National Competency Based Teacher Standards (NCBTS)

What is the NCBTS?

The NCBTS is an integral theoritical framework that defines the different dimensions of effective teaching, where effective teaching means being able to help all types of student learn the different learning goals in the curriculum.

Why Do We Need the NCBTS?

Filipino teachers often got mixed signals about what it means to be an effective teacher. What may have been taught definitions of good teaching in their pre-service education seem to be different from what their principals and supervisors expect them in their schools or teachers are taught new teaching approaches that seem inconsistent with the Performance Appraisal Sysyem. The NCBTS provides a single framework that shall define effective teaching in all aspects of a teacher's professional life and in all phases of teacher development. The use of a single framework should minimize confusion about what effective teaching is. The single framework should also provide a better guide for all teacher development programs and projects from the school level up to the national level.

Who Should Use the NCBTS?

Anyone who is interested in improving teaching practicesshould refer to the NCBTS. Thus teacgher education institutions shall use the NCBTS to design and implement effective pre-service teacher education curricula. The PRC shall refer the NCBTS in designing the Licensure Exam for Teachers. Organizations and agencies that implement in-service education for teachers (INSET) shall refer tho the NCBTS in developing their interventions. Award-giving bodies shall refer to the NCBTS in defining their criteria for outstanding teachers. The DepED shall use this in formulating its hiring, promotion, supervision, and other policies related to the teaching profession. It shall use the NCBTS to guide its INSET programs for teachers.

How Should Teachers Use the NCBTS?

Teachers can use the NCBTS in many ways:

• As a guide on their current teaching practices
• As a framework for creating new teaching practices
• As a guidepost for planning and professional development goals
• As a common language for discussing teaching practices with other teachers 

The best way to begin using the NCBTS is to use the competency-based framework as the guide for thinking critically about whether the teacher's current practices are helping students  attain  learning goals in the curriculum.

This competency-based teachers stnadards are organized hierarchically. The "basic" level categories of the standards are seven domains. A domain is defined as a distinctive sphere of the teaching-learning process, and is also well-defined arena for demonstrating positive teacher practices. Each domain  is defined in terms of a principle of ideal teaching associted with enhanced student learning.

Under each domain, there are standards. Strands refer to more specific dimensions of positive teacher practices under the broad conceptual domain.

At the lowest level of the hierarchical organization, under the strands, specific indicators are defined. These indicators are concrete, observable and measurable teacher behavior, actions, habits, routines, and practices known to create, facilitate, support and enhanced student learning.

A teacher can use various elements of the NCBTS to determine whether their different  actions and strategies as teachers are effective in helping their students learn the desired curriculum objectives. Thus. the NCBTS can be used as a self-assessment tool.

This self-assessment can help teachers plan for their professional development in the short-term and in the long-term. For example, using the NCBTS the teacher can be aware of her strengths as a teacher and ensure that she becomes more consistent in demonstrating her strengths. At the same time, she can plan on   professional development strategies so that she can improve on her weaknesses.

Thus, the NCBTS can help each Filipino teacher become a better teacher, and assist each teacher to continuously think about improving professionally to become even better and beter as facilitaors of student learning.

With NCBTS, all Filipino teachers also share common vocabulary for discussing their teaching practice, for defining their ideals as teachers, for negotiating and creating strategies to improve their practice, and for addressing their various stakeholders regarding the improvement of the teaching profession.

What Are These Seven Domains?

1. Social Regard for Learning
2. Learning Environment
3. Diversity of Learners
4. Curriculum
5. Planning, Assessing, and Reporting
6. Community Linkages
7. Personal Growth and Professional Development

Source: Experiential Learning Courses Handbook, a Project of Teacher Education Council (TEC), Department of Education (DepED), and Commission On Education (CHED)

Reflection/Insights

Kudos to all the educators whose aspiration is to achieve quality basic education in all Phillipine schools. You have done a great job! The development of NCBTS is a very helpful tool to all teachers who desire to become effective facilitators of student learning.Through NCBTS teachers can reflect on their current teaching practices or create new teaching practices. It serves as a common language to discuss teaching practices with other teachers. Further, NCBTS is a guidepost for planning and developing personal and professional goals.

Back in my teaching days, there was no NCBTS. I rely on what I have  learned in our pre-service teacher education curricula. The teaching experiences also contributed to my analysis of strengths and weaknesses as a teacher. I did readings and attended seminars to learn new approaches in teaching to be effective.

Now, here is NCBTS. The good thing is Teacher Education Institutions (TEI), PRC, organizations and agencies that implement in-service (INSET) education for teachers refer their interventions in developing their interventions. Award giving bodies refer NCBTS in defining their criteria for outstanding teacher. DepED uses NCBTS in formulating its hiring, promoting, supervising and other policies related to the teaching profession and in conducting INSET for teachers.

Teachers, nowadays, should learn many new ideas that the NCBTS is emphasizing. Teachers should learn practices found in the NCBTS that help students learn better, that way she will become competent, she will be an effective teacher.

On my part as a school head, I will influence my teachers to use NCBTS for their professional development activities. I will use NCBTS in providing instructional supervision for my teachers. Together, we will work to help different types of learners learn better.    

A POSITION PAPER ON THE CONTINUANCE OF NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT TEST (NAT)

I. Overview

      

A. Introduction/Background

The National Achievement Test (NAT) is a locally-made standardized test given annually in March to assess the competency level of both the public and private school students. This is designed to determine the learners’ achievement level, their strengths and weaknesses/knowledge and skills in five key subject areas: Mathematics, English, Filipino, Science, and HEKASI for grade school and Mathematics, English, Science, Filipino, and Araling Panlipunan for high school. The test is administered by the Department of Education’s National Education Testing and Research Center (NETRC). The results are intended to guide the Department of Education in its efforts towards the improvement of the quality of education in public schools and to provide appropriate interventions for the students. A score of 75% and up indicates mastery of the subject and 50% to less than 75%, near mastery; while a score of below 50% indicates low mastery or no mastery at all.

B. History

The National Achievement Test (NAT) was used to be called the National Elementary Achievement Test (NEAT) for grade school level and the National Secondary Achievement Test (NSAT) for the high school level. Both the NEAT and NSAT were precursors of the National College Entrance Examination (NCEE), an examination administered to gauge the competency of students entering college. The NCEE was abolished in 1994 through the Executive Order no.632 by the Education Secretary Raul Roco who stated that all high school students should be able to enter college and be given a chance of a better career in the future. It was replaced by NEAT and NSAT.

When the Department of Education Culture and Sports (DECS) was officially converted into the Department of Education (DepED), NEAT and NSAT were also abolished and replaced by the National Achievement Test (NAT). Both the public and private elementary and secondary schools take this exam. Many years back NAT result was part in the final grade of the second year test takers but it was also eliminated. This school year 2010-2011, there are schools, through sampling, where the second year test takers do composition writing in English and Filipino.

C. The Target Clienteles of the NAT

          This test is given to:

          Grade 3 – public schools only

          Grade 6 – both public and private schools

          Second year high school – both public and private schools

D. Coverage of NAT and the Test Items It Comprises

TEST	NAT G3	NAT G6	NAT Y2
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
Number of Items Per Subject	20	40	60
Total Number of Items	120	200	300

E. Features that Characterize the NAT

v     A multiple-choice test

v     A sampling of competencies intended for the whole year coverage

v     A standardized test with mostly moderately difficult items

v     Anchored on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives/Dimensions

v     High-Ordered Thinking Skills (HOTS)

v     The performance of an examinee is compared to the performance of  
       a national populace

v     The rating is expressed in percentage score or percent of correct   
       responses

F. Rationale of DepED in Administering the NAT in Grade III,     Grade Six, and Second Year

          The NAT, which is a system-based assessment, was specifically designed to gauge learning outcomes across target levels in identified periods of basic education. In particular, it spans from mid assessment of elementary education which falls on the third grade, and then to a terminal exit assessment which falls on the sixth grade. The test results in NAT-Grade Six can likewise serve as measurement of incoming first year students’ readiness for high school.

          On the other hand, the NAT for Second Year High School serves as mid assessment of the secondary level.

G. How the NAT Scores Are Reported and Interpreted To Each Examinee

          The SCORE comprises the Percentage of Correct Responses (PCR) per learning competency by subject area. The PCR is interpreted using the Achievement Level Descriptive Equivalent below.

Achievement Level

Percentage	Descriptive Equivalent
96% - 100%	Mastered
86% -  95%	Closely Approximating Mastery
66% -  85%	Moving Towards Mastery
35% - 65%	Average Mastery
16% - 34%	Low Mastery
5%  - 15%	Very Low Mastery
0%  -   4%	Absolutely No Mastery

H. Is There A Passing Score in the NAT?

          The NAT has no passing grade or score. It uses the Mean Percentage Score (MPS) to indicate the percentage of correctly answered items in a test. For instance, a 50 MPS would mean that an examinee correctly answered 20 of a 40-item subject area test. The computation of grades in school, however, is done very differently from NAT (Refer to DepED Order No. 70, s. 2003, “Revised Grading System for Elementary and Secondary Schools; www,deped.gov.ph).

I. Does an MPS below 75 Mean that the Examinee Failed the Test?

          An MPS below 75 does not mean that pupils/students who took the test failed it. For instance, a 66 MPS in the total test would mean that the examinees were “moving towards mastery.” The NAT uses a seven-descriptive equivalent of Achievement Level based on the normal curve wherein an MPS pf 75 and above is the national target.

J. How is NAT Administered?

          A Chief Examiner is assigned to administer the test, in which case a school principal who is not the school principal in that particular school. It is he/she who receives all the NAT test materials the day before the scheduled test and is accountable in the retrieval of these materials after the test. In case there are 5 or more testing rooms, a Room Supervisor is assigned, usually a head teacher, to monitor the conduct of the test administration in a testing center. He/She also checks the room examiners adhere to instructions in the Examiners Handbook and assists the Chief Examiner in the counting of Test Booklets per pack, the Answer Sheets, and the ETRE’s. The Room Examiners, teachers from other schools, are the ones who does the administration of the NAT in the testing room. They are responsible for the smooth administration of the test in the rooms where they are assigned. They assist the examinees in accomplishing the name grid and other pertinent personal information about himself/herself and other related information. They follow strictly the Examiner’s Handbook during test administration.

K. Persons Involved in the NAT Administration

          Testing Staff shall be done by the Schools Division Superintendent and shall include the following:

Ø   Room examiners – teachers coming from another school district (NAT Grades 3 & 6) within the Division (NAT Yr 2).

Ø   Room Supervisors – teachers coming from another school other than those schools where room examiners will be assigned.

Ø   Chief Examiners are school heads of another public school

Ø   School Testing Coordinators – teachers or head teachers who will stay in their respective schools.

L. Expenses Incurred in the NAT Administration

     The government has spent millions for the materials and administration of NAT. 

M. Assessment of School Performance

Since School Year 2002-2003, the test has been given to Grade 3, Grade 6, and 2^nd year high school students. From 2004-2006, the NAT was also given to high school seniors under the direction of Secretary Edilberto De Jesus as a special measure to further aid in the assessment of school performance.

          The schools of Eastern Visayas and CARAGA made it to the top 2 for school years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 while the schools of ARMM, NCR and Western Visayas were in the bottom 3. Science was found to be the lowest competence for both elementary and high school students. There was general deterioration seen in the results from school years 2004 to 2006 but by 2008 an improvement was seen, especially in the subject of Science, with the number of students found to have low mastery of each subject consistently decreasing (http://wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title).

          “From 2006-2009, the percentage increase of 21.36 percent was achieved. This only indicates a steady improvement in primary education in the country’s public school system,” noted DepEd Secretary Lapus. .

     2009 NAT scores showed some improvement over the previous year’s results. From 64.81% mean percentage score in 2008, it now increased to 66.33% in 2009.

   

This improvement could be credited to the various DepEd Programs like Teacher Mentoring Program, Every-Child –A-Reader-Program, Adopt-A-School-Program, the project TURN for literacy and the intensive reviews conducted in every schools as ordered by the Regional Directors through the Schools Division Superintendent .

However, though, an average score of 66.33% can not be a huge cause for celebration, as this Mean Percentage Score (MPS) is still off the passing grade of 75%.

The NAT 2010 also revealed an increase of MPS but still has not reached the passing grade of 75%. In Misamis Oriental for instance, a few secondary schools were assessed Poor in the NAT result while most of them obtained Very Poor in assessment. It also revealed that Araling Panlipunan was the subject that obtained the lowest competence.

II. Argument

1.   NAT is a good instrument in measuring students’ strengths and weaknesses in particular subject and particular skills.
2.  NAT is a good instrument in measuring students’ achievement levels, how well they have performed.

3.   NAT provides every subject teachers identify which competencies need more time for discussion to achieve the students’ mastery level.
4.  NAT results help the school head and the teachers undertake some measures in addressing the students learning needs.

5.   NAT allows all teachers to be serious in their teaching.

6.   NAT allows every learner to identify which competencies in every subject areas have been mastered, nearly mastered, or not mastered.

7.   The result of NAT can be a good way of improving the present education system.

8.   NAT allows students to be responsible of their own academic performance by studying harder. 

9.    It serves to measure the teaching performance of the teachers. 
10.  The NAT results guide the decision makers in formulating policies relative to the progression and promotion of students especially in the public schools.
11.  The results of the NAT will help DepED higher officials to formulate appropriate interventions aimed at improving the education system.
12.  NAT results provide information which schools are performing better and which are not. So, teachers from poor performing schools can be given special trainings/seminars to help enhance their competency level in terms of the domains, strands, and indicators of the National Competency Based Teacher Standards (NCBTS).

III. Conclusion

There have been criticisms about the National Achievement Test (NAT). The Federation of Association of Private Schools and Administration (FAPSA) criticizes and lobbies for the abolition of the program. The conduct of the test, according to the group, paves the way for ingenious access to leakage. Some have observed that cheating happened during the test administration, thus teaching the students to be dishonest. This further affect the validity of the test. Some students might have gathered information from the previous test takers that answer were given and so they may not try their best to enhance their skills during the NAT review because, anyway, answers will be given during the test. On the other hand, teachers may not sincerely conduct NAT reviews because students will be provided with the answers, anyway. Millions spent by the government could be spent for other programs that can benefit the students, others suggested.

The criticisms and observations cited above may convinced people to favor the abolition of NAT but I say, YES, to the continuance of this assessment of learning. If NAT will be eliminated, in what other way will we know the extent of students' learning? How shall we know whether or not teaching has been effective? How shall we improve the students' achievement if there is no assessment?

Others may suggest for another assessment to be constructed but it is still an assessment, so why should NAT be changed? NAT has been used for many years and surely its validity and reliability have been tested. The results of the past years NAT might not have yielded scores which everybody hopes for, that is, the 75% passing score set by DepED, but these had helped in measuring the students' competency level. These had aided in improving the NAT items. Further, the results have serve as a challenge to the teachers and school heads to undertake measures to improve their students' performance. The teachers, on the other hand, have been motivated to improve their competency level.

Whether we like it or not, assessment and evaluation are essential components of teaching and learning. In the educational process, assessment and evaluation have profound and well establish link to student performance.

The abolition of National Achievement Test (NAT) is not the answer. Close monitoring of the supervisors from DepED Division and Regional Offices to all the Testing Centers should be done during the test administration. To prevent leakage to happen, there should be Division Testing Coordinators in every school who shall bring the NAT Materials to their school assignment. Each must safeguard the confidentiality of the test materials by supervising closely the administration of the test. This may require the involvement of many people but with faith and commitment this is possible.





  

TEST INTERPRETATION

Aptitude and ability tests are used to make inferences about the individual's competencies, capabilities and likely future performance on the job. But what do scores mean and how are they interpreted?

There two distinct method to use in interpreting scores, criterion-referenced interpretation and norm-referenced interpretation. In criterion-referenced tests, the test score indicates the amount of skill or knowledge that a test taker has in a particular subject area. It involves comparing a student's score with a subjective standard of performance rather than with the performance of a norm group. Norm-referenced interpretation involves comparing a student's score with the scores other students obtained on the same test. How much a student knows is determined by the student's standing or rank within the reference group.

Sources:

...uiowa.edu/itp/...itbs_interp_score.aspx

psychometric-success.com/.../interpretin

...wikipedia.org/...Standardized_testing

Reflection

Student's skills and knowledge are usually determined through testing. The test scores are interpreted to judge the performance of the student if improvement has been made or to compare his performance with other students taking the same test. Testing in schools is also used not just to assess the students' performance but also to rank schools with other schools, region, or even with other nations.  This is the reason why teachers are encouraged to do review classes and to shape their classroom activities around the upcoming test with the hopes that their students will perform better than the other students in other schools. Indeed, we are living in the age of much testing and assessment with increasing demands for teachers and school accountability and ever more rigorous expectations for improved student test performance (wikipedia, standardized_ testing). 

Students and teachers feel the pressure put upon them and this creates tension It is very important then that interpretation of test scores be done by trained persons who have adequate amount of information and have understood fully the purpose of the test or what the test is designed to measure. There should be a check-recheck if interpretation of test scores accurately portray the test taker's performance, otherwise, it would be unfair for the students who are trying their best to get high scores and the teachers whose teaching performance is also measured based on the students' results on the test.   

    

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are two important characteristics of any measurement procedure. Reliability is the extent to which an experiment, test, or any measuring procedure yields the same result on repeated trials. A measure is considered reliable if a person’s score on the same test given twice is similar. Another way to think of reliability is to imagine a kitchen scale. If you weigh five pounds of potatoes in the morning, and the scale is reliable, the same scale should register five pounds for potatoes an hour later (unless, it has been peeled and cooked). Likewise, instruments such as classroom tests and national standardized exams should be reliable – it should not make any difference whether a student takes the assessment in the morning or afternoon; one day or the next.

Three approaches that reliability is usually estimated:

1. Stability – a measure is stable if one can secure consistent results with repeated measurement of the same person with the same instrument.

Method: Test/Retest

The idea behind test/retest is that the same group of subjects should get the same score on test 1 as they do on test 2 given on a separate day, weeks or months (preferably less than 6 months). Determination of reliability coefficient is correlation..

2. Equivalence – Reliability is associated with the degree to which alternative forms of the same measure produce same or similar results. This approach considers how much error may be introduced by different investigators (in observations) or different samples of items being studied (in questioning or scales). The difference between stability and equivalence is that latter is concerned with personal & situational fluctuations from one time or another, while equivalence is concerned with variations at one point in time among observers and sample of items. The major interest with equivalence is typically not how respondents differ from item to item but how well a given set of items will categorize an individual.

Method: Parallel forms

Parallel forms of a test may be administered to the same group of subjects simultaneously or with a delay, and the paired observations may be correlated.

3. Internal Consistency

This uses only one administration of a test or an instrument in order to assess consistency or homogeneity among the items. Thus it does not involve a time interval as do the test-retest and parallel forms methods.

Methods:

A.      Split-Half Method. This method can be used when the measuring tool has many similar statements or questions to which the subject can respond. After the administration of the instrument, results are separated by item into even and odd numbers or into randomly selected halves.

B.      Kuder-Richardson Methods Formula 20 and 21

These methods measure the extent to which items within one form of the test have as    
 much in common with one another as do the items in that one form with corresponding 
 items in an equivalent form.

C.      Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha
    This reliability coefficient is closely related to K-R procedures. However, it has the advantage of being applicable to multiple scored tests. Multiple scored tests are those that are not scored right or wrong according to some other all-or-none system.

The primary difference between test/retest and internal consistency estimates of reliability is that test/retest involves two administrations of the measurement instrument, whereas the internal consistency method involves only one administration of that instrument.

Validity, on the other hand, means that the measuring instrument actually measures the property it is supposed to measure. A test is valid when it measures what it is supposed to measure. How valid is the test depends on its purpose – for example, a ruler may be a valid measuring device for length, but it isn’t very valid for measuring volume.

Categories of Measurement Validity

Face validity is concerned with how a measure or procedure appears. Does it seem like a reasonable way to gain the information the researchers are attempting to obtain? Does it seem well designed? Does it seem as though it will work reliably.

Content validity is based on the extent to which a measurement reflects the specific intended domain of content. It includes a broad sample of what is being tested, emphasizes important material, and requires appropriate skills. Is the full content of a concept’s definition included in the measure?

Criterion validity is used to demonstrate the accuracy of a measure or procedure by comparing it with another measure or procedure which has been demonstrated to be valid. Is the measure consistent with what we already know and what we expect? Two categories: predictive and concurrent

         Predictive: Predicts a known association between the construct you’re measuring and something else.

        Concurrent: Associated with pre-existing indicators, something that already measures the same concept.

Construct validity seeks agreement between a theoretical concept and a specific measuring device or procedure.  For example, if we’re using an Alcohol Abuse Inventory, even if there’s no way to measure “abuse” itself, we can predict that serious abuse correlates with health, family, and legal problems. Two-sub-categories are: Convergent validity is the actual general agreement among ratings, gathered independently of one another, where measures should be theoretically related.  Discriminate validity is the lack of a relationship among measures which theoretically should not be related.

Sources:

Prado, Nenita I. et al (2010) .Methods of Research. Cagayan de Oro City

http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/rresearch/relval/pop2b.cfm

http://fcit.usf.edu/assessment/basic/basicc.html

socialresearchmethods.net/…/lcoiosi2.htm

http://www1.georgetown.edu/departments/psychology/resources 

http://quick-take.blogspot.com/2009/05/reliability-vs-validity.html

experiment-resources.com/validity-and-…

Reflection

I would like to base my reflection on this situation.

What will you recommend given this scenario?

Your school district is looking for an assessment instrument to measure reading ability. There were two possibilities at hand. Test A provides data indicating that it has high validity, but there is no information about its reliability. Test B provides data indicating that it has high reliability, but there is no information about its validity (http://fcit.usf.edu/assessment/basic/basicc.html).

I would recommend using Test A. Validity is more important than reliability because if an instrument is not accurate - does not actually measure what it is supposed to measure, there is no reason to use it even if it yields consistent results. “Reliability of an instrument does not warranty its validity.” (Murali D.)

CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS AND NORM-REFERENCED TESTS

Many educators and members of the public fail to grasp the distinctions between criterion-referenced and norm-referenced testing. It is common to hear the two types of testing referred to as if they serve the same purposes, or shared the same characteristics. Much confusion can be eliminated if the basic differences are understood.

          There are two chief groups in which tests are categorized, criterion-referenced testing and norm-referenced testing.

          Criterion-referenced tests are tests that seek to determine whether an individual has mastered knowledge or skills which were taught in a section of a course to see if instruction was successful and to take remedial action. This type of tests also serve to determine if someone can be certified to begin work on a given profession. Introduced by Glaser (1962) and Popham and Husek (1969), these are also known as domain-referenced tests, competency tests, basic skills tests, (http:www.education.com/definition/basic-skills/?-module=)  mastery tests, performance tests or assessments, authentic assessments, standards-based tests, credentialing exams to determine persons qualified to receive a license or certificate, and more. What all these tests have in common is that they attempt to determine a candidate’s level of performance in relation to a well defined domain of content. Classroom teachers use them to monitor student performance in their day to day activities. These tests are useful for evaluating student performance and generating educational accountability information at the classroom, school, district, and state levels. The tests are based on the curricula, and the results provide basis for determining how much is being learned by students and how well the educational system is producing desired results. Criterion-referenced tests are also used in training programs to assess learning. Typically pretest-posttest designs with parallel forms of criterion-referenced tests are used.

          In contrast, norm-referenced tests seek to compare respondents with some other group. The interpretation of such tests consist of comparing the individual score with either the other respondents in the same administration or with all others who have ever taken the test. The tests determine a candidate’s level of the construct measured by a test in relation to a well- defined reference group of candidates, referred to as norm group.

                    The following is adapted from Popham, J.W. (1975). Educational evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, New jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Dimension	Criterion-Referenced Tests	Norm-Referenced Tests
Purpose	To determine whether each student has achieved specific skills or concepts. To find out how much students know before instruction begins and after it has finished.	To rank each student with respect to the achievement of others in broad areas of knowledge. To discriminate between high and low achievers.
Content	Measures specific skills which make up a designated curriculum. These skills are identified by teachers and curriculum experts. Each skill is expressed as an instructional objective.	Measures broad skill areas sampled from a variety of textbooks, syllabi, and the judgments of curriculum experts.
Item Characteristics	Each skill is tested by at least four items in order to obtain an adequate sample of student performance and to minimize the effect of guessing. The items which test any given skill are parallel in difficulty	Each skill is usually tested by less than four items. Items vary in difficulty. Items are selected that discriminate between high and low achievers.
Score Interpretation	Each individual is compared with preset standard for acceptable achievement. The performance of other examinees is irrelevant. A student’s score is usually expressed as percentage. Student achievement is reported for individual skills.	Each individual is compared with other examinees and assigned a score-usually expressed as a percentile, a grade equivalent score, or a stanine. Student achievement is reported for broad skill areas, although some norm-referenced tests do report student achievement for individual skills.

References:

http://www.education.com/reference/article/criterion-referenced-tests

http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/measeval/crnmref.html

http://www.ehow/about_4569218_criterionreferenced-tests.html

http://www.brighthub.com/education/special/articles/72677.aspx

Reflection

          If I were to choose between criterion referenced testing and norm-referenced testing, I prefer the former. Why, because learners have different needs, level of understanding, and come from different backgrounds. So, why compare students to other students? Instead, compare this student to his own previous performance, if improvement has been made, that way he will strive to perform better and even best. Further, this will prevent the student from being discouraged.

          This can be likened to a parent who says “ Your cousin always gets better grades than you...” It’s unfair to be compared to someone else, isn’t it? Each individual is different. Well, just a thought…