National Assessment Policy of Nepal
Nepal's national assessment policy for school levels is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by constitutional mandates, federalization, and a commitment to global educational goals like Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4). The system aims to shift from traditional rote-based evaluations towards more inclusive, competency-based, and learner-centered approaches. Key institutions such as the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST), Curriculum Development Center (CDC), Education Review Office (ERO), and National Examinations Board (NEB) are central to policy formulation, curriculum development, and assessment implementation. Local governments are increasingly playing a critical role, particularly in basic education. The policy integrates continuous assessment systems (CAS) in early grades, blended models for middle basic levels, and standardized public examinations for Grades 8, 10, and 12. National Large-Scale Assessments (NASA) provide crucial system-level feedback.
Significant strides have been made in increasing access to education, strengthening assessment systems, and standardizing examinations. However, persistent challenges include inconsistent learning outcomes, pronounced disparities across regions, school types, and socio-economic groups, and critical gaps in teacher capacity for implementing new assessment paradigms. Future efforts must focus on targeted teacher professional development, equitable resource distribution, leveraging assessment data for remedial interventions, fostering multi-stakeholder collaboration, and ensuring the fidelity of policy implementation within the federal structure.
Introduction
Nepal's education system is anchored by a robust policy framework designed to ensure widespread access and quality learning outcomes. The nation’s commitment to education is enshrined in its Constitution, which guarantees every citizen the right to compulsory and free education up to the basic level and free education up to the secondary level from the state.1 This foundational mandate underpins all subsequent educational policies and initiatives, including the development of assessment systems.
The National Education Policy 2076 (2019 AD), officially approved in July 2022, serves as a comprehensive and transformative blueprint for the country's educational landscape. This policy is designed to foster inclusive, equitable, and quality education, aligning Nepal's national objectives with international standards, particularly those outlined in Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4). It emphasizes universal access, lifelong learning, and the integration of vocational and technical education to prepare a skilled, scientific, and practical workforce.
Successive reform programs have shaped the current educational structure. The School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP, 2009-2015) and its successor, the School Sector Development Program (SSDP, 2016/17-2022/23), were pivotal in restructuring Nepal's education into a formalized 12-year system, comprising Basic Education (Grades 1-8) and Secondary Education (Grades 9-12). These programs prioritized enhancing access, promoting inclusion, and improving quality, notably through the establishment of a standardized student assessment system. The SSDP achieved significant positive outcomes, including an increase in survival rates to Grade 12 and a reduction in the number of out-of-school children. Building on these achievements, the current School Education Sector Plan (SESP, 2023-2027), supported by the World Bank, aims to address learning losses exacerbated by recent global challenges and to further build a resilient and effective education system.
Key Institutional Actors in Assessment
The effective functioning of Nepal's assessment system relies on a network of inter-connected institutional bodies, each with distinct but complementary roles:
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST): As the apex governmental body, MoEST holds the primary responsibility for formulating national education plans and policies. It oversees the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of these policies across the education sector, acting as the central authority for educational governance.
Curriculum Development Center (CDC): Established in 1971, the CDC operates as an academic center under MoEST. Its core mandate involves the development, revision, and improvement of curricula, textbooks, and other instructional materials for all school levels. Significantly, the CDC also functions as the secretariat of the National Curriculum Development and Assessment Council and is directly involved in activities related to curriculum and student assessment, including the crucial task of specifying learning achievement benchmarks.
Education Review Office (ERO): Established in 2010, ERO is mandated to conduct independent performance audits of schools and educational institutions. A key function of ERO is to assess student achievement levels nationally, thereby promoting accountability within the education system and informing strategies for quality improvement. ERO is the leading entity for conducting the National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) at various grade levels.
National Examinations Board (NEB): Formed in 2016 as a replacement for the Higher Secondary Education Board (HSEB), NEB operates as an autonomous body responsible for the overall operation, management, and promotion of school education examinations. Its central task involves creating and enhancing examination methods, and it is specifically responsible for conducting the Grade 10 Secondary Education Examination (SEE) and the Grade 12 School Leaving Certificate Examination (SLCE).
Local Governments (LGs): Following Nepal's transition to a federal structure with the 2015 Constitution, the Local Government Operation Act (Article 11(8)) devolved significant educational responsibilities to local bodies. This includes the authority to develop local curricula tailored to community needs and, notably, the responsibility for conducting Grade 8 examinations. This shift aims to enhance local involvement and foster context-specific educational planning.
The assessment landscape in Nepal is characterized by a dynamic interplay between centralized policy formulation and decentralized implementation. While national bodies like MoEST, CDC, and NEB establish overarching frameworks and standards, the federal structure has increasingly empowered local governments with significant responsibilities in curriculum and assessment at the foundational levels. This devolution of authority is intended to make education more responsive to local needs and contexts. However, this dual approach also presents complexities. Reports indicate that despite the policy intent, curriculum development can remain centrally dominated in practice. Furthermore, local governments may face challenges in coordination, consistency, and a lack of necessary resources and expertise to effectively implement national policies. This situation suggests that while the framework for local responsiveness is in place, the practical execution faces systemic hurdles related to capacity and coordination, potentially leading to uneven implementation of national assessment policies across different local bodies and exacerbating existing disparities.
The evolution of Nepal's assessment system also reveals a strategic progression towards a more comprehensive and quality-focused approach. Historically, assessments may have lacked systematic reforms. However, the establishment of dedicated institutions like ERO and NEB, along with the explicit focus on "strengthened assessment systems" within major reform programs like the SSDP, signifies a deliberate move to build a robust institutional framework. ERO's shift from predominantly norm-referenced to criterion-referenced assessments and the emphasis on "assessment for learning" reflect a pedagogical shift beyond mere summative evaluation. This progression indicates a recognition of assessment's critical role in informing policy, monitoring educational quality, and ultimately driving improvements in learning outcomes. However, the effectiveness of this evolving system remains contingent on addressing the implementation challenges, particularly at the ground level, which continue to manifest as disparities in student achievement.
Table 1: Key Assessment Bodies and Their Responsibilities
Foundational Principles and Types of School-Level Assessment
Assessment is recognized as a cornerstone of an effective education system in Nepal, serving multiple critical purposes. It is fundamentally important for providing comprehensive information on the levels of student learning and achievement across the system. Beyond individual student performance, assessment is crucial for monitoring trends in education quality over time, offering real-time feedback to support educators and students in improving teaching and learning processes, and fostering accountability among various stakeholders within the educational landscape. At a broader policy level, national assessments specifically generate evidence that enables policymakers to formulate practical and implementable educational strategies at both national and sub-national tiers, thereby driving necessary reforms. These assessments also function as a vital mechanism for measuring the overall quality of education, providing both quantitative data and descriptive insights into student achievement.
Assessment Paradigms: Formative vs. Summative, Norm-Referenced vs. Criterion-Referenced
Nepal's contemporary education policies are increasingly advocating for a balanced integration of both formative and summative assessment approaches.
Formative Assessment: This type of assessment focuses on the ongoing evaluation of student learning during instruction. Its primary aim is to scrutinize the qualitative aspects of students' specified behaviors, skills, and attitudes, in addition to their academic achievement. Formative assessment is considered crucial for identifying specific learning gaps, providing timely and constructive feedback to students, and enabling personalized support to cater to individual learning needs.
Related Posts
Summative Assessment: In contrast, summative assessment is typically conducted at the end of an instructional unit or academic period. Its main purposes include student achievement certification, determining grade promotion, and measuring overall academic progress against a set of learning objectives.
Norm-Referenced Assessment: This method of interpreting assessment results involves comparing a student's performance to that of a larger group of students, often the average or "norm" of that group. Historically, many of ERO's National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) exercises for Grades 3, 5, and 8 were conducted using a norm-referenced approach.
Criterion-Referenced Assessment: This approach interprets assessment results by comparing a student's performance against pre-determined criteria or specific learning standards, rather than against the performance of other students. ERO initiated criterion-referenced assessment at Grade 8 in 2017, with plans to extend this methodology to Grades 5 and 10 in subsequent assessment rounds. This strategic shift indicates a move towards evaluating students based on their mastery of specific learning objectives and competencies, which aligns with the Curriculum Development Center's role in specifying learning achievement benchmarks.
Overview of Assessment Modalities: Classroom-Based, Public Examinations, National Large-Scale Assessments (NASA)
Nepal's assessment framework encompasses three primary modalities to evaluate student learning and system effectiveness:
Classroom Assessment (CA): This is a micro-level assessment that is considered an integral part of daily classroom instruction. It involves teachers collecting, synthesizing, and interpreting information to inform their instructional decisions. The National Curriculum Framework provides guidelines for classroom assessment practices. However, reports indicate that classroom assessment practices are generally not well-aligned with the national curriculum framework and are often considered weak, characterized by errors in grading, minimal useful feedback to students, and inadequate communication with parents regarding student progress.
Public Examinations: These are formal student certification programs administered externally at key transition points in the school system. Local bodies are responsible for conducting the Grade 8 examinations, while the National Examinations Board (NEB) conducts the Grade 10 Secondary Education Examination (SEE) at the provincial level and the Grade 12 School Leaving Certificate Examination (SLCE) at the national level. These examinations serve formal purposes such as high school graduation and university entrance, as well as informal functions like monitoring education quality and informing policy reforms.
National Large-Scale Assessments (NLSA): The National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA), conducted by the Education Review Office (ERO), represents Nepal's first nationally representative, large-scale assessment initiative. NASA is designed to provide comprehensive system-level feedback on the overall performance of the education system. These assessments typically cover a few core subjects on a regular, sample-based cycle, with results intended to inform national education policy reforms.
The persistent disparity between policy intent and actual classroom practice in assessment is a significant concern. While national guidelines emphasize formative and continuous assessment, observations suggest that these practices are often not effectively implemented, leading to issues like grading errors and insufficient feedback. The Continuous Assessment System (CAS), a key school-based assessment initiative, was even found to be ineffective in its pilot phases. This indicates a critical disconnect: despite a clear policy emphasis on using assessment to improve learning, the most immediate and frequent form of student evaluation is failing to provide meaningful feedback. This situation likely contributes to the persistent low learning outcomes observed in national assessments, as foundational learning gaps may not be adequately addressed early on.
Conversely, there is a clear strategic move towards standards-based assessment for systemic improvement. The shift by ERO from predominantly norm-referenced to criterion-referenced assessments is a notable policy evolution. Previously, comparing students against each other was the norm, which is useful for ranking but less informative for targeted interventions. By moving to criterion-referenced assessment, Nepal aims to gain a more precise understanding of what students know and can do relative to defined curriculum standards. This aligns with the CDC's role in setting learning benchmarks and the broader goal of ensuring students achieve desirable learning outcomes. This strategic direction is crucial for improving the overall quality of education, as it provides clearer metrics for diagnosing systemic weaknesses and designing more effective, standards-based interventions.
Assessment within the Integrated Curriculum (Basic Level: Grades 1-3)
Nepal's education system is undergoing a fundamental pedagogical shift, moving away from traditional teacher-centered instruction towards more progressive, student-centered approaches. A cornerstone of this transformation is the integrated curriculum, which represents a deliberate departure from the conventional subject-centered model of education.
Philosophy and Key Features of Nepal's Integrated Curriculum
The integrated curriculum is designed to offer a holistic and meaningful learning experience, with a strong emphasis on developing interdisciplinary skills, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities essential for navigating the complexities of the 21st century. For early grades (1-3), this curriculum encompasses six major learning areas: language and literacy, mathematics, science and technology, social studies, health and physical development, and creative arts. By fostering connections between these seemingly disparate subjects, the curriculum aims to minimize content duplication and encourage a more cohesive, real-world approach to problem-solving.
A core principle of the integrated curriculum is its learner-centered design, which prioritizes student engagement and active participation in the learning process. Furthermore, it aligns with Nepal's overarching vision of inclusive education, striving to cater to diverse learner needs and cultivate a supportive, collaborative learning environment. The curriculum incorporates the "Know, Do, Be" (KBD) framework, ensuring a comprehensive integration of knowledge acquisition, practical skills, and desirable attitudes, values, and behaviors.
Implementation of the Continuous Assessment System (CAS): Methods and Tools
For students in the early grades (1-3), the Continuous Assessment System (CAS) is envisioned as the primary assessment method, effectively replacing traditional high-stakes examinations. CAS is a tangible manifestation of School-Based Assessment (SBA) and has been a part of the basic school system for two decades, having been piloted under the Basic and Primary Education Project II (BPEP II).
The methods employed within CAS are diverse and designed to capture a broad spectrum of learning. These include ongoing classroom observations, the maintenance of student portfolios, engagement in project-based learning, participation in group activities, opportunities for creative expression, and evaluations based on attendance. These tools are specifically aligned with the key learning domains and sub-skills articulated in the integrated curriculum, reflecting Nepal’s holistic approach to student development. A significant benefit of CAS is its capacity to promote equitable learning opportunities, particularly for marginalized groups such as girls, children with disabilities, linguistic minorities, and students from Dalit and Indigenous communities, by allowing them to demonstrate their competencies in varied and contextually relevant ways.
Alignment of CAS with Integrated Curriculum Learning Domains
The integrated curriculum explicitly promotes the development of interdisciplinary skills, critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity—often referred to as the "4C Skills". CAS, with its emphasis on diverse assessment methods like project-based learning and group activities, is inherently designed to evaluate these broader competencies that extend beyond mere rote memorization. This shift towards CAS and competency-based assessment is in direct alignment with national policies and global commitments like SDG 4, signaling a deliberate move away from traditional, rote-based examinations towards child-friendly, formative, and inclusive approaches.
Despite the progressive and well-articulated policy for integrated curriculum and CAS in early grades, there are significant challenges in its practical implementation. Reports consistently indicate that classroom assessment practices are "generally not aligned" with the national curriculum framework and are widely "considered weak," often plagued by issues such as grading errors and insufficient feedback to students. Even after two decades of practice, CAS was found to be "ineffective" in its pilot phases. This situation is further compounded by the observation that the success of these advanced assessment models "depends heavily on teachers’ capacity and institutional readiness to implement and interpret assessment data effectively, which is currently a challenge". Barriers such as a lack of adequate teacher training, resource shortages, and the enduring prevalence of traditional teaching methods hinder the effective adoption of student-centered approaches like Project-Based Learning (PBL), a key component of CAS.
This scenario points to a substantial policy-practice gap. The ambitious vision for fostering holistic development and 21st-century skills through continuous, formative assessment is undermined by practical implementation hurdles. Without significant investment in sustained teacher training, ongoing support, and adequate resources, the intended benefits of these progressive assessment policies may not be fully realized. The continued "weakness" of classroom assessment directly impacts the foundational learning experiences of young children, potentially allowing learning deficits to accumulate and persist into higher grades, thereby impeding overall educational quality.
Assessment at the Basic Level (Grades 1-8)
Basic education in Nepal spans Grades 1 through 8, forming the foundational segment of the country's 12-year schooling structure.5 The curriculum and assessment policies for this level are designed to be responsive to both national standards and local contexts.
Curriculum Structure and Local Contextualization for Basic Education
The curriculum structure for basic education explicitly incorporates provisions for local curriculum or mother tongue instruction as a separate subject. This approach is intended to address the diverse linguistic and cultural needs of local populations across Nepal. Local governments are vested with the responsibility for developing these localized curricula for individual schools within their jurisdiction. While the National Curriculum Framework-2019 theoretically encourages teacher participation in curriculum development, practical implementation often remains centrally dominated. The local curriculum development guideline (2019) provides components for designing local curricula, though these are presented as non-mandatory, allowing for flexibility. The School Sector Development Program (SSDP) specifically emphasized the need for relevant and high-quality curricula, alongside reliable school-based assessment systems in basic education, including the crucial use of mother-tongue languages as a medium of instruction.
Blended Assessment Models for Grades 4-5 and 6-7 (CAS and Summative Integration)
As students progress through the basic education cycle, Nepal's assessment policy introduces a blended model that gradually integrates summative evaluations with the Continuous Assessment System (CAS).
Grades 4 and 5: For these grades, a model consisting of 50% CAS and 50% periodic summative assessments is envisioned. This approach aims to gently introduce learners to more formal evaluations while maintaining a significant focus on continuous, classroom-based practical assessments.
Grades 6 to 7: The assessment model further evolves for these grades, shifting to 60% summative assessments and 40% CAS. This progression is designed to prepare students for more structured assessments they will encounter in higher grades, while still retaining an emphasis on equity and inclusiveness through continuous assessment practices.
Decentralization of Grade 8 Examinations: Role of Local Governments
A significant policy shift under Nepal's federal system is the decentralization of the final examinations for the basic level (Grade 8). These examinations are now conducted by local bodies, as mandated by the Education Act. This responsibility has been specifically delegated to municipal governments, who receive support from Education Development and Coordination Units (EDCUs) for this task. The rationale behind this decentralization is to promote context-sensitive assessments, strengthen local ownership over educational outcomes, and ensure that testing genuinely reflects the linguistic, cultural, and geographical realities pertinent to students in different regions. Historically, Grade 8 public examinations were administered externally, and the National Curriculum Framework 2007 had already suggested district-level examinations at the end of Grade 8 to measure basic education standards.
The decentralization of Grade 8 examinations to local governments, while intended to foster context-specific and locally relevant assessments, introduces complexities that could impact assessment quality. The devolution of educational responsibilities under federalism aims to increase local involvement.22 However, concerns have been raised that local governments may "lack the necessary resources and expertise to implement national policies effectively," potentially leading to "challenges in coordination and consistency". The significant task of capacity building for 753 local governments is also a complex undertaking. If local bodies are unable to consistently develop and administer standardized, psychometrically sound examinations, the quality and comparability of Grade 8 assessment results across the country could be compromised. This situation, despite the stated goal of local ownership and relevance, risks undermining national efforts to ensure consistent educational quality and making it difficult to accurately compare student achievement at the basic level nationwide.
Furthermore, the policy's intent to integrate formative assessment throughout basic education, with a clear progression from 100% CAS in early grades to blended models in later basic levels, faces significant implementation hurdles. Reports indicate that classroom assessment practices remain "weak" and that CAS, despite its long-standing presence, has been found "ineffective" in pilot phases. Additionally, internal and practical assessments are often "not carried out properly as per the purpose". This suggests that the crucial real-time feedback and personalized support that formative assessment is designed to provide are largely absent or inadequate in practice. Consequently, learning gaps identified by national assessments in later grades are likely accumulating from these earlier, less effective formative practices. The effectiveness of the policy's gradual introduction of summative assessments alongside CAS is severely limited if the foundational CAS component is not robustly implemented, highlighting a critical need for sustained, practical teacher training and support in formative assessment methodologies.
Insights from National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) for Grade 8
The National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) is regularly conducted by the Education Review Office (ERO) at Grade 8, marking it as the country's first nationally representative, large-scale assessment exercise. Previous rounds of this assessment for Grade 8 were carried out in 2011, 2013, 2017, and 2020, demonstrating a consistent effort to monitor student learning over time.
NASA assesses students in core subjects such as Nepali, Mathematics, Science, and English. The assessments utilize standardized test booklets that are meticulously developed in alignment with the subject-specific assessment frameworks derived from the National Curriculum of Nepal. These assessments are conducted on a national representative sample of students and schools, allowing for the generalization of results across the country. A key objective of NASA is to provide robust evidence on student learning levels to policymakers, which is then used to inform educational reforms. The assessment also explores variations in student achievement based on factors such as gender, province, school type, ethnicity, home language, and socio-economic status. By identifying these influencing factors and trends, NASA provides crucial baseline data for future comparisons and targeted interventions. ERO employs advanced methodologies, including Item Response Theory (IRT), for the rigorous analysis of data, enabling the generalization of results at both national and provincial levels.
Table 2: Assessment Models by Basic Education Grade Levels (Grades 1-8)
5. Assessment at the Secondary Level (Grades 9-12)
Secondary education in Nepal encompasses Grades 9 through 12, representing a critical phase for student specialization and preparation for higher education or vocational pathways. The structure and assessment mechanisms at this level have undergone significant reforms to align with national educational goals.
Evolution of Secondary Education Structure and Curriculum Reforms
The School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP) was instrumental in establishing the current 12-year education structure, clearly delineating secondary education from Grades 9 to 12. The Ninth Amendment of the Education Act (2074 BS) further refined this structure by introducing three distinct streams for Secondary Education: General, Sanskrit, and Technical and Vocational. All schools are legally mandated to implement curricula and textbooks that have been approved by the government.
The Curriculum Development Center (CDC) plays a central role at this level, being responsible for the continuous development and revision of curricula and textbooks for all school education, including secondary levels. Recent reports from the CDC highlight ongoing curriculum changes, such as the preparation of 102 subjects for Grade 10, though only 20 are currently taught, indicating a potential gap between curriculum design and implementation capacity. There is a growing emphasis on ensuring that curriculum upgrading activities are responsive to the demands of the labor market, fostering greater relevance for students' future careers, and promoting collaboration between industry and academia.
Role and Responsibilities of the National Examinations Board (NEB) for Grade 10 (SEE) and Grade 12 (SLCE) Examinations
The National Examinations Board (NEB) is the principal autonomous body responsible for the conduct and management of public examinations at the secondary level. Specifically, NEB oversees the Grade 10 Secondary Education Examination (SEE) and the Grade 12 School Leaving Certificate Examination (SLCE). The Grade 10 SEE is administered at the provincial level, while the Grade 12 SLCE is a national-level examination.
NEB's mandate extends to ensuring the quality assurance of these public examinations, with a focus on making them fair, competency-based, and standardized across the country. The board is actively working towards the standardization of examinations based on the national curriculum. Beyond examination administration, NEB's responsibilities include granting approval for +2 schools, developing and revising curricula, awarding certificates to higher secondary graduates, supervising school programs, implementing improvement plans, recruiting staff, designing teacher training programs, conducting research, and submitting periodic reports to the Ministry of Education. The School Sector Development Program (SSDP) has supported NEB's efforts, including the development of an Assessment Framework for Grade 8 (which informs the broader examination system) and the establishment of a national repository of assessment items for Grades 8, 10, and 12, aimed at promoting standardization and quality.
Grading System and Promotion Criteria
Nepal utilizes a letter grading system for secondary level examinations, particularly for the Grade 10 SEE. The grading scale typically includes Grade A+ (85% and above), Grade A (70% to 84%), Grade B+ (60% to 69%), Grade B (50% to 59%), Grade C (40% to 49%), and Grade D (below 40%). This grading system is aligned with the National Curriculum of Nepal and NEB guidelines. For subjects requiring practical application, the total marks are usually distributed, with 80 marks allocated for theory and 20 marks for practical components.
Promotion to the next grade level is determined by a combination of internal assessments, class participation, and performance in the final examinations. Passing the SEE exams is particularly crucial as it directly impacts a student's transition to higher education. Historically, the National Curriculum Framework 2007 had suggested revising the School Leaving Certificate (SLC) examination system to allow students who passed five core subjects to be awarded the certificate, rather than requiring a pass in all subjects. The same framework also considered the implementation of a letter grading system after a feasibility study, which has since been adopted.
Insights from National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) for Grade 10
The NASA 2019 Grade 10 Report, published in 2020, offers critical insights into the learning outcomes and disparities at the secondary level.
Key Findings (NASA 2019 Grade 10):
Low Learning Achievement: A significant majority of students demonstrate struggles in acquiring even minimum learning levels, with most mastering less than 50% of the curriculum across all assessed subjects (Mathematics, Science, Nepali, and English).35 For instance, 30% of students were found to be below the basic level in English, and 51% were at or below the basic level, indicating poor competency.34 A substantial number of students also struggled with Higher Order Thinking items.
Provincial Disparities: Marked variations in student achievement exist across provinces. Bagmati, Gandaki, and Lumbini provinces generally performed above the national average, while Provinces 1, 2, Karnali, and Sudur Paschim consistently showed lower performance. The achievement gap between high and low-performing provinces was substantial, reaching up to 60 scale scores in English.
Gender Disparity: A statistically significant learning disparity was observed between boys and girls, with boys generally outperforming girls in Mathematics, Science, and English. However, no significant difference was noted in Nepali.
Age and Achievement: Students aged 14 and 15 years recorded the highest scores across all four subjects. Achievement scores tended to be lower for students aged 16 years or more, suggesting a correlation with grade repetition or delayed school entry in less conducive environments.
Home Language Influence: A notable difference in achievement was observed based on the student's home language, with those using Nepali as their home language scoring higher.
School Type Disparity: A vast achievement gap persists between community (public) schools and institutional (private) schools. Institutional schools significantly outperformed community schools, for example, by 68 scale scores in English and 49 in Math and Science. This disparity remains despite significant government investment in community schools.
Parental Factors: Higher parental education levels and certain parental occupations (e.g., teachers, government jobs) were positively associated with higher student achievement.
Teacher Regularity and Feedback: Teachers who were regular in the classroom and provided consistent feedback on homework were associated with improved student performance.
Resource Availability: The presence of study resources at home, such as a dedicated study table, a separate study room, computers, internet access, and books, positively correlated with better learning outcomes.
The NASA 2019 Grade 10 report, while highlighting the structural strengths of the assessment system, also lays bare fundamental challenges in the delivery of quality education at the secondary level. The finding that a majority of students are not achieving minimum learning levels and struggle with higher-order thinking, coupled with significant disparities across regions, school types, gender, and home language, indicates that the system is not effectively serving all students. This perpetuates a cycle of educational inequality. While the School Sector Development Program (SSDP) reported a "75% success rate for disadvantaged students attaining a GPA of 1.6 in Grade 10 exams" , this needs to be critically examined in light of the overall low learning achievement reported by NASA. A passing grade may not necessarily equate to a mastery of the curriculum, suggesting a potential disconnect between grading standards and actual learning outcomes. This situation underscores the need for systemic interventions that extend beyond just assessment mechanisms to address curriculum delivery, teacher capacity, and equitable resource allocation at a foundational level.
Analysis of Challenges and Successes in Nepal's School Assessment System
Nepal's journey in strengthening its school assessment system is marked by both notable achievements and persistent challenges. The strategic efforts undertaken over the past decades have laid a foundation for a more structured and data-informed educational landscape.
Challenges
Despite significant policy efforts and institutional reforms, several critical challenges continue to impede the effectiveness and equity of Nepal's school assessment system:
Inconsistent Learning Outcomes and Persistent Disparities: A fundamental challenge is the pervasive inconsistency in education quality, leading to wide variations in learning outcomes across different geographical regions, types of schools (community vs. institutional), and among students with varying individual and household characteristics. National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) reports consistently reveal that a significant majority of students fail to achieve minimum learning levels and struggle with higher-order thinking skills.
Pronounced Disparities Across Demographics: The NASA findings highlight substantial achievement gaps based on province, gender, socio-economic status, and home language. For instance, certain provinces consistently underperform compared to others, boys often outperform girls in core subjects like Mathematics and Science, and students from non-Nepali home language backgrounds show lower achievement. The stark contrast in performance between institutional (private) and community (public) schools, despite considerable government investment in the latter, further underscores deep-seated inequities.
Teacher Capacity Gaps and Implementation Fidelity: A major barrier to effective assessment, particularly continuous and formative approaches, is the insufficient capacity of teachers. Classroom assessment practices are often weak, characterized by errors in grading, and a lack of useful feedback to students.5 The Continuous Assessment System (CAS), despite being a long-standing policy, has faced challenges in effective implementation, with internal and practical assessments often not carried out properly.26 Evaluations of teacher training programs have even shown limited or no positive impact on student test scores, attributed to weak governance in training delivery, inadequate trainer preparation, and the irrelevance of some advanced training concepts to students with foundational learning gaps.
Resource Constraints and Infrastructural Deficiencies: Many rural schools continue to struggle with limited resources, leading to infrequent testing and a lack of remedial support for struggling students. Insufficient quality infrastructure, encompassing both physical facilities and academic resources, remains a significant concern, particularly in community schools. Furthermore, the decentralization of educational responsibilities to local governments, while conceptually sound, is hampered by a lack of necessary resources and expertise at the local level, posing challenges for consistent policy implementation.
Policy-Practice Discrepancy: A recurring theme is the gap between ambitious policy pronouncements and their practical realization on the ground. While policies advocate for competency-based, learner-centered, and integrated curricula with a strong emphasis on continuous assessment, traditional, rote-based teaching and assessment methods often persist. This disconnect is evident in the reported "ineffectiveness" of CAS in pilot phases and the general weakness of classroom assessment practices.
Funding Issues for Examinations: Public examinations are primarily funded by student fees, and this funding model often does not cover essential research and development activities. This financial constraint can limit the capacity for innovation and continuous improvement in examination methods and quality.
Successes
Despite these challenges, Nepal has achieved significant successes in strengthening its education and assessment systems:
Enhanced Access and Retention: Nepal has made commendable progress in expanding access to education, achieving near-universal primary school enrollment and gender parity in enrollment rates at both basic and secondary levels. The School Sector Development Program (SSDP) notably contributed to increasing the survival rate to Grade 12 and significantly reducing the number of out-of-school children nationwide.
Institutionalization of Reforms and Strengthened Assessment Systems: The establishment of dedicated assessment bodies, such as the Education Review Office (ERO) in 2010 and the National Examinations Board (NEB) in 2016, signifies the development of a robust institutional framework for assessment. Key reforms, including examination standardization, curriculum reforms, and the strengthening of assessment systems, have been successfully institutionalized under government programs. The ongoing development of a national repository for assessment items by NEB is a crucial step towards further standardization and quality assurance.
Progress in National Assessments: ERO consistently conducts National Assessment of Student Achievement (NASA) at various grade levels , providing invaluable system-level feedback that directly informs national education policies. The strategic shift towards criterion-referenced assessment indicates a move towards more meaningful evaluation against defined standards. Furthermore, Nepal demonstrates a strong commitment to data availability and quality by regularly reporting key education statistics to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS), often exceeding international benchmarks.
International Partnership Contributions: Collaborations with international partners, notably through the World Bank-supported SSDP and contributions from entities like Finland and the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), have significantly bolstered efforts to strengthen Nepal's school systems, including critical assessment reforms. GPE's framework highlights Nepal's commendable progress in enabling factors and the alignment of international grants with national systems.
Policy Commitment to Inclusivity: Nepal's education policy explicitly champions inclusive and equitable education. It promotes assessment practices designed to cater to diverse learner needs, including those of marginalized groups. The constitutional guarantee of education in mother tongue languages is a tangible step towards fostering a more inclusive learning environment.
The analysis reveals a critical paradox in Nepal's educational progress: while significant strides have been made in expanding access to schooling, ensuring that all children are effectively learning once enrolled remains a formidable challenge. Nepal has achieved impressive gains in getting children into schools, with near-universal primary enrollment and high completion rates at that level. However, completion rates drop sharply for secondary education , and national assessments consistently show "low learning achievement" and "significant learning loss" even prior to recent disruptions. As one report aptly states, "If learning does not occur, we cannot speak of substantive access". This situation indicates that increased access has not automatically translated into improved learning outcomes or equitable quality across the system. The assessment system, particularly NASA, serves as a crucial diagnostic tool, highlighting that future policy efforts must shift focus from merely expanding access to rigorously enhancing pedagogical quality and learning support, especially in community schools and disadvantaged areas, to ensure that meaningful learning is achieved for all.
Furthermore, the transition to a federal structure, while a policy success in principle, presents a complex dynamic for education reform. The devolution of educational responsibilities to local governments 1 is intended to foster context-specific plans and increase local involvement. However, this decentralization has concurrently led to "challenges in coordination and consistency," with local governments often "lack[ing] the necessary resources and expertise" for effective policy implementation. The immense task of building capacity across 753 local governments is a substantial undertaking, and local officers often face a "dilemma of balancing the priorities of the elected leadership and complying with federal conditional grants". This indicates that while federalism promotes local ownership and responsiveness in assessment (e.g., Grade 8 exams by local governments), it simultaneously introduces significant implementation complexities. The lack of uniform capacity and resources at the local level risks creating a fragmented education system where the quality and standards of assessment vary widely across different regions. This could exacerbate existing disparities and undermine national efforts towards standardized, high-quality education. Effective federalization, therefore, requires not just the devolution of power but a robust system of support, capacity building, and clear, flexible guidelines to ensure consistency and quality across all tiers of government.
Recommendations for Policy Enhancement and Implementation
To build upon existing successes and address the persistent challenges in Nepal's school assessment system, the following recommendations are crucial for policy enhancement and effective implementation:
Strategic Policy and Resource Alignment
To effectively bridge the gap between intended policy and achieved curriculum, radical changes in policy, resource management, curriculum design and implementation, and monitoring and evaluation strategies are necessary. This requires a deliberate effort to ensure justified distribution of resources, specifically targeting areas with wide disparities between high and low-performing provinces. Such efforts should include special budget allocation, human resource development, and curriculum contextualization to meet local needs. A critical step involves upgrading community schools through strategic interventions, which can be informed by comprehensive analyses of both better-performing institutional and community schools to identify effective improvement strategies. Furthermore, the funding models for public examinations must be reviewed to ensure they cover essential research and development activities, thereby fostering continuous innovation and quality enhancement in examination methods. Developing a comprehensive digital education strategy is also vital to leverage technology for improved access, quality, and equity, particularly in remote and rural areas.
Strengthening Teacher Professional Development in Assessment
A key to improving assessment practices lies in enhancing teacher capacity. Teacher Professional Development (TPD) curricula must be re-oriented to equip teachers with the necessary expertise to identify and provide tailored instruction to students who are performing below grade level. This includes comprehensive training on formative assessments, especially in earlier grades, and effective remedial education strategies. It is essential to intensify school-based teacher mentoring and support programs. Training programs should be redesigned to better accommodate teachers with existing gaps in prerequisite subject knowledge and should be combined with the distribution of relevant lesson plans and instructional materials to facilitate the adoption of new teaching methods. To ensure accountability and ongoing support, trainings should be linked to periodic classroom visits by mentors or coaches who can provide guidance, monitor progress, and hold teachers accountable for improved teaching practices. Additionally, efforts must be made to improve the training, equipping, and motivation of trainers themselves to ensure high-quality professional development delivery. Encouraging teachers to utilize children's home languages in the classroom, particularly in lower grades, and incorporating comprehensive language learning packages into TPD, will also help bridge existing achievement gaps.
Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Assessment Practices
To ensure that no child is left behind, a national campaign titled "No child is left below minimum level of learning" should be launched at the school level. This initiative would require the Curriculum Development Center (CDC) to define clear learning standards, the Center for Education and Human Resource Development (CEHRD) to prepare teacher training guidelines, and the National Examinations Board (NEB) to develop corresponding evaluation guidelines. Assessment tools must be strengthened to be more inclusive and equitable, reflecting Universal Design for Assessment (UDA) principles, which might include provisions for extra time or culturally and linguistically responsive assessments. The system should increasingly employ competency and evidence-based tools, such as portfolios, project work, creative tasks, and real-life simulations, to evaluate not only academic skills but also 21st-century competencies like collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving. Specific interventions should be devised to address gender disparity, exploring the underlying reasons for differences in learning outcomes between boys and girls, and promoting student-friendly teaching activities, targeted scholarships, and equal opportunities for classroom participation. Furthermore, efforts to reduce achievement gaps for marginalized groups, such as Janajati and Dalit children, should include inclusive curriculum design, remedial teaching, and the incorporation of local ideologies into the curriculum.
Leveraging Assessment Data for Targeted Interventions and Accountability
To maximize the utility of assessment data, Nepal must gradually institutionalize robust and scalable assessment systems, conducting regular assessments at key stages (e.g., Grades 2/3, 4/5, and 8). It is important to apply policy linking and Achieving Minimum Proficiency Levels (AMPL) approaches to connect national assessment results with global standards, such as SDG 4.1.1. Ensuring psychometric quality and comparability through standardized tools and data management protocols is paramount. The data generated from these assessments should be systematically utilized to identify specific learning gaps, facilitate targeted interventions, inform teacher development and classroom strategies, support inclusive teaching practices, and monitor overall progress towards national educational goals. Crucially, mechanisms must be established to ensure active parental and community involvement in holding schools accountable for student achievement levels.
Fostering Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Capacity Building
Effective implementation within the federal structure requires clearly defined roles and responsibilities for federal, provincial, and local governments in education and assessment. It is imperative to develop and implement comprehensive capacity development programs for provincial and local education authorities, ensuring they possess the necessary resources and expertise to effectively implement national policies. Robust coordination mechanisms across all levels of government are essential to ensure consistency and prevent fragmentation of educational efforts. Promoting interministerial collaborations, particularly with the Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration and the Ministry of Finance, can help integrate planning, budgeting, and reporting mechanisms across government tiers. Finally, actively including the voices of decentralized decision-makers, local non-governmental organizations, teachers, and students in policy review meetings will ensure that policies are responsive to grassroots needs and realities.
Many of these recommendations center on strengthening teacher capacity, providing adequate resources, and improving the practical implementation of assessment at the school and classroom levels. This directly addresses the observed gap between policy intentions and actual practice. The emphasis on re-orienting Teacher Professional Development curricula, establishing mentoring and support programs, and redesigning trainings indicates a recognition that merely issuing policies is insufficient. Educators require practical tools, ongoing support, and the professional autonomy to apply new methods effectively. The success of Nepal's assessment reforms, therefore, hinges on empowering teachers and local education authorities with the skills, resources, and flexibility to implement learner-centered and competency-based assessments effectively. This means moving beyond top-down mandates to a more supportive, capacity-building approach that acknowledges and addresses the diverse realities of school environments across the country. Without this empowerment, even the most progressive policies will remain aspirational rather than transformative in their impact on student learning.
Table 3: Identified Challenges and Corresponding Policy Recommendations
Conclusion
Nepal's national assessment policy for school levels stands at a pivotal juncture, characterized by ambitious reforms aimed at fostering inclusive, equitable, and quality education in alignment with global standards. The institutional framework, with the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Curriculum Development Center, Education Review Office, National Examinations Board, and increasingly, local governments, is evolving to support a more comprehensive assessment ecosystem. This system encompasses diverse modalities, from continuous classroom-based assessments and blended models in basic education to standardized public examinations at secondary levels, complemented by large-scale national assessments that provide system-level feedback.
Significant successes have been achieved in expanding access to education, enhancing student retention, and institutionalizing key assessment reforms, including examination standardization and the development of robust data reporting mechanisms. These achievements provide a strong foundation for future progress. However, the analysis consistently reveals deep-seated challenges that demand urgent and targeted interventions. These include persistent inconsistencies in learning outcomes, pronounced disparities across geographical regions, school types, and socio-economic and linguistic groups, and critical gaps in teacher capacity for effectively implementing new assessment paradigms. The transition to a federal structure, while promising localized relevance and ownership, also introduces complexities related to coordination and capacity building, which, if not adequately addressed, could lead to fragmentation and uneven quality across the education system.
Moving forward, Nepal's ability to translate its progressive assessment policies into widespread, effective practice will depend on a multi-pronged approach. This necessitates sustained investment in comprehensive teacher professional development, equitable allocation of resources to address regional and school-type disparities, and the strategic utilization of assessment data to drive targeted remedial interventions. Furthermore, fostering genuine multi-stakeholder collaboration at all levels of governance and ensuring the fidelity of policy implementation within the federal structure are paramount. Prioritizing the empowerment of educators and local communities to effectively implement child-friendly, competency-based assessments will be crucial for realizing the overarching vision of a "Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali" through quality education for all.
Works cited
A Review on Educational Policies of Nepal –by Nahakul KC, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/rnjds/article/view/58921/43982
Sustainable Development Goal 4: Education 2030 Nepal National Framework - Planipolis, accessed August 2, 2025, https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/nepal_sdg_4_education_2030_nepal_national_framework_2019_eng.pdf
Nepal's National Education Policy: Challenges, Progress and Future Directions, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/psj/article/download/77458/59374/223142
National Education Policy, 2076.ne - en | PDF - Scribd, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/693861365/National-Education-Policy-2076-ne-en
openknowledge.worldbank.org, accessed August 2, 2025, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstreams/416be1ba-14bd-53da-95a5-886af360239a/download
World Bank Documents and Reports, accessed August 2, 2025, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/605701468291026022/pdf/800660WP0SABER00Box385305B00PUBLIC0.pdf
Reforming Nepal's Education System: Building on Successes, Addressing Challenges | by Sandip Poudel | Medium, accessed August 2, 2025, https://medium.com/@poudelsandip/reforming-nepals-education-system-building-on-successes-addressing-challenges-a786f6702757
Nepal Makes Rapid Improvements in Quality and Inclusiveness of ..., accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2023/08/23/nepal-makes-rapid-improvements-in-quality-and-inclusiveness-of-education
Strengthening School Systems in Nepal - World Bank, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/trust-funds-and-programs/brief/strengthening-school-systems-in-nepal
Recovery and Accelerated Learning (ReAL) Plan (2023 ... - Planipolis, accessed August 2, 2025, https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/nepal_real_plan_2023-2028.pdf
2022-11-nepal-school education-sector-plan.pdf, accessed August 2, 2025, http://elibrary.moest.gov.np:8080/bitstream/123456789/198/1/2022-11-nepal-school%20education-sector-plan.pdf
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology - Edusanjal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://edusanjal.com/organization/ministry-of-education-science-and-technology/
Curriculum Development Center (CDC) - Edusanjal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://edusanjal.com/organization/curriculum-development-center/
Government of Nepal Ministry of Education, Science and ..., accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/page/1_5e998d38a58e0
EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT - Education Review Office, Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://ero.gov.np/upload_file/files/post/1595313482_598772199_1587622596_1795486007_Journal_NJEA_2(1)_2017(1).pdf
National Assessment of Student Achievement 2020 - Main Report, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/upload_file/files/post/1673576466_1947538526_NASA%202020%20Report%20final%20for%20Web.pdf
National Assessment Report - Education Review Office, Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/category/10
Evaluation system - - Kumudini, accessed August 2, 2025, https://kumudiniebs.edu.np/evaluation-system/
National Examinations Board - Edusanjal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://edusanjal.com/university/neb/
National Examination Board (Nepal) - Wikipedia, accessed August 2, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Examination_Board_(Nepal)
NEB - National Examinations Board | Collegenp, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.collegenp.com/institute/national-examinations-board-neb
(PDF) CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATION SYSTEM OF NEPAL - ResearchGate, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393860934_CRITICAL_ASSESSMENT_OF_EDUCATION_SYSTEM_OF_NEPAL
3 Takeaways from Sector Dialogues to Improve School Education in ..., accessed August 2, 2025, https://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/3-takeaways-sector-dialogues-improve-school-education-nepal
JIMPHE 8.2 Issue - ERIC, accessed August 2, 2025, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1410588.pdf
Strengthening Examinations: Assessment of Learning - British Council | Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.britishcouncil.org.np/programme/education/ssdp-ta/case-study/strengthening-examinations-assessment-learning
Measuring what matters: Inclusive and competency-based ..., accessed August 2, 2025, https://english.onlinekhabar.com/measuring-what-matters-inclusive-and-competency-based-assessments-for-nepal.html
Integrating the findings from the National Assessment of Student Achievement into the policy process: An experience from Nepal - ACER Research Repository, accessed August 2, 2025, https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=ar_misc
EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT - Education Review Office, Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/upload_file/files/post/1614877513_738807797_Journal_2077%20for%20web.pdf
National Curriculum Framework for School ... - Nepal In Data, accessed August 2, 2025, https://nepalindata.com/media/resources/items/20/bNational-Curriculum-Framework-2007-English.pdf
Investigating the Effectiveness and Implementation Challenges of Project-Based Learning: A Case Study of Public School Teachers, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/jbkc/article/download/80768/61868/232394
(PDF) Brief overview of the integrated curriculum in Nepal: Key features, impacts and challenges - ResearchGate, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382004214_Brief_overview_of_the_integrated_curriculum_in_Nepal_Key_features_impacts_and_challenges
(PDF) Brief overview of the integrated curriculum in Nepal: Key features, impacts and challenges - ResearchGate, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388180773_Brief_overview_of_the_integrated_curriculum_in_Nepal_Key_features_impacts_and_challenges
Annual Strategic Implementation Plan (ASIP) & Annual Work Plan & Budget (AWPB) - Global Partnership for Education, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.globalpartnership.org/node/document/download?file=sites/default/files/2019-05-nepal-implementation-plan-ssdp.pdf
NASA 2019 Grade 10 Report - Education Review Office, Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/post/6_60410dcdd2cc3
MAIN REPORT - Education Review Office, Nepal, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.ero.gov.np/upload_file/files/post/1614876114_221299301_nasa report 2077 for web.pdf
Evaluation of secondary school teacher training under the School Sector Development Program in Nepal - 3ie, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.3ieimpact.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/GFR-PW3.10-Nepal-SSDP.pdf
Global Partnership for Education Thematic and Country-level Evaluation Nepal Case Study (2024), accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.globalpartnership.org/node/document/download?file=document/file/2024-09-thematic-country-level-evaluation-nepal-case-study.pdf
GPE 2025 Results Framework for Nepal | Global Partnership for ..., accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.globalpartnership.org/node/document/download?file=document/file/2024-12-gpe-results-framework-nepal.pdf