Scratch programming is a vital tool in primary and lower secondary computing education. It enables pupils to develop computational thinking skills in a creative and engaging way. However, assessing progress in Scratch presents a unique challenge. How do we determine what students have truly learned? There should be a balance between project-based assessment and question-based assessment, each offering distinct benefits in measuring student understanding.

The Challenge of Assessment

At its core, assessment seeks to measure learning—specifically, the changes occurring in a learner’s brain. However, we cannot directly observe these changes, so we must rely on proxy measures. One approach is project-based assessment, where pupils’ work demonstrates their learning over time. If a project in September is significantly simpler than one in July, we can infer that learning has taken place. The other method involves testing pupils with well-designed questions that evaluate their understanding of key computing concepts.

Each of these approaches aligns with different educational philosophies. Project-based assessment aligns with constructionist theories, where students learn best through making and sharing. This perspective, influenced by thinkers such as Piaget and Papert, emphasises hands-on creativity. On the other hand, question-based assessment is rooted in behaviourist and positivist traditions. It assumes that knowledge exists independently of the learner and that we can measure understanding through structured questioning. These two paradigms may seem opposed, but they can complement each other in an effective assessment strategy.

Project-Based Assessment in Scratch

Project-based assessment focuses on students’ ability to apply computing knowledge to real-world tasks. Researchers such as Brennan and Resnick (2012) developed a framework for assessing computational thinking within Scratch. Their framework divides computational thinking into three components:

• Concepts: Programming principles such as sequences, loops, conditionals, and variables.
• Practices: Problem-solving skills such as debugging, iteration, and abstraction.
• Perspectives: The broader understanding of computing as a tool for problem-solving.

Using this model, teachers can assess pupils’ Scratch projects by examining the presence and sophistication of these elements. For example, a project that effectively uses loops and conditionals demonstrates a higher level of computational thinking than one relying solely on simple sequences. To support this approach, automated tools such as Dr. Scratch analyse students’ projects, providing feedback on their use of computational concepts.

Question-Based Assessment

While project-based assessment captures creativity and problem-solving skills, question-based assessment provides precise measurements of student knowledge. Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) can efficiently identify whether students grasp fundamental computing concepts. Well-designed questions are quick to answer, clearly diagnose misconceptions, and provide immediate feedback.

This method aligns with approaches like test-driven development (TDD) in software engineering. In TDD, programmers write tests before writing the actual code, ensuring that the final product meets requirements. A similar strategy can apply in education: before teaching a concept, we test students to assess prior knowledge. If they already understand, they can move on to more advanced topics. If not, they receive targeted instruction and are reassessed later.

Combining the Two Approaches

A balanced assessment strategy integrates both project-based and question-based methods. Project-based assessment allows students to demonstrate learning in an authentic and creative manner, while question-based assessment ensures structured evaluation and helps identify gaps in understanding.

One promising example is Parsons’s Problems, a form of assessment where students arrange blocks of code into a correct sequence. These problems maintain the problem-solving elements of coding while allowing for more efficient grading than open-ended programming tasks. Similarly, debugging challenges—where students identify and correct errors in pre-written code—test understanding in a focused way.

The Role of National Standards

National computing curricula, such as the English National Curriculum and the Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) standards, outline key programming concepts students should master at different educational stages. By age 11, students should be able to:

• Design, write, and debug programs.
• Use sequences, selection, and repetition.
• Work with variables and input/output systems.

These criteria provide a structured foundation for assessment. Teachers can evaluate Scratch projects against these benchmarks, checking for the presence of required programming concepts. Additionally, multiple-choice questions can assess students’ ability to apply these concepts outside of their projects.

The Future of Computing Assessment

The shift towards item banks of computing questions represents an evolution in assessment practices. Project Quantum, a UK initiative, has developed a national repository of multiple-choice questions for computing education. These questions are freely available, designed to support both formative (ongoing) and summative (final) assessment.

However, while efficient, question-based assessment should not entirely replace project-based approaches. Creativity, problem-solving, and real-world application remain central to computing education. The ideal assessment strategy blends these methods, ensuring students develop both theoretical understanding and practical skills.

Conclusion

Assessing learning in Scratch requires a thoughtful combination of approaches. Project-based assessment highlights creativity and application, while question-based assessment ensures measurable, structured evaluation. By using both methods, educators can gain a comprehensive understanding of students’ progress, helping them develop into confident and capable programmers. The key is to maintain a balance—fostering both the joy of making and the rigour of understanding.