Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.

org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

Problems of Implementing Continuous Assessment in

Primary Schools in Nigeria
Atsumbe Bernard N. and Raymond Emmanuel
Department of Industrial and Technology Education, Federal University of Technology, Minna Niger
State.
*E-mail of the correspondence author: atsumbe@yahoo.com

Abstract
Although there have been a general outcry about the various problems hindering the implementation of
continuous assessment in schools, nobody seems to have come out objectively to identify these
problems. Therefore this study was design to identify these problems and proffer solutions. Five
research questions and one hypothesis were stated. Primary school Teachers and their Headmasters
from Niger and Kogi States constituted the subjects. A 26 items questionnaire organized into 5
categories was used. The data was analyzed using chi-square (x2). Findings showed that Teachers
deliberately set simple C.A. test, some are overloaded with as much as twelve subjects, children cheat
to pass C.A. test, no financial or material stationeries support from the Government and lack of
uniformity of standards in different schools. Recommendations include adequate financial and material
support, training for Teachers in special subject areas, constant workshop or seminars for Teachers.
The need for inspectors to go round and ensure that standards are maintained and the need for Teachers
to be properly remunerated were also mentioned.

Introduction
Continuous assessment is defined as a mechanism whereby the final grading of a student in the
cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains of behavior takes account in a systematic way, of all his
performances during a giving period of schooling. Such an assessment involves a great variety of
modes of evaluation for the purpose of guiding and improving the learning and performance of the
student (Federal Ministry of Education, 1988).
Prior to the institution of the continuous assessment, the primary and secondary schools in the country
based their assessment and promotion of learners on the result of the promotion examinations that
usually came up at the end of each academic session. Through the result of such one-shot
examinations, summary judgments were passed on the Childs learning and achievement.
While teachers taught almost exclusively for the purpose of passing these examination and students
started with cheating of diverse sorts to pass the examinations, more daring learners, usually the more
insecure student, were all out for live papers (Ipaye 1982). This was the genesis of the large scale
examination malpractices which characterized the years between 1970 1978 in the history of
Nigerian education.
Prior to this time, the idea of continuous assessment had been muted at the curriculum conference of
1969. It would seem, however, that the alarming rate at which examination leakages and malpractices
gathered momentum during the decades, 1970-1980 inspired the recommendation in the National
Policy on Education first published in 1977 and revised in 1981 that continuous assessment should be
started for the educational programme at all levels.
It is expected that if the continuous assessment is adopted, not only will much of the current
examination malpractices be largely eliminated but also more meaningful learning will result. The
overall portrait of a pupils performances can be presented more reliably, more comprehensively and
more systematically.
Nwana (1979) observed that if the programme of continuous assessment must be effectively utilize in
our primary schools, teachers must of necessity demonstrate the ability to construct the various
instruments and employ the various techniques of collecting evidence on learner products. Above all,
they ought to be able to interpret the meaning of scores and grades awarded to students in the various
measuring instruments. Thus, teachers should demonstrate competences in the construction of test of
various sorts, questionnaires. Checklist and rating scale necessary for assessing cognitive, effective
learning outcome.
Success in implementing the continuous assessment programme largely depends on the number of
other factors. Not only must the teacher be vast in the act of constructing meaningful assessment
instrument, in addition they ought to be able to utilize the result of such assessments in improving the

71
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

school curriculum in the area of teaching and learning. The teachers who are supposed to employ this
system ought to be interest in and committed to the programme.

Problem of the Study

The success of the continuous assessment programme could lead to improved standard of teaching-
learning in our schools. For the programme to be successful the problems standing on the way to its
effective implementation must first be identified and then eliminated. What are these problems? How
can they be identified? On the basis of the identified problems, what recommendations can be made
toward improving the situation?

Research Questions
In order to accomplish the objectives of the study, the following research questions were put forward to
guide the investigation.

1. What teacher factors constitute problems in implementing the continuous assessment (CA)
programme in the primary school?
2. What learner factors constitute problems in implementing the CA programme in the Primary
Schools?
3. What government factors constitute problems in implementing the CA programme in the
primary school?
4. What problems are associated with the collection and utilization of evidence on pupils
progress?
5. What problems of uniformity of standards are encountered in the CA in the primary schools?

Hypothesis
The following null hypothesis was formulated to facilitate the analysis of data obtained from the
questionnaires:
There is no significant difference in the frequency of responses identifying each of the items
within each category as constituting a problem to continuous assessment and the frequency of
responses holding contrary views.

Subjects
The subjects used for the study consisted of a total of five hundred and forty-eight (548) primary school
(grade II) teachers drawn from Niger (243) and Kogi (305) states. Out of the sample from Niger State
130 and 113 subjects were drawn from rural and urban school centres respectively. And for the sample
from Kogi State, 162 and 143 subjects were drawn from rural and urban environments respectively.
Thus, a total of 292 and 256 subjects were randomly selected from rural and urban centres respectively.
Out of the total number from Niger State, there were 43 headteachers while the subjects from Kogi
State contained 37 headteachers. Thus, the sample effectively represented the two states.

Data Collection Instrument and Method

The researchers interviewed (20) primary school teachers and three (3) headteachers not included in the
sample for information on various possible problems associated with the CA programme of evaluation
in the primary school. The information supplied by them was used to develop a questionnaire
consisting of 26 items organized into 5 categories: (1) teacher-centred problems; (2) learner-centred
problems; (3) government centred problems; (4) problems of collecting and utilizing evidence; (5)
problems of items suggested and problems associated with each of the five categories. Respondents
were expected to indicate on a 4-point scale whether they strongly agreed, agreed, disagreed or strongly
disagreed with statements made in the questionnaire regarding the existence of those problem areas.
After the questionnaires had been constructed in agreement with the research questions and validated
by 3 experienced colleagues in the Department of Education, the researcher pretested the questionnaire
on a sample of thirty primary school teachers who did not participate in the study. Their responses
showed that the items were not only valid but also unambiguous.
The questionnaire was administered to the sample during their hours. They filled in the questionnaire at
the same time and where a few people needed some clarifications, these were made. The percentage
return of the questionnaire was 100.

72
 Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

Data Analysis Plan

In order to analyse the data obtained with respect to the research questions and hypothesis, the
frequencies of responses made by respondents for each questionnaire items were calculated. The
frequencies of responses under strongly agree and agree were pooled together to stand for positive
response-agree, while the responses under disagree and strongly disagree were pooled for negative
response disagree. Using the chi-square the data was analysed to determine whether there were
significant differences between the frequencies of positive and negative responses. The null hypothesis
related to each questionnaire item was rejected or upheld at the 0.05 level of significance. Since the
analysis involved 1 degree of freedom, the special Yates correction formular for chi-square analysis
was used.

Findings
The table below summarizes the analysis of items related to the research questions and hypothesis.
Summary Table of Chi-Square Analysis of Frequency of Positive and Negative Responses to
Items Relating to Identified Problems of Continuous Assessment in Primary Schools
Problem S/No Specific Problems Frequencies X2 at 1 Signific Decision
Category df and ance
0.05
Agreed Disagree

1. Some teachers set simple 305 243 7.02 Sign Reject

questions to record high null
percentage pass

Teacher 2. Teachers are reluctant to perform 327 221 20.51

the continuous assessment
regularly

3. Many teachers can not construct 217 331 23.72

good multiple choice tests

4. C. A. makes teachers 416 132 147.18

overworked

5. Some teachers forge pupils 348 200 39.78

marks to make up for undone
tests

6. Some teachers repeat old test 277 271 0.07 Not sign Dont
questions when they havent reject
covered enough ground

1. Pupils cheat in order to pass tests 344 204 37.77 Sign Reject

2. Pupils are threatened by the tests 256 292 2.37 Not sign Dont
reject
Learner 3. Pupils dont understand the 296 252 3.54
centred purpose of C.A

4. Pupils are psychologically 226 322 16.11 Sign Reject

depressed by failure

5. Some pupils absent themselves 291 257 2.11 Not sign Dont
from school if they expect the reject
tests.

73
 Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

1. Govt. fails to supply equipment

needed for conducting the C.A
e.g
455 93 239.14 Sign Reject
(a) Typewriters
(b) Cyclostyling machines 448 0 548.00
(c) Duplicating machines
(d) File jackets or other 446 102 215.04
storage facilities
548 0 548.00
Governme 2. Govt. provides no extra money
nt centred for operating the C.A 502 46 379.45 Sign Reject

3. Govt. supplies no proformas for 548 0 548.00

entering grades and other
records

1. Some teachers cant set good 210 338 29.8

questions especially objective
tests

2. Most teachers set only multiple- 492 56 346.89

choice or fill-in the gap
questions that are easy to mark

Problem 3. Teachers lack the time to correct 503 45 382.798

of or revise pupils scripts before
collection test
and
utilization 4. Many teachers cant evaluate 417 131 149.26
of some subjects e.g. music, drama
evidence etc. properly

5. One teacher cant evaluate the 402 146 119.59

class for all effective purposes.

6. Some bad behaved children may 267 281 0.36 Not sign Dont
not be discovered by a teacher reject

7. Teachers lack knowledge of 488 60 334.28 Sign Reject

other means of evaluating the
effective e.g. sociometry
(peer evaluation)

8. Some unusual pupil behaviours 393 155 103.37 Sign

are difficult to evaluate/interpret

Problem 1. Standards of performance vary 311 237 9.72

of uniform from school to school
standard
2. Teachers rating of pupils 356 192 48.48
behavior may be subjective in
favour of some people

Sign* = Significant difference in favour of negative response of disagree.

74
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

With respect to the teacher centred problems of the CA, there were positive significant differences (in
favour of disagree) in the frequencies of responses in items 1, 2, 4, and 5. The frequencies from item
3, was significant but in favour of negative (disagree) responses. And for item 6, it was statistically not
significant.
Within the learner-centred category, the frequency of agree responses for item 1 was
significant while for item 4, the frequency was significant but in favour of disagree. For the
government centred category, all the frequencies for all the items were statistically significant in favour
of agree responses.
In the category of problems of collection and utilization of evidence, the frequency for item 1 was
significant in favour of the negative (disagree) responses; for item 6 it was not significant; while for the
problem of uniform standards, the frequencies for the two items were significant in favour of agree
responses.

Discussion
The findings include that many teachers deliberately set simple C.A. test in order to record high
percentage passes in their classes. This behavior may result from the fact that inspectors often go round
schools to check the assessment grades of pupils. A teacher may therefore wish to convince the
inspectors that he teaches so well that most of his pupils pass well. This practice is most damaging to
the main purpose of the whole teaching learning exercise. The study also revealed that many teachers
are reluctant to conduct the C.A. regularly that is once every two weeks, the C.A. if adhered strictly to,
makes the teachers over-worked; and as a result some teachers put down fictitious marks/grades in
pupils records to represent grades of tests which in actual fact were not conducted.
When interviewed, many primary school teachers disclosed how demanding the C.A. policy is on
them. There are usually many (at least twelve) subjects that are taught and learned in the primary
schools. One teacher (sometimes aided by another teacher) teaches the entire subjects to the class
pupils. It is easy to imagine what volume of work a single teacher has to do when he is made to set test
questions in all the 12 subjects, mark the tests, record the marks, finding the class average and positions
of each member-every two weeks. While we acknowledge how tedious it is for one teacher to do all the
work, there is no justification for teachers to forge marks for tests not conducted.
Within the learner centered problem category the findings show that children cheat (copy from other
pupils, etc) in order to pass the tests. Yet the children do not seem to be either threatened by the tests or
depressed when they perform poorly in the examinations. This situation might result from the fact that
they do not seem to understand the philosophy of the C.A. clearly. Thus, because they are neither
threatened by the examinations nor depressed by failure, they hardly absent themselves from school
because of the tests.
It is painful to observe that in spite of all the emphasis government places on the C.A. there is no
financial or other material support offered by the government toward promoting the C.A. The schools
need stationeries and other equipment for effective implementation of the programme. There should be
at least one typewriter and duplicating machine with substantial quantity of paper for conducting the
periodic tests. The C.A. becomes useless if no provision is made for the preservation of records of tests.
Thus file jackets and metal drawers are of utmost importance for this purpose the one for keeping
individual pupils records, and the other for preserving the entire school records, especially against fire
outbreak. Where the government cannot provide these, money should be made available for the
procurement of the items. It is necessary also for the schools to be provided with the Performa for
entering pupils grade as well as other records of other affective, social and psychomotor behaviors.
This would save teachers the inconvenience of and time for tabulating those entries constantly.
Several problems are associated with the collection and utilization of evidence. Probably as a result of
the effort and time demanded on teachers for practicing the C.A. most teachers set only multiple-choice
test questions or the fill-in-the-gap type that are relatively easier to mark than the essay type items. This
findings agrees with the view of Akaju (1977) that most teachers go for test instruments such as
multiple choice and fill-in-the-gap which does not give the true picture of pupils behavior. Although
the teachers claim to be able to construct good multiple choice test item, it would seem that for a more
balanced and useful learning outcomes, a combination of essay and the multiple-choice type is
recommended.
Most teachers hardly find time to revise previous tests in class so that learners can learn from the
revision exercises. When such revisions are not carried out, then a most essential component of the

75
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol 3, No 6, 2012

C.A. has been neglected; otherwise, how can we guarantee that pupils have mastered all that they
should learn?
Lots of subjects are included in the syllabus of our primary schools including those for which the
available teachers are not properly trained to teach. Such subjects include music and drama. The result
is that teachers merely fill in any marks against pupils names for such subjects. Special teachers for
such special subjects need to be brought in to teach and evaluate pupils performance.
The respondents expressed the view that a single teacher can hardly evaluate learners performance in
many relevant affective behaviours. This fact calls for concerted effort on the part of several teachers
working together in evaluating pupils affective behaviours. Furthermore, sociometric techniques
(which) involve inferring from the entire class response the popularity or otherwise or other elements
of the behaviour of pupils are not employed by teachers for collecting evidence. These and other
techniques for collecting data need to be taught to the teachers, preferably during in-service training
courses, so that they would be able to demonstrate competence in gathering valuable data of various
sorts posted. (Unruh and Alexander, 1974).
Finally, Mkpa (1981) observed that with respect to the problem area of uniform standards, teachers
believe that some schools are known for maintaining higher standards than others. They also state that
teachers rating of pupil behaviours could be subjective. In coping with the first problem, it is hereby
suggested that periodic workshops should be held for teachers wherein they would be taught how to
unify standards of performance in the various schools. Inspectors of education should also go round to
ensure that such standards are maintained. This can be done through all the teachers of given primary
school classes with a zone coming together to set and harmonize their test questions under the
supervision of authorities from the Ministry of Education.
In order to ensure that a teachers rating is not subjective; several teachers should rate children on every
given behavior. Paper evaluation needs also to be effectively exploited.

References
Federal Ministry of Education (1988). Handbook on Continuous Assessment, Lagos Evaluation Unit,
Ministry of Education.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981). National Policy on Education (Revised) Lagos: Federal
Government Press.
Ipaye, Tunde (1982). Continuous Assessment in Schools (With Some Counselling Applications). Ilorin:
Ilorin University Press.
Mkpa, A. H. (1981). Curriculum Design and Instructional Evaluation. Ibadan, Evans Brothers Nigeria
Ltd.
Nwana, O. C. (1979). Educational Measurement for Teachers. Ibadan: Nelson-Africa.
Ohuche, R. O. and S. A. Akoju (1977). Testing and Evaluation in Education. Lagos: African Education
Resources (Nig.) Ltd.
Unruh G. G. and W. M. Alexander (1974). Innovation in Secondary Education 2nd Edition. New York,
Holt, Rinchart and Wiston.

76
This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,
Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access
Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is
Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.

More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTEs homepage:
http://www.iiste.org

The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and
collaborating with academic institutions around the world. Prospective authors of
IISTE journals can find the submission instruction on the following page:
http://www.iiste.org/Journals/

The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified
submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the
readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than
those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the
journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.

IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners

EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open

Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial
Library , NewJour, Google Scholar