ARTICLE

https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z OPEN

Assessment practices in Saudi higher education

during the COVID-19 pandemic
Samar Yakoob Almossa 1✉ & Sahar Matar Alzahrani1

This study determines the assessment practices used by teaching staff in Saudi universities,
explores how these assessment practices have changed during the coronavirus disease 2019
1234567890():,;

pandemic, and investigates how teaching staffs’ priorities and preferences for education on
assessment during the pandemic were shaped. To support professional development, the
study also aims to raise teaching staffs’ awareness of assessment practices. Teaching staff in
Saudi universities were invited to complete the Approaches to Classroom Inventory survey.
The results showed that the most highly endorsed practices included giving feedback, linking
assessments to learning objectives and learning outcomes, using scoring guides, and mon-
itoring and revising assessment approaches. The least endorsed practices included mapping
summative assessment to curriculum expectations, responding to the cultural and linguistic
diversity of students, and accommodating students with special needs/exceptionalities in
assessments. Further, during the pandemic, formative assessments were rarely used.
Although faculty members from various colleges and fields of specialty showed similar
patterns in endorsing assessment practices, they differed in their preferences and needs for
assessment education.

1 Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia. ✉email: [email protected]

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z 1

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

A
Introduction
ssessment is a cornerstone of any educational system, and competence in assessment are less likely to support students in
the position assessment takes as a high-stakes tool for achieving high academic standards. Consequently, there have
accountability purposes has increased the interest in tea- been calls to familiarise preservice and in-service teachers with
chers’ assessment literacy (Popham, 2013). Assessment-literate assessment principles such as practicality, reliability, validity,
educators are expected to know what they are assessing, why they authenticity, washback impact, and fairness (Bachman and
are assessing it, what the most effective assessment methods are, Palmer, 1996; Brown and Abeywickrama, 2010; Green, 2013;
and how to develop sound assessment practices and avoid Isaacs et al., 2013; Malone, 2017).
unsound assessment measures (Chappuis et al., 2011). As the Previous research in the Saudi English language teaching
scene has been changing over the years, and exclusively in 2020 context includes small-scale studies (Almalki, 2014; Almansory,
with the pandemic, there is a lot to be learned about university 2016), a quantitative study in English as a foreign language
teaching staff assessment practices. The coronavirus disease 2019 context (Umer et al., 2018), and an evaluation of preservice tea-
(COVID-19) pandemic came with unexpected changes in chers’ perceptions of formative assessment (Alaudan, 2014).
teaching, learning, and assessment practices in higher education These studies’ main findings have suggested that summative
worldwide. The documentation of this experience and the assessments, mainly examinations, were dominant, with a high
employed practices gives us an understanding of faculty assess- emphasis on knowledge retrieval questions that did not require
ment practices during times of uncertainty, and how they can be higher-order critical thinking skills. In some cases where a variety
used and sustained after the pandemic. of assessment tasks were used, there was a lack of standards and
Understanding assessment practices and their underlying criteria in terms of setting the tasks. Moreover, in some institu-
principles in the Saudi higher education context is challenged by a tions where assessment is unified, such as the Common First Year
lack of precise specifications and standards. Consequently, wide (the first year of university), teachers lack the authority to make
variations in its conceptualisation and the resulting practical assessment-related decisions.
implications are expected. Thus, more data is needed about the Much theorising and research on assessment have been con-
Saudi higher education context to contextualise assessment ducted in developed countries; however, there remains an urgent
experiences, practices, and professional development needs dur- need for further investigation to be conducted in other contexts
ing the shift to online assessment. Our study responds to this (Birenbaum et al., 2015). Few studies have focused on the higher
need by employing a quantitative approach to understanding education context in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)
current practices and identifying assessment literacy needs; this is region (Gebril and Brown, 2014), specifically in terms of assess-
expected to offer useful insights into how faculty members across ment practices across different departments in higher education
colleges have dealt with the changes during the COVID-19 crisis institutions. Compared to the international context, assessment
and what their educational priorities and preferences are. literacy in Saudi Arabia is less widely explored, and further
Therefore, this study investigates self-reported teaching staff research is needed (Darandari and Murphy, 2013). Faculty
assessment practices in the Saudi higher education context to (1) assessment knowledge and practices in the higher education
identify assessment practices in different departments, faculties, context represent fruitful research areas since there are gaps
and subjects and (2) explore faculty’s educational assessment between teachers’ assessment practices and contemporary
needs and their preferred medium for professional development. assessment standards (Deluca et al., 2016a, 2018; Gebril and
Brown, 2014).
Several studies have been conducted to investigate the impact
Literature review of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experiences of students and
Scholarly discussions around assessment have focused on how it faculty members in higher education (Al-Mohair and Alwahaishi,
is defined, how it is theorised, and how assessment standards are 2020; Almossa, 2021; Aristovnik et al., 2020; Bisht et al., 2020;
updated. As the two main stakeholders in educational assessment, Gonzalez et al., 2020; Sasere and Makhasane, 2020). These studies
teachers and students tend to have been overlooked when making have provided insights into how university students have coped
decisions about assessment in the psychometric-influenced edu- with changes in teaching, learning, and assessments, challenges,
cational context. There has been considerable discussion on tea- and opportunities presented by the crisis, but few have focused on
cher assessment literacy (Fulcher, 2012; Inbar‐Lourie, 2012; faculty and their assessment practices during COVID-19. Thus,
Malone, 2008), with a great emphasis on the importance of tea- more research is needed about faculty members’ experiences.
chers’ knowledge of and expertise in assessment (Broadfoot, 2008; Positive and negative narratives have emerged about the impact
Broadfoot and Black, 2004; Malone, 2008, 2013; Vogt and of the transition to online assessment on teachers and students
Tsagari, 2014), as well as students’ own assessment literacy (Smith during the pandemic (Almossa, 2021; Guangul et al., 2020;
et al., 2013). Given the role that assessment plays in teaching and Watermeyer et al., 2021). For example, Sharadgah and Sa’di
learning, teachers are expected to have adequate knowledge of all (2020) investigated how faculty members of a Saudi university
aspects of assessment to effectively develop their teaching, sup- approached assessment in a virtual learning environment. García-
port their students and respond to their needs, and meet the Peñalvo et al. (2021) observed that faculty reported online
expectations of stakeholder groups (Herrera and Macías, 2015). assessment as one of the most difficult tasks to be completed
They are also expected to enhance their students’ assessment during the academic year affected by the pandemic. The challenge
literacy. Research has shown that students’ learning outcomes can of online assessment was multifaceted, including first dealing with
be heavily affected by poor decisions made about assessment technology and various online platforms and tools and thereafter
methods and tasks (Galluzzo, 2005; Umer, 2015, 2016 cited in redesigning assessment tasks accordingly.
Umer et al., 2018; Volante and Fazio, 2007). There is still much to be learned about teachers’ assessment
Several issues have been raised related to educators who are knowledge and their practices in Saudi Arabia and similar con-
uneducated in assessment practices. Further, many teachers do texts. In addition, the COVID-19 situation resulted in unpreceded
not like assessment, which results in their designing unsound changes to assessment practices in higher education. The original
tests that do not adhere to effective assessment principles (Brown contribution of the present research to the extant knowledge is
and Abeywickrama, 2010; Herrera and Macías, 2015; Popham, providing data on assessment practices across various depart-
2004). Coombe et al. (2012) suggested that teachers who lack ments, colleges, faculty positions, and career stages to determine

2 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z ARTICLE

Table 1 Participant demographics (N = 267). The study setting. On the 8th of March 2020, the Ministry of
Education (MOE), Saudi Arabia, announced the shift to online
learning for all educational institutions. This shift came in the
Demographic variable Frequency
middle of the second semester (in Saudi universities, there are
Gender three semesters: winter, spring, and summer). During the second
Female 150 semester, the MOE, which governs Saudi universities and reg-
Male 117
ulates their educational and administrative practices, issued sev-
Teaching position
Assistant Professor 125
eral statements about the shift to online learning and assessment,
Lecturer 50 and how to make the most of it. The MOE issued a guideline
Associate Professor 37 document for assessment that encouraged the shift to alternative
Professor 20 assessment methods instead of examinations, limiting assessment
Teaching Assistant 21 tasks and sharing coursework grades with students before the
Language Teacher 13 finals.
Instructor (Master’s Degree) 1
College
Social Sciences College 66 Research design
Education College 44 We conducted a quantitative survey with teaching staff to collect
Science College 44 data about practices and priorities regarding assessment practices.
Medicine College 28 The research data were collected between June and December
Administration College 26 2020 (i.e. after the March 2020 lockdown until the end of the first
Humanities College 15 semester of 2021). To elicit information from teaching staff in
Sahri’ah (Theology) College 14 different Saudi universities, fields, and career stages, an online
Business College 1 survey was adapted to explore teaching staffs’ assessment prac-
Computer Sciences College 12 tices, changes in assessment before and during the COVID-19
Engineering College 8
assessment education, priorities, and needs.
Preparatory year 4
Foundation year 3
The Approaches to Classroom Inventory (ACAI) is a two-part
Branch College 2 survey developed by DeLuca et al. (2016b) addressing teachers’
Career stage approaches to classroom assessment. The first part of the survey
0–2 years 37 includes scenario-based questions, while the second asks about a
3–5 years 47 series of common assessment responsibilities that are aligned with
6–10 years 65 contemporary assessment standards (e.g. those of the Joint
11+ years 118 Committee on Student Evaluation). For this study, only part two
Students taught of the ACAI survey was adopted; other parts were added to this.
Diploma students 2 Part one of the survey was concerned with the demographic
BA students 167 information of the participants, including gender, teaching posi-
MA students 8 tion, college type, career stage, students taught (BA, MA, Ph.D.),
Ph.D. students 2
and assessment education (course in assessment, no course in
Combination of students 88
assessment, and self-study). Part two included 25 statements
Assessment education
Course or training in assessment 194
about assessment practices that covered assessment purpose,
Self-study only 40 assessment process, fairness, and assessment theory (see Table 2
No course or training in assessment 33 adapted from the work of DeLuca et al., 2016b). Part three
included assessment practices pre- and during COVID-19.
Finally, part four focused on the assessment education priorities
similarities and differences between practices across demographic and preferences of the teaching staff during and after COVID-19.
groups. The study posed the following research questions: In the next phase, the survey items were piloted; six university
(1) What are the assessment practices used by teaching staff in staff, who taught various subjects in Saudi universities, partici-
Saudi universities? Did these practices change during the pated in the piloting phase. The survey was administered to them
COVID-19 pandemic? to test the items and to determine if the survey required any
(2) What were the teaching staffs’ assessment training needs amendments before the main data collection. The final version of
and preferred training methods before and during the the survey was administered online to a wide group of teaching
COVID-19 pandemic? staff who worked in Saudi public universities to collect their
responses on their assessment approaches and practices, and their
priorities for professional development in assessment literacy.
Methods
Participant characteristics. There were 267 participants from 27 Data analysis
Saudi universities and 13 different colleges. The participants The ACAI data were quantitively analysed to respond to the
consent to participate was obtained before they completed the above research questions using descriptive statistics, exploratory
survey. Table 1 summarises the demographic characteristics of factor analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), inde-
the participants. They had been teaching for a wide range of pendent samples t-test, and chi-square tests. Exploratory factor
years, and the majority had more than 11 years of experience. analysis was used to uncover the underlying factor structure of
They taught students at different levels of higher education, the assessment practice items, while ANOVA and independent
including those working toward diplomas, Bachelor’s degrees, samples t-test were employed to identify statistical differences in
Master’s degrees, and Ph.D.s. Most of the respondents reported factor scores between demographic groupings. Finally, chi-square
they had been trained in the assessment, though some reported tests were used to identify statistical differences in the preferred
that they learned about assessment through self-study or had no methods of assessment education between demographic group-
training in assessment. ings. All analyses were conducted using SPSS statistical software.

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z 3

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

Table 2 ACAI assessment dimensions and sets of priorities.

Theme Priority Description of priority

Assessment purposes Assessment of learning Teachers use of evidence to summate student learning and assign a grade in relation to the
student’s achievement of learning objectives.
Assessment for learning Teachers’ and students’ use of evidence to provide feedback on progress toward learning objectives
and inform next steps for learning and instruction. Involves both teacher-directed and student-
centred approaches to formative assessment.
Assessment as learning Focuses on how the student is learning by providing feedback or experiences that foster students’
metacognitive abilities and learning skills, such as self-assessment, goal-setting, and learning plans.
Involves teachers but is primarily student-centred.
Assessment processes Design Focuses on the development of reliable assessments and items that measure student learning in
relation to learning objectives.
Scoring Focuses on the adjustment and use of scoring protocols and grading schemes to respond to
assessment scenarios.
Communication Focuses on the interpretation of assessment results and feedback through communication to
students and parents.
Fairness Standardised Maintains equal assessment protocols for all students regardless of ability or exceptionality.
Equitable Differentiates assessment protocols for formally identified students, such as special education or
English language learners.
Differentiated Individualises learning opportunities and assessments that address each student’s unique learning
needs and goals.
Assessment theory Reliability Works to ensure consistency in results within assessments, across time periods, and between
teachers.
Validity Works to ensure that the assessment or evaluation measures what it claims to measure (i.e.,
learning objectives) and promote valid interpretations of results.
Mixed Works to ensure consistency in measuring what an assessment or evaluation intends to measure,
and degree to which an assessment or evaluation measures what it claims to measure.

Results and linguistic diversity of my students’), and accommodating

RQ 1: What are the assessment practices used by teaching staff students with special needs/exceptionalities (‘I provide adequate
in Saudi Universities? Did these practices change during the resources, time, and accommodations to prepare students with
COVID-19 pandemic? Descriptive statistics (mean and standard special needs/exceptionalities for assessment’).
deviation) by item, exploratory factor analysis (principal axis The factor analysis revealed that the research participants
factoring with varimax rotation) with factor loadings reported, t- thought of assessment as a singular entity and reported doing
test, and ANOVA were employed to examine the relationship most of the assessment activities listed in the survey or focusing
between the factor score and demographics of the respondents on some of them with a high or low frequency. Assessment
(gender college, academic position, years of experience, and practices loaded very strongly onto a single (i.e. 1) factor with
assessment education). strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.957). This
Both the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy factor was titled assessment practice for analysis.
(0.880) and Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001) indicated that Significant differences in the assessment practice factor were
exploratory factor analysis would aid the interpretation of the noted for all comparisons between associate professors and the
data. Consequently, factor analysis was conducted on scaled items other four teaching positions (Table 3). Further statistical
related to assessment practices. differences were noted between professors and assistant profes-
Table 3 shows the item-level descriptive statistics (mean and sors. Associate professors reported the highest mean score
standard deviation) and exploratory factor loadings. The most followed by assistant professors (mean score 3.86) for this factor.
endorsed survey item was about assessment processes (commu- This finding suggests that among the different academic ranks,
nication approach): ‘I provide timely feedback to students to associate professors (who had the highest mean score amongst
improve their learning.’ This was followed by an item about the groups at 4.14) endorsed all the assessment practices as part
assessment theory (contextualised assessment): ‘I link my of their approach to assessment, while teaching assistants and
assessment tasks/questions to learning objectives’) and an item lectures did not as they demonstrated lower mean scores (3.69
about assessment fairness: ‘When grading student work, I use the and 3.86, respectively). This might be explained by the nature of
same rubric or scoring guide for all my students’). The the courses they teach, their career stages, and their years of
participants responded positively to ‘I monitor and revise my experience, all of which might have impacted their assessment
assessment approaches to improve the quality of my teaching.’ practices and knowledge. Professors revealed the lowest endorse-
This suggests that faculty members give more priority to some ment of the assessment practices among the academic ranks, with
aspects of assessment practices than others. a mean score of 4.46. The professors, who are the smallest group
The least endorsed assessment activity was mapping summa- but have the highest rank in academia, may either have viewed
tive assessments to student learning and curriculum expectations: assessment differently or taught courses that differed from those
‘My summative assessment (e.g. quizzes) grades provide a of their peers in the other ranks.
meaningful representation of individual student learning as
related to curriculum expectations’; this activity is related to
assessment purpose. Two of the other least endorsed items RQ 2: What were the teaching staffs’ assessment training needs
included assessment fairness in responding to the cultural and and preferred training methods before and during the COVID-
linguistic diversity of students (‘I spend adequate time ensuring 19 pandemic? The analyses that were conducted to answer this
my assessments are responsive to and respectful of the cultural research question included descriptive statistics by item, assessment

4 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z ARTICLE

Table 3 Item-level descriptive statistics and exploratory factor loadings.

Items Mean SD Factor loadings

I use student assessment data (e.g. grades) to inform instructional planning and next steps for individual students and 3.71 0.92 0.553
the whole class.
I monitor and revise my assessment practices regularly. 3.91 0.87 0.719
I use a variety of formative assessment techniques (e.g. structured Q&A, quick writes) and instruments (e.g. paper- 3.97 0.92 0.666
pencil quizzes, personal response systems) to check for understanding during instruction.
My summative assessment (e.g. quizzes) grades provide a meaningful representation of individual student learning as 3.46 1.05 0.501
related to curriculum expectations.
I use a variety of summative assessment types, such as multiple-choice type tests, essays, and performance-based 3.97 0.91 0.640
assessments.
I involve students in monitoring their own learning and using assessment information to develop their learning skills. 3.77 0.95 0.720
I spend adequate time ensuring my assessments are responsive to and respectful of the cultural and linguistic 3.59 1.00 0.642
diversity of my students.
I regularly involve students in assessment practices during teaching. 3.75 0.90 0.647
I clearly communicate the purposes and uses of assessment to students. 3.89 1.02 0.764
I provide timely feedback to students to improve their learning. 4.18 0.86 0.793
My assessment-related decisions are influenced by the intended purposes of the assessment or/and curriculum 3.91 0.87 0.757
expectations.
I am confident in my ability to analyse and make instructional decisions based on my students’ performance on unified 3.76 0.95 0.693
assessments.
I monitor and revise my assessment approaches to improve the quality of my teaching. 4.00 0.92 0.839
My methods and types of assessment allow students to demonstrate their learning in diverse ways. 3.97 0.91 0.740
I spend adequate time differentiating my assessment approaches to meet the specific educational needs of my 3.78 0.98 0.790
students.
I provide adequate resources, time, and accommodations to prepare students with special needs/exceptionalities for 3.67 0.89 0.544
assessment.
All students complete the same assignments, quizzes, and tests. 3.74 1.11 0.515
When grading student work, I use the same rubrica or scoring guide for all my students. 4.07 0.93 0.633
I link my assessment tasks/questions to learning objectives. 4.08 0.87 0.770
I am confident that my students’ performance on my assessments are the best representations of what I want them 3.81 0.88 0.728
to learn.
I can select assessments from test banks, textbook series, and/or online teacher sharing sites that align with my 3.75 0.87 0.716
learning objectives.
I use multiple assessments to measure each learning objective so that I am confident in the grades I assign. 3.69 0.93 0.686
My grades and feedback are based on the data I have collected about students’ achievement of learning expectations. 3.78 0.87 0.756
I am confident that I apply my scoring guides/rubrics consistently. 3.77 0.86 0.703
I use student performance data to inform instructional planning and next steps for individual students and the class as 3.78 0.92 0.763
a whole.
aA rubric is a scoring guide.

practices grouped by assessment type, and t-tests to examine the Assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the
relationship between the reported changes in assessment practices COVID-19 pandemic, the respondents’ assessment methods were
during the COVID-19 pandemic. far more varied; they used fewer assessment activities and instead
employed a range of modified summative and performance
assessment methods (Table 4). However, pre-pandemic, partici-
Assessment prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the pants administered on average 5.2 assessments (1384 divided by
COVID-19 pandemic, participants’ assessment methods were 267 participants), while during the pandemic, the average number
characterised by assignments, exams, projects, mid-terms and of assessments declined to 1.94 (343 divided by 177 participants
final exams, quizzes, and portfolios (Table 4). Summative who responded to items related to assessment practices during
assessments represented by exams and quizzes were very com- the pandemic). As such, the respondents varied the types of
mon, with 700 instances reported. Most of the participants had to assessments they used during the pandemic but reduced the
use exams, which are part of the MOE’s regulations for con- overall number of assessments.
ducting assessment in higher education (40% weightage for final The most frequently reported assessment activities were
exams and 60% for mid-term examinations and coursework, performance assessments, followed by modified performance
unless the university department has a weightage justification for assessments, which included discussions, research projects, read-
a different distribution of marks). However, during the COVID- ing tasks, research methods, and reflective essays (Table 5). The
19 pandemic, the MOE guidelines suggested 80% weightage for use of formative assessments as reported by the respondents only
coursework and only 20% weightage for final examination or twice during the pandemic compared to 102 instances before the
another alternative, such as projects, papers, or assignments. pandemic.
Performance assessments were reported 584 times, including The respondents were asked if they changed their assessment
activities such as assignments (215 instances), presentations (161 practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the majority
instances), projects (148 instances), and portfolios (57 instances). (67.8%) reported that they changed their practices, 32.2%
The respondents reported 102 instances of formative assessment reported that they did not. The respondents who did not change
activities. their assessment practices had plans that were in line with the

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z 5

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

Table 4 Frequency and statistical comparisons of the relationship between demographic variables and assessment practices.

Demographic variables Freq. (%) Assessment practices factor mean (SD) Statistics
Gender
Male 43.8 3.92 (0.58) p = 0.052, t = 1.953, df = 220
Female 56.2 3.75 (0.69)
Academic position
Teaching Assistant 47.0 3.69 (0.40) p = 0.003
Lecturer 18.8 3.79 (0.53) F = 4.048, df = 4
Assistant Professor 13.9 3.86 (0.61)
Associate Professor 7.5 4.14 (0.39)
Professor 7.9 3.46 (1.11)
College
Social Sciences College 31.7 3.80 (0.67) p = 0.692
Education College 21.2 3.74 (0.80) F = 0.559, df = 4
Science College 21.2 3.87 (0.57)
Medicine College 13.5 3.98 (0.70)
Administration College 12.5 3.92 (0.52)
Years of experience
0–2 years 13.9 3.57 (0.63) p = 0.097
3–5 years 17.6 3.91 (0.42) F = 2.134, df = 3
6–10 years 24.3 3.80 (0.54)
11+ years 44.2 3.89 (0.75)
Teaching degrees
BA 65.5 3.37 (1.50) p = 0.101
Combination of Degrees 34.5 3.94 (0.70) t = 1.646, df = 214
Assessment education
At least one course 72.7 3.86 (0.70) p = 0.206
Self-study only 15.0 3.86 (0.49) F = 1.592, df = 2
No course 12.4 3.63 (0.44)
Total 3.83 (0.65)

required changes, did not respond to new requirements or taught findings indicate that the participants were concerned about
courses for which essential changes were not required (e.g. MA or educating themselves about aspects relevant to their professional
Ph.D. courses). This finding suggests that the majority of the needs. Their suggestions were focused more on assessment
participants had to adjust their practices in response to the MOE purposes and assessment processes and less on fairness and
and departmental guidelines. However, there might be other measurement theory, which is in line with previous assessment
reasons. It is unknown how these adjustments will be incorpo- practices findings.
rated into assessment practices after the pandemic. To determine if there was a statistical association between the
respondents’ preferred assessment learning methods (individual
learning; through online learning; through a peer, mentor, or
Further assessment training. Respondents were then asked coach; or through a university course) and their demographics, a
about further professional training/education about assessment chi-square test of demographic variables and preferred assess-
practices. The respondents who did not change their assessment ment learning methods was performed. Males were statistically
practices were significantly more likely to prefer to learn about more likely than females to prefer learning about assessment (a)
assessment online. No additional significant relationships were individually and (b) through online learning. Instructors of BA
found between changes in assessment practices because of the students were more likely to (a) prefer learning about assessment
COVID-19 pandemic and faculty members’ preferences for through a peer, mentor, or coach, and (b) not prefer learning
learning about assessment. However, these findings should be about assessment through a university course compared to those
considered with caution as there are further influencing factors in instructors who taught a combination of Diploma, BA, MA, and
the pandemic context. Ph.D. students. Based on these results, various and accessible
When asked about their priorities for learning about assess- resources should be developed to respond to various learning
ment practices, the respondents mentioned writing test items, styles and preferences.
marking and scoring, feedback, peer assessment, and 21st-century
skills assessment techniques. Respondents shared that they
wanted workshops on a variety of topics, including assessment Discussion and conclusion
processes (i.e. how to create effective assessments); ideas for While previous research has explored assessment practices in
assessments using projects or various online techniques; assess- various contexts, this study contributes to the existing literature
ment purposes (e.g. mapping course learning outcomes based on because there is limited research on assessment practices in
teaching and assessment methods); alternative assessment higher education in the MENA region, specifically Saudi Arabia.
techniques; how to use fewer tests; measurement theory (e.g. The results from this study reveal how faculty members in Saudi
developing more accurate and diverse methods of assessment); universities approached assessment practices before and during
how to achieve validity, reliability, and accuracy in assessments; the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to various demographic
and assessment approaches that are suitable and fair based on characteristics including experience, fields of study, and academic
students’ needs. In addition, some respondents expressed the ranking. This study builds on the belief that there is no ‘globally
need for general professional development opportunities, such as homogeneous construct of teacher conceptions of assessment’
courses about using online tools and teaching methods. The (Brown et al., 2019, p. 1) and stresses the importance of exploring

6 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z ARTICLE

Table 5 Frequencies of assessment practices pre- and during the COVID-19 pandemic categorised by assessment group.

COVID-19 context Assessment group Frequency/group Assessment type Frequency

Pre- pandemic Summative assessment 700 Exams 214
Mid-terms and final exams 207
Quizzes 172
Summative assessment 107
Performance assessment 584 Assignments 215
Presentations 161
Projects 148
Portfolios 57
Case studies 2
Group work 1
Formative assessment 102 Formative assessment 100
Peer assessment 1
Self-assessment 1
Dissertation/Theses 1 Master’s and Ph.D. Dissertations/Theses 1
During pandemic Summative assessment 3 Quizzes 3
Modified summative assessment 6 Open book exams 3
Online exams 2
Take-home exams 1
Performance assessment 320 Assignments 106
Projects 89
Presentations 84
Portfolios 40
Group Project/Work 1
Modified performance assessment 12 Discussions 5
Research projects 4
Reading task 1
Designing surveys and interviews 1
Reflective essays 1
Formative assessment 2 Peer assessment 1
Self-assessment 1
Other 95 Not applicable 90
Other 3
Started teaching mid-pandemic 2
No examination 1

various contexts based on specific experience. As the pandemic’s guidelines implemented during the pandemic, which encouraged
impact is still overshadowing higher education, the way assess- educators to limit the number of examinations.
ment practices have been affected remains an interesting topic Overall, the participants did not focus on producing standar-
of study. dised, equitable, or differentiated assessments during the pan-
In Saudi Arabia, the MOE provided guidance for public higher demic. AERA (2014, p. 50) defined a fair assessment as an
education institutions and suggested a shift to online assessments ‘assessment that is responsive to individual characteristics and
during the pandemic. The research findings suggest that the testing contexts so that test scores will yield valid interpretations
respondents highly endorsed giving feedback, linking assessments for intended uses.’ Lack of fairness in assessments is a threat to
to learning objectives, using scoring guides, and monitoring and assessment reliability and validity.
revising assessment approaches. The least endorsed assessment The study findings showed that the participants responded to
activities were mapping summative assessment to students’ what was expected from them during the pandemic and adjusted
learning related to curriculum expectations, responding to the their assessment practices to include more performance assess-
cultural and linguistic diversity of students, and accommodating ments and fewer examinations. This finding is in line with that of
students with special needs/exceptionalities in assessments. Dar- Guangul et al. (2020), who found that the majority of participants
andari and Murphy (2013) suggested that summative assessments opted for assignment/project-based assessments or assessments
practices in Saudi higher education were not mapped on the with a time limit to minimise cheating. Formative assessments
curriculum expectations, a result supported by the current study were used less often during the pandemic, which is supported by
to some extent. In their study, Guangul et al. (2020) reported that Sharadgah and Sa’di (2020). This may be because the situation
coverage of learning outcomes, infrastructure issues, and aca- was overwhelming and there were unexpected changes mid-
demic dishonesty were challenges of online assessment during the semester, during which faculty members were asked to adjust
COVID-19 pandemic, which is consistent with the current their plans to focus on finalising summative assessments for
study’s research findings. The least endorsed practices by the accountability purposes.
faculty members were those that they could not handle or needed The study also presented key findings related to assessment
more experience and guidance with. training needs and preferences. The participants reported a
The assessment methods used most often by the current general interest in learning more about assessment practices.
study’s participants during the pandemic included presentations, Popham (2004) emphasised the importance of assessment edu-
projects, assignments, and portfolios, which is in line with cation, given its impact on all aspects of teaching and learning.
Guangul et al.’s (2020) finding that teaching staff leaned towards The research results suggested that while the faculty members
performance assessments. This is also in line with the MOE from various colleges and fields of specialty showed similar

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z 7

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

patterns in endorsing assessment practices, they differed in their Received: 29 October 2021; Accepted: 20 December 2021;
most or least endorsed practices. The respondents who said that
they did not change their assessment practices during the pan-
demic were more likely to consider learning more about assess-
ment using online resources. The respondents also shared a wide
range of assessment education needs during the pandemic and References
beyond, ranging from maintaining assessment standards to American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association,
finding ways to develop suitable alternative assessment activities & National Council on Measurement in Education (2014). Standards for
to tests. educational and psychological testing. American Psychological Association.
Alaudan R (2014) Saudi student teachers’ perceptions of formative assessment.
In terms of academic rank and years of experience, the
Dissertation, University of York
assessment education requirements of more experienced Almalki MS (2014) A preliminary design framework for formative blended
faculty members differed from those of teaching assistants and assessments in tertiary English as a foreign language (EFL) programs: an
lecturers. These findings suggest that training specifically tai- exploratory study in Saudi Arabia. Ph.D. thesis, University of Melbourne.
lored to educators’ needs should be developed. Coombs et al. Almansory M (2016) EFL teachers’ beliefs and attitudes towards English language
assessment in a Saudi university’s English Language Institute. Ph.D. thesis,
(2018) found that experienced teachers are more likely to have University of Exeter.
more comprehensive assessment knowledge, as they accumu- Al-Mohair H, Alwahaishi S (2020) Study on students’ experiences about online
late knowledge over the years. The advanced technology and teaching during COVID-19 Outbreak. Tech Soc Sci J 8:102–116. https://
online assessment were new experiences to many during the doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v8i1.701
pandemic, which had less to do with career stages and more to Almossa SY (2021) University students’ perspectives toward learning and assess-
ment during COVID-19. Educ Inf Technol https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-
do with each faculty member’s engagement with technology
021-10554-8
and willingness to learn more about online assessment tools, Aristovnik A, Keržič D, Ravšelj D, Tomaževič N, Umek L (2020) Impacts of the
procedures, and security. These research findings are in line COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: a global per-
with recent research studies that have suggested that staff and spective. Sustainability 12(20):8438
students should be trained in different aspects of using tech- Bachman LF, Palmer AS (1996) Language testing in practice: Designing and
developing useful language tests, vol 1. Oxford University Press.
nology and alternative assessments (Almossa, 2021; García- Birenbaum M, DeLuca C, Earl L, Heritage M, Klenowski V, Looney A, Smith K,
Peñalvo et al., 2021; Guangul et al., 2020; Sharadgah and Sa’di, Timperley H, Volante L, Wyatt-Smith C (2015) International trends in the
2020; Watermeyer et al., 2021). implementation of assessment for learning: Implications for policy and
practice. Policy Futur Educ 13(1):117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1478210314566733
Bisht RK, Jasola S, Bisht IP (2020) Acceptability and challenges of online higher
Research implications. This study suggests that assessment- education in the era of COVID-19: a study of students’ perspective. Asian
related training should be carefully designed to address the Educ Dev Stud. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-05-2020-0119
needs of targeted groups in their specific contexts. Moreover, Broadfoot P (2008) Assessment for learners: assessment literacy and the develop-
assessment education should not be limited to training but ment of learning power. Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in
contemporary education. Routledge/Taylor & Francis, London, p. 224
should also more broadly consider individual learning pre-
Broadfoot P, Black P (2004) Redefining assessment? The first ten years of assess-
ferences, such as providing new books in libraries, online ment in education. Assess Educ: Princ Policy Pract 11(1):7–26
synchronised and asynchronised courses, live webinars, short Brown HD, Abeywickrama P (2010) Language assessment. Principles and class-
and long courses, and one-on-one support to encourage faculty room practices, 3rd edn. Pearson Education.
to engage in assessment education using the means that are the Brown GT, Gebril A, Michaelides MP (2019) Teachers’ conceptions of assessment:
most convenient to them. This process of enhancing teachers’ A global phenomenonor a global localism. Frontiers in Education 4(16):1–13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00016
knowledge of sound assessment principles is beneficial but will Chappuis J, Stiggins RJ, Chappuis S, Arter JA (2011) Classroom assessment for
not be valuable in practical terms unless it is supported by student learning: doing it right-using it well, International edn. Pearson,
institutional training programmes and encouraged by policy- Portland, USA
makers in daily classroom practices. Coombe C, Troudi S, Al-Hamly M (2012) Foreign and second language teacher
assessment literacy: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. In:
Coombe C, Davidson P, O’Sullivan B, Stoynoff S (Eds.) The Cambridge
guide to second language assessment. Cambridge University Press,
Limitations. This study has several limitations due to its nature, Cambridge, pp. 20–29
sample size, and context. First, the research survey was based on Coombs A, DeLuca C, LaPointe-McEwan D, Chalas A (2018) Changing approa-
the participants’ self-report of their assessment practices, which ches to classroom assessment: an empirical study across teacher career stages.
Teach Teacher Educ 71:134–144
might be biased. Second, the sample was relatively small, Darandari E, Murphy A (2013) Assessment of student learning. In: Smith L,
reflecting the assessment practices of those who were willing to fill Abouammoh A (eds) Higher education dynamics. Springer, pp. 61–71
in the whole survey. Generalisation was not the aim of this study. DeLuca C, LaPointe D, Luhanga U (2016a) Teacher assessment literacy: a review of
The study shared the voices of only those who participated; international standards and measures. Educ Assess Eval Account
however, it shed light on general trends in assessment practices 28(3):251–272
DeLuca C, LaPointe-McEwan D, Luhanga U (2016b) Approaches to classroom
occurring in the target group. assessment inventory: a new instrument to support teacher assessment lit-
Future research might focus on cross-country analysis across eracy. Educ Assess 21(4):248–266
the MENA region. Other research could focus on exploring post- DeLuca C, Chapman-Chin AE, LaPointe-McEwan D, Klinger DA (2018) Student
assessment education and assessment practices and how teaching perspectives on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal
staff engaged and responded to assessment education opportu- 29(1):77–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2017.1401550v
Fulcher G (2012) Assessment literacy for the language classroom. Lang Assess Q
nities offered to them. Further, qualitative research (e.g. inter- 9(2):113–132
views, focus groups, and observations) could produce more Galluzzo GR (2005) Performance assessment and renewing teacher education. The
detailed data. Possibilities of the NBPTS Standards. Clear House 78(4):142–145. https://
doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.78.4.142-145
García-Peñalvo FJ, Corell A, Abella-García V, Grande-de-Prado M (2021)
Recommendations for mandatory online assessment in higher education
Data availability during the COVID-19 pandemic. In: Burgos D, Tlili A, Tabacco A (eds)
Research data are available upon request. Radical solutions for education in a crisis context. Springer, pp. 85–98

8 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z ARTICLE

Gebril A, Brown GTL (2014) The effect of high-stakes examination systems on Watermeyer R, Crick T, Knight C, Goodall J (2021) COVID-19 and digital disruption
teacher beliefs: Egyptian Teachers’ conceptions of assessment. Assess Educ: in UK universities: afflictions and affordances of emergency online migration.
Princ Policy Pract 21(1):16–33 High Educ 81(3):623–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00561-y
Gonzalez T, De la Rubia MA, Hincz KP, Comas-Lopez M, Subirats L, Fort S, Sacha
GM (2020) Influence of COVID-19 confinement on students’ performance in
higher education. PLoS ONE 15(10):e0239490 Acknowledgements
Green A (2013) Exploring language assessment and testing: language in action. The authors would like to thank the Deanship of Scientific Research at Umm Al-Qura
Routledge, London University for supporting this work under Grant Code:19-EDU-1-02-0005. Also would
Guangul FM, Suhail AH, Khalit MI, Khidhir BA (2020) Challenges of remote like to thank Dr. Christopher Deluca for his comments on the manuscript. Dr. Suhad
assessment in higher education in the context of COVID-19: a case study of Sonbul for her contribution to the adaptation of the survey. Dr. Mohammad Alzaidi and
Middle East College. Educ Assess Eval Account 32(4):519–535. https:// Dr. Saeed Alshahrani for their early comments on the research proposal.
doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09340-w
Herrera L, Macías DF (2015) A call for language assessment literacy in the edu- Competing interests
cation and development of teachers of English as a foreign language. Colomb The authors declare no competing interests.
Appl Linguist J 17(2):302–312
Inbar‐Lourie O (2012) Language assessment literacy. The encyclopedia of applied
linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford Ethical approval
Isaacs T, Zara C, Herbert G, Coombs SJ, Smith C (2013) Key concepts in educa- The authors obtained approval from the deanship of scientific research at their affiliated
tional assessment. Sage. university. Further approvals were obtained from the invited universities before the
Malone BE (2008) Secondary level special education teachers’ perspectives and self- participants were invited to participate in the study.
reported practices related to the self-determination skills of high school
students with disabilities. Illinois State University
Malone ME (2013) The essentials of assessment literacy: contrasts between testers and
Informed consent
The participants were informed during the recruitment process that the participation was
users. Lang Test 30(3):329–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213480129
voluntary, all the information was treated with confidentiality. The participants were
Malone ME (2017) Training in language assessment. In: Shohamy E, Hornberger N
informed also that they had the right to withdraw from the study and were asked to tick
(eds) Language testing and assessment. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 225–239
the consent box before proceeding with the survey completion. Invitations to participate
Popham WJ (2004) Why assessment illiteracy is professional suicide. Educ Lea-
in the survey were sent through official university means (e.g. sending letters from A
dersh 62(1):82–83
University to a dean at B University). Invitations were sent through personal commu-
Popham WJ (2013) Tough teacher evaluation and formative assessment: oil and
nications as well as by email, WhatsApp, and Twitter.
water? Voices Middle 21(2):10
Sasere OB, Makhasane SD (2020) Global perceptions of faculties on virtual pro-
gramme delivery and assessment in higher education institutions during the
2020 Covid-19 pandemic. Int J High Educ 9(5):181–192 Additional information
Sharadgah T, Sa’di R (2020) Preparedness of institutions of higher education for Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to Samar Yakoob
assessment in virtual learning environments during the Covid-19 lockdown: Almossa.
evidence of bona fide challenges and pragmatic solutions. J Inf Tecnol Educ:
Res 19(1):755–774 Reprints and permission information is available at http://www.nature.com/reprints
Smith CD, Worsfold K, Davies L, Fisher R, McPhail R (2013) Assessment literacy
and student learning: the case for explicitly developing students’ assessment Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
literacy. Assess Eval High Edu 38(1):44–60 published maps and institutional affiliations.
Umer M (2015) Formative assessment and consequential validity: a practice yet to
be truly implemented in Saudi higher education. Paper presented at the 2nd
international conference for assessment and evaluation: learning outcomes
assessment, Saudi Arabia Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Umer M (2016) National Transformation Programe 2020. Formative assessment Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
has to be made formative: it does not work itself. https://uqu.edu.sa/en/main/ adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
App/FILES/41207. Retrieved from: https://www.moe.gov.sa/ar/Pages/ appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
vision2030.aspx. Vision. Presented in National Conference on Education Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party
(IER 2016), Education for Tomorrow: issues, challenges and prospects. Umm material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless
Al Qura University, Peshawar, Pakistan, p. 2030 (2018) UQU strategic plans indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the
Umer M, Zakaria MH, Alshara MA (2018) Investigating Saudi University EFL tea- article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory
chers’ assessment literacy: theory and practice. Int J Engl Linguist 8(3):345–356 regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
Vogt K, Tsagari D (2014) Assessment literacy of foreign language teachers: findings
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/
of a European study. Lang Assess Q 11(4):374–402
licenses/by/4.0/.
Volante L, Fazio X (2007) Exploring teacher candidates’ assessment literacy:
Implications for teacher education reform and professional development.
Can J Educ/Rev Can Éduc 30(3):749–770. https://doi.org/10.2307/20466661 © The Author(s) 2022

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2022)9:5 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-01025-z 9

 © The Author(s) 2022. This work is published under
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/(the “License”). Notwithstanding
the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance
with the terms of the License.