Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
Region V _________
SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE OF ________
___________________Distrcit
_________________________ School
Appropriate Assessment Tools
Once faculty settle on learning outcomes, and hopefully use curriculum mapping to understand which
outcome(s) need attention, the next step is to select tools to assess student achievement in the target
outcome(s). As practitioners note, the selection of tools involves a tradeoff between the ability to obtain
detailed information and the need to keep the process feasible and manageable. For this reason,
programs should use multiple assessment tools to overcome the disadvantages of a single tool.
A. Two Major Issues to Consider When Choosing an Assessment Tool
1. Direct and Indirect: Assessment tools can generally be placed in two categories, direct and indirect
measures. Direct measures are those in which the products of student work are evaluated in light of the
learning outcomes for the program. Evidence from course work such as projects or specialized tests of
knowledge or skill are examples of direct measures. Indirect measures are not based directly on student
academic work but rather on the perceptions of students, alumni, employers, and other outside agents.
While both direct and indirect measures have their place in assessment (together they form an
important holistic impression of student learning), it is most useful for programs to start with the direct
measures, given that it is there that student achievement is directly evaluated.
Direct Methods
1. Capstone courses draw upon and integrate knowledge, concepts, and skills associated with the
entire curriculum of a program. Taken normally in the senior year, capstone courses ask
students to demonstrate facility in the program’s learning outcomes, in addition to other
outcomes associated with the particular course. Within a capstone course, evidence of student
learning may include comprehensive papers, portfolios, group projects, demonstrations,
journals, or examinations. But how does one use this evidence to assess the overall program?
The final grade for the course, being a single measure, does not dissociate into an assessment of
student achievement in the various learning outcomes for the program (although achievement
in each of the learning outcomes may combine into the final grade). One method of assessment
in capstone courses is to evaluate student work with an eye toward the multiple dimensions of
the program’s outcomes. More than one faculty member can be invited to assist in the
assessment of student work, e.g. in an essay, or a presentation. The assessment of a major
paper or project, or set of papers or projects, may be broken down into sub-assessments of each
learning outcome.
2. In course-embedded assessment, student work in designated courses is collected and assessed
in relation to the program learning outcomes, not just for the course grade. As in the capstone
course, the products of student work need to be considered in light of the multiple dimensions
of the learning outcomes. Products may include final exams, research reports, projects, papers,
and so on. The assessment may be conducted at specific points (e.g., introductory course and
upper-level course) in a program.3. Standardized tests. The Educational Testing Service and
other companies offer standardized tests for various types of learning outcomes, such as critical
thinking or mathematical problem solving. Scores on tests such as the GRE or the Massachusetts
Test of Educator Licensure (MTEL) may be used as evidence of student learning.
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
Region V _________
SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE OF ________
___________________Distrcit
_________________________ School
3. Locally developed tests. Faculty may decide to develop their own internal test that reflects the
program’s learning outcomes. Though locally developed tests require work by the program’s
faculty in development and scoring, they are less costly than a standardized test and are often
more meaningful in that they focus more clearly on the intended learning outcomes.
4. Portfolio evaluation. A portfolio is a compilation of student work that, in total, demonstrates a
student’s achievement of various learning outcomes. Portfolios can be created for a variety of
purposes aside from program assessment, such as fostering reflection by students on their
education, providing documentation for a student’s job search, or certifying a student’s
competency. Portfolios created over the span of a student’s academic career, compared to
those consisting of a student’s work only at the end, provide the basis for a developmental
assessment.
6. Pre- and post- tests. One of the questions that comes up in assessment is not only whether students
can demonstrate the learning outcomes when they graduate, but how much of what they can
demonstrate was actually gained during their time in the program. This suggests the need to assess the
students' knowledge and skills at the point of entry into the program and, later, at the point of exiting
the program. In pre-test/post-test assessment, student work is assessed both early and late in their
academic career, from which the growth and development of the students can be deduced. Several of
the previously described tools lend themselves to pretest/post-test evaluation. Portfolios that collect
evidence throughout a student’s academic career can intrinsically be a type of pre- and post-test
evaluation. Course-embedded assessment in which student work is collected from introductory and
upper-level courses also provides a type of pre- and post-test evaluation, although the level of difficulty
in the two courses can be expected to differ considerably. Standardized or locally developed tests can be
administered at two times in a student’s career to assess learning. However, if the test is exactly
duplicated at the two times, then students may improve simply by having seen it twice. On the other
hand, if different tests are administered at the two times, it can be difficult to ensure that both tests are
of the same nature and difficulty, so the reliability of this method becomes a question.
Indirect Methods
1. Student self-efficacy. Students have a sense of their own competence. Student self-efficacy involves
students rating their perception of their own achievement in particular learning outcomes. Research
shows a significant, although imperfect, correlation between actual and perceived competence. What
can be problematic are gender and demographic differences in the accuracy of self-efficacy. For
example, certain groups of students may rate their quantitative skills at a level below that indicated by
standardized tests. Also, unless “the answers are anonymous, students will be likely to overrate their
abilities. The same is true if students perceive they can be penalized by their answers. Self-efficacy as an
assessment tool is relatively simple. For example, tests have been designed that ask students to rate the
perceived importance and self-efficacy of leadership skills, communication skills, interpersonal skills,
analytical skills, decision-making skills, technological skills, the global economy, ethics, and business
practices.”(Source: Weber State)
2. Student satisfaction surveys. Given that student satisfaction with a program or course is not a learning
outcome, satisfaction may or may not relate to outcomes assessment. But satisfaction may correlate
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
Region V _________
SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE OF ________
___________________Distrcit
_________________________ School
with other variables. For this reason, a common component of assessment systems is the student
satisfaction survey. Such surveys may consider the extent to which students are satisfied with their
interactions with faculty, with their introductory or advanced courses, or with their preparedness
coming out of the program. “Use of individual course evaluations for program assessment is problematic
because the evaluations reflect on individual instructors – a serious pitfall to be avoided in program
assessment. Disadvantages include the difficulty of designing questions appropriately, or, again, a
potential hazard in linking student satisfaction and achievement of learning outcomes.” (Source: Weber
State)
3. Student attitudinal surveys. If learning outcomes include elements of appreciation or understanding
of particular issues of concern, student attitudes can be measured as part of the assessment program.
For example, informed appreciation for the arts may be assessed using an attitudinal survey. Another
example may be students’ empathy toward disadvantaged groups, which can be measured in an
attitudinal survey. A further example would be attitudes toward learning or toward the profession. Both
standardized tests and locally designed surveys can be used for this purpose, although the responses are
very sensitive to the wording of the questions. Disadvantages include the challenge of determining
student attitudes in a reliable manner.
5. Exit interviews. Rather than assess students’ attitudes, self-efficacy, or satisfaction through the
use of surveys, students may be interviewed directly in individual or focus-group settings. Such
interviews allow a more thorough, free-form exploration of the issues through the use of follow-
up questions that depend on students’ responses.
5. Alumni surveys. The perspective that students have on their education may change significantly after
time away from school. Some learning outcomes lend themselves more naturally to questions posed
sometime after graduation. For example, an outcome involving preparation for professional practice can
best be assessed after the student has graduated and been employed in the job market.
6. Employer surveys. It is possible that some of the students' knowledge and skills are evident to the
employers who rely on these characteristics. Thus, some accrediting bodies either require or encourage
programs to perform an assessment through the major employers of them students. These may range
from information as basic as hiring data, to site supervisor evaluations, to detailed surveys of the
characteristics that the employers perceive in program graduates. Advisory boards, anecdotal
information, and placement data may be used in place of formal surveys.
7. Curriculum Analysis. Accrediting bodies have historically required institutions to document the
information that students are receiving and the content that the program delivers in its courses. With
the move toward learning-outcomes assessment, programs are required to show that students actually
exhibit the skills and qualities that the program wishes to develop. However, a curriculum analysis may
still be relevant and is often included in accreditation documents. For example, some accrediting bodies
may require the documentation of the number of hours devoted to a particular subject in the curriculum
