MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND EXTERNAL STUDIES

EASTAFRICAN SCHOOL OF HIGHER EDUCATION STUDIES AND
DEVELOPMENT
NAME: NATTEMBO VICTORIA

REG. NO.: 2024/HD04/12168U

STUDENT NO.: 24OO712168

PROGRAM: MASTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION TEACHING AND LEARNING

COURSE UNITE: ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION

COURSE FACILITATORS: DR. GERALD BWENVU

QUESTION;

Overview of classroom, program and institutional assessment: Assessing outcomes and links to
assessment policy and practice: Assessing student inputs: Assessment as direct feedback to
learners and assessing the learning environment.

Overview of Classroom, Program, and Institutional Assessment in Uganda’s Higher

Education Context

In Uganda’s higher education system, assessment practices serve as critical tools for evaluating
learning outcomes, providing feedback to students, and shaping the learning environment. These
practices operate at three levels, classroom, program, and institutional each contributing uniquely
to the quality and relevance of education.

Classroom Assessment

This refers to methods and tools used by teachers to evaluate student learning, understanding,
skills, and development. It is typically more focused on individual students or small groups
within a classroom setting.
Purpose of classroom assessment

 To measure how well students are learning the material.

 To provide feedback to students to improve their performance.
 To help teachers adjust their instructional strategies.
 To monitor student progress and identify learning gaps.

Classroom assessment can be done using different methods which include;

 Formative Assessment. This is ongoing assessments such as quizzes, assignments, oral

presentations, observations that inform teaching and learning during the lesson or unit.
 Summative Assessment. This is the final evaluations such as exams, final projects, or
essays that assess students' overall learning at the end of a lesson or term.
 Diagnostic Assessment. This is pre-assessments that help identify students' prior
knowledge and learning needs before beginning a new topic.
 Peer and Self-assessment. Here the students evaluate their own or each other’s work to
foster reflective learning and collaboration.

Program Assessment

This aims at evaluating the effectiveness of a particular academic program or course, usually at
the departmental or institutional level. It examines how well the overall structure, curriculum and
delivery support students in achieving the learning objectives.

Purpose of program Assessment

 To assess how well the program meets its intended goals and learning outcomes.
 To evaluate curriculum coherence and how well individual courses contribute to the
program objectives.
 To identify strengths and weaknesses in the program structure or content.
  To inform program improvement and development.

Methods used in program assessment

 Curriculum Mapping. This involve analyzing the alignment of course content with
program goals and ensuring all necessary competencies are being covered.
 Exit Surveys or Interviews. This is gathering feedback from students or alumni on their
experiences and the effectiveness of the program.
 Assessment of Learning Outcomes. This involve reviewing student performance across
multiple courses or over time to see if learning objectives are being met.
 External Reviews. Programs are sometimes evaluated by external bodies or accrediting
agencies such as National Council for Higher Education in Uganda’s context

Institutional Assessment

This looks at the overall effectiveness of an educational institution, including its academic,
administrative, and support functions. This type of assessment is broader and involves examining
the institution's policies, resources, facilities, and overall educational environment.

Purpose of Institutional assessment

 To evaluate institutional performance and effectiveness in fulfilling its mission, vision,

and strategic goals.
 To assess institutional quality and areas for improvement.
 To support accreditation processes and regulatory compliance.
 To ensure that the institution is meeting national or international educational standards.

Methods used in institutional assessment

 Institutional Surveys. It involve making surveys of students, faculty, staff, and

stakeholders to gather feedback on the institution's performance in various areas.
 Accreditation Reviews. These are usually periodic reviews by accreditation bodies to
assess institutional compliance with established standards.
  Data Analysis. This involve the examining institutional data, such as graduation rates,
retention rates, and employment outcomes, to assess institutional success.
 Strategic Planning. This ensures aligning institutional assessments with long-term goals
and making data-driven decisions to improve overall effectiveness.

b)

Assessing Outcomes and Links to Assessment Policy and Practice

The assessment of learning outcomes in Uganda’s higher education is pivotal for ensuring that
graduates acquire the knowledge, skills, and competencies demanded by the labor market and
society. According to Zlatkin Troitschanskaia et al. (2016), assessing outcomes provides
assurance to stakeholders that students are prepared for employment or further study, a priority
in Uganda where employability remains a key policy goal (Altinyelken, 2015). The National
Council for Higher Education (NCHE) in Uganda mandates that institutions align their programs
with outcome-based frameworks, emphasizing competencies like critical thinking and problem
solving. However, policy implementation often lags due to resource constraints and inconsistent
practices across institutions (Mugimu & Sekiziyivu, 2019). For instance, while Makerere
University has adopted competency-based assessments in some programs, smaller institutions
struggle with outdated methods like rote-based examinations, which misalign with modern
pedagogical goals.

This misalignment reflects a broader tension between policy aspirations and practical realities.
The Uganda Higher Education Qualifications Framework (2016) advocates for assessments that
measure holistic graduate attributes, yet many institutions prioritize summative over formative
assessments, limiting opportunities for iterative learning (Mugimu & Sekiziyivu, 2019).
Altinyelken (2015) notes that the push for quality assurance in Uganda has led to increased
scrutiny of assessment practices, but bureaucratic inefficiencies and inadequate faculty training
hinder progress. Consequently, while policies aim to standardize outcomes, variations in
institutional capacity create disparities in how assessments are designed and implemented,
affecting the reliability of outcome measurements.

The link between assessment and policy is further complicated by external influences like global
education trends. Uganda’s adoption of learner centered approaches, inspired by international
frameworks, seeks to shift assessments toward practical and analytical skills (NCDC, 2010). Yet,
as Mitana et al. (2018) argue, the lack of clear guidelines on integrating these approaches into
assessment practices results in superficial reforms. For example, while policy encourages
project-based assessments, many lecturers revert to traditional exams due to familiarity and
resource shortages. This gap underscores the need for robust policy enforcement and
professional development to align assessment practices with intended outcomes.

c)

Assessing Student Inputs: Assessment as Direct Feedback to Learners

Assessing student inputs such as participation, assignments, and self-reflection serves as a direct
feedback mechanism that empowers learners to take ownership of their academic journey. In
Uganda’s higher education, formative assessments like continuous coursework and peer reviews
are increasingly recognized for their role in enhancing student engagement (Omona, 2022).
Black and Wiliam (1998) emphasize that frequent feedback fosters substantial learning gains by
helping students identify strengths and areas for improvement. At institutions like Kyambogo
University, for instance, lecturers use quizzes and group projects to provide timely feedback,
enabling students to adjust their learning strategies before final evaluations.

However, the effectiveness of feedback depends on its quality and delivery. Mitana et al. (2018)
found that in many Ugandan universities, feedback is often generic or delayed, reducing its
impact on student learning. For example, large class sizes, sometimes exceeding 100 students—
make individualized feedback challenging, particularly in under resourced institutions (EPRC,
2025). This issue is compounded by cultural factors, where students may perceive critical
feedback as demotivating rather than constructive, a dynamic noted by Mugimu and Sekiziyivu
(2019). To address this, some institutions are exploring digital platforms for automated feedback,
though limited ICT infrastructure poses barriers (Omona, 2022).

Feedback also plays a crucial role in promoting equity in learning. In Uganda, where students
come from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, tailored feedback can bridge gaps in prior
preparation (Altinyelken, 2015). For instance, programs at Uganda Martyrs University
incorporate reflective journals to encourage self-assessment, helping students from
disadvantaged backgrounds build confidence. Yet, as ZlatkinTroitschanskaia et al. (2016) argue,
feedback must be culturally sensitive and accessible to be effective. Without adequate training
for lecturers on inclusive feedback practices, disparities in student outcomes persist, undermining
the transformative potential of assessment.

The shift toward competency-based curricula in Uganda further emphasizes the importance of
feedback. The revised lower secondary curriculum, which influences higher education pathways,
prioritizes skills like collaboration and creativity, requiring assessments that provide actionable
insights (EPRC, 2025). However, lecturers often lack the tools to assess these skills
systematically, relying instead on subjective measures (Mitana et al., 2018). Strengthening
feedback mechanisms through faculty development and technology integration could enhance
the alignment between student inputs and learning outcomes, fostering a more responsive
educational experience.

d)

Assessing the Learning Environment

The learning environment in Uganda’s higher education encompasses physical infrastructure,

institutional culture, and pedagogical practices, all of which shape assessment effectiveness. A
conducive environment supports student engagement and facilitates meaningful assessment
outcomes. Shernoff et al. (2016) highlight that environmental complexity, balancing challenge
and support predicts student engagement, a finding relevant to Uganda where overcrowded
lecture halls and inadequate facilities are common (WENR, 2020). For example, at Busitema
University, limited laboratory equipment hampers practical assessments, forcing reliance on
theoretical evaluations that poorly reflect student capabilities (Biira et al., 2021).

Physical resources significantly influence assessment quality. NCHE data indicate that many
Ugandan universities operate with outdated libraries and insufficient ICT tools, limiting
opportunities for innovative assessments like e-portfolios or online simulations (WENR, 2020).
Omona (2022) notes that during the COVID19 pandemic, virtual learning exposed these gaps, as
students struggled with unreliable internet access, affecting their performance in online
assessments. Investments in infrastructure, such as those proposed in Uganda’s Education Sector
Strategic Plan, are critical to creating environments that support diverse assessment methods.
Institutional culture also plays a pivotal role. A learning environment that fosters trust and
collaboration enhances the validity of assessments by encouraging authentic student performance
(Shernoff et al., 2016). However, in Uganda, hierarchical lecturer-student relationships often
discourage open dialogue, impacting peer and self-assessment practices (Mugimu & Sekiziyivu,
2019). Initiatives like Makerere University’s mentorship programs aim to shift this dynamic, but
cultural change is slow, particularly in conservative institutions. Building a participatory culture
requires sustained efforts in faculty sensitization and student empowerment.

Pedagogical practices within the learning environment further determine assessment success.
The adoption of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles, which emphasize multiple
means of engagement and expression, could enhance inclusivity in Uganda’s diverse classrooms
(Fovet, 2020). Yet, as Mitana et al. (2018) observe, many lecturers lack training in UDL, leading
to one-size-fits-all assessments that disadvantage nontraditional learners. For instance, students
with disabilities often face barriers in accessing assessment accommodations, highlighting the
need for environmental adjustments to ensure equity.

The interplay between policy, practice, and environment is evident in Uganda’s efforts to
implement competency-based education. The revised curriculum demands assessments that
evaluate real-world skills, but without supportive environments like well-equipped classrooms or
trained faculty these goals remain elusive (EPRC, 2025). Biira et al. (2021) argue that
institutional commitment to resource allocation and professional development is essential for
aligning environments with assessment objectives. Without such alignment, assessments risk
becoming performative rather than transformative.

Conclusion

In Uganda’s higher education, classroom, program, and institutional assessments are

interconnected processes that shape learning outcomes, student development, and environmental
quality. Assessing outcomes requires robust policies and practices, yet resource constraints and
inconsistent implementation hinder progress. Providing direct feedback through student inputs
empowers learners, but its effectiveness depends on quality, timeliness, and cultural sensitivity.
Meanwhile, the learning environment spanning infrastructure, culture, and pedagogy underpins
assessment success, demanding investment and reform to meet modern demands. By addressing
these challenges through targeted interventions, Uganda can strengthen its higher education
system, ensuring assessments drive meaningful learning and societal impact.

References

Altinyelken, H. K. (2015). Evolution of curriculum systems to improve

learning outcomes and reduce disparities in school achievement.
Background paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring
Report 2015.

Biira, S., Gimuguni, L., Ocen, G., Bwire, F., Waako, P., & Wamakote, L. (2021).
COVID19 and students’ readiness for online learning in higher education
institutions in Uganda: A case study of Busitema University. Uganda Higher
Education Review, 9(2), 21–33.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning.

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

Fovet, F. (2020). Universal design for learning as a tool for inclusion in the
higher education classroom: A literature review. Journal of Education, 10(2),
45–60.

Mugimu, C. B., & Sekiziyivu, S. (2019). Assessment practices in Uganda’s

higher education: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Education and
Practice, 10(15), 1–10.

Omona, K. (2022). Addressing virtual learning challenges in higher

institutions of learning: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Journal of
STEAM Education, 5(2), 104–116.

Shernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha,
S., & Abdi, B. (2016). Student engagement as a function of environmental
complexity in high school classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 43, 52–60.
ZlatkinTroitschanskaia, O., Shavelson, R. J., & Kuhn, C. (2016). Assessing
student learning outcomes in higher education: Challenges and international
perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(5), 655–661.