Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice

Volume 17 Article 18
Issue 5 17.5

2020

Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Celina P. Sarmiento
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Marie Paz E. Morales

Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Levi E. Elipane
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Brando C. Palomar
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp

Recommended Citation
Sarmiento, C. P., Morales, M. E., Elipane, L. E., & Palomar, B. C. (2020). Assessment practices in Philippine
higher STEAM education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(5). https://doi.org/
10.53761/1.17.5.18

Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information
contact the UOW Library: [email protected]
Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Abstract
The study explored practices of the sampled higher education Philippine STEAM educators in assessing
learners. Data sourced from the database of a state-funded research on Philippine STEAM education
using a Classroom Observation Protocol, included 106 STEAM teachers from purposely selected
institutions drawn from 14 regions. Systematic data analysis (through data condensation, data display,
and drawing and verifying conclusions) revealed that STEAM teachers used both appropriate traditional
and authentic assessment tools and strategies with inclusive integration of technology. Furthermore,
results showed that STEAM teachers’ best assessment practices may be categorised as: 1) assessment
for career or industry readiness, 2) mounting assessment system to support instruction, and 3) collective
and reflective assessment process. COVID-19 pandemic implications and policy recommendations are
also offered, which may enhance assessment practices and suggest a perspective in crafting and
recommending national and international standards and guidelines on assessment literacy among higher
STEAM educators.

Keywords
assessment, STEAM higher education

This article is available in Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/
18
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice

Volume 17 Article 18
Issue 5 17.5

2020

Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Celina P. Sarmiento
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Marie Paz E. Morales

Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Levi E. Elipane
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Brando C. Palomar
Philippine Normal University, Manila, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp

Recommended Citation
Sarmiento, C. P., Morales, M. E., Elipane, L. E., & Palomar, B. C. (2020). Assessment practices in Philippine
higher STEAM education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(5).
https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18

Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information
contact the UOW Library: [email protected]

1
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Abstract
The study explored practices of the sampled higher education Philippine STEAM educators in assessing
learners. Data sourced from the database of a state-funded research on Philippine STEAM education
using a Classroom Observation Protocol, included 106 STEAM teachers from purposely selected
institutions drawn from 14 regions. Systematic data analysis (through data condensation, data display,
and drawing and verifying conclusions) revealed that STEAM teachers used both appropriate traditional
and authentic assessment tools and strategies with inclusive integration of technology. Furthermore,
results showed that STEAM teachers’ best assessment practices may be categorised as: 1) assessment
for career or industry readiness, 2) mounting assessment system to support instruction, and 3) collective
and reflective assessment process. COVID-19 pandemic implications and policy recommendations are
also offered, which may enhance assessment practices and suggest a perspective in crafting and
recommending national and international standards and guidelines on assessment literacy among higher
STEAM educators.

Keywords
assessment, STEAM higher education

This article is available in Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/
18

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 2
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Introduction
The advent of Industrial Revolution 4.0 (IR4.0) blurs the line that divides the physical and the digital
world (Maisiri et al., 2019). This innovation era defined by digital and technological outbursts
influences countries to focus on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) field
and profession, which is believed to be one of the foundations of knowledge-based economy and
society (Savage & Healy, 2019). It dictates the state-of-the-art contour of the workforce where
machines compliment men to surface new possibilities and harness potentials for inventions,
creations, and novelties (Almeida & Simoes, 2019). Eventually, Science, Technology, Engineering,
Agri/Fisheries or Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM) education arose, adding “A” to STEM, for the
purpose of better cultivating students’ cognitive benefits and to improve employability skills
necessary for career and economic progression (Perignat & Katz-Buonincontro, 2019). This new
education archetype thrive unique assessment practices, such as assessing student collaboration in
engaging to group performances, attitudinal inventories to index students’ development of soft
skills, or performance-based assessment which is observed as highly motivational in the STEAM
disciplines (Herro et al., 2017). Thus, this qualitative study, which is part of a state-funded research
project on STEAM education, was conceptualized to provide an empirical body of knowledge on
assessing learning in Philippine higher STEAM education.

Background

The Philippines indicates a firm stand on improving the human capital and its science, technology,
and innovation sectors, to help bridge the IR4.0 phenomenon (National Economic and Development
Authority, 2017). This prompted educational agencies to gear their efforts towards improving the
quality of STEAM education, trusting that it will contribute to the economic competence of the
country. However, despite the efforts, one in every four young (between 15 to 24 years old) Filipinos
are unemployed, with many young people (48.4% of the unemployed population) facing challenges
in finding work after they leave schools, due to job skills mismatch (Asian Development Bank,
2018). This implies a potential shortcoming of higher education assessment systems, which might
be reflecting deceptive student gains (Fook & Sidhu, 2014). As a consequence, there might be a
widening gap between what the students acquire in higher education institutions (HEIs) and skills
needed to survive in the continuously advancing technology-permeated workplace.

Salmon (2019) emphasized few trends that stand out in adapting education to meet the demands of
IR4.0. He believes that emphasis will be on project-based learning, big data interpretation, and
student involvement in curriculum design. As a result, trends in assessment and assessing students
will be very different from the conventional forms and platforms (Aziz Hussin, 2018) to adjust to
the new learning paradigm. The Philippine education system adheres to the principle of multiple
strategies for holistic assessment of student learning and success (Plata, 2018; Rosaroso & Rosaroso,
2015). Yet, although general assessment techniques that come from traditional to authentic kinds of
assessment visibly surface on the Philippine education topography, there are clear indicators that
the current assessment scheme does not reflect what students need to succeed in their future
workplace. Looking at the current assessment practices of STEAM teachers may help shift
assessment to gauge skills that are necessary in a complex global environment, which in turn will
assist in uplifting the current condition of higher education and human resource.

31
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

Literature review
Assessment in higher education

Assessment is the primary propeller of learning that interfaces between what the teacher expects the
students to learn, and the evidences that demonstrate students’ learning success and achievement
(Northcote et al., 2017). In fact, Thomas, Martin, and Pleasants (2011) believe that assessment plays
an essential part in providing quality andragogy to adults’ lifelong learning process and their
partaking in the community and the national economy. In the same manner, Banta and Blaich (2011)
describe that assessing learning is a subversive activity, which is beneficial to improve teaching and
learning. Furthermore, Maki (2010) explains that assessment is an opportunity for teachers to
develop a shared vision of student learning and to collaborate in realizing such goals. Many view
assessment as a way to informed decision-making in terms of best practices and instructional
delivery (Al-Thani et al., 2014). Additionally, assessment can provide distinct ways to gather
evidences for better judgement of student achievement. This fundamental practice, which is central
to teaching and learning in higher education, regulates students’ progress and can likewise facilitate
learning (Chase et al., 2017).

The impact of IR4.0 extends to all sectors, including assessment in higher education. The skills
upgrade required in the industry stimulates change to the learning system, which would suggest
modifications in the assessment process. In the new education topography, assessment hinges
education and research, creating heaps of new knowledge on evidence-based instructional delivery
(Hejase & Tabch, 2012). Currently, assessment transitions and transformations are visible to cope
with the fast-changing educational landscape. However, conceptualizing and developing assessment
tools that can measure cognition as well as skills in this new landscape is a challenge (DiCerbo,
2014), since these changes vehemently push assessment from the traditional form to digital badges
and other e-assessment techniques to meet the learning trajectory of the current learners (Chase et
al., 2017). The greatest challenges in the perspective of higher education assessment includes
providing feedbacks, improving students’ decision-making, enhancing active learning and
knowledge, and deriving test results which are useful to students (Webb & Gibson, 2015).

Philippine higher STEAM education

Advancement in STEM is believed to propel economic progress and advancement (English, 2016).
On this note, the Department of Education (DepEd) of the Philippines included STEM as one of the
tracks of the K to 12 senior high school curricula, which prepares students to take a higher education
degree in any STEM related disciplines. However, the Philippine Commission on Higher Education
(CHED) expanded the DepEd’s vision for STEM to a clustering of disciplines as STEAM, where A
represents agri-fisheries courses. This choice is rooted from the fact that agriculture plays a
significant role in the Philippine economy, involving about 24.3% of Filipino workers in 2018
according to the World Bank collection of development indicators.

The CHED recognizes that the Philippines may benefit from STEAM professionals for its human
capital. In fact, the government positioned STEAM disciplines at the foreground to improve the
present global metrics of the country according to international standards (National Economic and
Development Authority, 2017). Unfortunately, despite attempts to proliferate STEAM education in
the Philippines, only 38.5% out of the 3,589,484 collegiate enrolment in 2019 chose disciplines
under STEAM, with merely 21.9% completion rate (Commission on Higher Education, 2019).

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 42
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

In an effort to contribute to uplifting STEAM education, we conceived this qualitative research to

understand how learning is assessed in Philippine higher STEAM education. This study examined
various data gleaned on different STEAM constructs from 14 regions. The purpose is to: (1)
determine the current assessment practices of higher education STEAM teachers; (2) benchmark
teachers’ best practices in assessing STEAM students; and (3) suggest policies and programs that
could alleviate assessment in higher STEAM education.

Methods
To attain our objectives, we sought qualitative data from a state-funded research project in
Philippine STEAM education (Morales et al., 2018). The said project, which aims to craft an
emerging Technological Pedagogical Assessment Content Knowledge (TPACK) Model and
provide inputs to policies for Philippine STEAM education, has a vast database of quantitative and
qualitative data that we were permitted to access and use for this research. The database hosts
responses from 103 randomly selected HEIs (out of 2,299), which includes 46 public and 57 private
institutions of higher learning all over the country. Complete enumeration (n = 1,940) of STEAM
teachers in the identified institutions was done in the research project. From this initial sample, 106
teachers (see Table 1 for the distribution per region) were selected based on recommendations for
classroom observations and comprehensive interviews.

Table 1
Distribution of STEAM teacher respondents per region

Number of Number of
Region
Schools STEAM Teachers
I 2 5
II 1 4
III 3 15
IV 3 16
V 3 9
VI 2 10
VII 2 4
VIII 1 5
IX 1 5
X 2 4
XI 2 7
XII 2 8
National Capital Region (NCR) 5 10
Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) 1 4
Total 31 106

The data from the 106 STEAM teachers, which were gathered through: 1) classroom observation
notes, 2) interview protocol, and 3) assessment checklist, were used to address the objectives of this
paper. The first two instruments include open-ended questions that intend to collect observations,
information, explanation, and exploration of meanings behind the practices of STEAM teachers;
while the third is a checklist of the various techniques that STEAM teachers utilize to assess the
performance of the students. The said data were collected by trained field researchers, who were
deployed in the various HEIs to conduct observations, interviews, and collect other pertinent
information. These field researchers were also tasked to transcribe and organize the data collected
because they were more familiar to the data and to ensure that no details were missed. The organized

53
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

information and transcriptions were uploaded in the database of project, where we retrieved the
necessary materials needed for analysis.

We used MAXQDA 10 to organize the transcriptions and to facilitate analysis. The technique
proposed by Miles, Huberman and Saldaña (2014) were employed to analyze and triangulate the
qualitative data. This technique involves three concurrent processes: 1) data condensation, 2) data
display, and 3) drawing and verifying conclusions. Iterative procedure was practiced in this study
since qualitative data analysis is nonlinear in nature (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). To be exact, data
analysis for this study involved returning and analysing the raw data, memos, codes and figures
several times to arrive at the most precise themes.

Additionally, as qualitative analysis is an extremely interpretative research and may be subject to

validity and reliability concerns (Drost, 2011), we conducted a two-day workshop to evaluate and
gain additional insights about the results of our analysis. Furthermore, we presented the results in a
capability building program and national forum, which is part of the research project mentioned and
was attended by STEAM teachers from sampled HEIs, to ensure the soundness and integrity of the
conclusions derived from the data. These themes are presented in narrative form in the next section.

Results
In this section, we present the identified assessment practices of Higher Education STEAM teachers
in the Philippines. Correspondingly, the best practices were derived based on how curriculum,
instruction, and assessment were able to reinforce each other according to the standards emphasized
by STEAM Education. Although the common practices were identified from the sampled HEIs, the
best practices highlighted in this study may not exactly represent the most commonly utilized
assessment practices; but rather, they signify how assessment could be further enhanced for a more
relevant STEAM education for the country.

Assessment for career/industry readiness and development of essential skills

The practices included in this category represent the long-term goals and curricular objectives being
put forward by STEAM education in the Philippines, which highly affects the assessment practices
of teachers. Although traditional forms of assessment still prevail as the most widely used, several
STEAM educator-participants are fervently mindful of the following assessment practices: (a)
inclusion of real-life application problems specific to various disciplines; (b) involvement of (other)
experts and stakeholders in the assessment process; (c) selection of appropriate assessment based
on the competencies and expected outcomes; and (d) assignment of roles to students.

Inclusion of real-life application problems specific to various disciplines

In general, the teachers from the sampled HEIs hold on to a unified and overarching aim for their
STEAM learners to become productive citizens, ‘If students will study STEAM courses, there will
be a big improvement in our country, in our society.’ The differences and varied interests and
abilities of every student are taken into consideration, and subsequently delivered and assessed via
more experiential approaches. A faculty from Region VI stated,

I always try to find out the interest of my students… I want them to share their actual
experiences in life, reflected to the subject matter itself. There is always a difference in the
actual experience and the knowledge that you gain from the book and other sources.

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 64
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Relatedly, the inclusion of questions that provoke higher order thinking skills (HOTS) and critical
thinking were considered as best practices. The following statements were uttered by some
participants: ‘we are all encouraged as faculty members to include higher order thinking skills
[questions during assessment]’; ‘I keep on giving that kind of items [critical thinking items] so that
they will get used to it… and will most likely develop critical thinking.’

Involvement of (other) experts and stakeholders in the assessment process

Enablers of STEAM Assessment, institutional affordances and sustainability, were identified as

important variables in the assessment practice of STEAM education in the Philippines. HEIs
collaborate with industry and community partners to provide relevant experiences (in the form of
internship) that will prepare students to be competent in their respective fields. This activity engages
student-interns and permits them to interact with different individuals and systems providing them
the opportunity to contextualize learning, ‘they experience [using laboratory equipment] during
their practicum, so they know how to operate those [laboratory] instruments.’ Internship is included
in the curriculum of all STEAM disciplines in the Philippines, and is usually taken as a credit-
bearing course supervised by a teacher, where a coordinating member of the partner industry also
evaluates the performance of the student-interns, ‘we invite industry partners to collaborate and
check [students’ performance]… we have an evaluation form for the supervisors to evaluate our
OJTs [On the Job Trainees].’

Exceptional instances where the industry partner contributes by sharing assessment tools to faculty
members were also observed. In particular, a city college in Region III has an association with a
multinational IT (Information Technology) and business process outsourcing company that supplies
them with industry-related ICT (Information and Communication Technology) test questions, ‘it is
a partnership with [Name of partner industry]. They provide us with ICT questions that we can use
in our classes.’ Industry partners are also invited to update students about new technologies and
systems used in the field and the day-by-day scenario in the workplace, aiming to give STEAM
students better grounding and employability.

We invite our industry partners to update us about applications or software that they use,
so when our students graduate, they know the demand and will have higher employability
rate.

Selection of appropriate assessment based on the competencies and expected outcomes

Assessment practices of the participants reveal implications to instructional objectives or purposes,

also considering short-, medium-, and long-term goals. The assessment checklist reveals that most
of the sampled teachers tend to administer traditional forms of assessment, while only few uses the
more authentic types of assessment (see Figure 1). Moreover, a participant admitted that, ‘it is our
[their] routine to give questions that are related to the topics or module for the board exam.’ Aside
from the format, teachers also administer test items that have the same level of difficulty, ‘like board
exam question level of difficulties,’ because their ‘goal in teaching is for our [their] students to pass
the board exam.’

75
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

Figure 1
Bar chart of assessment tool utilization (n = 84)

90 78 77
80 69 70
66
70
Frequency 60 50
50
40 32 28
30 25 23
17 19
20
10
0

Assessment tools

Although STEAM teachers admit that they usually tailor-fit the assessment to mimic licensing
examinations, observation reveals that some of them likewise push boundaries for deeper and
substantive learning to provoke innovation among STEAM learners. As mentioned, we observed
teachers who know the importance and ask HOTS and critical thinking questions during assessment.
They also apply authentic assessment through the application of real-life scenarios and engagement
in practicum activities. It was also evident that STEAM teachers assign roles that challenge students
to be involved and active participants. This scenario is discussed in detail in the next section.

Assignment of roles to students

Role-playing and simulations were detected among the participants, where STEAM learners were
evaluated while assuming various roles and are interacting in real-life setting. For instance, a
midwifery professor emphasized that they initially teach and assess their students how to deliver a
baby through simulation, ‘for birthing, we have an OR [Operating Room]… we have beds for
simulation purposes.’ Similarly, another participant cited the importance of simulation in ensuring
that pre-med students understood the proper use and safety precautions in administering injections,
‘we have simulations on the proper administration of injection… and the correct usage of needles.’
Additional example is provided in Figure 2 that displays a practical exam in cardiopulmonary
resuscitation (CPR) of observed pre-med students. These types of assessment modality require
students to perform specific tasks in which they could demonstrate learned skills, capabilities, and
know-how in an actual field setting.

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 86
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Figure 2
Observed practical exam of pre-med students

On a similar note, one teacher participant stressed that he gave activities (in a professional ethics
course) that would allow students to empathize in different roles in the society and challenge them
to respond or act accordingly.

I gave students real life questions. I throw them questions about our society. For example,
in our professional ethics [class], I give them case studies where they have to react or tell
what they will do in that situation.

A teacher mentioned that their institution provides simulation materials, ‘we have simulation
materials if needed, everything is provided [by the institution],’ thus the students need not purchase
them anymore.

Mounting assessment systems to support instruction

Several time-honoured assessment practices are still being done in HEIs and are being utilised with
authentic assessment tasks, such as the following: 1) ensuring balanced distribution of items in terms
of content, difficulty, and assessment tools; 2) remediation for students having difficulties and
misconceptions; 3) inclusion of questions that provoke HOTS and critical thinking; 4) repetition of
items/activities for mastery of skills; 5) orientation of learners about expectations for the assessment
and how they will be graded; 6) proper monitoring of the assessment implementation; 7) use of
appropriate grouping strategies; and 8) utilization of rubrics.

97
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

It was observed that teachers involve students in a series of learning conditions that are geared to
equip knowledge and skills to achieve learning goals and reach set standards, which are usually the
basis of assessment.

And then for the competencies, I check if an activity requires a difficult output… then for
the next activity, I try to find new competencies that I can develop.

Teachers listen, observe, and examine students’ progress and work during each lesson to see how
students are performing, ‘you can say if your students are not learning or did not understand.’ They
investigate, inquire, refine and seek for indications to understand where students are, (you can
determine what their difficulties are), see what the gaps are, and motivate and remediate students to
succeed in the process (remedy that [difficult] part… and later you will know if they improved or if
what you did actually helped the student). Furthermore, evaluation empowers the teachers to adjust
and adapt their practices, instruction, and assessment to meet the learners’ needs (I will have an idea
if I am too fast or the coverage is too broad; if I need to remove, add or enhance the idea in the
topic).

Technology-enhanced assessments

Our investigations revealed varying practices among STEAM teachers in terms of technology
supported assessment, which is greatly affected by the support and resources of the HEIs. Some
schools have a technology integrated system (we have this e-learning management system) that can
support and deliver assessments beyond contact hours and off-campus. Some teachers also explore
the use of other open access websites and social media (There are faculty members who utilize
websites apart from our learning management system; we also use means like social media
especially Facebook and other learning management system like Edmodo). Additionally, it was
observed that some universities utilize advanced technology to ensure quality of submission (we
have TurnItIn) and to guarantee ethical practices in the dissemination and reporting of grades (they
[faculty members] upload the grades [in a secured school portal] to ensure confidentiality).

Collaborative and reflective assessment process

Collaboration and reflection are two procedures teachers use to innovate their practice (Murray,
2015; Owen & Davis, 2011). Even if finding the time to do so can be quite challenging, these are
present in the practices and are observed in assessing learning in Philippine STEAM education.
Collaboration and reflection exist in the process not just among STEAM teachers but also with
administrators, students, industry partners, and others, ensuring the participation of all stakeholders
in the assessment process. A best practice for instance is in the development of major exams, where
teachers teaching the same subject contribute test items and examine together the difficulty of the
exam, ‘In the departmental final exam, all teachers teaching the subject have to give their
contribution and help determine or assess the difficulty of exam.’ This process also involves the
leadership of the department head and subject coordinators (teachers’ exams are reviewed by
program chairs). Moreover, this strategy allows teachers without background in education to learn
concepts of the assessment processes and the principles of the Bloom’s Taxonomy from peers (we
encourage teachers to create questions using the Bloom's taxonomy… not all teachers are aware of
that... not everybody has a background in education.).

A noteworthy practice of collaboration and reflection is when teachers deliberate grades or actions
that will be given to students (we always have an actual deliberation every term… there is a

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 108
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

committee that facilitates the deliberation of grades, rewards, or punishments that will be given to
students). Teachers also reflect on the results of the assessment and uses findings to ‘determine
areas that students’ find difficult,’ ‘decide whether [they] need to reteach a little before proceeding
to the next,’ and in the process improve their assessment and classroom practices. Teachers also
train students to be reflective practitioners by encouraging them to reflect on the results of their own
assessment (whenever we have quizzes or assessments, I provide feedback so that they could reflect
and find ways to improve).

Discussion
Jobs are increasingly relying on technology and unified STEM skills, which means that it is essential
for students to develop scientific, mathematical, and imaginative dimensions. For this purpose,
STEAM education was crafted to distinctively cater students STEM learning and creativity, and to
enhance problem-solving skills in real-world setting (Perignat & Katz-Buonincontro, 2019). It
emphasizes the significance of incorporating education domain generating skills such as
perspective-taking, problem-solving and creative skills, knowledge transmission through
disciplines, and/or inspiring students to experience and explore new ways of knowing. Successful
STEAM education can empower the human capital for IR4.0, which requires the qualities and
attributes of STEAM-skilled professionals (National Economic and Development Authority, 2017).

The onset of IR4.0 serves as a game-changer as teachers assess skills and competencies that are
challenging (or not conventionally common) to measure, which takes different forms depending on
the fields under STEAM education. Assessment for career readiness legitimizes and even
strengthens several pedagogical strategies such as modelling, immersion and apprenticeship, and
authentic learning as practiced by teachers in higher STEAM education. This is to prepare learners
for various industries, some of which requires heavy procedural fluency, while others necessitate
strategical reasoning and deep cognitive abstractions (Maisiri et al., 2019). Thus, the focus of
assessment is not only to measure intellectual/academic accomplishment, but also to prepare
students in the work environment that awaits them when they graduate. Developing higher order
and critical thinking mindsets motivate students to apply skills which challenges them to evaluate,
deduce, and apply relevant information to come up with innovative solutions and judgements, which
are necessary to be a contributing member of the workforce (Maisiri et al., 2019).

The role of industry partners

Orienting assessment towards aimed career/industry allows teachers to pay attention to what is
essential in STEAM education (Perignat & Katz-Buonincontro, 2019). Students would also be
engaged, actively involved, and provided with individualized attention. It would also demand
appropriate management architecture, support, manpower, curriculum structure and
implementation, and policies from HEIs offering STEAM education. In fact, it highlights the
enabling factor of educators who are going to deliver the instruction – reiterating that best practices
are pushed when the curriculum, instruction, and assessment are constructively aligned and
reinforce each other (Dawson et al., 2013).

Evidently, building stronger relationships with industry partners can help improve learning
outcomes and address the poor employability of graduates, since education will be tailored
according to the skills needed in the workplace (Tiwari & Anjum, 2014). In fact, these partners
provides opportunity for role-playing and simulations; which triggers experiential learning (Russell
& Shepherd, 2010). The experience provided by industry partners can gauge students’ mechanisms
in handling different scenarios that may occur in their prospective fields, and confidence in

119
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

overcoming difficult situations and managing bizarre cases. These practices also provide
opportunities for students to engage in problem-solving that entails them to find creative and noble
ways to do things as knowledge is contextualized and questions are addressed in a more meaningful
fashion. Indeed, a stronger experiential learning focus could facilitate the transformation of fact-
based knowledge about careers/industries into the actual skilled job performances (Helyer, 2015).
Role-playing and simulation help students examine problems, assess decisions and actions, and
connect lessons learned in the classroom to real-life situations (Russell & Shepherd, 2010); which
also require support from the institution.

However, although the industry partners clearly play a major role in assessing STEAM students,
especially during practicum, at present, there is no clear parameters that maps partnership between
HEIs and industry cohorts. Hence, we suggest that CHED crafts a memorandum order that mandates
all HEIs to develop a standardize guidelines that could properly direct industry partners in assessing
STEAM students and establish their role in STEAM education.

Technology and assessment process

Technology-enhanced assessment is critical in engendering the different learning ecosystems in the

face of IR4.0. As challenging as it could be, based on the affordances and constraints in each of the
Philippine HEI, data from the investigation revealed how it could also support student learning.
Technology-enhanced assessment has the power to provide immediate feedback on students’
learning progress that would facilitate flexibility on the part of the teacher (and students) in terms
of what the students are learning or where they are having difficulty at, and make necessary
decisions on how to proceed with the courses or programs (Northcote et al., 2017; Schmauss, 2015).
It can also increase the productivity of teachers by automating mechanical tasks like computation
of grades. Capitalizing on the use of technology and utilizing it to create assessment systems could
facilitate the alignment of assessment with Philippine Higher Education PSGs (Policies, Standards,
and Guidelines) to enhance curriculum and instruction.

Evidently, our investigations revealed a spectrum of relevant assessment practices among STEAM
teachers. But it is important to note that higher education STEAM teachers tend to keen on more
traditional assessment forms than more authentic ones (Figure 1), probably because of the lack of
appropriate training in implementing other types of assessment, and the scarcity of resources and
available technology. In this regard, HEIs should allocate enough budget that could promote, assist,
and sustain STEAM teachers’ access to updated and pertinent resources, technology, training, and
information that could potentially improve assessment literacy, practices, and efficiency. On a
similar note, another observable reason why teachers favor more traditional forms of assessment is
their inclination to pattern assessments in the licensure examinations that students will take when
they graduate, which is paper-and-pencil in nature. Thus, the Professional Regulation Commission
(PRC) of the Philippines and other licencing body should regularly update the landscape of the
assessment process they implement to match the demands of the changes in education and in the
industry, by developing and implementing a research-based quality standards framework in
professional assessment.

The implementation of STEAM Education in HEIs in the Philippines is still in its nascent stages.
Therefore, the transition from traditional to a more STEAM-oriented assessment will draw from the
time-tested assessment practices that have been existent and pushing for a broader set of tools that
would allow documentation of students’ learning outcomes and mechanisms of knowing what
students know. Analysis of students’ growth on these assessments permits teachers and students to
reflect on what students have learned, to build students’ strengths, and to fill in any breach on

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 10
12
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

students’ knowledge and skills (McKevitt, 2016). This scheme guarantees an inclusive and
reflective method of decision making among faculty members, and consideration of relevant
empirical information and moral bases for decisions. Thus, to better promote collaborative and
reflective assessment practices, it is suggested that HEIs encourage and support teachers’
communities of practice in developing and sharing innovative assessment practices, through
monetary and promotional incentives.

Lastly, although we expect variations in the assessment practices of the STEAM teachers we
observed, there should be harmony in STEAM assessment among HEIs in the country to ensure that
graduates meet the standards necessary to join the future workforce. At present, there is no
assessment indicators for higher STEAM education that serves as blueprint for STEAM teachers in
conducting assessment, which explains the broad diversity in practice. Accordingly, the CHED
should create a governing body that at the national level, will define the vision, strategies, and plans
that would standardize, regulate, and monitor STEAM assessment practices.

Consequences to COVID-19 crisis

The unforeseen spread of COVID-19 compelled educational institutions to deliver classes in a

flexible modality and explore alternatives that could assist instruction in a non-face-to-face modality
(Scull et al., 2020). This abrupt change necessitates major shifts in assessment culture and adds
another dimension in the assessment practices of teachers in higher STEAM education. Universities
and higher education alike face massive challenges concerning how to operate efficiently in the so
called ‘new normal,’ including assessing learning (Deepika, 2020). Furthermore, the immediate
demand for flexible learning, directed teachers to hurriedly alter their practices, accountabilities,
and assessment routines. Educational sectors in many parts of the world strategize on how account
teaching and learning through meaningful assessment practices during the pandemic (Scull et al.,
2020). Consequently, we went back to our findings and highlighted STEAM practices in the area of
assessment that stakeholders can consider to ensure the continuity of education and quality learning
transfer amidst COVID19.

Our findings indicate that assessment in the Philippine higher STEAM education is highly tailored
for a set-up with physical meetings and does not account for a flexible learning modality. The
delivery of education in the new normal assumes a certain level of student independence (Deepika,
2020), which many STEAM teachers did not originally account for. Moreover, the data that we have
indicates that many STEAM teachers lack the mechanisms and preparation to conduct evaluation,
provide feedback, and offer formative guidance to students in a flexible learning scenario. These
rapid changes require assessment practices of teachers to presume that they have already established
particular competencies and digital technology know-how. Lack thereof might lead to failure in
attaining required learning standards and struggle in developing new knowledge and skills through
self-paced learning among students (Abdullah et al., 2020).

As such, we highly encourage the CHED and HEIs to provide appropriate training and support to
enable STEAM teachers to function in various learning environments, especially in a flexible one.
Furthermore, HEIs should invest in technologies and infrastructures that could support learning and
the implementation of assessment, even when physical meetings are not possible, and ensure quality
education delivery in different environments. Additionally, HEIs should take into account that upon
return to the ‘old normal,’ teachers may also have difficulty assessing students’ learning levels to
identify whether students met the standards, if there are any learning losses or gaps resulting from
HEI closure, and essential corrective actions undertake (Abdullah et al., 2020). Such assessments
may be crutial in apprising learning process, how to proceed with instruction, and boosting the

11
13
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

learning of those who lag behind because of the crisis (Turner et al., 2020). This necessitates HEIs
to prepare in advance and depending on the strategies to flexible learning and school reopening
procedure, may need to conceptualize and utilize modifications on assessment structures.

Conclusion and recommendations

This study explored and identified the common and best assessment practices employed by STEAM
teachers from different HEIs in the Philippines. More particularly, these assessment practices,
utilizing both traditional and authentic tools and strategies, were categorized as readiness for career
or industry, systems to support instruction, and collaborative and reflective processes. The results
highlight the effective use of perennial and established assessment practices in monitoring and
evaluating students’ learning and academic progress; describes how STEAM teachers collaborate,
reflect and utilize real-life situations, stakeholders’ participation, role-playing, simulations, and
technology-enhanced tools and techniques for the different purposes of assessment; and emphasize
STEAM teachers’ capability in utilizing assessment information, like students’ scores,
misconceptions, and difficulties, to address academic challenges and to enhance pedagogical
practices. However, our findings also hinted that STEAM teachers do not have the preparation
required to incorporate assessment in a flexible learning environment brought by the COVID19
pandemic.

This study showcases ‘best practices,’ which STEAM educators can use as benchmark to nurture
quality assessment delivery and assessment literacy. Furthermore, based on our findings, we
suggested several recommendations that could potentially improve and standardize assessment in
STEAM education, assist in assuring that assessment practices measure skills that students need in
the technology-driven industry, and facilitate quality STEAM education despite an international
crisis like COVID19. This mechanisms and programs could also offer a perspective in crafting and
recommending national and international policies on assessment literacy and standards among
HEIs’ STEAM educators.

The findings of this study may inspire the STEAM education community to develop notions
regarding best practices in the assessment process that will successfully harmonize the roles of each
stakeholders; and may serve as basis for future research studies aiming to motivate teachers to
innovate the way assessment is done. This will provide avenues in measuring and developing
innovative assessment processes and practices among educators in order to realize the outcomes of
STEAM disciplines in terms of the new teaching standards. Lastly, this paper could serve as basis
for other countries, particularly those who have similar circumstances with the Philippines, for
exploring assessment practices in higher STEAM education and for crafting guidelines and policies
that could help ensure that assessment gauges quality education that meets the demand of IR4.0.

Limitations and future research

The results of this study reflect assessment practices and highlights best practices in Philippine
higher STEAM education. Moreover, we offer policy and program suggestions for the improvement
of the assessment practices that we have identified. Nevertheless, these results must be interpreted
with care and some limitations should pondered. For instance, the practices were documented based
on highly qualitative data, and thus, does not mirror quantity or frequency of use. Furthermore, the
associations between the factors affecting assessment that we have discussed were mainly supported
by our observations and previous studies, which are currently not supported with statistical analysis.
Hence, we suggest that researches should be done to quantitatively confirm our findings.
Additionally, our analysis echoed practices that takes STEAM as a clustering of disciplines and does

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 12
14
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

not indicate features specific to individual STEAM areas. Investigating the unique assessment
practices in each STEAM discipline might further enrich our results. Lastly, future research may
also consider looking at the entire higher education assessment practices, to give a better view of
assessment and determine how it can be used to prepare the future workforce in IR4.0.

References
Abdullah, M., Husin, N. A., & Haider, A. (2020). Development of post-pandemic COVID19 higher
education resilience framework in Malaysia. Archives of Business Research.
https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.85.8321
Al-Thani, S. J., Abdelmoneim, A., Daoud, K., Cherif, A., & Moukarzel, D. (2014). Developing,
implementing and improving learning outcomes assessment in Qatar’s public higher
education. Near and Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education, 2014(3), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.5339/nmejre.2014.3
Almeida, F., & Simoes, J. (2019). The role of serious games, gamification and industry 4.0 tools in
the education 4.0 paradigm. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(2), 120–136.
https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.554469
Asian Development Bank. (2018). Reducing Youth Not in Employment, Education, or Training
through JobStart Philippines (Issue 87). https://www.adb.org/publications/reducing-youth-
not-in-employment-education-philippines
Aziz Hussin, A. (2018). Education 4.0 Made simple: Ideas for teaching. International Journal of
Education and Literacy Studies, 6(3), 92–98. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.6n.3p.92
Banta, T. W., & Blaich, C. (2011). Closing the assessment loop. Change, 43(1), 22–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.538642
Chase, A. M., Ross, B., & Robbie, D. (2017). Improving digital assessment practice: A case study
of a cross-institutional initiative. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice,
14(2), 1–18.
Commission on Higher Education. (2019). 2019 Higher Education Facts and Figures.
https://ched.gov.ph/2019-higher- education-facts-and-figures/
Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Boud, D. J., Hall, M., Molloy, E. K., Bennett, S., & Joughin, G. (2013).
Assessment might dictate the curriculum, but what dictates assessment? Teaching and
Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 107–111. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.1.107
Deepika, N. (2020). The impact of online learning during COVID-19: students’ and teachers’
perspective. The International Journal of Indian Psychology.
DiCerbo, K. (2014). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2014.931836
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and reliability in social science research. Education Research and
Perspectives, 38(1), 105–123.
English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. In International Journal
of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
Fook, C. Y., & Sidhu, G. K. (2014). Assessment practices in higher education in United States.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 299–306.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1427
Hejase, H. J., & Tabch, H. (2012). Ethics education: An assessment case of the American University
of science and technology – Lebanon. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern
Finance and Management, 5(2), 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538391211233416
Helyer, R. (2015). Learning through reflection: the critical role of reflection in work-based
learning (WBL). Journal of Work-Applied Management, 7(1), 2205–2062.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jwam-10-2015-003

13
15
 Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 17 [2020], Iss. 5, Art. 18

Herro, D., Quigley, C., Andrews, J., & Delacruz, G. (2017). Co-Measure: developing an assessment
for student collaboration in STEAM activities. International Journal of STEM Education,
4(26), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0094-z
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Maisiri, W., Darwish, H., & van Dyk, L. (2019). An investigation of Industry 4.0 skills
requirements. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 30(3), 90–105.
Maki, P. L. (2010). Assessing for Learning: Building a Sustainable Commitment across the
Institution (2nd ed.). Stylus Publishing, LLC.
McKevitt, C. T. (2016). Engaging students with self-assessment and tutor feedback to improve
performance and support assessment capacity. Journal of University Teaching and Learning
Practice, 13(1).
Miles, M. B., Huberman, M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis A Methods
Sourcebook 3rd edition. In SAGE Publications. SAGE Publications, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4622(98)00172-0
Morales, M. P. E., Abulon, E. R., Anito, J. C. J., Avilla, R. A., Palisoc, C. P., Elipane, L. E., &
Casilla, N. A. (2018). TPACK in Philippine STEAM Education. Philippine Normal University.
Murray, E. (2015). Improving teaching through collaborative reflective teaching cycles.
Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 7(3), 23–29.
https://doi.org/10.1080/24727466.2015.11790343
National Economic and Development Authority. (2017). Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022.
In National Economic and Development Authority. https://doi.org/10 July 2012
Northcote, M., Morton, L., Williams, A., Kilgour, P., & Hattingh, S. S. (2017). Transforming
assessment feedback design: Students’ responses to adaptively-released assessment feedback
(ARAF) strategies. Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness, 7(1–2), 41–68.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jasseinsteffe.7.1-2.0041
Owen, S., & Davis, G. (2011). Catering for student diversity: Building academic skills in graduate
attributes learning and assessment opportunities through collaborative work. Journal of
University Teaching & Learning Practice, 8(2), 1–11.
Perignat, E., & Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2019). STEAM in practice and research: An integrative
literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 31–43.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002
Plata, S. (2018). Minding the Gap: Exploring assessment education in CHED’s teacher preparation
program in the context of PPST and DepEd’s assessment reform. DLSU Research Congress
2018. https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/pdf/conferences/research-congress-
proceedings/2018/lli-01.pdf
Rosaroso, R. C., & Rosaroso, N. A. (2015). Performance-based Assessment in Selected Higher
Education Institutions in Cebu City , Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary
Research, 3(4), 72–77.
Russell, C., & Shepherd, J. (2010). Online role-play environments for higher education. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 992–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2009.01048.x
Salmon, G. (2019). May the fourth be with you: Creating Education 4.0. Journal of Learning for
Development (JL4D), 6(1), 95–115. https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/352
Savage, J., & Healy, J. (2019). Creative teaching design in STEM: Using graduate learning
outcomes to distribute students’ existing knowledge in first-year biology practical work
groups. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 16(3), 1–13.
Schmauss, S. (2015). Sustainability assessment tools in higher education institutions: Mapping
Trends and Good Practices Around the World. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 332.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.049

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol17/iss5/18 14
16
 Sarmiento et al.: Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education

Scull, J., Phillips, M., Sharma, U., & Garnier, K. (2020). Innovations in teacher education at the
time of COVID19: an Australian perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1802701
Thomas, G., Martin, D., & Pleasants, K. (2011). Using self- and peer-assessment to enhance
students’ future-learning in higher education . Journal of University Teaching Learning
Practice, 8(1), 1–17.
Tiwari, R., & Anjum, B. (2014). Role of higher education institutions and industry academia
collaboration for skill enhancement. Journal of Business Management & Social Sciences
Research (JBM&SSR), 3(11), 27–34.
Turner, K. L., Hughes, M., & Presland, K. (2020). Learning loss, a potential challenge for transition
to undergraduate study following COVID19 school disruption. Journal of Chemical
Education. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00705
Webb, M., & Gibson, D. (2015). Technology enhanced assessment in complex collaborative
settings. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9413-
5

15
17