Analysing Classroom Assessment

Hassan Basarally 806007430 EDME 2006
Name: Hassan Basarally
I.D.: 806007430
Faculty: Humanities and Education
Department: Liberal Arts
Course Code: EDME 2006
Course Name: Classroom Testing and Evaluation
Lecturer: Ms. Melville
Academic Year: 2007 – 2008
Semester: 2
Date of Submission: 07/04/08
1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVES
CONTENT
TEST CONSTRUCTION
TABLE OF SPECIFICATION
ITEM SELECTION
TEST ITEMS
MARKING RUBRIC
INTERPRETATION
APPENDIX I
APPENDIX II
Introduction
Assessments and tests are the primary methods of evaluation in the education system.
However the concepts of assessment, test and evaluation are not clearly understood by those in
the school system. A test “connotes the presentation of a standard set of questions to be
answered” (Mehrens & Lehmann, 1991, p. 4). Assessment is often used interchangeably with test
but according to Mehrens and Lehmann this is not the case. Assessment is the use of both
2
“formal and informal data-gathering procedures and the combining of the data in a global fashion
to reach an overall judgement” (1991, p. 4). Both tests and assessment are therefore used to
evaluate students. Evaluation is the process of making a value judgement based on information
from one or more sources. It must be noted that evaluation cannot exist truly of the entire student
but of a certain aspect such as academic performance, behaviour and attitude.
The project undertaken was to test the mathematical concept of fractions in a Form One
(1) class. The topics under fractions tested were proper and improper fractions, mixed numbers
and their conversions, fraction equality and simplification, fraction arrangement and fraction
computation. The test conducted was summative in nature. This type of assessment provides
information about student learning at the end of a unit of instruction. Summative assessment is
not the only type of assessment available to the teacher. Among others are formative, alternative
and performance. Formative assessment “refers to assessment that is specifically intended to
provide feedback on performance to improve and accelerate learning” (Sadler, 1998, p. 77).
Alternative assessment includes the non traditional forms of assessment such as portfolios and
projects. The performance assessment requires the student to demonstrate the knowledge learnt.
Background
The test was administered at Williamsville Junior Secondary on Tuesday 18th March,
2008. The school is located on Main Road, Williamsville. It has large catchment area which
consists of Princes Town, Gasparillo, Marabella and Williamsville and its environs. The test was
one (1) hour long, it started at 9: 50 a.m. and ended at 10: 50 a.m. The target group was Form
One (1), given the designation 1.1 by the school. The target group was composed of eighteen
(18) students; six (6) boys and twelve (12) girls. The age group of the students ranged from
twelve (12) to thirteen (13) years old. This age group was selected because of the cognitive
3
development stage in which they were experiencing. Piaget calls this the formal operation stage.
During which “learners display an increased abilityto abstract and deal with ideas independent of his
or her own experience” (Wadsworth, 1996, p. 84). This is important to the choice of subject,
mathematics. Mathematics has many abstract and practical concepts, which both describe
fractions. The test calls on students to test what they have learnt in a systematic fashion to
determine its validity. In summary, it was found that the students did not fully grasp the topic of
fractions, especially the concepts of Lowest Common Multiple (LCM) and division of fractions.
The texts used in the teaching period and for the formulation of questions were:
Layne, C. E. et. al., (1997). STP Caribbean Mathematics. (New Edition). Cheltenham: Stanley
Thomas Publications.
Pramanand, Harbukhan & Seegobin, (1997). Integrated Mathematics for Caribbean Schools: a
problem solving approach. Trinidad: Daiken Publishers Limited.
The classroom conditions for the test were appropriate. The classroom was well lit with all the
lights working. There was adequate ventilation but not too much wind. The room was spacious
enough for the students to be able to be well spaced from each other. There was a table for
students to place their bags so as not to be forced to hold them while doing the exam. Noise level
was to a minimum and extra stationary was provided by the test invigilator.
4
Purpose of the Test
The purpose of the test was:

Evaluate the performance of a sample of pupils in a specified secondary school in Trinidad and
Tobago.
To determine whether the teaching objectives were met.

To determine the strengths and weaknesses of the students in the topic of fractions.
To determine which areas need to be re taught.
To provide the teacher with possible areas for instruction improvement.
Group students according to performance on the test.
Assist in educational research.
Assist in the evaluation of the researcher‘s ability to apply learnt concepts from EDME2006.
5
Objectives
Objectives are essential to the successful classroom experience. An absence of objectives
results in“the educator [being] vulnerable to externally imposed prescriptions, to fads and frills, to
authoritarian schemes” (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2004, p. 9). This results in the teacher having no set
strategy for teaching and not being able to determine whether anything was achieved. Objectives
help “a teacher plan instruction, guide student learning, and provide a criteria for evaluating
student outcomes” (Mehrens & Lehmann, 1991, p. 4). At the end of the teaching period students
will be able to:
1. Identify types of fractions.
2. Identify the components of a fraction.
3. Match fractions with their diagrammatical representations.
4. Infer fractions of a whole from given word or diagram problems.
5. Select fractions of equal value.
6. Simplify given fractions to their lowest value.
7. Arrange fractions in ascending or descending order.
8. Compute missing numerator or denominator values in order to show fractions of equal value.
9. Convert mixed numbers to improper fractions and vice versa.
10. Solve computing problems involving addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of
fractions.
6
11. Appreciate that fractions express quantities that are used in daily living by using them to show
portion allocation.
Content
The content of the test included the following areas:
1. Improper fractions
2. Proper fractions.
3. Mixed numbers
4. Mixed number conversion.
5. Simplification of various types of fractions.
6. Fraction equality.
7. Ascending order of fractions.
8. Descending order of fractions.
9. Fraction computation.
7
Test Construction
Using the equation: weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions, the
amount of questions per objective was determined. This was to ensure that the amount of
questions were proportional to the amount of teaching time.
Topic Teaching Time Projected amount Actual amount
(weeks) of questions of questions

Proper / Improper 1.5 5.625 7
Fractions
Conversion / Mixed 0.5 1.825 2
Fractions
Fraction Equality / 1.5 5.625 5
Simplification
Fraction Arrangement 0.5 1.825 2
Fraction Computation 4 15 14
Total 8 30 30
Table 1: Calculation of Questions per Topic
It should be noted that the discrepancy between the projected and actual amounts of questions
are normal due to factors such as teaching time per topic. (A list of the questions and the
corresponding objectives is found in the Table of Specification). Example of calculations:
weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions
1.58 x 30=5.625
0.58 X 30=1.825
48 x 30=15
8
Table of Specification
Objective Knowled Comprehens Application Analy Tota

Dimension
ge ion sis l
Content
Dimension
(Im)proper (1,2,9,1 (11,12,14)
Fractions/
Fraction 0) III 7
Identifications
IV 3&6
1&4
Conversion/Mixe (3) (19)
d Fractions
I I 2
3 &2 5
9
Fraction (13) (4,5,20,21)

Equality/Simplifi
cation I IV 5
3, 6 & 8 6, 7 & 8
Fraction (22,2
Arrangement
3) 2
II
9
Fraction (6,7,8,24,25,26,27,2 (15,
computation (+ -
8,29,30) 16,17
x ÷)
VIII , 18) 14
2, 10, & 11 IV
10
Total 4 5 15 6 30
Table 2: Table of Specification
Key: The numbers in parenthesis () represent the question number on the test.
The numbers in Roman numerals represent the number of items on the test.
The plain numbers represent the corresponding objective.
For example, (1, 2, 9, 10) IV 1 means that questions 1, 2, 9 and 10 fall under the content
dimension listed, there are IV (4) questions of this type in the test and these questions test
objective number one (1) in the list of objectives.
10
Item Selection
The test consisted solely of Objective Type Items (see Appendix I). There are two types
of objective type questions, Supply Type and Select Type. The Supply Type includes True/False
questions, short answer and completion statements. True/ False questions allow a large amount
of subject matter to be covered. In addition it benefits poor readers, however like the multiple
choice question pupil’s scores “may be unduly influenced by good or poor luck in guessing”
(Mehrens & Lehmann, 1991, p. 123). “Short answer items are particularly useful in mathematics
and sciences, where computational answers are required or where a formula or equation is to be
written” (Mehrens & Lehmann, 1991, p. 112). The Select Type includes the multiple choice and
matching items. The benefit of this type of question is that it is more economical in correction
time. In addition as more questions can be asked it builds a broad base of knowledge. “Because
of the lessened amount of time needed for pupils to respond to a objective items many questions
can be asked in a prescribed examination period and more adequate content sampling can be
obtained, resulting in higher reliability and better content validity” (Mehrens & Lehmann, 1991,
p. 107). The matching items are useful as “the major advantage of the matching exercise is its
compact form, which makes it possible to measure a large amount of related factual material”
(Linn & Miller, 2005, p.181). Despite this Objective Type Items tend to not measure higher
mental processes. The test contained features of a Power Test as the students were allocated sixty
(60) minutes in addition the questions were ordered. “Items on a power test have different levels
of difficulty usually arranged in a hierarchy from knowledge level (easy) to increasing difficulty”
(Notar, C. E. et. al., 2004). The test paper had the following composition of questions:
Supply Type Select Type Total

Short True/False Completion Multiple Matching
Answer Statements Choice Items

11
12 4 2 8 4 30
Table 3: Test Item Selection
Test items
NAME
CLASS
DATE
SUBJECT Mathematics - Fractions
DURATION OF EXAM 1 hour
INSTRUCTIONS:
Fill in your name, class and date on the cover sheet.
12
Read all instructions carefully.
Answer all thirty (30) questions.
Write answers in pen or pencil.
All answers are to be written in this paper.
All working can be done in the working column or the blank side of the question
paper.
If you have any questions during the test, please raise your hand.
This paper consists of four (4) pages.
Directions -In each of the following questions, Nos. 1 – 8, choose the best
option by shading
either (A), (B), (C) or (D).
(1) Which of the following is an improper fraction? [1mark]
(A) 2¼
(B) 56
(C) 32
(D) 12
(2) Which of the following is a proper fraction?

[1mark]
(A) 14
(B) 3½
(C) 107
(D) 0.5
13
(3) What mixed number does Diagram 1 represent?

[1mark]
Diagram 1
(A) 4⅔
(B)5¼
(C)5¾
(D)6¼
Working Column
(4) What is the missing number, x, in the equality: 45= x50 [1mark]
(A) 100
(B) 40
(C) 12
(D) 10
(5) When simplified, 1218 is equal to: [1mark]
(A) 46
(B) 35
(C) 23
(D) 14
(6) What is 23 + 27 ? [1mark]
(A) 421
(B) 410
(C) 35
(D) 2021
14
(7) What is 2 45 + 7 310 ? [1mark]
(A) 1110
(B) 12
(C) 9 710
(D) 10 110
(8) What is 3¾ × 10? [1mark]
(A) 14
(B) 38
(C) 3⅔
(D) 36
______________________________________________________________________________
Directions – Complete the following two statements:
(9) The top number in a fraction is called the _____________________.

[1mark]
(10) The bottom number in a fraction is called the ____________________. [1mark]
______________________________________________________________________________
Directions -Match the shaded diagrams in Column A with their fractions in

Column B by
drawing a line to connect them. [1 mark

each]
Column A Column B
15
(11)
16
(12) 38
(13)
14
(14)
13
16
34
Directions - Tick the appropriate box, True or False, for each of the
following statements:
[1 mark each]
Working Column
(15) 3½ ÷ 1 = 3½ × 1 [ ] [ ]
True False
(16) ½ × (¼ + ⅛) = half of 38 [ ] [ ]
True False
(17) ½+½÷2=¾ [ ] [ ]
True False
(18) 12× 14 = 12 × 41 [ ] [ ]
17
True False
______________________________________________________________________________
Directions – Work out each of the following in the working column

provided. Place your answer in the space marked: Answer:
_______ for each question.
Working Column
(19) Convert the mixed number 8¾ to an improper fraction.

[2 marks]
Answer: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
(20) Calculate the missing number, x, in: 37= 9x [2 marks]
Answer: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
(21) Simplify the fraction 1656 to its lowest term. [2 marks]
Answer: ______________
______________________________________________________________________________
18
(22) Arrange the following in ascending order: [3 marks]
13, 56, 12, 712
Answer: _________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
(23) Arrange the following in descending order: [3 marks]
35, 12, 34, 710
Answer: _________________________
(24) A vase contains 5 pink flowers, 3 red flowers and
7 white flowers. What fraction of the flowers in the
vase are:
(a) Red? Answer: _________ [2 marks]
(b) Pink? Answer: _________ [2 marks]
(c) Not white? Answer: _________ [2 marks]
______________________________________________________________________________
(25) What is 8 45 – 512? [3 marks]
Answer: _______________
19
______________________________________________________________________________
(26) What is 5 14× 223? [3 marks]
Answer: _______________
______________________________________________________________________________
(27) What is 14 ÷ ⅞? [3 marks]
Answer: _______________
______________________________________________________________________________
(28) What is 5⅝ ÷ 6¼? [4 marks]
Answer: _______________
______________________________________________________________________________
(29) What is 2 7/8 + 1/4 ? [3 marks]
20
Answer: _______________
______________________________________________________________________________
(30) What is 4 2/3 +2 3/4 ? [3 marks]
Answer: _______________
______________________________________________________________________________
Scoring Rubric
Question Number Answer Mark

1 C 1
2 A 1
3 C 1
4 B 1
5 C 1
6 D 1
7 D 1
8 D 1
9 NUMERATOR 1
10 DENOMINATOR 1
11 ⅜ 1
21
12 ¼ 1
13 ⅓ 1
14 16 1
15 TRUE 1
16 FALSE 1
17 TRUE 1
18 FALSE 1
Item # Total Breakdown of Mark
Mark Answer Working
19 2 354 8 x 4 = 32 - 32 + 3 = 35 -
- (1) (½) (½)
20 2 21 - 3x3 = 9 - 7 x 3 = 21 -
(1) (½) (½)
21 2 27 - 1656=828 828=414
(1) - (½) - (½)
22 3 13, 12, 71256, - LCM = 12 - Numerators

(1) (1) 4,10,6,7 = -
(1)
23 3 34, 71035, 12, - LCM = 20 - Numerators

(1) (1) 12,10, 15, 14
= - (1)
24 2 15 - total of Reducing of
(a) (1)
flowers = 15 - 35 -
(½) (½)
(b 2 ⅓ - Reducing of
) (1)
515 -
(1)
(c 2 815 - 5 + 3=8 -
) (1)
22
(1)
25 3 3310 - 8 – 5=3 - LCM = 10 - (1) Numerators

(1)
(1) 8, 5 -
(1)
26 3 14 - Conversion to Cancelling - (1)

(1)
Improper fraction
214 -
(1)
27 3 16 - Changing Cancelling - (1)
(1) division
to multiplication
and flip the
second fraction
- (1)
28 4 910 Conversion of Changing Cancelling

- (1) to improper division (1)
fraction
to multiplication
458-254 and flip the
- (1) second fraction
- (1)
29 3 3⅛ - LCM and Answer 1⅛

(1) numerators - added to 2
(1) - (1)
30 3 7⅝ - LCM and Answer 1⅝

(1) numerators - added to 6
(1) - (1)
Table 4: Rubric
23
Interpretation
After the papers were corrected by three (3) individuals, two (2) from within the research
group and an external party the following scores were earned by the students:
Media
Name Score Total Mean Mode n
Anastacia 33.833 40 &
.L 53 100 33 24 30.5
Ameer M. 52 100
Donnelle
W. 48 100
Monique
S. 46 100
Seantel
G. 44 100
Malcom
B. 40 100
Vanessa
H. 40 100
Farisha M. 36 100
Nerissa J. 32 100
Akeisha
B. 29 100
O'neil M. 28 100
Kimberly
R. 27 100
Fareed H. 25 100
Kevin S. 24 100
Gizelle J. 24 100
Janice F 23 100
Regine A. 22 100
Damian
S. 16 100
24
The range can be found by subtracting the lowest score from the highest one: 53 – 16 = 37. This
shows that due to the small range the scores are close together. The mode and the median were
lower than the mean, showing that the test was too difficult for the students. The histogram
shows the frequency of the class intervals. To further suggest that the items were too difficult, the
lowest interval (20-29) had the highest frequency.
Figure 1: Histogram Showing Score Frequency
By finding the square root of the square of the mean and dividing it by the amount of students
the standard deviation was found.
x2N = 33.8333218 = 11.336
Due to the fact that a normal distribution is “a mathematical model-an idealisation-that can be
used to represent data collected in behavioural research” a non normal distribution was achieved
(Shavelson qtd. in Best & Khan, 1998, p. 352). The result was skewed negatively as shown in
Table 4. This meant that the students’ scores were near the low end of the range. According to
Best and Khan skewed distribution indicates that “a test... is too easy or hard or an atypical
sample (very bright or very low intelligence)” (1998, p. 353). As this project cannot determine
whether there was an atypical sample, the interpretation was that the test was too difficult for the
students.
Figure 2: Skewed Curve
However the student performance can be understood through the use of the Z score. “The
conversion of each test score to a sigma score makes them equally weighted and comparable”
(Best & Khan, 1998, p. 353). By subtracting the mean from the raw score and dividing it by the
standard deviation the Z score is achieved. For example, Seantel G.’s Z score was calculated: 44-
25
33.833311.336 = 0.89. If this score was equivalent or near to a past mathematics test. It would
mean that the performance was typical, resulting in the test not necessarily being too difficult. A
previous score was obtained from the teacher and the following calculation was made:44-
33.833311.336=1.6. This showed that the Z scores were close and that the student
performance was fairly typical.
The Item difficulty table showed that generally students did better in the Select Type
questions as opposed to the Supply Type. Also called the Item-Achievement Rate it refers to “the
percentage or proportion of students who get the individual item correct” (Gallagher, 1998, p.
329). The Item Difficulty Index was low for questions 25- 30 but high for 6 -8 despite both sets
testing fraction computation. A possible reason is that the students found difficulty in working
the questions and may find the concepts such as LCM difficult to apply. The students scored
better in questions in which some visual aide was used such as questions 3, 11 and 12. The
exception is question 13 in which students were not able to realise that the fraction could be
reduced. The Item Difficulty Index showed that objectives such as: 1. identify types of fractions, 2.
identify the components of a fraction and 3. match fractions with their diagrammatical representations
were achieved. However, objectives, such as; solve computing problems involving addition, subtraction,
multiplication and division of fractions, were not. Therefore students had knowledge and comprehension
of the topic but were not able to apply it. Other factors to affect the index include quality on teaching and
time on task.
Question Number Amount of students Amount of students Item difficulty
answering correctly answering incorrectly index (%)

1 8 10 44
2 14 4 78
3 13 5 72
4 10 8 55
5 13 5 72
6 2 16 11
7 3 15 17
8 16 2 89
26
9 3 15 17
10 6 12 33
11 17 1 94
12 17 1 94
13 8 10 44
14 17 1 94
15 11 7 61
16 14 4 78
17 3 15 17
18 10 8 55
19 5 13 28
20 15 3 83
21 10 8 55
22 0 18 0
23 1 17 5.5
24 a 12 6 66
24 b 16 6 89
24 c 1 17 5.5
25 3 15 17
26 1 17 5.5
27 3 15 17
28 0 18 0
29 0 18 0
30 1 17 5.5
Table 5: Item Difficulty Index
The distractors provided met limited success. Some questions had different distractors
selected while others did not. Question 7 and 8 had only one distractor selected by the students.
While question 7 seems to have an alternative too close to the answer, question 7 shows that
students probably did convert the mixed number to an improper fraction before multiplying.
Student Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
M. B. B A C B C B D C
G. J. C A C A C B C D
D. W. C A B B C A C D
J. F. A A C D D B C D
D. S. A A B B A B C C
A. L. C A C B C D D D
N. J. A B D B C B C D
Table 6: Answers to Multiple Choice Questions
A B C D
27
Q1 3 1 3 0
Q2 7 1 0 0
Q3 0 2 4 1
Q4 1 5 0 1
Q5 1 0 5 1
Q6 1 5 0 1
Q7 0 0 5 2
Q8 0 0 2 5
Table 7: Distractor Analysis (Correct answer underlined)
The distractor analysis contained students of both the high and low groups. This enabled
the investigation of how good the distractors were. This can be done by the following table:
Item Item Item Alternative High Group Low Group
Difficulty Discrimination
Index Index
1 44 0.3 A 0 2
B 1 0
C 2 0
D 0 0
Table 8: Distractor Analysis for Question1
What is learnt is that since only 44% of the students choose the correct answer the item
was difficult. This is a flaw in the test as the easier items should come at the beginning of the
paper. There appears to be no ambiguity in the stem or alternatives of the item (See Test Items).
The Discrimination Index is minimally acceptable, as a high positive figure is required. The
distractor D did not work as no student choose it. Distractor A worked as students of the Low
group choose it. Due to the small sample the figures cannot give an accurate description of the
distractor, generally it worked.
From the Item Discrimination Index the questions tend to discriminate in the desired
direction. However, there are instances of the index being at zero (0). In question 12 all the
students scored, therefore the question may have been too simple. In question 26 all the students
28
had the incorrect answer meaning that the fraction computation continues to be a problem area
for students.
Number in high Number in low H-LN
group answering group answering
correctly correctly
Question H L H–L D
1 3 1 2 0.6
2 3 2 1 0.3
12 3 3 0 0
13 2 0 2 0.6
25 2 0 2 0.6
26 0 0 0 0
Table 9: Item Discrimination Index
By comparing the Item Difficulty Index to the Item Discrimination Index it can be
deduced whether a particular item is flawed. This would occur when there is a low Item
Difficulty Index and a negative Item Discrimination Index. In short few students got the item
correct and those that did were not from the high group. As shown in Table this was not the case
for the test.
The purposes of the test were fulfilled. It was found that students did understand some of
the objectives initially. However in certain areas such as fraction computation and fraction
simplification there needs to be revision by the students and if deemed necessary by the teacher,
some objectives need to be re taught. It should be noted that the suggestions are made with the
limitation of the researcher not actually teaching the class. The matching items questions were
well done as these had a higher Item Discrimination Index than the multiple choice items, in
which some had poor results in the distractor analysis. The test can be improved through the
reduction of multiple choice items (see Appendix II). As evidenced by the Item Difficulty Index
students scored better in the select types. Select types such as question 8 and 14 had an index of
89 and 94 respectively. Supply items such as 28 had an index of 0.

29
Therefore the test has a certain degree of success and reliability. The Item Discrimination
and Difficulty Indices mostly had the desired figures. Improvements need to be made in detractor
selection and possibly in instruction to raise the mean.
Works Cited
Best, J.W. & Khan J. V. (1998). Research in Education (8th ed.).

Gallagher, D. J. (1998). Classroom testing for Teachers. New Jersey: Patience-Hall Inc.
Linn L. R. & Miller, M. D. (2005). Measurement and Assessment in Teaching. (9th ed.). New
Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Mehrens, A. W. & Lehmann J. I (1991). Measurement and Evaluation in Education and
Psychology (4th ed.). California: Wadsworth/Thomas learning.
Ornstein, A. C. & Hunkins F. P. (2004). Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues (4th
ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Sadler, D. R. (1998) Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory, Assessment in Education,
5(1), pp. 7-83.
Wadsworth, B. J., (1996). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development. (5th ed.). New
York: Longman Publishers USA.
30
31

Analysing Classroom Assessment

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Analysing Classroom Assessment

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Hassan Basarally 806007430 EDME 2006

Name: Hassan Basarally

Faculty: Humanities and Education

Department: Liberal Arts

Course Code: EDME 2006

Course Name: Classroom Testing and Evaluation

Lecturer: Ms. Melville

Academic Year: 2007 – 2008

Date of Submission: 07/04/08

but of a certain aspect such as academic performance, behaviour and attitude.

and performance. Formative assessment “refers to assessment that is specifically intended to

problem solving approach. Trinidad: Daiken Publishers Limited.

Purpose of the Test

The purpose of the test was:

To determine whether the teaching objectives were met.

Objectives are essential to the successful classroom experience. An absence of objectives

will be able to:

1. Identify types of fractions.

2. Identify the components of a fraction.

3. Match fractions with their diagrammatical representations.

4. Infer fractions of a whole from given word or diagram problems.

5. Select fractions of equal value.

6. Simplify given fractions to their lowest value.

7. Arrange fractions in ascending or descending order.

9. Convert mixed numbers to improper fractions and vice versa.

The content of the test included the following areas:

4. Mixed number conversion.

5. Simplification of various types of fractions.

7. Ascending order of fractions.

8. Descending order of fractions.

Using the equation: weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions, the

questions were proportional to the amount of teaching time.

Topic Teaching Time Projected amount Actual amount

(weeks) of questions of questions

Table 1: Calculation of Questions per Topic

corresponding objectives is found in the Table of Specification). Example of calculations:

weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions

weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions

weeks per topictotal weeks x # of questions

Objective Knowled Comprehens Application Analy Tota

Fraction (13) (4,5,20,21)

Table 2: Table of Specification

The plain numbers represent the corresponding objective.

objective number one (1) in the list of objectives.

Supply Type Select Type Total

Answer Statements Choice Items

Table 3: Test Item Selection

SUBJECT Mathematics - Fractions

DURATION OF EXAM 1 hour

Fill in your name, class and date on the cover sheet.

Read all instructions carefully.

Answer all thirty (30) questions.

Write answers in pen or pencil.

All answers are to be written in this paper.

This paper consists of four (4) pages.

either (A), (B), (C) or (D).

(1) Which of the following is an improper fraction? [1mark]

(2) Which of the following is a proper fraction?

(3) What mixed number does Diagram 1 represent?

(5) When simplified, 1218 is equal to: [1mark]

(6) What is 23 + 27 ? [1mark]

(7) What is 2 45 + 7 310 ? [1mark]

(8) What is 3¾ × 10? [1mark]

Directions – Complete the following two statements: