General objectives

         The study is descriptive – developmental in nature which aimed to prepare and validate an Achievement test in Filipino for third year high school students.

Specific Objectives

The study also attempt to:

1. Identify specific skills in Filipino 3 which will be included in the test

2. Prepare a table of specifications for the skills to be tested

3. Construct test items for each skill

4. Trey out the validity of the test

5. Analyze each item of the test

6. Revise the test based on the weaknesses found during the try-out stage

7. Compute the validity and reliability indices of the test

8. Prepare a test manual

        The study is only concerned on the preparation and validation of achievement test in Filipino for third year students of ANHS, Butuan City SY 2003-2004.

        The achievement test prepared measures the skills developed during the four grading periods. The validity and reliability of the test prepared were determined with the help of Filipino 3 teachers in the school and some selected students in Filipino subjects in the four sections in the third year.

         The study underwent four stages: planning, test construction, administration and evaluation stages.

         The descriptive – developmental method is used in this study. Its objective is to develop and validate an achievement test in Filipino 3.

         The respondents of the study were the fourth year and third year students of Agusan National High School, Butuan City, during SY 2003-2004

        The subjects of the pilot testing stage were twenty (20) fourth year students chosen randomly from twenty (20) sections in fourth year students. Two hundred (200) fourth year students were the subjects for the first and second trial run. Two hundred (200) third year students were used in the third trial run or the final run of the study. From those one hundred (100) were chosen to take the re-test and they were also the very same students who were made to take the Division test.

        The teachers of ANHS teaching Filipino evaluated the appropriateness or suitability of the items, clarify of directions and language used in the test.

        The fourth year students utilized for the pilot testing were chosen through random sampling method. There were two hundred fourth year students chosen who took the first and second trial run. The third year students for the final run. They were chosen using the purposive random sampling.

Preparation of the Table of Specification

          In this study a pre-survey was done to identify the skills to be tested. It was an aid for the development of the test item. All skills included in the test were the result of the pre-survey and the self observation of the researcher.

          The tests were based on the Philippine Secondary Schools Learning Competencies in grammar and literature in Filipino 3.

          The test items in this study were developed using analytic method and only the multiple type of test was effective since its validity and reliability is measurable.

Content Validation and Pilot Testing

          After the items were developed inspection was done by the experts and Filipino teachers of Agusan National High School, Butuan City. The test was tried out to twenty (20) fourth year students, the purpose of which was to determine the language suitability of the items and ease in following directions from the point of view of the examinees. The average length of time to finish the test was also determined. The test can be finished in two (2) hours and 10 minutes as known during the pilot testing.

First Try out

         After the pilot testing and content validation it was given for the first time to two hundred (200) fourth year students. It was found out that there were only ninety four (94) acceptable items, eleven (11) need revision and eighty three (83) were not accepted. The test was finished in two hours during the first try out.

         There was a total of ninety-four (94) items included in the test. After it was given again to two hundred (200) students the item analyses have shown that there were fifty six (56) good items, eleven (11) need revision, seventeen (17) were not accepted and included in the final form of the test.

         There were fifty-six (56) items included in the final form of test. It was conducted to third year students to find out the effectiveness of the revisions done during the preceding try outs. It was given to two hundred (200) students selected purposively from third year students on February 11, 2004.

          The concurrent validity of the tests were calculated using the Pearson Product Moment method by comparing the test re-test result to the Division Achievement test. The reliability coefficient was determined by comparing their score from the final run to the test re-test result. The calculated concurrent validity coefficient was 0.658 significantly means that the test constructed were valid, while the test re-test reliability coefficient of the test was 0.802 it means that the test is concurrently reliable.

          Based on the results of the different try outs, the final form of the test was prepared. There were fifty six (56) items included in its final from.

1. The test is based on the learning skills found on the PSSLC used in teaching Filipino 3 and the scientific steps in constructing the test are observed.
2. It was found out that the students were not at ease with the items on getting information, nothing details, symbolism of the poem, and literacy theories.
3. In the test result, it was noted that the students got low in figures of speech, conventions of drama, and interpreting the lines of the poem.
4. There were not enough theses on literary and language testing in Filipino which can be used as basis of the present study.
5. It was found out that the test is reliable because those who got higher score in the final form of test got a higher result in the test re-test. 
6. The test is valid because the score of the students in the test re-test is consistent and had a higher score in the Division Achievement test and this type of tests is really intended for the third year level.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The test can be given to other students in barangay high schools in or outside CARAGA Region for further validation.
2. Wide use of multiple choice of test and analytic method of test is encouraged so that the students will be used to such type of tests.
3. The teachers should not focus only on preparing work books but they are encouraged to prepare other teaching materials like a validated test.
4. It is suggested in this study that teachers in the secondary should be updated on test construction.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Oronce, Orlando A. et.al. Exploring Mathematics (Geometry). Manila: Rex Book Store, 2003.

Polya, George.How To Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. 2nd ed. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1957.

Sevilla, Consuelo G. et. al. Research Method. Quezon City: Rex Printing Company, 1992.

Walpole, Ronald E. Introduction to Statistics. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1982.

Articles, Journals, Publications

Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain (1991),

Cooper, Charles R. and Petrosky, Anthony.” Secondary SchoolStudents’ Perceptions of Mathematics Teachers and Mathematics Classes”, The Mathematics Teacher, Volume 69,No. 3 March, 1976,226.

Copeland, Richard W. “How Children Learn in Math”, 284-256.

Gerver, Robert and Richard Sgroi. “Retooling the General Mathematics Curriculum.” Mathematics Teacher 85. (April) 1992.

Hoffer,Alan R. “Geometry is more than a proof.” Mathematics Teachers 74.(January) 1981.Jensen, Eric . Learning Smarter (2000),

Lewis, Aiken Jr., “Mathematics as a Creative Language”. The Arithmetic Teacher, XXIV, 251-254.

Licop, Nora.” Cooperative Mastery Learning Strategy and the Conventional Approach in the Teaching of Mathematics”. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3,(July-September) 1990:35-45.

McIntosh, Margaret E. “Word That’s in Geometry”. The Mathematics Teacher. (October 1994).

Nebres, Bienvenido F. “Message on the CEAP Conference”. Ceap Perspective. Vol. XIX No. 3 September 1996.

Seak, Shanon L. “How Well A Students Write Geometry Proofs?” The Mathematics Teacher.(September 1985):448 – 456.

Tatsulok: Ang Magasing Matematika sa Makabagong Kabataan, Book Compilation SY. 1996-1997. Book 2. Diwa Scholastics Press Inc. Makati, 1997.

Veniegas, Ophelia P. Practical Suggestions for Engaging Students Learning The Interactive Curriculum. Excerpts from the Department of Education (DepEd) basic document describing the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum to exemplify what it envisions as interactive curriculum.__. “Achievement Rate in Mathematics:” http://www.hhh.umu.edu./centers/wilkins/news.htm.

”Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years:” Boston College, TIMSS International Study Center: 1996 -.http://www.harvard.edu./Pls/HG.htm.; .http://www./rde.pitt.edu/page/old/gaeapage.htm.Theses