INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Global Trends in School-Based Assessment: Implications for Effective  
Implementation in Sri Lanka  
E.M.Y. Sachith1, R.D.C. Niroshinie2  
1Lecturer, Department of Planning & Evaluation, National Institute of Education, Sri Lanka  
2Senior Lecturer, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education, University of Colombo,  
Sri Lanka  
Received: 20 November 2025; Accepted: 25 November 2025; Published: 01 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This systematic review summarizes evidence on implementation, philosophical underpinnings, methodologies,  
and challenges of School Based Assessment (SBA) conducted in 12 countries including Finland, Canada, New  
Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Africa, the Caribbean, Australia, Malaysia, China, the United States, and  
Sri Lanka. Based on policy documents, empirical research, and academic publications, the review reveals that  
SBA has become a major international reform strategy that will empower student-centered learning, formative  
assessment, and holistic evaluation. The analysis divides SBA models based on the underlying philosophical  
orientations and shows that most of the Western systems are mostly constructivist and with learner-centered  
models, and most of Asian systems are standardized, centrally regulated models. Although the structures differ,  
SBA is largely known to support deep learning, intrinsic motivation, and meaningful engagement of learners. In  
the examined settings, multiple common obstacles limit efficacious implementation, such as the overload of  
workload on teachers, lack of assessment literacy, insufficient professional development, and ongoing issues  
with reliability and consistency. The comparison of 48 publications guided by PRISMA indicates the similarities  
in cross-national aspects as well as significant regional variations, which provides a strong foundation of  
evidence in the future of policy and practice. The review finds that permanent capacity-building of teachers,  
systematic moderation of teachers, and harmonious policy alignment are critical in ensuring equitable and  
effective implementation of SBA to maximize its role in fostering student-centered learning and quality  
education.  
Keywords: School-Based Assessment, formative assessment, global educational reform, PRISMA-style  
approach, philosophical foundations, methodologies, and challenges  
INTRODUCTION  
School-Based Assessment (SBA) is an innovative and flexible method for evaluating students in schools,  
allowing for actual, formative, and ongoing assessments that align with students' learning and curricular goals.  
SBA has emerged as a significant strategy to modernize education and develop 21st-century skills like critical  
thinking, creativity, and teamwork. However, the implementation of SBA varies across different areas due to  
differences in educational policy, socio-cultural context, and teacher training. This comprehensive research aims  
to identify best practices, impediments, and possibilities related to SBA adoption, focusing on experiences from  
twelve different countries. SBA is a formative and performance-orientated alternative to traditional high-stakes  
examinations, developed to align assessment with real-world skills and learning objectives for the 21st century.  
It emphasizes continuous evaluation, authenticity, and student agency in the learning process. The study aims to  
investigate the influence of various educational philosophies and system structures on SBA practices, identify  
universal obstacles, and suggest policy solutions on a global scale. SBA encourages authentic, continuous, and  
relevant examination processes, but many poor countries, such as Sri Lanka, face significant obstacles in  
realizing its promise. Despite countries with high incomes, such as Finland, Canada, and Australia, incorporating  
SBA into their national assessment policies, Sri Lanka faces significant challenges in implementing it.  
Page 9286  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Despite the widespread adoption of School-Based Assessment (SBA) across the world, the academic literature  
does not provide any systematic and profound reviews of it, which would critically examine its philosophical  
foundations and practical implementation problems. The majority of studies are inclined to concentrate on the  
efficiency of SBA in definite countries or in definite schools, and few attempts are made to compare the results  
in meaningful cross-context to another setting. These analyses are essential, not only in that they help to clarify  
the theoretical underpinnings, such as constructivist or competency-based learning models, on which SBA is  
based, but also reveal the situational barriers and practical difficulties of the problem. These issues are  
preparedness of the teachers, resources, assessment literacy and policy congruity.  
The research aims to analyze Sri Lanka's history and present trajectory in implementing SBA into its educational  
framework and provide a comprehensive review of various SBA techniques being implemented globally.  
LITERATURE REVIEW  
School-Based Assessment (SBA) has been widely adopted across educational systems globally, driven by  
philosophies emphasizing constructivism, learner-centered pedagogy, and formative evaluation. Countries such  
as Finland have institutionalized SBA through formative feedback, portfolio assessments, and strong teacher  
autonomy, fostering deep learning and student ownership (Sahlberg, 2011). Similarly, Canada's “Growing  
Success” policy promotes individualized and reflective assessment strategies to cater to diverse learner needs  
(Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010; Earl & Katz, 2002).  
And also, New Zealand's NCEA framework connects SBA with national qualifications through curriculum-  
aligned tasks, encouraging self-regulation and inquiry (NZQA, 2023; Hipkins & Vaughan, 2019). In Hong Kong,  
SBA is integrated within the high-stakes HKDSE examination system through inquiry-based and project work  
methods, supported by structured training and moderation (Carless et al., 2011; Tong & Adamson, 2015).  
Singapore, known for innovation-based education, employs SBA via frameworks like Project Work and Design  
Thinking (MOE, 2020).  
Also, South Africa’s Continuous Assessment System (CASS) uses SBA to address educational equity but faces  
infrastructure and training challenges (Chisholm & Leyendecker, 2007; Sayed et al., 2013). The Caribbean  
region has advanced digital SBA through the CXC system, strengthening authentic learning and teacher-student  
engagement, especially after COVID-19 (Evans, 2021; Issaka et al., 2020). Australia integrates SBA into high  
school assessments under the HSC and SACE boards, balancing formative and summative assessments with  
strong moderation (Klenowski, 2011; NESIA, 2023).  
But, In Malaysia, the Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS) model promotes a hybrid approach combining  
psychometric, co-curricular, and formative assessments. However, initial implementation challenges led to  
revisions under PBS 2.0 to enhance training and tool support (Zakaria et al., 2024). China's SBA reforms  
emphasize reflective learning and soft skills but face rural-urban disparities (Tan, 2016; Deneen & Hoo, 2021).  
The United States, with decentralized education policy, implements SBA through portfolio and performance  
assessments in models like NYPSC, aimed at civic engagement and deeper learning (Brookhart, 2013a; Fine et  
al., 2020).  
In contrast, Sri Lanka officially introduced SBAin 1998 (MOE, circular, 1998/45) following foundational reform  
movements dating back to the Handessa scheme of 1945 (Aturupane & Little, 2019). Despite multiple policy  
circulars (1998/45, 2001/23, 2017/23) and a comprehensive framework of 31 assessment types, actual  
implementation faces persistent barriers. These include limited teacher assessment literacy (Weerakoon, 2025),  
over-reliance on summative exams (Senarath, 2020), inadequate infrastructure (NEC, 2016), and domination of  
classroom practices by lower-order assessments (Abayasekara & Arunatilake, 2018; Edussuriya et al., 2018).  
Moreover, Sri Lanka’s curricular reforms have not fully embraced 21st-century assessment principles such as  
authentic rubrics and higher-order thinking evaluation (Hapugoda & Kulasekara, 2024). The absence of  
validated SBAtools, weak moderation systems, and lack of community awareness further widen the gap between  
policy and practice (Perera et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2022). While the Ministry of Education has provided SBA  
guideline handbooks, training inadequacies and administrative burdens have undermined their effective use  
Page 9287  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
(Circular No. 2003/13; 2017/23). Scholars advocate for realigning SBA with the broader goals of national  
education transformation (Sachith & Niroshinie, 2025).  
Across all reviewed contexts, countries with successful SBA systems share several key features:  
Comprehensive and sustained teacher professional development  
Clearly defined assessment rubrics and feedback structures  
Robust moderation and quality assurance mechanisms  
Student participation in assessment through self and peer evaluation  
But, in Sri Lanka’s limited progress is attributed to:  
The absence of validated and standardized SBA tools (Perera et al., 2020)  
Persistent exam-centric mindsets in schools and among parents (Senarath, 2020)  
Teacher resistance to new assessment paradigms (NEC, 2016)  
Increased workload for teachers, inconsistent implementation across schools, lack of professional  
development and Low parental and community trust in SBA mechanisms (Sachith & Niroshinie, 2025)  
To move forward, the literature recommends the development of contextually validated SBA tools, alignment of  
SBA with the formative curriculum, capacity-building for educators and administrators, and national-level  
awareness campaigns to build confidence in SBA as a valid measure of student learning.  
METHODOLOGY  
This systematic literature review aimed to synthesize global and local literature on School-Based Assessment  
(SBA) practices, following the PRISMA guidelines. The review process involved four steps: identification,  
screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Key components included a comprehensive search across various academic  
and policy-related databases, such as ERIC, JSTOR, Google Ads for Professionals, and repositories managed by  
the government and institutions. The search keywords included "School-Based Assessment," "Formative  
Assessment," "Portfolio Assessment," "continuous assessment," and "performance-based assessment." The  
inclusion criteria included articles published in academic journals, policy briefs, reports produced by the  
government, and dissertations reviewed by another peer.  
An internal quality rating grid was used to assess each selected study's methodological rigor, policy relevance,  
and contextual clarity. A framework for analytical considerations and coding based on individual themes was  
used, using a method known as theme analysis. A thorough coding approach was used to identify recurring  
concepts and patterns, which were then classified into five categories: assessment philosophy, methods of  
assessment, teacher responsibilities and role, challenges and policy-level interventions.  
To find patterns, differences, and policy ramifications, each topic was researched deeper across countries,  
resulting in a comparative framework relevant across different countries. Procedures were carried out to verify  
the provenance of documents, evaluate the publication's legitimacy, double-code themes, and validate results  
unique to each nation through at least two trustworthy sources. A PRISMA flow diagram was developed to  
provide a visual representation of the selection process, and a comparative summary table was prepared to  
compare and contrast different aspects of SBA implementation among the twelve countries studied in this study.  
PRISMA Summary Table of SBA Implementation is shown below in Table no: 3.1.  
Page 9288  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Table no: 3.1. PRISMA Summary Table of SBA Implementation  
Country Philosophy Assessmen Teacher Role  
t Methods  
Challenges  
Moderation  
System  
Key Features  
Finland  
Constructivi  
st  
Project  
work,  
portfolios  
High  
None  
significant  
Minimal  
moderation  
Emphasis on  
teacher  
autonomy  
autonomy,  
Trained in  
assessment  
literacy  
Canada  
Student-  
centered  
Formative  
tasks,  
peer/self  
eval  
Customized  
feedback,  
Ongoing  
training  
Varies by  
province  
Provincial  
variation  
Flexible models;  
strong emphasis  
on equity  
New  
Zealand  
Competency  
-based  
NCEA,  
internal  
Design  
curriculum-  
Moderation  
consistency  
External  
moderation  
Clear links to  
curriculum  
assessment aligned tasks  
s
competencies  
Hong  
Kong  
Standards-  
driven  
SBA tied  
to DSE  
exams  
Responsible  
for detailed  
assessment  
Teacher  
workload,  
Implementatio  
n gap  
Strong  
moderation  
Integrated into  
high-stakes  
assessment  
Singapor  
e
Hybrid  
Oral tasks,  
project  
Integrated  
with MOE-  
SEAB  
Workload,  
Neutrality  
Internal +  
external  
High-  
performing;  
systematized  
teacher PD  
work  
moderation  
South  
Africa  
Equity-  
focused  
Continuous Track learner  
Class size,  
Training,  
Resources  
Cluster  
moderation  
Overcomes  
exam-centric  
legacy system  
assessment  
progress,  
Resource  
constrained  
Caribbea  
n
Moderated  
SBA  
CAPE  
SBA  
projects  
CXC  
guidelines,  
Moderate  
responsibilitie  
s
Workload,  
Feedback time  
Regional  
moderation  
Structured  
regional  
frameworks  
Australia  
Outcome-  
based  
Projects,  
reflective  
tasks  
State-guided, Standardizatio  
State-based  
moderation  
Flexible  
implementation  
across states  
Moderated  
n, Workload  
Malaysia Centralized  
Oral,  
written,  
observatio  
n
Use SPPBS  
system,  
Trained  
Tech issues,  
Teacher  
confidence  
National  
moderation  
Phased SBA  
integration;  
limited teacher  
agency  
regularly  
China  
Nationally-  
driven  
Task  
banks,  
BEQMS-  
monitored,  
Exam-centered  
culture,  
Local +  
central  
checks  
Reforming  
exam-centric  
tradition  
Page 9289  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
behavioral  
rubrics  
Varies by  
region  
Standardizatio  
n
USA  
Standards-  
based  
Portfolio,  
digital  
assessment  
s
Formative-  
driven,  
Diverse by  
state  
Policy  
variance,  
Resource gaps  
School/distri Diversity across  
ct level  
states; equity  
concerns  
Sri  
Lanka  
Exam-  
reduction  
Continuous  
, unit-  
Formative  
Assessment  
Facilitator,  
Record  
Keeping and  
Reporting  
High teacher-  
pupil ratios,  
Limited  
training in  
assessment  
literacy.  
Limited  
moderation  
Early stages of  
SBA  
institutionalizatio  
n
based  
Source: Study data  
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  
Assessment Philosophy and Methods  
Schools of Business Administration (SBA) in nations such as Finland, Canada, New Zealand, and Singapore are  
founded on constructivist and student centred ideologies that promote active learning and learner autonomy  
(Sahlberg, 2011; Earl & Katz, 2002). Educational approaches such as project-based learning (PBL), performance  
tasks, portfolio evaluations, and reflective diaries are commonly utilized to enhance students’ critical thinking  
and engagement (Brookhart, 2013a; NZQA, 2023).  
Finland and New Zealand place a strong emphasis on formative feedback, personalized learning pathways, and  
curriculum-aligned tasks, which enable students to regulate their learning and receive continuous support  
(Sahlberg, 2011; Hipkins & Vaughan, 2019). In contrast, countries like Singapore and Hong Kong have adopted  
more structured and standardized SBA formats tied closely to national examinations, often focusing on subject-  
specific assessments and rigorous moderation (Tan & Ng, 2020; Carless et al., 2011; Tong & Adamson, 2015).  
At the same time, countries like China and Malaysia are moving away from systems focused only on exams to  
more mixed assessment models that include psychological testing, evaluations of extracurricular activities, and  
lessons on morals and values. These changes reflect a growing commitment to aligning assessment practices  
with 21st-century learning needs and national identity goals. Table 4.1 below summarizes and presents the  
differences that exist in Assessment Philosophy and Methods in different countries.  
Table No: 4.1. Summary of the differences that exist in Assessment Philosophy and Methods in different  
countries  
Constructivist, student-centred,  
formative-focused (Sahlberg,  
2011)  
Project-based learning,  
portfolios, performance  
tasks, reflective journals  
Personalized learning,  
continuous feedback,  
curriculum aligned tasks  
Finland  
Student-centred and inquiry-  
based learning (Earl & Katz,  
2002)  
Performance tasks,  
portfolios, project work  
Formative feedback culture;  
promotes learner autonomy  
Canada  
Constructivist, competency-  
based, autonomy-driven  
(Hipkins & Vaughan, 2019;  
NZQA, 2023)  
Project-based tasks,  
portfolios, NCEA internal  
assessments  
Strong formative  
assessment, self-regulated  
learning  
New  
Zealand  
Page 9290  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Structured, standardized SBA  
aligned with national exams  
(Tan & Ng, 2020)  
Subject-based assessments,  
performance tasks, practical  
tests  
Rigorous moderation,  
alignment with high-stakes  
exams  
Singapore  
Exam-aligned mixed SBA  
system (Carless et al., 2011;  
Tong & Adamson, 2015)  
Projects, practical  
assessments, subject tasks  
Strong monitoring and  
moderation; standardized  
formats  
Hong  
Kong  
Shift from exam-heavy to  
holistic assessment  
Psychological tests,  
extracurricular evaluation,  
subject tasks  
Values education,  
citizenship, whole-child  
development  
China  
Mixed assessment with holistic  
orientation  
Performance tasks, co-  
curricular assessment,  
moral/values education  
Emphasis on 21st-century  
skills, character  
Malaysia  
development  
Source: Study data  
Role of Teachers and Moderation  
Teachers are central to SBA implementation, as they are responsible for designing assessment tasks, delivering  
timely feedback, guiding student reflection, and recording learning progress (Brookhart, 2013a; Earl & Katz,  
2002). In countries such as Canada and Australia, this role is supported through structured training programs and  
moderation frameworks, allowing teachers to assess with confidence and consistency (Klenowski, 2011; Ontario  
Ministry of Education, 2010; ACARA, 2020).  
Moderation mechanisms play a vital role in ensuring inter-school reliability and fairness. For example, New  
Zealand’s NZQA implements rigorous teacher moderation and professional judgment verification (Hipkins &  
Vaughan, 2019; NZQA, 2023). Similarly, Singapore’s SEAB and South Africa’s Umalusi enforce national  
quality assurance processes through benchmarking, marking schemes, and cross-school moderation practices  
(MOE, 2020; Sayed & Kanjee, 2013).  
However, in countries such as Sri Lanka and China, gaps in teacher training, limited exposure to formative  
assessment strategies, and a lack of effective moderation structures hinder the full realization of SBA’s potential  
(Perera et al., 2020; Deneen & Hoo, 2021; NEC, 2016; Weerakoon, 2025). Without reliable moderation,  
disparities across schools and regions undermine assessment equity and validity. Table 4.2 below summarizes  
and presents the differences that exist in Role of Teachers and Moderation in different countries.  
Table No. 4.2: Summary of the differences that exist in Role of Teachers and Moderation in different countries  
Canada  
Teachers create tasks,  
provide feedback, facilitate  
reflection; with the help of  
planned training.  
The provincial moderation  
structures maintain  
uniformity.  
Well-founded teacher  
judgment systems.  
Australia  
The use of SBA is guided  
and trained by teachers.  
State moderation,  
benchmarking, cross-school  
standardization.  
Assures of dependable and  
just evaluation.  
New  
Zealand  
Professional judgment is  
applied by teachers; training  
by NZQA.  
Strict moderation, checking Good reliability as a result of  
of judgments.  
good QA.  
Page 9291  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Singapore  
Subject-based SBA is  
administered by teachers on  
national guidelines.  
SEAB moderation, marking  
schemes, benchmarking.  
Very standardized and  
quality guaranteed.  
South  
Africa  
SBAs are scored and planned  
by teachers based on the  
national policy.  
Umalusi does outside  
moderation and QA.  
Good QA and  
implementation are regional.  
Sri Lanka  
China  
The teachers prepare SBA  
tasks, but they are not trained  
properly.  
Limited or weak moderation;  
Intermittent practices.  
Loopholes decrease  
credibility and fairness.  
Mixed assessments are dealt  
with by teachers.  
Incident structures of  
moderation that are in  
progress.  
Low training standards have  
an impact on uniformity.  
Source: Study data  
Challenges  
Across diverse educational contexts, challenges to effective SBA implementation are often linked to excessive  
teacher workload, limited assessment literacy, inequitable resource allocation, and policy-practice misalignment  
(Klenowski, 2011; NEC, 2016; Earl & Katz, 2002; Sachith & Niroshinie, 2025). These systemic issues reduce  
teachers’ capacity to design meaningful assessments and offer timely feedback, undermining the core objectives  
of formative and student-centred evaluation.  
In developing countries, additional structural limitations compound these problems. The digital divide,  
insufficient technological infrastructure, and large class sizes act as significant obstacles to equitable SBA  
deployment, particularly in under-resourced rural areas (Sayed & Kanjee, 2013; UNESCO, 2022; Zakaria et al.,  
2024). The credibility of SBA has been particularly vulnerable in nations such as South Africa and Sri Lanka,  
where inconsistent implementation and lack of standardization have led to stakeholder mistrust and  
accountability issues (Perera et al., 2020; Weerakoon, 2025; Chisholm & Leyendecker, 2007).  
These examples highlight the critical need for robust monitoring, moderation mechanisms, and continuous  
professional support to maintain the integrity and reliability of school-based assessment systems. Table 4.3 below  
summarizes and presents the variations in challenges observed across countries.  
Table No. 4.3: Summary of the variations in challenges observed across countries  
Excessive workload reduces  
teachers’ ability to design quality  
assessments and give timely  
feedback  
Global issue  
(developed and  
developing countries)  
Weakens formative  
assessment and reduces  
SBA effectiveness  
Teacher  
Workload  
Teachers lack knowledge on  
formative strategies, task design,  
and feedback  
Sri Lanka, China,  
many developing  
nations  
Training gaps affect  
quality, consistency, and  
fairness  
Limited  
Assessment  
Literacy  
Unequal allocation of resources  
limits fair SBA implementation  
Rural/under-resourced  
regions in developing  
countries  
Capacity to implement  
SBA varies widely  
between schools  
Resource  
Inequity  
Policies exist but implementation  
is inconsistent  
Global contexts  
(Klenowski, 2011;  
NEC, 2016)  
Leads to confusion,  
superficial compliance,  
and mistrust  
PolicyPractice  
Misalignment  
Page 9292  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
Lack of devices, connectivity, and Developing countries,  
Negatively impacts  
assessment equity and  
digital SBA processes  
Digital Divide  
technological infrastructure  
rural contexts  
Oversized classrooms reduce  
ability to give individual feedback  
Developing countries  
(Asia, Africa)  
Limits student-centred  
and formative  
Large Class Sizes  
assessment  
Lack of structured moderation  
leads to inconsistent judgments  
Sri Lanka, South  
Africa  
Undermines reliability  
and reduces stakeholder  
trust  
Weak  
Moderation &  
Standardization  
Inconsistent implementation  
reduces credibility of SBA  
South Africa, Sri  
Lanka  
Emphasizes need for  
quality assurance and  
monitoring  
Stakeholder  
Mistrust &  
Accountability  
Issues  
Source: Study data  
Technological Integration and Innovation  
The COVID-19 pandemic served as a critical inflection point, accelerating the digital transformation of School-  
Based Assessment (SBA) systems across the globe (UNESCO, 2022; Evans, 2021). Countries such as the United  
States, Australia, and Caribbean nations adopted digital tools like e-portfolios, Google Classroom, and virtual  
feedback platforms to maintain instructional continuity and formative assessment (Brookhart, 2020; ACARA,  
2020; Issaka et al., 2020). To address educational challenges, Malaysia and China created hybrid SBA models  
that mixed traditional tests with information about students' emotions and moral thinking (Mahmud et al., 2020;  
Tan, 2020; Zakaria et al., 2024; Deneen & Hoo, 2021). These models aimed to support holistic learning and  
well-rounded student development.  
Even with these new approaches, there is still a big problem with digital inequality, particularly in rural and  
poorly funded schools, where issues like poor infrastructure, lack of internet access, and insufficient teacher  
training make it hard for digital SBAtools to work well (UNESCO, 2022; Weerakoon, 2025; Perera et al., 2020).  
This points out the need for equitable digital investment and policy mechanisms to bridge the digital divide and  
ensure inclusivity in post-pandemic assessment reforms. Table 4.4 provides a summary of the technological  
integration and innovation observed across different countries.  
Summary of the technological integration and innovation observed across different countries  
United States  
Use of digital platforms (e-  
portfolios, Google  
Classroom, virtual feedback  
tools)  
Online formative  
assessment, digital learning  
continuity  
Rapid digital shift during  
COVID-19  
Australia  
Adoption of digital learning  
& assessment systems  
E-portfolios, online  
feedback systems  
Strong digital  
infrastructure but regional  
disparities exist  
Caribbean  
Nations  
Integrated digital platforms  
to maintain SBA during  
pandemic  
E-classrooms, online  
feedback mechanisms  
Supported instructional  
continuity and remote  
SBA  
Malaysia  
Hybrid SBA models  
combining academic,  
Traditional tests + affective Supports holistic learning;  
domain indicators innovative hybrid models  
emotional, and moral data  
Page 9293  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
China  
Digitally enhanced hybrid  
SBA approaches  
Digital tools + moral/values  
assessments  
Aims for holistic  
development; uneven  
implementation  
Rural/Under-  
resourced  
Regions  
Limited internet, poor  
infrastructure, lack of teacher  
ICT skills  
Low adoption of digital  
SBA tools  
Digital divide remains a  
major obstacle  
Global Post-  
pandemic  
Context  
Greater dependency on  
digital platforms  
Expansion of e-learning and Requires equitable digital  
virtual assessment systems  
investment and strong  
policies  
Source: Study data  
POLICY AND RECOMMENDATIONS  
Effective SBA (School-Based Assessment) systems are underpinned by clear national policy frameworks,  
comprehensive teacher training, and stakeholder engagement mechanisms (Earl & Katz, 2002; OECD, 2013).  
Countries such as Finland, New Zealand, and Singapore demonstrate that successful SBA depends on aligning  
assessment practices with pedagogical goals while offering institutional support structures such as continuous  
professional development and robust moderation (Sahlberg, 2011; Hipkins & Vaughan, 2019; Tan & Ng, 2020).  
For Sri Lanka, the review recommends a multi-pronged strategy to enhance SBA credibility and effectiveness.  
First, the development of validated and reliable SBA tools is essential to reduce inconsistency and increase  
standardization (Perera et al., 2020). Second, moderation mechanisms must be strengthened to ensure inter-  
school equity and fairness in grading (NEC, 2016; Weerakoon, 2025). Third, ongoing teacher professional  
development in formative assessment principles, rubrics, and feedback strategies is necessary to build  
assessment literacy (Abayasekara & Arunatilake, 2018; Brookhart, 2013a).  
Lastly, the integration of SBA into Sri Lanka’s national education policy must be done with institutional clarity,  
clear role definitions, and sustained policy commitment to ensure alignment across curricular, assessment, and  
accountability domains (Sachith & Niroshinie, 2025; UNESCO, 2022). Table 4.5 summarizes the policy  
recommendations for Sri Lanka derived from international practices.  
Table No. 4.5: Summary of the policy recommendations for Sri Lanka derived from international practices  
Effective SBA requires  
clear policies aligned with  
pedagogy and curriculum  
Finland, New Integrate SBA with national education  
National Policy  
Frameworks  
Zealand,  
policy using clear role definitions and  
policy coherence  
Singapore  
Continuous PD, assessment Finland, New  
Provide ongoing PD on formative  
assessment, rubrics, feedback  
strategies  
Teacher Training  
& Professional  
Development  
literacy, and moderation  
training strengthen SBA  
quality  
Zealand  
Robust moderation ensures  
consistency, reliability, and New Zealand  
fairness  
Singapore,  
Strengthen moderation mechanisms to  
ensure inter-school equity and reduce  
grading disparities  
Institutional  
Support &  
Moderation  
Standardized tools improve  
assessment validity and  
minimize inconsistencies  
Global best  
practices  
Develop validated SBA instruments to  
improve reliability and comparability  
Validated &  
Reliable SBA  
Tools  
Page 9294  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
SBA succeeds when  
pedagogy and assessment  
share aligned goals  
Finland,  
Singapore  
Enhance teachers’ assessment literacy;  
align SBA tasks with student-centred  
pedagogy  
Assessment  
Literacy &  
Pedagogical  
Alignment  
Sustained national  
commitment ensures long-  
term success and scalability  
OECD nations  
Ensure long-term policy stability,  
institutional clarity, and stronger  
accountability structures  
Policy  
Commitment &  
System Coherence  
Source: Study data  
CONCLUSION  
Globally, School-Based Assessment (SBA) is increasingly recognized as a flexible and context-sensitive tool for  
evaluating student learning in a manner that is holistic, authentic, and inclusive (OECD, 2013; Brookhart,  
2013a). Rooted in constructivist and formative paradigms, SBAempowers learners to engage meaningfully with  
content through reflection, feedback, and performance-based tasks (Earl & Katz, 2002; Hipkins & Vaughan,  
2019). It is not only a method of assessment but also a pedagogical tool that supports deep learning,  
metacognition, and self-regulation (Sahlberg, 2011; Tan & Ng, 2020).  
Despite differences in socioeconomic and educational contexts, recurring themes emerge globally—most  
notably, the critical role of teacher preparedness, policy coherence, and systemic institutional support  
(Klenowski, 2011; UNESCO, 2022). Successful examples from Finland, New Zealand, and Singapore illustrate  
that when SBA is embedded within national curricula, supported by robust moderation systems, and  
complemented with sustained professional development, it enhances both equity and learning outcomes  
(Sahlberg, 2011; Hipkins & Vaughan, 2019; MOE, 2020).  
Conversely, nations like Sri Lanka, SouthAfrica, and China reveal how implementation gaps, such as insufficient  
teacher training, weak infrastructure, and policy-practice disconnects, continue to undermine the full potential  
of SBA (Perera et al., 2020; Deneen & Hoo, 2021; Sayed & Kanjee, 2013; Weerakoon, 2025; Sachith &  
Niroshinie, 2025). These challenges call for targeted reforms, particularly in the areas of assessment literacy,  
tool validation, and digital equity, especially in rural and underserved areas (UNESCO, 2022; Zakaria et al.,  
2024).  
As education systems globally move beyond the limitations of high-stakes, summative examinations, SBA  
presents a promising pathway for cultivating lifelong learners, critical thinkers, and adaptive citizens for the 21st  
century (Brookhart, 2020; ACARA, 2020). Its emphasis on learner agency, formative feedback, and real-world  
applicability aligns with the evolving demands of modern economies and democratic societies.  
Future research should focus on longitudinal studies that evaluate the sustained impact of SBA on academic  
performance, student well-being, and post-school outcomes. Moreover, cross-national comparative studies are  
needed to identify effective models of SBA implementation and scalability across diverse educational systems,  
including those in low- and middle-income countries.  
BIBLIOGRAPHY  
1. Abayasekara, A., & Arunatilake, N. (2018). School-level resource allocation and education outcomes in  
Sri  
Lanka.  
International  
Journal  
of  
Educational  
Development,  
61,  
127–141.  
2. Aturupane, H., & Little, A. W. (2019). General education in Sri Lanka. In Global education systems (pp.  
3. Australian  
Curriculum, Assessment  
and  
Reporting Authority.  
(2020). Assessment.  
Page 9295  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
4. Brookhart, S. M. (2013). Classroom assessment in the context of motivation theory and research. In J.  
H. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 35–54). SAGE  
5. Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies  
in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075071003642449  
6. Chisholm, L., & Leyendecker, R. (2007). Curriculum reform in post-1990s sub-Saharan Africa.  
International  
Journal  
of  
Educational  
Development,  
28(2),  
195–205.  
7. Deneen, C. C., & Hoo, H. (2021). Connecting teacher and student assessment literacy with self-  
evaluation and peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(2), 214–226.  
8. Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2002). Leading schools in a data-rich world. In A. Harris, C. Day, M. Hadfield, D.  
Hopkins, H. Hargreaves, & C. Chapman (Eds.), Effective leadership for school improvement (pp. 1003–  
9. Edussuriya, D. H., Waduge, R. N., Lamawansa, M. D., & Samaranayake, A. N. (2018). Evaluation of the  
cognitive level of essay questions of an undergraduate medical program in Sri Lanka, using Bloom’s  
taxonomy. Sri Lanka Journal of Medicine, 27(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljm.v27i1.72  
10. Evans, C. (2021). Enhancing assessment feedback practice in higher education: The EAT framework  
11. Fine, M., & Pryiomka, K. (2020). Assessing college readiness through authentic student work. Learning  
Policy  
Institute.  
12. Hapugoda, J. C., & Kulasekara, G. U. (2024). Harnessing the affective domain of learning taxonomy for  
value integration in online learning. International Conference on Learning, Virtual Education (ICLVE),  
13. Hipkins, R., Vaughan, K., & New Zealand Council for Educational Research. (2019). Subject choice for  
the future of work: Insights from research literature [Technical report]. New Zealand Council for  
14. Issaka, N. J., Hammond, N. D. K., Yeyie, N. P., & Agroh, N. P. K. (2020). Benefits of School-Based  
Assessment in the learning of Social Studies. Social Education Research, 219–228.  
15. Klenowski, V. (2011). Assessment for learning in the accountability era: Queensland, Australia. Studies  
in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.003  
16. Ministry of Education. (1998). Implementation of school-based assessment (Circular No. 1998/45).  
Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka.  
17. Ministry of Education. (2001). Revised guidelines on continuous assessment (Circular No. 2001/23).  
Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka.  
18. Ministry of Education. (2003). Guidelines for implementing school-based assessment in Sri Lankan  
schools (Circular No. 2003/13). Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka.  
19. Ministry of Education. (2017). Further instructions on school-based assessment implementation (Circular  
No. 2017/23). Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka.  
21. National Education Commission. (2016). Proposals for a national policy on general education in Sri  
education-in-sri-lanka-2016/  
22. National Examination and School Inspection Authority. (2023, February). National subject assessment  
standards  
for  
the  
end  
of  
term  
II,  
2022–2023  
school  
year.  
b47e15b0970e9ffc2b  
23. New Zealand Qualifications Authority. (2023, November 7). Spotlight 4: Innovative internal assessment  
4
24. OECD, Pont, B., Musset, P., Istance, D., Vincent-Lancrin, S., Van Damme, D., Weatherby, K., Achiron,  
M., Del Bourgo, E., Tessier, R., & Villoutreix, E. (2013). Preparing teachers and developing school  
Page 9296  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025| Special Issue on  
leaders for the 21st century: Lessons from around the world (A. Schleicher, Ed.). OECD Publishing.  
25. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). Growing success: Assessment, evaluation, and reporting in  
Ontario  
schools.  
Ontario  
Ministry  
of  
Education.  
26. Perera, G. G. P. S., Bandara, A., & Ekanayake, S. Y. (2020). Study of the existing status of school-based  
assessment system in upper school chemistry of Sri Lanka. European Journal of Education Studies, 7(10).  
27. Sachith, E. M. Y., & Niroshinie, R. D. C. (2025). An investigation of the nature of the school-based  
assessment (SBA) programme implemented in junior secondary (Grades 6–9) classes in Sri Lanka.  
Rajasthan Association for Studies on English, 19(Special Issue), 1–15. ISSN 0975-3419  
28. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Paradoxes of educational improvement: The Finnish experience. Scottish  
improvement-SER-2011.pdf  
29. Sayed, Y., Kanjee, A., & Nkomo, M. (2013). The search for quality education in post-apartheid South  
Africa: Interventions to improve learning and teaching. HSRC Publishers.  
30. Senarath, S. (2020). Examination stress, stress management strategies, and counseling needs of college  
level students in Sri Lanka. Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Science, 8(2), 45–56.  
31. Tan, C., & Hairon, S. (2016). Education reform in China: Toward classroom communities. Action in  
32. Tong, S. Y. A., & Adamson, B. (2015). Student voices in school-based assessment. Australian Journal of  
33. UNESCO. (2022). Sri Lanka – National consultation report (Transforming education). UNESCO Office  
Bangkok.  
34. Weerakoon, D. (2025). Unmasking exam pressure: Reimagining Sri Lanka’s education for a brighter  
35. Zakaria, N., Lim, G. F., Jalil, N. A., Anuar, N. N. A. N., & Aziz, A. A. (2024). The implementation of  
personalised learning to teach English in Malaysian low-enrolment schools. SHS Web of Conferences,  
Page 9297