CAPIZ STATE UNIVERSITY

College of Education
Pontevedra Campus

ED 106 (Assessment in Learning I)

1st Semester, A.Y. 2021 – 2022
Instructor: Alvin D. Tenorio

Module 4: Planning for Assessment

Most Essential Learning Outcomes
After finishing this module, the students should have:
1. set appropriate instructional objectives for a written test;
2. discussed what table of specification or test blueprint is;
3. constructed a table of specifications for a written test;
4. discussed the different considerations in constructing relevant test items.

What are the Objectives for Testing? (Balagtas-Ubina et al., 2020)

In developing a written test, the cognitive behaviors of learning outcomes are usually
targeted. For the cognitive domain, it is important to identify the levels of behavior expected
from the students. Traditionally, Bloom’s Taxonomy was used to classify learning objectives
based on levels of complexity and specificity of the cognitive behaviors. With knowledge at
the base (i.e., lower-order thinking skill), the categories progress to comprehension,
application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. However, Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s
student and research partner, respectively, came up with a revised taxonomy in which the nouns
used to represent the levels of cognitive behavior were replaced by verbs, and the synthesis and
evaluation were switched.

Photo Credit: Google Images

In developing the cognitive domain of instructional objectives, key verbs can be used.
See Module 2 for the sample objectives in the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Framework.

What is a Table of Specifications (TOS)? (Balagtas-Ubina et al., 2020)

A table of specifications (TOS), sometimes called a test blueprint, is a tool used by

teachers to design a test. It is a table that maps out the test objectives, contents, or topics covered
by the test; the levels of cognitive behavior to be measured; the distribution of items, number,

Ed 106 – Assessment in Learning I (A. Tenorio) Page 1 of 5

placement, and weights of test items; and the test format. It helps ensure that the course’s
intended learning outcomes, assessments, and instruction are aligned.
Generally, the TOS is prepared before a test is created. However, it is ideal to prepare
one even before the start of instruction. Teachers need to create a TOS for every test that they
intend to develop. The test TOS is important because it does the following:
• Ensures that the instructional objectives and what the test captures match.
• Ensures that the test developer will not overlook details that are considered essential to
a good test.
• Makes developing a test easier and more efficient.
• Ensures that the test will sample all important content areas and processes.
• Is useful in planning and organizing.
• Offers an opportunity for teachers and students to clarify achievement expectations.

General Steps in Developing Table of Specifications (TOS) (Balagtas-Ubina et al., 2020)

1. Determine the objectives of the test. The first step is to identify the test objectives. This
should be based on the instructional objectives. In general, the instructional objectives or
the intended learning outcomes are identified at the start, when the teacher creates the course
syllabus. There are three types of objectives: (1) cognitive, (2) affective, and (3)
psychomotor. Cognitive objectives are designed to increase an individual’s knowledge,
understanding, and awareness. On the other hand, affective objectives aim to change an
individual’s attitude into something desirable, while psychomotor objectives are designed
to build physical or motor skills. When planning for assessment, choose only the objectives
that can be best captured by a written test. For example, if you test the psychomotor domain,
it is better to do a performance-based assessment. There are also cognitive objectives that
are sometimes better assessed through a performance-based assessment. Those that require
the demonstration or creation of something tangible like projects would also be more
appropriately measured by performance-based assessment. For a written test, you can
consider cognitive objectives, ranging from remembering to creating ideas, that could be
measured using common formats for testing such as multiple-choice, alternative response
tests, matching type, and even essays or open-ended tests.
2. Determine the coverage of the test. The next step in creating the TOS is to determine the
contents of the test. Only topics or contents that have been discussed in class and are relevant
should be included in the test.
3. Calculate the weight for each topic. Once the test coverage is determined, the weight of
each topic covered in the test is determined. The weight assigned per topic in the test is
based on the relevance and the time spent to cover each topic during instruction. The
percentage of time for a topic in a test is determined by dividing the time spent for that topic
during instruction by the total amount of time spent for all topics covered in the test. For
example, for a test on Theories of Personality for General Psychology 101 class, the teacher
spent ¼ to ½ hours in class sessions. As such, the weight for each topic is as follows:

Topic No. of Sessions Time Spent Percent of Time (Weight)

Theories and Concepts 0.5 class session 30 min 10.0
Psychoanalytic Theories 1.5 class sessions 90 min 30.0
Trait Theories 1 class session 60 min 20.0
Humanistic Theories 0.5 class session 30 min 10.0
Cognitive Theories 0.5 class session 30 min 10.0
Behavioral Theories 0.5 class session 30 min 10.0
Social Learning Theories 0.5 class session 30 min 10.0
TOTAL 5 class sessions 300 min or 5 hours 100

Ed 106 – Assessment in Learning I (A. Tenorio) Page 2 of 5

4. Determine the number of items for the whole test. To determine the number of items to be
included in the test, the amount of time needed to answer the items is considered. As a
general rule, students are given 30-60 seconds for each item in test formats with choices.
For a one-hour class, this means that the test should not exceed 60 items. However, because
you need also to give time for test paper/booklet distribution and giving instructions, the
number of items should be less, maybe just 50 items.
5. Determine the number of items per topic. To determine the number of items to be included
in the test, the weights per topic are considered. Thus, using the examples above, for a 50-
item final test, Theories & Concepts, Humanistic Theories, Cognitive Theories, Behavioral
Theories, and Social Learning Theories will have 5 items, Trait Theories – 10 items, and
Psychoanalytic Theories – 15 items.

Topic Percent of Time (Weight) No. of Items

Theory and Concepts 10.0 5
Psychoanalytic Theories 30.0 15
Trait Theories 20.0 10
Humanistic Theories 10.0 5
Cognitive Theories 10.0 5
Behavioral Theories 10.0 5
Social Learning Theories 10.0 5
TOTAL 100 50 items

Different Formats of a Test Table of Specifications (Balagtas-Ubina et al., 2020)

1. One-Way TOS. A one-way TOS maps out the content or topic, test objectives, number of
hours spent, and format, number, and placement of items. This type of TOS is easy to
develop and use because it just works around the objectives without considering the
different levels of cognitive behaviors. However, a one-way TOS cannot ensure that all
levels of cognitive behaviors that should have been developed by the course are covered in
the test.

No. of Hours Format and Number and

Topic Test Objective
Spent Placement of Items Percent of Items
Recognize important
Theories and Multiple Choice 5
concepts in personality 0.5
Concepts Item #s 1-5 (10.0%)
theories
Identify the different
Psychoanalytic theories of personality Multiple Choice 15
1.5
Theories under the Psychoanalytic Items #s 6-20 (30.0%)
Model
Etc.
TOTAL 5 50 (100%)

2. Two-Way TOS. A two-way TOS reflects not only the content, time spent, and the number
of items but also the levels of cognitive behavior targeted per test content based on the theory
behind cognitive testing. For example, the common framework for testing at present in the
DepEd Classroom Assessment Policy is the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (DepEd, 2015).
One advantage of this format is that it allows one to see the levels of cognitive skills and
dimensions of knowledge that are emphasized by the test. It also shows the framework of
assessment used in the development of the test. However, this format is more complex than
the one-way format.

Ed 106 – Assessment in Learning I (A. Tenorio) Page 3 of 5

 No. & Level of Cognitive Behavior, Item Format, Number and
Time
Content Percent KD* Placement of Items
Spent
of Items R U AP AN E C
I.3
F
Theories and 0.5 5 #1-3
Concepts hours (10.0%) I.2
C
#4-5
I.2
F
#6-7
I.2 I.2
C
Psychoanalytic 1.5 15 #8-9 #10-11
Theories hours (30.0%) I.2 I.2
P
#12-13 #14-15
I.3 II.1 II.1
M
#16-18 #41 #42
Etc.
Scoring 1 point per item 2 points per item 3 points per item
OVERALL 50
5 20 20 10
TOTAL (100.0%)

Another presentation is shown below:

Level of Cognitive Behavior and Knowledge Dimension*, Item

Time No. of
Content Format, Number and Placement of Items
Spent Items
R U AP AN E C
I.3 I.2
Theories and 0.5 5
#1-3 #4-5
Concepts hours (10.0%)
(F) (C)
I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 II.1 II.1
#6-7 #8-9 #10-11 #14-15 #41 #42
Psychoanalytic 1.5 15 (F) (C) (C) (P) (M) (M)
Theories hours (30.0%) I.2 I.3
#12-13 #16-18
(P) (M)
Etc.
Scoring 1 point per item 2 points per item 3 points per item
OVERALL 50
5 20 20 10
TOTAL (100.0%)

*KD - Knowledge Dimension (F - Factual, C - Conceptual, P - Procedural, M - Metacognitive)

I – Multiple Choice; II – Open-ended

3. Three-Way TOS. This type of TOS reflects the features of one-way and two-way TOS. One
advantage of this format is that it challenges the test writer to classify objectives based on
the theory behind the assessment. It also shows the variability of thinking skills targeted by
the test. However, it takes much longer to develop this type of TOS. (Please refer to the
table on page 5 for the sample.)

Considerations in Constructing Relevant Test Items (Keith Waugh & Gronlund, 2013)

The construction of a set of relevant test items is greatly simplified if the intended
learning outcomes have been clearly defined and the test specifications carefully prepared. The
quality of the test will then depend on how closely the test maker can match the specifications.
Here we shall confine our discussion to some of the general specifications in preparing test
items.

Ed 106 – Assessment in Learning I (A. Tenorio) Page 4 of 5

1. Selecting the type of test items to use. The items used in the achievement test can be
classified as either selection-type items or supply-type items. The selection-type item
presents students with a set of possible responses from which they are to select the most
appropriate answer. The supply-type item requires students to create and supply their own
answers.
2. Matching items to specific learning outcomes. Effective testing requires that a set of test
items be constructed that calls forth the performance described in the intended learning
outcomes.
3. Improving the functioning content of items. If test items are to call forth the performance
described in the intended learning outcomes, great care must be taken in phrasing the items.
We need to eliminate all barriers that might prevent a knowledgeable person from
responding and all clues that might lead the uninformed to the correct answer. Only those
who have achieved the outcome being measured should get the item right. All others (no
matter how intelligent) should miss it.
4. Determining the number of items to use. The number of items to use should be indicated in
the test specifications, and is modified by several practical constraints such as the following:
a. Age of the students tested
b. Time available for testing
c. Type of test items used
d. Type of interpretation to be made

Level of Cognitive Behavior and Knowledge

Learning Time No. of Dimension*, Item Format, Number and
Content
Objectives Spent Items Placement of Items
R U AP AN E C
Recognize I.3 I.2
important #1-3 #4-5
Theories and 0.5 5
concepts in (F) (C)
Concepts hours (10.0%)
personality
theories
Identify the I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 II.1 II.1
different theories #6-7 #8-9 #10-11 #14-15 #41 #42
Psychoanalytic of personality 1.5 15 (F) (C) (C) (P) (M) (M)
Theories under hours (30.0%) I.2 I.2
#12-13 #12-13
psychoanalytic
model (P) (P)
Etc.
Scoring 1 point per 3 points per 5 points per
item item item
OVERALL 50
20 20 10
TOTAL (100.0%)
*KD - Knowledge Dimension (F - Factual, C - Conceptual, P - Procedural, M - Metacognitive)
I – Multiple Choice; II – Open-ended

References

1. Balagtas-Ubina, M., David, A., Golla, E., Magno, C., & Valladolid, V. (2020). Assessment
in learning I (1st ed.). Rex Bookstore.
2. Keith Waugh, C., & Gronlund, N. (2013). Assessment of student achievement (10th ed.)
Pearson Education, Inc.

Ed 106 – Assessment in Learning I (A. Tenorio) Page 5 of 5