MAMAY P's Pinoy Halu-Halo: The Impossible Dream?

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

The Impossible Dream?

The very purpose of assessment is manifested when the teachers or instructors are able to know with precision the previous understanding of their learners, identify how these students approach their learning, provide adequate opportunities to enhance/improve their learning process and how to use appropriately the information gathered in the formulation of the next instructional design and approach to teaching in accord with the learning goals and how students viewed meaningful learning activities.

To craft a formative assessment to be used in the entire Philippines for elementary, high school and even tertiary students are not only overwhelming but also impossible. To gauge the performance and skills of every student based on a uniform standard or criteria is difficult because such assessment can be unfair and bias. This is because the students, the infrastructure of their learning, the provision of instructional materials and the qualification of their teachers are mostly varied and diverse.

It is not wise to evaluate and compare the level of understanding of Juan of Quezon City about the “Laws of Motion” with that of Khalid of South Cotabato where the former has all the equipment and materials in conducting experiments on the subject matter while the latter does not have even a physics book to know about it. Even if the same students have the instructional materials and equipment, the result of their assessment cannot truly represent their learning if the quality and time spent by their teachers on them are not the same. Juan’s teacher has master’s degree in Science or Physics and teaches full time and only that subject while Khalid’s instructor has Science as minor subject and teaches Physics once a week and other subjects.

However, to formulate a formative assessment on a national scale is still possible if the assessment criteria are varied, in accord with the learners’ background and achievement, and implement only to specific students and schools having the same qualifications as previously identified. For example, the assessment with the purpose of improving/enhancing the mathematical ability of grade 4 pupils in La Union can also be given to grade 4 students of Iloilo if both students have similar opportunities and level of instructions. In the same manner, English proficiency of Grade 8 students of Quezon City can be evaluated and compared with those students of Manila because they have similar learning/teaching backgrounds. In essence, a specific formative assessment should be given to students and schools possessing the same learning/teaching experiences so that the information collected will be fair and comparable.

Devising a national formative assessment is positively challenging if the education officials from the national government to the school are willing to participate in its planning, execution, monitoring and revision. But the greatest challenge would be seen in their preparedness and eagerness to come out with specific assessment tasks and address the outcomes of the assessment. This is because most programs of the Department of Education of the Philippines to enhance/improve basic education start and end with pilot studies. They are often short-term, short-lived and die with the shortage of funds. The very aims of the assessment programs are not well-defined. Even if they are, the implementation of corrective measures often only reached the recommendation stage.

To be successful, national formative assessment should be primarily aimed to identify students’ weaknesses and strengths on particular topics or subjects, and to determine how instructional strategies and learning activities can be revised and improved in accord with the learning goals previously articulated and discussed with different stakeholders.