Assessment practices across disciplines: Implications for course assessments in post-pandemic times

Department/Unit

Institutional Testing and Evaluation Office

Document Type

Article

Source Title

Educational Management and Evaluation Review

Volume

11

First Page

61

Last Page

77

Publication Date

2020

Abstract

This descriptive study aimed to determine assessment practices in face-to face and hybrid classes in three disciplines, namely STEM, HUMMS, and ABM. It analyzed the syllabi of 327 undergraduate courses of one HEI using frequencies, percentages, and chi-square.It also presented suggestions to address assessment concerns in time of pandemic and thereafter.Results indicate that majority (80%) of courses employ both conventional and alternative assessments. Around ten percent each use conventional assessments only and alternative assessments only. ABM courses use conventional assessments only more than the two disciplines while HUMMS courses employ more alternative assessments only as well as mixed methods. The most common traditional assessmentsare quizzes, final, and midterm exams. They are most dominant amongSTEM and ABM courses. Alternative assessments used include written and visual products, and performance-based assessments. STEM courses place the most weight in quizzes and seatworks/exercisesin computation of final grade while HUMMS courses, in finalresearch papers, portfolio, class standing, and reflection papers. More than three-fourths of courses use at least one rubric, with analytic-taskspecific type as the most utilized. The top rubrics used are for research/written report, oral presentation, and overall assessment. ABM courses employ rubrics more than the two disciplines. Research on assessment practices in SHS is recommended.

html

Disciplines

Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research

Keywords

Educational tests and measurements

Upload File

wf_no

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS