Teacher Assessment Literacy and Learner Outcomes in Bodega Elementary School
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I2.115Keywords:
Assessment Literacy, Assessment Practices, Bodega Elementary School, Learner Outcomes, Mixed Methods, Professional Development, Quality Education, Teacher Assessment LiteracyAbstract
This study examined teacher assessment literacy and learner outcomes at Bodega Elementary School, with emphasis on teachers’ assessment literacy and practices, learners’ perceptions and attitudes toward assessment, and the influence of teaching and assessment practices on learner outcomes. The study was guided by Constructivist Learning Theory, Sociocultural Theory, Feedback Intervention Theory, Self-Regulated Learning Theory, and the researcher-developed Integrated Assessment Literacy Theory. A mixed-methods design was employed using questionnaires administered through census sampling to three teachers and 119 Grade 4 to Grade 6 learners. Data were analyzed using weighted mean and percentage. Findings revealed a high overall level of teacher assessment literacy at 77.78%, although differences were observed across grade levels. Learners generally reported positive assessment experiences, with an overall weighted mean of 3.41, and strongly positive attitudes toward assessment, with an overall mean of 3.62. Teachers frequently employed assessment practices, obtaining an overall mean of 4.43, while teaching practices received an overall mean of 3.72, indicating a positive perceived influence on learner outcomes. Despite these favorable results, areas for improvement remained in the transparency of marking criteria, consistency in the use and interpretation of assessment tools, alignment of assessment with classroom and real-world applications, and opportunities for greater learner participation. The study concluded that teachers generally demonstrated strong assessment literacy and regularly used assessment to support instruction and learner progress. It recommended strengthening professional development in assessment standards, interpretation of results, development of specifications and rubrics, clearer feedback and marking criteria, and greater use of collaborative, hands-on, and real-world assessment activities. The study supports Sustainable Development Goal 4: Quality Education by promoting improved assessment practices, evidence-informed instruction, and enhanced learning opportunities. Its sustainability impact lies in strengthening continuous instructional improvement, professional competence, and communication among teachers, learners, parents, school leaders, and other educational stakeholders.
References
Arnold, J. (2022). Prioritising students in assessment for learning: A scoping review of research on students’ classroom experience. Review of Education, 10(3), e3366. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3366 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3366
Brown, G. T. L. (2022). Student conceptions of assessment: Regulatory responses to our practices. ECNU Review of Education, 5(1), 116–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211007869 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211007869
Craig-Hare, J. (2022). Survey sampling. In B. B. Frey (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of research design (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071812082.n616 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071812082.n616
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2025). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research-4-269004
Cui, Y., & Zhang, H. (2022). Integrating teacher data literacy with TPACK: A self-report study based on a novel framework for teachers’ professional development. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 966575. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.966575 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.966575
Department of Education. (2026, June 4). DO 015, s. 2026: Revised guidelines on classroom assessment, grading system, and awards and recognition for the K to 12 Basic Education Program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2026/06/04/june-4-2026-do-015-s-2026-revised-guidelines-on-classroom-assessment-grading-system-and-awards-and-recognition-for-the-k-to-12-basic-education-program/
Estaji, M., Banitalebi, Z., & Brown, G. T. L. (2024). The key competencies and components of teacher assessment literacy in digital environments: A scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 141, 104497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104497 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104497
Giraldo, F. (2021). Language assessment literacy and teachers’ professional development: A review of the literature. Profile: Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 23(2), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v23n2.90533 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v23n2.90533
Goodfellow, L. T. (2023). An overview of survey research. Respiratory Care, 68(9), 1309–1313. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11041 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11041
Illowsky, B., & Dean, S. (2023). Introductory statistics 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/introductory-statistics-2e/pages/1-introduction DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/9789815123135123010002
Kang, M., & Lam, R. (2024). Understanding university English instructors’ assessment literacy: A formative assessment perspective. Language Testing in Asia, 14, Article 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-024-00323-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-024-00323-y
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
Latif, M. W. (2021). Exploring tertiary EFL practitioners’ knowledge base component of assessment literacy: Implications for teacher professional development. Language Testing in Asia, 11, Article 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-021-00130-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-021-00130-9
Lee, J., Alonzo, D., Beswick, K., Abril, J. M. V., Chew, A. W., & Oo, C. Z. (2024). Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 36, 145–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-024-09435-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-024-09435-8
Lei, W., & Lei, Z. (2026). Formative assessment literacy: A systematic review. Language Testing in Asia, 16, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-025-00418-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-025-00418-0
Li, Z., Yan, Z., Chan, K. K. Y., Zhan, Y., & Guo, W. Y. (2023). The role of a professional development program in improving primary teachers’ formative assessment literacy. Teacher Development, 27(4), 447–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2023.2223595 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2023.2223595
Malabo, E. (2024). Assessment literacy of basic education teachers in a private institution. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(7), 792–799. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12665985
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025). Unlocking high-quality teaching. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f5b82176-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/f5b82176-en
Pastore, S. (2023). Teacher assessment literacy: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1217167. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1217167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1217167
Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education (G.-A. Roberts, Trans.). Grossman Publishers. https://books.google.com/books/about/To_Understand_is_to_Invent.html?id=jT6cAAAAMAAJ
Tandas, J. B. (2025). Classroom assessment practices of practice teachers and mentoring support of cooperating teachers: Inputs for a school-based enhancement program in the Philippines. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(12), 66–96. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.12.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.12.4
United Nations. (2024). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Xuan, Q., Cheung, A., & Sun, D. (2022). The effectiveness of formative assessment for enhancing reading achievement in K–12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 990196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.990196 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.990196
Yan, Z., & Pastore, S. (2022). Are teachers literate in formative assessment? The development and validation of the Teacher Formative Assessment Literacy Scale. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, 101183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101183
Yan, Z., Panadero, E., Wang, X., & Zhan, Y. (2023). A systematic review on students’ perceptions of self-assessment: Usefulness and factors influencing implementation. Educational Psychology Review, 35, Article 81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09799-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09799-1
Zhang, H., Ge, S., & Mohd Saad, M. R. B. (2024). Formative assessment in K–12 English as a foreign language education: A systematic review. Heliyon, 10(10), e31367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31367 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31367
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jenny M. Trangia (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
