Assessment in the Affective Domain; Issues, Importance and the need for Re-orientation of

Social and Civic Education Teachers

Emeka Timothy Nwokocha Mumini Adamu

University of Jos, Jos. Umar Suleiman Coll. Of Edu. Geshua
08164704521, mariodwise@gmail.com 08026792251, muminiadamu90@gmail.com

Abstract

This paper focused mostly on challenges of assessing learning outcomes in Social Studies and

Civic Education which are seen as subjects in the affective domain, but due to emphasis on

cognitive development, assessment of learning outcomes in these subject areas tend to neglect

completely the affective domain which focuses on attitude, character, values etc which are often

difficult to measure and assess. Hence the teacher in the classroom relegates assessment in the

affective domain to the background. The paper considered certain challenges in carrying out

assessment in the affective domain which includes how to affectively measure behaviour,

teacher’s lack of competencies and impatience in measuring learning outcomes in the affective

domain etc. The paper also outlined some techniques in measuring learning outcomes in the

affective domain which includes observation, use of socio-metric devices, checklist etc. The

paper recommended that the promotion of learners should not be restricted to the cognitive or

psychomotor abilities alone but also affective abilities, teaching in the affective domain should

move away from lecturing or the teacher impacting knowledge to an engaging approach where

the learners will have to find knowledge for themselves.

Keywords: Assessment, Affective Domain, Re-orientation, learning outcomes, Social Studies,

Civic Education
Introduction

Subject areas like Social Studies and Civic Education has suffered mostly when it comes to

assessment of learners outcome owing largely to the emphasis laid on cognitive assessment as

most of the techniques used in assessing learning outcomes focuses on cognitive knowledge.

Though the challenge of making clear distinction between the affective domain and the cognitive

domain mostly as it relates to classroom interaction could prove difficult for the teacher in

subject areas like social studies and civics but the challenge or difficulty should not prove a

reason for the neglect of effective assessment in the areas. Individuals have raised questions such

as “why is crime still on the increase despite subjects like Social studies and Civic Education in

the schools”. When such questions are raised, it only throws educators in the subject area into

confusion due largely to a question they have barely been able to provide answers to “How can

one effectively measure behaviour”?

The affective domain which the Social studies and Civic Education focuses on deals with

attitudes, motivation, willingness to participate, valuing what is being learned, incorporating

values into life, etc. These subjects likewise aid the learning of character that aids one to become

a functional member of a society, appreciate the interdependence of human existence and imbibe

virtues the society deems worthwhile. According to Bozimo and Ikwumelu (2009) the goals of

social studies and civic education centers on an acronym (VASK) which entails the development

of values that aids coexistence in a social group, citizenship attitudes and characters that

encourages interdependence and group development, positive behaviours that will engender

development in every society, skills for personal development of an individual to fit properly into

a social group and knowledge in terms of learning and transmission of the desirables for a

society. Many key Social studies and Civics Education skills such as critical thinking, social

2
responsibility and informed decision-making are hard to define compared to skills from other

subjects, (Iyortsuun, 2002). Furthermore, some of these complex skills such as the development

of responsible citizenship may not be evident until after students have left school and engaged in

tasks such as informed voting, social action, and other forms of civic participation. As a result of

these varied and contested skills, the field of social studies and civics has had great difficulty

reaching consensus on its key concepts and purposes. Including what constitutes sound

assessment and evaluation, because Social studies and Civics are concerned with affairs in the

real world.

Joseph (2016) opines that the limited role for assessment has broadened over the past

twenty years for a number of reasons and one of them is that the goals of education in general,

and social studies in particular, have greatly expanded as we attempt to help our children acquire

the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviours required for living in the twenty-first century. As

social studies educator, Joseph argued that Social studies and Civic Education is not about the

accumulation of selected facts for later recall but should aim to: Produce a responsible person

able to cope with change, capable of making reasonable decisions, who is an intelligent

consumer and controller of science and technology, able to live with and appreciate human

diversity, and support and defend human dignity. Such a person should be able to settle

differences honourably, avoid the use of violence, be cognizant of, and active in, the stewardship

of our planet, and have the skills necessary to maintain a functional economic system and

democratic government. This expanded view of the purposes of social studies education is

reflected across the curriculum and requires a much more sophisticated approach of assessment

and evaluation (Joseph, 2016) concluded.

3
 Assessment is a process by which information is obtained relative to some known

objective or goal (Bob, 2014). In classroom assessment, since teachers themselves develop,

administer and analyze the questions, they are more likely to apply the results of the assessment

to their own teaching. Therefore, it provides feedback on the effectiveness of instruction and

gives students a measure of their progress. As Biggs (1999) maintains, two major functions can

be pointed out for classroom assessment: One is to show whether or not the learning has been

successful, and the other one is to clarify the expectations of the teachers from the students. A

primary concern in education is whether students attain the objectives of the course of study or

curriculum scope and sequence. This paper therefore tries to look at how effective assessment in

social studies and civics education can aid the achievement of the goals of the subject areas.

Clarity of terms; Measurement, Assessment and Evaluation

According to Okpalla (1999) measurement is a process of assigning numerals to objects,

quantities or events in other to give quantitative meaning to such qualities. In the classroom, to

determine a child’s performance, you need to obtain quantitative measures on the individual

scores of the child. If the child scores 80 in Mathematics, there is no other interpretation you

should give it, you cannot say he has passed or failed.

Assessment is a fact finding activity that describes conditions that exists at a particular time.

Assessment often involves measurement to gather data, (Wittrock, 2006). Assessment in

educational setting may describe the progress students have made towards a given educational

goal at a point in time. However, it is not concerned with the explanation of the underlying

reasons and does not proffer recommendations for action. Although, there may be some implied

judgment as to the satisfactoriness or otherwise of the situation.

4
Keachie (2005) explains that evaluation is a systematic process of determining the extent to

which students achieve instructional objectives. Evaluation therefore, is the systematic process of

collecting evidence to determine whether changes are taking place in the learner as well as

determines the amount or degree of change in individual students.

The Affective Domain and the Goals of Social and Civic Education

Learning domains have always played important roles in evaluating the student’s

knowledge and skills. The learning domains can be incorporated, while designing the course

outcomes of all the courses in a program. However, the assessment of learning domains practiced

in many educational programs results in vague assessment methods and as a result, they fail to

show concrete continual quality improvement, (Wittrock, 2006)

The need for effective assessment and evaluation in the subject areas of Social Studies and Civic

Education has been a concern to stakeholders in the area. Social studies and civic education has

been categorized mostly as subjects in the affective domain of knowledge. Judging from Blooms

Taxonomy, these subject areas focus more on the attitude of the learners emphasizing cognitive

abilities to behavioural, emotional, motivational and valuing abilities, (Kazi, 2007).

A goal of Bloom’s taxonomy is to motivate educators to focus on all the three domains, creating

a more holistic form of education. Bloom divides the educational objectives into three domains:

cognitive domain, which deals with how a student acquires, processes and utilizes the

knowledge. It is the “thinking” domain and it focuses on intellectual skills. Psychomotor domain,

which focuses on performing sequences of motor activities to a specified level of accuracy,

smoothness, rapidity or force. Affective domain, which deals with attitude, motivation,

5
willingness to participate, valuing what is being learned and ultimately incorporating the

discipline values into real life, (Bloom, 1956).

According to Kazi (2007) the global goals are generally held and they led to the development of

national goals of the subject in different countries across the world and these goals are;

a. The inculcation of values, attitudes and appreciations in the learners

b. The development of skills like group, social, intellectual and manipulative

c. The acquisition of knowledge and understanding

d. The development of concepts and generalizations peculiar to social studies as a discipline

or subject

From the goals outlined above, it is evident that social studies resides in the affective domain

dealing with attitudes, values, social skills for living and acquisition of knowledge for socio-civic

living in a society as suggested by Bloom. The assessment of these traits that constitutes social

studies has been mostly evaluated on the cognitive levels of tests and assignments. Otote and

Omo-Ojugo (2009) lamented that social studies as a subject encourages the development of

socio-civic and personal behavior. Otote and Omo-Ojugo is of the opinion that if its’ focus is on

the affective domain of learning, it would be easy to ascertain success of instruction through an

appropriate evaluation of this domain.

Civic Education is generally understood to as a means to develop three elements of

democratic citizenship: civic disposition, civic knowledge and civic skills. Civic disposition

involves citizens developing confidence to be able to participate in civic life, engaging in

political processes, assuming the roles, rights and responsibilities usually associated with

citizenship. In democratic systems, it involves being open, tolerant and responsible in exercising

6
their rights and responsibilities. Civic knowledge means citizens should understand their political

and civic context, know their social and economic rights as well as their political and civil rights,

understand the roles, rights and responsibilities of citizenship. While Civic skills involve citizens

acquiring the ability to explain, analyze, interact, evaluate, defend a position, monitor processes

and outcomes, using knowledge for informed participation in civic and political processes,

(Iyortsuun, 2002). This summarizes the goals of civic education as taught in our schools and it is

also evident that these goals are domiciled in the affective domain than the cognitive or

psychomotor domain which emphasizes the disposition of the learner more than remembering

and regurgitating what has been taught.

Challenges to Teaching and Learning in the Affective Domain

The affective domain is difficult to pin down and define unlike the cognitive and

psychomotor domain as supported by Ringness (1975) but its importance and relevance in

learning cannot be undermined. Bloom (1956) describes learning objectives in the affective

domain as those which involve interest, attitudes and values. Affective domain is critical for

learning but is often not well addressed possibly owing to the nature of knowledge in this

domain. This domain focuses on attitude, motivation, willingness to participate, valuing what is

being learned and ultimately incorporating the discipline values into real life forming character

and dispositions of the individual. It follows then that teaching in the affective domain is at least

as important as instruction in the cognitive and psychomotor domains. Yet, instructional design

models and practices have focused primarily on the acquisition of knowledge and psychomotor

skills. Stages in this domain are not as sequential as the cognitive domain, but have been

described as the following: Receiving (willing to listen), Responding (willing to listen), Valuing

(willing to be involved), Organizing (willing tο be an advocate), Characterization (willing tο

7
change one’s behaviour, lifestyle, or way of life) which is at the peak, (Jarolimek, 2003). Issues

of choice are fundamental as far as behaviour and attitude is involved and human behaviour is so

dynamic that a given situation can change the disposition of an individual. Hence there is hardly

a particular code of standard to describe what should constitute behaviour and character as far as

choices are concerned in a democratic setting. This challenge describes social studies and civic

education as subjects which are “value laden and value free”. Value laden in the sense that

developing positive and desirable values in the learners is a task that has to be achieved while on

the other hand, values cannot be forced on the learner. For instance, social studies and civics will

barely have a position on issues such as gay marriage, while it will try to preach against gay

marriage largely due to cultural values it will on the same time not condemn those that practice it

since they have their rights to freedom of choice.

Orakwue (2000) suggested that videos and audio clips are excellent ways to engage the

affective domain as the target is to affect behaviour, attitude and values. Hence the senses should

be involved the best way possible. These video and audio clips should be short and include the

following: lecturers-students discussion on course value, Conducting Quiz at regular intervals,

examples of professionals applying the learned course, knowledge in their lives, conducting

course-wise guest lectures. But looking at this idea, our classrooms are not tailored to

accommodate such, the syllabus barely recommends the use of these facilities and the timetable

in the schools will not accommodate a teacher who wants to try. Evaluation in the affective

domain is one of the needed changes in Social and Civic education evaluation. It will not only

improve teaching of the subject but also enhance student’s interest and performance in Social

Studies and Civic Education.

Issues of Assessment in the Affective Domain

8
 In Social studies instruction and Civic education, assessments in the cognitive and

psychomotor domains have continued to dominate teachers’ instructional evaluation to the

detriment of the affective domain. School syllabus and examinations which are mostly skewed

towards the recall or memory pattern also encourage the development of cognitive domain

leading to rote learning, examination malpractices, individuals who know it but lack the moral

and will to apply in the school system. For many teachers in Nigeria, evaluation has a fixed

period: mid-term, term end, semester end and end of the year. This is also one of the reasons why

most Nigerian students develop mainly cognitive domain and partly the psychomotor domain, to

the neglect of affective domain which is often why individuals will ask the question “why do we

still have high rate of crime and moral decadence despite the place of social and civic education

in our schools”

Affective learning outcomes involve attitudes, motivation and values, the expression of

these often involves statements of opinions, beliefs, or an assessment of worth. The emphasis on

evaluating knowledge rather than values, attitudes and feelings is based on the fact that character

is not largely independent of knowledge (Jarolimek, 2003). However, Iyortsuun (2002) opines

that testing for values, attitudes and feelings required different techniques other than those used

for cognitive aspect of learning. Jarolimek (2003) further pointed out that to evaluate typical

behaviour in the affective domain (attitudes, values and feelings), teachers may have to rely on

systematic but informal observation of students’ behaviour in real, non-test situations.

Orakwue (2000) identified some problems that arise in application and evaluation of affective

domain in the classroom to include:

9
i. Method: There is no one universally agreed way of applying the affective domain in

educational objective. Unlike the cognitive domain, which is streamlined, affective domain is

strictly speaking, broad and not standardized. Besides, it is time consuming and energy

consuming during its application in teaching and evaluation process.

ii. Not coming easily: The proposed objectives, which border mainly on change in behavioural

patterns morally and otherwise do not easily come by. In many cases they are not even

achievable in particular classroom periods. As a result of that, many impatient teachers easily

abandon the practice and the idea. Moreover, a teacher may not even notice any change in

behaviour after an effective teaching in Social Studies lesson.

iii. Performance Evaluation: Changes in students’ morals, values, attitudes, likes, dislikes

and feelings are not easily observable. As a result, their proper recording and evaluation become

difficult.

iv. Lack of Adequate Training: Many teachers lack adequate training in the application of

subjective evaluation especially as it pertains to the making of effective inferences. To a teacher

not trained properly in this field, the exercise looks so simple at first, later it becomes unclear to

him and at last, completely abandoned or omitted due to ignorance.

v. Erroneous Assumption: Some well-trained teachers hold very wrong assumption about the

affective objectives while teaching. They often presume that the affective domain has automatic

side effects when one is achieving cognitive objectives. But teaching ordinarily does not produce

affective effects just like that.

Methods for Effective Assessment in Social and Civic Education (affective domain)

10
 As stated above, assessing and evaluating student progress is a complex endeavour, good

teachers will develop a range of tools for helping with this task. Some will be in traditional forms

and some will be newer forms such as performance or authentic assessment which are relevant in

assessing the affective domain. Some options are outlined below but these represent only a small

part of what is possible, (Jarolmek, 2003, James, 2016, Okafor & Arinze, 2011).

Performance assessment

Performance assessment is considered new although it is as old as the term assessment

itself, unlike selected response, the assessor does not count correct responses in order to render a

judgement. Instead she or he collects data on the process or makes a judgement about the quality

of the final product as students actually do something. There are many examples of social studies

performance tasks, such as: Students analyze a transcribed excerpt of a discussion of a recurring

public issue e.g. hate speeches, distinguishing among factual, definitional, and ethical issues, and

judging the quality of each participant’s contribution. Okafor & Arinze (2011) suggests that

performance activities;

 are central to the unit and it’s a big question

 are known to students in advance

 require students to think deeply about important issues

 ask students to create a meaningful product or performance

 demand students use different learning styles and intelligences

 make clear to students the standards by which their work will be judged

 foster the habit of self-assessment

 allow teachers to act as coaches

11
Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessments are a particular form of performance assessment where students

are required to perform a real-life activity and an assessment is made based on that activity. For

example, the students will embark on personal campaign against prostitution, drug abuse, child

trafficking to mention but a few.

Structured observation

This entails watching for, and collecting evidence on particular behaviours. In the area of

thinking, for example, we might watch for:

• Perseverance: Do students give up or back up and use a different strategy if the first ones do

not work?

• Decreased impulsiveness: Do students blurt out answers and make many corrections in their

written responses or do they pause before an-swering, make sure they understand the learning

task, and consider the responses of others in building arguments?

• Flexible thinking: Do students use the same ap-proaches for different problems or do they use

and weigh the merits of alternative strategies, consider the approaches of others and deal with

more than one classification system simultaneously?

• Metacognition: Are students unaware of how they learn or do they describe and reflect on the

processes they used in learning?

• Careful review: Do students hand in uncorrected or unedited work as soon as it is done or do

they take time to review and edit?

12
These observations would be structured not only in the sense that the teacher looks for evidence

for precise criteria like these but also in the sense that some form of record is kept of the

observations such as checklists or anecdotal notes.

Rating Scale

A rating scale is an evaluation instrument that can be used to show the degree at which

particular traits are in a student or the rate at which the student exhibits a particular character for

example cooperation. A rating scale usually bears in it a number of traits to evaluate, which are

believed to be present in a student but now aims at finding out the degree of their presence. It

usually uses these rating items: very high, moderate, low and very low.

Work Sample (Portfolio Assessment)

Work sample or portfolio consists of sample of a student’s work accumulated in a folder

over a period of time. Additionally it may include observations and comments regarding the

students (Okafor & Arinze, 2011). Portfolio provides a holistic view of a student’s capabilities

and behavioural standard. It is normally reviewed periodically through out the year to chart

progress.

Socio-metric Device

Socio-metric is an evaluation technique used in evaluating progress in social relations and

changes in social structure of a particular group of people. Since human behaviours change often,

socio-metric device is normally applied more than once to a particular group to ensure its

reliability. This device can be used to determine how co-operative and social individual students

are, (Alinier & Alinier, 2005)

13
Behavioural Record (Anecdotal Record)

Behavioural record or anecdotal record is a description of specific incidents or situations

regarding the behaviour of individual students. A collection of such description over a period of

time provides the teacher with a pattern of behaviour that has occurred or is progress (Bozimo

and Ikwmelu, 2009).

Likert Scale

Likert attitudinal scale is an evaluation instrument used by the teacher to determine

varying levels of students’ personal opinions on topical issues. These levels or scale ask students

opinion on whether they:

i. Strongly agree (SA)- 5 points

ii. Agree (A) – 4 points

iii. Undecided (UD)- 3 points

iv. Disagree (D) - 2 points

v. Strongly disagree (SD)- 1point (Orakwue, 2000).

James (2004) suggested the following, classroom observation, student’s ratings, student

achievement, peer rating, self rating, teaching interview, parents rating, competence tests, and

indirect measures of assessment of learning outcomes in Social studies and Civics Education.

These suggests that a social studies and civics education teacher has more to do than the usual

chalk and talk method of instruction and test and examination approach to assessing students

14
understanding and performance. The need to produce effective citizens who can make

meaningful changes in their communities cannot be overemphasized then.

Importance of Assessment in the Effective Domain

One major question that will guide the discussion here will be posed in this form; is the

school responsible for the development of qualities of character and conscience of learners as

expressed in their interests, attitudes, appreciations, values and emotional set of biases? An

approach to take will be to look at the school as the nucleus of the society. The school serves as

the medium through which the society transmits her values from one generation to the other.

Whatever the society deems worthwhile, the school propagates such to the members of the

society starting from such early age.

Nnamani and Oyibe, (2016) are of the opinion that the assessment of character, attitudes,

behaviours, value and other variables that constitutes the affective domain is important as these

traits are exhibited by the learners not just within the school environment but in the larger

society. Affective domain is the much more desired of the objectives achievable in Social and

Civic Education. It is important because it is the only area that touches the mind and helps to

train and develop the humanistic aspects of the students. Thus, it borders mostly on co-operation,

honesty, trust, fare play, appreciation, prudence, chastity, hardworking, self-control and many

other things that really help to bring about unity, understanding and mutual relationship between

individuals and groups in the society. Affective education in Social Studies and Civics enables

the students to use “evidence rather than supported opinions and the use of logical rather than

illogical, (Nnamani & Oyibe, 2016). This is to say that effective teaching enables the students to

become logical and develop critical thinking. While evaluation of students in affective domain

15
helps the teacher to determine the extent the students have developed logical ability, think

critically and imbibe the desired virtues of honesty, fare play, hardworking, co-operation,

appreciation of good works, trust, chastity to mention but a few. It then reflects in the quality of

citizenship a society will have as the students constitute the members of the society.

When such topic as value is being taught in the class, it is expected that students

understand the term and imbibe the virtuous that will be mentioned there in. Not just to have a

head knowledge of the concept of value without a reflection of good values in his or her

character. Hence assessment in the affective domain ensure that the teacher is after the

development of sound individuals with good value system, sound character and effective citizens

who will fit into and contribute to the development of their society.

Recommendations

Teachers of social studies and civic education should move towards employing the techniques

effective in measuring learning in the affective domain as enumerated above. This will ensure

that behaviours and attitudes which are the major objectives of the subject areas are measured.

This will improve the teaching and learning of character behaviour in the students both within

and outside the school for a better nation.

Also, cognitive assessment should not be the only bases on which placements in class, awards

and promotions should be made. Students with good behaviors and attitudes should be awarded

and promoted as well. This will encourage other students to strive to improve in their attitude

which is what social studies and civic education emphasizes. This is often said but never applied

as the tense reads “found worthy in character and learning” in most certificates issued to

students.

16
The major challenge to implementation has been teacher’s inabilities to employ affective

techniques of assessments in measuring learning.

Moreso, teaching and learning in social studies and civic education should shift from the

conventional classroom methods of lecturing and “teacher impacting knowledge” to inquiry

methods of the teacher facilitating knowledge and guiding the learners to find knowledge for

themselves. Hereby creating value and character that will aid their relevance outside the

classroom,

Conclusion

The study has lamented issues and challenges of assessment in the social and civic

education mostly as it bothers on the goals of these subject areas which centers more on the

affective domain than the cognitive aspects where the teacher focuses both in terms of teaching

and assessment. The goal of social studies and civic education if well achieved spans outside the

school environment to affect the society at large as the school is the nucleus of the society and a

medium where the society transmits her cherished values and ideals from one generation to

another. Hence social studies and civics should not be taught and assessed like other subject

areas focusing more on the cognitive and psychomotor domains.

References

Alinier, N. &, Alinier, G. (2005) Design of an objective assessment tool to evaluate students’
Basic electrical engineering skills. The Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject
Centre

Bob, K. (2014) Measurement, Assessment, and Evaluation in Education. We measure distance,

we assess learning, and we evaluate results in terms of some set of criteria. Assessed
from http://resource.unisa.edu.au/course/view.php?id=82

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational

17
 goals. handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.

Biggs, L. J. (1999). Future Directions for instructional design. Educational Technology. Vol. 22,
October, p. 18-23

Bozimo, G. & Ikwumelu, S. N. (2009). Social Studies in a Changing Society. Owerri:

Acadapeak Publisherss

Iyortsuun, P. (2002). Introduction to Teaching of Social Studies. Unpublished Monograph.

Federal College of Education, Obudu.

James, L. E (2004). Evaluating Teachers, An Alternative Model. Journal of Personal Evaluation

in Education vol.2 pp.5

Jarolimek, H. U (2003). Social Studies Competencies and Skills. Learning to Teach As An

International. New York: Macmillian

Joseph M. K, (2016) Elementary Social Studies (Scarborough, ON: Prentice Hall, 1991)

Kazi, N. P. (2007) The Scope of Social Studies Education. Federal College of Education,
Pankshin, Plateau State

Keachie, W. J (2005). Teaching Tips. A Guide Book for The Beginning College Teacher.
Lexington, M.A: DC Heath and Company 

Nnamani, S. C. & Oyibe, O. A. (2016). Achieving Nigerian Educational objectives

through effective Social Studies instruction. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in
Education Volume 6, Issue 4 Ver. IV, PP 19-24

Okpalla P. M. (1999) Measurement and Evaluation in Education. Stiching – Horden

Publishers (Nig.) Ltd. Benin City.

Okafor, V. E. & Arinze, F. O. (2011) The Needed Change in Social Studies Evaluation for
Repositioning Social Studies Education to Meet Vision 20-2020 Challenges in Nigeria.
Nigerian Journal of Social Studies and Civic Education, Vol. 1 (1)
Orakwue, I.T.C. (2002). Social Studies for Tertiary Institutions. Onitsha:DESVIC Publishers

Otote, C. O., & Omo-Ojugo, M. (2009). Influence of teacher characteristics on affective

evaluation of social studies teachers in Nigeria. Education, 129(4), 654-660. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196414282?accountid=10919

Ringness, T. (1975). The affective domain in education. Boston: Little, Brown and Company

Withrock, M.C. (2006). Basic Principles In Curriculum Instruction. USA:  Chicago University
Press

18