16297136 assessment handbook v1

8/9/2019 16297136 Assessment Handbook V1

1/74

The Assessment HandbookContinuing Education ProgramVolume 1, May 2009

Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association


2/74

The Assessment Handbook: Continuing Education Program, Vol. 1, May 2009

2

The Assessment Handbook contains articles and materials presented in the Continuing Education Program of the Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association. Copyright 2009 by the Philippine Educational Measurement and Evalu

ation Association. Center for Learning and Performance Assessment, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde, 2544 Taft Ave. Manila, Philippines

Publication Division of PEMEA Philippine Educational Measurement and EvaluationAssociation


3/74


3

The Assessment Handbook: PEMEA Continuing Education Program Volume 1, May 2009Articles1 The 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum Lolita Andrada, Department of Educatio

n Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and Cognitive Processes Neil Parias, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde Assessing and DevelopingSelf-regulated Learning Carlo Magno, De La Salle University, Manila An Assessment Toolkit Paz Diaz, Roosevelt College System, Cainta Assessment for Learning via Alternative Assessment Jimelo Silvestre-Tipay, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde Portfolio Assessment: A Celebration of Learning Laramie Tolentino, De La Salle University, Manila

12

26

43

53

62


4/74


4

The 2010 Secondary Education CurriculumLolita Andrada Department of Education The Role of the School Head TheChallenge of Curriculum Reform Imperatives of Curriculum Reform Design of the C

urriculum Managing the implementation of the curriculum: School Readiness for Reform Managing for Excellence: The School Head as Culture Builder, Leader Builder, and Leader for Learning

THE CHALLENGE OF CURRICULUM REFORM 1. Maximize the potentials of curriculum change by linking it to increasing student participation and improving the internalefficiency of schooling. 2. Provide opportunities for children to develop 21st Century Core Skills. 21st Core Skills Digital Age Literacy Basic scientific, mathematical, and technological literacies Visual and information literacies Cultural literacy and global awareness

Inventive Thinking Adaptability/ability to manage complexity Curiosity, cr

eativity, and risk taking Higher-order thinking and sound reasoning

Effective Communication Teaming, collaboration, and interpersonal skills Personal and social responsibility Interactive communication skills

High Productivity Ability to prioritize, plan, and manage for results Effective use of real-world tools Ability to create relevant, high-quality products


5/74


5

IMPERATIVES OF CURRICULUM REFORM 1. 2. 3. 4. New needs, new curriculum The curriculum must remain responsive to national development goals. Lean is better. Curriculum reform as a process of continuous improvement

FEATURES OF THE CURRICULUM Lean- focuses on essential understandingsSets high expectations (standards-based) expressed in terms of what studentsshould know and the quality and proficiency of the skill that they are expectedto demonstrate as evidence of learning Rich and challenging- provides for a personalized approach to developing the students multiple intelligences Develops readiness and passion for work and lifelong learning

Figure 1 Design of the Curriculum


6/74

Figure 2 Conventional Curriculum Design

Figure 3 Backward Design (Understanding By Design)


7/74


7

Figure 4 Curriculum Process

I. Results/Desired Outcomes Defines what students should be able to know and do

at the end of the program, course, or unit of study; generally expressed in terms of overall goals, and specifically defined in terms of content and performancestandards. What learning standards are for They express what students shouldknow and be able to do to demonstrate their learning. They set clear performance expectations for students, helping them understand what they need to do to meet the expectations. They guide teachers in designing instruction and assessment around what is important to learn. Learning standards may be classified into: Content standards, which specify the essential knowledge (includes the most important and enduring ideas, issues, principles and concepts from the disciplines), skills and habits of mind that should be taught and learned. They answer thequestion, What should students know and be able to do?


8/74


8

Performance standards, which express the degree or quality of proficiency that s

tudents are expected to demonstrate in relation to the content standards. They answer the question, How well must students do their work? or At what level ofperformance would the student be appropriately qualified or certified?

Essential Understandings These are the big and enduring ideas at the heart ofthe discipline. Essential Questions These are open-ended, provocative questions that spark thinking and further inquiry into the essential meanings and understandings.

II. Assessment It defines acceptable evidence of students attainment of desired results. It determines authentic performance tasks that the student is expected to do to demonstrate the desired understandings. It defines the criteria

against which the students performances or products shall be judged. Products and Performances Students demonstrate conceptual understanding, and content and skill acquisition or show evidence of their learning through products andperformances. Products and performances promote self-understanding, self-monitoring, and selfassessment. They include opportunities for authentic audiences toexperience and critique results They permit choices and combinations of oral, written, visual, and kinesthetic modes Facets of Understanding Explanation Interpretation Application Perspective Empathy Self-knowledge Checking forUnderstanding The teacher can determine if students have developed conceptual understanding if they can demonstrate this in a number of ways, that is, by explaining, interpreting, applying, giving their perspective, showing empathy, and revealing their self-knowledge. These are referred to as the facets of understanding.


9/74


9

A student who has understanding of a current event should be able to do the following: Explain the event (e.g. Explain why, for example, the MILF is waging war against the government.) Interpret it (e.g. Interpret the message that the MIL

F is conveying when it drives away the residents of a community and thereafter occupies it.) Apply it (e.g. Apply their knowledge of the effects of conflicts inpredicting what the outcome of this conflict might be.) Give his/her own perspective about the event (e.g. Give their perspective on what could influence the MILF to go back to the negotiation table. ) Show empathy with the people who figure in the event (e.g. Share their thoughts about why the MILF believes its actions are justified (Empathy) Reveal self-knowledge about the event (e.g. Express their level of confidence about making a judgment on the crisis in Mindanao in light of what they have read or heard, or the background knowledge they have aboutthe local history of the people of Mindanao (Self Knowledge)

III. Instructional/Learning Activities The learning activities are aligned with the standards and are designed to promote attainment of desired results. They include instructional resources, both digital and non-digital that students will need to perform the activities and produce the products and performances.


10/74


10

Managing the implementation of the curriculum: School readiness to Reform Figure5 Implementation of the Curriculum in a Child-Friendly School Environment

Figure 6 Managing for Excellence


11/74


11

The Principal as Culture Builder The Principal as Leader Builder The Principal a

s Leader for Learning The learning-centered leader focuses on: 1. Ensuring thatstudents learn; 2. Building a culture of collaboration; and 3. Achieving results.

The learning-centered leader moves from working with individual teachers to working with teams of teachers in order to promote student learning.

Change is inevitable. Progress is optional. -Anonymous


12/74


12

Revised Taxonomy: Reframing our Understanding of Knowledge and Cognitive ProcessesNeil Parias De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde

Why is there a need to revise the Blooms Taxonomy? What are the major changes made? How can we use the revised taxonomy in teaching and assessing students learning?

Background Although the Blooms Taxonomy is named after Benjamin Bloom, the taxonomy was actually the work of the many individuals hired to help manage the influx of veterans into the education system following World War II. Discharged soldiers, home from fighting World War II, were eligible for the GI education stipend, which paid college tuition, textbook fees, living expenses, and support for the ex-soldiers dependents. The GI stipend enabled many World War II veterans toattend college, flooding campuses with new students even though few new faculty

members were hired to educate this deluge of students. In recognition of the life experiences of these veterans, the concept of credit-by-examination was developed with support from the Department of Defense. The work that eventually became the Taxonomy of Education resulted from the collective efforts of many including the psychology graduates hired to design, administer, and score tests for college-credit-by-examination, hence their title of Examiners. The Examiners first met formally following the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1948. They continued to meet after the annual APA conventions to further their discussions of ways to define and structure intellectual content. They were attempting to make sense of the multiple educational fields needingtests, with a goal of reducing the complexity of their tasks by categorizing knowledge into hierarchies. Once developed, these hierarchies would provide them with a framework for writing test items in a variety of subjects (Pickard, 2007).

These psychology-trained examiners decided a classification system represented an appropriate starting place to measure student knowledge and understanding. Aspsychologists, they wanted a convenient system for describing and ordering testitems, examination techniques, and evaluation instruments; and they believed a classification system would enable educators to compare and study educational programming (Anderson, 2006). They also hoped that their system would serve to establish an order for educational goals. By 1956, their efforts resulted in BloomsTaxonomy of Educational Objectives, named by default since Benjamin Bloom was the first name in the alphabetic list of authors (Anderson, 2006.). This classicwork on knowledge levels has influenced curriculum theory and practice for the last fifty years. However, its authors always considered it a work in progress, neither finished nor final (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p xxxvii). The examinerswhose efforts led to the development of the original framework expected it to facilitate the exchange of test items among their cooperating institutions. Blooms Taxonomy contains three overlapping domains: the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective, also known as knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA). The taxonomy wasa means to


13/74


13

express qualitatively the different kinds of intellectual skills and abilities.The cognitive and affective domains provided a way to organize thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic to levels that are more complex. It was a on

e-dimensional cumulative hierarchy, with achievement at each lower level considered necessary to move up to the next level (Anderson, 2006). The original development committee produced the hierarchical levels for the cognitive and affectivedomains, but not for the psychomotor domain. Their explanation for this omission was that they saw little need to teach manual skills to college students (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) thus completely overlooking athletics, drama, and applied programs of study such as music. Requests were made to Dr. Lorin Anderson, a former student of Blooms at the University of Chicago, to update the Taxonomy prior to his retirement. At the urging of publishers and education professionals,he agreed to the task, to reflect the enlarged understanding of the teaching andlearning processes now available. He and co-editor, the elderly David Krathwohl, one of the editors of the original taxonomy, collaborated with seven other edu

cators to produce the revised Taxonomy (Pickard, 2007). During the revision processes, the editors identified 19 alternative frameworks, developed to supplement, clarify, and improve upon the original Blooms Taxonomy. The alternative frameworks were examined to determine how they might contribute to the revision of the updated taxonomy. Of these, 11 represented a single dimension like the original taxonomy while eight frameworks represented two or more dimensions (Pickard, 2007). What are the major changes made? The Revised Taxonomy is seen as a tool to help educators clarify and communicate what they intended students to learn asa result of instruction (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p 23). Incorporated intothe Revised Taxonomy are advances in teaching and learning since publication ofthe original. The term knowledge was deemed an inappropriate term to describe acategory of thinking and was replaced with the term remembering. In addition, the revision reconceptualized the original single dimension taxonomy into two dime

nsions with both a Cognitive Process Dimension and a Knowledge Dimension. Figure1 Cognitive Domain of the Blooms Taxonomy


14/74


14

Table 1 The Revised Taxonomy

The Revised Taxonomy is not a cumulative hierarchy, as the original was. Instead

, the six stages are viewed as a cognitive processing dimension. Our current concepts of learning view students as active participants in the learning process. Students select the information to which they attend and construct their own meanings from the selected information. This constructivist perspective of learning emphasizes how learners cognitively process new knowledge as they engage in meaningful learning. Thus, the cognitive process dimension reflects students cognitive and metacognitive activity as expressed within the opportunities and constraints of the learning setting. This constructivist process of making senseinvolves the activation of prior knowledge as well as various cognitive processes that operate on that knowledge (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p. 38). In addition to the cognitive processing dimension, the Revised Taxonomy authors identified four general types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacogn

itive which make up the Knowledge Dimension. Table 2 The Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised TaxonomyDimension Remember: can the student recall or remember the information? Understand: can the student explain ideas or concepts? Apply: can the student use the information in a new way? Analyze: can the student distinguish between the different parts? Evaluate: can the student justify a stand or decision? Create: can thestudent create new product or point of view? Anderson, L. (2006) Examples of the cognitive processes involved define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce state classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate, recognize, report, select, translate, paraphrase choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write appraise,compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test appraise, argue, defend, judge, select, support, va

lue, evaluate assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, write


15/74


15

Table 3 The Detailed Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised TaxonomyCATEGORIES

& COGNITIVEPROCESSES

ALTERNATIVE NAMES DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

1. REMEMBER- Retrieve relevant knowledge from long-term memory 1.1 RECOGNIZING

Identifying

Locating knowledge in long-term memory that is consistent with presented material (e.g., Recognize the dates of important events in U.S. history) Retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory (e.g., Recall the dates of important event

s in U.S. history)

1.2 RECALLING

Retrieving

2. UNDERSTAND-Construct meaning from instructional messages, including oral, written, and

graphic communication2.1 INTERPRETING

Clarifying, paraphrasing, representing, translating illustrating, instantiating

Categorizing, subsuming Abstracting, Generalizing Concluding, Extrapolating, Interpolating, predicting Contrasting, mapping, matching Constructing models

Changing from one form of representation (e.g., numerical) to another (e.g., verbal) (e.g., Paraphrase important speeches and documents) Finding a specific example or illustration of a concept or principle (e.g., Give examples of various artistic painting styles) Determining that something belongs to a category (e.g.,Concept or principle) (e.g., Classify observed or described Cases of mental disorders) Abstracting a general theme or major point(s) (e.g., Write a Short summary of the events portrayed on a videotape) Drawing a logical conclusion from presented information (e.g., In learning a foreign language, infer grammatical Principles from examples) Detecting correspondences between two ideas, objects, and the like (e.g., Compare historical events to contemporary Situations) Constructing a cause-and-effect model of a system (e.g., Explain the causes of important 18th-century events in France)

2.2 EXEMPLIFYING 2.3 CLASSIFYING

2.4 SUMMARIZING

2.5 INFERRING

2.6 COMPARING

2.7 EXPLAINING

3. APPLY-Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation 3.1 EXECUTING


16/74

Carrying out

Applying a procedure to a familiar task (e.g., Divide one whole number by another whole number, both with Multiple digits) Applying a procedure to an unfamiliartask (e.g., Use Newton

s Second Law in situations in which it is appropriate)

3.2 IMPLEMENTING Using


17/74


16

Table 3 The Detailed Cognitive Processing Dimension of the Revised Taxonomy (continuation)CATEGORIES

& COGNITIVEPROCESSES

AL TERNATIVE NAMES DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

4.

ANALYZE-Break

material into its constituent parts and determine how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose Discriminating, distinguishing, foc

using, selecting Finding coherence, intergrating, outlining, parsing, structuring Deconstructing Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant parts or important fromunimportant parts of presented material (e.g., Distinguish between relevant andirrelevant numbers in a mathematical word problem) Determining how elements fitor function within a Structure (e.g., Structure evidence in a historical description into evidence for and against a particular historical explanation)

4.1

DIFFERENTIATING

4.2

ORGANIZING

4.3

ATTRIBUTING

Determine a point of view, bias, values, or intent underlying presented material(e.g., Determine the point of view of the author of an essay in terms of his orher political perspective)

5.

EVALUATE-Make

judgments based on criteria and standards Coordinating, detecting, monitoring, testing Detecting inconsistencies or fallacies within a process or product; determining whether a process or product has internal consistency; detecting the effectiveness of a procedure as it is being implemented (e.g., Determine if a scientist

s conclusions follow from observed data) Detecting inconsistencies between aproduct and external criteria, determining whether a product has external consistency; detecting the appropriateness of a procedure for a given problem (e.g.,Judge which of two methods is the best way to solve a given problem)

5.1CHECKING

5.2


18/74

CRITIQUING

Judging

6.

CREATE-Put

elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganize elements into a new pattern or structure Hypothesizing Coming up with alternative hypotheses based on criteria (e.g., Generate hypotheses to account for an observed phenomenon) Devising a procedure for accomplishing some task (e.g., Plan a research paper on a given historical topic) Inventing a product (e.g., Build habitats for aspecific purpose)

6.1

GENERATING

6.2 6.3

PLANNING

Designing Constructing

PRODUCING

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001)


19/74


17

Within the knowledge dimension is basic information that students must rememberto be acquainted with a discipline or solve a problem. Labeled factual knowledge, this may include terminology of the discipline or knowledge of specific detail

s. Factual knowledge includes the discrete facts and basic elements that expertsuse when communicating about their discipline, understanding it, and organizingit systematically; there is little abstraction to factual knowledge. Because ofthe explosion of knowledge within all subjects, curriculum designers, textbookauthors, and teachers must decide what is critical to include and what is of lesser importance. Many educators now recognize that memorization of discrete factsis not highly productive knowledge, since so much information today is a few keystrokes away on the internet (Pickard, 2007). Conceptual knowledge is more complex than factual knowledge and includes three subtypes: 1) knowledge of classifications and categories, 2) knowledge of principles and generalizations, and 3) knowledge of theories, models, and structure (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). When students can explain the concepts in their own words and transfer information to

new situations they have acquired conceptual knowledge. Chamberlain and Cummings(2003) indicate that concepts can be defined and characterized, and that generalizations show relationships among concepts. Classifications and categories of concepts form the basis for principles and generalizations. Principles and generalizations form the basis for theories, models, and structures. Classification, principle, and theory capture the greatest amount of intellect within widely different disciplines (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Both factual and conceptual knowledge deal with products, however procedural knowledge is often a series or sequence of steps to follow. Procedural knowledge also includes criteria of when touse various procedures and reflects knowledge of different processes. Examples of procedural knowledge could include syntax of an essay, or application of art and design principles in a display board for interior design. Meaningful learningprovides students with the knowledge and cognitive processes they need for succ

essful problem solving. Problem solving occurs when a student devises a way of achieving a goal never before accomplished, often by reformulating the problem into a more familiar form, recognizing the similarity, and applying the method insolving for the new knowledge. The fourth dimension of knowledge is metacognitive knowledge, an awareness of and knowledge about ones own thinking. The metacognitive knowledge concept is an emerging milestone in our understanding of learning since the publication of the original taxonomy. Today emphasis is on making students more aware of and responsible for their own knowledge and thought (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Students may acquire some of the information from theirstudy, but may not have the ability to monitor the learning conditions or make adaptations within their learning process to facilitate acquiring more than superficial understanding and knowledge. One way in which students can be helped to develop their metacognitive knowledge is to ask them to log the amount of effortthey make in completing assignments and studying for tests. When they begin to reflect on how much effort they have made, they become aware that often they failto make the necessary effort in their study, which is reflected in less than optimum achievement (Marzano, Norford, Paynter, Pickering & Gaddy, 2001).


20/74


18

Table 4 The Major Types and Subtypes of the Knowledge DimensionMAJOR TYPES AND SUBTYPES A. FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE EXAMPLES

The basic elements students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve problems in it Technical vocabulary, musical symbols Major natural resources,reliable sources of information

AA. AB.

Knowledge of terminology Knowledge of specific details and elements

B. CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE-

BA.

The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that enable them to function together Knowledge of classifications and Periods of geological time, forms of business categories ownership Knowledge of principles andgeneralizations Knowledge of theories, models, and structures Pythagorean theorem, law of supply and demand Theory of evolution, structure of Congress

BB.

BC.

C. PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE-How

to do something, methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms,

techniques, and methods Skills used in painting with watercolors, whole-number division algorithm Interviewing techniques, scientific method Criteria used to determine when to apply a procedure involving Newton

s second law, criteria used to judge the feasibility of using a particular method to estimate business costs

CA.

Knowledge of subject-specific skills and algorithms Knowledge of subject-specific techniques and methods Knowledge of criteria for determining when to use appropriate procedures

CB.

CC.

D. METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE-Knowledge

of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of one

s own cognition Knowledge of outlining as a means of capturing the structure of a unit of subject matter in a textbook, knowledge of the use of heuristics Knowledge of the types of tests particular teachers administer, knowledge of the cognitive demandsof different tasks Knowledge that critiquing essays is a personal strength, whereas writing essays is a personal weakness; awareness of one

s own knowledge level

DA.

Strategic knowledge


21/74

Knowledge about cognitive tasks, Including appropriate contextual and Conditional knowledge DC. Self-knowledgeDB.

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001)


22/74


19

How can we use the revised taxonomy in teaching? A major contribution that the revised taxonomy can make is in the way educators think about instruction. The intersection of the cognitive process dimensions and the knowledge dimensions can

facilitate instructional planning and assessment. When educators plan how they will assess learning, the intersection of the cognitive processing and knowledgedimension can facilitate the selection of learning activities that will providefor modeling and practice using the intended assessment format. Use of the revised taxonomy enables educators to specify how they expect students to use specified knowledge and thus provide learning experiences to assist students to reach that cognitive stage. The matrix also streamlines the list of verbs used in generating learning objectives to precise descriptions of the expected outcomes (Pickard, 2007). Figure 2 The Knowledge and Cognitive Process Dimensions of a Learning Objective


23/74


20

Table 5 Sample Learning Activities about the Topic TravelRemembering How many ways can you travel from one place to another? List and draw all the ways you know. Describe one of the vehicles from your list, draw a dia

gram and label the parts. Collect transport pictures from magazines- make a poster with info. How do you get from school to home? Explain the method of traveland draw a map. Write a play about a form of modern transport. Explain how youfelt the first time you rode a bicycle. Make your desk into a form of transport.Explain why some vehicles are large and others small. Write a story about the uses of both. Read a story about The Little Red Engine and make up a play aboutit. Survey 10 other children to see what bikes they ride. Display on a chart orgraph. Make a jigsaw puzzle of children using bikes safely. What problems are there with modern forms of transport and their uses- write a report. Use a Venn Diagram to compare boats to planes, or helicopters to bicycles. What changes would you recommend to road rules to prevent traffic accidents? Debate whether we should be able to buy fuel at a cheaper rate. Rate transport from slow to fast etc

. Invent a vehicle. Draw or construct it after careful planning. What sort of transport will there be in twenty years time? Discuss, write about it and report to the class. Write a song about traveling in different forms of transport.

Understanding

Applying

Analysing

Evaluating

Creating

Figure 3 Pie Chart of Cognitive Processes, Activities, and Products


24/74

Table 6. Revised Taxonomy verbs, materials/situations that require this levelof thinking, potential activities and products REMEMBERING UNDERSTANDING APPLYING ANALYZING EVALUATING CREATINGTell, List, Describe, Relate, Locate, Write, Find, State, Name, Identify, Label,Recall, Define, Recognise, Match, Reproduce, Memorise, Draw, Select, Write, Recite Explain, Interpret, Outline, Discuss, Distinguish, Predict, Restate, Translate, Compare, Describe, Relate, Generalise, Summarise, Put into your own words, P

araphrase, Convert, Demonstrate, Visualise, Find out more information about Speech, stories, drama, cartoons, diagrams, graphs, summaries, outlines, analogies,posters, bulletin boards. Solve, Show, Use, Illustrate, Construct Complete, Examine Classify, Choose Interpret, Make Put together, Change, Apply, Produce, Translate, Calculate, Manipulate, Modify, put into practice Diagrams, sculptures, illustrations, dramatisations, forecasts, problems, puzzles, organisations, classifications, rules, systems, routines. Construct a model to demonstrate how it willwork. Make a diorama to illustrate an important event. Make a scrapbook about the areas of study. Make a papier-mache map to include relevant information aboutan event. Take a collection of photographs to demonstrate a particular point. Make up a puzzle game showing the ideas from an area of study. Make a clay modelof an item in the area. Design a market strategy for your product. Dress a doll

in costume. Paint a mural. Write a textbook outline. Analyse, Distinguish, Examine, Compare Contrast, Investigate Categorise, Identify Explain, Separate Advertise, Take apart Differentiate, Subdivide, deduce, Judge, Select, Choose, Decide,Justify, Debate, Verify, Argue, Recommend, Assess, Discuss, Rate, Prioritise, Determine, Critique, Evaluate, Criticise, Weigh, Value, estimate, defend Recommendations, selfevaluations, group discussions, debates, court trials, standards, editorials, values. Create, Invent, Compose, Predict Plan, Construct Design, Imagine Propose, Devise Formulate, Combine, Hypothesize, Originate, Add to, Forecast,

VERBS

MATERAILS SITUATIONS

Events, people, newspapers, magazine articles, definitions, videos, dramas, textbooks, films, television programs, recordings, media presentations Make a list of the main events . Make a timeline of events. Make a facts chart. Write a listof any pieces of information you can remember. List all the in the story. Makea chart showing.. Make an acrostic. Recite a poem

Surveys, questionnaires, arguments, models, displays, demonstrations, diagrams,systems, conclusions, reports, graphed information Design a questionnaire to gather information. Write a commercial to sell a new product. Conduct an investigation to produce information to support a point of view. Construct a graph to illustrate selected information. Make a jigsaw puzzle. Make a family tree showing relationships. Put on a play about he study area. Write a biography of the study person. Prepare a report. Arrange a party and record as a procedure. Review apiece of art including form, colour and texture

Experiments, games, songs, reports, poems, speculations, creations, art, inventions, drama, rules.

teachers.net/lessons/posts/355.html www.teachers.ash.org.au/researchskills/dalton.htm www.lgc.peachnet.edu/academic/educatn/Blooms/critical_thinking.htm

POTENTIAL ACTIVITIES & PRODUCTS

Cut out or draw pictures to show a particular event. Illustrate what you think the main idea was. Make a cartoon strip showing the sequence of events. Retell th

e story in your own words. Paint a picture of some aspect you like. Write a summary report of an event. Prepare a flow chart to illustrate the sequence of events. Make a colouring book.


25/74

Prepare a list of criteria to judge a ..show? Remember to indicate prioritiesand ratings. Conduct a debate about a special issue. Make a booklet about 5 rules you see as important to convince others. Form a panel to discuss views. Writea letter to .... advising on changes needed at Write a half yearly report. present your point of view.

Invent a machine to do a specific task. Design a building to house your study. Create a new product, give it a name and then devise a marketing strategy. Writeabout your feeling sin relation to Design a record, book or magazine cover. Sell an idea. Devise a way to Compose a rhythm or put new words to an old song.

Dalton.J & Smith.D [(1986) Extending Childrens Special abilities Strategies for Primary Classrooms


26/74

Table 7 Blooms Revised Taxonomy Planning FrameworkCreating (Putting together ideas or elements to develop an original idea or engage in creative thinking). Actions Designing Constructing Planning Producing Inventing Devising Making Products Film Story Project Plan New game Song Media product Advertisement Painting Debate Panel Report Evaluation Investigation Verdict Conclusion Persuasive speech Survey Database Mobile Abstract Report Graph Spreadsheet Checklist Chart Outline Illustration Simulation Sculpture Demonstration Pre

sentation Interview Performance Diary Journal Recitation Summary Collection Explanation Show and tell Example Quiz List Label Outline Quiz Definition Fact Worksheet Test Label List Workbook Reproduction Learning Activities

Higher-order thinking

Evaluating (Judging the value of ideas, materials and methods by developing andapplying standards and criteria).

Checking Hypothesising Critiquing Experimenting Judging Testing Detecting Monitoring Comparing Organising Deconstructing Attributing Outlining Structuring Integrating

Analyzing (Breaking information down into its component elements).

Applying (Using strategies, concepts, principles and theories in new situations).

Implementing Carrying out Using Executing

Lower-order thinking

Understanding (Understanding of given information).

Interpreting Exemplifying Summarising Inferring Paraphrasing Classifying Compari

ng Explaining

Remembering (Recall or recognition of specific information).

Recognising Listing Describing Identifying Retrieving Naming Locating Finding


27/74


23

How can we use the revised taxonomy in assessing students learning? The knowledge dimension will help you consider the type of knowledge that you are trying toassess (factual, conceptual, procedural or meta-cognitive). The cognitive dimen

sion will help you create different types of questions that relate to differentcognitive skills. The table, therefore, can be used to generate different typesof questions that is, questions that cover a spread of the knowledge/cognitivedomain (rather than a series of questions that repeatedly assess the same thing). So, given a specific topic, and thinking about the different types of knowledge and cognitive skills, it should be possible to come up with a number of diverse questions on that topic. The taxonomy table provides a means of categorisingthe questions. For example: 1. Define a computer database. (remembering factual knowledge) 2. Explain three key characteristics of a computer database. (understanding conceptual knowledge) 3. Relate each of these characteristics to a database package with which you are familiar (applying procedural knowledge). 4. Compare the database facilities of a dedicated database package to those of a gener

al purpose spreadsheet package. (analysing procedural knowledge) 5. Suggest criteria that could be used to help users decide whether to use a database or spreadsheet package for a specific task. (evaluating procedural knowledge) The questions could be mapped onto the taxonomy table as illustrated in the Table below. Table 8 Mapping Questions in the Revised Taxonomy Knowledge dimension A. Factual knowledge B. Conceptual knowledge C. Procedural knowledge D. Meta-cognitive knowledge Cognitive dimension 1. 2. Remember Understand Question 1 Question 2 3. Apply 4. Analyze 5. Evaluate 6. Create

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5


28/74


24

Mapping the questions onto the taxonomy table gives an indication of the relative complexity of the questions. The mapping also confirms that the questions arediverse since they occupy different cells in the table and therefore assess diff

erent cognitive abilities. Different questions will occupy different cells in the taxonomy table; similar questions will occupy the same cells in the table. Simple questions will occupy cells close to the top left-hand corner; complex questions will be further away from the top left-hand corner. In general, you would expect lower level papers to have more questions towards the top left-hand cornerof the table and higher level papers to have questions towards the middle and bottom right-hand corner. But every paper irrespective of its level should map onto a range of cells (rather than repeatedly assessing the same type of knowledge or cognitive process). This provides the necessary discrimination to allowcandidates to perform at varying levels and receive different grades (Elliott, 2002). Once a paper has been constructed, the taxonomy table can be used to analyse it. This could be done to check the balance of a paper in other words, to c

heck if different types of knowledge have been examined and various cognitive skills assessed.

Dalton (2003) applied the revised taxonomy in identifying the following types ofassessment activities: Table 9 Possible Assessment Strategies in the Revised Taxonomy Remember Understand Factual knowledge Multiple Choice - recall definitions as taught Modified True/False Multiple Choice - interpretation Short-answer essay Match causeeffect Multiple Choice - predict using principles; examples and non-examples; summaries Comprehension item set Choose best (new) definition Match classification

Apply Multiple Choice - Apply memorized facts to simple authentic situations Lab:

high inference Pictoral item set Apply concepts to solve an authentic problem Lab: low inference Interactive video, simulation Instrumented lab

Analyze Multiple Choice - best answer Lab: high inference Differentiation interlineal set Knowledge mapping Problemsolving item set

Evaluate Multiple Choice - best answer Discussion (formative) Essay (rated on use of principles) Essay (rated on use of procedures) Review/critique

Create

Constructed response Exhibition Portfolio

Conceptual knowledge

Matching Recall order e.g. concept, category, principle definitions

Procedural knowledge

Recall steps of procedures Recall sequencing

Interlineal item set


29/74


25 Evaluate Create

Remember Understand

Apply

Visual observation, rating Project Pictoral item set Instrumentaided observation Anecdotal (formative) Demonstration with rating scale, checklist Exhibition Performance

Analyze

References Anderson, L. (2006). Taxonomy academy handbook. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from http://www.andersonresearchgroup.com/tax.html Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. E. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom

s taxonomy of educational objectives [Abridged]. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Chamberlain, V. J. & Cummings, M. N. (2003). Creative instructionalmethods. New York: Glencoe McGraw-Hill. Dalton, E. (2003). The new Bloom

s tax

onomy, objectives, and assessments questions. Retrieved Feb. 20, 2007, from http://gaeacoop.org/dalton/publications/ new_bloom.pdf Elliott, B. (2002). Using the revised Blooms Taxonomy for the creation of examination questions. RetrievedFeb. 20, 2007, from http://www.bobbyelliott.com/ Taxonomy.htm Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J. & Gaddy, B. B. (2001). Handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervisionand Curriculum Development. Pickard, M. J. (2007). The new Blooms taxonomy: Anoverview for family and consumer sciences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 25, 45-55.


30/74


26

Developing and Assessing Self-regulated LearnersCarlo Magno De La Salle University, Manila Abstract The report focuses on aspects in the development and assessment of self-regulated learning in the school con

text. The nature of self-regulated learning was discussed by identifying its critical characteristics. Different models showing the components and process of self-regulation was presented in order to focus different ways of assessing it asa construct. Different studies are then presented to show the effects of developing self-regulation in the classroom context. The need to assess self-regulationas part of the teaching and learning process is discussed under certain needs in the school setting. Different protocols with examples are shown in assessing self-regulated learning as applied in the classroom. Who is a self-regulated learner? Teachers generally commend students that are more independent in their studies, diligent in listening inside the classroom, focused on doing their task inside the classroom, gets high scores in tests, able to recall teachers instruction and facts lectured in class, and submits quality work. However, teachers see p

roblematic students when they miss assignments, inattentive during lectures, volatile during class activities, fails to recall instructions taught in the classroom, submits poor work and worst is not submitting any work at all. These two scenarios differentiate self-regulated students with those who are poor in regulating their learning. Self-regulated learners are generally characterized as independent learners, ability to control their learning, focused in their studies, plans and studies in advance to obtain high scores in tests, and uses strategies to recall instruction. By showing these characteristics, self-regulated studentseventually performs well and obtains successful academic outcomes. Self-regulation is generally defined by Zimmerman (2005) as self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals (p. 14). Zimmerman (2002) further explained that self-regulation isa self-directive process by which learners transform their mental abilities int

o academic skills (p. 65). There are various contexts where self-regulation canbe practiced. It can be applied in sports to regulate ones performance, in health to attain potent physical condition, in the industrial setting to determineeffective employees, and in managing ones emotions (emotion regulation). This report focuses on self-regulated learning in the academic context. In the academic setting, one of the main goals is to develop students to be self-regulated learners. Learners that are self-regulated become independent of their own learningand thus control their own learning in general. Selfregulation entails studentsthat carefully plan their actions, set goals, and use a variety of strategies in accomplishing a task. Zimmerman (2002) further characterizes selfregulated students as having superior motivation, adaptive learning methods, and views theirfuture optimistically.


31/74


27

There are numerous ways of characterizing a self-regulated learner. Generally the characteristics involve traits that enable a student to achieve their goals. These traits are organized into a set of components in order to frame specific va

riables for selfregulation. These components are processes are used in order toattain goals. Zimmerman (2002, p. 66) presented six components of self-regulation: The component skills include: (a) setting specific proximal goals for oneself, (b) adopting powerful strategies for attaining the goals, (c) monitoring one

sperformance selectively for signs of progress, (d) restructuring one

s physicaland social context to make it compatible with one

s goals, (e) managing one

s time use efficiently, (f) self-evaluating one

s methods, (g) attributing causation to results, and (h) adapting future methods. There are several studies indicating that self-regulated learners turn out to perform well in school related tasks (Blakey & Spencer, 1990; Collins, 1982; Corsale & Ornstein, 1980; Kluwe, 1982;Lopez, Little, Oettingen, Baltes, 1998; Rock, 2005; Schneider, 1985). There isalso an established theory that learners who self-regulate have increased selfe

fficacy or beliefs in ones ability to execute actions (see Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Schunk, 1981, Schunk, 1983; 1984). It is also notable that selfregulated learners are more motivated (see Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Corno & Mandinach, 1983). Specifically for the Filipino adolescent, students who see the consequence of their actions and those who structure their environment for study showed to be moremastery oriented (developing competency and gaining understanding) (see Magno &Lajom, 2008). In a developmental perspective, the study of Magno and Lajom (2008) showed that all components of self-regulation increased from high school to college students. Models of Self-regulation There are several models of self-regulation that are used depending on the specific area how self-regulation is viewed. Bandura (1986) sees self-regulation as a triadic process where there is an interaction of personal, behavioral, and environmental aspects. Framed in this theory, the behavioral aspect of self-regulation involves selfobservation and strat

egically adjusting performance. The environmental aspect includes observing andadjusting environmental conditions or outcomes. Covert regulation (personal) includes monitoring and adjusting cognitive and affective strategies. Based on thesocial cognitive perspective, Zimmerman (2002; 2005) derived the process involved in self-regulation. In this cyclical process, self-regulation in a threephasestructure (forethought phase, performance phase, and self-reflection phase). Theforethought phase is the stage where the learner analyzes the task by planningand setting goals. Analysis of tasks is influenced by learners self-monitored beliefs, intrinsic interest, and goal orientations. After careful planning the learner proceed to the performance phase or the execution of a task. While executing a task, the learner maintains self-control by establishing self-instruction,imagery, attention focusing, and strategies used for accomplishing the task. Theperformance phase is also accompanied by self-observation by self-recording andself-experimentation. After the performance, the self-regulated learner reflects on the execution which is the self-reflection phase. In


32/74


28

this phase the learner judges how well they have planned and executed the task through self-evaluation and causal attribution. The start to react on the plan and execution whether they are satisfied and identify what possible adaptations ca

n be used when engaged in the same task again. Their reflections are carried outin the forethought phase the next time they engage in a task that will requirethem to self-regulate. There are other models of self-regulated learning. For example, Craver and Scheir (2005) sees self-regulation as a feedback loop. The process starts with a goal, standard, or reference value. Then the performance is compared with the output value (comparator). If the output is same or exceed thereference value, then performance is successful, if not, there is discrepancy. Shah and Kruglanski (2005) see self-regulation as a network of goals. They use aconnectionist perspective where goals and means are viewed as a network of complex cognitive associations. A personality systems perspective in self-regulationidentify ways how positive and negative affect influence self-regulation as a cognitive system. This was operationalized in the model of Magno (2008) where syst

ems of activation and inhibitions to self-regulated learning were identified andtheir effects on self-regulation were tested. The activation system was composed of self-determination, disengagement, initiative, and persistence while negative affect is composed of anxiety, worry, thought suppression, and fear of negative evaluation. It was found that the activation and inhibition systems served their purpose. The activation system increased with selfregulation while the inhibition system identified as negative affect decreased selfregulation. This showedthat experience of negative affect such as worry, anxiety, thought suppression,and fear of negative evaluation interfered with the use of selfregulation. Whenlevels of the activation system (high and low) were varied, it was found that individuals who used high levels of the activation system who used selfregulationwere not affected by the negative affect. Those individuals with low levels ofthe activation system, their self-regulation were negatively impacted by the inh

ibitions such as the negative affect. This model provides a theoretical perspective of identifying certain conditions how to make self-regulation work and not work well. Moreover, Winne (1995; 1997) views self-regulation as composed of metacognition, intrinsic motivation, and strategy use. Metacognition is the awareness of the learners in their own academic strengths and weaknesses, cognitive resources that they can apply to meet the demands of tasks, and how to regulate theengagement of tasks. Intrinsic motivation is the belief in incremental learning,high value placed on personal progress, and high efficacy for learning. His process model of self-regulation starts with task and cognitive conditions that individuals set. These conditions provide information on how the task in the environment will be evaluated. The second phase involves setting goals and planning how to reach them. This includes decision making supplemented by information retrieved from memory, framing goals, and assembling a plan to approach them. The third phase involves enacting tactics by controlling and monitoring used during theperformance. The products of self-regulation may turn out as definition of a task, goals and plans, studying tactics and adaptation. The last phase involves adapting metacognition. In the past phase the learner makes major adaptations to those parts of the model under their control. The various models of self-regulation provides a view on how self-regulation involves other variables, its process,how its components are interrelated to each other.


33/74


29

The Need to Develop Self-regulated Learners Contemporary principles in educationespouse that the process of student learning involves not only teaching the content but the process on how to learn the content as well. Being aware in the pro

cess of learning a material involves selfregulation. One of the direct applications of self-regulation can be used in teaching. This means that self-regulatoryprocesses can be taught to students. Schunk and Zimmerman (1998) showed in theirstudy that when self-regulation was taught to students, it increased their motivation and achievement. Self-regulation can be taught through modeling by parents, teachers, coaches, and peers. There is much room for different research to propose ways on how to teach students to self-regulate since current literature focuses too much on its conceptualizations and factors that influence it. Zimmerman, Bonner, and Kovach (1996) raised issues that (1) few teachers are preparing students to effectively learn by themselves, (2) students are seldom given choices regarding academic tasks, (3) few teachers encourage students to establish specific goals for work and teacher learning strategies, (4) students are rarely as

ked to evaluate their own work, and (5) very few teachers assess students beliefs about their own learning. These issues were raised due to the lack of models,strategies, methods, and techniques that teachers can use as exemplars in implementing the instruction for self-regulation. This notion is often raised becauseteachers rely mostly on strategic formulas in their process of teaching especially in the Philippine context (Magno, 2007). Teachers need to change their perspective about their belief on what learning is and what their teaching should become from conventional ways of teaching content. Since learners are believed to self-regulate their learning, teachers should concentrate on how to activate theirstudents self-regulatory processes. Focusing on techniques of teaching students to self-regulate concerns much of the need to identify ways to activate it which is proposed in the present study. Some of the research attempts that translate self-regulation into the actual teaching practice were shown in the work of de

la Fuente Arias, Justicia, and Garcia Berben (2006), Fok and Watkins (2007), and Paris and Paris (2001). It is important to mention these studies because self-regulation when used in teaching demonstrates different ways of activating it among students. The study by dela Fuente Arias, Justicia, and Garcia Berben (2006)developed a teaching-learning process using the Interactive Model of RegulatedTeaching and Selfregulated Learning. In their new model, they improved the presage-process-product model of Biggs (2001) where the interactive dimension ofthe teaching-learning process becomes the primary function and the model explicitly incorporates the dimension of regulated teaching and self-regulated learning. They provided evidence that improvement of general teaching strategies, adjustments in the evaluation system, and improving specific teaching strategies (regulation of teaching) as implemented in their teaching-learning model have produced a general improvement in general learning behavior and in students specific learning strategies (self-regulated learning), as measured through the evaluationscales used.


34/74


30

The study by Fok and Watkins (2007) used a constructivist teaching approach which is typically a self-regulation technique and investigated its effect using theLearning Process Questionnaire (LPQ) and the Constructivist Learning Environmen

t Scale (CLES). The constructivist technique employed involves students to givetheir own examples, authentic problems, testing own ideas, challenge each others conceptualizations, group presentations, self-analysis, self-reflective thinking, and evidence to support ideas, and present ideas. The study found significant post-test gains among the high achieving group on the learning process and constructivist learning environment after the constructivist technique. This showsthat a constructivist learning environment that includes self-regulation is effective in developing deeper approaches to learning. Paris and Paris (2001) described 12 principles that teachers can use to design activities in classrooms thatpromote students self-regulation. They emphasized that self-regulation can be taught with explicit instruction, directed reflection, metacognitive discussions,and participation in practices with experts. Self-regulation can be promoted ind

irectly by modeling and activities that entail reflective analyses of learning.There are also other studies that employed self-regulation in the classroom setting and tested the procedures on their effectiveness on students performance indifferent tasks and subject areas. The study by Glaser and Brunstein (2007) examined whether self-regulation procedures would increase the effectiveness of a writing strategies training designed to improve 4th graders

(N = 113) composition skills. The strategy training included methods of direct instruction and cognitive modeling as well as phases of guided and independent practice to help students acquire effective strategies (e.g., the widely used story grammar strategy)for planning and redrafting stories. Students who were taught composition strategies in conjunction with self-regulation procedures were compared with (a) students who were taught the same strategies but received no instruction in selfregulation and (b) students who received didactic lessons in composition. Both at pos

ttest and at maintenance (5 weeks after the instruction), strategy plus self-regulation students wrote more complete and qualitatively better stories than students in the 2 comparison conditions. They also displayed superior performance ata transfer task requiring students to recall essential parts of an orally presented story. The study of Azevedo and Cromley (2004) examined the effectiveness ofselfregulated learning (SRL) training in facilitating college students

learning with hypermedia. The training included planning (planning, subgoals, prior knowledge activation), monitoring (feeling of knowing, judgment of learning, self-questioning, content evaluation, identifying the adequacy of information), strategies (selecting new informational source, summarization, rereading, and knowledge elaboration), task difficulty and demands (time and effort planning, task difficulty, and control of context), and interest. Undergraduate students were randomly assigned to either a training condition or a control condition and used a hypermedia environment to learn about the circulatory system. Students in the self-regulation group were given a 30-min training session on the use of specific, empirically based self-regulation variables designed to foster their conceptual understanding; control students received no training. Pretest, posttest, and verbal protocol data were collected from both groups. The SRL condition facilitatedthe shift in learners

mental models significantly more than did the


35/74


31

control condition; verbal protocol data indicated that this was associated withthe use of the SRL variables taught during training. The study by Fuchs et al. (2003) assessed the contribution of self-regulated learning strategies, when comb

ined with problem-solving transfer instruction, on 3rdgraders

mathematical problem solving. SRL incorporated goal setting and selfevaluation. Problem-solving transfer instruction taught problem-solution methods, the meaning of transfer, and four superficial-problem features that change a problem without altering its type or solution. The problem-solving transfer also prompted metacognitive awareness to transfer. The effectiveness of transfer plus SRL was contrasted with thetransfer treatment alone and to teacher-designed instruction for 16 weeks. Students were pre- and posttested on problem-solving tests and responded to a posttreatment questionnaire tapping self-regulation processes. SRL positively affectedperformance. A local study by Dedel (2002) taught students in an experimental group different strategies like orientation, planning, action, and checking (OPAC)strategies to enhance students

problem-solving skills and conceptual understan

ding in teaching selected topics in mechanics. Although the study did not explicitly mention that the OPAC strategies are self-regulation in itself. The strategies are similar with conceptualizations on the components of self-regulation. Consistent with the findings of other research, the OPAC problem-solving strategyused in physics instruction significantly enhanced students

achievement in terms of problem-solving skills and conceptual understanding. Developing self-regulation among students can be integrated in the teaching and learning process. Certain classroom activities that involve the active participation of students can help them develop self-regulation. For example, in a mathematics class where students learn concepts of fraction, identify similar and dissimilar fraction, add and subtract factions (see table 1). A group of teachers devised some activitieswhere self-regulation is tapped in different subject areas (Tables 1 to 3). Table 1 Self-regulation Activities in a Third Grade Mathematics Class Self-regulatio

n component Goal-setting Student and Teacher Tasks

Students will verbalize at the start of the lesson what will be their specific goals for the topic on fraction. Time management Students create a daily scheduleand express in fraction how much time is devoted for specific activities. Learning strategies Students are taught with strategies in identifying the Least Common Denominator (LCD). Self-evaluation Students solve board work and let the other students evaluate of the answers are correct. The other students also point out where the mistake is. Seeking help or Students are paired and they test each other how well they add information and subtract fractions. They teach each otherthe correct answers for the items missed. Motivational beliefs Students whose works shows exemplary and acceptable proficiency are posted on the board.


36/74


32

Table 2 Self-regulation Activities in a Second Year High School Class on AnatomySelf-regulation component Goal-setting Student and Teacher Tasks

Students list down the future benefits of knowing the parts of the different body systems. What will the good consequences if they have mastered the labels forthe parts. Time management Students allot specific time of their day to restudyand memorize the parts presented in class. Learning strategies Students list down different memory strategies to easily remember the parts of an organ or body system. Self-evaluation The students once in a while are reviewed if they can recall the parts of a specific organ. Seeking help or Students will go to the library and seek other references to information determine the complete parts of theorgan rather than relying on a single reference. Motivational beliefs After taking the test, students are given feedback that they can still make it for the next test.

Table 3 Self-regulation Activities in a Fourth Grade Class on Reading Self-regulation component Goal-setting Student and Teacher Tasks

Students aim to finish reading a childrens novel (ex. Harry Potter) within twoweeks. Time management Students are required to read a childrens novel and timethemselves how long they finish a chapter with 8,000 words. They will constantly time themselves each chapter to monitor if they are improving. Learning strategies Students are asked by the teacher once in a while to report the events thatthey read already in the novel to check their pace and understanding. They aretaught specific reading strategies such as skimming, scanning etc. Self-evaluation They stop after each paragraph and check if they understand what they are reading. They will reread in case they did not fully understand a part of the text.Seeking help or Other students share the strategies they use to read the text w

ith information better comprehension. Other students will be encouraged to try the strategies. Motivational beliefs Students with good book reports will be given awards. Students will be given a selection on which book to read and select the ones that they will be interested on.


37/74


33

Why Assess Self-regulated Learning in Schools? It is important to assess studentself-regulation in the school setting under two accounts. First, most schools based major decisions and classroom interventions on results of achievement, apti

tude, and diagnostic tests that are based on ability of students. It assumed that these abilities are gained overtime as a result of instruction. The problem with this issue is the representativeness of the test items in the form of instruction that has taken place. Most of the time, there is mismatch between the approach and philosophy used in teaching and learning inside the classroom and the kind of assessment that will take place. Traditional standardized tests are commonly used to assess if students have learned from instruction. There is mismatch when the classroom instruction is based on contemporary constructivist approach to teaching which is not captured by traditional paper and pencil tests. Second,most of the assessment of learning is focused as an outcome and not as a process. Traditional paper and pencil tests such as an achievement test is usually administered towards the end of the school year that assumes to measure the collecti

ve learning of students overtime. Much of the concern is the outcome of learningand there are no specific steps to assess what went on during the learning process. There should be subsequent assessment that takes place in the classroom while students are learning. Third, most of the assessment is focused on ability asa construct and not on certain cognitive and strategic processes of students thinking. If there are such assessments on the affective domain, it is concentrated on personality and vocational interests. This is brought about by the paradigmand focus of homeroom and other guidance programs in the grade school and highschool. Because of the nature of these assessment orientations, schools fail todetermine what is currently going in the students learning process. Much of theconcern is fast tracking the students and not on the interventions that could bedone while students are learning. Given these scenario, aspects of students learning process such as self-regulation should be included as part of the assessme

nt package given to students. Self-regulation can be assessed both as an outcomeand process. As an outcome, there are available assessment tools that provide arating on the extent of student selfregulation. As a process there are certaintechniques that teachers can use while conducting instruction such as think aloud techniques (see Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995), error detection tasks (see Baker& Zimlin, 1989), and observation of performance (see Turner, 1995). Certain protocol techniques will be described that can be helpful in assessing academic self-regulation in the classroom context. These assessment techniques are classified under seven protocols: Questionnaires, structured interview, teacher judgments, think aloud techniques, error detection tasks, trace methodologies, and observation of performance. These classification are based on Winne and Perrys (2005)assessment of self-regulation as aptitude and event. Before using any of the protocols in assessing self-regulation, users must be critical of the methods andrigors on how the tools were established that concerns their validity and reliability. The process of establishing the tests and scales first involve the construction and selection of items based on a framework, an empirical model, or grounded on some empirical data. The underlying factors of the items are then explored


38/74


34

using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) techniques. The underlying factors are further tested by using a more rigorous method called Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). On some instances the test developer may opt to use a different approac

h such as the Item Response Theory (IRT). In this approach items are good if they have acceptable item characteristic curves based on the logit measures. In such cases items with good fit (Mean Square within 0.8 to 1.2, z standard score ofbelow 2.00), high point biserial correlations (indicative of item discriminationfor a one-parameter Rasch model), adequate item information functions, and devoid of item differential functioning (free of bias). On the second criteria, responses to items should indicate acceptable reliability or consistencies. Most commonly internal consistencies of test are established using Cronbachs alpha, split-half, or interitem correlation. Tests and scales of self-regulation evidenceto have acceptable validity and reliability are safe to use. Protocols in Assessing Self-regulation Questionnaires. Self-regulation questionnaires are composedof a set of a sample items that are responded numerically. The items are classif

ied under certain factors of self-regulation. A score is derived per factors andinterpreted whether it is above or below norms. Examples of questionnaires thatare commonly used in literature that measures self-regulation are the Learningand Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) (Weinstein, 1987), Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991), and the Metacognitive Strategies Inventory (MAI) (Scraw & Dennison, 1994). The LASSI and MSLQ are standardized and available in the market. The MAI is have consistent psychometric properties and across adults in different samples. The issuewith these questionnaires is that the items typify strategies and scenarios within a western context. In the Philippine setting, Magno (2009) developed the Academic Self-regulated Learning Scale (A-SRL-S). The A-SRL-S was based on the modelderived by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986; 1988). The ASRL-S measures students academic self-regulation under seven subscales: Memory strategy, goal-settin

g, self-evaluation, seeking assistance, environmental structuring, responsibility, and organizing. What is new in the A-SRL-S is the responsibility subscale that is not present in the foreign scales. The subscale on responsibility typifiesthe high regard of a Filipino student for their studies. The items on this subscales reflects prioritizing ones studies, concern for tasks related in school, and immediately attending to school related tasks. The subscales of the A-SRL-S was confirmed in a measurement model with good fit (RMR=.02, GFI=.94, CFI=.91). The items showed high internal consistencies (refer to Table 4). Convergent validity was also established where all factors increase with each other (refer to table 5). Apart from the foreign questionnaires the A-SRL-S was analyzed using anIRT approach, specifically using the one-parameter Rasch model. The items also showed adequate fit using the oneparameter Rasch model with acceptable item characteristic curves (ICCs).


39/74


35

Table 4 Properties of the A-SRL-SSubscales M Variance Cronbachs Alpha No. of items CFA Standardized Parameter estimate Person Reliability Item Reliability

Memory Strategy Goal-setting Self-evaluation Seeking assistance Environmental structuring Responsibility Organizing

2.53 2.73 2.84 3.12 2.82 2.95 3.26

.81 .99 .70 .68 .94 .69 .69

.82 .87 .84 .74 .73 .75 .78

14 5 12 8 5 5 6

.70*** .54*** .69*** .62*** .51*** .68*** .65***

.76 .42 .80 .30 .34 .27 .71

.99 .80 .84 .97 .95 .97 .77

***p


40/74


41/74


36

Table 6 Self-regulated Learning Strategies Based on the SRLIS SRL Category Self-evaluation Organizing and Transforming Goal-setting and planning Seeking information Keeping records and monitoring Environmental structuring Self-consequences

Rehearsing and memorizing Seeking social assistance Reviewing records Example ofresponse I check my solution in a math problem if it is correct. I make an outline of information presented in long paragraphs from various references. I studyone week before the schedule of the exam. I search the internet for referencesthat I can use when searching for information. I keep all my notes for future reference. I go to a quiet place where I can study well. If I got low on a test, Imake sure to study well for the next test. I keep on repeating the important facts learned in class so that I will not forget about it. If I could not figure out how to solve a math problem I ask the help of my teacher. I make sure that Ireview my books and notes to prepare for an exam.

The responses in the interview can be quantitatively scored in three ways: Strat

egy use, strategy frequency, and strategy consistency. The first two ways are scored by coders and the last is estimated y students. Strategy use is scored dichotomously as having occurred or not in the six contexts. Strategy frequency is counting the number of times a strategy is mentioned. Strategy frequency is ratedby students based on the frequency of using the mentioned strategies (1=seldom,2=occasionally, 3=frequently, 4=most of the time). The instrument demonstrateddiscriminant validity across high and low ability groups. In subsequent studiesof Zimmerman, eight prompts were provided that measures each self-regulation strategy: Rehearsing and memorizing, organizing and transforming, seeking information, self-evaluation, goal-setting and planning, keeping records and monitoring,self-consequencing, and environmental structuring. These prompts were adapted byMagno (2008) for the Filipino context. The responses were scored by the respondents using strategy frequency.


42/74


37

Table 7 Adapted SRLIS for Filipino College StudentsSelf-regulation Component Rehearsing and memorizing Prompt Assume your teacher is discussing with your class the history of the Philippine revolution. Your teac

her says that you will be tested on the topic the next day. What method do you use to help you learn and remember the information being discussed? Assume your teacher asked your class to write a short paper on a topic on the history of theorganization in school that you belong to. Your score on this paper will affectyour course card grade. In such cases, what method in particular will help you plan and write your paper? Teachers usually expect much accuracy with students math home work. Many of these assignments must be completed without the help of the teacher. What particular method do you use when you dont understand a math problem when youre already at home? When completing homework assignments such asscience reports or English grammar exercises, what method do you use in particular for checking your work after it is finished? Most teachers give important tests at the end of the semester/term, and these tests greatly affect course grade

s. What particular method do you use for preparing for these tests? When takinga test in school, what particular method do you use for obtaining as many correct answers as possible? Many times students have difficulty completing homework assignments because there are other more interesting things they would rather do,such as watching TV, daydreaming, or talking to friends. What particular methoddo you use to motivate yourself to complete your homework under these circumstances? Some students find it easier if they can arrange the place where they study. What particular method do you use for arranging the place where you study?

Organizing and transforming

Seeking information

Self-evaluation

Goal-setting and planning

Keeping records and monitoring Self-consequencing

Environmental structuring

The interview is accurate to derive authentic data from students regarding specific self-regulation strategies they use. When these self-regulation strategies are verbalized by students, other students can learn and try the strategies elicited. Teachers can catalogue a list of self-regulation strategies and teach it tofuture students. Teacher Judgments. In a subsequent study by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1988), they devised a version of the SRLIS that is used by teaches toassess their students self-regulation strategies. In the study, 12 items were produced that indicate students self-regulated learning strategies that is readily observable by teachers. Students were rated by the teacher for each item usinga five-point scale ranging from never (1) to always (5). The self-regulation components measured are seeking information, self-evaluation activities, goal-setting and planning, seeking assistance, organizing and transforming, and intrinsicmotivation to learn. When the ratings were


43/74


38

factor analyzed, the 12 items loaded only to three factors. These factors were labeled as student self-regulated learning, student verbal expressiveness, and student achievement. Teachers judgment about students self-regulation strategies

can be very accurate if they are trained to be observant of students behavior.Teachers can look at several situations where self-regulation can occur such asduring drills, seat works, group works, tests, recitations, and even during class discussion. Think aloud techniques. In think aloud techniques, students report their thoughts and cognitive processes while performing a task (Erricson, 2006). There are some studies that made use of the think aloud protocol. For exampleGreene and Azevedo (2007) studied learning through a science module about the human circulatory system. Students were instructed to say everything that they were thinking while performing the computerized task. Example of prompts for thinkaloud techniques are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Why do you think it is correct? It is easy for you? Why? What made it difficult? Do you think you can solve it using another technique? How accurate are you with your answer? Is it easy to work with

others or better if alone?

The think aloud protocol is advantageous because it does not limit students of their response on a task. The teacher can detect multiple signs of self-regulation strategies the students are engaging in. This can help teachers by creating tasks that would enrich students to develop further their self-regulation skills.Error Detection Tasks. Error detection tasks are created to assess students ability to monitor their performance and evaluate the material exposed to. The ability to detect errors is a means that a student can exercise metacognitive control because they should have the ability to correct errors after identifying them.Error detection can be done by providing an evaluation of errors conducted. Another technique is by underlining specific spots where the error occurred. The ability to detect errors is a sign that students have mastered the lesson and have

developed evaluation and monitoring skills. Trace Methodologies. Traces are observable indicators about cognition that students create as they engage with a task (Winne, 1982). Traces of student selfregulation can be assessed by looking attheir underlines on texts, highlights on particular information in a text, writes notes in the margin of reading materials, and writes mnemonic devises on thetext. These traces indicate that students are isolating information from the rest of the material that they see as important. They serve as cues for students toeasily locate and remember needed information. Notes on the margin provide students the needed cue to easily comprehend their method of studying the material.Some notes may also signal specific strategies they use to remember important points of the material.


44/74


45/74


40

Collins, J. L. (1982, March). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive enga

gement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-108. Corsale, K. & Ornstein, P. A. (1971). Developmental changes in childrens useof semantic information in recall. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30, 231-245. de la Fuente Arias, J., Justicia, F., & Gracia Berben, A. (2006). Aninteractive model of regulated teaching and self-regulated learning. The International Journal of Learning, 12, 217-226. Dedel, E. (2002). The effect of orientation, planning, action and checking (OPAC) problem-solving strategy on students

problem-solving skills and conceptual understanding. Unpublished masters thesis, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines. Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Protocolanalysis and expert thought: Concurrent verbalizations of thinking during experts performance on representative tasks. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charnesse, P. J.Feltovich, & R. Hoffman, (Eds.). Handbook of expertise and expert performance (p

p. 223-241). New York: Cambridge University Press. Fiske, S.T & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.) New York: Mc-Graw Hill. Fok, A. & Watkins, D. (2007). Does a critical constructivist environment encourage a deeper approach tolearning?. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 16, 1-10. Fuchs, et al. (2003). Enhancing third-grade students

mathematical problem solving with self-regulated learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 306315. Glaser, C.& Brunstein, J. (2007). Improving fourth-grade students

composition skills: Effects of strategy instruction and self-regulation procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 297310. Kluwe, R. H. (1982). Cognitive knowledge and execution control: Metacognition. In D. R. Griffin (ed.). Animal mind human mind (pp. 201-224). New York: Springer-Verlag. Lopez, D.F., Little, T. D., Oettingen, G., & Baltes, P. B. (1998). Self-regulation and school performance: Is there optimal level of action-control?. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 54-7

5.


46/74


41

Magno, C. (2007, May). Constructivism: Becoming self-regulated learners. Seminarconducted at Dominican School, Manila, Philippines. Magno, C. (2008). Comparingmodels for generating a system of activation and inhibition of self-regulated l

earning. An unpublished doctoral dissertation, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines. Magno, C., & Lajom, J. (2008). Self-regulation, self-efficacy, metacognition, and achievement goals in high school and college adolescents. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 41, 1-23. Paris, S. G. & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist,36, 89-101. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading:The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Rock,M. L. (2005). Use of strategic self-monitoring to enhance academic engagement, productivity, and accuracy of students with and without exceptionalities. Journalof Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 3-18. Schneider, W. (1985). Developmental trends in the metamemory-memory behavior relationship: An integrative review.In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.). Metacognition

, Cognition, and Human Performance, Vol. 1 (pp. 57 109). New York: Academic. Schraw, G. & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-473. Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children

s development: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psycho

16297136 assessment handbook v1

Documents