2009年-世界发展银行全球_Tajikistan___Student_Assessment_49页_1mb

Tajikistan Student Assessment Summary

Core Content

This report outlines the state of student assessment in Tajikistan as of 2009, based on the SABER-Student Assessment framework. It evaluates the development levels of three main types of assessment: classroom assessment, examinations, and large-scale assessments (both national and international). The report highlights the challenges and opportunities for improving the quality and effectiveness of the assessment system in the country.

Main Assessment Types and Their Status

1. Classroom Assessment

• Level of Development: Emerging

• Key Features:

  • A formal system-level document exists for classroom assessment, but it is only available to teachers.
  • Some system-wide resources are available for teachers to use in classroom assessment.
  • The system lacks clear guidelines on expected student performance relative to the curriculum.
  • Classroom assessment practices are considered weak and often subjective.
  • Monitoring is done through ad-hoc mechanisms governed by outdated Soviet-era regulations.
  • There are no system-level mechanisms to ensure teacher training in classroom assessment.
  • Results are not systematically used to support student learning or shared with key stakeholders.

• Policy Recommendations:

  • Implement system-level mechanisms to ensure teacher development in classroom assessment.
  • Establish systematic monitoring of classroom assessment practices.
  • Communicate the appropriate use of assessment data to teachers and ensure dissemination to key stakeholders.

2. Examinations

• Level of Development: Emerging (State Examinations) and Latent (University Entrance Examinations)

• State Examinations:

  • Conducted in grades 9 and 11 for grade completion and graduation.
  • Governed by a formal policy document not available to the public.
  • Funding is included in the recurrent budget of the Ministry of Education and its substructures.
  • No dedicated facilities or full-time staff are allocated for conducting state examinations.
  • There are delays in exam administration due to poor question design and inadequate training of test administrators.
  • Examination results are used by the Ministry of Education to evaluate schools and teachers, but the credibility of these results is questioned.

• University Entrance Examinations:

  • Managed at the institutional level by higher education institutions.
  • No standardized system in place, and no technical reports or documentation on the process.
  • Lack of quality assurance mechanisms and perceived corruption in the process.
  • Limited preparation materials for students and no opportunities for training on examination practices.
  • Results are not widely credible, and students from vulnerable families face barriers due to corruption.

• Policy Recommendations:

  • Create a permanent, adequately staffed examinations center accountable to an external body.
  • Develop training opportunities for individuals involved in examination activities, including mandatory courses for teachers.
  • Improve the quality, fairness, and transparency of both state and university entrance examinations.

3. National Large-Scale Assessment (NLSA)

• Level of Development: Latent

• Key Features:

  • No NLSA program currently exists in Tajikistan.
  • No immediate plans to establish one, but consideration is being given for implementation within the next decade.
  • NLSA data could be useful for addressing important education policy issues.

• Policy Recommendations:

  • Facilitate high-level discussions among stakeholders on the potential use of NLSA data.
  • Assess the need for and outline possible steps toward implementing an NLSA program.

4. International Large-Scale Assessment (ILSA)

• Level of Development: Latent

• Key Features:

  • Tajikistan has not participated in any ILSA.
  • No immediate plans to participate, but consideration is being given for involvement within the next decade.
  • ILSA data could provide valuable insights for improving the education system.

• Policy Recommendations:

  • Encourage high-level discussions among stakeholders about the potential benefits of ILSA data.
  • Determine the need for and outline steps toward participating in an ILSA exercise.

Key Policy Areas

• Classroom Assessment: Needs stronger institutional support, teacher training, and alignment with curriculum and learning goals.
• Examinations: Requires reform to improve quality, fairness, and transparency, particularly in state and university entrance exams.
• Large-Scale Assessments: Both NLSA and ILSA are at the latent stage, indicating a need for development and institutionalization.

Quality Drivers of an Assessment System

The SABER framework identifies three main drivers of assessment system quality:

1. Enabling Context:
   • Policies, leadership, public engagement, funding, and human resources.
2. System Alignment:
   • Curriculum, learning goals, and teacher training.
3. Assessment Quality:
   • Design, administration, analysis, and effective use of results.

Development Levels

The report categorizes the development levels of assessment systems into four:

• Latent: Absence of, or deviation from, the desired attribute.
• Emerging: On the way to meeting the minimum standard.
• Established: Acceptable minimum standard.
• Advanced: Best practice.

Education Context in Tajikistan

• Economic Status: Low-income country with a GDP per capita of $734 (2009).
• Enrollment:
  • Primary: 97%
  • Secondary: 84%
  • Girls: 83% enrollment at 15 years old due to high opportunity costs.
  • Boys: 96% enrollment at 15 years old.
• Teacher Shortages: A significant issue, especially in secondary schools.
• Government Priorities:
  • Improving access and quality of education.
  • Increasing public expenditure on education (currently at 4.1% of GDP).
  • Reforming the education system to incorporate stakeholder partnerships.

Conclusion

Tajikistan's student assessment system is at an early stage of development. While there are some formal policies and guidelines in place, the implementation and quality of these assessments are weak. The report emphasizes the need for institutional capacity building, teacher training, and the development of standardized and transparent assessment practices. It also suggests the potential benefits of implementing large-scale assessments in the future to support evidence-based education reforms.