Linking national and local student assessment in Suzhou Industrial Park

Integrating a district-wide system for assessing students’ overall development: a midterm report  

Gu Chunqing  

Suzhou Industrial Park  

Abstract:The Education Bureau of Suzhou Industrial Park has explored the deep integration of national and regional platforms. By connecting the SEED platform’s comprehensive quality assessment system for students, which is guided by the “Core Competencies for Student Development in China”, with the “Little Five-Star” assessment system for students’ overall development in the park, a comprehensive multi-dimensional quality assessment model has been developed. This model provides a standardized framework for students’ holistic development and presents a new approach to assessing students’ qualities in line with core competencies. By integrating the goals of moral, intellectual, physical, artistic, and labor education, as well as key elements such as social responsibility, innovative spirit, and practical ability, this approach enables the technical integration and functional coordination between the national “Student Comprehensive Assessment and Development Platform (SEED)” and the park’s “Yijia Comprehensive Quality” platform. This allows for real-time synchronization of core data such as academic performance, behavioral outcomes, and developmental trajectories. At the same time, both outcome-based and process-based evaluations are integrated effectively. Using big data analysis and artificial intelligence technologies, a comprehensive report on students’ overall quality is generated, covering various aspects such as academic development, physical and mental health, social adaptability, and innovation ability. This report provides a detailed, multi-dimensional picture of each student’s dynamic growth, thereby offering precise support for personalized educational interventions and career development plans.    

1. Summary of the progress made on the project at each stage  

(1) Clarify the current problems and research objectives  

Currently, there are two main problems with the comprehensive evaluation of students’ qualities.  

On one hand, there exists a persistent problem of emphasizing grades over growth, and focusing on outcomes rather than the process. The wrong tendency of labeling students based on their grades has not been completely corrected. The overall understanding of comprehensive quality assessment focuses on “evaluation” of students, while the role of “education” in their development is overlooked. As a result, the value of individual growth is diminished and ignored.  

On the other hand, there are issues such as an incomplete system of indicators for evaluating the overall quality of students, and a lack of practicality in these indicators. It is difficult to measure and assess the level of core competencies in students who benefit from the integration of the five aspects of education. The collection and analysis of evaluation data are highly subjective, with insufficient intelligence-based methods, and there is also a lot of human intervention.  

Based on the above issues, we actively explore the evaluation of students’ comprehensive qualities in the context of cultivating moral integrity in the new era. We strive to establish a core competency index system for student development that integrates the five aspects of education, as well as innovative evaluation methods that leverage digital and intelligent technologies. The goal is to make the evaluation more scientific and professional, more accurate and convenient, and more effective, thereby facilitating a comprehensive transformation of the educational model.  

(2) Optimizing the research content  

Content 1: Literature review on the current data standards for evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities. Key points of the study: An analysis of the meaning of evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities based on both process-based records and diagnostic results; the value orientation of evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities; the basic approaches to evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities.  

Content 2: A study on the integration of evaluation tools that consider both process and outcome aspects. Key research points: the development of process-based assessment scales for students of different age groups; the development of diagnostic outcome scales for students of different age groups; the design and use of digital data collection tools.  

Content 3: Research on the data encoding and mutual recognition of procedural records and diagnostic results. Key points of the research: Conduct scientific encoding studies based on the statistical points involved in the procedural record scales; conduct scientific encoding studies based on the statistical points involved in the diagnostic result scales; conduct analysis studies based on the data model that combines procedural records and diagnostic results.  

Content 4: A research on the practice of evaluating students’ overall qualities through the recording of the process and diagnostic results in an innovative and integrated manner. Key points of the research: Analysis of the current situation of student overall quality evaluation; Development of an evaluation system for students’ overall qualities that combines process-based records and diagnostic results; Practical research on student overall quality evaluation based on the combination of process-based records and diagnostic results.  

(3) Organize literature research and theoretical studies  

After the initial evaluation, based on the opinions of the expert group, the research team organized key teachers from the school to form a literature review group for the research project. They conducted a thorough collection and organization of relevant theories and research progress related to this project, resulting in a literature review on “Student Comprehensive Quality Assessment”. Through theoretical research, a scientific basis was provided for the practical research of the project. Regular meetings were held for the members of the team to study and discuss the theory of “Student Comprehensive Quality Assessment”, in order to improve their theoretical knowledge and enhance their understanding of the project.  

(4) Analysis of the meaning of “Comprehensive Quality Evaluation”  

Based on theoretical research, the comprehensive quality assessment in this project is a evaluation system that focuses on the all-round development of students. It involves the systematic collection and analysis of students’ performance in various aspects such as moral character, academic ability, physical and mental health, artistic skills, and social practice. Suzhou Industrial Park utilizes educational digitalization to support students’ “learning” and “growth”. It actively explores regional approaches to reforming educational evaluation through digitalization. By innovating the student evaluation system and using intelligent methods to record students’ growth, the region aims to change the concept of evaluation, and cultivate socialist builders and successors who develop comprehensively in terms of moral, intellectual, physical, artistic, and labor skills.  

(5) Promote the research in each stage in a orderly manner  

Based on the absorption of advanced research results from domestic and international sources, this project focuses on “the coordinated development of the five aspects of education” and “five management principles”. Using the theoretical model for evaluating students’ overall qualities on the SEED platform, and by leveraging the data provided by the park’s EJIA system, an innovative approach to evaluating students’ overall qualities is attempted. By continuously conducting such evaluations for students within the region every year, a basic data system for the development of students’ overall qualities can be established. The patterns of development in student groups can be identified, and a solution for evaluating students’ overall qualities that integrates data from the region, schools, and families, with characteristics specific to the park, can be developed. This will create exemplary experiences suitable for educational transformation driven by data, thereby better serving and guiding the large-scale teaching practices in the region.  

(6) Stage-specific research results  

1. Integrating evaluation and education, and establishing a system of evaluation indicators for students’ comprehensive qualities

Evaluations are crucial for determining the direction of education development. The type of evaluation criteria determines the orientation of educational practices. Over the years, the park has actively explored the establishment of a comprehensive evaluation system for students’ overall qualities. It has adopted evaluation indicators based on the five aspects of education, as well as indicators based on the core competencies for student development in China. It has also made efforts to integrate these two types of indicators, thereby creating a new system of indicators that reflect the integration of the five aspects of education in student development. This system features a clear characteristic of being comprehensive, universal, specific, and consistent.  

(1) Establishment of an evaluation system for the comprehensive quality of students based on the integration of the five aspects of education. The park has developed its own “‘Little Five-Star’ Evaluation Criteria for the Development of Students’ Comprehensive Quality” (Figure 1) – local evaluation criteria. This evaluation system is based on the spirit of the “Opinions of the Ministry of Education on Strengthening and Improving the Evaluation of the Comprehensive Quality of High School Students” (Jiao Ji Er [2014] No. 11). It focuses on the integration of the five aspects of education and the individual development of students. The system includes 19 indicators covering five areas: “Moral Character”, “Academic Performance”, “Artistic Competence”, “Physical and Mental Health”, and “Labor Practice”, along with 19 corresponding evaluation points.  

(2) Construction of an evaluation system for the comprehensive qualities of Chinese students based on their core competencies for development. The results of the “Large-Scale Tracking Study on Student Development Across Different Stages” project carried out by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology are utilized in the “Evaluation Criteria for the Comprehensive Qualities of Chinese Students” (Figure 2). This system focuses on the comprehensive qualities and core competencies of students, emphasizing both their abilities and various aspects of their development. It consists of three aspects—“Self-Directed Development”, “Cultural Cultivation”, and “Social Participation”—and 10 dimensions, along with 36 evaluation criteria.  

(3) Establishment of a new system for indicators of students’ core competencies in the integration of the five aspects of education. The park collaborates with institutions such as Beijing Normal University to conduct research on the relationship between the five aspects of education and core competencies. A well-structured, accurately categorized, and practical evaluation system is developed, forming a system for indicators of students’ core competencies in the integration of the five aspects of education (Figure 3). This system uses a scale from 0 to 7 to indicate the strength of the relationship between the five aspects of education and core competencies, ensuring consistency and feasibility in the educational process and evaluation methods.  

2. Digital and intelligent empowerment: Exploring practical approaches to evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities

The park actively explores a reform of the comprehensive evaluation of students’ qualities, which is enhanced by digital and intelligent technologies. This approach has led to a practical model that is easy to implement and replicate: information collection is convenient, data is efficiently integrated, analysis is thorough and accurate, and follow-up applications are efficient.  

(1) R&D platforms and innovative evaluation tools. The park adheres to the integrated approach of UGBS (government, research institutions, enterprises, and universities). By following the principle of “overall planning and phased implementation,” platforms are established, and two types of evaluation tools for the overall quality of students are developed over time.  

One is a process-based evaluation tool focused on fostering talent development. In 2021, the park independently developed the “YiJiaZongSu” platform, which implements a core competency assessment system for the integration of the five aspects of education: moral, intellectual, physical, artistic, and labor skills. Focusing on various aspects such as moral, intellectual, physical, artistic, and labor skills, this platform creates various process-based evaluation tools, including “Instant Praise”, “Virtue Collection Cards”, “Core Competency Surveys”, “Realistic Records”, “Daily Scores”, and “Academic Monitoring”. These tools cover the entire process of collecting, storing, analyzing, and presenting the students’ development data.  

Secondly, there are assessment tools that are oriented towards diagnosis. In the process of implementing the Ministry of Education’s “Pilot Project on Evaluating Students’ Comprehensive Qualities with Information Technology”, the park localized the “Student Comprehensive Evaluation and Development Platform (SEED)” of Beijing Normal University in 2024. Fourteen performance assessment tools based on artificial intelligence were utilized, including “Dancing in the Shadow of Ropes”, “Creative Thinking”, “Space Exploration”, and “Expert in Daily Life”. These tools enable the collection of data from various aspects of students’ activities, as well as multimodal data such as audio, video, and images. The collected data are automatically classified and analyzed, allowing for an intelligent and objective evaluation of students’ competencies, thereby effectively implementing comprehensive evaluation of students’ qualities.  

(2) Data collection and analysis are carried out to create a profile of students’ qualities. Based on the “YiJia Education” platform, the park combines online and offline methods, as well as qualitative and quantitative approaches. It conducts comprehensive evaluations of students’ overall qualities across all subjects and in all aspects. This approach provides a scientific and clear picture of students’ development, helping them to develop in a comprehensive, autonomous, and unique manner.  

Firstly, full-sample collection. Through various platforms and tools, data related to students’ in-class and out-of-class learning, formal and informal learning environments, as well as offline and online learning processes, as well as monitoring results and homework completion outcomes, can be collected. For example, using a performance evaluation tool for rope skipping, video recordings of students skipping rope can be captured in a real-world context. By employing multi-modal integration methods, students’ endurance, balance, and coordination abilities can be automatically assessed.  

Secondly, it involves comprehensive analysis. By utilizing artificial intelligence, the scattered process data and outcome data can be automatically labeled and categorized. These data are then used in conjunction with the relevant indicator systems to conduct intelligent analysis and evaluation of various data types. This helps to better reflect the scientific nature of the students’ core competencies. Based on this platform, a unified tool, unified data, and unified computing system are implemented; the results are comparable. This leads to the creation of three types of reports for the campus: “Growth Records”, “Competency Reports”, and “Comprehensive Development Evaluation” (Figures 5-7), as well as a national report on “Student Comprehensive Development Evaluation” (Figure 8). These reports cover four levels: the region, the school, the class, and the individual student. Vertical development analysis and horizontal comparisons enable us to assess the overall development of groups and understand the development level of individual students.  

(3) Strengthen applications and promote follow-up evaluations. The park focuses on the development of students’ core competencies through the integration of the five aspects of education; it fully utilizes the role of evaluations in guiding, diagnosing, and providing feedback, thereby promoting teaching and learning through evaluations, and facilitating the comprehensive development of students.  

Firstly, evidence-based teaching methods are used to promote student development. Based on the data and profiles related to students’ overall qualities, attention is given to the level of students’ competencies, with efforts made to address their strengths and address their weaknesses, thereby facilitating their growth. For example, in the evaluation of a student’s overall qualities, it was found that the student had strong abilities in humanities and aesthetics, as well as in technology and application skills; however, his language communication and self-management skills were lacking. Teachers set clear goals and conduct follow-up research. Through special activities such as “Little Teacher Lectures”, “Scientific Exploration”, and “Art Salons”, students’ strengths are utilized to help develop their weaker skills. In the assessments the following year, it was observed that the student’s language communication and self-management skills improved significantly (Figure 9).  

Secondly, evidence-based guidance is provided to improve the quality of student development. Based on the evaluation results of students’ overall and individual capabilities, the advantages and shortcomings of the school’s development are analyzed. This helps to improve management efficiency. For example, in a certain school, the average score in the three areas of “self-directed development”, “social participation”, and “cultural cultivation” was lower than the average level in similar regions. Through the “Yi Jia” platform for campus education, the school has further improved classroom teaching, promoted new forms of teaching and learning, and utilized digital and intelligent technologies to support autonomous, collaborative, thematic, and project-based learning, thereby enhancing students’ ability for self-directed development. After 8 months of implementation, the average score in “self-directed development” improved significantly. However, it was also found that the balance index for this dimension decreased slightly (Figure 10). After further research, the school believes that this may be due to the limited scope of interdisciplinary project-based learning, which leads to greater differences in the level of development of this skill. In the future, the school will introduce more types of interdisciplinary project-based learning and ways for students to participate, so that every student can improve through independent research and exploration.  

II. Specific practical cases  

“Using SEED assessments to unlock the keys to the full development of primary school students”  

(1) Background of the case  

At the end of the semester, when conducting evaluations of students’ overall qualities, it is likely that many class advisors and teachers encounter various difficulties. For example, in terms of evaluation criteria, traditional evaluation methods focus too much on academic performance, while neglecting aspects such as moral character, physical and mental health, artistic skills, and social activities. When selecting “excellent students,” academic performance often plays a dominant role; students who do not achieve top grades but have outstanding achievements in other areas are often overlooked. Additionally, the traditional evaluation process is highly subjective, relying mainly on individual observations and impressions by teachers, without any objective data to support it. In terms of moral evaluation, teachers have different standards for judging students’ behavior, which leads to unfair evaluation results. Moreover, it is difficult to collect evaluation data, requiring a lot of time and effort. Teachers have to manually record various aspects of students’ performance, such as their participation in extracurricular activities and classroom behavior, which is inefficient and prone to errors.  

Furthermore, traditional evaluation methods are somewhat one-sided. There is often a lack of effective communication among the evaluators. Schools, families, and society operate in isolation, without forming a coordinated effort. Parents have difficulty gaining a comprehensive understanding of their children’s overall performance at school, and schools cannot obtain timely information about students’ development outside of school. This severely hinders the effective development and holistic growth of students. In such a situation, the introduction of the SEED assessment system becomes an urgent need for schools to overcome the challenges associated with comprehensive quality evaluation.  

(2) Key measures  

1. Preparation phase: Establishing the foundation for SEED implementation

(1) Form a professional team. A special working group for SEED assessment should be established, consisting of school leaders, key teachers, and information technology experts. School leaders are responsible for overall planning and decision-making, ensuring that the direction is correct; key teachers provide professional support based on their teaching practices; information technology experts ensure the stable operation and maintenance of the system technology aspects, providing the necessary human resources for subsequent work.  

(2) Conduct comprehensive training for all staff. Multiple sessions of training were organized for teachers, students, and parents. For teachers, detailed explanations were given regarding the assessment criteria, procedures, and how to adjust teaching strategies based on the assessment results. For students, interesting lectures were given to help them understand how to conduct self-and peer assessments within the system. For parents, both online and offline training was provided to help them become familiar with the system’s functions and understand how the assessment results can be used to support their children’s development. After the training, more than 90% of the teachers had a clear understanding of the SEED assessment, which laid a solid foundation for its successful implementation.  

2. Implementation phase: Comprehensive, diverse, and phased

(1) The evaluation methods are diverse and flexible. They combine in-class and out-of-class activities: Some assessment tasks are carried out during class, such as “Basic Information Survey”, “Tower of Wisdom”, “Markings of Growth”, “Rhythm of Life”, and “Finding Hidden Figures”. These tasks can be completed during the normal teaching process without taking up too much extra time, and they allow for an immediate assessment of students’ performance and state during class. There are also some assessment tasks that require students to complete them outside of class, such as “I Am a Little Reciter”, “Expert in Daily Life”, and “Scientific Exploration Journey”. These tasks need to be completed at home, and students must submit their results by uploading videos, recordings, or photos. This combination of in-class and out-of-class evaluations enables a more comprehensive understanding of students’ performance in various situations. It avoids the one-sidedness of evaluating students only based on their performance in class, thereby providing a more accurate reflection of their overall abilities.  

(2) Utilize various technical methods and tools. Various devices such as computers, mobile phones, and 5G tablets are used for assessments, which aligns with the trends in modern information technology. This makes it convenient for students and teachers to use these tools. For example, “Heart Speech Garden” uses computers for assessments; a series of multiple-choice questions are used to gather information about students’ daily experiences, thereby indirectly assessing their mental health and learning habits. “I Am a Little Reciter” requires students to upload their reading recordings via mobile phones, which is convenient and efficient, and can accurately reflect students’ oral expression abilities. In “Little Artist”, drawing tasks require bulk uploading of works, and the use of computers and mobile phones enables more efficient submission and evaluation of artworks.  

At the same time, advanced assessment methods such as computer-based interactive tests (e.g., “Tower of Wisdom”, “Finding Hidden Images”, “Fun Park”) are also used. These methods enable a more accurate measurement of students’ abilities in problem-solving, learning styles, computational thinking, self-directed learning, problem-solving, and innovation. The use of these diverse technical tools not only improves the efficiency and accuracy of assessment, but also encourages students to participate more actively, making the assessment process more scientific and objective.  

(3) The scheduling of evaluations is reasonable and follows a phased approach. ① It spans the entire semester. From the second week to the twelfth week, there are corresponding evaluation tasks at each stage. For example, in the second and third weeks, the “Heart’s Garden” evaluation is carried out; in the third week, the “Growth Mark” and “Life Rhythm” evaluations are conducted. By distributing the evaluation tasks evenly throughout the semester, the pressure on students and teachers due to concentrated evaluations is reduced. This makes the evaluations more regular and continuous, allowing for a more comprehensive and dynamic tracking of students’ development. ② The timing of different tasks is well-optimized. Depending on the nature and complexity of each evaluation task, the school has assigned appropriate durations for each task. For instance, the “Basic Information Survey” takes only 10 minutes and can be completed quickly during class; whereas the “Fun Park” activity, which is a comprehensive interactive evaluation, requires 60 minutes to ensure that students have enough time to participate and showcase their abilities. This way of arranging time according to the characteristics of each task enables students to fully utilize their capabilities within a relatively relaxed time frame, thereby ensuring that the evaluation results truly reflect their abilities and qualities. This demonstrates the scientific and reasonable nature of the evaluation time arrangement.  

(4) Diversification of evaluation subjects. ① Teachers have clear responsibilities. Teachers from different subjects are responsible for the evaluation tasks related to their respective subjects. For example, teachers of psychology courses are in charge of “Heart’s Garden”, teachers of information courses are responsible for “Wisdom Tower”, and art teachers are responsible for “Little Artists”. This clear division of responsibilities allows teachers from various subjects to fully utilize their professional expertise, ensuring the professionalism and accuracy of each evaluation task. For instance, art teachers can use their professional knowledge and experience to evaluate students’ art works and related abilities more accurately, thereby making the evaluation results more authoritative and scientific. In addition, class advisors also participate in some evaluation tasks, such as “Mark of Growth” and “Rhythm of Life”. Class advisors have a better understanding of students’ daily behavior and overall situation, and can provide more comprehensive evaluation information from the perspectives of class management and students’ overall development. This complements the evaluations provided by subject teachers, creating a more comprehensive and scientific evaluation system. ② Potential for student self-evaluation and peer evaluation. Although student self-evaluation and peer evaluation are not explicitly mentioned in the forms, the design of some tasks actually enables such evaluations. For example, in the task “I am a Little Reciter”, students are required to upload recordings of their readings, allowing them to evaluate their own fluency and accuracy during the preparation process. In the “Little Artists” activity, students can appreciate and evaluate each other’s works. These potential methods of self-evaluation and peer evaluation enable students to participate more actively in the evaluation process, enhancing their self-awareness and peer learning. This further expands the range of evaluation subjects, making the evaluations more comprehensive and scientific.  

(5) The evaluation process is well-defined and practical. ① Clear descriptions of tasks and requirements. Each assessment task has a detailed description, including the purpose, content, and method of the assessment. For example, “Rope Shadow Fluttering” is an automated assessment that evaluates students’ endurance, balance, and coordination skills. It involves analyzing students’ skipping video using intelligent technology to assess their physical health and physical qualities. “Little Expert in Daily Life” consists of two parts: “Gaining Knowledge Through Labor” and “The Glory of Labor”. The first part includes scales and situational questions, while the second part requires students to upload videos of their household chores and their thoughts. By completing both parts, it is possible to assess students’ sense of labor and independence. These clear descriptions of tasks enable teachers and students to know exactly what to do and how to do it, ensuring the standardization and consistency of the evaluation process. Additionally, specific details such as the organization method, responsible person, recommended duration, whether recording is required, the equipment used, and the planned assessment time are specified, making the entire evaluation process practical. Teachers can carry out the assessments in an orderly manner according to the arrangements in the table, thereby improving the efficiency and quality of the evaluation work. ② Considerations regarding data collection and processing. For tasks that require recording or uploading work, such as “I Am a Little Reciter”, “Little Expert in Daily Life”, and “Little Artist”, the methods of data collection (video, audio, photos, etc.) and upload requirements (bulk upload, self-uploading of works, etc.) are clearly defined, which facilitates subsequent data processing and analysis. This prior planning for data collection and processing ensures the completeness and accuracy of the evaluation data, helping to analyze students’ overall development more scientifically and providing valuable data support for teaching improvement and student development.  

(6) Timely feedback on assessment progress. After completing their responsibilities regarding assessment tasks, teachers in various subjects should be able to promptly organize and analyze the performance of students. For example, after the “Little Artists” assessment is completed, art teachers can quickly review the artworks uploaded by students, gain a preliminary understanding of students’ attitudes toward art and their creative abilities, and then provide this information to class advisors and other relevant teachers. This enables teachers to have a comprehensive view of students’ development in different areas. As the core of class management, class advisors can coordinate the information provided by teachers regarding assessment progress, and regularly summarize and report on it within the class. For instance, during weekly class meetings, class advisors can inform students and parents about the assessment tasks completed this week, highlighting which students performed well in certain areas and which areas need further improvement, so that students and parents can be aware of the progress of the assessment and the students’ achievements at each stage.  

3. Result feedback and application: Promoting the comprehensive development of students

(1) Generate personalized reports: The SEED system creates personalized comprehensive evaluation reports for each student, based on the evaluation data from various sources. These reports present the students’ performance in different aspects using clear charts; detailed text analyses are also provided to highlight their strengths and weaknesses, along with targeted suggestions for improvement. For example, the report might indicate that a student has strong artistic skills, but participates less in social activities. It is recommended that the student engage more in community service activities.  

(2) Facilitating teaching improvement: Based on the assessment results, teachers analyze the overall development of students in the class and adjust their teaching plans and methods accordingly. For classes where students’ academic performance is uneven, teachers can implement differentiated teaching methods; for areas where students generally lack proficiency, such as writing skills, additional specialized training can be provided.  

(3) Promoting collaborative education between schools and parents: Schools regularly hold parent-teacher meetings to explain the comprehensive evaluation reports of students, and they discuss educational strategies with parents. Based on the reports, parents adjust their parenting methods. If parents notice that their children are under stress related to mental health, they work together with school counselors to help their children relieve this stress.  

(3) Practical effectiveness  

1. Improvement in the comprehensiveness of evaluation: Before the implementation of the SEED assessment, schools’ evaluations of students were mainly based on academic performance, which accounted for 80% of the overall evaluation. After the implementation, the proportion of academic performance decreased, while aspects such as moral development, physical and mental health, artistic skills, and social practice each accounted for a certain proportion, resulting in a more comprehensive evaluation system. The proportion of students with excellent overall qualities increased from 20% to 35%, including students who excel in various areas.  

2. Improved accuracy of evaluations: Through multi-channel data collection and rigorous review, SEED evaluations effectively reduce the subjectivity in assessments. Taking moral character evaluations as an example, before implementation, the deviation in evaluations by different teachers for the same student reached 30%; after implementation, this deviation is reduced to less than 10%, ensuring the objectivity and fairness of the evaluation results.  

3. Accelerated holistic development of students: Under the guidance of the SEED assessment, students have made progress in all aspects. The number of students participating in club activities has increased by 25%, and the number of students’ art works winning awards in municipal competitions has increased by 30%. The proportion of students engaged in social activities has risen from 50% to 80%, and students’ sense of social responsibility has significantly improved. At the same time, students’ mental health levels have been improved, and the incidence of psychological problems has decreased by 15%.  

4. Closer communication between school and family: After the SEED assessment was implemented, parents’ satisfaction with school education improved. The frequency of communication between parents and teachers through the system doubled; as a result, both parties can cooperate more effectively to promote the growth of students. The combined efforts of the school and family create a better environment for students’ development.  

III. Existing problems and next steps for improvement  

(1) Existing problems  

1. Research on the meaning of “Student Comprehensive Quality Evaluation” and the construction of a model

Problems exist: (1) “Student comprehensive quality evaluation” is the focus of this research; further in-depth study is needed regarding the meaning of “Student comprehensive quality evaluation”. In particular, it is necessary to further break down and analyze the secondary indicators. (2) The model for “Student comprehensive quality evaluation” is still being developed, and it requires time to be tested.  

Improvement measures: (1) Organize a literature research group to further enhance the research on the “comprehensive quality evaluation of students”. Through expert guidance, group-based progress, and specific implementation of tasks, the secondary indicators can be more thoroughly analyzed and studied. (2) The campus actively explores the establishment of criteria for evaluating the comprehensive quality of students. At the same time, it collaborates with Beijing Normal University to develop a scientific and reasonable system of core competencies for student development that integrates the five aspects of education.  

2. Data processing related to “Student Comprehensive Quality Evaluation”

Problem: The relevant data for “Student Comprehensive Quality Evaluation” require further analysis. It involves professional data analysis, and it is difficult to improve the survey report with the current capabilities of the research team.  

Improvement measures: With the help of research teams at universities, relevant reports can be completed.  

(II) Next research plan  

1. Further revise the indicator system for the core competencies in student development that encompasses the integration of the five aspects of education. From the perspectives of comprehensiveness, scientificity, and developmental value, this will help to address the issue of an incomplete system for evaluating students’ overall qualities. As a result, the diagnostic, educational, and motivating functions of such evaluations will be fully utilized.

2. Improve the intelligent platform for evaluating students’ comprehensive qualities. Achieve intelligent, automated, and accurate data collection and analysis for evaluation, thereby addressing the issues of lack of objectivity and authenticity in traditional evaluation methods. This will enable a diverse and objective assessment of students’ abilities in real-world situations, allowing the level of students’ core competencies to be measured and evaluated.