Definisi dalam pendidikan: Satu prosedur yang sistematik untuk ukur perubahan sebahagian daripada semua aspek tingkah

laku seseorang individu terhadap pembelajarannya. Sistematik prosedur teratur dengan mengikut peraturan tertentu untuk mentadbirkan ujian & menetapkan pemarkahan / penggredan secara terperinci. Soalan apa? Cara bagaimana dijalankan. Tempat pengujian.

Memberi ujian untuk dapat sesuatu maklumat tentang pencapaian murid dalam pembelajaran.

Kaedah lazim di kelas kesan pencapaian Mesti gunakan alat pengukuran e.g. kertas soalan

Ciri-ciri tingkah laku yg kognitif / psikomotor / afektif

1

diukur

Dilaksanakan secara formal dengan menggunakan ujian kertas pensel e.g. ujian bulanan & peperiksaan tahunan / tidak formal melalui ujian lisan. Keputusan memberi bandingan prestasi antara murid.

Usaha untuk tentukan nilai kuantitatif sesuatu benda, perkara / keadaan Definisi dlm pendidikan: Satu proses menghasilkan nilai kuantitatif untuk tentukan peringkat pencapaian & kedudukan murid dlm pembelajaran Perolehi drp penyukatan dgn menggunakan alat dlm unit angka yg tetap e.g. pembaris ukur panjang/lebar sesuatu benda dlm sm; termometer ukur suhu dlm C / F

Dilakukan melalui ujian / pp utk kumpul bukti / data dlm angka Alat pengukuran yg lain: kadar skala, senarai semak, soal selidik & kod skor Maklumat dikumpulkan utk buat interpretasi, tetapkan keputusan & capai sesuatu tujuan Hasil nilai kuantitatif pengukuran : Dlm markah (skala selang) & gred (skala norminal / kategori) yg menunjukkan prgkt pencapaian Nilai kuantitatif blh digunakan utk mengatur kedudukan prestasi m mengikut susunan turutan (skala ordinan) e.g. UPSR, PMR, SPM : pengukuran pencapaian m di dlm bbrp m/p sekolah Perbandingan dibuat antara murid utk membayangkan kedudukan seseorg murid dari segi prestasi norma / pencapaian kriteria yg tlh ditetapkan

Tdk bersifat mutlak krn murid yg menjawab semua soalan dgn salah & mendpt 0 dlm ujian tidak semestinya tdk mempelajari langsung apa yang tlh diajarkan kpdnya Tdk wajar dikatakan seseorg murid yg mendpt markah 90 adalah 2 kali lebih pandai drp m yg hanya mendpt 45 Pengukuran mesti menuju ke arah keobjektifan supaya keputusan lebih dpt dipercayai & konsisten

Sistem/proses akt mengumpul maklumat tentang strategi & aktiviti P & P Buat analisis Tindakan selanjutnya

PENILAIAN = Pengukuran Kuantitatif + Penghuraian Kualitatif + Pengadilan Nilai

4

Meliputi pencapaian & kemajuan dlm pelajaran & pentaksiran semua aspek perkembangan mental & fizikal, minat, sikap, bakat, emosi & kejayaan dlm sosial

Pengujian

Pengukuran Penilaian
Perhubungan P3

Prinsip asas melakukan penilaian: tujuan penilaian bidang yg dinilai calon yg dinilai teknik yg digunakan, termasuk kesedaran kekurangan & kelemahan dlm teknik Prosedur penilaian:

Tujuan
5

Rasional Maklumat balik laporan

1. MENGAPA

m guru

obj pljran pembljran m prestasi g kur cara menilai

2. APA

3. SIAPA

PENILAIAN

teknik penilaian 4. BAGAIMANA masa DI MANA, BILA, tmpt KRITERIA kriteria norma/prestasi

TUJUAN PENGUJIAN & PENILAIAN DI SEKOLAH Utk mendpt maklumat balik Utk membaiki kurikulum Sebagai penggerak
6

Utk mengesan punca kelemahan Utk menempatkan m dlm jurusan pendidikan Utk pengelasan & pensijilan Utk penyelidikan Ramalan Tujuan dlm KBSR & KBSM Mengesan perkembangan penguasaan m dari segi pengetahuan, penhayatan nilai murni, jasmani & social selaras dgn obj P& P Mengenal pasti kekuatan & kelemahan m dlm pembljran utk merancang akt pengayaan & pemulihan Mengenal pasti keberkesanan pengajaran guru supaya memblhkan guru memperbaiki pengajaran selanjutnya Mengambil tindakan susulan utk mengatasi kelemahan & meningkatkan lagi proses P & P Menentukan pencapaian murid dlm semua m/p dgn memberi markah & gred yg berkenaan Merekod keputusan pengujian & penilaian itu dlm Rekod Prestasi & Rekod
7

Profil m utk dirujuk oleh pihak-pihak yg berkenaan

AIMS OF TESTS Determine changes in ps behaviour Determine ps achievement in certain learning Place p in suitable groups based on test results Motivate p to do revision Train p to be prepared for public exams AIMS OF MEASUREMENTS Determine level of achievement & positions of p in the same class or classes

 Make comparison bet ps achievement & positions in certain subject / their overall academic achievement For appropriate streaming Make analysis, interpretation & conclusion for certain research based on the result Award certificates as a form of academic achievement in certain school level As criteria for relevant authority to refer for certain purpose AIMS OF EVALUATIONS Collect information concerning ps achievement after teaching-learning acts, to interpret the result and take appropriate action Determine ps strength & weaknesses in learning certain skill in order to plan enrichment / remedial work Determine the trs presentation in class so that a more effective teaching strategy could be employed Determine the achievement of predetermined learning objs so that teachinglearning acts could be planned further
9

 Record the evaluation results in ps Performance & Profile Record so that they could be referred by relevant authorities when required Assess the effectiveness of implementing a certain new prog e.g. KBSR / KBSM

CIRI-CIRI UTAMA UJIAN VALIDITY (KESAHAN) - Measure what it is supposed to measure - How far the test has fulfilled its obj CONTENT VALIDITY (KESAHAN ISI) actually & accurately testing the subject content according to its aim & skills predetermined prepare a Test Blue Print PREDICTIVE VALIDITY (KESAHAN RAMALAN)
10

- predict the capability / qualification of an ind. in carrying out certain duty/work in the future, e.g. STPM exam is used to predict a candidates qualification for entering a university - predict an inds action / behavioural change in future based on test result, e.g. MTest selected to follow a course in a teachers training college & obtained a Teaching Certificate

CONCURRENT VALIDITY (KESAHAN SERENTAK) Inds achievement in a test = highly correlate with the achievement of a previous similar test So, test contains high cv. Dont conduct two similar tests after a short period as there would be the effect of history/memory performs better
11

Eg to determine cv tr construct own test items which include all the materials found in the work books. If test performance correlates with the performance of ex. in work books, then high cv.

CONSTRUCT VALIDITY (KESAHAN GAGASAN) Matching bet the assessment & attribute Attributes should include all previous skills related to the assessment of the said attributes RELIABILITY (KEBOLEHPERCAYAAN) The extent of how close a particular result of a test is to the true value of what is being assessed Refers to the consistency of a ps achievement after a few similar tests taken at different time periods Scores obtained would cluster around the proper score (standard score)
12

 Measures of reliability correlate 2 tests : value of correlation coefficient is more than .9, tests are reliable. Also known as test-retest reliability Difficult to determine the reliability of all test items due to factors such as emotion, test venue, environment condition, and health Reliability of a test could be improved by preparing more questions The more the questions, the less possibility of the p guessing the right answers Another way is to us split-half reliability where the test is split into two equivalent halves (odd & even nos.) A more reliable approach is the use of parallel tests : reduce the practice effects OBJECTIVITY (KEOBJEKTIFAN) The accuracy of an examiner in marking a candidates answers Giving the same marks to the same answers according to the marking scheme determined earlier
13

Objective test and subjective test with limited structured responses good egs. as there is only one correct answer & marks would not be affected by the examiners emotions Free responses tests (essays) loww objectivity Objectivity could be improved by using an analytic marking scheme imp. Pts are given appropriate marks or coordination meeting for all examiners by marking a few sample scripts ASSESSIBILITY (KEBOLEHTAFSIRAN) Result of achievement can be easily interpreted & assessed Test result easy to collect, assess & interpret to reflect a clear & accurate picture of the test performance Correct depiction of achievement & placing, strengths & weaknesses, suitability of teaching-learning strategy &
14

test items, & achievement of teachinglearning objective in the class Data collected from test result easily collected & converted into statistical figures, then expressed in the form of table / graph depicting a clear picture for interpretation test is has high assessibility

ADMINISTRABILITY (KEBOLEHTADBIRAN) The smooth implementation of the testing process room / examination hall The arrangement of the exam center, punctuality in carrying out the test, instructions & invigilation well done, collection & marking of answers scripts according to schedule Improved via no. of questions = time allocated, arrangement of tables & chairs,
15

distribution of qn papers & collection of answer scripts, instructions & standardized & efficient marking scheme
PENGERTIAN JPU Satu blue print @ rangka rujukan utk membantu g menyediakan 1 ujian yg mempunyai keutuhan & kesahan yg tinggi JPU mengandungi: Bentuk & tempoh masa ujian Kandungan topik-topik Aras kemahiran Peruntukan peratusan item / soalan Bilangan soalan Aras kesukaran Tujuan Penyediaan JPU Ujian yg dibina lebih terancang Meningkatkan kesahan & kebolehpercayaan ujian Panduan & penentu bagi penggubal soalan Menyeimbangkan tajuk-tajuk, obj pelalaran & aras kemahiran Panduan penggubal soalan yg lain spy soalan bermutu G boleh membuat perbandingan ant aras kesukaran 1 ujian dgn ujian yg lain
16

Ciri-ciri Utama JPU Mengandungi maklumat ttg tajuk-tajuk yg akan diuji Menyenaraikan aras kemahiran yg akan diuji mengikut Taksonomi Bloom (PKAASP) Ada 2 lajur - lajur menengak : tajuk-tajuk yg akan diuji - lajur mendatar : jenis kemahiran soalan Gambaran jumlah soalan dlm 1 ujian Bilangan soalan mengikut aras kesukaran soalan Menentukan kesahan ujian bidang yg akan diuji mengikut peruntukan masa dlm proses P &P LANGKAH-LANGKAH MEMBINA JPU MENENTUKAN OBJ UJIAN MENENTUKAN ISI UJIAN MENGISI LAJUR KANDUNGAN MENGISI LAJUR KEMAHIRAN MENENTUKAN JENIS & BILANGAN SOALAN MENYEMAK SEBARAN SOALAN
TAKSONOMI BLOOM (BLOOMS TAXONOMY)
17

1. KNOWLEDGE (PENGETAHUAN) Kebolehan calon mengingat kembali fakta, prinsip, hukum, konsep (apakah? Siapakah? senaraikan, nyatakan) Cth2 soalan subjektif: a. Berapa bucukah yg terdapat dlm sebuah kubus? b. Senaraikan dua ciri khas yg terdpt dlm mamalia c. Siapakah yg pertama menyarankan konsep pembentukan Malaysia?

2. COMPREHENSION (KEFAHAMAN) Kebolehan calon memahami, menukar, menerang & menjelaskan fakta, prinsip, konsep, hukum atau teori (jelaskan, terangkan, huraikan) Cth2 soalan subjektif: a. Terangkan dgn menggunakan satu ayat anda sendiri, maksud aras kemahiran dlm bdg pendidikan. b. Mengapakah 4 x 5 = 20? c. Huraikan konsep disiplin di prgkt sekolah. 3. APPLICATION (APLIKASI) Kebolehan calon menggunakan fakta, prinsip, konsep, hukum, teori, kemahiran utk menyelesaikan masalah (kirakan, selesaikan, gunakan, tunjukkan) Cth2 soalan subjektif: a. Cari perimeter segitiga yg mempunyai panjang sisi 5 cm, 12 cm dan 13 cm. b. Buat ayat dgn menggunakan simpulan bahasa khabar angin. c. Tuliskan sepucuk surat kpd Pengarah Pendidikan Negeri utk memohon kebenaran bertukar sekolah.

4. ANALYSIS (ANALISIS)

18

 Kebolehan calon membanding & menghuraikan faktorfaktor kesamaan, perbezaan & perhubungan ant satu sama lain (tafsirkan, asingkan, bandingkan, bahagikan) Cth2 soalan subjektif: a. Bezakan maksud gula dengan 'gula-gula. b. Bandingkan kebaikan ujian objektif dgn ujian subj. c. Analisiskan faktor2 yg mempengaruhi pembentukan FPK. 5. SYNTHESIS (SINTESIS) Kebolehan calon mencantum, menggabung & mengintegrasikan fakta atau idea yg berkaitan (gabungkan, bentukkan, kumpulkan, merekabentuk) Cth2 soalan subjektfi: a. Bagaimanakah nilai2 murni dpt diintegrasikan dlm akt. Kokurikulum? b. Rancangkan langkah2 yg blh mempertingkatkan prestasi m dlm pembljrn BM. c. Gubahkan satu pantun bertema 'kasih sayang. 6. EVALUATION (PENILAIAN) Kebolehan calon membuktikan, menilai, mengesahkan, mengkritik, memberi pendapat atau merumus sesuatu prinsip, teori, pernyataan & karya & sebagainya (buktikan, nilaikan, kritikkan, beri komen anda) Cth2 soalan subjektif: a. Nilaikan buku 'Sejarah Melayu dari sudut sastera. b. Apakah pendapat anda terhdp Wawasan 2020? c. Kritikan program KBSR yg dilaksanakan di SR.

JPU Ujian Mata Pelajaran Kimia

Topiktopik Aras-aras Domain Kognitif Jumlah Penget Kefah Aplikas Analisis Sintesis Penilaian i
19

Jirim Ikatan Kimia Asid & Bes Bahan buatan dlm industri Bahan kimia utk pertanian

2 1 1 1 2

3 3 2 2 3

2 2 1 2 2

1 2 2 2 1

1 1 2 1 1

1 1 1 1 2

10 10 10 9 11 50

Jumlah item aneka pilihan

Soalan: 1. Apakah yang dimaksud Jadual Penentuan Ujian? 2. Beri 3 sebab mengapa JPU perlu disediakan oleh guru? 3. Senaraikan 5 perkara yang perlu ada di dalam JPU. 4. Jelaskan 3 kelemahan sesuatu ujian yang dibina tanpa JPU. 5. Bina satu JPU bagi mata pelajaran yang akan anda ajar. Example of a Blueprint (JPU)
Test Specifications for Pilot Study Pretest Section A Short story 1 No. of multiple-choice questions Total score The allocation of question types: Section B Short Story 2 Number of questions Total score The allocation of question types: 20

: 20 : 20

: 20 : 20

Lower level questions: Barretts Taxonomy Of Comprehension Levels 1 2

Lower level questions: Nuttalls Question Type 1 2 Subtotal

Barretts Nuttalls Taxonomy Question Question Of Type No./Total Comprehension Levels 1 1-4 4 1 2 5-8 4 2 Subtotal 8

Question No./Total 1-4 5-8 4 4 8

Higher level questions: Barretts Taxonomy Of Comprehension Levels 3 4 5 ) ) Total Nuttalls Question Type

Higher level questions:

Barretts Taxonomy Nuttalls Question Of Question No./Total Comprehension Type Levels 3 9-12 4 3 3 4 13-16 4 4 4 5 17-18 2 5 ) 5 6 19-20 2 ) 6 Subtotal 12 Subtotal 20 Total 16 40% 60%

Question No./Total 9-13 14-16 17-18 19-20 5 3 2 2 12 20

Total number of Lower level questions :

Total number of Higher level questions : 24 -

Analysis of Answer Scripts using Flanagans Method (I.D.) a. 60 answer scripts were analysed b. comparison made bet good & weak sts on how well they performed on each test item c. Short cut for calculating item discrimination (item/indeks diskriminasi) manually called Flanagans method named after its inventor described by Oller (1979, pgs. 250-252 in Bailey, 1998: 135) The following are the steps utilised in computing ID: 1. Score the exam. Rank order the papers from highest to lowest score.
21

2. Take the top 27% percent of the exams and the bottom 27% percent of the exams from the top to bottom of the pile of papers. These two subsets of the exams will be referred to as the high scorers and the low scorers, respectively. (Set the middle group aside for the moment.) 3. Then, to compute the I.D. value for each item, the following formula is used: I.D. =
[# of high scorers who got the item right] [# of low scorers who got the item right]

27% of the total number of students tested I.D. values range from +1 to 1, with positive 1 showing a perfect discrimination between high scorers and low scorers, and 1 showing perfectly wrong discrimination. An I.D. of 0 shows no discrimination, or no variance whatsoever. The lowest acceptable values are usually set at 0.25 or 0.35 (Oller, 1979 in Bailey, 1998: 135) The relationship between item difficulty and item discrimination indexes is shown in the figure below (Salkind, 1997: 142):

The Relationship between Item Difficulty and Item Discrimination Indexes Discrimination Level
+1.00

0 0% 50% 100%

22

-1.00

Difficulty Level
Reference: Bailey, K.M. (1998). Learning about Language Assessment: Dilemmas, Decisions, and Directions. London: Heinle and Heinle Publishers. Salkind, N.J. (1997). Exploring Research (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

I.D. Discriminates bet good & weak sts Formula: BT - Br 1/2J BT = Jumlah calon dlm kumpulan skor tinggi menjawab item dgn betul Br = Jumlah calon dlm kumpulan skor rendah menjawab item dgn betul J = Jumlah dua kumpulan skor tinggi & rendah I.D. I.D. > 0.4 Interpretation Decision of an item/qn + discrimination Very suitable & High can be accepted
23

0.2 < I.D. 1 < + discrimination 0.4 Moderate 0 < I.D. 1 < 0.2 + discrimination Low I.D. < 0 negative discrimination: Performance of low-score gp is better than high-score gp
CALCULATION OF I.D.
Item 1: Score Tally High Scorers (n = 16) HS1 + HS2 + HS3 + HS4 + HS5 + HS6 + HS7 + HS8 + HS9 + HS10 + HS11 + HS12 + HS13 + HS14 + HS15 + HS16 + Total 16 I.D.= 16 15 27% (60) = _1_ = 0.06 16.2

Modify item / qn Item/qn needs to be reconstructed Item/qn is bad & should be removed

Interpretation of an item/qn based on I.D.

Low Scorers (n = 16) LS1 + LS2 + LS3 + LS4 + LS5 + LS6 + LS7 + LS8 + LS9 + LS10 + LS11 + LS12 + LS13 + LS14 LS15 + LS16 + Total 15

Item 2: Score Tally High Scorers (n = 16) HS1 + HS2 +

Low Scorers (n = 16) LS1 + LS2 + 24

HS3 HS4 HS5 HS6 HS7 HS8 HS9 HS10 HS11 HS12 HS13 HS14 HS15 HS16 Total I.D.= 14 8 27% (60) =

+ + + + + + + + + + + + 14 _6_ = 0.37 16.2

LS3 LS4 LS5 LS6 LS7 LS8 LS9 LS10 LS11 LS12 LS13 LS14 LS15 LS16 Total

+ + + + + + 8

ITEM FACILITY (ITEM KESUKARAN I.K.) To find out the difficulty of a test item: too difficult, average or too easy Formula: I.K. = BT + Br J

I.K. =

No. of candidates who answered correctly (BT) Total no. of candidates who attempted the item (Br)

Interpretation of an item/qn I.D. < 0.3 Too difficult 0.3 I.D. 0.8 Average I.D. > 0.8 Too easy
25

I.K.

Decision Modify Accept Modify

Interpretation of an item/qn based on I.K. KLASIFIKASI UJIAN UJIAN OBJEKTIF Item soalan yg perlu SATU jawapan betul Kesahan keobjektifan sgt tinggi Jenis-jenis UO 1. Jenis item respons bebas (separuh obj) 2. Jenis item respons tetap (obj) Jenis Item Respons Bebas: a. Item yg memerlukan jawapan pendek b. Item melengkapkan ayat c. Item perkaitan Jenis Item Respons Tetap: a. Item betul / salah b. Item jenis padanan c. Item jenis pengelasan d. Item aneka pilihan UJIAN SUBJEKTIF Berbentuk karangan atau esei Kesahan keobjektifan sangat rendah kecuali jika ada skema permarkahan yg baik 2 jenis: i. jawapan pendek
26

ii. jawapan tidak terhad PERBANDINGAN DI ANTARA UJIAN FORMATIF & UJIAN SUMATIF Fungsi Ujian formatif Ujian sumatif Maklum balas kpd Pensijilan atau guru & pljr penggredan pljr mengenai kemajuan akhir kursus pljr Kesan punca kelemahan utk pemulihan Masa diberi Tekanan dalam penilaian Sepanjang pengajaran Di akhir satu-satu unit atau kursus

T/laku kognitif, T/laku kognitif psikomotor & afektif Objektif kursus Beraneka jenis Semua prgkt: ada yg sgt senang & ada pula yang sgt

Focus Satu-satu segmen pengukuran Sifat sampelan Terhad kpd tugasan pembljaran Kesukaran Berubah-ubah item mengikut segmen

27

Ujian formatif Jenis alat

susah Ujian sumatif

Alat pengukur Peperiksaan akhir formatif yg dibentuk tahun khas Ujian rujukan kriteria Biasanya ujian rujukan norma ttp blh ujian rujukan kriteria

Jenis-jenis skor

Cara melapor Skor gagal atau lulus Jumlah skor skor UJIAN RUJUKAN NORMA perbandingan antara 1 pljr dgn plr lain dalam satu kelas jenis soalan senang & susah bezakan prgkt pencapaian pljr memberi pangkatan dari tinggi ke rendah berdasarkan pencapaian contoh: Markah Rosmawati adalah baik berbanding dgn pljr lain di dalam kelas atau markah Rosmawati adalah lebih baik daripada 80% pljr dlm kelas menggalakkan perkembangan maksimum UJIAN RUJUKAN KRITERIA
28

 pencapaian ind diukur & dibandingkan dgn kriteria yg tlh ditentukan Contoh: Ujian memandu kereta pencapaian pemandu A berbanding dgn pemandupemandu lain tidak penting Uji kemahiran-kemahiran asas spt membaca & mengira di SR (KBSR) rekod prestasi yg menyenaraikan kemahiran-kemahiran yg harus diperolehi bagi satu-satu unit pembelajaran (obj asas minimum) Berpendapat semua pljr blh menguasai apa yg diajar jika diberi masa yang mencukupi Soalan-soalan hampir sama prgkt kesukarannya Tujuan bilakah kemahiran pljr mencukupi utk membenarkan dia bermula dgn unit pljran yg lain. Kelemahan tekan kpd pembljaran bahagian & bukan seluruh. Perasaan kegagalan & kurang cekap krn mengambil masa yg lama utk selesai 1 unit pembljran Ujian pengetahuan & kefahaman kurang efektif

Ujian rujukan norma Penggunaan Ujian membandingkan

29

Ujian rujukan kriteria Membandingkan pencapaian dgn

pencapaian individu kriteria yg ditentukan Tekanan Mengukur perbezaan pencapaian ind. Meliputi satu bdg pljran yg luas -sdaMenumpu pd tugas-tugas pembljran yg terhad Kriteria secara terperinci ditentukan Semua soalan dpt membayangkan pencapaian calon dgn jelas. Biasanya hampir sama prgkt kesukarannya Ujian rujukan kriteria Taraf mutlak menentukan prgkt pencapaian. Contohnya: Ros

Bidang

Pelan Ujian Jadual penentuan biasanya diguna Pemilihan item ujian Soalan ujian berbeza mengikut prgkt kesukarannya. Bertujuan mendptkan diskriminasi maksimum ant calon Ujian rujukan norma Taraf Kedudukan dlm pencapaian sesuatu kump menentukan pangkat pencapaian
30

dapat menjawab 20 drp 25 soalan Matematik UJIAN SARINGAN & UJIAN DIAGNOSTIK Konteks pendidikan pemulihan u/saringan kenal pasti pljr-pljr yg benarbenar perlukan pendidikan pemulihan Terdiri drp unit-unit pembljran yg dipljri Setlh u/saringan, pljr yg dianggap tidak perlukan p/pemu dihantar balik ke kelas biasa Perlukan p/pemu akan duduki u/diagnostic u/diag kesan punca kelemahan yg khusus 2 jenis: ujian diagnostic kebolehan & ujian diagnostic BM & Mat. UJIAN SARINGAN UJIAN DIAGNOSTIK

1 Uj am yg meliputi Diberi berasaskan kemahiran asas 3M keputusan u/saringan. Bdg yg diuji adalah lebih khusus. Meliputi kemahiran 3M & pengamatan 2 Blh kenal pasti Dpt kenal pasti punca
31

kelemahan & keblhan pljr dlm pengamatan & m/p asas 3 Bertujuan mengasingkan pljr yg lambat 4 Satu ujian petempatan 5 Dpt menilai pencapaian pljr secara kasar

kelemahan secara terperinci Bertujuan memulihkan atau mengatasi mslhmslh pembljran Satu ujian rujukan kriteria Keputusan ujian digunakan utk mencari kesalahan bagi membolehkan obj pengajaran pemulihan disediakan secara prgkt demi prgkt Biasa diberi secara ind.

6 Biasa diberi secara kump

CARA ANALITIK Sesuai utk soalan esei bentuk tindak balas terbatas Pemberatan markah diberikan bagi setiap soalan atau unit-unit sesuatu soalan Jumlah markah adalah jumlah poin yg diberi bagi setiap soalan / unit Lebih dipercayai & memudahkan pemeriksa Tidak sesuai bagi soalan bentuk tindak balas lanjutan

32

 Tidak dapat membezakan mutu dua jawapan jika hanya diberi 1 atau 2 markah dlm skim permarkahan Sering digunakan dlm peperiksaan awam soalan yg memerlukan jawapan terperinci, seragam & berstruktur Membolehkan ramai pemeriksa & bukan pakar utk memeriksa skrip jawapan Mengambil masa yg agak lama utk memeriksa Kelebihan cara Analitik Mudah menentukan jawapan yg tetap Diperiksa sekali sudah mencukupi Pencapaian boleh dijadikan panduan Boleh diperiksa oleh pemeriksa yg krg berpengalaman atau kurang mahir dlm bidang berkenaan Kelemahan cara Analitik Diperiksa secara fakta & bukan secara keseluruhan Kemahiran penulisan calon tidak diberi tumpuan Memerlukan masa yg lama utk memeriksa Lebih memeriksa kesalahan semasa memeriksa karangan

Cara Holistik / Global

Menilai satu-satu skrip secara keseluruhannya Pemeriksa menentukan standard jawapan yg diperiksa Jawapan tidak dibandingkan dgn 1 contoh jawapan yg unggul Pemeriksaan mesti konsisten Pemeriksa yg berpengalaman spy perselisihan memberi markah dpt dikurangkan
33

 Menjimatkan masa pemeriksaan Sesuai utk soalan esei bentuk tindak balas lanjutan

Kelebihan cara Holistik

Kemahiran calon menjawab soalan dinilai secara keseluruhan Taksiran dibandingkan dlm kumpulan Mengurangkan masa utk memeriksa kerana tidak memerikdsa sering ayat, fakta & idea jawapan calon

Kelemahan cara Holistik

Sukar hendak diuruskan & mungkin perlu diperiksa lebih drp sekali Mungkin tidak diperiksa dgn teliti Memerlukan ketua pemerika yg berpengalaman Memerlukan pemeriksa yg berpengalaman

MARKING APPROACHES Analytic Holistic / Global Focuses on specific point Focuses on essay response allocation as a whole Helps to identify ability of student is strengths & assessed globally weaknesses of marking is faster students performance Reliability increases
34

 Marking is more objective Marking is not influenced by emotions / halo effects tr might get too attentive to details & might miss the students response as a whole marking might take a long time

a 2nd marker might be required (moderation) marking is not objective marking can be influenced by irrelevant factors such as neatness & handwriting markers mut be experienced MARKING APPROACHES

Types of scoring instruments for performance assessments Scoring instruments for performance assessments Checklists Rating Scales Rubrics Analytic Rubrics Holistic Rubrics
35

Holistic marking scoring the overall process / product as a whole not judging the component parts separately errors in some part of the process can be tolerated provided the overall quality is high used when performance tasts where there is no definite correct answer assessment on a unidimensional level quicker scoring process utilised when performance assessment is summative in nature limited feedback given to sts. An eg. of holistic scoring rubrics Template for Holistic Rubrics Score Description 5 Demonstrates complete understanding of the problem. All requirements of task are included in response. 4 Demonstrates considerable understanding of the problem. All requirements of task are included. 3 Demonstrates partial understanding of the problem. Most requirements of task are included. 2 Demonstrates little understanding of the
36

1 0

problem. Many requirements of task are missing. Demonstrates no understanding of the problem. No response / task not attempted.

Analytic marking scoring separate, individual parts of the product / performance first summing the individual scores to obtain a total score type of response is focussed 1 / 2 acceptable responses & creativity is not usually looked into result initially in several scores followed by a summed total score assessment on a multidimensional level scoring process is slower / time-consuming product is examined several times

37

 individuals work should be examined a separate time for each specific task / scoring criterion significant feedback to sts. & trs. Specific feedback is given on each performance Easy to keep a profile of sts strengths & weaknesses Before designing a rubric, tr decides whether to score the product holistically or analytically If a summative score is wanted holistic scoring approach is used If formative feedback analytical scoring should be used

TEMPLATE FOR ANALYTIC RUBRICS

Beginning 1 Criteria Description #1 reflecting beginning level of performance Criteria Description #2 reflecting beginning level of Developing 2 Description reflecting movement towards mastery level of performance Description reflecting movement towards Accomplishe d 3 Description reflecting achievement of mastery level of performance Description reflecting achievement of mastery
38

Exemplary 4 Description reflecting highest level of performance Description reflecting highest level of

Score

performance mastery level of performance Criteria Description Description #3 reflecting reflecting beginning movement level of towards performance mastery level of performance Criteria Description Description #4 reflecting reflecting beginning movement level of towards performance mastery level of performance

level of performance performance Description reflecting achievement of mastery level of performance Description reflecting achievement of mastery level of performance Description reflecting highest level of performance Description reflecting highest level of performance

Step-by-step procedure in designing scoring rubrics

Step 1: Step 2: Re-examine the learning objs to be addressed by the task Identify specific observable attributes that you want to see (as well as those you dont want to see) your sts demonstrate in their product, process, or performance Brainstorm characteristics that describe each attribute For analytic rubrics Step 4b: Write thorough narrative descriptions for excellent work &

Step 3:

For holistic rubrics Step 4a: Write thorough narrative descriptions for excellent work & poor work
39

incorporating each attribute into the description Step 5a: Complete the rubrics by describing other levels on the continuum that ranges from excellent to poor work for the collect attributes Step 5b:

poor work for each individual attribute

Complete the rubrics by describing other levels on the continuum that ranges from excellent to poor work for each attribute

Step 6: Step 7:

Collect samples of the students work that exemplify each level Revise the rubrics as necessary

TABLE OF SPECIFICATION (TEST BLUEPRINT)

PURPOSE Guidance in the construction of test qns. Appropriate weightage for various topics & their skill levels Inform sts what they are expected to find in the text / exam & how they could best prepare for it FACTORS TO CONSIDER: The construction of a good test requires a clear specification that has the following information: 1. Form of test items to be used
40

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

No. of items in each form Kinds of tasks the items would present No. of tasks for each kind Areas of content to be tested No. of items in each area Level & distribution of item difficulty

PREPARATION: A test specification or test blueprint could be presented in a two-way grid used to outline the coverage of a test Several major areas of content to be covered are assigned to several rows / columns of the grid

Questions Test Blueprints 1. What is a Test Blueprint? 2. What is the purpose of a test blueprint? 3. Prepare a test blueprint for a specified topic in the syllabus
41

Objective & Subjective Tests 1. 2. 3. 4. Compare and constrast objective and subjective tests Construct objective and subjective items based on your test blueprint What are the principles involved in constructing subjective questions? List the strengths and weaknesses of objective and subjective tests

American Psychological Association (APA) Contoh penulisan bibliografi / rujukan

Buku rujukan: Candy, T. (2003). This is the title of the book (2nd ed.). City: Publisher. Lee, S. M. (1993). Pedagogi 4 (A). Pengujian dan Penilaian dalam Pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Kumpulan Budiman Sdn. Bhd. Mok, S. S. (2003). An Education Course for K.P.L.I. (Student Development, TeachingLearning Process and Evaluation). Subang Jaya: Kumpulan Budiman Sdn. Bhd. Majalah / Suratkhabar:
42

Sofiah Jane. (2004, November). Sofi Back with a Kick. Magazine of Tomorrow, pp. 8-10. Woods, T. (2004, November 23). Tiger Back in the Hunt. The Star Publications, pp. 45.

Jurnal: Wallace, M. 2001. Action Research. The English Teacher. Edinburgh: Oxford University Press, 2(3), 23 - 41. Tesis: Koh, B. H. (2002). Developing Reading Strategies. Unpublished masters thesis, University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor.

43

44