Suwara: Paglalantad ng Karanasan ng mga Guro sa Pagtataya sa Pagpapaunlad ng Kasanayan sa Pagsulat ng mga Nahihirapang Mag-Aaral
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21597111Keywords:
pagtatayang formatibo, kasanayan sa pagsulat, nahihirapang mag-aaral, karanasan ng guro, Filipino 7, penomenolohiyaAbstract
Sinuri ng pag-aaral na ito ang mga karanasan ng mga guro sa pagtataya bilang instrumento sa pagpapaunlad ng kasanayan sa pagsulat ng mga nahihirapang mag-aaral sa Filipino 7. Gumamit ito ng kwalitatibong Transcendental Phenomenological na disenyo. Sampung guro mula sa anim na pampublikong paaralan sa Columbio, Sultan Kudarat ang pinili sa pamamagitan ng purposive sampling. Nangalap ng datos gamit ang balidado at pilot-tested na semi-structured interview guide; ang mga panayam ay inirekord, itinranskrayb, sinuri sa pamamagitan ng thematic analysis, at pinagtibay sa pamamagitan ng member checking at audit trail. Lumitaw sa karanasan ng mga guro ang apat na pangunahing tema: mga hamon sa kognitibo at mekaniks ng pagsulat, sikolohikal na hadlang, estratehiya sa pagtataya at pagtuturo, at mga salik na nakaaapekto sa pagtataya. Ang mga kontekstuwal na salik ay kinabibilangan ng suporta ng stakeholders, kalagayan ng silid-aralan, administratibong pasanin, kakulangan sa kagamitan, at pagkakaiba-iba ng kakayahan ng mga mag-aaral. Tinitingnan ng mga guro ang kanilang hinaharap bilang mga facilitator ng pagkatuto na patuloy na magpapaunlad ng assessment competence, gagamit ng teknolohiya, makikipagkolaborasyon, at tutuon sa mas mabuting resulta ng pagkatuto. Iminungkahi ang maagang interbensyon, integrasyon ng pagbasa at pagsulat, scaffolded at authentic na gawain, sistematikong pidbak, propesyonal na pagsasanay, sapat na oras at resources, digital tools, kolaborasyon ng paaralan at komunidad, at lokalisadong materyales. Ipinakikita ng pag-aaral na ang epektibong pagtataya sa pagsulat ay isang tuloy-tuloy, makatao, at kolektibong prosesong nangangailangan ng angkop na pedagohiya at matatag na institusyonal na suporta.
References
Agtarap, H. J., Januto, A. C., Aglibot, K. A., & Toquero, C. M. (2024). Assessment strategies and challenges of teachers in evaluating students during online learning. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 4(2), Article ep2418. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14863
Andrade, H. L., & Brookhart, S. M. (2020). Classroom assessment as the co-regulation of learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 350–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571992
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications.
Calkins, L. M. (1994). The art of teaching writing (New ed.). Heinemann.
Chen, J. (2022). Strategy instruction and rubric-referenced assessment: Enhancing EFL students’ writing competence and confidence. Assessing Writing, 51, Article 100592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100592
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cuesta, L., & Fernández, M. (2022). Scaffolded learning and formative evaluation in the L2 writing process. System, 105, Article 102710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102710
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2024). Teacher beliefs about writing instruction and assessment: A foundational catalyst for student motivation and literacy growth. Educational Psychologist, 59(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2023.2285321
Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Heinemann Educational Books.
Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy (D. Carr, Trans.). Northwestern University Press.
Jackaria, P. M., & Caballes, D. G. (2022). Equipping teachers to adapt: A look into teachers’ professional development programs in times of COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Humanities and Education Development, 4(4), 18–22.
Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Newbury House.
Karaman, P. (2024). Effects of using rubrics in self-assessment with instructor feedback on pre-service teachers’ academic performance, self-regulated learning and perceptions of self-assessment. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39, 2551–2574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00782-y
Kileri, A., & Listyani, L. (2021). The power of balanced correction and constructive feedback in EFL writing classrooms. Language and Language Teaching Journal, 24(2), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v24i2.3364
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Mahmood, A., Iqbal, M., & Khan, S. (2022). Professional development workshops: Empowering teachers in rubric construction and formative evaluation of compositions. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18(2), 884–897.
Majid, M. A. A., Othman, M., Mohamad, S. F., Lim, S. A. H., & Yusof, A. (2017). Piloting for interviews in qualitative research: Operationalization and lessons learnt. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(4), 1073–1080. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i4/2916
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Moses, R. N., & Mohamad, M. (2019). Challenges faced by ESL learners in vocabulary and grammar in writing compositions and its reflection on summative assessment. Creative Education, 10(12), 2749–2758. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1012198
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. SAGE Publications.
Murray, D. M. (1972). Teach writing as a process not product. The Leaflet, 71(3), 11–14.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Walls, J., & Johnston, S. (2023). Bridging teacher training with student grades: How professional development in writing assessment yields higher literacy outcomes. Reading Research Quarterly, 58(2), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.492
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
