This study is aimed at describing the implementation of attitude assessment conducted by teachers starting from the assessment planning, implementation, results processing, its utilization, and the follow-up. This study employed a qualitative and quantitative method. The subject was elementary school teachers in Bekasi city who had taught in classes applying Curriculum 2013. The data were collected using questionnaires and focus group discussions. The result shows that the implementation of attitude assessment had not been done optimally because of teachers' lack of understanding. Besides, too many techniques of attitude assessment cause teachers to need a lot of time to learn and conduct the assessment. In Curriculum 2013, students' involvement is emphasized, yet most students were quite passive in class, and there was no dynamic and active discussion in the learning process. It means teachers need to apply different methods to encourage students to be more active. Lastly, the utilization and follow-up of the assessment results were not optimal. Some recommendations that can be proposed are: (1) schools are hoped to be able to provide independent training for the implementation of assessment in Curriculum 2013; (2) mandatory attitude assessment required to be done by each subject teacher is observation, while other required assessments are done by the classroom teacher; (3) variables in attitude assessment needs to be completed and clearly stated especially in social aspects (KI-2), which are accepting and responding; (4) there should be a detailed description of attitude assessment in students' reports.

Teachers in Indonesia utilize daily class assessment mostly for assessment of learning purpose instead of assessment for learning and as learning purposes, when in fact, daily class assessment should be primarily used for assessment as and for learning purposes. This prompted us to conduct this study "Utilizing the Assessment of Learning Outcome to Improve Learning Quality", aiming to analyze the implementation of assessment for learning and as learning in teachers' daily class assessment, and its issues. This study used qualitative approach. Data were collected using questionnaires and through focus group discussion (FGD). 5 sample areas were selected using purposive sampling. Informant involved in FGDs were 50 teachers, and respondents filling the questionnaire were 7.508 teachers, all from elementary and junior high schools that have implemented the 2013 Curriculum. The research concluded: a) in assessment for learning: (i) most schools use 1 Minimum Completion Criteria score; (ii) most teachers haven't utilized assessment result for remedial, material enrichment, and evaluation of learning process; (iii) students are burdened by the scoring method of the reassessment in the remedial process; b) in assessment as learning: (i) most teachers do not give out the result of class assessment to students; (ii) most teachers do not utilize the result of class assessment for study counseling; and (iii) the descriptive grading in attitude, knowledge, and skills aspects serves less to no meaningful purpose. This research recommends a detailed and specifically explained assessment guidelines regarding assessment for learning and assessment as learning, complete with examples of classroom implementation.