I.

CONTEXT AND RATIONALE

The researcher started his career as a simple classroom teacher after he

graduated in college in 2008. Since then, the researcher believe that he can

measure the learnings of his students through good assessment tool. Assessment

is one of the important part of the teaching and learning process. It determines if

the student learn from the disccusion or from the lesson taught to them by their

teacher . That is why the researcher make sure that the construction of test is

carefully crafted. The researcher make it apoint that all questions in the test is

based on the competencies and objective of the lessons especially when it is a

summative test.

For eight years of teaching Grade 7 Science which is Integrated Science, the

researcher observed that some students are active during discussions but after

the written assessment was administered these students can’t attained the

mastery level of learning. For four consecutive years the researcher’s students

belong to slow learners group. Those were students from section 15, 16, 17, and

18. These are the lowest section of grade seven in Makati High School.

Looking at the academic standing of these students, it is very difficult for

the researcher as a teacher to discuss topics in Science using the English language.
This means that the researcher needs to use the Filipino Language in explaining

some concept and ideas for them to easily grasp and understand the lesson. They

are very participative when the researcher allowed them to speak in Filipino then

after that asked them for translation in English through the help of their

classmates. According to Cummins (2001), use of the home language should be

encouraged as pupils benefit from drawing on their strong linguistic skills in the

language they feel confident in. Allowing pupils to converse in the home language

for such things as discussing new concepts or creating new ideas can free pupils

up to think and talk quickly. They can then slow down as they process the

information and report back in English. They learn that way inside the classroom.

The researcher disappointment came after giving quizzes to them. Some

acitve students in the class during discussion got low scores. The resesarcher

continually observe these students. Their performance in the classroom

discussion and in the written assessment. The researcher asked them, these low

performing students in assessment, What is the problem in test? They honestly

answer that question in Filipino. “Sir, hindi po kasi namin maintindihan kasi

English yung mga tanong. Kapag po nagleleson kayo nakukuha namin kasi taglish

pero pag test na at English lahat yung iba po hindi na namin maintindihan.”
 The researcher started to plan an action that can addresses the problem of

the class. The researcher decided to construct formative assessment with Filipino

subtitle. It is a bilingual formative assessment thatthe researcher do believe can

help the students to easily understand the question and answer it correctly based

on their understanding. Utilizing bilingual formative assessment for low

performing students that can help them in answering the questions and be

familiarize in the different terms use in assessment. It further gives the teachers

right disicion in planing for the new lesson and topic.

The Philippines is no different from the rest of the world the average

Filipinospeaks three to four languages. There are two official languages, English

and Filipino. Filipino, the amalgam of various local languages, is the language of

the streets, popular media and the masses. Inhabitants of Metro Manila, the

nation’s capital, are all exposed to these two languages the minute they are born.

Yet, when they enter school, English is introduced as the “global” language, as

well as the language of mathematics, Science and Technology. The Philippines is

in a linguistic situation where English and Filipino are used predominantly for

different functions: English is used for formal and business communication needs,

as well as for most academic discourse. Thus, it becomes imperative to learn this

language, mostly at the expense of the other.

 The purpose of this study is to investigate the Effects of Bilingual Formative

Assessment to the Achievement of Slow Learner Students in Grade Seven Science.

The findings of the study will be useful to students, teachers, administrator,

curriculum planners and future teachers.

Students. Bilingual Formative Assessment can help to the Achievement of

Slow- Learner Student in Grade Seven Science

Teachers. The result of this study may further ignite their reflection that

there are ways of helping the learners attain functional and scientific literacy

through the use of Bilingual Assessment as part of traditional measurement.

Administrators. They could provide in-service trainings and seminar

workshops on the principles and preparation of Bilingual Assessment that can be

beneficial for the betterment of the educative process.

Curriculum Planners. It serves as a basis for improving the K to 12

curriculum.

Future Researches. Results of this study can be used as a spring board of

other educational researcher to see the effect of Bilingual Assessment in other

topic and subjects.

 II. Review of Related Literature

This part of the research work presents a collection of literature and studies

that had been crafted by experts of the country and overseas in the field of

education. They serve as useful references for deeper understanding and support

for action research.

Assessment

Assessment can be defined as a sample taken from a larger domain of

content and process skills that allows one to infer student understanding of a part

of the larger domain being explored. The sample may include behaviors, products,

knowledge, and performances. Assessment is a continuous, ongoing process that

involves examining and observing children's behaviors, listening to their ideas,

and developing questions to promote conceptual understanding. The term

authentic assessment is often referred to in any discussion of assessment and can

be thought of as an examination of student performance and understanding on

significant tasks that have relevancy to the student's life inside and outside of the

classroom.
The Purpose of Assessment

Critical to educators is the use of assessment to both inform and guide

instruction. Using a wide variety of assessment tools allows a teacher to

determine which instructional strategies are effective and which need to be

modified. In this way, assessment can be used to improve classroom practice,

plan curriculum, and research one's own teaching practice. Of course, assessment

will always be used to provide information to children, parents, and

administrators. In the past, this information was primarily expressed by a "grade".

Increasingly, this information is being seen as a vehicle to empower students to

be self-reflective learners who monitor and evaluate their own progress as they

develop the capacity to be self-directed learners. In addition to informing

instruction and developing learners with the ability to guide their own instruction,

assessment data can be used by a school district to measure student

achievement, examine the opportunity for children to learn, and provide the basis

for the evaluation of the district's science program. Assessment is changing for

many reasons. The valued outcomes of science learning and teaching are placing

greater emphasis on the child's ability to inquire, to reason scientifically, to apply

science concepts to real-world situations, and to communicate effectively what

the child knows about science. Assessment of scientific facts, concepts, and
theories must be focused not only on measuring knowledge of subject matter, but

on how relevant that knowledge is in building the capacity to apply scientific

principles on a daily basis. The teacher's role in the changing landscape of

assessment requires a change from merely a collector of data, to a facilitator of

student understanding of scientific principles.

According to Ausubel, the purpose of education is to enhance the students'

cognitive structures through the accumulation of knowledge in an organized

manner. It should be no surprise that in Ausubel's view evaluation should seek to

uncover what knowledge exists in these cognitive structures. That is, Ausubel

would assess the contents of the students' cognitive structures.

Ausubel's position on assessment and evaluation is pretty traditional in that

he wishes to assess what knowledge the students have acquired. This can be done

through paper and pencil tests such as multiple-choice tests or short answer (fill-

in-the-blank) tests. Ausubel might ask questions like "What is the capital of

Germany?" or "What is the symbol for iron?" Because Ausubel is interested in not

only the content of students' cognitive structures but also their organization, his

tests might include a number of questions about relationships among pieces of

knowledge such as "How are a parallelogram and rectangle similar? How are they

different?"

Remember that Ausubel is interested in meaningful learning, not rote

learning. Thus, he would not be looking for rote memorization on the evaluation

but rather the student's ability to respond in his/her own words, not rote recall.

Essays can provide a way to get some insight into the students' cognitive

structures – what they know and how they have it organized. Ausubel did use

multiple choice questions for assessment but often they sought to detect the

students' understanding of relationships.

Evaluation would be a separate activity from instruction and could consist

of paper and pencil tests or perhaps an examination of student products to gauge

what knowledge they had acquired and how they organized it. 

Common Underlying Proficiency’ Theory

    This theory was developed by Jim Cummins, in the early 1980’s. It stated that

the two languages used by an individual, though on the surface apparently

separate, function through the same central cognitive system.

Dual Language

Over the years, bilingual education has acquired many terms to mean avariety of

activities pertaining to second language learning. This is becauseeducation in

more than one language is necessary and common around the world(Lessow-

Hurley 2000). In the United States alone, instruction in two languages ormore has

taken different forms, each with its own set of goals, design and manner of

,implementation. A variety of labels, terminologies, program models and designs

fortypes of population is well documented in literature. Commonly used terms

includedual language education, two way immersion, enriched education and

developmentalbilingual education. The more all-encompassing term used is dual

languageinstruction. The term indicates that teaching and learning is happening in

two languages (Calderon and Minaya-Rowe 2003, Lessow-Hurley 2000).

Dual language instruction is used as an umbrella term for several types of

program models whichuse two languages for instruction with the goal of having

students achieve fullconversational and academic proficiency in two languages

(Freemen, Freemen and Mercuri, 2005). According to Thomas and Collier (2002),

compared to other bilingual programs, dual language models are the only

programs which result in maintaining high levels of achievement in all subjects

among students after five to six years of schooling. Unlike other bilingual

education programs, dual language programs are considered to have an additive

approach to language learning. In additive approaches, a second language is

learned without losing one’s first language. In contrast, subtractive approaches

result in one language being gradually lost, as the other language is being

acquired (Lessow-Hurley, 2000).

Multilingual and Bilingual Program Models in the Philippines

In the Philippines, bilingual education started in 1974, when the

Departmentof Education mandated the use of English and Filipino as the media of

instruction in both primary and secondary schools. This decree was likewise

renewedin 1987 in pursuit of a “bilingual nation, competent in both Filipino and

English”(Gonzales and Sibayan, 1988). According to the 1987 decree, Filipino was

to beused as a language of instruction in the subjects Filipino and Araling

Panlipunan(Social Studies). On the other hand, English was used for Mathematics

and Science.Decades have passed since bilingual education was mandated in both

the public andprivate schools. In the process, the Philippine educational system

has witnessedchanges in the official language of instruction influenced by changes

in politicalleadership.
 In the light of this decree, The University of the Philippines’ laboratory

school,UP Integrated School (UPIS), implemented a bilingual program with a

strong bias forFilipino language maintenance. It opted to teach all subjects in

Filipino throughoutthe elementary years then introduced English as a language of

instruction at thesecondary level. After a thorough evaluation of the program in

2003, itrecommended a new bilingual program model which prescribed the use of

Filipino from Kinder through the Grade 4 levels for all subjects except English,

Music and Art. From Grade 5 until the high school level, UPIS used both Filipino

and English as media of instruction, with English used in Math and Science

(Resuma and Ocampo,2005). Bilingual classrooms do more than just preserve

national identity by thepropagation of Filipino. Bilingual classrooms also result in

numerous benefits on the part of the bilingual Filipino learner. Thus, Filipino

educators and educational researchers should endeavor to work towards making

bilingual learning systematicand effective.( Almario and Villanueva, 2009)

We should not assume that non-native speakers who have attained a high

degree of fluency and accuracy in everyday spoken English have the

corresponding academic language proficiency. This may help us to avoid labelling

children who exhibit this disparity as having special educational needs when all

they need is more time. Cumminsdraws the distinction between additive

bilingualism in which the first language continues to be developed and the first

culture to be valued while the second language is added; and subtractive

bilingualism in which the second language is added at the expense of the first

language and culture, which diminish as a consequence. Cummins (1994) quotes

research which suggests students working in an additive bilingual environment

succeed to a greater extent than those whose first language and culture are

devalued by their schools and by the wider society.

III. RESEARCH QUESTION

The study aim to investigate the Effects of Bilingual Formative

Assessment to the Achievement of Slow-Learner Student in Grade Seven Science.

Specifically, the researcher wants to answer the following questions.

1. What is the performance of the students before the exposure to the

Bilingual Formative Assessment?

2. What is the performance of the students after the exposure to the Bilingual

Formative Assessment?

3. Is there a significant difference between the performance before and after

the exposure to Bilingual Formative Assessment?

 IV. SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This study aims to investigate the Effect of Bilingual Formative Assessment

for Low Performing Students in Grade Science 7 of Makati High School for School

Year 2015-2016. The study was conducted on the Third Quarter part of the school

year. The 16 identified low performing students from section VII-Masigasig

handled by the researcher were used as the sample. The section has 34 students.

The other 18 students served as the control group of the study.

The respondents answered the teacher made bilingual formative

assessment during the given time for assessment. The Third Grading period

covered the Physics topics in Grade Seven Science. Which includes the following

topics: Describing Motion, Waves, Sound, Light, Heat and Electricity. The Bilingual

Assessment is just a formative assessment intended to prepare the students for

the summative test.

 V. METHODOLOGY

Sampling

There are sixteen students who were used the bilingual formative

assessment. These students were from section in which the researcher is handling

in the school year 2015-2016. Which is Masigasig. These were all Grade Seven

students of Makati High School Annex. Section Masigasig has a class size of 32.

The other sixteen were used as the control group. They are the average students

of the section.

The sample was chosen based on the observation and assessment in the

previous grading period which is first and second grading. The researcher also

conducted an interview to the low performing students and asked them on what

was the problem regarding the lesson and to the strategies of the teacher. The

sample were those students who have low scores quizzes and examination in the

previous quarter, but they are active during the class discussion. This is how the

16 respondents were chosen as sample in the action research. The researcher has

a total contact time with each section equivalent to 4 hours in a week as prescribe

by K to 12 curriculum. The daily schedule for Grade 7 Masigasig is from 1:20 PM

to 2:20 Pm.
Research Instrument

To conduct the study, the researcher used research instruments.

These are Bilingual Formative Assessment (BFA) and Science Achievement Test

(SAT), that was developed by the researcher. The Bilingual Formative Assessment

was subjected to a Filipino Teacher for Evaluation of Filipino language used in the

BFA.

Bilingual Formative Assessment (BFA). The main instrument of the action

research is a paper and pencil test which is written in English but a translation in

Filipino is provided. These BFA includes cognitive questions that helped the

student to be familiar with the term used in examination and clearly understand

the concept of the topic.

Science Achievement Test. The researcher developed a 50 multiple-choice

item Science Achievement Test in Physics and was used as instrument in the

study. The achievement Test measured the cognitive skills of the respondents

namely, content, application and procedural. The test was developed following a

table of specifications. The total score of the Science Achievement Test is 50.
Data Gathering Procedure

The first phase was the development of the Bilingual Formative Assessment

and evalution by the a Filipino teacher.

The second phase was the administration of the pretest to the student of

grade 7 section masigasig. The The test that was given covered the topic for third

quarter,that is Describing Motion, Light, Sound and Electricty with a total of 50

questions. The test ran for one hour. The results of the test was recorded

separately based on their group (experimental and control) for comparison

purposes.

The third phase was the conduct of the regular teaching method and class

activities. The teacher followed the classrrom routine and the lesson plan for

each day. The teacher utilized the bilingual formative assessment in each

evaluation part of the lesson. The used of Bilingual Formative Assessment last for

the whole third quarter.

Each lesson the teacher gave the BFA to the students belong to the

experimental group. It was the same question to the students in the control

group. Checking of answers to the BFA and discussion was done right after the

allotted time assigned for the given session.

 After disccussing all lesson and utilization of BAF, administration of a

posttest was given to the respondents.

The result of the posttest was computed and compared it to the pretest

performed before the BFA was used.

Data Analysis

It is important to note that proper selection of the statistical techniques

should be given consideration in any educational research so that one can arrive

at valid conclusion. In the analysis and interpretation of results the following

statistical measure will be used.

Percentage of Mastery. This tool will be used to determine the

performance of the students in the pretest and posttest.

The formula for this is.

Percentage of mastery = Raw Scorex 100%

Total Score

Mean. To determine the competency the formula for mean will be used.
Where:

X= mean
∑X= sum of all score
N= number of subjects
Correlated T- Test. To calculate if there is a significant different between the

pretest and posttest performance of the participants, correlated T-test will be

used.

t= __n (x-x1)___
n∑d2 –(∑d)2
n-1

where:
t= test
n= sample size
x= mean of pretest
x= mean of posttest
∑d2= summation of deviaton

The respondents of the study were pretested to determine their prior

knowledge on the subject matter before the BFA was utilized. The table below

shows the results of the pretest of the 16 respondents.

 Table 1 Pretest Result
Mean N MPS
Prestest 15.3750 16 30.75

Table 1 shows the prestest administered to 16 students before the use of

Bilingual Formative Assessment. It has a mean score of 15.3750 and a mean

percentage score of 30.75.

The same achievement test was used to determined the performance of

the students after utilizing BFA.

Table 2. Posttest Result

Mean N MPS
Posttest 34.50 16 69.00

Table 2 shows the posttest administered to 16 students after the use of

Bilingual Formative Assessment. It has a mean score of 34.50 and mean
percentage score of 69.00.
The result of prestest and posttest was subjected into t-test to determin if

there is a significant difference between the result of prestest and posttest.

Table 3. t- Test of Pretest-Posttest

Mean t-value p-value Remark
pretest 15.375 -21.623 0.000 Significant
posttest 34.50
 The computation indicate that there is a significant increase in the gain

score obtain of the respondents which is equivalent to 19.125 points from the

34.5 and 15.375 mean scores of the posttest and pretest, respectively. The t-test

for paired sample results to a t-value of -21.623 and p-value of 0.000. this means

that the difference between the posttest and pretest is significant.

VI. WORKPLAN

Table 4. Activity Time Line

Acitvity Person Involve Day/Time Started Day/Time End
Preparation of Teacher- October 26, 2015 October 27, 2015
Pretest and Researcher
Posttest
Identification of
Sample Teacher- October 29, 2015 October 29, 2015
Researcher
Conducting an
Interview to the Teacher and November 2, 2015 November 3, 2015
Respondents Respondents
Administer Pretest Teacher and November 4, 2015 November 4, 2015
Respondents
Construction of Teacher Two days before
BFA and researcher, each Lesson from To January 5,
Evaluation Filipino Teacher November 5, 2015 2016
Classroom Teacher
Discussion and researcher and November 5, 2015 To January 5, 2015
Administration of Respondents Christmas Break
BFA not included
Posttest Teacher January 7, 2016 January 7, 2016
Administration researcher
Tabulating and Teacher January 11, 2016 January 15 2016
Analysis of the Researcher,
Gathered Data statistician

VII. COST ESTIMATES

The cost of the material being used in the action research was very

minimal. The pretest, posttest and the BFA paper were the main material. The

pretest consist of 4 pages and another 4 pages for the posttest. There are 12

Bilingual Formative Assessment with one page in each quiz. The table below

shows the computation of the printing cost of the material.

Table 5 Cost and Expences

Material Number of Number of Amount per Total
Pages Copies Page
Pretest 4 16 .75 c P 48
BFA 12 16 .75 c P 144
Posttest 4 16 .75 c P 48
P 240
 VII. ACTION PLAN

After gathering and analyzing the data, the researcher found out that using

Biligual Formative Assessment is an effective tool to enhance the academic

performance of low performaning students in Grade 7 Science, specifically in

Physics part.

Based on the result of the pretest with a mean score of 15.38 and posttest

with a mean score of 34.5 the increase is evidently significant. It was subjected

into a T- test with t value of -21.62 and p value of 0.000.

The researcher concluded that the Bilingual Formative Assessment helped

to improved the performance of the of low achieving students in Grade 7 Science.

Based on the findings of the study and conclusions drawn, the following are

hereby recomended:

1. Use Bilingual Formative Assessment in other topics in Grade 7 Science

to further validate the result of the research.

2. Conduct a similar research on the use of BFA in other discipline to

confirm the result of the study.

3. Encourage administrators, science supevisors and teachers to construct

Bilingual Formative Assessment in all topics in Science from Grade 7 to

Grade 10 or if possible up to Grade 12.

VIII. REFERENCE

BESRA Report (2006) 2015 KRT 3 Formulation of the National Learning

Strategies for the Filipino and English Languages. Ocampo, D. Ed.
Unpublished report, Department of Education, Philippines.

Calderon, M. E. and. Minaya-Rowe., L. (2003). Designing and

Implementing Two Way Bilingual Programs A Step-by-Step Guide for
Administrators, Teachers, and Parents. Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin
Press, Inc A Sage Publications Co.

Cloud, N. Genesee., F. and Hamayan, E. (2000). Dual Languag Instruction

A Handbook for Enriched Education. Boston, MA, Heinle and Heinle
Thomson Learning.
Cummins, J. (1991) Language Development and Academic Learning
Cummins, J in Malave, L. and Duquette, G. Language, Culture and
Cognition Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pedgogy: Bilingual Children in

the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Cummins, J. (1994) The Acquisition of English as a Second Language, in

Spangenberg-Urbschat, K. and Pritchard, R. (eds) Reading Instruction for
ESL Students Delaware: International Reading Association,

Dumatog, R.C., and Dekker D.E. (2003). First Language Education in

Lubuagan Northern Philippines. A paper presented in “Language
Development,Language Revitalization, and Multilingual Education in
Minority Communities in Asia”, conference organized by SIL
International, Mahidol University andUNESCO-Bangkok.
Accessed May 30, 2008.
www.sil.org/asia/ldc/parallel_presentations.html

Gonzalez, V. (Ed.). (1999). Language and cognitive development in

second language learning: educational implications for children and
adults. Boston, Massachusett Allyn and Bacon.

Gonzales, A., and Sibayan, B. (1988). Evaluating bilingual education in

the Philippines:1974-1985. Manila, Philippines:Linguistic Society of the
Philippines.

Freeman, Y.S., Freeman, D. E.; and Mercuri, S. (2005). Dual Language

Essentials. Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann.

Howard, E. R., Sugarman, J., Christian, D., Lindholm-Leary, K. and Rogers,

D.(2005). Guiding Principles for Dual Language Education.
Washington, DC, Center for Applied Linguistics.

Howard, E.R. and Sugarman, J. (2007). Realizing the Vision of Two-Way

Immersion. Washington, DC, Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta
Systems Co, Inc.

Lessow-Hurley, J. (2000). The Foundations of Dual Language Instruction.

 NewYork, Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Resuma, V., and Ocampo, A. (2005). Filipino Bilang Wikang Panturo sa

U.P.Integrated School: Isang Pag-aaral. Alipato A Journal of Basic
Education 3(1) Office of Research Development and Publication. UP
Integrated School. University of the Philippines: Diliman, Quezon City.

Villanueva, J and Almario, A. (2009). Dual language program models in

Philippine progressive schools. Unpublished works

MAKATI HIGH SCHOOL

Gen. Luna St. Poblacion, City of Makati
EFFECTS OF BILINGUAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT TO THE ACHIEVEMENT OF
LOW PERFORMING STUDENTS IN GRADE SEVEN SCIENCE

BONN LESTER FLOYD R. CERVANTES

Submitted to:

MAKATI HIGH SCHOOL

ACTION RESEARCH COMMITTEE

September 2016