Deneen, C. C., Fulmer, G. W., Brown, G. T. L., Tan, K., Leong, W. S., & Tay, H. Y. (2019). Value, practice and proficiency: Teachers' complex relationship with assessment for learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 80, 39-47.

Fulmer, G. W., Tan, K. H., & Lee, I. C. (2017). Relationships among Singaporean secondary teachers’ conceptions of assessment and school and policy contextual factors. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 1-18.

Leong, W. S. (2014). Singaporean teachers’ views of classroom assessment: Findings from using Q-Methodology. Assessment Matters, 6, 34−64.

Leong, W. S. (2016). Contextualising assessment for learning in Singaporean classrooms. In K. Tan, C, Ratnam, & M. Heng (Eds), Curriculum Leadership by Middle Leaders: Theory, Design and Practice. Singapore: Routledge.

Leong, W. S., & Tan, K. H. K. (2014). What (more) can, and should, assessment do for learning? Observations from ‘successful learning context’ in Singapore. Curriculum Journal, 25(4), 593- 619.

Ratnam-Lim, C., & Tan, K. H. K. (2015). Large-scale implementation of formative assessment practices in an examination oriented culture. Assessment in Education, 22(1), 61-78.

Tan, K. H. K. (2011). Assessment for learning in Singapore - Unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 10(2), 91-103.

Tan, K. H. K. (2013). Variation in teachers' conceptions of alternative assessment in Singapore primary schools. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 12(1), 21-41.

Tay, H. Y., Tan, K. H. K., Deneen, C. C., Leong, W. S., Fulmer, G. W., & Brown, G. T. L. (2019). Middle leaders’ perceptions and actions on assessment: the technical, tactical and ethical, School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 45-63, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2019.1582016

Deneen, C. C., Fulmer, G. W., Brown, G. T. L., Tan, K., Leong, W. S., & Tay, H. Y. (2019). Value, practice and proficiency: Teachers' complex relationship with assessment for learning. Teaching and Teacher Education 80(1), 39-47.

In Singapore and elsewhere, competing assessment priorities pose challenges for teachers implementing Assessment for Learning (AfL). Understanding how teachers perceive and negotiate these tensions is of great importance. 1054 teachers at 12 Singapore secondary schools were surveyed on their values, practices, and proficiency of AfL. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis were applied to the data. Three patterns emerged: teachers value AfL but lack preparation and opportunities to practice it. Conversely, they reported proficiency at and frequent use of summative activities; however, they assign less value to these activities. Participants negotiate tensions in assessment priorities and policies through endorsing a particular understanding of AfL as a design exercise. Taken together, these findings suggest that development and change management could better serve teachers’ negotiation of competing assessment priorities by addressing their values, proficiency and opportunity for practice, together. Local and global implications are presented for teaching, teacher education/development and curriculum development.

Leong, W. S. (2018, August 29). Situating Assessment for Learning (AfL) in Singaporean classrooms: Exploring “good” approaches. Paper presented at European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) SIG 1 Biennial Conference 2018, Helsinki, Finland.

Singaporean secondary-school contexts are high-stakes assessment environments, exemplified by complex negotiations of priorities, understandings and enactments of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Investigating these complexities may lead to understanding larger-scale interactions of assessment policies, perceptions and practices within Singapore and other high-stakes educational settings. This paper focuses on qualitative findings from a grant-funded two-year mixed methods research study based in 13 Singaporean secondary schools. From the results, we present two cases of how AfL is situated and enacted in Singaporean classrooms. How various stakeholders negotiate and select solutions to resolving tensions of assessment are analysed, as are mediating influences in this process. Implications for further inquiry and analysis are discussed, especially in terms of how approaches to negotiating AfL and its tensions may reflect both global and indigenous goals of assessment and learning.

Fulmer, G. W., Tan, K. H. K., & Lee, I. C. H. (2017). Relationships among Singaporean secondary teachers’ conceptions of assessment and school and policy contextual factors. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 1-18.

This study examines teachers’ conceptions of assessment and related contextual factors at the classroom, school and national levels. A representative survey of Singaporean secondary school teachers resulted in a final sample consisting of 229 teachers from 9 secondary schools. Findings on that, teachers endorse views of assessment for school accountability, student accountability and student improvement, but little endorsement of assessment as irrelevance. Teachers report feeling capable and qualified to use assessments, but concerned about how much they are trusted as assessors at school and national levels. Follow-up latent class analysis identified groups of teachers based on their responses to the irrelevance of assessment; teachers who found assessment irrelevant were present across all schools and subjects, but showed lower sense of preparation for assessment, school-level support and importance of academic success in society.

Leong, W.S., & Tan, K. (2014). What (more) can, and should, assessment do for learning? Observations from ‘successful learning context’ in Singapore. Curriculum Journal, 25 (4), 593−619.

Journal article link: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09585176.2014.970207#.VKdU6rkcRjo

Singapore has earned accolades as one of the leading education systems in the world, based on its record in international assessments, including TIMSS and PISA. This has contributed to the entrenchment of ‘assessment’ becoming an institutional authority of standards, teaching (performativity) and classroom learning. It is against, and amidst such contexts, that this article traces how the notion and discourse of formative assessment and Assessment for Learning (AfL) are widely introduced and used formally across all Singapore schools, particularly after a recent introduction of new ‘Holistic and Balanced Assessment’ policies. We argue that the very institutional authority of successful high-stake examination results, which served as critical standards of performativity of teaching and learning in the classroom, is being challenged. The changing assessment context of Singaporean schools therefore serves as an interesting case study site for studying how formative assessment and AfL can be adapted and understood when 'learning' is already seen to be successful.

Ratnam-Lim, C.T.L. & Tan, K. T. (2015). Large-scale implementation of formative assessment practices in an examination-oriented culture. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 1(22), 61-78.

Abstract: Singapore’s education system has often been characterised as exam-oriented. This paper describes efforts (‘windmills’) made by the Government to constructively respond to the ‘winds of change’ in the education system. A committee called the Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) Committee was appointed to study and recommend the priorities, programmes and resources needed to revise primary education in Singapore. The Committee recommended that a balanced school-based assessment system that provides constructive feedback, enabling more meaningful learning in support of both academic and non-academic aspects of a pupil’s development, be carried out under the label of ‘Holistic Assessment’. This paper is an attempt at surfacing the challenges (‘walls’) in implementing ‘Holistic Assessment’ on a large scale, highlighting in particular, the tensions perceived by stakeholders concerning the interaction between formative assessment and accountability systems. It documents how stakeholders, namely teachers and parents, perceive and typify the concept of ‘Holistic Assessment’. The findings provide insights into the consequent realities of a nationwide shift in assessment purpose and discourse on teachers and parents.