconds.
2. A seven item matching exercise takes 60-90 seconds.
MASA UJIAN
3. A four response multiple choice test item that asksfor an answer regarding a term, fact, definition, ruleor principle (knowledge level item) takes 30 seconds.The same type of test item that is at the applicationlevel may take 60 seconds.
MASA UJIAN
4. Any test item format that requires solving a problem,analyzing, synthesizing information or evaluatingexamples adds 30-60 seconds to a question.
MASA UJIAN
5. Short-answer test items take 30-45
seconds.
6. An essay test takes 60 seconds for each point to be compared and contrasted.
TEST THEOREM
If an individual can perform the most difficult aspects of the objective, the instructor can "assume" the lower levels can be done.
However, if testing the lower levels, the instructor cannot "assume" the individual can perform the higher levels.
ARAS KESUKARAN UJIAN
Aras kesukaran
• Memastikan item yang dibina adalah bersesuaiandengan aras keupayaan pelajar.
• Membuktikan aras kesukaran item yang ditetapkandalam JSI.
• Analisis aras kesukaran ini dilakukan untukpenetapan aras item untuk disimpan di dalam bankitem.
• Bagi mengkaji semula aras kesukaran item yangdiletakkan semasa penulisan Jadual Spesfikasi Item.
• Analisis secara CTT boleh dilakukan sebagai asasanalisis item
Item Difficulty Level: Definition
The percentage of students who answered the item correctly.
High
(Difficult)
Medium
(Moderate)
Low
(Easy)
≤= 30% > 30% AND < 80% ≥=80%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
• Menentukan indeks kesukaran bagi item objektif:
pengiraan itu boleh dilakukan dalam bentuk jadual seperti dibawah.
cTT
Item Difficulty Level: Discussion
• Is a test that nobody failed too easy?
• Is a test on which nobody got 100% too difficult?
• Should items that are “too easy” or “too difficult” be thrown out?
KUALITI INSTRUMEN
Indeks Diskriminasi Item
Bagi memastikan item yang dibina berfungsi denganbaik. Boleh dianalisis menggunakan CTT dan IRT. Itemyang baik seharusnya dapat membezakan keupayaanpelajar yang berpencapaian tinggi dan berpencapaianrendah. Indeks diskriminasi membantu penetapan itemdibuang dan disimpan dalam bank item
Bagaimana anda menganalisis indeks kesukaran item?
What is a “good” value?
If the item has Ratio of Students answered the itemcorrectly
Positive Discrimination High achievers >Low achievers
Negative Discrimination High achievers < low achievers
No discrimination High achievers = low achievers
What is a “good” value?
Discrimination Index Item Evaluation
0.40 and above Very good
0.30-0.39 Good and can be improved
0.20-0.29 Marginal and need improvement
Below 0.19 Bad, cant be accepted and need proper checking
• Contoh:Jika terdapat 40 orang murid dalam satu kelas, bahagikan mereka kepada dua kumpulan iaitu 20 murid pencapaian tinggi dan 20 murid pencapaian rendah. Misalnya bagi item 8, 16 murid dari kumpulan berpencapaian tinggi dapat menjawab dengan betul manakala hanya 4 orang murid dari kumpulan berpencapaian rendah yang menjawab betul bagi item tersebut.
Maka:K t = 16 = 0.8 atau ( 80 % )
20K r = 4 = 0.2 atau ( 20 % )
20D = K t – K r = 0.8 - 0.2 = 0.6( Kesimpulannya item 8 adalah item yang baik)
cTT
GRADED ASSIGNMENT
• Develop one table of specification for your final exam, using the formula given in this workshop.
• Send in softcopy (using excel form)
• Individual/ Group Assignment according to your course.
GRADED ASSIGNMENT
• Analyze your final examination item using Classical test theory
• Send in softcopy (using excel form)
• Individual/ Group Assignment according to your course
ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT
• Beyond the traditional psychometrically
driven testing. Design to assess learning
tasks that stimulate critical thinking skills
and require students to produce or
demonstrate knowledge rather simply
recall information provided to them by
others
www.presentationgo.com
HUMAN JUDGMENT IN SCORING
REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS
MEANINGFUL INSTRUCTIONAL TASK
HIGHER LEVEL OF THINKING
STUDENTS PERFORMANCE
Characteristics of Alternative Assessment
Examples of authentic assessment
Research Project Debate
Writing Speech / summary
Studio
Work
Portfolio
Article Review
Writing Journal / proposal
Case Study
AUTHENTIC ASSESSMENT
New Academia Learning Innovation
Not only performance based, buthappen in the real setting.
Emphasizing more on process ratherthan product
Soft skills development
Holistic assessment
Rubric
Table 1: Subjects Without Practical Components
Percentage Parts Assessed
10-20% Soft skills (e.g. communication, teamwork,
problem solving, responsibility)
40-60% Academic coursework (tests, quizzes,
assignments, papers)
30-40% Final examination
Distribution of Marks
Table 2: Subjects With Practical Components
Percentage Parts Assessed
10-20% Soft skills (e.g. discipline, teamwork, problem
solving, ethics)
80-90% Practical knowledge and skills
Distribution of Marks