Assessment

Assessment is an ongoing process with the key aim of understanding and improving learner learning. The following principles of assessment at SIT are outlined (not listed in order of priority):

Criterion-referenced: Criterion referencing is critical to SIT’s emphasis on competency-based education. It ensures that learners are assessed based on their ability to meet specific pre-determined learning outcomes, competencies and performance standards, rather than being compared and evaluated in relation to their peers' performance.

Relevant and Authentic: Academic assessment should focus on evaluating industry-relevant knowledge, competencies, skills, and, where applicable, behaviours, attitudes and transferable skills. When designing assessment tasks, it is important to ensure that they address the attributes learners need to cultivate and develop.

Fit for Purpose: Well-designed assessment tasks, combined with timely and constructive feedback, can drive active learning rather than simply being a measure of learner’s achievement.

Valid: Validity ensures that assessment tasks and criteria effectively measure the learner’s attainment of the intended and communicated learning outcomes at an appropriate level. A valid assessment should assess what it claims to assess, as intended.

Reliable: Reliable assessment uses consistent methods and procedures to ensure the competency standards are interpreted and applied correctly. This means that different assessors, using the same assessment criteria and marking rubrics, would arrive at the same evaluations and results.

Transparent: The module profile clearly defines and communicates to the learners an explicit and logical relationship among assessment tasks, learning outcomes, and the criteria used as the basis of assessment.

Efficient and Manageable: Assessment is conducted within the available resource provisions and educational technology, making it achievable for both academic staff and learners with reasonable effort.

Fair and Equitable: The content, format and conduct of assessment are designed to ensure that no individual or group of learners are unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged. Varied assessment modes may be considered. The weightage of assessment items should reflect the amount of work required to prepare for and complete the assessment. Appropriate assessment accommodations should be made for learners with special needs or medical conditions to ensure that all learners have equitable opportunities to succeed.

Assessment Strategy
Assessment strategy should include formative and summative assessments to promote deep learning and measure competency, knowledge and attitudes.
Assessments should be continuous and spread out across the Trimester, rather than concentrated (in weight and/or in time) at the end of the module.
An early assessment, either formative or summative, should be scheduled to provide learners with early feedback, allowing them to apply it towards the subsequent related assessment.
Where possible, assessments should be integrated across modules, either within the same Trimester or across related modules over different Trimesters.
Assessments in weeks 14/15 are not restricted to traditional examinations. They may include alternative assessments, such as assignments, projects and practical examinations.
Assessment Outcomes/Aims
In addition to Module Learning Outcomes (MLOs)/competencies, assessments must be mapped to programme-level outcomes.
Assessments should, where feasible, include evaluations of professional skills and competencies to prepare learners for professional readiness.
Assessment Weightage
SIT has shifted away from relying on a single high-weightage examination at the end of the Trimester. Except for capstone modules and Integrated Work Study Programme (IWSP) modules, no individual assessment item in a module/competency unit (CU) should exceed 35% weightage.
Integrated, authentic assessments that require continuous effort over an extended period (e.g., project-based) may account for up to 50% of the total weight, with scaffolded feedback provided throughout the process. Such heavily weighted assessments should be reviewed and approved by the Director(s) of Programmes (DoP).
Weightage of assessment should align with the format of assessment and intended learning outcomes. To avoid grade inflation, the weightage of items such as in-class participation, online participation, lab participation, and peer evaluation should be kept minimal. Attendance alone should not contribute to the assessment mark, although it may serve as a hurdle requirement. Where feasible, summative assessments should consider the demands (including weighting and scheduling) of assessments in parallel modules/CUs within the programme.
Group marks should not constitute more than 50% of the total marks in a module. For assessments that include group work, there should be an individual evaluation component (e.g., peer evaluation or individual questioning).
Any deviations from the above clauses must be approved by the DoP.
Assessment weightage must not be changed after it has been communicated to the learners.
Format of Assessment
Assessors must ensure that learners are well-acquainted with the format, platform or tools required for assessments, particularly online ones, to maintain the assessment’s validity. To help learners become familiar with these requirements, trial or mock sessions may be conducted. The assessment format must be clearly communicated to learners through the module/CU profile and the Learning Management System within the first two weeks of the module. For any alternative assessments or changes in the assessment mode, this information must be provided to learners at least two weeks prior to the assessment.
Coordination of Assessment
To manage learner assessment load, Programme Leaders (PLs) should designate an academic staff member to coordinate the timing of assessments across the modules in a trimester.
Information Pertaining to Assessment
Assessment information, such as the weightage of tasks, should be listed in module documents and followed as outlined. Any changes after the first week of the Trimester require formal approval from the Programme Learner (PL). Learners must be given sufficient notice before the assessment.
Academic staff should inform learners about the acceptable use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools. They should also emphasise the importance of clearly declaring any AI assistance used in the learners’ assignments, as this declaration maintains transparency and upholds academic integrity.
Where more than one instructor is involved in providing information to learners about assessment requirements, consistent information must be provided.
Assessment Marking
Anonymous marking is undertaken where appropriate and feasible.
When there is a likelihood of conflict of interest (e.g., a family member or close associate is enrolled in a module in the programme), the academic staff member shall not participate in marking assessments or determining the final grade. The academic staff member must inform their reporting officer of the potential conflict at the earliest opportunity, so that alternative arrangements for assessment can be made.
Reliable assessment employs consistent methods and procedures to ensure that competency standards are interpreted and applied uniformly. This ensures that different assessors will produce consistent evaluations and results using the same assessment criteria and marking rubrics.
Adjustments to Assessments
Reasonable adjustments or changes to assessments may be made in certain circumstances (e.g. due to medical conditions or special education needs) to ensure equitable participation for all learners. The changes may involve adjustments to the assessment format or the assessment duration. Proposed changes by the Module Lead (ML) must be formally approved by the Programme Leader (PL).
Adjustments must retain the essential Module Learning Outcomes (MLOs)/competencies assessed for the module/CU and programme.
Feedback on Assessments
SIT recognises that timely feedback for assessment tasks enhances future learning and improves learner’s performance. Ideally, feedback should be provided within 10 working days. This ensures that learners receive feedback in time to prepare effectively for their next assessment task.
Feedback should be provided for all Continuous Assessment (CA) tasks and, where possible, faculty should offer feedback on learning points from examinations. Feedback can be delivered in various forms (e.g., written, verbal) and from multiple sources (e.g., self, peer, tutor).
Record-Keeping of Assessments
To maintain assessment integrity and improve feedback quality, all assessments and their evaluations must be clearly documented and retained for five years. For assessments like presentations or oral exams, it is recommended to assign two markers, record the session, or keep detailed records of performance based on established criteria and standards.

All information is accurate as of 20 March 2025. SIT reserves the right to update the information as required.

Back to Academic Bulletin