

97

Training Burmese Teachers
Thein Lwin*

Human rights education does not exist in the Burmese formal education systemadministered by the military regime. However, human rights remain highin the agenda in Burma in light of the democratic movement led by Aung
San Suu Kyi. Burmese people who were forced to flee Burma or migrated elsewhere
get the opportunity to learn about human rights through the human rights groups.
The Human Rights Education Institute of Burma, for example, tirelessly works onhuman rights education through training, seminars and publications. The Teacher
Training Center for Burmese Teachers, on the other hand, includes human rights
education in its training curriculum. Schools in refugee camps introduce humanrights to the students. In this paper I discuss the background of education in Burma,
refugee camps and migrant schools, and the educational activities being done by
the Teacher Training Center for Burmese Teachers. I discuss human rights education as a step towards a future democratic Burma.
Burma has been governed by military
regimes from 1962 onward. The nationwide
democratic uprising under the leadership of
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in 1988 gave people
the hope of a return to democracy in Burmaand a democratic educational change. However,under the current military regime, education
deteriorated in every area from children’s accessto education, to curriculum, to teaching andstudents’ progress.
Children in rural areas as well as childrenof poor families in the cities have little chanceof getting educated because of lack of schools
and economic deprivation. The school dropout
rate is very high. According to a recent study(Thein Lwin, 2003)1, almost forty per cent of
the children never attended school and almost
three-quarters failed to complete primary education. There is a different reckoning on theadult literacy rate between the regime and othersources. The regime claims that the literacy rate

Education in Burma
The Burmese people received traditional
Buddhist education at monasteries in the past.
Under the British colonial rule, the school system and curriculums were changed. There were
three types of schools – English medium schools,
Anglo-vernacular schools and vernacular schools.
Vernacular schools were the only schools for the
majority of children throughout the country.
These schools taught in local language. The
other types of schools were only affordable toparents with higher income. The education system under the British administration was called‘colonial education’ by the patriotic Burmese.
After independence in 1948, it was changed
from colonial education to nationalist education which emphasized Burmese nationalism. In
1962, after a military coup, the education system
was changed again from nationalist education to
so-called socialist education.
97

98  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

is 80 per cent2 while other estimates put it atless than eighty per cent. The regime argues
that although the children do not attend publicschools, they learn reading and writing at Buddhist monasteries. It is true that the regime
allows Buddhist monasteries to open primaryschools. Children learn reading, writing andBuddhism. With regard to functional literacy,
however, which is required for people to work
efficiently with appropriate skills in agricultural,industrial or other sectors, children need at leastnine years of compulsory education. Buddhist
monasteries do not have the capacity to provide
education of this type.

Public Schools
Today’s public schools in Burma are extremely poor in terms of equity, quality andefficiency. Schools do not treat students equally.
Children of government officials who pay bribes
to teachers are privileged. Many teachers enter
the classroom without proper training. Curriculum is textbook-based and is just concerned withmemorizing facts in science, history, geography
and other subjects. Teachers use an authoritative role in teaching. It seems that the regime
uses education as a political tool by preventing
children from learning how to think. Youngpeople are expected to be disciplined in andout-of-school under the military regime. The
notion of discipline invokes ideas of loyalty andgives the image of obedient citizens.

Monastic Education
Thanks to Buddhist monks, children who
never enrolled in secular schools can still learn
the three Rs in monasteries. These children
learn literacy, numeracy, sciences, history andgeography as well as Buddhism. From the political, social and religious points of view, however, monastic schools should be reconsidered.
Monastic schools are officially allowed by theregime under the Ministry of Religious Affairs.
It is likely that monastic schools are supported

by Buddhist communities and the regime does
not need to use its budget. However, otherreligious communities - such as Christian andMuslim - are not allowed to open schools. It is
not a fair policy. Even in the eyes of Buddhists,
schools should be supported by the government
and monasteries should be the place for Buddhism. It is difficult for the children of otherreligious communities to send their children to
Buddhist monastic schools.

Private Schools
There are some private schools operatingin the city of Rangoon. Since children do notreceive quality education in the public schools,
parents want to send their children to private
schools with Western teachers and qualified local
teachers. School fees are high and only the ruling class and rich people can send their children
to such schools. There are huge discrepancies
between the children of the different social
classes with regards to education. The private
schools mostly focus on the mastery of the
English language. Parents want their children to
speak good English - hoping that they will send
their children to the English-speaking countries
to work or to continue their studies.

Higher Education
The regime has opened many new universities in different regions and proudly announces
the number of graduates each year. However,
it is just quantity rather than quality. Even so,in terms of quantity, many young people do notfinish their primary or secondary education,and only a small percentage of young people
can go to the universities. In terms of quality,
the universities are very much below standard
with lack of resources and research. Students do
not get ownership of their learning. University
courses are again textbook-based and are seriously lacking in resources.
Students cannot choose the courses theywant to study. The subjects to be taken depend

Training Burmese Teachers  99

on 11th grade examination marks. Entry to
medical, engineering, computer science andforeign relationship courses require higher
marks. This makes students, parents and teachers exam-oriented rather than concerned withstudents’ real learning. There is so much corruption involved in order to get higher marks
in examinations and entry to popular courses at
the university. The quality of education is very
low at all levels. Graduates are not properly
trained to gain the skills required to be able towork. Many graduates are unemployed. On theother hand, the military established their own
universities for the children of members of themilitary. It is thought that these students are
well-trained and have the opportunity to further
their studies abroad, while ordinary students
receive poor education.

Education of refugees and migrants in
Thailand
There are 150,000 refugees living in ninerefugee camps on the Thai-Burma borderwhich are recognized by United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The
refugees are mostly from Karen and Karenni
states where frequent fighting between regime troops and ethnic armed groups occur.
There are two million illegal immigrants living
throughout Thailand outside the camps. The
migrant population comes from different partsof Burma and enters Thailand illegally for work.
There are also thousands of Burmese migrants
living in neighboring Bangladesh and India.
Since Thailand is facing a shortage of labor,
undocumented immigrants are allowed to apply
for work permits to work in farms, factories,and sweatshops. About one million Burmese
have applied for work permits, and it is believedthat at least another one million are staying in
Thailand without proper documents. The annual fee for a work permit is 4,000 Baht (100US dollars). Many migrant workers with low

paid jobs cannot afford to pay the fees. In manycases, they have to pay more than 4,000 Baht
for bribe. About 20 per cent of the refugee andmigrant populations are of school age children
and are in need of education.

Refugee Schools
About 30,000 students are attending schools
in refugee camps - from primary to senior secondary levels. There are about 1,000 teachers.
At the beginning of a school year, the numberof students is higher because young people
inside Burma cross the border and come into
refugee camps to get an education. The Karenni
ethnic armed opposition group (Karenni
National Progressive Party - KNPP) controls
schools in two Karenni refugee camps andKaren ethnic armed opposition group (Karen
National Union - KNU) controls schools inseven Karen refugee camps with the support ofnon-governmental organizations (NGOs). Curriculums are based on political and nationalist
ideas. Teachers are recruited from the refugee
population and are not well qualified. Where
native English speakers go to the camps andteach English, the students’ level of English is
relatively higher than students inside Burma.
However, the overall level of education does notshow much improvement. One good thing isthat almost all children in camps attend school.
Because education is free in camps and parents
get food rations, children do not need to work
- or there no is available work anyway. About
two hundred young people in camps complete
their secondary education every year. Sometwenty-five students from camps are selected
to join an intensive college foundation course(ICFC) in Chiang Mai supported by Open Society Institute (OSI) and have the opportunity
to get higher education supported by scholarship. Other young people have no chance tocontinue their studies and some work as teachers
or medics in camps.

100  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

Migrant Schools
Many Burmese migrants came to Thailand
with their family. Some got married while in
Thailand and have children. These children
need to attend school. Since the parents areworking illegally in Thailand and children do
not understand Thai, they cannot attend Thai
schools. In theory, every school age child can
go to a Thai school but, in practice, these children are denied schooling because they are notThai citizens. Some Burmese communitiesin Thailand have their own schools and teachBurmese, Karen, English, and Thai languages,
and mathematics to the children. Some parents
want their children to attend schools that teachin Burmese or Karen language to preserve theirown language and culture. In the Mae Sot area
alone (near the Burma border), there are about
forty schools (many are one-classroom schools)
attended by 2,000 students. There are someschools in Mahachai area (near Bangkok) andPhuket peninsula. A few hundred children get
education in these “migrant” schools. These arechildren who live near the schools with parents
who want to give them education. Many otherchildren live at a distance from schools, withparents who move from place to place for theirjobs, or with parents who need their older children to work to earn money or to look after thesmaller children. Consequently, these children
have little opportunity to learn.
Furthermore, the migrant workers themselves need education and training. Their old
skills and disrupted education in Burma do not
fit the requirements of the Thai economy. They
need to learn more to improve their skills.

Educational activities of exiled educators
This author and his colleagues started an
education program along the Burma-Thai border in 2000. They met with community leaders,teachers and educators and learned that there

were enormous needs for the education of theyounger generation in the border areas. They
found many problems including lack of schools,
shortage of teachers, insufficient training of theteachers, and disputes about the curriculum.
Unable to provide for all their needs, they decided to contribute their knowledge and skills
by organizing teacher training and education
seminars, and offering professional advice on
curriculum development. Since the beginningof the program, the Center for International
Studies in Education, University of Newcastle,
United Kingdom has been helping them organize seminars and teacher training.

A teacher training center
A 2001 teacher training course3 in Chiang
Mai, Thailand for Burmese teachers prompted
two Burmese trainers, Thein Lwin, Ph.D. and
Nan Lung, to establish an independent educational institute called the Teacher Training
Center for Burmese Teachers (TTBT) in February 2002. They thought that the establishmentof such an educational institute is necessary
because students need qualified teachers both inside Burma and in the refugee camps. TTBT was
established as an education foundation serving
the needs of schools in Burmese refugee camps,
areas of internally displaced persons, remoteareas of Burma, and areas of Burmese migrant
workers in Thailand. It seeks to improve thequality of education in these schools by training
new teachers, promoting active learning, criticalthinking and democratic practice in schools,
providing professional development opportunities for teachers, and developing educational
policy and practice. Its program offers basic
teacher training, advanced teacher training,
and Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking(RWCT) workshops. The program focuses on
primary and junior secondary education.

Training Burmese Teachers  101

Basic teacher training
The basic teacher training course of TTBT
is based on the experience of the 2001 teacher
training held in Chiang Mai. The 2001 training was a three-month course with thirty-one
students. A training of trainers’ workshop in
Chiang Mai followed this course with six students from the 2001 training and two Kachinteachers. From 2002, TTBT has been holding
its own basic teacher training course under asix-month program. The training course offers
teaching strategies in literacy, numeracy, social
studies and sciences across the curriculum.
These courses were designed to help teachers get
appropriate basic knowledge in education andto promote active learning. Mary Wootten andSteve Wootten of University of Newcastle cameto Chiang Mai for a month in 2001 and taught
lesson planning, curriculum development, andassessment of students’ performance.
There were fourteen students in 2002,
twenty-five students in 2003, and twenty-three
students in 2004 completing the six-monthtraining. The students were awarded a ‘Certificate in Education’ upon completion of the
training. The students were selected from different ethnic nationality groups of Burma. The
selection tried to ensure an ethnic and genderbalance but most were Karen nationals because
the majority of applications were from Karen
refugee camps. Almost all students (approximately 80%) went back to their communities
and now work as teachers.

Advanced teacher training
The advanced teacher training programaims to provide professional development opportunities for experienced teachers. In 2002,
six students were sent to study at the Universityof Newcastle in the United Kingdom. The
Prospect Burma and Open Society Institutesupported the scholarship program. Five stu-

dents were awarded Bachelor in Philosophyin Education and one student (Nan Lung)
was awarded Master of Education in Special
Educational Needs. After the study, Nan Lung
continued working in the teacher-training program of TTBT while the other students went
back to their respective communities – Kachin,
Karenni, Karen and Mon – to continue theirwork in education.
Due to high cost of studying abroad, TTBT
initiated an Advanced Teacher Training Course
in Chiang Mai. The Advanced Teacher Training
Course, an intensive three-month course, started
in March 2005 as a pilot program. Nineteen
teachers joined the course (fifteen teachers
from private schools in Rangoon, Mandalay
and Myitkyina; four teacher trainers from the
Karen Education Project based in Mae Sot andworking in refugee camps). The participants
were awarded the ‘Advanced Teacher Training
Certificate.’ All participants hold at least a first
degree from a university inside Burma except
one participant from Kachin who graduatedfrom the Maijayan Teacher Training School.
Two participants from the Karen Education
Project hold master degrees. They all have teaching experiences.
The training course currently offers the following content:4• Theories of Learning• Multiple Intelligences (Howard Gardner) and similar theories• Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking (RWCT 8 Guidebooks)• Assessing Pupils’ Progress• Practical Classroom Management•	Study Skills and Thinking Skills•	Special Educational Needs•	Education for Human Needs and WellBeing• Art in Education.
Theories of learning include different learning styles of students. Multiple intelligences wasintroduced to appreciate the students’ different

102  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

skills and to use different teaching strategies tomeet their (students’) varied abilities. Practicalclassroom management is designed to change
classroom setting to encourage students’ active
participation. It also discusses and practices lesson planning. The use of formative assessment5

rather than traditional summative assessment6
is encouraged. The program on ‘special educational needs’ for the children with learning
difficulties is most needed for children in refugee
camps and those with learning and language
difficulties.

Human rights education may be understood to begin with a number of basic questions related tohuman needs and well-being. These key questions are:1)	What essential needs must be satisfied in order for humans to live good lives? What does it mean
to live a good life?
2)	What moral imperatives guide humans as they try to satisfy these essential needs, i.e., to create
a community/world in which they can be satisfied?
3)	What recourse do humans have when these essential needs are disrespected or ignored?
Although it often has other more specific objectives, human rights education aims broadly to develop young people’s capacity to engage in moral reasoning about these key questions by helping
them understand the foundations of [or reasons for] their own moral choices as they approach thequestions. This course of 10 sessions will explore ways of achieving this objective through (1) a“human rights friendly” approach to classroom management; (2) integration of teaching methods
that promote moral reasoning about human needs and well-being across the curriculum and (3)inclusion of content that encourages thinking about the key questions above in a number of academic
disciplines at different grade levels. Insofar as participants are interested, the course can also explore
approaches to the teaching of international human rights specifically. Finally, (4) it will address thequestion of how to assess and evaluate learning of moral reasoning.

Specific Topics:
1)	Understanding the ethical framework for addressing the key questions: the teacher as ethicist
2) Creating a “human rights friendly” classroom environment and approach to teaching3) Creating a social/cultural context for addressing the key questions: community, cooperation andcare as essential components of moral reasoning about human needs and well-being4) The importance of effective questioning as the most basic of all participatory teaching methods;
how to elicit important questions from students
5) Addressing the key questions across the curriculum: methods, activities and content for developing
moral reasoning about human needs and well-being in the social sciences, arts, and sciences
6) [Optional] Studying human rights directly: The international human rights system; globalizationand human rights; culture and human rights
7) Assessment and evaluation in a “human rights friendly” learning environment: creating opportunities for students to apply moral reasoning.

Training Burmese Teachers  103

The ‘educating for human needs and wellbeing’ course was written by Mary Purkey, a human rights educator in the Champlain Regional
College, Lennoxville, Canada. The course has
the following description and content:
The participants were interested in the subjects and participated actively. They said ‘humanrights friendly learning environment’ can be
included in their classroom teaching while they
are teaching subjects such as social studies andlanguages without talking about ‘human rights
violations in Burma’. The teachers thought thatteaching about democracy and human rights
might be considered as a crime and possibly
lead to punishment by the regime.
From 2002 to 2004, educators from the
Human Rights Education Institute of Burma(HREIB) have been invited to provide oneweek human rights courses at the TTBT training. With participants from refugee camps, thecourses provided direct human rights training
because teachers in camps can teach humanrights explicitly. In 2005, we changed the threemonth course focusing on Reading and Writing
for Critical Thinking (RWCT) and education
for human needs and well-being. The training
focused on student-centered teaching strategies
and democratic practice in the classroom. Due
to visa difficulties, we organized three-month,rather than six-month, training course. Thesechanges were mainly aimed at adjusting to the2005 course participants who were teachers
from inside Burma and who were reluctant
to join a training that includes criticism of themilitary regime and its human rights violations.
They had to go back to Burma and were worriedof being investigated by the military regime forparticipating in politics.

Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking
RWCT course covers democracy, humanrights and peace education implicitly. The
RWCT project is based on the idea that democratic practices in schools play an important rolein the transition toward democratic societies.
Active in thirty countries of Central and Eastern
Europe, Central Asia, Latin America and Southeast Asia, RWCT introduces research-based
instructional methods to teachers and teacher
educators. These methods are designed to help
students think reflectively, take ownership for
their personal learning, understand the logic ofarguments, listen attentively, debate confidently,
and become independent lifelong learners.
The program can be used in all grades andsubjects within the existing curriculums. The
RWCT Northern Thailand project for Burmese
teachers is a part of the international RWCT
program initiated and funded by the International Reading Association and Open Society
Institute based in Washington D.C. and New
York respectively.
In 2002, twenty-five teachers from Karenni
and Karen camps and from Mae Sot joined
the first RWCT workshops. In 2003, theseparticipants organized workshops in KarenniCamp 1, Mae Khong Kha Karen Camp and
Mae Sot. Ninety teachers joined in 2003. In
2004, the RWCT workshops were organizedin six places – two Karenni camps, two Karen
camps, Mae Sot and Chiang Mai. One hundredand sixty teachers joined in the third year. In
December 2004, RWCT extended to Kachin
State, Northern Burma upon the invitation of
Kachin leaders. TTBT held a four-week RWCT
workshop attended by forty teachers.

Other training activities
TTBT also provided special training courses
for non-teachers. In 2005, TTBT held a fortyhour training course on teaching technique tothe medical trainers working at Dr. Cynthia
Maung’s clinic and from inside Burma. The
course included adult education, general teaching strategies in science, lesson planning, assessment and evaluation. With 50,000 Burmese
migrants registered with the Thai government
along with another 50,000 undocumented

104  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

Burmese around Chiang Mai working in factories, night market, hotels, restaurants, sex
shops and construction sites, TTBT consideredestablishing a learning center for them. Throughthe Migrant Learning Center, which provides
language (Thai and English languages) andcomputer training, six hundred workers havecompleted their courses. Currently, two hundredmigrant workers are attending the courses. The
center intends to offer occupational training in
the future.
Also in 2005, TTBT organized an education program for those affected by the tsunami.
TTBT organized a training course for teachersof schools established in the Phuket peninsula
after the tsunami for the children of Burmese
workers. The training course included special
education for children suffering from trauma,teaching techniques, lesson planning, andclassroom management. The course was held incooperation with NGOs working in the area.

Challenges Faced
Working with only a few colleagues andinadequate resources, the improvement TTBT
can make in the educational situation of Burmais limited. However, it has been able to provide
teacher training to young people who completed their secondary education in refugee
camps and who wish to become teachers. It also
invited teachers working at community schools
in the ceasefire areas and migrant schools in
Mae Sot area. These people came to Chiang
Mai to attend the training without proper
travel documents. Negotiation with local Thaiauthorities made this happen. But from 2004,
the participants found it more difficult to go to
Chiang Mai. As a result, the TTBT training team
had to visit border regions to provide training
there. The same situation faced some of the local trainers who have no proper documents totravel to Thailand.
In 2005, TTBT invited teachers from inside
Burma with travel documents to join six-monthtraining in Chiang Mai. But since it was difficult to obtain six-month visa, the six-monthtraining course was changed to a three-monthintensive course. The participants were teachers
from community and private schools especiallyfor disadvantaged children. Teachers from thegovernment schools were not invited.
Within six years, almost all teachers working at migrant schools in Mae Sot area havecompleted the TTBT training in Chiang Mai
and Mae Sot. TTBT staff frequently visited theschools, met the teachers and provided feedback
to their questions. During the last six years,
TTBT has trained over 1,000 teachers. The
number includes training courses in Chiang Mai,
Mae Sot, refugee camps on the Burma-Thailand
border, Khao Lak, Mahachai Kachin, Mandalay,
Twantae, Thanlyin and Bago. In 2005, one
hundred twenty-three teachers completed the
TTBT training courses (nineteen in Chiang
Mai, forty-four in Mae Sot, twenty-two in Khao
Lak, sixty inside Burma). In 2006, two hundred
fifty-two teachers completed the training (forty
in Chiang Mai, twelve in Mahachai and two
hundred inside Burma). As earlier mentioned,
second generation training inside Burma does
not include direct teaching of human rights but
they are woven into their discussions. TTBT
believes that this program serves as capacitybuilding in education and will help in the future
educational development of Burma.
TTBT is trying to affiliate the program with
Chiang Mai University and get a certificate ofaccreditation, which will facilitate the issuanceof study visas for the students and official recognition of the education program by an academic
institution. Official accreditation, however,means payment of international student fees.
Since the program relies on donation, such fees
are beyond our means.

Evaluation
Over one thousand three hundred teachers received training from the TTBT programTraining Burmese Teachers  105

in six years. Twenty per cent of this number
quit their teaching job – some went to a third
country for resettlement, some changed to otherjobs with better income, and some undertook
other training such as on media and humanrights advocacy. About one thousand teachers
entered the classrooms to teach forty thousand
students. It is expected that these teachers would
provide students a student-centered education,and promote active participation and criticalthinking.
According to some teachers who graduatedfrom TTBT, students are more active than before. They are happy in the classrooms and want
to go to school every day. Through classroom
observation, it is clear that students are active.
However, there has been no research about thestudents’ level of critical thinking. Some teachers
in refugee camps revealed that during the passive
teaching/learning era, students were quiet andobeyed the teachers. Now they are active anddo not show their respect to their teachers. For
example, some students dare to fight their teachers. In the past, students do not smoke in frontof teachers because they (teachers) do not likesmoking not only at school but also at home.
Today, students not only smoke but also drink
alcohol in front of the teachers. This perceived
problem will be considered through such approaches as classroom management techniques,lesson planning and moral education.
One thousand is a small number comparedwith the thousands of teachers in Burma. In aschool, only one or two teachers who received
TTBT training might employ new teachingapproaches while the other twenty or thirty
teachers would continue to use traditional rotelearning strategies. TTBT employs a policy ofequality – regional equality, ethnic equality andgender equality – which limits to a few teachers
from a school the opportunity to join the training. In the future, school-based training has tobe employed so that all teachers practice newteaching strategies in each school.

Conclusion
Moral education has been missing in the
Burmese education system for many years.
During the British administration, colonialeducation was introduced and moral education
was not included in the school curriculum. The
Burmese nationalist movement created schools
which promoted education to fight imperialism,
rather than civic and moral education. Under
the General Ne Win government, socialist moral
values were deemed more important than thespiritual values of moral development. This was
known as the Burmese way to socialism. The
current military regime does not give a place tomoral values in education. The lack of moral
consideration is not only the fault of the military
regime but also of exiled opposition groups.
Education in the ethnic army-controlled areas
has a similar tradition - fighting the Burmese
army is seen as more important than peacefulcoexistence.
Lack of moral education for many years inevery part of Burma has resulted in corruption
prevailing everywhere. It is not only material
corruption but also mental corruption such as
cheating, bribing, ‘pleasing up and pressing
down’. This article does not intend to humiliate
people but highlight the importance of moral
development in Burmese society. Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi is an excellent role model of moral
authority. Based on good practices elsewhere,
moral education should be included in Burmese
school curriculum and TTBT training should
teach moral education. Further discussion on
the relationship between moral education andreligious education would be needed in thisregard.
Human rights education which aims broadly
to develop young people’s capacity to engage inmoral reasoning should be included in Burmese
education system. TTBT will develop a programon the integration of teaching methods that
promote moral reasoning about human needs
and well-being across the curriculum.

106  HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION IN ASIAN SCHOOLS

Endnotes* Thein Lwin, PhD, is the Program Director of
Teacher Training Center for Burmese Teachers.
1
Education in Burma (1945-2000). The paper canbe viewed at www.educationburma.net
2
It is obvious that forty percent of children neverattend school and almost three-quarters fail to complete
primary education (see Education in Burma, page 63)3
The 2001 teacher training course organized by
Thein Lwin, Ph.D. and Nan Lung was held under the
auspices by the National Health and Education Committee (NHEC) – an umbrella political organization
coordinating health and education along the BurmaThailand border.
4
Based on the May 2006 three-month intensive
Advanced Teacher Training Certificate course.
5
Formative assessment is often done at the beginning or during a program, thus providing the opportunity for immediate evidence for student learning in aparticular course or at a particular point in a program.
Classroom assessment is one of the most common
formative assessment techniques. The purpose of thistechnique is to improve quality of student learning andshould not be evaluative or involve grading students.
This can also lead to curricular modifications when
specific courses have not met the student learning outcomes. Classroom assessment can also provide important
program information when multiple sections of a course
are taught because it enables programs to examine if thelearning goals and objectives are met in all sections of
the course. It also can improve instructional quality byengaging the faculty in the design and practice of thecourse goals and objectives and the course impact on
the program. Source: www.provost.cmich.edu/assessment/toolkit/formativesummative.htm
6Summative assessment is comprehensive in nature,provides accountability and is used to check the levelof learning at the end of the program. For example, if
upon completion of a program students will have theknowledge to pass an accreditation test, taking the test
would be summative in nature since it is based on the
cumulative learning experience. Program goals andobjectives often reflect the cumulative nature of thelearning that takes place in a program. Thus the program
would conduct summative assessment at the end of
the program to ensure students have met the program
goals and objectives. Attention should be given to using various methods and measures in order to have acomprehensive plan. Ultimately, the foundation for anassessment plan is to collect summative assessment data
and this type of data can stand-alone. Formative assessment data, however, can contribute to a comprehensive
assessment plan by enabling faculty to identify particularpoints in a program to assess learning (i.e., entry into a
program, before or after an internship experience, impactof specific courses, etc.) and monitor the progress being
made towards achieving learning outcomes. Source:
www.provost.cmich.edu/assessment/toolkit/formativesummative.htm