Schools in Singapore adhere closely to the national curriculum. In 2006, the Ministry of Education rolled out Teach Less Learn More (TLLM), which called on teachers to re-examine the how, what and why of teaching so as to improve student learning and to increase student engagement.  TLLM continues systemic changes under the Thinking Schools Learning Nation mission which aims to develop students into “thinking and committed citizens” (Ministry of Education, 2009).  Thinking Schools are to serve as “crucibles for questioning and searching” (Goh, 1997) such that they will nurture students who have a zest for learning.  Learning Nation envisages that learning extends beyond school.  Ultimately, the aim was to prepare students for life in the knowledge society.

The implications of TLLM on classroom assessment are that teachers “teach for the test of life and not a life of tests”; focus on the process and not the product of learning; and use more formative and qualitative assessment instead of test preparation and standard formulae answers (MOE (Bluesky), 2007).

Broadly, the TLLM tenets reflect constructivist learning theories (Koh & Luke, 2009).  However, TLLM does not recommend a swing from behaviourist approaches to learning and assessment.  Rather, TLLM advocates “more” of some practices, and “less of others”.  Seven years after TLLM, to what extent do Singapore geography teachers enact more qualitative and less quantitative assessing? Do the assessment tasks provide students with opportunities to apply higher-order thinking skills and to demonstrate their learning in different ways? Or are teachers still mimicking the format and modes used in the national examinations?

To this end, the study draws on theories of constructivist learning and assessment to analyse and interpret the study findings.  Specifically, I draw on Torrance and Pryor’s (2001) convergent-divergent and constructivist assessment (Shepard, 2000) to examine the nature and quality of classroom assessment used in geography assessment.  In addition, the authentic intellectual work (AIW) criteria (Newmann & Associates, 1996) are used as indicators of the type of 21^st century higher-order thinking as envisaged in TLLM (e.g., process of learning, searching questions, understanding).

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102 Koh, K. H., & Luke, A. (2009). Authentic and conventional assessments in Singapore schools: An empirical study of teacher assignments and student work. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 291-318. Newmann, F. M., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Newmann, F. M., Secada, W. G., & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). A guide to authentic instruction and assessment: Vision, standards and scoring. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Ng, P. T. (Ed.). (2008). Thinking schools, learning nation: Contemporary issues and challenges. Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102 Newmann, F. M., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Newmann, F. M., Secada, W. G., & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). A guide to authentic instruction and assessment: Vision, standards and scoring. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Ng, P. T. (Ed.). (2008). Thinking schools, learning nation: Contemporary issues and challenges. Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.