KEVIN ANTHONY V. TUPLANO. DECEMBER 9, 2024.

BSED-SOCIAL STUDIES 3A
EDUC 306: Assessment in Learning 1

Student ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM TOTAL
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SCORE
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 6
2 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 5
3 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 6
4 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 6
5 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 7
6 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 8
7 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 8
8 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 9
10 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 8
11 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 7
12 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 9
14 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
15 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 8

ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM TOTAL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SCORE
Student 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
8
Student 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 9
9
Student 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
12
Student 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9
13
PU 1 0.75 1 0.75 1 1 0.75 1 0.75 1
Student 1 0 0 1 `1 1 0 1 1 0 6
1
Student 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 6
3
Student 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 6
4
Student 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 5
2
PL 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 1 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.25
Discrimination Index = PU - PL

ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 – 0.5 =0.75 – =1 - 0 =0.75 – =1 – 1 =1 – 0.75 =0.75 – =1 – 0.75 =0.75 – =1 – 0.25
0.5 0.5 0.75 0.75
0.5 0.25 1 0.25 0 0.25 0 0.25 0 0.75
Difficulty Index = (PU+PL) /2

=1+0.5 =0.75+0.5 =1+0 =0.75+0.5 =1+1 =1+0.75 =0.75+0.75 =1+0.75 =0.75+0.75 =1+0.25
/2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2 /2
0.75 0.63 0.5 0.63 1 0.88 0.76 0.88 0.75 0.63
Easy Easy Very Easy Very Very Easy Very Easy Easy
difficult easy easy easy

Which item can I retain?

Item Analysis part at another file.

 My reflection in TOS and TEST, during and after administering the TEST.

Creating a Test Specification (TOS) and the test itself was a valuable learning experience. At first, we were
uncertain about how to balance the level of difficulty and ensure that the questions aligned with the course
objectives. However, through careful planning and review, we were able to structure the TOS in a way that
helped guide the test development. The TOS allowed us to map out the content areas and the cognitive levels
we wanted to assess, making sure the test would measure what students actually learned.
When we are in the process of writing the questions, it was challenging for us. We had to make sure each
question was clear and that the distractors were plausible. We also had to be mindful of the difficulty level to
ensure that the test was fair and appropriately challenging. This process made us appreciate the effort that
goes into designing a good test.
After we’ve done effort making the TOS and the TEST, we are in the part that we need to administer the test in
grade 7 at the laboratory school in Catanduanes State University. Before the test, we felt nervous, wondering if
the students would find it too easy or too difficult. We had carefully crafted the test based on the TOS, but we
still wondered how they would respond.
During the test, we made sure to create a calm environment for the students. As the students began working,
we noticed some of them seemed confident while others appeared to struggle. Some of them approached
mister Tindoc and ask him a question about the test, not just one who approach, but four students. That’s
where we forgot to announced to the class the instructions for clarifying even the instructions were already on
the test papers. And somehow, we still manage to response to those students who asked for clarification.
After the test, we reflected on how the students performed. Some answered most of the questions correctly,
which reassured us that the test was at the right level for many students. However, there were also some
questions that seemed to be more difficult for others, making us realize that there might be room for
improvement in terms of balancing the test’s difficulty. This feedback helped us understand the importance of
analyzing test results to adjust future assessments and improve their fairness.
This experience taught us a lot about test design, the process of administering exams, and how to respond to
students’ needs during testing. It highlighted the importance of creating assessments that are not only valid
and reliable but also considerate of the learners’ capabilities. The process was both challenging and rewarding,
and we look forward to applying what we have learned in the future.

MY JOURNAL
My journey when I spent some time reading and answering the module for my class. Honestly, it wasn’t easy.
At first, I thought studying from a module would be simpler than attending face-to-face classes. But I quickly
realized that without the teacher explaining things in person, I had to figure a lot of things out on my own.
I tried to focus, but it was harder to stay motivated when I didn’t have anyone directly guiding me. In class, I
could ask questions right away if something was unclear, but with the module, I had to reread parts over and
over and sometimes still didn’t get it. Sometimes I would even get distracted because I didn’t have a teacher’s
presence to keep me on track.
I did my best to understand each I’ve tackled, I had to look up extra resources online or try to find explanations
from other sources to fully understand. I realized how much more effort self-studying requires. It’s not just
about reading the material, but also making sure I really understand it on my own. I can see now that face-to-
face classes offer a lot more interaction, which makes learning easier. But at the same time, self-studying with
a module is teaching me to be more independent and resourceful. It’s definitely not as easy as sitting in class,
but it’s making me realize how important it is to take responsibility for my own learning. Hopefully, with more
practice, I’ll get better at studying this way.
In the end, I felt a sense of accomplishment when I finished the module, even though it was challenging. I
know I still have a lot to learn about self-studying, but this experience is helping me grow in ways that face-to-
face classes don’t always allow.