COMPILATION FOR ENGLISH 48 - LANGUAGE

LITERATURE ASSESSMENT

Presented to:
PROF. HANSEL ROY NALLA
University of Mindanao
Matina, Davao City
 Table of Contents

Cover Page 1

Table of Contents 2

Introduction 3

Discussion and Interpretation 5

Recommendation 10

2
INTRODUCTION
 Introduction
Language and Literature Assessment (Eng 48) subject gave us a task to conduct a survey or a test.
What is the purpose of this survey? This is to have data for item analysis and a completion for the said
subject. What is an item analysis? Refers to statistical methods used for selecting items for inclusion in a
psychological test. of item analysis is to produce a relatively short list of items (that is, questions to be
included in an interview or questionnaire) that constitute a pure but comprehensive test of one or a few
psychological constructs. To carry out the analysis, large pools of candidate items, all of which show some
degree of face validity, are given to a large sample of participants who are representative of the target
population.
Ms. Josheri Janine Grace M. Salucop provided the test questionnaire which she got help from her
mother in making it. Constructing questions is not easy; it needs effort, knowledge and comprehension. We
conducted the survey or test at Vicenta Nograles National High School, where Mr. Kent Boyd K.
Concepcion and Mr. Democrito D. Baitin Jr. proctored the said survey/test. They conducted the survey/test
to the Grade 7 students. The survey/test went well and all the students participated. Ms. Angelica L. Lu and
Ms. Lanie Jowasen E. Mesiona tallied all the scores, solved, and made the interpretations. All in all it was a
group effort where everybody contributed to make this task possible.

4
DISCUSSION and
INTERPRETATION
 Discussion and Interpretation

Item Facility and Item Discrimination Analysis were distinguished from a 30 items questionnaire.
The IF result of each item is quotient of the numbers of correct (numbers of students who answered
correctly) divided to the total numbers of the student who took the test. Additionally, the item
discrimination analysis is the difference from the IF of the upper group subtracted to the IF of the lower
group.
In particular, only few items were considered as marginal and very good which the rest are identified
as poor that was categorized by using ID. Item 26 is the item which is very good with an ID of 0.43 for the
upper group got 0.57 IF than the lower group that has an IF of 0.14. In addition to that, there are four items
which is classified as marginal. These items were numbers 1, 2, 6 and 28; wherein the ID of 1 is 0.29 from
upper group IF 0.43 subtracted to the lower group 0.14 which is alike with the item 28. Also, for the items
2 and 6, the IF of upper group is 0.57 minus to the lower group IF 0.29 with a difference of 0.29 making it
as marginal with the same manner with 1 and 28.

6
 Discussion and Interpretation
Cont.
Since 16.67% of the items were marginal and very good, the rest of the percentage of 83.33%
marked as poor. Based on the data gathered, there are items where the IF of the upper group were
halfway from the lower group- items such as; 3, 8 and 11 with the same ID of 0.14. First, in item 3
the IF of the upper is 0.29 and the IF of lower is 0.14 which is equal as item 11 and in item 8 the
upper got 0.43 in IF while the lower has 0.29. One more, same as items 3, 8, and 11, the item 10 got
a higher total of IF in the upper than the lower group but the lower almost reach the figure of the
upper; IF upper is 0.57 and IF lower is 0.43. In contrast to such concept, the item 21’s lower group
overrun the IF of the upper group incredibly-IF upper 0.43 vs. 0.71 IF from lower, making a
difference of 0.29. Correspondingly, items 4 and 30 with the same statistics with an ID of -0.14. The
upper group has an IF of 0.43 and IF from the lower of 0.57 shows that there is only small difference
from the digit of lower from the upper that it almost surpass the IF of the upper, but still the
questionnaire is considered as poor. Also, the item 9 with an equal ID with items 4 and 30, the IF
from upper got 0.29 and the lower IF is 0.43 almost halfway from each other.

7
 Discussion and Interpretation
Cont.

Furthermore, items 15, 17, 18, 19, 23 and 24 shows an ID of -0.14 that the lower group got higher
IF than the upper. Item numbers 15, 17 and 19 shows an IF from the upper of 0.14 and the IF of the
lower is 0.29 but the numbers 18, 23 and 24 figures were doubled, the IF upper is 0.29 and the lower is
0.43, same concept as the lower IF is almost halfway the IF of the upper. Furthermore, there are 6 items
that reveals that lower group outperformed the upper group-items 12, 14, 20, 22, 25 and 29.
Remarkably, the items 12, 25 and 29 with an ID of -0.71 was the difference from the upper IF of 0.00
subtracted to the lower IF 0.71; item number 14, with an ID of -0.57 from the upper IF of 0.00 and lower
IF 0.57; in the same manner, item 22 got an ID of -0.29 from the IF of 0.00 minus lower IF 0.29; and last
the item number 20 has an ID of -0.43, the upper got an IF of 0.14 but was outrun still by the lower
group with an IF of 0.57. Lastly, the last 5 items has total ID of 0.00 for the figures in upper group IF is
same as the IF of the lower group; item 5, 0.14-0.14; item 7 and 13, 0.29-0.29; finally item 16 and 27,
0.43-0.43.

8
 Discussion and Interpretation
Cont.

In general, among all items, item 2 is labeled as easy. The item 2 with an IF of 0.73
(IF=18/30=0.73) is an easy question because most of the students got the correct answer. For items;
1,3-8,10,11,13,15-17,19-24,26-28 and 30 are marked as well centered items. These items, the students
that has an IF ranges from 0.30-0.67 with a percentage ranges from 30%-67% makes the said items as
not so easy neither difficult. On the other hand, the rest of the items are tagged as difficult; the items 9,
12, 14, 18, 25 and 29. These items has a percentage ranges from 0.00-0.27, which means most of the
students were not able to answer the items accurately. With that said, the questionnaire needs to
undergone revision making it more effective in testing the capability and amount of knowledge the
students really have.

9
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Recommendations

The result was revealed based on the data that the survey gathered upon administering some
survey questionnaires to the thirty (30) students of Grade 7, section Honesty in Vicenta C. Nograles
National High School, sixteen (16) of them are females, and fourteen (14) are males who answered the
given survey. The results of the survey show that there were more female takers than males. However,
as a teacher in this sense we can recommend and suggest that collaborative activities must be utilized
particularly in this subject during the lesson proper because there are students who were not proficient
the lesson from the test. The collaborative activity during the execution of application may can address
those who had a poor interest and understanding the lesson. Also, from the teacher’s end, this can be a
good strategy to exploit an appropriate assessment through the help of those students who had an easy
and very good comprehension in the topic and for some instance, it’s very advantage for those students
who are academically challenged in this subject.

11
 Recommendations Cont.
The survey result shows that there is only one (1) easy question from the takers, six (6) are
difficult questions, and twenty-three (23) are well centered questions. This means that seventy-seven
percent (77%) of the respondents had been answered the items with an average understanding of the
test. Therefore, we can recommend that those remaining twenty percent (20%) who answered the items
very difficult and missed the items answered correctly may have or given an appropriate assessment
and the teacher may give more example of each items for them to understand well the topic.
Also, in items discrimination we found out from the survey that there were twenty-five (25)
respondents or eighty-three percent (83%) percent of them answered the items poorly, four (4) of them
answered marginally and only one (1) of them answered very good and that was in item number twenty
six (26). This seems that eighty-three percent (83%) of the takers were answered the test poorly.
Therefore, we recommend for the teacher and the future teacher to contrast the performance of those
students who got the highest and lowest scores that being also separated the upper and lower group as
an indication for those who performed well from each item. It is also a reference of the teacher to quickly
determine the students who have a poor understanding of the test items. In this sense, the teacher as
we suggest may also give more attention for those who had low scores and fill in or assess them the
lacks in the said items.

12
 Recommendations Cont.

Other thing, we also recommend that the teacher may revise the test questionnaire that has been
answered by the respondents since the result shows most of the items were very difficult. The teacher
may have a more improved version of the test and s/he may also ensure that each of the revised items
are understood and easy to recall by the students.
Lastly, we would like also to recommend as per result of the survey that the teacher may call the
attention and determined the difficulties experienced by the students in which s/he can quickly respond
and exploit the best assessment for the students to really understand the item. There may be a
retention in any revise version of the test, that every taker must be well assessed using the appropriate
assessment prior to the execution of the test questionnaires for them to really understand the topic and
questions in the test particularly those students who are academically challenged and answered then
the previous or unrevised test in this subject.

13