Assessment Handbook V1

The
Assessment
Handbook
Continuing Education Program
Volume 1, May 2009
Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association

The Assessment Handbook: Continuing Education Program, Vol. 1, May 2009 2
The Assessment Handbook contains articles and materials presented in the Continuing
Education Program of the Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation
Association.
Copyright © 2009 by the Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation

Association. Center for Learning and Performance Assessment, De La Salle-College of
Saint Benilde, 2544 Taft Ave. Manila, Philippines
Publication Division of PEMEA

Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association
The Assessment Handbook: PEMEA Continuing Education Program®

Volume 1, May 2009
Articles
1 The 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum

Lolita Andrada, Department of Education
12 Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and

Cognitive Processes
Neil Pariñas, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde
26 Assessing and Developing Self-regulated Learning

Carlo Magno, De La Salle University, Manila
43 An Assessment Toolkit
Paz Diaz, Roosevelt College System, Cainta
53 Assessment for Learning via Alternative Assessment

Jimelo Silvestre-Tipay, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde
62 Portfolio Assessment: A Celebration of Learning

Laramie Tolentino, De La Salle University, Manila
The 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum

Lolita Andrada
Department of Education
The Role of the School Head
• The Challenge of Curriculum Reform

• Imperatives of Curriculum Reform
• Design of the Curriculum
• Managing the implementation of the curriculum: School Readiness for Reform
• Managing for Excellence: The School Head as Culture Builder, Leader Builder,
and Leader for Learning
THE CHALLENGE OF CURRICULUM REFORM
1. Maximize the potentials of curriculum change by linking it to increasing student

participation and improving the internal efficiency of schooling.
2. Provide opportunities for children to develop 21st Century Core Skills.
21st Core Skills
Digital Age Literacy
• Basic scientific, mathematical, and technological literacies

• Visual and information literacies
• Cultural literacy and global awareness
Inventive Thinking
• Adaptability/ability to manage complexity

• Curiosity, creativity, and risk taking
• Higher-order thinking and sound reasoning
Effective Communication
• Teaming, collaboration, and interpersonal skills

• Personal and social responsibility
• Interactive communication skills
High Productivity
• Ability to prioritize, plan, and manage for results

• Effective use of real-world tools
• Ability to create relevant, high-quality products
IMPERATIVES OF CURRICULUM REFORM
1. New needs, new curriculum

2. The curriculum must remain responsive to national development goals.
3. Lean is better.
4. Curriculum reform as a process of continuous improvement
FEATURES OF THE CURRICULUM
• Lean- focuses on essential understandings

• Sets high expectations (standards-based) – expressed in terms of what students should
know and the quality and proficiency of the skill that they
• are expected to demonstrate as evidence of learning
• Rich and challenging- provides for a personalized approach to
• developing the student’s multiple intelligences
• Develops readiness and passion for work and lifelong learning
Figure 1
Design of the Curriculum
Figure 2
Conventional Curriculum Design
Figure 3
Backward Design (Understanding By Design)
Figure 4
Curriculum Process
I. Results/Desired Outcomes
Defines what students should be able to know and do at the end of the program, course, or
unit of study; generally expressed in terms of overall goals, and specifically defined in terms
of content and performance standards.
What learning standards are for

• They express what students should know and be able to do to demonstrate their
learning.
• They set clear performance expectations for students, helping them understand what
they need to do to meet the expectations.
• They guide teachers in designing instruction and assessment around what is important
to learn.
Learning standards may be classified into:

• Content standards, which specify the essential knowledge (includes the most
important and enduring ideas, issues, principles and concepts from the disciplines),
skills and habits of mind that should be taught and learned. They answer the question,
“What should students know and be able to do?”
• Performance standards, which express the degree or quality of proficiency that

students are expected to demonstrate in relation to the content standards. They answer
the question, “How well must students do their work?” or “At what level of
performance would the student be appropriately qualified or certified?”
Essential Understandings
• These are the big and enduring ideas at the heart of the discipline.
Essential Questions
• These are open-ended, provocative questions that spark thinking and further inquiry into
the essential meanings and understandings.
II. Assessment
• It defines acceptable evidence of student’s attainment of desired results.

• It determines authentic performance tasks that the student is expected to do to
demonstrate the desired understandings.
• It defines the criteria against which the student’s performances or products shall be
judged.
Products and Performances
• Students demonstrate conceptual understanding, and content and skill acquisition or show
evidence of their learning through products and performances.
• Products and performances promote self-understanding, self-monitoring, and self-
assessment.
• They include opportunities for authentic audiences to experience and critique results
• They permit choices and combinations of oral, written, visual, and kinesthetic modes
Facets of Understanding
• Explanation
• Interpretation
• Application
• Perspective
• Empathy
• Self-knowledge
Checking for Understanding
The teacher can determine if students have developed conceptual understanding if they
can demonstrate this in a number of ways, that is, by explaining, interpreting, applying,
giving their perspective, showing empathy, and revealing their self-knowledge. These
are referred to as the facets of understanding.
A student who has understanding of a current event should be able to do the following:
• Explain the event (e.g. Explain why, for example, the MILF is waging war against
the government.)
• Interpret it (e.g. Interpret the message that the MILF is conveying when it drives
away the residents of a community and thereafter occupies it.)
• Apply it (e.g. Apply their knowledge of the effects of conflicts in predicting what the
outcome of this conflict might be.)
• Give his/her own perspective about the event (e.g. Give their perspective on what
could influence the MILF to go back to the negotiation table. )
• Show empathy with the people who figure in the event (e.g. Share their thoughts
about why the MILF believes its actions are justified (Empathy)
• Reveal self-knowledge about the event (e.g. Express their level of confidence about
making a judgment on the crisis in Mindanao in light of what they have read or
heard, or the background knowledge they have about the local history of the people
of Mindanao (Self Knowledge)
III. Instructional/Learning Activities
• The learning activities are aligned with the standards and are designed to promote
attainment of desired results.
• They include instructional resources, both digital and non-digital that students will need
to perform the activities and produce the products and performances.
Managing the implementation of the curriculum: School readiness to Reform
Figure 5
Implementation of the Curriculum in a Child-Friendly School Environment
Figure 6
Managing for Excellence
 The Principal as Culture Builder

 The Principal as Leader Builder
 The Principal as Leader for Learning
The learning-centered leader focuses on:
1. Ensuring that students learn;

2. Building a culture of collaboration; and
3. Achieving results.
The learning-centered leader moves from working with individual teachers to working with
teams of teachers in order to promote student learning.
Change is inevitable. Progress is optional.

-Anonymous
Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and

Cognitive Processes
Neil Pariñas
De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde
Why is there a need to revise the Bloom’s Taxonomy? What are the major changes
made? How can we use the revised taxonomy in teaching and assessing students’ learning?
Background
Although the Bloom’s Taxonomy is named after Benjamin Bloom, the taxonomy was
actually the work of the many individuals hired to help manage the influx of veterans into the
education system following World War II. Discharged soldiers, home from fighting World War
II, were eligible for the GI education stipend, which paid college tuition, textbook fees, living
expenses, and support for the ex-soldier’s dependents. The GI stipend enabled many World War
II veterans to attend college, flooding campuses with new students even though few new faculty
members were hired to educate this deluge of students. In recognition of the life experiences of
these veterans, the concept of “credit-by-examination” was developed with support from the
Department of Defense. The work that eventually became the Taxonomy of Education resulted
from the collective efforts of many including the psychology graduates hired to design,
administer, and score tests for college-credit-by-examination, hence their title of “Examiners.”
The Examiners first met formally following the annual meeting of the American Psychological
Association (APA) in 1948. They continued to meet after the annual APA conventions to further
their discussions of ways to define and structure intellectual content. They were attempting to
make sense of the multiple educational fields needing tests, with a goal of reducing the
complexity of their tasks by categorizing knowledge into hierarchies. Once developed, these
hierarchies would provide them with a framework for writing test items in a variety of subjects
(Pickard, 2007).
These psychology-trained examiners decided a classification system represented an

appropriate starting place to measure student knowledge and understanding. As psychologists,
they wanted a convenient system for describing and ordering test items, examination techniques,
and evaluation instruments; and they believed a classification system would enable educators to
compare and study educational programming (Anderson, 2006). They also hoped that their
system would serve to establish an order for educational goals. By 1956, their efforts resulted in
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, named by default since Benjamin Bloom was the
first name in the alphabetic list of authors (Anderson, 2006.). This classic work on knowledge
levels has influenced curriculum theory and practice for the last fifty years. However, its authors
always considered it a work in progress, neither finished nor final (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001, p xxxvii). The examiners whose efforts led to the development of the original framework
expected it to facilitate the exchange of test items among their cooperating institutions.
Bloom’s Taxonomy contains three overlapping domains: the cognitive, psychomotor, and
affective, also known as knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA). The taxonomy was a means to
express qualitatively the different kinds of intellectual skills and abilities. The cognitive and
affective domains provided a way to organize thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic
to levels that are more complex. It was a one-dimensional cumulative hierarchy, with
achievement at each lower level considered necessary to move up to the next level (Anderson,
2006). The original development committee produced the hierarchical levels for the cognitive
and affective domains, but not for the psychomotor domain. Their explanation for this omission
was that they saw little need to teach manual skills to college students (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001) thus completely overlooking athletics, drama, and applied programs of study such as
music.
Requests were made to Dr. Lorin Anderson, a former student of Bloom’s at the
University of Chicago, to update the Taxonomy prior to his retirement. At the urging of
publishers and education professionals, he agreed to the task, to reflect the enlarged
understanding of the teaching and learning processes now available. He and co-editor, the elderly
David Krathwohl, one of the editors of the original taxonomy, collaborated with seven other
educators to produce the revised Taxonomy (Pickard, 2007).
During the revision processes, the editors identified 19 alternative frameworks, developed
to supplement, clarify, and improve upon the original Bloom’s Taxonomy. The alternative
frameworks were examined to determine how they might contribute to the revision of the
updated taxonomy. Of these, 11 represented a single dimension like the original taxonomy while
eight frameworks represented two or more dimensions (Pickard, 2007).
What are the major changes made?
The Revised Taxonomy is seen as “a tool to help educators clarify and communicate
what they intended students to learn as a result of instruction” (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p
23). Incorporated into the Revised Taxonomy are advances in teaching and learning since
publication of the original. The term knowledge was deemed an inappropriate term to describe a
category of thinking and was replaced with the term remembering. In addition, the revision
reconceptualized the original single dimension taxonomy into two dimensions with both a
Cognitive Process Dimension and a Knowledge Dimension.
Figure 1
Cognitive Domain of the Bloom’s Taxonomy
Table 1
The Revised Taxonomy
The Revised Taxonomy is not a cumulative hierarchy, as the original was. Instead, the six
stages are viewed as a “cognitive processing” dimension. Our current concepts of learning view
students as active participants in the learning process. Students select the information to which
they attend and construct their own meanings from the selected information. This constructivist
perspective of learning emphasizes how learners cognitively process new knowledge as they
engage in meaningful learning. Thus, the cognitive process dimension reflects students’
cognitive and metacognitive activity as expressed within the opportunities and constraints of the
learning setting. “This constructivist process of ‘making sense’ involves the activation of prior
knowledge as well as various cognitive processes that operate on that knowledge” (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001, p. 38). In addition to the cognitive processing dimension, the Revised
Taxonomy authors identified four general types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural,
and metacognitive which make up the Knowledge Dimension.
Table 2
The Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised Taxonomy
Dimension Examples of the cognitive processes involved

Remember: can the student recall or define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce
remember the information? state
Understand: can the student explain ideas or classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate,
concepts? recognize, report, select, translate, paraphrase
Apply: can the student use the information in choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret,
a new way? operate, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write
Analyze: can the student distinguish between appraise, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate,
the different parts? discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question,
test
Evaluate: can the student justify a stand or appraise, argue, defend, judge, select, support, value,
decision? evaluate
Create: can the student create new product assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate,
or point of view? write
Anderson, L. (2006)
Table 3
The Detailed Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised Taxonomy
CATEGORIES
& COGNITIVE ALTERNATIVE
PROCESSES NAMES DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES
1. REMEMBER- Retrieve relevant knowledge from long-term memory

1.1 RECOGNIZING Identifying Locating knowledge in long-term memory that is consistent
with presented material (e.g., Recognize the dates of
important events in U.S. history)
1.2 RECALLING Retrieving Retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory

(e.g., Recall the dates of important events in U.S. history)
2. UNDERSTAND-Construct meaning from instructional messages, including oral, written, and

graphic communication
2.1 INTERPRETING Clarifying, Changing from one form of representation (e.g., numerical)
paraphrasing, to another (e.g., verbal) (e.g., Paraphrase important speeches
representing, and documents)
translating
2.2 EXEMPLIFYING illustrating, Finding a specific example or illustration of a concept or principle (e.g.,
instantiating Give examples of various artistic painting styles)
2.3 CLASSIFYING Categorizing, Determining that something belongs to a category (e.g.,
subsuming Concept or principle) (e.g., Classify observed or described
Cases of mental disorders)
2.4 SUMMARIZING Abstracting, Abstracting a general theme or major point(s) (e.g., Write a
Generalizing Short summary of the events portrayed on a videotape)
2.5 INFERRING Concluding, Drawing a logical conclusion from presented information
Extrapolating, (e.g., In learning a foreign language, infer grammatical
Interpolating, Principles from examples)
predicting
2.6 COMPARING Contrasting, Detecting correspondences between two ideas, objects, and
mapping, the like (e.g., Compare historical events to contemporary
matching Situations)
2.7 EXPLAINING Constructing Constructing a cause-and-effect model of a system (e.g., Ex-
models plain the causes of important 18th-century events in France)
3. APPLY-Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation
3.1 EXECUTING Carrying out Applying a procedure to a familiar task (e.g., Divide one
whole number by another whole number, both with
Multiple digits)
3.2 IMPLEMENTING Using Applying a procedure to an unfamiliar task (e.g., Use New-
ton's Second Law in situations in which it is appropriate)
Table 3
The Detailed Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised Taxonomy (continuation)
CATEGORIES
& COGNITIVE AL TERNATIVE
PROCESSES NAMES DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES
4. ANALYZE-Break material into its constituent parts and determine how the parts relate to one
another and to an overall structure or purpose
4.1 DIFFERENTIATING Discriminating, Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant parts or important from
distinguishing, unimportant parts of presented material
focusing, (e.g., Distinguish between relevant and irrelevant
selecting numbers in a mathematical word problem)
4.2 ORGANIZING Finding Determining how elements fit or function within a

coherence, Structure (e.g., Structure evidence in a historical
intergrating, description into evidence for and against a particular
outlining, historical explanation)
parsing,
structuring
4.3 ATTRIBUTING Deconstructing Determine a point of view, bias, values, or intent under-
lying presented material (e.g., Determine the point of
view of the author of an essay in terms of his or her
political perspective)
5. EVALUATE-Make judgments based on criteria and standards

5.1 Coordinating, Detecting inconsistencies or fallacies within a process or
CHECKING
detecting, product; determining whether a process or product has
monitoring, internal consistency; detecting the effectiveness of a procedure
testing as it is being implemented (e.g., Determine if a scientist's
conclusions follow from observed data)
5.2 CRITIQUING Judging Detecting inconsistencies between a product and external

criteria, determining whether a product has external
consistency; detecting the appropriateness of a procedure for a
given problem (e.g., Judge which of two methods is the best
way to solve a given problem)
6. CREATE-Put elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganize elements

into a new pattern or structure
6.1 GENERATING Hypothesizing Coming up with alternative hypotheses based on
criteria (e.g., Generate hypotheses to account for an
observed phenomenon)
6.2 PLANNING Designing Devising a procedure for accomplishing some task (e.g.,
Plan a research paper on a given historical topic)
6.3 PRODUCING Constructing Inventing a product (e.g., Build habitats for a specific
purpose)
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001)
Within the knowledge dimension is basic information that students must remember to be
acquainted with a discipline or solve a problem. Labeled factual knowledge, this may include
terminology of the discipline or knowledge of specific details. Factual knowledge includes the
discrete facts and basic elements that experts use when communicating about their discipline,
understanding it, and organizing it systematically; there is little abstraction to factual knowledge.
Because of the explosion of knowledge within all subjects, curriculum designers, textbook
authors, and teachers must decide what is critical to include and what is of lesser importance.
Many educators now recognize that memorization of discrete facts is not highly productive
knowledge, since so much information today is a few keystrokes away on the internet (Pickard,
2007).
Conceptual knowledge is more complex than factual knowledge and includes three
subtypes: 1) knowledge of classifications and categories, 2) knowledge of principles and
generalizations, and 3) knowledge of theories, models, and structure (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001). When students can explain the concepts in their own words and transfer information to
new situations they have acquired conceptual knowledge. Chamberlain and Cummings (2003)
indicate that concepts can be defined and characterized, and that generalizations show
relationships among concepts. Classifications and categories of concepts form the basis for
principles and generalizations. Principles and generalizations form the basis for theories, models,
and structures. Classification, principle, and theory capture the greatest amount of intellect
within widely different disciplines (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
Both factual and conceptual knowledge deal with products, however procedural
knowledge is often a series or sequence of steps to follow. Procedural knowledge also includes
criteria of when to use various procedures and reflects knowledge of different processes.
Examples of procedural knowledge could include syntax of an essay, or application of art and
design principles in a display board for interior design. Meaningful learning provides students
with the knowledge and cognitive processes they need for successful problem solving. Problem
solving occurs when a student devises a way of achieving a goal never before accomplished,
often by reformulating the problem into a more familiar form, recognizing the similarity, and
applying the method in solving for the new knowledge.
The fourth dimension of knowledge is metacognitive knowledge, an awareness of and

knowledge about one’s own thinking. The metacognitive knowledge concept is an emerging
milestone in our understanding of learning since the publication of the original taxonomy. Today
emphasis is on making students more aware of and responsible for their own knowledge and
thought (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Students may acquire some of the information from
their study, but may not have the ability to monitor the learning conditions or make adaptations
within their learning process to facilitate acquiring more than superficial understanding and
knowledge. One way in which students can be helped to develop their metacognitive knowledge
is to ask them to log the amount of effort they make in completing assignments and studying for
tests. When they begin to reflect on how much effort they have made, they become aware that
often they fail to make the necessary effort in their study, which is reflected in less than optimum
achievement (Marzano, Norford, Paynter, Pickering & Gaddy, 2001).
Table 4
The Major Types and Subtypes of the Knowledge Dimension
MAJOR TYPES AND SUBTYPES EXAMPLES
A. FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE - The basic elements students must know to be acquainted with a
discipline or solve problems in it
AA. Knowledge of terminology Technical vocabulary, musical symbols
AB. Knowledge of specific details and Major natural resources, reliable sources of
elements information
B. CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE- The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that
enable them to function together
BA. Knowledge of classifications and Periods of geological time, forms of business
categories ownership
BB. Knowledge of principles and Pythagorean theorem, law of supply and demand
generalizations
BC. Knowledge of theories, models, and Theory of evolution, structure of Congress
structures
C. PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE-How to do something, methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills,
algorithms, techniques, and methods
CA. Knowledge of subject-specific skills and Skills used in painting with watercolors,
algorithms whole-number division algorithm
CB. Knowledge of subject-specific techniques Interviewing techniques, scientific method

and methods
CC. Knowledge of criteria for determining Criteria used to determine when to apply a
when to use appropriate procedures procedure involving Newton's second law, criteria
used to judge the feasibility of using a particular
method to estimate business costs
D. METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE-Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of

one's own cognition
DA. Strategic knowledge Knowledge of outlining as a means of capturing
the structure of a unit of subject matter in a text-
book, knowledge of the use of heuristics
DB. Knowledge about cognitive tasks, Knowledge of the types of tests particular teachers
Including appropriate contextual and administer, knowledge of the cognitive demands
Conditional knowledge of different tasks
DC. Self-knowledge Knowledge that critiquing essays is a personal
strength, whereas writing essays is a personal weak-
ness; awareness of one's own knowledge level
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001)

How can we use the revised taxonomy in teaching?
A major contribution that the revised taxonomy can make is in the way educators think
about instruction. The intersection of the cognitive process dimensions and the knowledge
dimensions can facilitate instructional planning and assessment. When educators plan how they
will assess learning, the intersection of the cognitive processing and knowledge dimension can
facilitate the selection of learning activities that will provide for modeling and practice using the
intended assessment format. Use of the revised taxonomy enables educators to specify how they
expect students to use specified knowledge and thus provide learning experiences to assist
students to reach that cognitive stage. The matrix also streamlines the list of verbs used in
generating learning objectives to precise descriptions of the expected outcomes (Pickard, 2007).
Figure 2
The Knowledge and Cognitive Process Dimensions of a Learning Objective
Table 5
Sample Learning Activities about the Topic “Travel”
Remembering How many ways can you travel from one place to another? List and draw all
the ways you know. Describe one of the vehicles from your list, draw a
diagram and label the parts. Collect “transport” pictures from magazines- make
a poster with info.
Understanding How do you get from school to home? Explain the method of travel and draw a
map. Write a play about a form of modern transport. Explain how you felt the
first time you rode a bicycle. Make your desk into a form of transport.
Applying Explain why some vehicles are large and others small. Write a story about the
uses of both. Read a story about “The Little Red Engine” and make up a play
about it. Survey 10 other children to see what bikes they ride. Display on a
chart or graph.
Analysing Make a jigsaw puzzle of children using bikes safely. What problems are there
with modern forms of transport and their uses- write a report. Use a Venn
Diagram to compare boats to planes, or helicopters to bicycles.
Evaluating What changes would you recommend to road rules to prevent traffic accidents?
Debate whether we should be able to buy fuel at a cheaper rate. Rate transport
from slow to fast etc.
Creating Invent a vehicle. Draw or construct it after careful planning. What sort of
transport will there be in twenty years time? Discuss, write about it and report
to the class. Write a song about traveling in different forms of transport.
Figure 3
Pie Chart of Cognitive Processes, Activities, and Products
Table 6. Revised Taxonomy – verbs, materials/situations that require this level of thinking, potential activities and products
REMEMBERING UNDERSTANDING APPLYING ANALYZING EVALUATING CREATING
Tell, List, Describe, Relate, Explain, Interpret, Outline, Solve, Show, Use, Analyse, Distinguish, Judge, Select, Choose, Create, Invent, Compose,
Locate, Write, Find, State, Discuss, Distinguish, Predict, Illustrate, Construct Examine, Compare Decide, Predict
Name, Identify, Label, Restate, Translate, Compare, Complete, Examine Contrast, Investigate Justify, Debate, Plan, Construct
VERBS
Recall, Define, Recognise, Describe, Relate, Generalise, Classify, Choose Categorise, Identify Verify, Argue, Design, Imagine
Match, Reproduce, Summarise, Put into your Interpret, Make Explain, Separate Recommend, Assess, Propose, Devise
Memorise, Draw, Select, own words, Paraphrase, Put together, Change, Advertise, Take apart Discuss, Rate, Prioritise, Formulate, Combine,
Write, Recite Convert, Demonstrate, Apply, Produce, Differentiate, Subdivide, Determine, Critique, Hypothesize, Originate,
Visualise, Find out more Translate, Calculate, deduce, Evaluate, Criticise, Weigh, Add to, Forecast,
information about Manipulate, Modify, put Value, estimate, defend
into practice
Events, people, newspapers, Speech, stories, drama, Diagrams, sculptures, Surveys, questionnaires, Recommendations, self- Experiments, games,
SITUATIONS
MATERAILS
magazine articles, cartoons, diagrams, graphs, illustrations, arguments, models, evaluations, group songs, reports, poems,
definitions, videos, dramas, summaries, outlines, dramatisations, forecasts, displays, demonstrations, discussions, debates, court speculations, creations,
textbooks, films, television analogies, posters, bulletin problems, puzzles, diagrams, systems, trials, standards, editorials, art, inventions, drama,
programs, recordings, media boards. organisations, conclusions, reports, values. rules.
presentations classifications, rules, graphed information
systems, routines.
Make a list of the main Cut out or draw pictures to Construct a model to Design a questionnaire to Prepare a list of criteria to Invent a machine to do a
events . show a particular event. demonstrate how it will gather information. judge a ……..show? specific task.
Make a timeline of events. Illustrate what you think the work. Write a commercial to Remember to indicate Design a building to
Make a facts chart. main idea was. Make a diorama to sell a new product. priorities and ratings. house your study.
Write a list of any pieces of Make a cartoon strip showing illustrate an important Conduct an investigation Conduct a debate about a Create a new product,
POTENTIAL ACTIVITIES & PRODUCTS
information you can the sequence of events. event. to produce information to special issue. give it a name and then
remember. Retell the story in your own Make a scrapbook about support a point of view. Make a booklet about 5 devise a marketing
List all the …in the story. words. the areas of study. Construct a graph to rules you see as important strategy.
Make a chart showing.. Paint a picture of some Make a papier-mache illustrate selected to convince others. Write about your feeling
Make an acrostic. aspect you like. map to include relevant information. Form a panel to discuss sin relation to …
Recite a poem Write a summary report of an information about an Make a jigsaw puzzle. views. Design a record, book or
event. event. Make a family tree Write a letter to .... magazine cover.
Prepare a flow chart to Take a collection of showing relationships. advising on changes Sell an idea.
illustrate the sequence of photographs to Put on a play about he needed at … Devise a way to …
events. demonstrate a particular study area. Write a half yearly report. Compose a rhythm or put
Make a colouring book. point. Write a biography of the present your point of view. new words to an old
Make up a puzzle game study person. song.
showing the ideas from Prepare a report.
an area of study. Arrange a party and
Make a clay model of an record as a procedure.
item in the area. Review apiece of art
Design a market strategy including form, colour
for your product. and texture
Dress a doll in costume.
Paint a mural.
Write a textbook outline.
teachers.net/lessons/posts/355.html www.teachers.ash.org.au/researchskills/dalton.htm Dalton.J & Smith.D [(1986) Extending Children’s Special abilities – Strategies for Primary Classrooms
www.lgc.peachnet.edu/academic/educatn/Blooms/critical_thinking.htm
Table 7
Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy Planning Framework
Actions Products Learning Activities

Creating Designing Film
Constructing Story
(Putting together ideas Planning Project
or elements to develop Producing Plan
an original idea or Inventing New game
engage in creative Devising Song
thinking). Making Media product
Advertisement
Higher-order thinking
Painting
Evaluating Checking Debate
Hypothesising Panel
(Judging the value of Critiquing Report
ideas, materials and Experimenting Evaluation
methods by developing Judging Investigation
and applying standards Testing Verdict
and criteria). Detecting Conclusion
Monitoring Persuasive
speech
Analyzing Comparing Survey
Organising Database
(Breaking information Deconstructing Mobile
down into its component Attributing Abstract
elements). Outlining Report
Structuring Graph
Integrating Spreadsheet
Checklist
Chart
Outline
Applying Implementing Illustration
Carrying out Simulation
(Using strategies, Using Sculpture
concepts, principles and Executing Demonstration
theories in new Presentation
situations). Interview
Performance
Diary
Lower-order thinking
Journal
Understanding Interpreting Recitation
Exemplifying Summary
(Understanding of given Summarising Collection
information). Inferring Explanation
Paraphrasing Show and tell
Classifying Example
Comparing Quiz
Explaining List
Label
Outline
Remembering Recognising Quiz
Listing Definition
(Recall or recognition of Describing Fact
specific information). Identifying Worksheet
Retrieving Test
Naming Label
Locating List
Finding Workbook
Reproduction
How can we use the revised taxonomy in assessing students’ learning?
The knowledge dimension will help you consider the type of knowledge that
you are trying to assess (factual, conceptual, procedural or meta-cognitive). The
cognitive dimension will help you create different types of questions that relate to
different cognitive skills.
The table, therefore, can be used to generate different types of questions – that
is, questions that cover a spread of the knowledge/cognitive domain (rather than a series
of questions that repeatedly assess the same thing). So, given a specific topic, and
thinking about the different types of knowledge and cognitive skills, it should be
possible to come up with a number of diverse questions on that topic.
The taxonomy table provides a means of categorising the questions. For

example:
1. Define a ‘computer database’. (remembering factual knowledge)
2. Explain three key characteristics of a computer database. (understanding
conceptual knowledge)
3. Relate each of these characteristics to a database package with which you are
familiar (applying procedural knowledge).
4. Compare the database facilities of a dedicated database package to those of a
general purpose spreadsheet package. (analysing procedural knowledge)
5. Suggest criteria that could be used to help users decide whether to use a database
or spreadsheet package for a specific task. (evaluating procedural knowledge)
The questions could be mapped onto the taxonomy table as illustrated in the
Table below.
Table 8
Mapping Questions in the Revised Taxonomy
Cognitive dimension
Knowledge
dimension 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
A. Factual Question
knowledge 1
B. Conceptual Question
knowledge 2
C. Procedural Question Question Question
knowledge 3 4 5
D. Meta-cognitive
knowledge
Mapping the questions onto the taxonomy table gives an indication of the
relative complexity of the questions. The mapping also confirms that the questions are
diverse since they occupy different cells in the table and therefore assess different
cognitive abilities.
Different questions will occupy different cells in the taxonomy table; similar
questions will occupy the same cells in the table. Simple questions will occupy cells
close to the top left-hand corner; complex questions will be further away from the top
left-hand corner. In general, you would expect lower level papers to have more
questions towards the top left-hand corner of the table and higher level papers to have
questions towards the middle and bottom right-hand corner. But every paper –
irrespective of its level – should map onto a range of cells (rather than repeatedly
assessing the same type of knowledge or cognitive process). This provides the
necessary discrimination to allow candidates to perform at varying levels and receive
different grades (Elliott, 2002).
Once a paper has been constructed, the taxonomy table can be used to analyse it.
This could be done to check the balance of a paper – in other words, to check if
different types of knowledge have been examined and various cognitive skills assessed.
Dalton (2003) applied the revised taxonomy in identifying the following types
of assessment activities:
Table 9
Possible Assessment Strategies in the Revised Taxonomy

 Modified  Multiple
 Multiple True/False Choice - Apply
Factual Choice - recall  Multiple Choice memorized  Multiple  Multiple
knowledge definitions as - interpretation facts to simple Choice - best Choice - best
taught  Short-answer authentic answer answer
essay situations
 Match cause-  Lab: high  Discussion
effect inference (formative)  Constructed
 Lab: high
 Multiple Choice response
inference
- predict using  Differentiation  Essay (rated
 Matching interlineal set on use of  Exhibition
principles;
 Recall order  Pictoral item principles)
examples and
Conceptual non-examples; set
 Knowledge  Portfolio
e.g. concept,  Essay (rated
knowledge category,
summaries
 Apply
mapping
 Comprehension on use of
principle concepts to
item set  Problem- procedures)
definitions solve an
 Choose best solving item
authentic
(new) definition set  Review/critique
problem
 Match
classification
 Lab: low
inference
 Recall steps of
Procedural procedures  Interlineal item
 Interactive
video,
knowledge  Recall set
simulation
sequencing
 Instrumented
lab

 Visual
observation,
rating
 Project
 Pictoral item
set
 Instrument-
aided
observation
 Anecdotal
(formative)
 Demonstration
with rating
scale,
checklist
 Exhibition
 Performance
References
Anderson, L. (2006). Taxonomy academy handbook. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from
http://www.andersonresearchgroup.com/tax.html
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning teaching and
assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives [Abridged].
New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Chamberlain, V. J. & Cummings, M. N. (2003). Creative instructional methods. New

York: Glencoe McGraw-Hill.
Dalton, E. (2003). The “new Bloom's taxonomy,” objectives, and assessments

questions. Retrieved Feb. 20, 2007, from
http://gaeacoop.org/dalton/publications/ new_bloom.pdf
Elliott, B. (2002). Using the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy for the creation of examination
questions. Retrieved Feb. 20, 2007, from http://www.bobbyelliott.com/
Taxonomy.htm
Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J. & Gaddy, B. B. (2001).
Handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Pickard, M. J. (2007). The new Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview for family and
consumer sciences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 25,
45-55.
Developing and Assessing Self-regulated Learners

Carlo Magno
De La Salle University, Manila
Abstract
The report focuses on aspects in the development and assessment of self-regulated
learning in the school context. The nature of self-regulated learning was discussed by
identifying its critical characteristics. Different models showing the components and
process of self-regulation was presented in order to focus different ways of assessing it
as a construct. Different studies are then presented to show the effects of developing
self-regulation in the classroom context. The need to assess self-regulation as part of the
teaching and learning process is discussed under certain needs in the school setting.
Different protocols with examples are shown in assessing self-regulated learning as
applied in the classroom.
Who is a self-regulated learner?
Teachers generally commend students that are more independent in their studies,
diligent in listening inside the classroom, focused on doing their task inside the
classroom, gets high scores in tests, able to recall teachers instruction and facts lectured
in class, and submits quality work. However, teachers see problematic students when
they miss assignments, inattentive during lectures, volatile during class activities, fails
to recall instructions taught in the classroom, submits poor work and worst is not
submitting any work at all. These two scenarios differentiate self-regulated students
with those who are poor in regulating their learning. Self-regulated learners are
generally characterized as independent learners, ability to control their learning, focused
in their studies, plans and studies in advance to obtain high scores in tests, and uses
strategies to recall instruction. By showing these characteristics, self-regulated students
eventually performs well and obtains successful academic outcomes. Self-regulation is
generally defined by Zimmerman (2005) as “self-generated thoughts, feelings, and
actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals” (p.
14). Zimmerman (2002) further explained that self-regulation is “a self-directive
process by which learners transform their mental abilities into academic skills” (p. 65).
There are various contexts where self-regulation can be practiced. It can be
applied in sports to regulate one’s performance, in health to attain potent physical
condition, in the industrial setting to determine effective employees, and in managing
one’s emotions (emotion regulation). This report focuses on self-regulated learning in
the academic context. In the academic setting, one of the main goals is to develop
students to be self-regulated learners. Learners that are self-regulated become
independent of their own learning and thus control their own learning in general. Self-
regulation entails students that carefully plan their actions, set goals, and use a variety
of strategies in accomplishing a task. Zimmerman (2002) further characterizes self-
regulated students as having superior motivation, adaptive learning methods, and views
their future optimistically.
There are numerous ways of characterizing a self-regulated learner. Generally

the characteristics involve traits that enable a student to achieve their goals. These traits
are organized into a set of components in order to frame specific variables for self-
regulation. These components are processes are used in order to attain goals.
Zimmerman (2002, p. 66) presented six components of self-regulation:
The component skills include: (a) setting specific proximal goals for oneself, (b)
adopting powerful strategies for attaining the goals, (c) monitoring one's
performance selectively for signs of progress, (d) restructuring one's physical
and social context to make it compatible with one's goals, (e) managing one's
time use efficiently, (f) self-evaluating one's methods, (g) attributing causation
to results, and (h) adapting future methods.
There are several studies indicating that self-regulated learners turn out to
perform well in school related tasks (Blakey & Spencer, 1990; Collins, 1982; Corsale &
Ornstein, 1980; Kluwe, 1982; Lopez, Little, Oettingen, Baltes, 1998; Rock, 2005;
Schneider, 1985). There is also an established theory that learners who self-regulate
have increased self–efficacy or beliefs in one’s ability to execute actions (see Bandura
& Schunk, 1981; Schunk, 1981, Schunk, 1983; 1984). It is also notable that self-
regulated learners are more motivated (see Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Corno & Mandinach,
1983). Specifically for the Filipino adolescent, students’ who see the consequence of
their actions and those who structure their environment for study showed to be more
mastery oriented (developing competency and gaining understanding) (see Magno &
Lajom, 2008). In a developmental perspective, the study of Magno and Lajom (2008)
showed that all components of self-regulation increased from high school to college
students.
Models of Self-regulation
There are several models of self-regulation that are used depending on the
specific area how self-regulation is viewed. Bandura (1986) sees self-regulation as a
triadic process where there is an interaction of personal, behavioral, and environmental
aspects. Framed in this theory, the behavioral aspect of self-regulation involves self-
observation and strategically adjusting performance. The environmental aspect includes
observing and adjusting environmental conditions or outcomes. Covert regulation
(personal) includes monitoring and adjusting cognitive and affective strategies.
Based on the social cognitive perspective, Zimmerman (2002; 2005) derived the
process involved in self-regulation. In this cyclical process, self-regulation in a three-
phase structure (forethought phase, performance phase, and self-reflection phase). The
forethought phase is the stage where the learner analyzes the task by planning and
setting goals. Analysis of tasks is influenced by learners’ self-monitored beliefs,
intrinsic interest, and goal orientations. After careful planning the learner proceed to the
performance phase or the execution of a task. While executing a task, the learner
maintains self-control by establishing self-instruction, imagery, attention focusing, and
strategies used for accomplishing the task. The performance phase is also accompanied
by self-observation by self-recording and self-experimentation. After the performance,
the self-regulated learner reflects on the execution which is the self-reflection phase. In
this phase the learner judges how well they have planned and executed the task through
self-evaluation and causal attribution. The start to react on the plan and execution
whether they are satisfied and identify what possible adaptations can be used when
engaged in the same task again. Their reflections are carried out in the forethought
phase the next time they engage in a task that will require them to self-regulate.
There are other models of self-regulated learning. For example, Craver and
Scheir (2005) sees self-regulation as a feedback loop. The process starts with a goal,
standard, or reference value. Then the performance is compared with the output value
(comparator). If the output is same or exceed the reference value, then performance is
successful, if not, there is discrepancy. Shah and Kruglanski (2005) see self-regulation
as a network of goals. They use a connectionist perspective where goals and means are
viewed as a network of complex cognitive associations.
A personality systems perspective in self-regulation identify ways how positive
and negative affect influence self-regulation as a cognitive system. This was
operationalized in the model of Magno (2008) where systems of activation and
inhibitions to self-regulated learning were identified and their effects on self-regulation
were tested. The activation system was composed of self-determination, disengagement,
initiative, and persistence while negative affect is composed of anxiety, worry, thought
suppression, and fear of negative evaluation. It was found that the activation and
inhibition systems served their purpose. The activation system increased with self-
regulation while the inhibition system identified as negative affect decreased self-
regulation. This showed that experience of negative affect such as worry, anxiety,
thought suppression, and fear of negative evaluation interfered with the use of self-
regulation. When levels of the activation system (high and low) were varied, it was
found that individuals who used high levels of the activation system who used self-
regulation were not affected by the negative affect. Those individuals with low levels of
the activation system, their self-regulation were negatively impacted by the inhibitions
such as the negative affect. This model provides a theoretical perspective of identifying
certain conditions how to make self-regulation work and not work well.
Moreover, Winne (1995; 1997) views self-regulation as composed of
metacognition, intrinsic motivation, and strategy use. Metacognition is the awareness of
the learners in their own academic strengths and weaknesses, cognitive resources that
they can apply to meet the demands of tasks, and how to regulate the engagement of
tasks. Intrinsic motivation is the belief in incremental learning, high value placed on
personal progress, and high efficacy for learning. His process model of self-regulation
starts with task and cognitive conditions that individuals set. These conditions provide
information on how the task in the environment will be evaluated. The second phase
involves setting goals and planning how to reach them. This includes decision making
supplemented by information retrieved from memory, framing goals, and assembling a
plan to approach them. The third phase involves enacting tactics by controlling and
monitoring used during the performance. The products of self-regulation may turn out
as definition of a task, goals and plans, studying tactics and adaptation. The last phase
involves adapting metacognition. In the past phase the learner makes major adaptations
to those parts of the model under their control.
The various models of self-regulation provides a view on how self-regulation
involves other variables, its process, how its components are interrelated to each other.
The Need to Develop Self-regulated Learners
Contemporary principles in education espouse that the process of student

learning involves not only teaching the content but the process on how to learn the
content as well. Being aware in the process of learning a material involves self-
regulation.
One of the direct applications of self-regulation can be used in teaching. This
means that self-regulatory processes can be taught to students. Schunk and Zimmerman
(1998) showed in their study that when self-regulation was taught to students, it
increased their motivation and achievement. Self-regulation can be taught through
modeling by parents, teachers, coaches, and peers. There is much room for different
research to propose ways on how to teach students to self-regulate since current
literature focuses too much on its conceptualizations and factors that influence it.
Zimmerman, Bonner, and Kovach (1996) raised issues that (1) few teachers are
preparing students to effectively learn by themselves, (2) students are seldom given
choices regarding academic tasks, (3) few teachers encourage students to establish
specific goals for work and teacher learning strategies, (4) students are rarely asked to
evaluate their own work, and (5) very few teachers assess students beliefs about their
own learning. These issues were raised due to the lack of models, strategies, methods,
and techniques that teachers can use as exemplars in implementing the instruction for
self-regulation. This notion is often raised because teachers rely mostly on strategic
formulas in their process of teaching especially in the Philippine context (Magno,
2007). Teachers need to change their perspective about their belief on what learning is
and what their teaching should become from conventional ways of teaching content.
Since learners are believed to self-regulate their learning, teachers should concentrate
on how to activate their students’ self-regulatory processes. Focusing on techniques of
teaching students to self-regulate concerns much of the need to identify ways to activate
it which is proposed in the present study.
Some of the research attempts that translate self-regulation into the actual
teaching practice were shown in the work of de la Fuente Arias, Justicia, and Garcia
Berben (2006), Fok and Watkins (2007), and Paris and Paris (2001). It is important to
mention these studies because self-regulation when used in teaching demonstrates
different ways of activating it among students.
The study by dela Fuente Arias, Justicia, and Garcia Berben (2006) developed a
teaching-learning process using the “Interactive Model of Regulated Teaching and Self-
regulated Learning.” In their new model, they improved the “presage-process-product”
model of Biggs (2001) where the interactive dimension of the teaching-learning process
becomes the primary function and the model explicitly incorporates the dimension of
regulated teaching and self-regulated learning. They provided evidence that
improvement of general teaching strategies, adjustments in the evaluation system, and
improving specific teaching strategies (regulation of teaching) as implemented in their
teaching-learning model have produced a general improvement in general learning
behavior and in students’ specific learning strategies (self-regulated learning), as
measured through the evaluation scales used.
The study by Fok and Watkins (2007) used a constructivist teaching approach
which is typically a self-regulation technique and investigated its effect using the
Learning Process Questionnaire (LPQ) and the Constructivist Learning Environment
Scale (CLES). The constructivist technique employed involves students to give their
own examples, authentic problems, testing own ideas, challenge each others’
conceptualizations, group presentations, self-analysis, self-reflective thinking, and
evidence to support ideas, and present ideas. The study found significant post-test gains
among the high achieving group on the learning process and constructivist learning
environment after the constructivist technique. This shows that a constructivist learning
environment that includes self-regulation is effective in developing deeper approaches
to learning.
Paris and Paris (2001) described 12 principles that teachers can use to design
activities in classrooms that promote students self-regulation. They emphasized that
self-regulation can be taught with explicit instruction, directed reflection, metacognitive
discussions, and participation in practices with experts. Self-regulation can be promoted
indirectly by modeling and activities that entail reflective analyses of learning.
There are also other studies that employed self-regulation in the classroom
setting and tested the procedures on their effectiveness on students’ performance in
different tasks and subject areas.
The study by Glaser and Brunstein (2007) examined whether self-regulation
procedures would increase the effectiveness of a writing strategies training designed to
improve 4th graders' (N = 113) composition skills. The strategy training included
methods of direct instruction and cognitive modeling as well as phases of guided and
independent practice to help students acquire effective strategies (e.g., the widely used
story grammar strategy) for planning and redrafting stories. Students who were taught
composition strategies in conjunction with self-regulation procedures were compared
with (a) students who were taught the same strategies but received no instruction in self-
regulation and (b) students who received didactic lessons in composition. Both at
posttest and at maintenance (5 weeks after the instruction), strategy plus self-regulation
students wrote more complete and qualitatively better stories than students in the 2
comparison conditions. They also displayed superior performance at a transfer task
requiring students to recall essential parts of an orally presented story.
The study of Azevedo and Cromley (2004) examined the effectiveness of self-
regulated learning (SRL) training in facilitating college students' learning with
hypermedia. The training included planning (planning, subgoals, prior knowledge
activation), monitoring (feeling of knowing, judgment of learning, self-questioning,
content evaluation, identifying the adequacy of information), strategies (selecting new
informational source, summarization, rereading, and knowledge elaboration), task
difficulty and demands (time and effort planning, task difficulty, and control of
context), and interest. Undergraduate students were randomly assigned to either a
training condition or a control condition and used a hypermedia environment to learn
about the circulatory system. Students in the self-regulation group were given a 30-min
training session on the use of specific, empirically based self-regulation variables
designed to foster their conceptual understanding; control students received no training.
Pretest, posttest, and verbal protocol data were collected from both groups. The SRL
condition facilitated the shift in learners' mental models significantly more than did the
control condition; verbal protocol data indicated that this was associated with the use of
the SRL variables taught during training.
The study by Fuchs et al. (2003) assessed the contribution of self-regulated
learning strategies, when combined with problem-solving transfer instruction, on 3rd-
graders' mathematical problem solving. SRL incorporated goal setting and self-
evaluation. Problem-solving transfer instruction taught problem-solution methods, the
meaning of transfer, and four superficial-problem features that change a problem
without altering its type or solution. The problem-solving transfer also prompted
metacognitive awareness to transfer. The effectiveness of transfer plus SRL was
contrasted with the transfer treatment alone and to teacher-designed instruction for 16
weeks. Students were pre- and posttested on problem-solving tests and responded to a
posttreatment questionnaire tapping self-regulation processes. SRL positively affected
performance.
A local study by Dedel (2002) taught students in an experimental group different
strategies like orientation, planning, action, and checking (OPAC) strategies to enhance
students' problem-solving skills and conceptual understanding in teaching selected
topics in mechanics. Although the study did not explicitly mention that the OPAC
strategies are self-regulation in itself. The strategies are similar with conceptualizations
on the components of self-regulation. Consistent with the findings of other research, the
OPAC problem-solving strategy used in physics instruction significantly enhanced
students' achievement in terms of problem-solving skills and conceptual understanding.
Developing self-regulation among students can be integrated in the teaching and
learning process. Certain classroom activities that involve the active participation of
students can help them develop self-regulation. For example, in a mathematics class
where students learn concepts of fraction, identify similar and dissimilar fraction, add
and subtract factions (see table 1). A group of teachers devised some activities where
self-regulation is tapped in different subject areas (Tables 1 to 3).
Table 1
Self-regulation Activities in a Third Grade Mathematics Class
Self-regulation Student and Teacher Tasks
component
Goal-setting Students will verbalize at the start of the lesson what will be
their specific goals for the topic on fraction.
Time management Students create a daily schedule and express in fraction how
much time is devoted for specific activities.
Learning strategies Students are taught with strategies in identifying the Least
Common Denominator (LCD).
Self-evaluation Students solve board work and let the other students evaluate of
the answers are correct. The other students also point out where
the mistake is.
Seeking help or Students are paired and they test each other how well they add
information and subtract fractions. They teach each other the correct answers
for the items missed.
Motivational beliefs Students whose works shows exemplary and acceptable
proficiency are posted on the board.
Table 2
Self-regulation Activities in a Second Year High School Class on Anatomy

component
Goal-setting Students list down the future benefits of knowing the parts of
the different body systems. What will the good consequences if
they have mastered the labels for the parts.
Time management Students allot specific time of their day to restudy and memorize
the parts presented in class.
Learning strategies Students list down different memory strategies to easily
remember the parts of an organ or body system.
Self-evaluation The students once in a while are reviewed if they can recall the
parts of a specific organ.
Seeking help or Students will go to the library and seek other references to
information determine the complete parts of the organ rather than relying on
a single reference.
Motivational beliefs After taking the test, students are given feedback that they can
still make it for the next test.
Table 3
Self-regulation Activities in a Fourth Grade Class on Reading

component
Goal-setting Students aim to finish reading a children’s novel (ex. Harry
Potter) within two weeks.
Time management Students are required to read a children’s novel and time
themselves how long they finish a chapter with 8,000 words.
They will constantly time themselves each chapter to monitor if
they are improving.
Learning strategies Students are asked by the teacher once in a while to report the
events that they read already in the novel to check their pace and
understanding. They are taught specific reading strategies such
as skimming, scanning etc.
Self-evaluation They stop after each paragraph and check if they understand
what they are reading. They will reread in case they did not
fully understand a part of the text.
Seeking help or Other students share the strategies they use to read the text with
information better comprehension. Other students will be encouraged to try
the strategies.
Motivational beliefs Students with good book reports will be given awards. Students
will be given a selection on which book to read and select the
ones that they will be interested on.
Why Assess Self-regulated Learning in Schools?
It is important to assess student self-regulation in the school setting under two

accounts. First, most schools based major decisions and classroom interventions on
results of achievement, aptitude, and diagnostic tests that are based on ability of
students. It assumed that these abilities are gained overtime as a result of instruction.
The problem with this issue is the representativeness of the test items in the form of
instruction that has taken place. Most of the time, there is mismatch between the
approach and philosophy used in teaching and learning inside the classroom and the
kind of assessment that will take place. Traditional standardized tests are commonly
used to assess if students have learned from instruction. There is mismatch when the
classroom instruction is based on contemporary constructivist approach to teaching
which is not captured by traditional paper and pencil tests. Second, most of the
assessment of learning is focused as an outcome and not as a process. Traditional paper
and pencil tests such as an achievement test is usually administered towards the end of
the school year that assumes to measure the collective learning of students overtime.
Much of the concern is the outcome of learning and there are no specific steps to assess
what went on during the learning process. There should be subsequent assessment that
takes place in the classroom while students are learning. Third, most of the assessment
is focused on ability as a construct and not on certain cognitive and strategic processes
of students thinking. If there are such assessments on the affective domain, it is
concentrated on personality and vocational interests. This is brought about by the
paradigm and focus of homeroom and other guidance programs in the grade school and
high school. Because of the nature of these assessment orientations, schools fail to
determine what is currently going in the students learning process. Much of the concern
is fast tracking the students and not on the interventions that could be done while
students are learning. Given these scenario, aspects of students learning process such as
self-regulation should be included as part of the assessment package given to students.
Self-regulation can be assessed both as an outcome and process. As an outcome, there
are available assessment tools that provide a rating on the extent of student self-
regulation. As a process there are certain techniques that teachers can use while
conducting instruction such as think aloud techniques (see Pressley & Afflerbach,
1995), error detection tasks (see Baker & Zimlin, 1989), and observation of
performance (see Turner, 1995).
Certain protocol techniques will be described that can be helpful in assessing
academic self-regulation in the classroom context. These assessment techniques are
classified under seven protocols: Questionnaires, structured interview, teacher
judgments, think aloud techniques, error detection tasks, trace methodologies, and
observation of performance. These classification are based on Winne and Perry’s (2005)
assessment of self-regulation as aptitude and event.
Before using any of the protocols in assessing self-regulation, users must be
critical of the methods and rigors on how the tools were established that concerns their
validity and reliability. The process of establishing the tests and scales first involve the
construction and selection of items based on a framework, an empirical model, or
grounded on some empirical data. The underlying factors of the items are then explored
using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) techniques. The underlying factors are further
tested by using a more rigorous method called Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). On
some instances the test developer may opt to use a different approach such as the Item
Response Theory (IRT). In this approach items are good if they have acceptable item
characteristic curves based on the logit measures. In such cases items with good fit
(Mean Square within 0.8 to 1.2, z standard score of below 2.00), high point biserial
correlations (indicative of item discrimination for a one-parameter Rasch model),
adequate item information functions, and devoid of item differential functioning (free of
bias). On the second criteria, responses to items should indicate acceptable reliability or
consistencies. Most commonly internal consistencies of test are established using
Cronbach’s alpha, split-half, or interitem correlation. Tests and scales of self-regulation
evidence to have acceptable validity and reliability are safe to use.
Protocols in Assessing Self-regulation
Questionnaires. Self-regulation questionnaires are composed of a set of a

sample items that are responded numerically. The items are classified under certain
factors of self-regulation. A score is derived per factors and interpreted whether it is
above or below norms. Examples of questionnaires that are commonly used in literature
that measures self-regulation are the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI)
(Weinstein, 1987), Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich,
Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991), and the Metacognitive Strategies Inventory (MAI)
(Scraw & Dennison, 1994). The LASSI and MSLQ are standardized and available in
the market. The MAI is have consistent psychometric properties and across adults in
different samples. The issue with these questionnaires is that the items typify strategies
and scenarios within a western context. In the Philippine setting, Magno (2009)
developed the Academic Self-regulated Learning Scale (A-SRL-S). The A-SRL-S was
based on the model derived by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986; 1988). The A-
SRL-S measures students’ academic self-regulation under seven subscales: Memory
strategy, goal-setting, self-evaluation, seeking assistance, environmental structuring,
responsibility, and organizing. What is new in the A-SRL-S is the responsibility
subscale that is not present in the foreign scales. The subscale on responsibility typifies
the high regard of a Filipino student for their studies. The items on this subscales
reflects prioritizing one’s studies, concern for tasks related in school, and immediately
attending to school related tasks. The subscales of the A-SRL-S was confirmed in a
measurement model with good fit (RMR=.02, GFI=.94, CFI=.91). The items showed
high internal consistencies (refer to Table 4). Convergent validity was also established
where all factors increase with each other (refer to table 5). Apart from the foreign
questionnaires the A-SRL-S was analyzed using an IRT approach, specifically using the
one-parameter Rasch model. The items also showed adequate fit using the one-
parameter Rasch model with acceptable item characteristic curves (ICC’s).
Table 4
Properties of the A-SRL-S
Subscales M Variance Cronbach’s No. CFA Person Item

Alpha of Standardized Reliability Reliability
items Parameter
estimate
Memory Strategy 2.53 .81 .82 14 .70*** .76 .99
Goal-setting 2.73 .99 .87 5 .54*** .42 .80
Self-evaluation 2.84 .70 .84 12 .69*** .80 .84
Seeking assistance 3.12 .68 .74 8 .62*** .30 .97
Environmental 2.82 .94 .73 5 .51*** .34 .95
structuring
Responsibility 2.95 .69 .75 5 .68*** .27 .97
Organizing 3.26 .69 .78 6 .65*** .71 .77
***p<.001
Table 5
Convergent Validity of the Subscales of the A-SRL-S
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

(1) Goal-setting ---
(2) Memory Strategy 0.52*** ---
(3) Self-evaluation 0.32*** 0.55*** ---
(4) Seeking Assistance 0.27*** 0.39*** 0.49*** ---
(5) Environmental Structuring 0.25*** 0.27*** 0.35*** 0.31*** ---
(6) Responsibility 0.28*** 0.43*** 0.48*** 0.44*** 0.41*** ---
(7) Organizing 0.42*** 0.43*** 0.35*** 0.41*** 0.38*** 0.51*** ---
***p<.05
The advantage of using questionnaires is the economical way of administration,

scoring, and interpretation. Questionnaires can be administered to numerous students at
a single time. This ensures consistency in the instructions given for respondents and
control for the testing conditions. Scores can be obtained by computing for means on
the certain factors. The numerical scores are easily interpreted by constructing norms
for groups of standards for interpreting scores. Generally high scores indicate the
optimum presence of self-regulation characteristics measured and low scores indicate
less of the characteristic. Interventions may be suggested for students with low A-SRL-
S scores.
Structured Interview. Assessing self-regulation through structured interview

was pioneered by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986; 1988). They devised an
interview called the self-regulated Learning Interview Schedule (SRLIS) composed of
14 self-regulation strategies under six different learning contexts. If a response occurred
that do not belong in the 14 categories, it is classified under a new category (others).
Table 6
Self-regulated Learning Strategies Based on the SRLIS
SRL Category Example of response

Self-evaluation I check my solution in a math problem if it is correct.
Organizing and I make an outline of information presented in long
Transforming paragraphs from various references.
Goal-setting and I study one week before the schedule of the exam.
planning
Seeking information I search the internet for references that I can use when
searching for information.
Keeping records and I keep all my notes for future reference.
monitoring
Environmental I go to a quiet place where I can study well.
structuring
Self-consequences If I got low on a test, I make sure to study well for the next
test.
Rehearsing and I keep on repeating the important facts learned in class so
memorizing that I will not forget about it.
Seeking social If I could not figure out how to solve a math problem I ask
assistance the help of my teacher.
Reviewing records I make sure that I review my books and notes to prepare for
an exam.
The responses in the interview can be quantitatively scored in three ways:

Strategy use, strategy frequency, and strategy consistency. The first two ways are
scored by coders and the last is estimated y students. Strategy use is scored
dichotomously as having occurred or not in the six contexts. Strategy frequency is
counting the number of times a strategy is mentioned. Strategy frequency is rated by
students based on the frequency of using the mentioned strategies (1=seldom,
2=occasionally, 3=frequently, 4=most of the time). The instrument demonstrated
discriminant validity across high and low ability groups.
In subsequent studies of Zimmerman, eight prompts were provided that
measures each self-regulation strategy: Rehearsing and memorizing, organizing and
transforming, seeking information, self-evaluation, goal-setting and planning, keeping
records and monitoring, self-consequencing, and environmental structuring. These
prompts were adapted by Magno (2008) for the Filipino context. The responses were
scored by the respondents using strategy frequency.
Table 7
Adapted SRLIS for Filipino College Students
Self-regulation Component Prompt

Rehearsing and memorizing Assume your teacher is discussing with your class the history of
the Philippine revolution. Your teacher says that you will be
tested on the topic the next day. What method do you use to help
you learn and remember the information being discussed?
Organizing and Assume your teacher asked your class to write a short paper on a
transforming topic on the history of the organization in school that you belong
to. Your score on this paper will affect your course card grade. In
such cases, what method in particular will help you plan and
write your paper?
Seeking information Teachers usually expect much accuracy with students’ math
home work. Many of these assignments must be completed
without the help of the teacher. What particular method do you
use when you don’t understand a math problem when you’re
already at home?
Self-evaluation When completing homework assignments such as science reports
or English grammar exercises, what method do you use in
particular for checking your work after it is finished?
Goal-setting and planning Most teachers give important tests at the end of the
semester/term, and these tests greatly affect course grades. What
particular method do you use for preparing for these tests?
Keeping records and When taking a test in school, what particular method do you use
monitoring for obtaining as many correct answers as possible?
Self-consequencing Many times students have difficulty completing homework
assignments because there are other more interesting things they
would rather do, such as watching TV, daydreaming, or talking
to friends. What particular method do you use to motivate
yourself to complete your homework under these circumstances?
Environmental structuring Some students find it easier if they can arrange the place where
they study. What particular method do you use for arranging the
place where you study?
The interview is accurate to derive authentic data from students regarding

specific self-regulation strategies they use. When these self-regulation strategies are
verbalized by students, other students can learn and try the strategies elicited. Teachers
can catalogue a list of self-regulation strategies and teach it to future students.
Teacher Judgments. In a subsequent study by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons

(1988), they devised a version of the SRLIS that is used by teaches to assess their
students self-regulation strategies. In the study, 12 items were produced that indicate
students self-regulated learning strategies that is readily observable by teachers.
Students were rated by the teacher for each item using a five-point scale ranging from
never (1) to always (5). The self-regulation components measured are seeking
information, self-evaluation activities, goal-setting and planning, seeking assistance,
organizing and transforming, and intrinsic motivation to learn. When the ratings were
factor analyzed, the 12 items loaded only to three factors. These factors were labeled as
student self-regulated learning, student verbal expressiveness, and student achievement.
Teacher’s judgment about students’ self-regulation strategies can be very
accurate if they are trained to be observant of students’ behavior. Teachers can look at
several situations where self-regulation can occur such as during drills, seat works,
group works, tests, recitations, and even during class discussion.
Think aloud techniques. In think aloud techniques, students report their

thoughts and cognitive processes while performing a task (Erricson, 2006). There are
some studies that made use of the think aloud protocol. For example Greene and
Azevedo (2007) studied learning through a science module about the human circulatory
system. Students were instructed to say everything that they were thinking while
performing the computerized task. Example of prompts for think aloud techniques are:
1. Why do you think it is correct?

2. It is easy for you? Why?
3. What made it difficult?
4. Do you think you can solve it using another technique?
5. How accurate are you with your answer?
6. Is it easy to work with others or better if alone?
The think aloud protocol is advantageous because it does not limit students of
their response on a task. The teacher can detect multiple signs of self-regulation
strategies the students are engaging in. This can help teachers by creating tasks that
would enrich students to develop further their self-regulation skills.
Error Detection Tasks. Error detection tasks are created to assess students’
ability to monitor their performance and evaluate the material exposed to. The ability to
detect errors is a means that a student can exercise metacognitive control because they
should have the ability to correct errors after identifying them. Error detection can be
done by providing an evaluation of errors conducted. Another technique is by
underlining specific spots where the error occurred.
The ability to detect errors is a sign that students have mastered the lesson and
have developed evaluation and monitoring skills.
Trace Methodologies. Traces are observable indicators about cognition that

students create as they engage with a task (Winne, 1982). Traces of student self-
regulation can be assessed by looking at their underlines on texts, highlights on
particular information in a text, writes notes in the margin of reading materials, and
writes mnemonic devises on the text. These traces indicate that students are isolating
information from the rest of the material that they see as important. They serve as cues
for students to easily locate and remember needed information. Notes on the margin
provide students the needed cue to easily comprehend their method of studying the
material. Some notes may also signal specific strategies they use to remember important
points of the material.
Trace methodologies help teachers determine what strategies students use to

learn a material. This can easily identify and predict students who would be successful
in a task or not.
Observation of performance. The most common method of assessing self-

regulation is constant observation of students. The teacher can create specific classroom
scenarios and activities that tap self-regulation. During these tasks the teacher notes
students’ behavior that may indicate self-regulation. Some students are asked how they
arrived with their answer, what technique did they use to remember information easily,
what strategy was used to understand the problem.
There are varied ways on how self-regulation can be implemented and assessed
inside the classroom. Developing self-regulation takes one to believe that it is necessary
as a learning process in order to work well. Initial steps to assess and implement self-
regulation inside the classroom would be difficult especially if students are not used to
it. But once the teacher develops the skill to use it inside the classroom, students would
well develop the skills. It should be realized that self-regulation is necessary in order for
students to be successful in their performance on academic tasks. If a teacher wants and
desires to develop lifelong learners, developing the learners’ self-regulation skills is a
key to this success.
References
Azevedo, R. & Cromley, J. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate

students' learning with hypermedia?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96,
523-535.
Baker, L., & Zimlin, L. (1989). Instructional effects on children’s use of two levels of
standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 81, 340-346.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive

theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D.H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and
intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 41, 586-598.
Blakey, E. & Spencer, S. (1990). Developing metacognition. ERIC Digest, ED327218.
Carver, C. S., 7 Scheier, M. F. (2005). On the structure of behavioral self-regulation. In

M. Bokaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of Self-regulation (pp.
42-80). New York: Academic Press.
Collins, J. L. (1982, March). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior. Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New York.
Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom
learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-108.
Corsale, K. & Ornstein, P. A. (1971). Developmental changes in children’s use of

semantic information in recall. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30,
231-245.
de la Fuente Arias, J., Justicia, F., & Gracia Berben, A. (2006). An interactive model of
regulated teaching and self-regulated learning. The International Journal of
Learning, 12, 217-226.
Dedel, E. (2002). The effect of orientation, planning, action and checking (OPAC)
problem-solving strategy on students' problem-solving skills and conceptual
understanding. Unpublished masters’ thesis, De La Salle University, Manila,
Philippines.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Protocol analysis and expert thought: Concurrent verbalizations

of thinking during experts’ performance on representative tasks. In K. A.
Ericsson, N. Charnesse, P. J. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman, (Eds.). Handbook of
expertise and expert performance (pp. 223-241). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Fiske, S.T & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.) New York: Mc-Graw Hill.
Fok, A. & Watkins, D. (2007). Does a critical constructivist environment encourage a

deeper approach to learning?. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 16, 1-10.
Fuchs, et al. (2003). Enhancing third-grade students'mathematical problem solving with

self-regulated learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 306-
315.
Glaser, C. & Brunstein, J. (2007). Improving fourth-grade students' composition skills:

Effects of strategy instruction and self-regulation procedures. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99, 297–310.
Kluwe, R. H. (1982). Cognitive knowledge and execution control: Metacognition. In D.

R. Griffin (ed.). Animal mind – human mind (pp. 201-224). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Lopez, D.F., Little, T. D., Oettingen, G., & Baltes, P. B. (1998). Self-regulation and
school performance: Is there optimal level of action-control?. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 54-75.
Magno, C. (2007, May). Constructivism: Becoming self-regulated learners. Seminar

conducted at Dominican School, Manila, Philippines.
Magno, C. (2008). Comparing models for generating a system of activation and

inhibition of self-regulated learning. An unpublished doctoral dissertation, De
La Salle University, Manila, Philippines.
Magno, C., & Lajom, J. (2008). Self-regulation, self-efficacy, metacognition, and

achievement goals in high school and college adolescents. Philippine Journal of
Paris, S. G. & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated

learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89-101.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of
constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rock, M. L. (2005). Use of strategic self-monitoring to enhance academic engagement,

productivity, and accuracy of students with and without exceptionalities.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 3-18.
Schneider, W. (1985). Developmental trends in the metamemory-memory behavior

relationship: An integrative review. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon,
& T. G. Waller (Eds.). Metacognition, Cognition, and Human Performance, Vol.
1 (pp. 57 – 109). New York: Academic.
Schraw, G. & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-473.
Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children's development: A

self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 93-105.
Schunk, D. H. (1983). Developing children's self-efficacy and skills: The roles of social
comparative information and goal setting. Contemporary Educational
Schunk, D. H. (1984). The self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior.

Educational Psychologist, 19, 199-218.
Schunk, D.H., & Zimmerman, B.J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and

performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shah, J. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2005). Aspects of goal networks: Implications for
self-regulation. In M. Bokaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of
Self-regulation (pp. 86-108). New York: Academic Press.
Turner, J. C. (1995). The influence of classroom context on young children’s motivation

for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 410-441.
Weinstein, C. E. (1987). LASSI user’s manual. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.
Winne, P. H. (1982). Minimizing the block box problem to enhance the validity of
theories about Instructional effects. Instructional Science, 11, 13-28.
Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational

Psychologist, 30, 173-187.
Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 89, 1-14.
Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2005). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Bokaerts,

P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of Self-regulation (pp. 532-564).
New York: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. I., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (1996). Developing self-regulated

learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Zimmerman, B. J. & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy

model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80,
284-290.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into

Practice, 41, 64-72.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2005). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In

M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation
(pp. 13-35). New York: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview

for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American
Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
An Assessment Toolkit
Paz Diaz
Roosevelt College Systems, Cainta
"By mid-way through their first semester, the bases students used to
judge their potential success had changed. Instead of citing challenges
they had faced and assessing how they had performed, they were most
influenced by how they compared with their peers. Some comparisons
were based on how fast they could learn new material or complete
assignments.”
Mica A. Hutchison-Green (2008)
What is Assessment For?
Are we assessing students against one another or against their own capabilities
or against certain standards set by educational authorities? Studies (Green et al, 2008)
have shown that students begin to learn early on to judge their potential success not by
citing challenges they had faced and assessing how they had performed, but mostly how
they compared with their peers or how fast they could learn new material or complete
assignments.
Green et al. (2008) suggest that instructors should explain to students that how
long it takes them to solve a problem is less important than eventually understanding
and solving it. They also suggest that teachers might design group work assignments
that let each student contribute to the learning of the others. One suggestion is that
“Educators should try, early on, to build students’ self-efficacy by giving them the
chance to master particular skills…” and that “instructors need to give students clear
and concise feedback” to improve learning and not necessarily to compare themselves
with others.
Ultimately, educators should not simply make students memorize specific facts
and to judge themselves by how much they have memorized (although that is, of course,
the basis of learning) but to give students a more accurate way of measuring their
successes and failures. By ensuring that they are using appropriate experience to shape
their confidence in lifelong success, studies suggest that teachers can improve students’
attitudes on retention through the excitement of learning.
The examples in this workshop have been gathered from best practices from
numerous sources, the sites and references are found at the end of this handout.
First off, some principles of authentic assessment
1. Authentic assessment methods correspond as closely as possible to real world

experience
2. Criteria for authentic assessment must be clear and performance behavior

assessment should not be overly subjective
3. Using rubrics is particularly useful in assessing criteria that are complex and
subjective
4. Authentic assessment includes (a) the teacher observing the student in the process of
working on something real, (b) providing feedback, (c) monitoring the student's use
of the feedback, and (d) adjusting instruction and evaluation accordingly.
Action or Conative Modes in Learning
Kolbe (1990) identifies four stages in human learning:

 Fact Finding (instincts to probe, refine and simplify);
 Following Through (instincts to organize data, reform and adapt);
 Quick Start-up (instincts to improvise, revise and stabilize); and
 Implementing or acting (instincts to construct, renovate, and envision).
In Kolbe’s formulation, it is the combination of the striving instinct, reason, and

targeted goals that results in different levels of commitment and action.
When a teacher prepares assessment exercises, he or she could follow Kolbe’s stages of
learning:
1. Ask for facts; be sure about facts (otherwise an experiment can blow in the student’s
face)
2. Follow through; make students organize, reorganize, reform and adapt data or facts
they have learned; make mind maps, outlines, draw figures, sing songs, assess cases
3. Hands-on Demonstrations; return-shows, re-write classical texts, field trips,
interviews, find exemplars in the community, find masters who are skillful,
undertake structured learning experiences
4. Carry out projects (make students present dramas, personal experiences, write new
poems and personal songs, translate materials to hip-hop sounds
Activity 1: Assess the following assessment tools and techniques you can use in the
classroom
1. Individual Notes: Most important point learned today

2. Chain Notes: Student build on what others say as the note paper is passed around or
written by groups
3. Matrix Notes: Labels previously prepared by the teacher and students fill in blank
matrix cells
4. One-sentence summary
5. Layman’s translation of a just-learned technical or scientific concept
6. Draw it
7. Outline it
8. Student-generated exam questions
Activity 2: Assess the following assessment tools and techniques you can use
outside the classroom
Keeping a Project Journal:
1. What is a Project Journal useful for? Assess the following:
(a) Remembering
(b) Evaluating the project
(c) Evaluating team members
(d) Protecting oneself
2. What to write in the Project Journal. Evaluate the following:
(a) First, record what you saw and heard. Try to capture the event exactly—word
for word, scene for scene, with no embellishment or evaluation on your part.
"Just the facts man, just the facts."
(b) Second, add your interpretation and understanding. If the meaning you attach to
the event is different from the exact words and actions you observed, you must
write your interpretation in your journal. You must also consider whether this
interpretation is yours alone or if others would have the same interpretation.
(c) Third, add your feelings about what has transpired. Yes techies, it is okay to
have feelings about things. Someone has said, "Feelings are facts to those who
have them." Our feelings influence us in the same way our facts do.
(d) Fourth, record your response—what you said or did at the time. Again, note
exactly what you said and did. If you meant to give a different response you
must note that also.
(e) Fifth, note your feelings about your response. Was your response appropriate?
Was it too sharp? Too judgmental? Too passive? Not only is it okay to have
feelings about our responses, it is vital to evaluate them. Our feelings often give
excellent guidance about the appropriateness of our responses.
Activity 3: Invent assessment tools and techniques you can use for social
performance
1. For social goals, focus on the performance of the group

2. Focus on individuals fitting into the group
3. Focus on the group undergoing the following levels of group life:
(a) “Getting to know you”
(b) “What are our rules”
(c) “Who will lead and who will follow”
(d) “Cliques” and In-groups/Out-groups
(e) “Working together”
(f) “Satisfaction – the group gels”
(g) “Dissatisfaction – the group disintegrates”
(h) “What next?”
Activity 4: Invent assessment tools and techniques you can use for successful self-
direction
1. Backward planning – beginning with desired end results and working on required
procedures to meet those results
2. Task Analysis – identifying the skills and knowledge required to learn or perform a
specific task to arrive at the end result
3. Back-home action plan
Activity 5: Develop incentives that will motivate learning
Teachers who repeatedly reward student for completing easy tasks results in the student
feeling less able and being less motivated. Even rewarding excellence with honor rolls
and status may be detrimental if students restrict their interests or avoid hard courses to
keep their grade averages high. It is indeed complicated, but carefully selected
incentives can still motivate students to excel in learning.
1. Motivational factors at the BEGINNING: When learner enters and starts learning
ATTITUDES: Toward the environment, teacher, subject matter, and self
NEEDS: The basic need within the learner at the time of learning
Suggest Motivational Strategies:
2. Motivational Factors DURING learning: When learner is involved in the body or

main content of the learning process.
STIMULATION: The stimulation processes affecting learner during the learning
experience.
AFFECT: The emotional experience of the learner while learning.
3. Motivational Factors at the END of learning period: When learner is completing the
learning process.
COMPETENCE: The competence value for the learner that is a result of the
learning behaviors.
REINFORCEMENT: The reinforcement value attached to the learning experience,
for the learner.
Activity 6: Postcards
1. Geography Lessons
2. Celebrations
This task can be produced under the following conditions:

 In class, individually
 In class, by partners or triads
 Outside class, individually as in a homework
Define the situation

Make the directions
The completed assessment task can demonstrate the following qualities:
 relevant and detailed content organized to support a point of view

 structure and organization
 style appropriate for nominated audience and purpose
 control of written language
Achievement Objective Learning Outcomes … Students are able to…

Being Assessed
Transactional Writing Publish clear concise messages on postcards describing
activities, feelings and a place visited during the holidays.
Presenting Use visual features to communicate ideas using layout, illustration
by hand or computer generated.
Processes
Thinking Critically Identify and discuss meanings in written texts, drawing on
personal background, knowledge, and experiences.
Processing Information Identify, retrieve, record, and present coherent information, using
more than one source and type of technology, and describing the
process used.
Supporting Achievement
Objectives
Viewing Respond to meanings and ideas in the verbal and visual features
of postcards Shows awareness of how words and images can be
combined.
Activity 7: Watching a specific TV show and writing feature articles about it
Example: Family life in the Philippines

 Watching TV shows about families, including cartoons and sitcoms
 Extracting evidence from texts – electronic and print
 Taking notes independently
 Working in collaborative groups
 Writing for a specified audience and purpose
 Identifying and using the conventions of feature articles
Introduce facts sheet to build students' knowledge of current family trends in the
Philippines.
Instruct them about what to take note of or the angle that they want to write about.
Alternatively, they can dramatize, role play, or do a “before-and after” scene.
How will you assess the selected activity?
Activity 8: Determine the uses, pros, and cons of the following sample assessment
activities. These are not mutually exclusive and can be mixed and matched by the
teacher depending on the topics or situations inside or outside the classroom.
 Team Quiz: Teacher does a “Data Dump” of factual information.

Teacher stops the lecture at intervals, allowing teams of participants to come up
with questions on the materials covered so far and to conduct a short quiz contest.
This lecture game is especially useful for presenting significant amounts of
technical information or conceptual content.
 Table Talk: Teacher introduces two contrasting approaches. Participants
collect information about the similarities and differences between these two
approaches. Teacher organizes, summarizes, and clarifies the information.
 Superlatives: Interrupt your presentation at the end of each logical unit
and ask teams to identify the most important, the most disturbing, the most
surprising, or the most complex idea presented so far. This interactive lecture format
is especially suitable when participants know how to take notes and discuss them. It
is appropriate for presentations that can be divided into 7 – 10 minute sections.
 Questionnaire Analysis: Participants respond to a questionnaire and
compute their scores. Teacher helps them to interpret the scores and learn more
about the topic. This lecture game is especially useful when the instructional content
involves values, attitudes, personality characteristics, or preferences that can be
explored through a questionnaire.
 Question Cards: After your presentation, ask teams of participants to
write 20 short-answer questions based on the content. Collect all questions, shuffle
the cards, and conduct a quiz program.
 Press Conference: Participants organize themselves into teams and
write a set of questions on different subtopics. Teacher responds to the questions in
a press-conference format.
 Interactive Story: Teacher narrates a case incident in the form of a
story. During pauses at critical junctures, participants figure out what happened,
why it happened, or what should happen next.
 Intelligent Interruptions: Teacher stops the lecture at random intervals
and selects a participant. This participant asks a question, makes a comment, or
challenges a statement as a way of demonstrating that he or she has been
intelligently processing the presentation. This lecture game is especially useful
when the instructional content is informational.
 Idea Map: While Teacher lectures, participants take notes using an idea
mapping approach. At logical junctures, the lecture stops to permit teams of
participants to consolidate their idea maps.
 Glossary: The Teacher identifies a key term related to the training topic.
Teams of participants come up with a definition of the term. The teacher collects
these definitions, inserts the correct definition among them, and plays a
“dictionary”-type guessing game.
 Fish Bowl: Teacher conducts a coaching session with an individual
participant. Other participants observe and learn vicariously.
 Fictional or Real Case Study: Teacher tells a story that illustrates

different steps in a process. Teams of participants create and present their own
stories. Cases serve as springboards to student-designed investigations.
 Essence: Participants write several summaries of a lecture, repeatedly
reducing its length. This interactive lecture is particularly useful with factual,
conceptual, or informational content that can be effectively summarized.
 Egg-Hunt / Web Quest: Teacher uses examples to explain several
related concepts. Later, participants generate examples to demonstrate their mastery.
 Debrief: A brief and powerful experiential activity is followed by a
debriefing discussion to elicit and share useful insights. This lecture game is
especially useful when the instructional content involves counter-intuitive
principles, attitudes, and values.
 Crossword Lecture: Participants receive a crossword puzzle that
contains questions to test the mastery of the major learning points in the
presentation. During puzzle-soling interludes, participants pair up and solve as much
of the puzzle as possible. This lecture game is suited for any type of content that can
be summarized by a series of one-word-answer question (which are converted into
crossword puzzle clues).
 Bingo: Teacher hands out bingo cards to participants. Teacher then
delivers parts of a lecture interspersed with short-answer questions. Participants play
bingo by identifying the answers on their cards.
 Best Summary: Each participant prepares a summary of the main points
at the end of a presentation. Teams of participants switch their summaries and select
the best summary from each set. This lecture game is especially useful for
informational or conceptual content.
 Social Responsibility: understanding the past and creating preferred
futures. Students understand that investigating the past and reflecting on the present
are essential to understanding self and others and creating preferred futures.
 True or False: Teacher displays a series of statements about the topic
and asks participants to decide whether each is true or false. Teacher then provides
background information related to each statement.
 Predictions and Interpretations: Give them real data, as a graph for a
short question or to plot themselves as part of a longer exercise. Have them
summarize and interpret any patterns they can find.
 Making calculations and estimations: Give the students some real data,
and make them summarize the data mathematically before moving on to
interpretation.
 Brainstorming: Especially handy for assessing prior knowledge of a
topic, this can be done quickly by individuals (have them write their ideas on an
index card) or groups working together.
 Tying ideas together: After covering several topics, let the students try
and synthesize big ideas from them before you start to do so through lecture. More
straightforward syntheses can be done with short questions, or if they need time for
reflection, group projects.
 Applying what has just been learned in class or reading to solve a problem: It's
very important to make sure that students can connect abstract ideas with specific
real examples, especially slightly complicated ones.
 Collecting student responses: Think about how you will end an interactive
activity, gathering student responses and providing, when appropriate, a
synthesizing discussion or follow-up assignment. The student responses also
provide useful feedback about what students have learned.
 Interactive lectures are classes in which the instructor breaks the lecture at least
once per class to have all of the students participate in an activity that lets them
work directly with the material. These activities allow students to apply what they
have learned earlier or give them a context for upcoming lecture material.
 Interactive Segments: There is a wide range of possibilities for interactive
activities that can be interspersed with lecture segments. Any of these general
suggestions for interactive segments could be developed into short think-pair-share
questions or activities
 Predicting/Evaluating: Used to help students activate prior knowledge.
K - Recall what the group KNOWs about the subject.
W - Determine what the group WANTs to learn.
L - Identify what the group LEARNed as they read.
H - HOW the group can learn more
 Visualizing: Used to see the description of physical structures, places, spatial
relationships, concrete objects, abstract concepts, or visual images. Detailed
diagrams provide more formal options of visualization
 Creating thumbnails: Thumbnails represent scaled down versions of a final
composition. For a project where the final size is 9" x 12", thumbnails might be
approximately 2" x 2-2/3", large enough to show some detail, but small enough to
work quickly.
 Sketching: Sketches can be fun and or loose indicators that don't require great
artistic ability to describe a physical phenomenon or an abstract learning
 Use of Models – Model Types: Conceptual, physical demonstrations, mathematical
and statistical, and visualization. Be aware of technical and pedagogical
considerations when using models
 Think–Pair–Share: A problem is posed. Students think about it alone for five
minutes or less, and then pair up to discuss their views. The pairs share their
conclusions with the rest of the class.
 Jigsaw: Choose learning material that can be divided into parts, like an experiment,
a list, or several articles on a similar topic. Divide students into groups equaling the
number of parts. Ask each group to read, discuss, and learn the material. Next, form
jigsaw learning groups composed of one member from each of the initial groups.
Each new group will contain an expert on each part of the material, so that together
the group will learn all of the material. Reconvene the class to go over the material.
You may also ask the jigsaw groups to answer questions based on their accumulated
knowledge.
 Roundtable: Students divide into groups to answer a query. Each group is given
only one pen and one piece of paper. Each group member in turn writes down his or
her response on the paper. The results are examined and placed on an overhead for
class discussion. There is more accountability for each student if he or she has to
explain the written remarks.
 Voting: A show of hands to keep students involved and to determine what the class
believes as a group. This exercise works well in large classes. It refocuses the
students' attention. It can clarify larger issues into smaller subsets. It requires
students to engage the material. Start off with a general query, and then explore the
subject further.
 End of Class Query: In the last three minutes of class ask the students to write on
¼ sheets of paper anonymously two things they learned and what questions remain.
 Trade a Problem: Divide the class into teams and have each team construct review
questions. Each question is written on an index card (each team can have a different
color). The answer to each question is written on the back of the card. The teams
then trade cards. Without looking at the answers, one member of the team reads
each question. The team decides by consensus on an answer. If the team's answer
does not agree with the original answer, they should add their answer on the back of
the card as an alternative. Cards continue to be traded. The teacher may then want to
conduct a whole-class discussion on the questions with more than one answer.
 Concept Map: Divide the class into groups and give each group a pen and a large
piece of paper or a transparency. Each group should write down the topic being
studied in the center of the paper inside a circle or rectangle, then place key
examples or related concepts inside smaller shapes and connect them to the main
topic. There are many possible models of the relationship among concepts, i.e.
chains, spiders, or more complicated ones.
 Minute Paper: Pause after 15 minutes of class and ask students to take a minute to
write a two-sentence summary of what he or she has learned so far. Depending on
how much time you want to devote to this, the students could pair up and help each
other better understand the material for a few minutes or a few could report to the
class.
Activity 9: Managing the Class for Authentic Assessment
1. What are the characteristics of a class where the teacher uses authentic assessment
techniques?
2. What will you do if other teachers claim your class is too noisy and the students are
enjoying too much?
3. How would you manage such a class?
4. What are the problems and situations you should look out for?
5. What are the difficulties you may run into?
6. How would students react to authentic assessment techniques?
7. What if all students care about are numerical grades?
8. Would students want to undergo these kinds of assessment techniques when all their
parents ask are for them to have high grades, to be in the Honor Roll, or on the other
hand, just pass their classes and obtain a college diploma no matter what?
9. What effects would authentic assessment have on the students’ chances to pass
government regulatory examinations?
10. What effects would authentic assessment have on the students’ chances of finding
jobs after their graduation?
Activity 9: What are Rubrics? What are the Uses of Rubrics? Write Rubrics for
this assignment:
You have asked your students to write a 12- to 15-minute speech addressing the youth
in their school or organization, using the excerpt below from Jose Rizal's The Reign of
Greed, following Aristotle’s rhetorical framework: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. Each
student will deliver the speech before the class.
Where are the youth who will consecrate their golden hours, their
illusions, and their enthusiasms to the welfare of the land? Where are
they who will generously pour out their blood to wash away so much
shame, so much crime, so much abomination? Pure and spotless must be
victim be that the sacrifice may be acceptable! Where are you, youth,
who will embody in yourselves the vigor of life that has left our veins,
the purity of ideas that has been contaminated in our brains, the fire of
enthusiasm that has been quenched in our hearts? We await you, O
youth! Come, for we await you.
Assessment for Learning via Alternative Assessment

Jimelo L. Silvestre-Tipay
De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde
Scenario Analysis
Scenario 1:
A high school English teacher assigns students to read three novels by the same
author and develop a thesis statement about a common theme, consistent character
development, or social commentary in the novels. They must then defend that thesis in a
term paper with references. To set students up for success, the teacher begins by
providing them with a sample of an outstanding paper to read and analyze. The next
day, the class discusses what made the sample outstanding.
As their next assignment, the teacher gives students a sample paper of poor
quality. Again, they analyze and evaluate its features in some detail. Comparing the two
papers, students list essential differences. The class then uses this analysis to
collaboratively decide on the keys to a high-quality paper.
After identifying and defining those keys, the students share in the process of
transforming them into a rubric—a set of rating scales depicting a continuum of quality
for each key. The teacher provides examples of student work to illustrate each level on
the quality continuum.
Only after these specific understandings are in place do students draft their
papers. Then they exchange drafts, analyzing and evaluating one another's work and
providing descriptive feedback on how to improve it, always using the language of the
rubric. If students want descriptive feedback from their teacher on any particular
dimension of quality, they can request and will receive it. The paper is finished when
the student says it is finished. In the end, not every paper is outstanding, but most are of
high quality, and each student is confident of that fact before submitting his or her work
for final evaluation and grading (Stiggins, in press; Scenario 1 adapted by permission).
Scenario 2:
Gail is a 5th grader who gets her math test back with “60 percent” marked at the
top. She knows this means another F. So her losing streak continues, she thinks. She's
ready to give up on ever connecting with math.
But then her teacher distributes another paper—a worksheet the students will
use to learn from their performance on the math test. What's up with this? The
worksheet has several columns. Column one lists the 20 test items by number. Column
two lists what math proficiency each item tested. The teacher calls the class's attention
to the next two columns: Right and Wrong. She asks the students to fill in those
columns with checks for each item to indicate their performance on the test. Gail checks
12 rights and 8 wrong.
The teacher then asks the students to evaluate as honestly as they can why they
got each incorrect item wrong and to check column five if they made a simple mistake
and column six if they really don't understand what went wrong. Gail discovers that
four of her eight incorrect answers were caused by careless mistakes that she knows
how to fix. But four were math problems she really doesn't understand how to solve.
Next, the teacher goes through the list of math concepts covered item by item,
enabling Gail and her classmates to determine exactly what concepts they don't
understand. Gail discovers that all four of her wrong answers that reflect a true lack of
understanding arise from the same gap in her problem-solving ability: subtracting 3-
digit numbers with regrouping. If she had just avoided those careless mistakes and had
also overcome this one gap in understanding, she might have received 100 percent.
Imagine that! If she could just do the test over…
She can. Because Gail's teacher has mapped out precisely what each item on the
test measures, the teacher and students can work in partnership to group the students
according to the math concepts they haven't yet mastered. The teacher then provides
differentiated instruction to the groups focused on their conceptual misunderstandings.
Together the class also plans strategies that everyone can use to avoid simple mistakes.
When that work is complete, the teacher gives students a second form of the same math
test. When Gail gets the test back with a grade of 100 percent, she jumps from her seat
with arms held high. Her winning streak begins (Stiggins, Arter, Chappuis, & Chappuis,
2004; Scenario 2 adapted by permission).
ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING: OUR ASSESSMENT LEGACY
“The real voyage of discovery consists, not of seeking new landscapes but see
through new eyes.”
Accurate Assessments + Effective Use = Students Success
Effect of Previous Practices: rank students on achievement by graduation

New Expectation: Assure competence in Math, Reading, Writing, etc.
Implications?
Assessment and grading procedures had the effect of helping some students
succeed now must serve to help all students succeed.
Testing Explosion
1950s College Admission
1960s District wide Testing
1970s Statewide Testing
1980s National Assessment
1990s International Test
2000s NCLB Every Pupil Test
Mistaken beliefs about how to use assessment to support school improvement:
1. High-stakes tests are good for all students because they motivate learning
2. If I threaten to fail you, it will cause you to try harder
3. If a little intimidation doesn’t work, use a lot of intimidation
4. The way to maximize learning is to maximize anxiety
Remedy: We can’t, won’t shouldn’t stop the high pressure testing; so how do
we help more (all) students expect to succeed?
5. It is the adults who use assessment results to make the most important
instructional decision.
Remedy: Build assessment systems that inform annual decisions, the
ones made every 3-4 minutes and everything in between
PROFOUND MISTAKE
Teachers and leaders don’t need to understand sound assessment practices – the
testing people will take care of us.
COUNTER BELIEF
They do need to understand sound assessment practices.
ASSESSMENT LEGACY
1. Assessment has been far more a matter of compliance than of teaching and
learning
2. Disregard of the information needs students and teachers who make the most
frequent and highest impact decisions
3. Assessment that drive as many students to give up in hopelessness as they spur
to more learning
4. And we fail to provide practitioners with the assessment understandings needed
to help
OUR ASSESSMENT FUTURE
Remedy: Balance day-to-day classroom assessment in support of learning with periodic
assessments verifying learning
Crucial Distinction
Assessment of Learning
How much have students learned as of a particular point in time?
Assessment for Learning
How can we use assessment to help students learn more?
 Students - accurate
Assessments
 Teachers - stronger
desire to learn
 Administrators - increased
achievement
 Policy Makers - accountability
for performers
OVERVIEW
Assessment OF Assessment FOR
Learning Learning
Reason Check status Improve learning Assessment for Learning
To Others about students Students about
inform themselves TEACHER’S ROLE
Focus Standards Enabling Targets 1. Identify the Standard
2. Deconstruct it to enabling
State Standards the targets
(Writing, Math, Reading) 3. Transform to Student-
KNOW friendly version
REASON 4. Create accurate classroom
SKILLS
PRODUCTS
assessments
5. Use with students to track
growth
Example High Stakes External Assessments that
Assessment diagnose needs or STUDENT’S ROLE
help students see
Classroom Tests used themselves improve 1. Strive to understand what
for grading success looks like
Place in An event after A process during 2. Use each assessment to
Time learning Learning understand how to do better
next time
EFFECTS
1. helping students to understand what good work looks like
2. helping them to compare their work with standards of excellence
3. help them understand how to close the gap
STRATEGIES
1. Student-friendly targets from the beginning
2. Models of strong and weak work
3. Continuous descriptive feedback
4. Teach self-assessment and goal setting
5. Teach one facet at a time
6. Teach focused revision
7. Teach self-reflection to track growth
A Time for Action

1. Policy balancing assessment OF and FOR learning
2. Local assessment systems balanced to serve all users
3. Learning community professional development in assessment OF and FOR learning
Alternative Assessment: A Definition
Alternative assessment 1) includes alternatives to standardized or traditional tests

for finding out what a student knows or can do; 2) is intended to show growth and
inform instruction; 3) is criterion-referenced, not norm-referenced test (it compares
performance against established criteria or standards, not against a peer population; 4) is
authentic when it is based on activities that represent actual progress toward a broad
range of instructional goals (not just cognition) and reflects tasks typical of classrooms
and real-life settings; and 5) may include teacher observation, performance-based
assessment, and student self-assessment (Pierce & O’Malley, 1992).
 Alternative assessments are likely to be more authentic or real in nature than

traditional assessments, and therefore, be more closely aligned with the true goals
that teachers have for their students’ learning.
 The primary rationale for an increased use of alternative forms of assessment is that
they are thought better at providing teachers and administrators with a more
complete picture of what each student might know and understand about a science
related skill or concept rather than comparing the knowledge of individuals to a
standardized norm.
 Alternative assessments also are intended to help students begin to self-assess and
take responsibility for their learning
 Alternative assessment uses activities that reveal what students can do with
language, emphasizing their strengths instead of their weaknesses.
 Alternative assessment instruments are not only designed and structured differently
from traditional tests, but are also graded or scored differently.
Because alternative assessment is performance based, it helps instructors emphasize that

the point of language learning is communication for meaningful purposes.
Source (Haury, 1993; Mitchell, 1992; Stiggins, 1991 b; Vandervoort, 1983; Wiggins, 1989, 1992, 1993 b
& d).
Alternative assessment methods work well in learner-centered classrooms

because they are based on the idea that students can evaluate their own learning and
learn from the evaluation process. These methods give learners opportunities to reflect
on both their linguistic development and their learning processes (what helps them learn
and what might help them learn better). Alternative assessment thus gives instructors a
way to connect assessment with review of learning strategies.
Features of alternative assessment:
 Assessment is based on authentic tasks that demonstrate learners' ability to

accomplish communication goals
 Instructor and learners focus on communication, not on right and wrong answers
 Learners help to set the criteria for successful completion of communication
tasks
 Learners have opportunities to assess themselves and their peers
Designing tasks for alternative assessment
Successful use of alternative assessment depends on using performance tasks

that let students demonstrate what they can actually do with language. Fortunately,
many of the activities that take place in communicative classrooms lend themselves to
this type of assessment. These activities replicate the kinds of challenges, and allow for
the kinds of solutions, that learners would encounter in communication outside the
classroom.
The following criteria define authentic assessment activities:
 They are built around topics or issues of interest to the students

 They replicate real-world communication contexts and situations
 They involve multi-stage tasks and real problems that require creative use of
language rather than simple repetition
 They require learners to produce a quality product or performance
 Their evaluation criteria and standards are known to the student
 They involve interaction between assessor (instructor, peers, self) and person
assessed
 They allow for self-evaluation and self-correction as they proceed
Alternative assessment methods
Effective alternative assessment relies on observations that are recorded using

checklists and rubrics.
Checklists
Checklists are often used for observing performance in order to keep track of a
student's progress or work over time. They can also be used to determine whether
students have met established criteria on a task. To construct a checklist, identify the
different parts of a specific communication task and any other requirements associated
with it. Create a list of these with columns for marking yes and no.
For example, using a resource list provided by the instructor, students contact
and interviews a native speaker of the language they are studying, and then report back
to the class. In the report, they are to
 Briefly describe the interviewee (gender, place of birth, occupation, family)

 Explain when and why the interviewee came to the United States
 Describe a challenge the person has faced as an immigrant
 Describe how the person maintains a connection with his/her heritage
Students are told that they will need to speak for a minimum of three minutes
and that they may refer only to minimal notes while presenting. A checklist for
assessing students' completion of the task is shown in the popup window.
Checklists can be useful for classroom assessment because they are easy to
construct and use, and they align closely with tasks. At the same time, they are limited
in that they do not provide an assessment of the relative quality of a student's
performance on a particular task.
Rubrics
Whereas a checklist simply provides an indication of whether a specific

criterion, characteristic, or behavior is present, a rubric provides a measure of quality of
performance on the basis of established criteria. Rubrics are often used with
benchmarks or samples that serve as standards against which student performance is
judged.
Rubrics are primarily used for language tasks that involve some kind of oral or
written production on the part of the student. It is possible to create a generic rubric that
can be used with multiple speaking or writing tasks, but assessment is more accurate
when the instructor uses rubrics that are fitted to the task and the goals of instruction.
There are four main types of rubrics.
1. Holistic rubrics
Holistic scales or rubrics respond to language performance as a whole. Each

score on a holistic scale represents an overall impression; one integrated score is
assigned to a performance. The emphasis in holistic scoring is on what a student does
well.
Holistic rubrics commonly have four or six points. The popup window shows a
sample four-point holistic scale created for the purposes of assessing writing
performance.
Holistic scoring is primarily used for large-scale assessment when a relatively

quick yet consistent approach to scoring is necessary. It is less useful for classroom
purposes because it provides little information to students about their performance.
2. Analytic rubrics
Analytic scales are divided into separate categories representing different

aspects or dimensions of performance. For example, dimensions for writing
performance might include content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics.
Each dimension is scored separately, and then dimension scores are added to determine
an overall score.
Analytic rubrics have two advantages:
 The instructor can give different weights to different dimensions. This allows
the instructor to give more credit for dimensions that are more important to the
overall success of the communication task. For example, in a writing rubric, the
dimension of content might have a total point range of 30, whereas the range for
mechanics might be only 10.
 They provide more information to students about the strengths and weaknesses
of various aspects of their language performance.
However, analytic scoring has also been criticized because the parts do not
necessarily add up to the whole. Providing separate scores for different dimensions of a
student's writing or speaking performance does not give the teacher or the student a
good assessment of the whole of a performance.
3. Primary trait rubrics
In primary trait scoring, the instructor predetermines the main criterion or

primary trait for successful performance of a task. This approach thus involves
narrowing the criteria for judging performance to one main dimension.
For example, consider a task that requires that a student write a persuasive letter
to an editor of the school newspaper. A possible primary trait rubric for this task is
shown in the popup window.
This kind of rubric has the advantage of allowing teachers and students to focus
on one aspect or dimension of language performance. It is also a relatively quick and
easy way to score writing or speaking performance, especially when a teacher wants to
emphasize one specific aspect of that performance.
4. Multi-trait rubrics
The multi-trait approach is similar to the primary trait approach but allows for
rating performance on three or four dimensions rather than just one. Multi-trait rubrics
resemble analytic rubrics in that several aspects are scored individually. However,
where an analytic scale includes traditional dimensions such as content, organization,
and grammar, a multi-trait rubric involves dimensions that are more closely aligned
with features of the task.
For example, on an information-gap speaking task where students are asked to

describe a picture in enough detail for a listener to choose it from a set of similar
pictures, a multi-trait rubric would include dimensions such as quality of description,
fluency, and language control, as the example in the popup window shows.
Five Assessment Myths and Their Consequences

By Rick Stiggins
America has spent 60 years building layer upon layer of district, state, national,
and international assessments at immense cost—and with little evidence that our
assessment practices have improved learning. True, testing data have revealed
achievement problems. But revealing problems and helping fix them are two entirely
different things. As a member of the measurement community, I find this legacy very
discouraging. It causes me to reflect deeply on my role and function. Are we helping
students and teachers with our assessment practices, or contributing to their problems?
My reflections have brought me to the conclusion that assessment’s impact on

the improvement of schools has been severely limited by several widespread but
erroneous beliefs about what role it ought to play. Here are five of the most problematic
of these assessment myths:
Myth 1: The path to school improvement is paved with standardized tests.
Myth 2: School and community leaders know how to use assessment to improve
schools.
Myth 3: Teachers are trained to assess productively.
Myth 4: Adult decisions drive school effectiveness.
Myth 5: Grades and test scores maximize student motivation and learning.
Rick Stiggins is the founder of the Educational Testing Service's Assessment Training Institute, in
Portland, Ore.Vol. 27, Issue 08, Pages 28-29
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/10/17/08stiggins.h27.html?print=1 10/18/2007
Portfolio Assessment: A Celebration of Learning

Laramie R. Tolentino
De La Salle University, Manila
Abstract
This article is a summary of a presentation delivered in the 1st PEMEA Continuing Education
Program which aims to equip teachers with a basic know-how of portfolio assessment to enable
them to effectively assess student learning and evaluate educational outcomes. The seminar
focused on current trends in classroom assessment, particularly the development and use of
portfolios in the basic education level.
Classroom assessment has now become more than a technical process of documenting
student learning. It has transformed into a tool that also enhances the learning process. The
changing focus of classroom assessment is moving towards the evaluation of multiple
intelligences through alternative and authentic methods of assessment (Popham,1999). One of
these methods is portfolio assessment. Portfolios provide this opportunity to evaluate several
abilities exemplified by diverse learners. This characteristic benefits both the teacher and
student. The former is able to gather additional evidences of learning while the latter is given a
chance to monitor oneself by engaging in a self-evaluation process. The use of portfolios is
similar to performance tests since it also allows students to demonstrate their understanding of
the subject matter by showing accomplished works. But unlike performance tests, the time spent
and the outputs included in developing portfolios makes it a richer source of achievement
evidences. Furthermore, the affective aspects of learning such as persistence and effort that
contributed to the completion of a particular product are also assessed in the process of creating
a portfolio.
Characteristics of Student Portfolios
The first image that will come to mind when one hears the word portfolio is a picture of
a portable case containing numerous documents. This is probably why until now most teachers
as well as students perceive this assessment task as a mere clerical requirement of storing
outputs in a clearfolder , this perception is called folder mentality. This mentality explains why
some students equate portfolios with scrapbooking or a simple compiling task. This
misconception occurs when the real use and purpose of portfolios are not well expressed and
known. Portfolio development is definitely more than a simple compilation task for it requires a
purposeful and systematic process of collection and evaluation. This process is geared towards
showing evidences of accomplishments aligned with specified learning targets (McMillan,
2001; Popham, 1999). The collection process including the selection of entries is planned and
most of the time requires a collaborative effort between students, teachers, as well as parents.
Indeed, the portfolio exists to make meaning out of students’ output, to communicate about their
work, and to relate their learning to a larger context (Grace,1992). These make portfolios truly
an authentic assessment task.
Similar with other forms of alternative assessment, the nature of portfolios could either
be product or process oriented. Product-oriented portfolios typically showcase final outputs and
also allow the comparison of student products. However, it shows limited evidence of growth
since it only includes the revised and final outputs. On the other hand, process-oriented
portfolios highlight the evidence of growth since it emphasize the story behind the product. It
encourages students to reflect on the strategies they have used as well as to plan for the future.
The use of portfolio encourages active engagement through reflection and self-assessment, a
process by which the learner develops critical and creative thinking (Kubiszyn & Borich, 2004).
Likewise, it provides a comprehensive documentation of student growth which is useful for
both planning instruction and conducting student evaluation. In addition, the products
showcased in portfolios may also be used to demonstrate learners’ progress and achievements in
specific subject areas and also across the curriculum (Lankes, 1995). This allows the learner to
appreciate the relevance of the subject and the interconnection of all subject areas. It may also
be used as basis for discussion during parent-teacher conferences for it includes tangible
evidences of learning (Grace, 1992).
On the other hand, portfolio assessment just like other methods has some disadvantages
needs to be addressed. One of which is the demand for additional time. Unlike selected-
response tests, reviewing and commenting on student’s work and portfolio takes longer time.
Moreover, extra time is also needed for planning and developing materials as well as for
conferring with parents and other teachers. Another drawback is the demand for additional
resources such as multimedia equipment or a bigger space for storage (Sweet, 1993). Hence,
teachers as well as administrators should be equipped with a thorough understanding of this
assessment task and should also be willing to allot time for additional planning, conference, and
preparation of strategies. Still, the benefits that could be gained from using portfolios outweigh
the abovementioned common drawbacks.
Planning and Developing Portfolios
Portfolio construction indeed requires time and additional preparation but its fruits are
definitely worthwhile. Planning is essential for successful portfolio assessment. Part of which is
to determine the purpose of using portfolios as a method of assessment. This is done by asking
oneself “Why do I want my students to do it in the first place?” The decisions about what
products to include in a portfolio should be based on the identified purpose of the portfolio.
Without a purpose, a portfolio is just a simple folder of student work. Equally important is the
identification of learning targets. These are competencies that students should achieve at the end
of an activity or program. From these learning targets the teacher could start devising a more
specific plan to further guide the students in the portfolio making process. Involving the
students from portfolio planning to assessment encourages personal ownership which makes it
meaningful and relevant to the students. According to Stiggins (1997), teachers can help
emphasize this ownership by telling students to package their portfolios as their personal
storybook, describing their story of learning and growth.
After clarifying the purpose and learning targets, there must be an agreement of what
type of portfolio will be developed. This is because the type of portfolio will also determine the
selection of entries as well as the criteria for evaluation. Below is a table of common types and
formats of student portfolios:
STUDENT PORTFOLIOS
Types Forms
 Checklist Portfolios  Hard copy or Print media
composed of predetermined
work samples  Special holding cases or
displays
 Showcase Portfolios
presents selected pieces of  Multimedia (CD-Rom)

evidence to demonstrate mastery
 Open-Format Portfolios  Online Publishing
includes work samples chosen by

the students
The type of portfolio will depend on the purpose of assessment while the form will vary
depending on the type of products that will be presented and the age and preference of the
students. Nowadays, multimedia and online portfolios are much preferred than the traditional
printed media. This is because multimedia and online portfolio makes the work “accessible,
portable, examinable, widely distributable, and the performance replayable and reviewable”
((Sheingold, 1992 cited in Barrett, 1994). In addition to this, multimedia and online portfolios
make transfer samples of student work from teacher to teacher and school to school easier
(Lankes, 1995).
After determining the type and format, it is equally important to discuss with the class
what needs to be included. The portfolio is generally subdivided into three parts, the: (a) front
matter, which includes the cover page, acknowledgment, table of contents, introduction and
setting of expectations to prepare the reader, (b) middle part, which is the heart of the portfolio
for it contains the selected work samples and reflections, and (c) back matter, which synthesizes
the learning experience and includes a plan of action to pursue lifelong learning. The selection
of entries will depend on the purpose and the type of portfolio being developed but all types
contain work samples that showcases what and how much the learner’s know, the process
he/she went through to acquire and deepen this knowledge and/or skill, and the effort he/she
exerted in the learning process. Portfolio development is a collaborative process. The teacher
constantly needs to scaffold students by clarifying their conceptions about the purpose of
portfolio making and by showing work samples that matches the different levels of the scoring
rubric.
Assessing Student Portfolios
Portfolios are assessed using a rubric that the learners are familiar with. A good
assessment system allows students and teachers to have a shared understanding of what
constitutes good work (Barrett,1994). These scoring rubrics or guides are used for the
evaluation of the entire portfolio rather than to each piece of entry. A wide variety of criteria
can be used to evaluate the quality of a portfolio. The scoring criteria will depend on the
purpose of assessment and type of portfolio being evaluated. Unlike traditional tests, authentic
assessment involves students in the evaluation process. Student self-evaluation facilitates better
learning and allows the reader to gain insights about learning strategies used (Popham, 1999).
Allowing students to evaluate their efforts and performance promotes appreciation and valuing
of the reflection process (Mondock, 1997). However, the teacher needs to clarify to the students
that self-evaluation is not a random process of selecting a preferred grade it instead involves a
system of justifying the chosen grade. The teacher also has the right to lower or increase the
grade if the justification given by the student inaccurately supports the rating. Hence, the final
grade is a collaborative outcome between the teacher and the students.
Conclusion
A portfolio basically allows the learner to document and demonstrate what he/she has
accomplished. It also allows both the learner and teacher to evaluate the progress achieved in a
given period of time. Successful portfolio projects do not happen without considerable planning
and effort on the part of both the teacher and the student. A portfolio is definitely a labor of love
for it tells a story of a learner’s growth and active engagement in the learning process.
References
Barrett, H. (1994). Technology-supported portfolio assessment. The Computing Teacher, 3,

127-137.
Grace, C. (1992). The portfolio and its use: Developmentally-appropriate assessment of young
children. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood
Education.
Kubiszyn, T. and Borich, G. (2004). Educational testing and measurement: Classroom

application and practice (7th ed). NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
Lankes, A. (1995). Electronic portfolios: A new idea in classroom assessment.Syracuse. NY:

ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
Mcmillan, J. (2001). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective instruction
(2nd ed). MA, USA: Allyn & Bacon.
Mondock, S. (1997). Portfolios: The story behind the story. English Journal, 86(1), 59-64.
Popham, W. J. (2005). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Sweet, D. (1993). Student portfolios: Classroom uses. Eight Education Research Consumer
Guide. Retrieved April 29, 2009 from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/
classuse.html
Stiggins, R. (1997). Student-centered classroom assessment (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River,
NJ:Prentice-Hall.

Assessment Handbook V1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment Handbook V1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The

Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association

Copyright © 2009 by the Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation

Publication Division of PEMEA

The Assessment Handbook: PEMEA Continuing Education Program®

1 The 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum

12 Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and

26 Assessing and Developing Self-regulated Learning

53 Assessment for Learning via Alternative Assessment

62 Portfolio Assessment: A Celebration of Learning

The 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum

The Role of the School Head

• The Challenge of Curriculum Reform

THE CHALLENGE OF CURRICULUM REFORM

1. Maximize the potentials of curriculum change by linking it to increasing student

2. Provide opportunities for children to develop 21st Century Core Skills.

21st Core Skills

Digital Age Literacy

• Basic scientific, mathematical, and technological literacies

• Adaptability/ability to manage complexity

• Teaming, collaboration, and interpersonal skills

• Ability to prioritize, plan, and manage for results

IMPERATIVES OF CURRICULUM REFORM

1. New needs, new curriculum

FEATURES OF THE CURRICULUM

• Lean- focuses on essential understandings

What learning standards are for

Learning standards may be classified into:

• Performance standards, which express the degree or quality of proficiency that

• It defines acceptable evidence of student’s attainment of desired results.

Products and Performances

Checking for Understanding

III. Instructional/Learning Activities

Managing the implementation of the curriculum: School readiness to Reform

 The Principal as Culture Builder

The learning-centered leader focuses on:

1. Ensuring that students learn;

Change is inevitable. Progress is optional.

Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and

These psychology-trained examiners decided a classification system represented an

What are the major changes made?

Dimension Examples of the cognitive processes involved

1. REMEMBER- Retrieve relevant knowledge from long-term memory

1.2 RECALLING Retrieving Retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory

2. UNDERSTAND-Construct meaning from instructional messages, including oral, written, and

3. APPLY-Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation

4.2 ORGANIZING Finding Determining how elements fit or function within a

5. EVALUATE-Make judgments based on criteria and standards

5.2 CRITIQUING Judging Detecting inconsistencies between a product and external

6. CREATE-Put elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganize elements

The fourth dimension of knowledge is metacognitive knowledge, an awareness of and

MAJOR TYPES AND SUBTYPES EXAMPLES

CB. Knowledge of subject-specific techniques Interviewing techniques, scientific method

D. METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE-Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001)

How can we use the revised taxonomy in teaching?

Actions Products Learning Activities

How can we use the revised taxonomy in assessing students’ learning?

The taxonomy table provides a means of categorising the questions. For

Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create

Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create

Chamberlain, V. J. & Cummings, M. N. (2003). Creative instructional methods. New

Dalton, E. (2003). The “new Bloom's taxonomy,” objectives, and assessments

Developing and Assessing Self-regulated Learners