2013 NAT Presentation-Dr. Benito-For DTC

NAT Overview and 2012 Test Results

Department of EducationNational Education Testing and Research Center

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

1

2

1. What is the NAT?

The National Achievement Test (NAT) is a Philippine-made standardized test designed to determine pupils/students’ achievement level, strengths and weaknesses in five key curricular subject areas at the end of the school year.

2

3

2. What is the purpose of the NAT?

The NAT was developed to measure what pupils/students in Grade Three, Grade Six and Fourth Year know and can do in five subject areas: Science, Mathematics, English, Filipino, and HeKaSi (Heograpiya, Kasaysayan at Sibika) in elementary and Araling Panlipunan in secondary level.

Specifically, the test aims to:

1. provide empirical information on the achievement level of pupils/students

to serve as guide for policy makers, administrators, curriculum planners, supervisors, principals and teachers in their respective courses of action.

2. identify and analyze variations on achievement levels across the years by region, division, school and other variables

3.determine the rate of improvement in basic education with respect to individual schools within certain time frames.

3

4

3. Who are the target clienteles of the NAT in 2013?

Grade 3 - public schools (census) - Madrasah schools

Grade 6 - public and private schools (census)

Year 4 - public and private schools (census)

4

5

TEST NAT G3 NAT G6 NAT Y4

Subject Area Coverage 1. Science 1. Science 1. Science

2. Mathematics 2. Mathematics 2. Mathematics

3. English 3. English 3. English

4. Filipino 4. Filipino 4. Filipino

5. HeKaSi 5. Araling Panlipunan

Critical Thinking Skills (20 items)

Number of Items Per Subject

30 40 60 (Except for Math, 50)

Total Number of Items 120 200 310

4. What is the coverage of the NAT and how many test items does it comprise?

5

Planning the Test

Developing the Table of Specifications

Item Writing

Test Assembly and Review of Test Items

Pilot Testing or Try Out of the Test (at least 2 forms of the final test)

Item Analysis

Items Useful

Validity/Reliability

Organize final form of the test

Norming

Preparation of the Test Manual/Examiner’s Handbook

Yes

NoReject

6

5. How is the NAT developed?

Test DevelopmentProcess

6

7

6. What features characterize the NAT?

• A multiple-choice test• A sampling of competencies intended for the whole year coverage• A standardized test with mostly moderately difficult items• Anchored on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives / Dimensions• High-Ordered Thinking Skills (HOTS) • The performance of an examinee is compared to the performance of a national populace.• The rating is expressed in percentage score or percent of correct responses.

7

8

7. What is the rationale of DepEd in administering the NAT in Grade Three, Grade Six and Fourth Year?

The NAT is a system-based assessment specifically designed to gauge learning outcomes across target levels in identified periods of basic education.

NAT-Grade Three- Pursuant to Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP), it serves as mid-

assessment of elementary education.

NAT-Grade Six- It serves as terminal exit assessment of elementary education and as

measurement of incoming first year students’ readiness for high school (pursuant to DepED Order No. 5, s. 2005).

NAT-Fourth Year- It serves as exit assessment of the secondary level of basic education

(pursuant to DepED Order No. 5, s. 2005).

8

10

8. What information is derived from the NAT Certificate of Rating (NAT-COR)?

• Raw scores obtained by an examinee five subjects are reported in a table alongside with the percentage scores.

• Total test scores for raw and percentage scores are revealed at the bottom part of the table.

• A quartile distribution of the obtained of mean percentage scores is provided to guide end-users in interpreting test results.

• Percentage of Correct Responses (PCR) per learning competency by subject area is likewise presented to have a glimpse on the performance of the pupil/student in every skill measured in the test.

10

11

Facsimile of the COR for NAT-Grade 6

12

(Back Portion)

13

9. How are the NAT scores reported and interpreted to each examinee?

The NAT results are interpreted in quartile distribution of Mean Percentage Scores (MPS) to indicate the percentage of correctly answered items in a test or subject area proficiencies. It is also used in classifying test performances of schools, divisions, regions and the total country.

For example: Performance of School X•School X has overall Mean Percentage Score (MPS) of

52%. It is classified as upper average in school performance.•School X has MPS of 80% in English. It has superior

performance in English.

Quartile Distribution Descriptive Equivalent76-100% Superior

51-75% Upper Average

26-50% Lower Average

0-25% Poor

13

10. How is the Mean Percentage Score (MPS) interpreted?

• The MPS indicates the ratio between the number of correctly answered items and the total number of test questions or the percentage of correctly answered items in a test.

• For instance, a 50 MPS in one subject area would mean that an examinee correctly answered 20 out of 40 test items (NAT-Grade 6).

• On the other hand, a 60 MPS for a total score means that an examinee correctly answered 6 out of 10 questions in the test.

14

14

15

11. Is there a passing score in the NAT?

None.

It uses the MPS to indicate the percentage of correctly answered items in a test.

The computation of grades in school, however, is done very differently from the NAT.

(Refer to DepED Order No. 73, s. 2012, “Guidelines on the Assessment and Rating of Learning Outcomes under the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum; www.deped.gov.ph)

15

16

16

17

12. Does an MPS below 75 mean that the examinees failed the test?

• No. • An MPS below 75 would mean that the examinees’ test performance does not belong to the upper average of the total number of test-takers.

• The standard criterion set by the Department in terms of achievement level is 75% which is the national target.

17

18

The Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT


The National Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT Subtests

19

• On the average, the Grade 3 children in public schools obtained an MPS of 56.98 in the 2012 NAT. This finding is a retrogression in relation to the previous years’ performance.

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement LevelIn Overall Test

20

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL SY2009-2010 SY2010-2011 SY2011-2012

MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT n % n % n %

96 - 100% Mastered 34,803 1.78 19,379 0.98 11,972 0.60

86 - 95% Closely Approximating Mastery 284,441 14.57 239,391 12.08 207,286 10.40

66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 651,190 33.36 632,856 31.94 588,707 29.53

35 - 65% Average 725,775 37.18 749,781 37.84 757,484 38.00

15 - 34% Low 252,453 12.93 335,415 16.93 423,627 21.25

5 - 14% Very Low 3,138 0.16 4,243 0.21 4,165 0.21

0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery 354 0.02 162 0.01 154 0.01

N= 1,952,154 1,981,227 1,993,395

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Levelby Subject Area in the 2012 NAT – G3

21

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION EXAMINEES

MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT RC - English RC - Filipino Grammar English

Grammar Filipino Science Mathematics

96 - 100% Mastered 1.02 1.54 10.69 6.35 1.97 7.65

86 - 95% Closely Approximating Mastery 9.08 10.86 12.59 11.07 13.96 17.98

66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 25.29 29.01 21.80 25.53 27.31 22.81

35 - 65% Average 40.68 40.56 26.23 32.48 27.70 26.59

15 - 34% Low 21.90 16.51 20.18 18.21 22.21 20.18

5 - 14% Very Low 1.94 1.42 6.35 4.84 6.33 4.35

0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery 0.09 0.10 2.16 1.51 0.52 0.44

TOTAL 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

22The Regional Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT Subtests

• CARAGA Region had the best performance in the NAT Grade 3 among the regions.

SCHOOL YEAR

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

I II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII

NCR CAR

ARMM

CARAGA

2010-2011 60.94 56.47 61.83 61.48 64.49 54.96 57.12 50.91 72.53 65.48 63.00 55.05 64.41 51.47 52.13 55.98 75.70

2011-2012 53.27 57.28 62.03 56.23 64.12 54.13 54.22 50.22 68.43 60.25 60.94 54.81 62.19 45.17 51.91 54.50 74.47

Most Improved Region in the NAT Grade Three(National)

• Regions II and III are the most improved regions in the NAT Grade 3.

23

24

SCHOOL YEARCLUSTER 1 - MPS

III IV-A V VI VII VIII NCR

2010-2011 61.83 61.48 54.96 57.12 50.91 72.53 51.47

2011-2012 62.03 56.23 54.13 54.22 50.22 68.43 45.17

Most Improved Region by Cluster(Cluster 1)

Cluster 1 – Large Size Region (100,001 examinees and above)* Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions• Region III is the most improved region in the 2012 NAT Grade 3.

25Most Improved Region by Cluster(Cluster 2)


I X XI XII IX ARMM2010-2011 60.94 63.00 55.05 64.41 65.48 55.982011-2012 53.27 60.94 54.81 62.19 60.25 54.5

Cluster 2 – Medium Size Region (75,000 – 100,000 examinees)* Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions• All Cluster 2 regions had retrogressed in NAT Grade 3 performance in the 2012 when compared with the previous year.

26


II IV-B CAR CARAGA2010-2011 56.47 64.49 52.13 75.702011-2012 57.28 64.12 51.91 74.47

Most Improved Region by Cluster(Cluster 3)

Cluster 3 – Small Size Region (74,999 examinees and below)* Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions

• Region II is the most improved region in 2012 NAT Grade 3.

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G3 Performance* 27

Area VariableCategory with Best

PerformanceMPS

School-Related Variables

Learning Environment1.School Location2.Science Laboratory 3.Computer Laboratory4.Electricity Supply5.Internet Access/Connection6.EDQ #3 – Reading materials/aidsOthers:1.Type of Public School2.Class Size3.Class Shift4.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in RC-English5.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in English Grammar6.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Science7.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Mathematics8.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in RC-Filipino9.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Filipino GrammarSchool Header Variables:1.NAT Review2.Yearly NAT Results3.Obtaining the NAT Results4.NAT as an ECARP Evaluation Strategy

Outside the town properWith Science LaboratoryWithout Computer Lab.With ElectricityWithout Internet AccessTextbooks

Multi-grade SchoolsBelow 30 One Shift1:11:11:11:11:11:1

With NAT reviewYearly tracking of NAT resultsDivision OfficeEffective as assessment to ECARP

61.4361.2460.5860.6160.6359.31

60.3360.5859.3458.0262.1360.8061.3861.9860.66

60.5760.8660.66

60.99



PerformanceMPS

Student Factor

1. Gender2. EDQ #9 – How Much do you

like Mathematics

FemaleI like it very much

59.1959.36

Teacher Factor

EDQ Variables1. EDQ #2 – Reading books in

the Library2. EDQ #4 – Reading Class in

English and Filipino3. EDQ #7 – Science class

experiment/observation4. EDQ #8 – Assessment

Strategies5. EDQ #10 – Class

Observation of Principals

Twice a week

Individual reading

Sometimes

Give us a short quiz or testOften;Sometimes

59.59

59.74

58.86

60.3357.99;58.90

Home Background Variables

EDQ Variables:1. EDQ #5 – Number of

Children in the Family2. EDQ #6 – Family Support

Two children

Mother

58.41

58.52

*Sources of data: (1) Examiner’s Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) (2) School Header (SH)

29

The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT


30The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT Subtests

****

*All private schools were included**Sampling private schools only

*

31

Key Findings:

National Data

1.The achievement rate of Grade 6 examinees in the NAT approximates a status quo performance for the past three years.

2.Over the years, they performed best in Filipino in contrast with the remaining subjects: Math, Science, HeKaSi and English.

3.In the recent NAT, the examinees showed marked increase in Science; while slightly improved performance in English.

32Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL SY2009-2010 SY2010-2011 SY2011-2012MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT n % n % n %

96 - 100 % Mastered 2,659 0.14 10,294 0.55 5,906 0.31

86 - 95 % Closely Approximating Mastery 242,624 13.07 306,448 16.48 272,803 14.31

66 - 85 % Moving Towards Mastery 906,171 48.81 827,234 44.50 845,935 44.3635 - 65 % Average 642,895 34.63 640,804 34.47 684,234 35.8815 - 34 % Low 61,826 3.33 74,114 3.99 97,755 5.135 - 14 % Very Low 142 0.01 140 0.01 191 0.010 - 4 % Absolutely No Mastery 55 0.00 6 0.00 13 0.00

n = 1,856,372 1,859,040 1,906,837

33Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level and by Subject Area

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EXAMINEESMPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT FILIPINO MATH ENGLISH SCIENCE HEKASI

96 - 100 % Mastered 0.67 7.21 1.09 2.82 0.55

86 - 95 % Closely Approximating Mastery 13.63 20.10 15.74 15.15 14.69

66 - 85 % Moving Towards Mastery 47.92 29.99 40.20 37.72 42.4735 - 65 % Average 34.49 27.97 34.20 35.28 32.4015 - 34 % Low 3.23 14.36 8.57 8.81 9.585 - 14 % Very Low 0.05 0.36 0.18 0.21 0.290 - 4 % Absolutely No Mastery 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03

The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT SY2011-2012

Key Findings:

Region VIII and CARAGA showed high performance in the NAT.

34



PerformanceMPS

Learning Environment

1. School Location2. Science Laboratory 3. Computer Laboratory4. Internet Access/Connection5. Electricity Supply

Outside the town properWithout Science LaboratoryWithout Computer Lab.Without Internet AccessWith Electricity Supply

70.7668.6070.7179.2968.07

School Related

Variables

Others:1. Public Type of School2. Private Type of School3. Class Shift4. Class Size5. Textbook-Ratio – English6. Textbook-Ratio – Science7. Textbook-Ratio -

Mathematics8. Textbook-Ratio - Filipino9. Textbook-Ratio - HeKaSi

Non-Central Elem.SchoolPrivate SectarianOne shiftBelow 302:12:12:11:22:1

68.5864.7368.3968.4169.7969.6772.9571.4071.13



PerformanceMPS

Student Variables

1. Gender2. EDQ #1 Activity – Perform

Best3. EDQ #13 Science4. EDQ #14 English5. EDQ #15 Mathematics

FemaleTaking care of plantsEasy, because I study hardEasy, because I study hardEasy, because I study hard

68.5769.1668.4969.0368.52

Teacher Factors

1. EDQ #5 Teacher’s Attendance

2. EDQ #9 Teaching Strategies

3. EDQ #10 use of computer set

4. EDQ #11 TV, CD, DVD use

Always present in schoolThey discuss the lesson the whole period (chalk-talk method), then ask questions if there is remaining timeNeverNever

67.72

68.0768.9367.63


*Sources of data: Examiner’s Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) School Header (SH)


PerformanceMPS

Assessment Strategies

EDQ Variables:1. EDQ #6 Assessment

Strategies2. EDQ #8 Asessment

Strategies

3. ED Q #7 Performance and Portfolio

Give a short written quizFill in the blanks, Identification, Sentence completion typeBoth A and B

68.37

68.05

68.37

Home Background

Variable

EDQ Variable:1. EDQ #2 Educational

Facilities at HomeTV and several magazines and books

68.48

38

The Performance of Fourth Year Students in the NAT


The National Performance of High School Students in the NAT

SCHOOL YEAR OVERALL FILIPINOMATHEM

ATICSENGLISH SCIENCE

ARALING PANLIPU

NAN

CRITICAL THINKING

SKILL TEST

SY2004 - 2005 46.80 42.48 50.70 51.33 39.49 50.01 NA

SY2005 - 2006 44.33 40.51 47.82 47.73 37.98 47.62 NA

SY2011 - 2012 48.90 51.27 46.37 51.80 40.53 54.22 48.57

39

On the average , the fourth year students obtained an MPS of 48.90 in the 2012 NAT, an improved performance when compared with the previous years (44.33 in 2006 and 46.80 in 2005).

40Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Examinees in Achievement Level in OVERALL PERFORMANCE

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL SY2004-2005 SY2005-2006 SY2011-2012

MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT n % n % n %

96 - 100% Mastered 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

86 - 95%Closely Approximating Mastery

15 0.00 0 0.00 578 0.04

66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 72,457 7.06 78,704 7.69 156,379 11.40

35 - 65% Average 768,456 74.89 667,322 65.23 1,016,503 74.09

15 - 34% Low 184,831 18.01 270,941 26.49 198,221 14.45

5 - 14% Very Low 300 0.03 4,376 0.43 247 0.02

0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery 56 0.01 1,652 0.16 39 0.00

1,026,115 1,022,995 1,371,967

41Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Examinees in Achievement Level in All Subject Area

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION

MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT FILIPINOMATHEMA

TICSENGLISH SCIENCE

ARALING PANLIPUNAN

CRITICAL THINKING

SKILL TEST

96 - 100% Mastered 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04

86 - 95%Closely Approximating Mastery

0.01 5.33 1.18 0.54 0.64 1.40

66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 13.93 15.79 23.21 7.94 24.12 16.62

35 - 65% Average 74.45 38.51 57.11 49.95 62.79 59.76

15 - 34% Low 11.51 38.26 18.30 41.14 12.25 20.34

5 - 14% Very Low 0.09 1.06 0.17 0.41 0.18 1.45

0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.39

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT Subtests42

CARAGA showed the best performance followed by Region VIII in the NATY4. Five out of 17 regions surpassed the 50% MPS: Regions III, IV-B, VII, VIII and CARAGA.

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT

Cluster 1 – Large Size Region with 100,001 and more Examinees

43

SCHOOL YEARMEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

III IV-A VI VII NCR

2011-2012 50.20 47.17 49.75 51.98 49.32

Central Visayas Region showed the best performance in Cluster 1.

Cluster 2 – Medium Size Region with 75,000 to 100,000 Examinees

44The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT

Bicol Region outperformed Ilocos Region in Cluster 2.

SCHOOL YEARMEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

I V

2011-2012 42.60 46.36

Cluster 3 – Small Size Region with 74,999 and Below Examinees

45The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT

CARAGA showed the best performance in NATY4 among Cluster 3 regions; with Region VIII closely trailing behind.

SCHOOL YEAR

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

II IV-B VIII X XI XII CAR ARMMCARA

GA

2011-2012 47.75 64.12 68.43 60.94 54.81 62.19 51.91 54.50 74.47

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT Y4 Performance* 46

Area Variable

Category with Best

Performance

MPS

Student Variable

1. Gender2. EDQ #4 – Financial Support3. EDQ#5 – Distance of school

from home 4. EDQ#6 – Comm. Skills -

English5. EDQ#7 – Working at Home6. EDQ#8 – Access to learning

resources

FemaleLittle

Not at AllNot at AllNot at All

Not at All

50.5648.89

51.8252.4751.88

50.10




PerformanceMPS

Teacher Factor

EDQ Variables1.EDQ #9 – Use of ICT2.EDQ #10 – Short Tests3.EDQ #11 – Active Participation4.EDQ#12 – Feedback of assignments5.EDQ #13 - English

6.EDQ #14 - Science

7.EDQ#15 - Math

SeldomOftenOftenStrongly AgreePresenting first the concept/theory followed by a variety of examples and/or situational roles and then application concept.

Presenting first the concept/theory followed by a variety of examples and/or situational roles and then application concept.

Presenting first the formula followed by varied examples or situational cases.

50.9150.9550.91

49.9951.36

52.29

50.50




PerformanceMPS

Home Background Variables

EDQ Variable:1. EDQ #1 – Family

Income

2. EDQ #2 – Family Size

3. EDQ#3 – Educational Facilities at Home

Salary from domestic (goverment or private)Two to Three

Textbooks, supplementary books, newspapers, and magazines

50.34

49.32

48.92


Correlates of the NAT 2012 Overall Score

Grade ThreeGrade SixFourth Year

49

Correlates of the 2012 NAT G3 Overall Score

Model R R Square8 .330m .109

8

Correlates of NAY G3 B Std. Error t Description

(Constant) -21.141 .384 -55.123

1 Grade in English .303 .003 93.355 Higher Grade In English

2

Grade in Science .170 .003 61.155 Higher Grade In Science

3

RegionCluster 2.021 .028 71.053 Regions with small number of examinees

4 Grade in Filipino .165 .003 61.557 Higher Grade In Filipino

5

Grade in Mathematics

.152 .003 57.369 Higher Grade In Mathematics

6 Shifts per Day -2.327 .046 -50.075 Single Shift

7 Age -.068 .004 -17.206 Younger examinees

8 Class Size .017 .002 8.659 Small Class Size

Note: The eight variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

50


•Eight variables out of 14 surfaced as correlates of NAT G3 Overall Score

•The correlation between NAT G3 Overall Score and the variables was found to be less moderate (0.330)

•The identified variables could be accounted for only 10.90% (R Square) of NAT G3 Overall Score

51


Note: The twelve variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

52

Model R R Square14 .330n .109

Correlates of NAT G6B Std. Error

tDescription

14 (Constant) .281 .635

1 School Cluster 3.477 .024 142.978 School with Small Number

of examinees

2Grade in Mathematics .430 .004 95.849 Higher Grade in

Mathematics

3 TEEP 13.889 .093 149.798 Teep Schools

4 Grade in HEKASI .325 .005 69.759 Higher Grade in HeKaSi


6 Grade in English .277 .004 64.632 Higher Grade in English


8Region Cluster 2.938 .038 78.223 Regions with small number

of examinees

9 Grade in Filipino .242 .004 56.858 Higher Grade in Filipino

10 Grade in Science .189 .004 46.761 Higher Grade in Science

12 Age -.091 .022 -4.206 Younger Examinees


•Twelve variables out of 14 surfaced as correlates of NAT G6 Overall Score

•The correlation between NAT G6 Overall Score and the variables was found to be less moderate ( 0.330)

•The identified variables could be accounted for only 10.90% (R Square) of NAT G6 Overall Score

53

Correlates of the 2012 NAT Y4 Overall Score

Note: The eleven variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

54

Number of Variables Included R R Square

11 .443m .196

11

Correlates of NAT Y4 Overall Score B Std. Error t Description

(Constant) -99.901 .785 -127.327

1 Grade in English .808 .006 138.723 Higher Grade in English

2

Grade in AP .674 .006 113.191 Higher Grade in Aralin Panlipunan

3

Grade in Mathematics .597 .006 108.174 Higher Grade in Mathematics

4 Teep 17.105 .129 132.347 TEEP Schools

5 Grade in Science .585 .006 100.004 Higher Grade in Science

6 Grade in Filipino .496 .005 93.159 Higher Grade in Filipino

7

DivisionCluster 3.620 .046 79.500 Divisions With Small Number of Examinees



10

RegionCluster -1.890 .050 -37.546 Small Number of Examinees

11 Age -.179 .006 -28.933 Younger

Correlates of the 2012 NAT Y4 Overall Score

•All variables surfaced as correlates of NAT Y4 Overall Score

•The correlation between NAT Y4 Overall Score and the variables was found to be moderate ( 0.443)

•The identified variables could be accounted for only 19.60% (R Square) of NAT Y4 Overall Score

55

Policy Recommendations

- School Level - Division Level - For Teachers - Central Office Level

56

Policy RecommendationsNAT G3, G6 and Y4

SCHOOL LEVEL

1. Provide remedial classes to poor readers.2. Early detection of potential non-readers in the first grade

should be a primary concern in each school.3. Producing fluent readers in the third grade should form part

of the crafted vision in each school.4. Developing reading comprehension skills should permeate

all learning areas not only in reading.5. Maximize the implementation of ECARP at the school level.6. Expose students to authentic learning activities using

constructivist approach (learning by doing).7. School-based assessment for learning (formative

assessment) should utilize varied forms of assessment.8. Conduct Parent-Teacher-Child Conferencing on the child’s

progress in school.9. Maximize the utilization of NAT results for intervention and

remedial instruction.

57

DIVISION LEVEL

1.Support sustainable implementation of programs geared towards raising learning outcomes

School commitment R.O., C.O. support

2.Strengthen educational supervision at the school level.

3.Subject area specialists be made available to schools without specialists (twinning system).

4.Provide supplementary materials (modular form) to enhance the competencies of those in schools with more than one shift as an enabling mechanism to extend time on task.


58

CAPABILITY BUILDING FOR TEACHERS1.Make developing genuine love for reading among

children a part of the in-service training for teachers.

2.Provide training for teachers on developing children’s strategies in reading.

3.Provide formative assessment/evaluation training.

CENTRAL OFFICE1.Reinforce the stipulations of the DECS Order No.

34, s. 2001, requiring all students to read two books a year and must show evidence of having at least read one book in the vernacular and one book in English per year before being promoted to the next grade or year level.


59

•End of Presentation

60

2013 NAT Presentation-Dr. Benito-For DTC

Documents

Transcript of 2013 NAT Presentation-Dr. Benito-For DTC