2. 1
Abstract
This report provides an overview of the development and trends of educational
measurement and evaluation in higher education in the Philippines. The development of the
field of educational measurement and evaluation in the country is heavily influenced by its
colonial history and it is described to be multidisciplinary where there is integration with
psychological testing and psychometrics within the social science domain. The report
present covers development of the field by (1) tracing the historical background of
educational testing in the Philippines starting with the NCEE; (2) describing the trends in the
shift from national testing to institutional testing; (3) recounting the programs advocating
the discipline among higher education institutions; and (4) citing the organizations and
institutions supporting the discipline. The development in these four areas shaped the
status of educational measurement and evaluation at present time. In this report, the early
and rich beginnings of educational measurement and evaluation the Philippines are
described both with its theoretical and practical developments.
3. 2
Measurement and Evaluation in the Philippine Higher Education:
Trends and Development
The advancement of educational measurement and evaluation in higher education in
the Philippines has been heavily influenced by its colonial history and it is described to be
multidisciplinary. Various fields of study are accounted for in describing the growth and
development of the discipline, theory, and practice. The progress of measurement and
evaluation in the Philippines subsumes educational and psychological measurement and
evaluation, educational and psychological assessment, educational and psychological
testing, research and evaluation, and psychometrics. Testing, assessment and evaluation are
essentially used formally and informally in all colleges and universities that explain it as
being part of the higher education system (i.e., decision making, creating and continuance of
progress).
Historically, the early Filipinos made use of primarily authentic assessment where
parents teach their children survival and livelihood skills such as hunting, farming, and
fishing. When the Philippines was colonized by the Spain, formal schooling and structured
types of assessment was introduced among the academic elites. When the public
educational system was introduced during the American regime, assessment in schools was
expanded because of the development done in the western part of the world during that
time. Significantly, it was also during this time when the Philippine Vocabulary Test was
introduced in 1924 in the public school system. In 1916, Lewis Terman improved the first
intelligence test that is now known as the Stanford‐Binet and in 1929, Thurstone expanded
theories on measurement in the psychological perspective. This was the start of
psychometrics that was also introduced in the Philippines through national testing and
4. 3
obviously, the development of assessment, evaluation and testing in the Philippines is
brought along with the development of the field in the West because of the colonization.
Most recently, Magno (2010) provided a succinct overview of the history of
educational assessment in the Philippines in his seminal work in tracing the culture of
assessment in the Philippines. He described the development of educational assessment in
the Philippines as shaped by government mandates, studies done at the national level,
educational institutions that offer training in the field, professional organizations, and
pioneering research studies. The psychological perspective of assessment was also
chronicled by Clemeña (2002) in her work that traced the development of career guidance
in the Philippines. She cited that testing began in the field of career guidance which started
in the fourth period (1970‐1986). Although, testing was already used in the government and
schools, testing in this line of thought was within the practice of counseling psychology
which is also used for educational purposes.
Aside from the assessment of students and teachers in colleges and universities, one
of the forms in the practice of evaluation in higher education in the Philippines is through
accreditation. The process of accreditation allows schools to ensure quality assurance in the
program delivered to its stakeholders (Fitzpatrick, Worthen, & Sanders, 2003). Most
accreditation agencies in the Philippines operate under the Federation of Accrediting
Agencies of the Philippines (FAAP) that is authorized by the Commission on Higher
Education (Valisno, 1980). The accrediting agencies include: the Philippine Accrediting
Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU), the Philippine Association of
Colleges and Universities' Commission on Accreditation (PACUCOA), Accrediting Agency of
Chartered Colleges and Universities of the Philippines (AACCUP) and the Association of
Christian Schools, Colleges and Universities Accrediting Association Inc. (ACSCU‐AAI). With
5. 4
the exception of AACUP, these accrediting agencies constitute the FAAP. The accreditation
system, however, is voluntary and is modeled on the regional accreditation system in the
United States, although only program evaluations and not institutional evaluations are
performed.
Much of the development in measurement and evaluation in the Philippines in terms
of theory, training, development of experts, and programs originated in higher education
institutions. The higher education institutions serve as centers where the development in
the field of measurement and evaluation is nurtured, propelled, and directed (Stigler, 1993).
This present report presents the development of measurement and evaluation in higher
education by first presenting the (1) historical background of educational testing in the
Philippines, (2) shift from national testing to institutional testing, (3) programs advocating
the discipline among higher education institutions, and (4) organizations and institutions
supporting the discipline.
Historical Background of Educational Testing in the Philippines
The earliest formal testing that was implemented in the Philippines started in 1924
where government employees were screened before holding an office. This was followed by
other government‐mandated tests for students in higher education institutions such as the
National College Entrance Examination (NCEE). The NCEE was first administered nationally
on November 25, 1975 under the Presidential Degree No 146 aimed at upgrading the
quality of education in the country by requiring all high school graduates seeking admission
to post‐secondary degree programs necessitating a minimum of four years’ study to pass
the test. However, the test was later abolished on June 2, 1994 under Republic Act No.
7731. From then on, no national entrance examination shall be required for admission to
post‐secondary degree program. In lieu of a national examinations, higher educational
6. 5
institutions started to develop their own college admission examinations such as the UP
College Admission Test (UPCAT), DLS College Entrance Test (DLSCET), Ateneo College
Entrance Test (ACET), UST Entrance Test (USTET) and PLM Admission Test (PLMAT), to name
a few, while other institutions have to rely on foreign‐made aptitude and achievement tests
to select their students.
In the mid‐80s, national admission testing was again reinforced, however this time; it
was only for admission to medical schools. This test called the National Medical Admission
Test was developed and administered by the Center for Educational Measurement (CEM).
Later in 1994, a mandatory Law School Admission Test (LSAT) was proposed by the Supreme
Court as part of the proposed reforms in Bar Examinations.
National College Entrance Examination (NCEE)/National Secondary Assessment
Test (NSAT)/National Career Assessment Examination (NCAE). The NCEE (1973‐1994) was
taken by every graduating high school student to be admitted to a degree course in higher
education in the Philippines. The intention was to screen graduating high school students if
they are eligible to study for college. The earlier version for this purpose was the College
Entrance Test (CET) which was used in 1971 and 1972. This was created by a team from the
Fund for Assistance to Private Education (FAPE). This test served as an admission test for
colleges and universities in the Philippines that measured Verbal Ability, Verbal Reasoning,
Abstract Reasoning and Numerical Ability. This test became controversial because the test
used primarily English language that may prejudice students from rural and poor areas,
which led to abolition in 1994.
In 1995, the National Secondary Assessment Test (NSAT) was introduced as an
alternative assessment system to the NCEE. This test was also administered to graduating
fourth year high school students, however, it did not function like the NCEE but was used to
7. 6
assess the competencies learned by high school students in their second to fourth years in
high school. The test included communications arts in English and Filipino, science,
mathematics, and araling panlipunan (social studies) (DepEd Order No. 5 s. 2005). The NSAT
was developed and administered by the National Education Testing and Research Center
(NETRC) of the Department of Education, Sports and Culture (DECS) and was administered
at the national level from 1995 to 1998 (SEMEO Secretariat, 1998).
In 2006, the Department of Education (DepEd) through NETRC has introduced
another test, the National Career Assessment Examination (NCAE) that aims to enable
students to better assess their career options based on their own skills and fields of interest.
The parts of the tests are: Scientific Ability, Mathematical Ability, Reading Comprehension,
Verbal Ability, Manipulative Skills, Clerical Ability, Non‐Verbal Ability and Entreprenuerial
Skills (DepEd Memo 368 s. 2006). But unlike NCEE, the NCAE seeks to minimize mismatch in
career choices vis‐à‐vis ability and interests among senior high school students. Former
DepEd Secretary Jesli Lapus argues that NCEA results are, at best, recommendatory and are
not used as prerequisite for admission to higher education.
Other tests being administered by NETRC are the National Elementary Achievement
Test (NEAT), Philippine Validating Tests (PVT), Philippine Educational Placement Test (PEPT),
Accelerated Learning Program for Elementary School Qualifying Exams (ALPES) and the
Accreditation and Equivalency Examinations (A&E) for Alternative Learning Systems.
National Medical Admissions Test (NMAT). In the mid‐1980’s, there was a need to
screen and assure the standards of students who will enter the medical profession. The
NMAT was created in order to assess the students to be admitted in the medical profession.
The NMAT is an entrance examination for students who would like to enter a medical school
in the Philippines. The test has two parts – first part is composed of aptitude measures that
8. 7
include verbal, inductive reasoning, quantitative, and perceptual acuity skill and second part
is achievement of basic sciences such as, biology, physics, social sciences, and chemistry.
The test was first used in 1985 developed by the Center for Educational Measurement
(CEM) for the Board of Medical Education of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)
(CEM, 2010).
Science and Technology Scholarship Examinations. Another milestone of
educational testing in the Philippines was the development of the Department of Science
and Technology – Science Education Institute (DOST‐SEI) Science and Technology
Scholarship Examination (S&T Exams) in 1996, under Republic Act No. 7687, known as the
Science and Technology Scholarship Act of 1994. The DOST‐SEI S & T Examinations is
considered the first national aptitude test designed to measure abilities that determine
academic and professional success in the different areas in science and technology. The test
is divided into two major components – Intellective and Non‐Intellective. Intellective
component includes Scientific Ability, Quantitative Ability, Mechanical and Technical Ability,
Linguistic Ability, Imagery, Working Memory and Sensorimotor Ability. The non‐intellective
component is an attitude test toward science and technology. Later, this test was also used
to select DOST‐SEI Merit Scholars.
The NCEE, NSAT, NMAT, S & T Exams are some of the early educational tests that
were developed for higher education students initiated by the government through its
various departments. Private organizations, such as the CEM, Asian Psychological Services
and Assessment Corporation (APSA) and Psychological Corporation of the Philippines have
also contributed in the advancement of measurement and evaluation for higher education
in the country. CEM has been administering the College Scholastic Aptitude Test (CSAT) and
to its member schools along the NCEE in the 80s to 90s. At present, it provides tests for
9. 8
higher education such as Admission Test for Colleges and Universities (ATCU), Nursing
Aptitude Test (NAT), Law School Qualifying Test (LSQT), Graduate Level Test (GLT), Allied
Medical Courses Admission Test (AMCAT), College Scholarship Quality Test (CSQT),
Philippine Aptitude Test for Teachers (PATT) and the NMAT. On the other hand, APSA’s tests
and examinations for higher education include Assessment of College Potential (ACP),
Assessment of Nursing Potential (ANP), Assessment of Engineering Potential (AEP) and the
Assessment of Accounting Potential (AAP). The Philippine Psychological Corporation
continues to provide foreign‐made psychological and educational tests for higher education
and has developed local norms for most of the tests that they are selling.
Shift from National Testing to Institutional Testing
In the late 1990’s, higher education institutions started to identify competencies that
they look for admitting students guided by the charisma of their mission and vision. While
the NCEE assess general competencies that may not provide basic requirements in higher
educational institutions (HEIs), some of them ventured on developing their own
examinations to further assess students’ capabilities that fit into their learning community
structures. During this period, there was a shift from using national assessment results to
institutional assessment. Colleges and universities strengthen the administration their own
admission policies such as their own entrance examinations, a considerably positive result
of the abolition of NCEE. For example, the University of the Philippines began administering
its own entrance examination known as the UPCAT that is taken by less than 70,000
students annually. Other HEIs followed and continued up to the present developing and
administering their own college entrance examinations. This brought about also less
dependence on foreign‐made tests for admission examinations.
10. 9
Admission testing in HEIs. Admission in higher education institutions in the
Philippines is still heavily reliant on the use of test results in the selection of students.
However, apart from test results, high school grades, and letter of recommendations are
also required. Yet, decision for admission is still heavily relied on the results of the entrance
exams. For example, the University of the Philippines UP) comes up with a University
Predicted Grade (UPG) or Academic Performance Index (API) that is composed of 40% high
school grades and 60% from the college entrance tests.
The abolition of NCEE promoted admission testing in the HEIs to make use of either
university/college developed entrance exam or use of available standardized tests. Most
university/college‐developed entrance examinations are constructed based on the
competencies required in the entry of a specific program, usually as a result of institutional
validation studies, making institutional entrance testing become a high stake testing such as
the UPCAT, DLSCET, ACET, etc.
On the other hand, HEIs that rely on standardized tests, use tests that can predict
the general ability required to enter the college/university. The choice of what tests to use,
however, is based also on institutional validation studies usually undertaken by Guidance
and Counseling Office, the typical unit of HEIs that handles testing and even admission
services of HEIs (Gonzales, 1991). These admission tests may also come in the forms of
achievement, aptitude and non‐cognitive tests. The achievement test measures what the
students have gained in the high school. The aptitude test measure students’ ability to
develop skills or acquire knowledge such as abstract reasoning, number/letter series, verbal
analogy, topology, visual discrimination, object rotation and manipulation, surface
development, object assembly (see Magno, 2009). Non‐cognitive measures are also being
used to include vocational interest, work and study habits, learning preferences and others.
11. 10
Practices in admission testing. Aside from the use of admissions test, other forms of
assessment are also employed for programs that require performance‐based assessment.
For example, there are courses such as theater arts, music, dance, and other related
performing arts that will require demonstration of skills. Performance based assessments
emphasize on the students’ ability to perform tasks by producing their own work with their
knowledge and skills (Magno & Ouano, 2010). For example, in UP Fine Arts, UST Fine Arts
Conservatory of Music as well as De La Salle‐College of Saint Benilde require student
applicants to perform the skills required in the course through an audition or submission of
a student portfolio. There is a movement from the traditional paper and pencil test (such as
the admissions test) to alternative type of assessment. Alternative assessments are method
that differs from conventional paper‐and‐pencil tests (most particularly objective tests).
Another example is the admission of graduate students in De La Salle University, Manila that
do not require an entrance exam but makes use of interview and portfolio of student
academic works in order to assess qualifications to enter a specific graduate program.
Programs advocating educational measurement and evaluation in HEIs
There are not many universities in the Philippines that offer specialized training on
educational measurement and evaluation. These trainings and professional development
are offered as tracks or majors in masters and doctorate degree in universities in the
National Capital Region (NCR). These programs are offered usually under the psychology
department or programs under the college of education.
The De La Salle University‐Manila was the first university to offer a masters program
in educational measurement and evaluation in 1986. This program in DLSU provides
students with specialized training in the design and use of various methods for the
assessment and/or measurement of educational and psychological variables with special
12. 11
application to data gathering. The programs within the education for psychological and
educational measurement and evaluation are offered in the Counseling and Educational
Psychology (CEPD) of DLSU, Miriam College, and Philippine Normal University (PNU). The
CEPD under the College of Education of DLSU offers a degree in master of science in
educational measurement and evaluation. It initially started with the Institute for
Educational Measurement, Evaluation and Statistics (IEMES) program in 1985 where all
students are grantees of the Center for Educational Measurement (CEM) and the Fund for
Assistance to Private Education (FAPE). The IEMES produced over a hundred graduates who
are specialized in the educational measurement and evaluation. The IEMES also served as a
training center for the preparation of teachers and researchers in measurement and
evaluation. The DLSU Psychology Department also offers Master of Science in Psychology,
major in Psychological Measurement. The program provides students with specialized
training in the design and use of various methods for assessment and/or measurement of
psychological variables with specialist data‐gathering needs in the Philippine setting.
In Miriam College, the degree Master of Arts in education major in measurement
and evaluation emphasizes on assessment and evaluation, both for research and
development purposes that is suitable for middle and upper level personnel who have
capabilities to undertake studies involving testing and measurement. The Philippine Normal
University also offers the degree master of arts in education major in measurement and
evaluation.
Doctorate programs that focus on educational measurement and evaluation are
offered by the University of the Philippines Diliman (UP) and De La Salle University, Manila.
UP Diliman offers the PhD in education major in research and evaluation. The program
envisions the graduates’ “command of a broad field of academic and research knowledge
13. 12
and ability to initiate, organize, and pursue the investigation of an original problem which is
based upon or contributes to the field of education.” The DLSU doctoral program is a Doctor
of Philosophy in Educational Psychology major in Measurement and Evaluation (now major
in Quantitative Research). This PhD program is designed to develop knowledge and skills for
advanced scholarship and professional practice that applies psychological approaches,
theories and methodologies to specific educational concerns. It is intended for psychology
students and professionals interested in psychological measurement in schools, learning
and development in schools, and in educational programs/interventions for special
populations such as children with special learning needs, the gifted, indigenous groups,
adult learners, and the elderly. The research‐oriented courses allow the students to develop
strong and updated theoretical understanding and research capacities in their specific areas
of interest.
Aside from the colleges and universities, the competencies of psychometricians in
the field of psychology were regulated by Professional Regulatory Board of Psychology. This
was enacted in 2009 though the Philippine Psychology Act. The psychology act defines the
work of a psychometrician as (1) administering and scoring objective personality test, (2)
interpreting results of test and prepares reports, and (3) conducting preparatory intake
interviews of clients for psychological intervention. Undergraduates who intend to work as
psychometricians need to pass the examination from the Philippine Regulation Commission
(PRC) to be a licensed psychometrician.
Organizations/Institutions Supporting EME in HEIs
On top of degree granting institutions like universities and colleges, also other
institutions/organizations advocate training, development and research in line with
educational measurement and evaluation. There are two private institutions in the country
14. 13
offer training and development in educational measurement – the CEM and the APSA and
only one professional organization in the Philippines that fosters the promotion and
advocacy in the rich role of educational assessment specialist in the country, the Philippine
Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association (PEMEA). The onset of these
organizations and institutions were described by Magno (2010) as part of “the assessment
in contemporary period” when he traced the history of educational assessment in the
Philippines.
Center for Educational Measurement (CEM). The CEM was institutionalized by the
Fund for Assistance to Private Education (FAPE) that undertook the testing and
measurement projects through the leadership of Dr. Abraham Felipe. The CEM was then
headed by Dr. Leticia M. Asuzano who was appointed as the executive vice president. The
CEM initiated the use of locally developed tests in schools. They have developed over 60
local tests since it was established 35 years ago. The CEM continues its efforts to bring
locally developed tests in the Philippine classroom that are attuned to the Philippine
curriculum and learning. CEM recognizes the improvement of learning through research and
classroom based assessment. CEM is a member of the International Association for
Educational Assessment (IAEA), the International Reading Association (IRA), and the
American Psychological Association (APA).
Asian Psychological Services and Assessment Corporation (APSA). Dr. Genevieve
Tan given the growing demand in industrial and educational testing in 1982 established the
APSA. In 2001, the APSA was expanded to offer several tests in different educational
institutions headed by Dr. Leticia M. Asuzano, who also established the CEM. The APSA
works toward the need to use quality and appropriate assessment that will identify what
students should know or what students should be able to do at a certain grade level in
15. 14
various subject areas. APSA introduced the Standards‐Based Assessment (SBA) that
addresses the needs of schools for quality assessment. They also introduced the use of the
Rasch model in item analysis where good items are identified isolating the effects of norm
characteristics. The APSA tests that are standards‐based are anchored on the Department of
Education (DepEd) and international standards. The APSA also created programs to extend
the use of assessment from different stakeholders. These programs are the principals’
institute, math circle and suken math. Furthermore, APSA actively participates in the
Guidance Circle and the Asian Psychological and Educational Counselors Association
(APECA). APSA sees its role in the need to upgrade the state of local education through
proper assessment.
Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation Association (PEMEA). The
PEMEA is the only educational association in the Philippines that is focused on the field of
educational measurement and evaluation. It was established during the first National
Conference on Measurement and Evaluation (NCEME) that was organized August 6 to 7,
2008 through the leadership of the former IEMES Co‐Director Dr Rose Marie Salazar‐
Clemena and IEMES alumni Marife Mamauag, who also heads the Center for Learning and
Performance Assessment of DLSU College of Saint Benilde. Neil Pariñas initially drafted the
constitution and by‐laws and presented it in the body during the first NCEME convention.
The first set of board members was elected and Dr. Richard DLC Gonzales, an IEMES
alumnus and presently working as Educational Assessment and Examination Reforms
Consultant for foreign‐funded education projects in Asia‐Pacific, was elected as the
Founding President and Chairman. The PEMEA is a professional organization that involves
educators, researchers, teachers, and measurement and evaluation practitioners. The
purpose of the organization is to (1) promote standards in various areas of education
16. 15
through appropriate and proper assessment; (2) provide technical assistance to educational
institutions in the area of instrumentation, assessment practices, benchmarking, and
process of attaining standards; (3) enhance and maintain the proper practice of
measurement and evaluation in both local and international level; and (4) enrich the theory,
practice, and research in evaluation and measurement in the Philippines (PEMEA By‐Laws
and Constitution, 2009). The PEMEA is the only organization in the country that has been
granted an affiliate membership status to the International Test Commission (ITC) early this
year.
The PEMEA also launched its journal called Educational and Measurement and
Evaluation Review (EMEReview) that mobilized its purpose through dissemination of
empirical reports. The EMEReview is an international, refereed and abstracted scholarly
journal. It publishes scholarly reports about contemporary theory and practice in the field of
education and social science that measurement, assessment and evaluation. Its first set of
Editorial Board includes Dr. John Hattie, the President‐Elect of ITC; Dr. Jack Holbrook, former
President of International Council of Associations of Science Education (ICASE), and Dr.
Anders Jönssön of Malmo University.
To fulfill its mission in advancing educational measurement and evaluation, the
organization conducts yearly continuing education programs and other projects to promote
appropriate and high standard assessment and evaluation practice. The PEMEA has also
established different divisions that will work on different facets of assessment: School
Testing Division (headed by Dr. Lenore Decenteceo, President of CEM), Test Development
Division (headed by Violeta Valladolid), Psychometrics and Educational Statistics Division
(headed by Dr. Carlo Magno), and Educational Evaluation Division (headed by Dr. Irma
Coronel).
17. 16
Future Trends and Directions in Educational Measurement and Evaluation
The article presents the development of educational measurement and evaluation in
higher education institutions by highlighting the efforts of colleges/universities, national and
non‐government (CEM/APSA) tests, and organizations and institutions (PEMEA). What is
streamlined in these efforts is the use of tests in assessment and evaluation and the
production of research in the field. Magno (2010) even recognized that part of the direction
of educational measurement and evaluation is the stretch to produce more the use of
mathematical models on item analysis in measurement research.
The other side of the direction is the proper practice of educational assessment,
both institutional and classroom. The dismal results of professional board of examinations
reflect how assessment of and assessment for learning are being undertaken at the
classroom level. Gonzales (1999) noted that teachers of selected HEIs have not gone beyond
measuring remembering and understanding skills and very seldom they attempted to
measure and assess application, analysis and synthesis, and evaluation skills. Hence,
development of culture of proper assessment even at the classroom level in HEIs is
imperative for all professional development programs of HEIs. The focus will not only be
limited to correct use but also on proper construction of assessment tools.
The role of assessment specialists is increasing widely due to the demand for quality
assurance in schools especially in teaching and implementation of programs. Previously, the
practice of assessment and testing in college and universities are integrated in the tasks of
guidance counselors. Guidance centers or offices served as the testing centers in most HEIs,
where guidance counselors also served as psychometricians at the same time. With the
professionalization of guidance counselors and psychometricians, this practice needs to be
18. 17
revisited. The important role of testing or assessment specialists in schools and industrial
setting is becoming increasingly significant and vital to academic programs and
organizational development. For this reason, there is a need develop strong academic
programs to prepare these specialists for them to be able to perform their roles aptly.
The institutionalization of testing, evaluation and assessment centers or units is also
increasingly embarked by most HEIs because of the shift from national testing to
institutional testing, not only to provide admission testing but also to support instruction,
research and organizational performance. The number of HEIs adhering to selective
admission using valid tests and examinations is rising as well as the number of institutions
seeking for program accreditation. Again, these organizational initiatives demand for more
professionals who are equipped with skills in measurement, assessment, evaluation and
research as HEIs are also progressively becoming more aware about assessment of
accountability. Major universities are conscious of their standing and the need to improve
based on international benchmarks. For example, in 2009 the Times Higher Education
released it metrics on the top world university rankings. For example in terms of faculty
citations, the University of the Philippines Diliman is top 167 in Asia followed by the De La
Salle University, Manila as top 302, and the Ateneo de Manila University in top 314 (Times
Higher Education, 2009).
The strong need to develop more professionals and scholars engaged in educational
measurement and evaluation is obvious. However, the presence of few but strong
institutions, centers, and organizations supporting and promoting the advancement of the
discipline and the growing number of scholars and researchers in the country getting
interested in it promise that the future of the field is not bleak after all. Given various
19. 18
recognition and importance of measurement and evaluation in higher education, it is likely
to sustain and advance scientific frontiers in the future.
References
By‐laws and Constitution (2009). Philippine Educational Measurement and Evaluation
Association. [online] Available at http://pemea.club.officelive.com/ Retrieved
September 24, 2010
CEM (2010). Tests for Entrance to High School, Colleges, and Professional Schools. [online]
Available at http://www.cem‐inc.org.ph/tests‐entrance‐high‐school‐colleges‐and‐
professional‐schools. Retrieved September 21, 2010.
Department of Education (2005). Student Assessment at the National and Division Levels of
Basic Education, DepEd Order No. 5, s. 2005. Available at
http://www.deped.gov.ph/cpanel/uploads/issuanceImg/DM%20150_05‐06‐
05_00001.pdf. Retried on September 30, 2010.
Department of Education (2006). Amendments to DepEd Order No. 5, s. 2005.
http://www.deped.gov.ph/cpanel/uploads/issuanceImg/DM%20No.%20368,%20s.%
202006.pdf. Retrieved on September 30, 2010.
Department of Education (2010). National Educational Testing and Research Center.
Available at http://www.deped.gov.ph/about_deped/organizationalinks.asp?id=16.
Retrieved on September 30, 2010.
Fitzpatrick, J. D., Worthen, B. R., & Sanders, J. R. (2003). Program evaluation: Alternative
approaches and practical guidelines. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
20. 19
Gonzales, R. DLC (1991). Putting meaning into tests. In E. Gruenberg (Ed). Readings in
effective college teaching. Manila: Inter‐institutional Consortium.
Gonzales, R. DLC (1999). Assessing thinking skills in the classroom: Types, techniques and
taxonomy of measures of thinking skills in higher education. Philippine Journal of
Educational Measurement, 9(1), 17‐26.
Magno, C. (2009). Taxonomy of aptitude test items: A guide for item writers. The
International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 2, 39‐53.
Magno, C. (2010). A brief history of educational assessment in the Philippines. Educational
Measurement and Evaluation Review, 1, 140‐149.
Magno, C., & Ouano, J. (2010). Designing written assessment for student learning. Manila,
QC: Phoenix Pub.
Salazar‐Clemeña, R. (2002). Family ties and Peso signs: Challenges for career counseling in
the Philippines. The Career Development Quarterly, 50(3), 246‐256.
SEMEO Secretariat (1998). Examination Systems at the Secondary Level of Countries in the
SEAMEO Region. [online] Available at http://www.seameo.org/vl/. Retrieved
September 20, 2010.
Stigler, S. M. (1993). Competition and the research universities. Daedalus, 122(4), 157‐177.
Valisno, N. (1980). Evaluation and accreditation of non‐formal education in the Philippines.
Paris : UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.
World Rankings in Asia (2009). Times Higher Education. [online] Available at
http://www.the.com Retrieved February 8, 2010
21. 20
Bioprofile
Dr. Carlo Magno is the first graduate in the PhD program in educational
measurement and evaluation in De La Salle University, Manila which he is also presently
doing full‐time teaching and research. He handles courses in measurement and evaluation,
psychometric theory, and advance statistics. He is also a board member of PEMEA and a
division chair of the educational statistics and psychometrics. He published in several
international refereed and abstracted articles in line with measurement and evaluation.
He was a recipient of the Most Outstanding Scientific Paper Award by the National
Academy of Science and Technology in 2008.
Dr. Richard DLC Gonzales is presently serving as Team Leader and Assessment and
Examination Policy Framework Specialist for the Education Sector Project II in Samoa. He
also served as Assessment/Examination Reform, Educational Evaluation and Monitoring,
and Teaching‐Learning Methodologies Specialist in Kyrgyz Republic, Lao PDR, Nepal, Sri
Lanka, Mongolia and Viet Nam. Concurrently, he is a Professorial Lecturer at the University
of Santo Tomas Graduate School and President and CEO of the Development Strategists
International Consulting, Inc. He is also the founding and present President and Chairman
of PEMEA.
He holds a PhD in Research and Evaluation and cognates in Psychology from
University of the Philippines. His publications and research interests include assessment of
motivation in foreign language learning, assessment of thinking skills and teachers’ beliefs
and practices in classroom assessment.
