Information Sheet ASSESS 213-7

Planning the Test

Learning Objectives:
After reading this INFORMATION SHEET, YOU MUST be able to:
1. Construct valid classroom assessment tests for measuring target
learning outcomes
2. Prepare a table of specifications for a classroom test.

Assessment in a classroom environment is accountability focused as it

reflects the success of the teacher and learners in the teaching-learning
process. The test results can be inferred to speak of how well the learners have
studied hard to hurdle the subject or course and the teachers, of how
effectively well they have delivered instruction. Teachers use summative
testing as their principal means to arrive at objective measures of students’
performance, a practice also well accepted by the stakeholders. This chapter
intends to assist you and the teachers in planning for the development of
classroom-based tests to ensure their validity for measuring student
achievement. It will provide guidance on:
• Specifying the purpose of the test from the very outset
• Identifying what essential learning outcomes to be measured, and
• Preparing a test blueprint that will guide the construction of items.
OVERALL TEST DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

The process of test construction for classroom testing applies the same
initial steps in the construction of any instrument designed to measure a
psychological construct. Figure 7.1 illustrates these common steps shared by
various authorities (Crocker and Algina, 1986; Miller, et. al. 2009; Russel and
Airasian, 2012):

A. Planning Phase – where purpose of the test is identified, learning

outcomes to be assessed are clearly specified and lastly a table of
specifications is prepared to guide the item construction phase

B. Item Construction Phase – where test items are constructed following

the appropriate item format for the specified learning outcomes of
instruction

Review Phase - where items are examined by the teacher or his/her peers,
prior to administration based on judgement of their alignment to content and
behavior components of the instructional competencies, and after
administration, based on an analysis of students’ performance in each item.

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 1 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
Figure 7.1 Test Development Process for Classroom Tests

Phase A is the focus of this chapter while Phases B and C will be treated
in the succeeding chapters.

Identifying Purpose of Test

Testing as an assessment mechanism aims to gather valid and reliable

information useful to both learners and teachers for formative as well as
summative purposes. Classroom formative assessment seek to uncover what
students know and can do to get feedback on what they need to alter or work
on farther to improve their learning. Teachers on the other hand, can use the
results to map out their pedagogical moves to improve teaching-learning for
appropriate mentoring. Feedback provided is used primarily to address specific
student learning problems while instruction is still in progress (Russel and
Airasian, 2012). With this formative purpose of testing, the behaviors to be
tested as well as how the items can be constructed will matter.

Multiple-choice items, for instance, lend themselves well in detecting and

diagnosing the source of difficulty in terms of misconceptions and areas of
confusion. Each option or alternative can represent a type of error that
Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 2 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
students are likely to commit. Here’s a very simple illustration of a multiple-
choice item with distractors selected to represent possible errors of students:

9 2
Item: − = _______
12 4
7
A. (Error in getting difference in both numerator and denominator)
8

3
B. (Correct option)
12

4
C. (Error in changing dissimilar fractions to similar ones)
12

6
D. (Error in getting difference between similar fractions)
12

Alternatives or distracters in selected-response items can be in terms of

popular falsehoods, misconceptions, misinterpretations, or inadequately stated
principles students may likely adapt. By obtaining the option plausibility of the
distracters, the teacher can identify what to reinforce in the lesson follow-up
based on the most frequently chosen error. This clearly illustrates a formative
use of a classroom test for diagnosis given during the instructional process.
With this purpose in mind, the teacher carefully selects the relevant content or
skills to be covered in a test.

Given at the end of the instructional process, a test takes a different

purpose. The test considers the planned competencies to be developed in the
unit of work. Consequently, the learners spend enormous time reviewing,
recalling or re-learning their past lessons prior to testing. Their test motivation
is contingent on the stake they put on testing, to “pass the test”, to “pass the
course”, or to “get high grades”. Many teachers conveniently use testing as
their sole means to arrive at objective measures for evaluating students’
performance and later, for communicating grades to stakeholders. Rigor in the
selection of learning competencies to be tested is determined by the teacher’s
purpose in giving the test.

Specifying the Learning Outcomes

Assessment has changed considerably as advances occur in the field of

educational and cognitive psychology particularly in defining learning and its
domains. Consequently, this has influenced curriculum designing for various
educational levels. Defining learning has progressed from being simply an
accumulation of facts to being able to allow the learner to interpret and apply
such facts to create new knowledge. Developments in the assessment of
learning have, of late, focused on multiple measures of student performance
reflecting different levels of outcomes of the teaching-learning process. The
Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 3 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
efforts of curriculum makers have recently and more seriously focused on
defining learning standards in terms of outcomes that spell out what learners
should know and be able to do along established hierarchical levels of cognition
(Anderson, et.al., 2004). The learning outcomes communicate both specific
content and nature of tasks to be performed. Assessment then becomes a
quality assurance tool for tracking student progress in attaining the
curriculum standards in terms of content and performance (Enc. No.1, DepEd
Order No. 73, s. 2012).

Processes for assessment recognize and address different learning targets

defined by the intended outcomes from knowledge of facts and information
covered by the curriculum at every level to various facets of showing
understanding of them: what operative process or skills they can demonstrate,
what bigger and newer ideas they can form and derive, the innovative products
and processes they can create including their authentic application in real-life.
They are considered as learning targets that include knowledge, reasoning,
skills, products and affect which are suggested by the levels of learning
outcomes targeted. They are derived from what are considered essential to be
achieved as a result of instruction.

Summative tests given at the end of an instructional process focus on

the accomplishment of the learning outcomes demarcated in every unit of work
designed in the curriculum. As mentioned previously, the learning outcomes
progress from the lowest cognitive level to the highest level attainable for the
grade. It will therefore follow that the assessment framework to be adapted
would suggest the inevitable use of appropriate methods and techniques for
assessment. As the focus of assessment varies due to recognized levels of
learning, so do the methods or techniques for assessment. Each learning
outcome when properly stated, defines the behavior or task to be performed
within a given content area. How to elicit this behavior through testing is part
of the construction planning phase.

Classroom tests need to be carefully planned to ensure that they

truthfully and reliably quantify what are intended to be measured. Does it
intend to assess amount of student learning at the end of an instructional
period, e.g. week’s lesson, a unit, a quarter or semester or at the end of a
course? This type of test is a post instructional assessment tool expected to
cover the curriculum standards of a subject or course, grade or year level in
terms of measurable and demonstrable student outcomes. It can also be used
as a pre-instructional assessment tool which can diagnose what the learners
know of the new lesson for instructional adjustment on the part of the teacher.
As important as these two assessment purposes is utilizing the test as a means
to inform the learners how they are learning and how they are progressing.

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 4 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
Preparing a Test Blueprint

Whatever the purpose of the test maybe, a teacher must determine

appropriately the learning outcomes to be assessed. These are the two most
significant elements a classroom teacher must competently be definite about
when planning for a test. Regardless of what subject area s/he is teaching, a
classroom test covers the learning outcomes intended and essential to be
achieved within the unit or period of work, in terms of cognitive skills or
competencies to be performed and demonstrated. Particularly realizing this
planning phase helps teachers make genuine connections in the trilogy among
curriculum, instruction and assessment (Fives, H. & DiDonato-Barnes, N.,
2013). The curriculum dictates the instructional as well as assessment
strategies to be applied while assessment informs both the curriculum and
instruction what decisions to make to improve learning

Curriculum

Instruction Assessment

Figure 7.2

To assure the preparation of a good test, a test blueprint is commonly set up in

a two-way Table of Specifications (TOS) that basically spells WHAT will be
tested and HOW it will be tested to obtain the information needed. WHAT
covers two aspects: the content area (i.e. subject matter) being covered and the
target learning outcomes (i.e. competencies). These two aspects should sample
the intended curriculum standards for the subject or course. HOW specifies
the test format, i.e. the type of assessment question or task to be used and the
item distribution to attain an effective and balanced sampling of skills to be
tested. The length of test should be able to sample what students should know
based on an outline of work and not on ease of constructing questions
particularly for low level outcomes. The more important a learning outcome is,
Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 5 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
the more likely will there be more points allotted to it. McMillan (2007) suggests
some rules of thumb in determining how many items are sufficient for good
sampling. A minimum of ten items is needed to assess each knowledge learning
target in a unit but which should represent a good cross-section of difficulty of
items. However, if there are more specific learning targets to be tested, at least
five items would be enough for each one to allow for criterion-referenced
interpretation for mastery. Eighty percent (80%) correct of items for a
competency is an acceptable mastery criterion.

A table of specification takes different forms depending on what a teacher

wants to show. With only one element, e.g. the objectives or skills, in the TOS
present as shown in Table 7.1, it is called a one-way grid showing a plan for
testing different learning outcomes within the same topic area (e.g. verbs). One-
way TOS is often used for skill-oriented subjects like language and reading or
for classroom formative tests focusing on specific skills.

Table 7.1 A Simple One-way TOS for a Language Test

Objectives/Skills Number of items/points

1. Identify the statements with

10
errors in verb use.

2. Supply the correct verb forms in

10
a paragraph.

3. Prepare a news article reporting

20
a past school activity.

Total Items/Points 40

Another TOS is shown in Table 7.2 for the same language test. This time,
both elements are shown, i.e. what (subject matter and skills) and how (type of
test format). This instantiates a two-way grid or three-way grid depending on
the elements displayed. Column 1 shows the topic or content, Column 2, the
target instructional outcomes or the skills and Column 3, the item format
recommended for use.

For the test or item format, two general types can be utilized: objective
test items and non-objective or performance tasks. They are called objective
items because they have a single right or best answer for every item based on
a key to correction prepared in advance. They require the learners to either
supply a missing fact or select the correct response from a set of alternatives.
Performance tests, on the other hand, require learners to construct or create
responses, written or oral, (e.g. write a letter) or perform a task (e.g. design an
experiment). They are also referred to as non-objective items since scoring

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 6 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
relies on corrector’s judgment guided by a rubric or standard for scoring
prepared ahead. A classroom test can consist purely of objective items but
inclusion of performance tasks provides a better profile of the learners’ ability
across instructional outcomes.

Table 7.2. Sample Two-way Table of Specifications

Number of
Content Outcome/Skill Test Format
items/Points

A. Verb usage 1. Identify the Objective

statements with
10
errors in verb
use.

2. Supply the Objective

correct verb
10
forms in a
paragraphs

B. Communicative 3. Prepare a news Performance

writing article reporting a
20
past school
activity

Total Points 40

Outcomes 1 and 2 call for the application of rules in the use of verbs.
Although the term identify is used in Outcome 1, it goes beyond just knowing
or recalling the rule. The learners identify the statements with erroneous
application of a rule. Outcome 2 is more direct in applying the rule as the
learner has to supply the correct verb forms in a stimulus material like a
paragraph. Outcome 3 demands a higher level of cognition (i.e. creating) as it
requires the integration of different skills (verb usage, vocabulary, organization,
mechanics, etc.) to produce a news article.

Table 7.3 shows an expanded TOS by indicating the specific item format
to be used in framing the test questions. Outcome 1 may call for objective types
like Selection type requiring the response to be selected or recognized from two
given choices. For Outcome 2, Supply type can be used with a paragraph as
stimulus material with gaps or blanks representing the verbs to be supplied.
The number of gaps in the paragraph is the number of items for this portion.

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 7 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
Outcome 3 is a performance task calling for an authentic writing task of
producing a real product or output. It is non-objective since the teacher will
have to use a scoring scale to rate the finished product. The finished product
could be rated using Grammatical Accuracy and Clarity of Clarity of Message
as criteria for the rubric.

Table 7.3 An Expanded Table of Specifications

Objective Performance
Subject Area Outcome/Skill Alternate Gap Product
Form Filling Assessment

A. Verb usage 1. Identify the 10 Items

statements
(25%)
with errors in
verb use.

2. Supply the 10
correct verb Items
forms in a
(25%)
paragraph

B. Communicati 3. Prepare a 20 points

ve Writing news article
(50%)
reporting a
past school
activity.

TOTAL: 40 POINTS (100%)

Rubrics for Grammatical

Accuracy (10pts) and Clarity of
Message (10pts) can be used to
evaluate the article.

Planning a test blueprint for a long test like a final examination may be
presented by showing the different units of study that are meant to develop
similar cognitive outcomes as given in Table 7.4. Each unit may be intended to
develop a common set of skills like conceptual understanding, computational
skills and problem solving in Mathematics. Items for the first two outcomes can
be measured using objective items while problem solving can either be objective
or non-objective depending on how it is designed to be scored. A problem
Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 8 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
solving item as an analysis task requiring the learners to provide both the
solution and the correct answer may be given more than one point. Thus 15
problems can earn 45 points if 3 points are given for each (e.g. 2 points for the
solution or process and 1 point for the correct answer). This TOS variant
illustrates the logic of giving a greater value to a higher cognitive outcome level,
i.e. analyzing as more cognitively demanding than applying.

Clarity and specificity of the test blueprint in terms of what to test (i.e.
instructional content and cognitive ability or behavior) serve as primary
evidence of the content validity of a teacher-made test. The final version of the
test should mirror the test blueprint as prepared.

Table 7.4 A Table of Specifications in Mathematics

Competencies
Analysis No. of
UNIT Comprehending Applying
(Problem Items
(Concepts) (Computation)
solving)
A. Whole Numbers 5 12 5 22
B. Rational 5 8 2 15
Numbers
C. Geometry 10 5 3 18
D. Measurement 5 5 5 15
Total Item 25 30 15 70
Weight 25% 30% 45% 100%
(3
pts/item)

Other forms of Test Specifications

Miller, Linn & Gronlund (2009) has shown a way of preparing a table of
specifications that breaks down a learning outcome covering a wider domain.
This is done when the purpose of testing is to determine in particular the
source of difficulty in mastering an outcome. Again this is quite useful in skills-
oriented subject areas like Mathematics and Language. For instance in
Language, the outcome “demonstrate use of correct subject-verb agreement”
can be broken into more specific tasks for diagnostic purposes as shown in
Table 7.5.

Table 7.5 Table of Specifications for a Mastery Test on Subject-Verb

Agreement

Subject type Instructional Objective Number of items

Use correct verb Use correct verb

forms with forms with plural

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 9 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba
 singular subjects subjects

First person 5 5 10
subjects
Second person 5 5 10
subjects
Third person 5 5 10
subjects
Total items 15 15 30

With this type of specifications the teacher can easily detect the areas the
learners have gained mastery in and those which need additional instructional
attention. It will also be easy to set a mastery criterion (e.g. 80%) for a test
planned this way. This is rarely used however, for summative testing.

Date Developed:
Bachelor of Technical- Bulacan
June 2020
Vocational Teacher Polytechnic Page 10 of 10
Date Revised:
Education College
June 2020
Assessment in Learning 1
ASSESS 213
Document No. Developed by:
Revision # 02
40-ASSESS 213 Beverlyn Rose De Alba