All nations have a duty to emphasise quality education for all a truth, in agreement to the promises made at Dakar (Alexander, 2008). Regarding higher education, the Dakar objectives obviously highlighted the eminence characteristics of learning (Thomas, 2009). These objectives include:
learning requests of all people, being achieved over and done with impartial admission to suitable learning platforms;
attaining a 50% advancement in the stages of adult literacy by 2015, expressly for women;
fair admission to simple and on-going learning for all adults;
refining all features of the quality of education; and
confirming fineness by all in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills.
(World Education Forum, 2000).
However, the commitment to improve all the aspects of quality education is required, to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency for all.
Methods of assessing student learning through conventional approaches, such as essays, multiple choice questions and approaches based on self- and peer-assessment, are highlighted in this study (Gibbs & Simpson, 2004; Brown, Bull & Pendlebury, 2013).
However, three themes emerge from these methods: effectiveness, efficiency and ability. The strategy is to provide experiences and assessments for students that empower them to become independent, self-motivated students, who have an abundance of problem-solving strategies for working with materials, concepts and
people (Brown et al., 2013). The assessment of students‟ understanding of these themes (effectiveness, efficiency, and ability) is important (Pearshouse et al., 2009; Brown et al., 2013). This provides students with strategies to think about other deep issues that they encounter in their working lives.
However, only a few scholars focus on the assessment of student growth efforts (Biggs, 1999; Heck & Hallinger, 2009; Black & Wiliam, 2009). An assessment is defined as a goodness of match between objectives and student achievement (Suskie, 2010;
Falchikov, 2013). Two approaches, namely, formative and summative assessments need to be clarified. In summative assessment, students are accredited at the end of a programme; while in formative assessments, the intention is to identify scope and potential for improvement (Yorke, 2003; Scott & Fortune, 2009; Price, Carroll, O‟Donovan & Rust, 2011). Therefore, the results of formative assessments are used for feedback to supervisors and students alike (Juwah et al., 2004; Hounsell, 2007;
Falchikov, 2013). Formative assessment is considered the heart of effective learning, with self-assessment as an essential component of formative assessment (Black &
William, 1998; 2010). Many studies reveal that formative evaluation enable low achievers more than other students (Nicol & Macfarlane‐ Dick, 2006). Formative assessment is evaluated at the end of the curriculum, to provide successful action and to ignore problems of creating shared implications (Black & William, 2006; Falchikov, 2013). At the summative limit, shared meanings are important, and undesirable consequences that emerge, are often judged by appeal to the need of creating consistency of interpretation (Wiliam & Black, 1996; Knight & Yorke, 2003; Knight, 2012). However, this current study relies more on formative assessment.
In addition, the eminence feature of learning is one of the best debated points from Dakar. It is problematic to detect variables to describe and assess quality learning, as well as to designate a joint meaning (Onwe, 2013; Jerrard, 2016). The approach learning makes the students for lifetime, is harder to describe, and varies from university to university, as well as country to country (Biggs, 2011). For instance, contrary to South Africa, there is little informed debate on reforms in higher education in India (Agarwal, 2006). Additionally, the public strategies on higher education are not founded on long-term concerns. These guidelines do not cautiously consider the adjustment between inconsistent goals, and disregard the fact that the markets are now
the main arbitrators of resource distribution. There are no in-depth studies of the diverse approaches and significances on the registration and achievement degrees, or the students knowledge in the long-standing (Jaggars, Hodara, Cho & Xu, 2015). However, the policy has to take into consideration the forces of globalisation, the main socio-economic factors, and its traditional factors of production (Moloi, Gravett & Petersen, 2009).
Different recommendations, regarding social cultural factors and statistics anxiety, indicate that negative attitudes towards statistics usually revolve around improving strategies during learning statistics, the application of several different assessments of statistical concepts, and learning from failures (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor &
Schellinger, 2011). There is no doubt about the strength of these recommendations. It is certain that many students, who are learning statistics, could be assisted, if they received the appropriate support, in time, from trained professional statistics monitors, or supervisors, in situational learning related complications (Allen, 2016). The evidence about the capability of these recommendations to support students against failure in the application of learning statistics procedures (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia & Jones, 2009). The prediction approach aims to avoid difficulties related to learning statistics through measures based on diverse factors, such as social, cultural, statistics anxiety, attitudes towards statistics, to name a few (Keller, 2009; Frankfort-Nachmias & Leon-Guerrero, 2017). For many researchers, the improvement of these factors should be the main strategy reduction of failure in SELS beliefs (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2003).
According to the Dakar framework, emerging and redressing learning and learning schemes, need the considerate, obligation and dynamic contribution of those in a straight line involved, and of the people at huge, namely, instructors, parents, students, the educational public, NGOs, private enterprise and the house of worship (Luong &
Nieke, 2014; Makaaru, Cunningham, Kisaame, Nansozi & Bogere, 2015). The Dakar framework essentially means updating, or reorienting these plans, as excellence, effectiveness, fairness and gender impartiality in learning, are nationwide and worldwide objectives (Brenes, 2008; DaSilva, 2011).