Assessment that takes about a minute per learner
Every learner completes 15 projects and a Capstone. Teachers assess them at two speeds, so the workload stays small and the growth line stays clear.
- Pre
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Capstone
- Post
Projects 1, 5, 10 and the Capstone
These get the full seven-criterion rubric, about one minute per learner.
A four-tap Workbook Check
About 30 seconds per learner. After each project, learners also rate themselves in five taps and give peers up to three stickers.
Same seven, scored the same way, everywhere
The criteria measure how independently a learner worked through the design process and teamwork, never right or wrong answers.
Understand the problem
Names a person and a need
Evidence: Define the ProblemIdeas and planning
An independent idea, offered first
Evidence: Design and PlanTechnical building
A working build and code
Evidence: The build, code or photoTesting
An honest check against goals and rules
Evidence: Test pageImproving
A change that responds to the test
Evidence: Improve pageTeamwork
A role taken, an idea contributed
Evidence: Team roles and stickersCommunication
Explaining choices, reflecting
Evidence: Reflect and Show and TellOne four-level ladder for every criterion
- 1 BeginningBlank, or an adult supplied the words or fixed the build.
- 2 DevelopingDid it after a prompt, or after seeing a teammate’s work.
- 3 ProficientDid it independently, meeting what the project asks.
- 4 ExtendingDid it independently and went beyond what was asked.
If an adult supplied the work, the criterion is capped at 2. If the teacher did not see that part happen, it is marked N/O instead of a guessed score.
A baseline, four checkpoints and a post-assessment
- Before Lesson 1
Pre-Assessment
13 to 15 minutes, 18 items, read aloud. It is a baseline, not presented to learners as a test.
- During the year
Four full scores
Start, two midpoints and end give a clear growth line at a fraction of the marking load.
- End of year
Post-Assessment
The same 18 items show growth against the baseline. A paper fallback works if devices are not ready.
What is recorded, and what is never scored
Four kinds of taps become year-round records: a learner rating themself, a teacher checking a workbook, a teacher scoring the rubric, and a peer giving a sticker. The format is being piloted at Level 4 and is designed to extend to every level.
| Instrument | When | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-Assessment | Once, before Lesson 1 | 16 scored items across six pillars, plus 2 unscored context items on prior exposure to instructions and technology |
| Workbook Check | 11 of 15 projects | Pages complete, build works, stickers earned (0 to 3) and a needs-support flag. These are flags, not quality scores |
| Checkpoint rubric | Projects 1, 5, 10 | Seven criteria scored 1 to 4, plus a sustainability line (Not yet, Developing, Secure) that is never added to a score |
| Self-rating | After every project | Five statements on a four-level ladder. Only completion is scored, never the level |
| Peer stickers | Every project | Up to three per project, with two more at the Capstone |
| Capstone rubric | Once | The same seven criteria across the Capstone prototypes |
| Innovation Fair judge sheet | Once | Four questions rated 1 to 4 stars by anonymous community raters. Never tied to a learner score |
| Parent checklist | Once, at year end | Four statements answered Yes, Sometimes or Not yet. Never scored |
| Post-Assessment | Once, at year end | 16 items paired to the Pre-Assessment pillars |
Learners and teachers
A seven-criterion growth profile, pillar-level gain from pre to post, a completion trail, and a single achievement score out of 100 with its components shown.
Schools and ministries
Class and school views of strengths, support needs and completion, built from the same records.
SKOOL21
Aggregated results across schools to check and improve the curriculum.
Growth is the unit of analysis, and no single score is compared between learners. Reporting across schools is still being built and depends on the digital platform.
What the studies found
Average rating out of 5 from teachers, students and parents, with about 230 respondents in each group. A perception survey, not an independent evaluation.
Aggregate assessment score in one class of 23 students over the programme. There was no comparison group.