Показать сокращенную информацию
Validation and use of biology achievement test to evaluate learning outcomes
dc.contributor.advisor | Morano, Lourdes N. | |
dc.contributor.author | Piabol, Maricar D. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-04-19T08:31:53Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-04-19T08:31:53Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2004-07 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Piabol, M. D. (2004). Validation and use of biology achievement test to evaluate learning outcomes [Master's thesis, West Visayas State University]. WVSU Institutional Repository and Electronic Dissertations and Theses PLUS. | en |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.wvsu.edu.ph/handle/123456789/279 | |
dc.description.abstract | The main objective of this study was to validate the 2002 Division Achievement Test in biology and to produce a revised form. Specifically, the study aimed determining the characteristics of the 2002 Division Achievement Test in biology in terms of content, index to difficulty, index of discrimination and effectiveness of distracters, and reliability coefficient (2) determining the characteristics of the 2004 Division Achievement Test in Biology; (3) revising the existing Division Achievement Test in biology based on the result of its validity and reliability tests; and (4) using the revised Division Achievement Test in biology. In order to find out the learning outcomes being measured by the 2004 Division Achievement Test in Biology a table of specification was constructed. The data were gathered in six phases. The administration of the 50-item Division Achievement Test in biology was made in the Division of Iloilo. On the basis of content validation, item analysis, computation of reliability coefficient, and determination of the learning outcomes, the following results were obtained: Both the 2002 DAT in biology and its revised form had content validity. However, the former test contained items that were not equally distributed by chapters, while the latter test had items that were distributed equally and the learning outcomes were improved. As to index of difficulty, the 2002 DAT an biology was difficult while the 2004 DAT in biology was composed of items found to be desirable. The index of discrimination of the 2002 DAT in biology was good but the 2004 DAT in biology was found to have items that were highly discriminating. As to quality of the distracters, both tests contained good distracter. In terms of reliability coefficient, both tests were composed of reliable items. The learning outcomes measured by the 2004 DAT in biology were analyzing, synthesizing, identifying concepts, applying principles, problem-solving reading information from graph, table, and diagram classifying, evaluating, and recalling information. | en |
dc.format.extent | xvii, 200 p. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | West Visayas State University | en |
dc.subject | Biology | en |
dc.subject | Achievement test | en |
dc.subject | Learning outcomes | en |
dc.subject | Division Achievement Test (DAT) | en |
dc.subject | Examination in biology | en |
dc.subject | Division Achievement Test | en |
dc.subject | DAT | en |
dc.subject.lcsh | Biology | en |
dc.subject.lcsh | Achievement tests | en |
dc.title | Validation and use of biology achievement test to evaluate learning outcomes | en |
dc.type | Thesis | en |
dcterms.accessRights | Limited public access | en |
thesis.degree.discipline | Biological Science | en |
thesis.degree.grantor | West Visayas State University | en |
thesis.degree.level | Masters | en |
thesis.degree.name | Master of Arts in Education (Biological Science) | en |
dc.contributor.chair | Andora, Henry J. | |
dc.contributor.committeemember | Bilbao, Purita P. | |
dc.contributor.committeemember | Gasalao, Santiaga B. | |
dc.contributor.committeemember | Hojilla, Ma. Elena Bernadette P. |
Файлы в этом документе
Файл | Размер | Формат | Просмотр |
---|---|---|---|
В этом документе нет ни одного файла. |
Данный элемент включен в следующие коллекции
-
2. Master's Theses [97]