Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 112 Download : 120

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines the shift in assessment paradigms and practices among elementary school teachers following the transition from the 2013 Curriculum (Kurikulum 2013/K-13) to the Merdeka Curriculum in Indonesia. The study focuses on two issues: the changing orientation from summative assessment toward formative assessment, and the implementation challenges associated with project-based assessment, particularly the Projek Penguatan Profil Pelajar Pancasila (P5). A descriptive survey with a mixed-method design was conducted at Hasanah Quranic School (HQS) Bekasi. Quantitative data were collected using a five-point Likert-scale questionnaire completed by 17 teachers, while qualitative data were obtained through open-ended responses and analyzed thematically. The findings indicate that teachers demonstrated a relatively strong conceptual understanding of formative assessment as a tool for improving learning (M = 3.88) and reported frequent use of feedback practices (M = 3.82). However, teachers’ understanding of P5 assessment methodology remained at a neutral level (M = 3.29), suggesting methodological uncertainty in assessing project-based learning through qualitative and narrative evidence. Qualitative findings confirmed three major challenges: the demand for teacher creativity and innovation, instability in report-card administration systems, and the suboptimal implementation of P5. The study concludes that the philosophical orientation of formative assessment has been generally accepted by teachers, but implementation quality still depends on practical training, shared assessment instruments, systematic documentation of learning evidence, and consistent school-level guidance for P5 reporting

Keywords

formative assessment summative assessment Merdeka Curriculum 2013 Curriculum P5 elementary education

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ahya, I. N., & Setiyatna, H. . (2026). Comparative Analysis of the Implementation of Formative and Summative Assessment: A Case Study of the Shift in Assessment Practices from the 2013 Curriculum to the Merdeka Curriculum among Elementary School Teachers at Hasanah Quranic School (HQS) Bekasi. Pasundan Social Science Development, 6(2), 453–467. https://doi.org/10.56457/pascidev.v6i2.347

References

  1. Andrade, H. L., & Brookhart, S. M. (2020). Classroom assessment as the co-regulation of learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 350–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571992
  2. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  3. Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2nd ed.). ASCD.
  4. Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.7275/jg4h-rb87
  5. Gardner, J. (Ed.). (2012). Assessment and learning (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  6. Guskey, T. R. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 6–11.
  7. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  8. Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom. Corwin Press.
  9. Kemendikbudristek. (2022a). Keputusan Kepala Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan Nomor 008/H/KR/2022 tentang capaian pembelajaran pada pendidikan anak usia dini, jenjang pendidikan dasar, dan jenjang pendidikan menengah pada Kurikulum Merdeka. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.
  10. Kemendikbudristek. (2022b). Panduan pembelajaran dan asesmen pendidikan anak usia dini, pendidikan dasar, dan menengah. Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan.
  11. Kemendikbudristek. (2024). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Nomor 12 Tahun 2024 tentang kurikulum pada pendidikan anak usia dini, jenjang pendidikan dasar, dan jenjang pendidikan menengah.
  12. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
  13. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830280103
  14. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
  15. Satria, R., Adiprima, P., Wulan, K. S., & Harjatanaya, T. Y. (2022). Panduan pengembangan Projek Penguatan Profil Pelajar Pancasila. Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan, Kemendikbudristek.
  16. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
  17. Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170508700414
  18. Stiggins, R. J., & DuFour, R. (2009). Maximizing the power of formative assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 640–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000907
  19. Wiggins, G. P. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.
  20. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.