1

NAT Overview and 2012 Test Results

Department of Education National Education Testing and Research Center

DEPARTMENT

OF EDUCATION

1. What is the NAT?

The National Achievement Test (NAT) is a Philippine-made standardized test designed to determine pupils/students achievement level, strengths and weaknesses in five key curricular subject areas at the end of the school year.

2. What is the purpose of the NAT?

The NAT was developed to measure what pupils/students in Grade Three, Grade Six and Fourth Year know and can do in five subject areas: Science, Mathematics, English, Filipino, and HeKaSi (Heograpiya, Kasaysayan at Sibika) in elementary and Araling Panlipunan in secondary level. Specifically, the test aims to:

1.

provide empirical information on the achievement level of pupils/students to serve as guide for policy makers, administrators, curriculum planners, supervisors, principals and teachers in their respective courses of action.

2. identify and analyze variations on achievement levels across the years by region, division, school and other variables 3. determine the rate of improvement in basic education with respect to individual schools within certain time frames.

3. Who are the target clienteles of the NAT in 2013?

Grade 3 - public schools (census) - Madrasah schools Grade 6 - public and private schools (census) Year 4 - public and private schools (census)

4. What is the coverage of the NAT and how many test items does it comprise?
TEST NAT G3 NAT G6 1. Science NAT Y4 1. Science

Subject Area Coverage 1. Science

2. Mathematics
3. English 4. Filipino

2. Mathematics
3. English 4. Filipino 5. HeKaSi

2. Mathematics
3. English 4. Filipino 5. Araling Panlipunan Critical Thinking Skills (20 items)

Number of Items Per Subject

Total Number of Items 5

30
120

40
200

60 (Except for Math, 50)

310

Planning the Test

5. How is the NAT developed?

Developing the Table of Specifications

Item Writing

Test Assembly and Review of Test Items

Test Development Process

No Reject
Items Useful

Pilot Testing or Try Out of the Test (at least 2 forms of the final test)

Item Analysis

Validity/Reliability

Yes Organize final form of the test

Norming

Preparation of the Test Manual/Examiners Handbook

6. What features characterize the NAT?

A multiple-choice test A sampling of competencies intended for the whole year coverage A standardized test with mostly moderately difficult items Anchored on Blooms Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives / Dimensions High-Ordered Thinking Skills (HOTS) The performance of an examinee is compared to the performance of a national populace. The rating is expressed in percentage score or percent of correct responses.
7

7. What is the rationale of DepEd in administering the NAT in Grade Three, Grade Six and Fourth Year?
The NAT is a system-based assessment specifically designed to gauge learning outcomes across target levels in identified periods of basic education. NAT-Grade Three - Pursuant to Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP), it serves as midassessment of elementary education. NAT-Grade Six - It serves as terminal exit assessment of elementary education and as measurement of incoming first year students readiness for high school (pursuant to DepED Order No. 5, s. 2005). NAT-Fourth Year - It serves as exit assessment of the secondary level of basic education (pursuant to DepED Order No. 5, s. 2005).
8

8. What information is derived from the NAT Certificate of Rating (NAT-COR)? Raw scores obtained by an examinee five subjects are reported in a table alongside with the percentage scores.
Total test scores for raw and percentage scores are revealed at the bottom part of the table. A quartile distribution of the obtained of mean percentage scores is provided to guide end-users in interpreting test results.

10

Percentage of Correct Responses (PCR) per learning competency by subject area is likewise presented to have a glimpse on the performance of the pupil/student in every skill measured in the test.
10

Facsimile of the COR for NATGrade 6

11

(Back Portion)

12

9. How are the NAT scores reported and interpreted to each examinee?

13

The NAT results are interpreted in quartile distribution of Mean Percentage Scores (MPS) to indicate the percentage of correctly answered items in a test or subject area proficiencies. It is also used in classifying test performances of schools, divisions, regions and the total country. For example: Performance of School X School X has overall Mean Percentage Score (MPS) of 52%. It is classified as upper average in school performance. School X has MPS of 80% in English. It has superior performance in English.
Quartile Distribution 76-100% 51-75% 26-50% 13 0-25% Descriptive Equivalent Superior Upper Average Lower Average Poor

10. How is the Mean Percentage Score (MPS) interpreted?

The MPS indicates the ratio between the number of correctly answered items and the total number of test questions or the percentage of correctly answered items in a test.

14

For instance, a 50 MPS in one subject area would mean that an examinee correctly answered 20 out of 40 test items (NAT-Grade 6).

On the other hand, a 60 MPS for a total score means that an examinee correctly answered 6 out of 10 questions in the test.

14

15

11. Is there a passing score in the NAT? None.

It uses the MPS to indicate the percentage of correctly answered items in a test.
The computation of grades in school, however, is done very differently from the NAT. (Refer to DepED Order No. 73, s. 2012, Guidelines on the Assessment and Rating of Learning Outcomes under the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum; www.deped.gov.ph)

15

16

16

12. Does an MPS below 75 mean that the examinees failed the test?
No. An MPS below 75 would mean that the examinees test performance does not belong to the upper average of the total number of test-takers.

17

The standard criterion set by the Department in terms of achievement level is 75% which is the national target.

17

18

The Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT

Department of Education National Education Testing and Research Center

The National Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT Subtests

70 60 MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

19

50

40

30

20

10

0 RC-ENGLISH SY2007-2008 SY2008-2009 SY2009-2010 SY2010-2011 SY2011-2012 59.03 59.37 61.74 56.13 54.42 RC-FILIPINO 56.96 54.76 61.25 62.06 58.61

GRAMMAR ENGLISH 58.15 62.93 61.94 59.38 57.23

GRAMMAR FILIPINO 48.24 58.15 63.94 64 56.97

SCIENCE 56.13 60.51 61.68 53.48 55.15

MATH 62.8 62.4 65.09 64.15 59.87

OVERALL 57.42 59.3 62.44 59.58 56.98

On the average, the Grade 3 children in public schools obtained an MPS of 56.98 in the 2012 NAT. This finding is a retrogression in relation to the previous years performance.

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level In Overall Test

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Absolutely No Mastery Very Low Low Average Moving Towards Mastery SY2011-2012 Closely Approximating Mastery Mastered

20

SY2009-2010

SY2010-2011

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL

SY2009-2010

SY2010-2011

SY2011-2012

MPS

DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT

n
34,803 284,441 651,190 725,775

%
1.78 14.57 33.36 37.18

n
19,379 239,391 632,856 749,781

%
0.98 12.08 31.94 37.84

n
11,972 207,286 588,707 757,484

%
0.60 10.40 29.53 38.00

96 - 100% Mastered 86 - 95% Closely Approximating Mastery 66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 35 - 65% Average

15 - 34% Low
5 - 14% Very Low 0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery N=

252,453
3,138 354 1,952,154

12.93
0.16 0.02

335,415
4,243 162 1,981,227

16.93
0.21 0.01

423,627
4,165 154 1,993,395

21.25
0.21 0.01

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level by Subject Area in the 2012 NAT G3
45.00 40.00

21

35.00
30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Absolutely No Mastery RC - English Very Low RC - Filipino Low Average Moving Towards Closely Mastery Approximating Mastery Grammar Filipino Science Mastered Mathematics

Grammar English

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION EXAMINEES RC - English RC - Filipino 1.02 9.08 25.29 40.68 21.90 1.54 10.86 29.01 40.56 16.51 Grammar Grammar English Filipino 10.69 12.59 21.80 26.23 20.18 6.35 11.07 25.53 32.48 18.21 Science 1.97 13.96 27.31 27.70 22.21 Mathematics 7.65 17.98 22.81 26.59 20.18

96 - 100% Mastered 86 - 95% Closely Approximating Mastery 66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 35 - 65% Average 15 - 34% Low

5 - 14% Very Low

0 - 4% Absolutely No Mastery TOTAL

1.94
0.09 100.00

1.42
0.10 100.00

6.35
2.16 100.00

4.84
1.51 100.00

6.33
0.52 100.00

4.35
0.44 100.00

The Regional Performance of Grade Three Pupils in the NAT Subtests

22

OVERALL
80 70 60 68.43 50 40 30 20 57.28 53.27 62.03 56.23 64.12 54.13 54.22 50.22 60.25 60.94 54.81 62.19 51.91 54.50 74.47

45.17

10
0

CARAGA Region had the best performance in the NAT Grade 3 among the regions.

Most Improved Region in the NAT Grade Three (National)

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

23

2010-2011

2011-2012

SCHOOL YEAR I 20102011 20112012 II III IV-A IV-B V

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CAR ARM CAR M AGA

NCR

60.94 56.47 61.83 61.48 64.49 54.96 57.12 50.91 72.53 65.48 63.00 55.05 64.41 51.47 52.13 55.98 75.70

53.27 57.28 62.03 56.23 64.12 54.13 54.22 50.22 68.43 60.25 60.94 54.81 62.19 45.17 51.91 54.50 74.47

Regions II and III are the most improved regions in the NAT Grade 3.

Most Improved Region by Cluster (Cluster 1)

80 70

24

60
50 40 30 20 10 0 III IV-A V SY 2010-2011 VI SY 2011-2012 VII VIII NCR

SCHOOL YEAR 2010-2011 2011-2012

CLUSTER 1 - MPS III 61.83 62.03 IV-A 61.48 56.23 V 54.96 54.13 VI 57.12 54.22 VII 50.91 50.22 VIII 72.53 68.43 NCR 51.47 45.17

Cluster 1 Large Size Region (100,001 examinees and above) * Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions

Region III is the most improved region in the 2012 NAT Grade 3.

Most Improved Region by Cluster (Cluster 2)

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 I X XI XII IX ARMM

25

SY 2010-2011

SY 2011-2012

SCHOOL YEAR 2010-2011 2011-2012

I 60.94 53.27

X 63.00 60.94

CLUSTER 2 - MPS XI XII 55.05 64.41 54.81 62.19

IX 65.48 60.25

ARMM 55.98 54.5

Cluster 2 Medium Size Region (75,000 100,000 examinees) * Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions All Cluster 2 regions had retrogressed in NAT Grade 3 performance in the 2012 when compared with the previous year.

Most Improved Region by Cluster (Cluster 3)

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 II IV-B SY 2010-2011 CAR SY 2011-2012 CARAGA

26

SCHOOL YEAR 2010-2011 2011-2012

II 56.47 57.28

CLUSTER 3 - MPS IV-B CAR 64.49 52.13 64.12 51.91

CARAGA 75.70 74.47

Cluster 3 Small Size Region (74,999 examinees and below) * Based on the SY 2010-2011 clustering of regions Region II is the most improved region in 2012 NAT Grade 3.

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G3 Performance*

Area Variable Learning Environment 1.School Location 2.Science Laboratory 3.Computer Laboratory 4.Electricity Supply 5.Internet Access/Connection 6.EDQ #3 Reading materials/aids Others: 1.Type of Public School 2.Class Size 3.Class Shift 4.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in RC-English 5.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in English Grammar 6.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Science 7.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Mathematics 8.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in RC-Filipino 9.Pupil-Textbook Ratio in Filipino Grammar School Header Variables: 1.NAT Review 2.Yearly NAT Results 3.Obtaining the NAT Results 4.NAT as an ECARP Evaluation Strategy Category with Best Performance Outside the town proper With Science Laboratory Without Computer Lab. With Electricity Without Internet Access Textbooks Multi-grade Schools Below 30 One Shift 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 With NAT review Yearly tracking of NAT results Division Office Effective as assessment to ECARP

27

MPS

61.43 61.24 60.58 60.61 60.63 59.31 60.33 60.58 59.34 58.02 62.13 60.80 61.38 61.98 60.66 60.57 60.86 60.66 60.99

SchoolRelated Variables

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G3 Performance*

Area Student Factor Variable 1. Gender 2. EDQ #9 How Much do you like Mathematics

28
MPS 59.19 59.36

Category with Best Performance

Female I like it very much

Teacher Factor

EDQ Variables 1. EDQ #2 Reading books in the Library 2. EDQ #4 Reading Class in English and Filipino 3. EDQ #7 Science class experiment/observation 4. EDQ #8 Assessment Strategies 5. EDQ #10 Class Observation of Principals
EDQ Variables: 1. EDQ #5 Number of Children in the Family 2. EDQ #6 Family Support

Twice a week Individual reading Sometimes Give us a short quiz or test Often; Sometimes

59.59 59.74 58.86 60.33 57.99; 58.90

Home Background Variables

Two children Mother

58.41 58.52

*Sources of data:

(1) Examiners Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) (2) School Header (SH)

29

The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT

Department of Education National Education Testing and Research Center

The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT Subtests

90.00

30

80.00
70.00 Percentage Score 60.00

50.00
40.00 30.00

20.00
10.00 0.00 FILIPINO SY2006 - 2007 SY2007 - 2008 SY2008 - 2009 SY2009 - 2010 SY 2010 - 2011 SY2011 - 2012 66.02 MATHEMATI CS 60.29 63.89 67.37 63.26 68.41 66.47

ENGLISH 60.78 61.62 61.81 67.81 65.11 66.27

SCIENCE 51.58 57.90 58.86 63.14 60.35 66.11

HEKASI 61.05 67.44 67.84 70.88 70.38 65.97

OVERALL 59.94 64.81 65.55 68.01 68.14 66.79

** * * *

73.18 71.90 74.98 76.44 69.15

*All private schools were included **Sampling private schools only

31

Key Findings:
National Data

1.The achievement rate of Grade 6 examinees in the NAT approximates a status quo performance for the past three years.
2.Over the years, they performed best in Filipino in contrast with the remaining subjects: Math, Science, HeKaSi and English. 3.In the recent NAT, the examinees showed marked increase in Science; while slightly improved performance in English.

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level

1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0

32

SY2009-2010

SY2010-2011

SY2011-2012

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT 96 - 100 % Mastered Closely Approximating 86 - 95 % Mastery 66 - 85 % Moving Towards Mastery 35 - 65 % Average 15 - 34 % Low 5 - 14 % Very Low 0-4% Absolutely No Mastery n=

SY2009-2010 n % 2,659 0.14 242,624 906,171 642,895 61,826 142 55 1,856,372 13.07 48.81 34.63 3.33 0.01 0.00

SY2010-2011 n % 10,294 0.55 306,448 827,234 640,804 74,114 140 6 1,859,040 16.48 44.50 34.47 3.99 0.01 0.00

SY2011-2012 n % 5,906 0.31 272,803 845,935 684,234 97,755 191 13 1,906,837 14.31 44.36 35.88 5.13 0.01 0.00

Percentage Distribution of Examinees by Achievement Level and by Subject Area

60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00

33

FILIPINO

MATHEMATICS

ENGLISH

SCIENCE

HEKASI

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EXAMINEES MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT FILIPINO MATH ENGLISH SCIENCE HEKASI 96 - 100 % Mastered 0.67 7.21 1.09 2.82 0.55 Closely Approximating 86 - 95 % Mastery 13.63 20.10 15.74 15.15 14.69 66 - 85 % Moving Towards Mastery 47.92 29.99 40.20 37.72 42.47 35 - 65 % Average 34.49 27.97 34.20 35.28 32.40 15 - 34 % Low 3.23 14.36 8.57 8.81 9.58 5 - 14 % Very Low 0.05 0.36 0.18 0.21 0.29 0-4% Absolutely No Mastery 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03

The Performance of Grade Six Pupils in the NAT SY2011-2012

34

90.00 80.00 70.00

80.36

72.87

71.90

69.35

67.94

68.43

70.39

70.27

66.21

66.71

59.87

63.85

50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00

66.13

67.18

72.60

60.00

Key Findings: Region VIII and CARAGA showed high performance in the NAT.

54.88

79.48

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G6 Performance*

Area 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Variable School Location Science Laboratory Computer Laboratory Internet Access/Connection Electricity Supply Category with Best Performance Outside the town proper Without Science Laboratory Without Computer Lab. Without Internet Access With Electricity Supply

35

MPS 70.76 68.60 70.71 79.29 68.07

Learning Environment

School Related Variables

Others: 1. Public Type of School 2. Private Type of School 3. Class Shift 4. Class Size 5. Textbook-Ratio English 6. Textbook-Ratio Science 7. Textbook-Ratio - Mathematics 8. Textbook-Ratio - Filipino 9. Textbook-Ratio - HeKaSi

Non-Central Elem.School Private Sectarian One shift Below 30 2:1 2:1 2:1 1:2 2:1

68.58 64.73 68.39 68.41 69.79 69.67 72.95 71.40 71.13

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G6 Performance*

Category with Best Performance Female Taking care of plants Easy, because I study hard Easy, because I study hard Easy, because I study hard

36

Area 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Variable Gender EDQ #1 Activity Perform Best EDQ #13 Science EDQ #14 English EDQ #15 Mathematics

MPS 68.57 69.16 68.49 69.03 68.52

Student Variables

1. 2. Teacher Factors 3. 4.

EDQ #5 Teachers Attendance EDQ #9 Teaching Strategies

EDQ #10 use of computer set EDQ #11 TV, CD, DVD use

Always present in school They discuss the lesson the whole period (chalk-talk method), then ask questions if there is remaining time Never Never

67.72

68.07 68.93 67.63

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT G6 Performance*

Category with Best Performance Give a short written quiz Fill in the blanks, Identification, Sentence completion type Both A and B

37

Area

Variable EDQ Variables: 1. EDQ #6 Assessment Strategies 2. EDQ #8 Asessment Strategies 3. ED Q #7 Performance and Portfolio

MPS 68.37 68.05 68.37

Assessment Strategies

Home Background Variable

EDQ Variable: 1. EDQ #2 Educational Facilities at Home

TV and several magazines and books

68.48

*Sources of data: Examiners Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) School Header (SH)

38

The Performance of Fourth Year Students in the NAT

Department of Education National Education Testing and Research Center

The National Performance of High School Students in the NAT

39

Mean Percentage Score

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 OVERALL FILIPINO MATHEMATICS ENGLISH SCIENCE ARALING PANLIPUNAN CRITICAL THINKING SKILL TEST

SY2004 - 2005

SY2005 - 2006

SY2011 - 2012

SCHOOL YEAR SY2004 - 2005 SY2005 - 2006 SY2011 - 2012

CRITICAL ARALING MATHEMA THINKING OVERALL FILIPINO ENGLISH SCIENCE PANLIPUN TICS SKILL AN TEST 46.80 44.33 48.90 42.48 40.51 51.27 50.70 47.82 46.37 51.33 47.73 51.80 39.49 37.98 40.53 50.01 47.62 54.22 NA NA 48.57

On the average , the fourth year students obtained an MPS of 48.90 in the 2012 NAT, an improved performance when compared with the previous years (44.33 in 2006 and 46.80 in 2005).

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Examinees in Achievement Level in OVERALL PERFORMANCE

80.00 70.00 60.00

40

50.00
40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 Absolutely No Mastery Very Low Low Average Moving Towards Closely Mastery Approximating Mastery SY2011-2012 Mastered

SY2004-2005

SY2005-2006

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL MPS DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT 96 - 100% Mastered Closely Approximating 86 - 95% Mastery 66 - 85% Moving Towards Mastery 35 - 65% Average 15 - 34% Low 5 - 14% 0 - 4% Very Low Absolutely No Mastery

SY2004-2005 n 0 15 72,457 768,456 184,831 300 56 1,026,115 % 0.00 0.00 7.06 74.89 18.01 0.03 0.01

SY2005-2006 n 0 0 78,704 667,322 270,941 4,376 1,652 1,022,995 % 0.00 0.00 7.69 65.23 26.49 0.43 0.16

SY2011-2012 n 0 578 156,379 1,016,503 198,221 247 39 1,371,967 % 0.00 0.04 11.40 74.09 14.45 0.02 0.00

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Examinees in Achievement Level in All Subject Area
80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00

41

FILIPINO

MATHEMATICS

ENGLISH

SCIENCE

ARALIN PANLIPUNAN

CRITICAL THINKING

ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL MPS

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION

CRITICAL MATHEMAT ARALING THINKING DESCRIPTIVE EQUIVALENT FILIPINO ENGLISH SCIENCE ICS PANLIPUNAN SKILL TEST 0.00 0.01 13.93 74.45 11.51 0.09 0.01 1.02 5.33 15.79 38.51 38.26 1.06 0.02 0.00 1.18 23.21 57.11 18.30 0.17 0.03 0.00 0.54 7.94 49.95 41.14 0.41 0.03 0.00 0.64 24.12 62.79 12.25 0.18 0.01 0.04 1.40 16.62 59.76 20.34 1.45 0.39 Closely Approximating Mastery Moving Towards Mastery Average Low Very Low Absolutely No Mastery

96 - 100% Mastered 86 - 95% 66 - 85% 35 - 65% 15 - 34% 5 - 14% 0 - 4%

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT Subtests 42 Regional Performance in Mean Percentage Score
70

60 62.42 50.20 50.46 49.75

PERCENTAGE SCORE

50

49.32

48.44

48.92

48.11

47.75

47.17

30

42.60

46.36

47.98

49.10 37.11

40

20

10

0
I 2012 42.60 II 47.75 III 50.20 IV-A 47.17 IV-B 50.46 V 46.36 VI 49.75 VII 51.98 VIII 55.38 IX 48.44 X 48.92 XI 48.11 XII 47.98 NCR 49.32 CAR 49.10 ARMM 37.11

51.98

55.38

CARAG A 62.42

CARAGA showed the best performance followed by Region VIII in the NATY4. Five out of 17 regions surpassed the 50% MPS: Regions III, IV-B, VII, VIII and CARAGA.

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT Mean Percentage Score (Cluster 1)
53 52 51 50 49 48

43

47
46 45 44 III IV-A V VI NCR

SCHOOL YEAR 2011-2012

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES III 50.20 IV-A 47.17 VI 49.75 VII 51.98 NCR 49.32

Cluster 1 Large Size Region with 100,001 and more Examinees Central Visayas Region showed the best performance in Cluster 1.

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT Mean Percentage Score (Cluster 2)
47
46 45

44

44
43 42 41 40 I V

SCHOOL YEAR
2011-2012

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES I 42.60 V 46.36

Cluster 2 Medium Size Region with 75,000 to 100,000 Examinees Bicol Region outperformed Ilocos Region in Cluster 2.

The Regional Performance of High School Students in the NAT Mean Percentage Score (Cluster 3)
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 II IV-B VIII X XI XII CAR ARMM CARAGA

45

SCHOOL YEAR

MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES II 47.75 IV-B 64.12 VIII X XI XII CAR ARMM CARA GA

2011-2012

68.43 60.94 54.81 62.19 51.91 54.50 74.47

Cluster 3 Small Size Region with 74,999 and Below Examinees

CARAGA showed the best performance in NATY4 among Cluster 3 regions; with Region VIII closely trailing behind.

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT Y4 Performance*

46

Area

Variable

Category with Best Performance Female Little

MPS

Student Variable

1. Gender 2. EDQ #4 Financial Support 3. EDQ#5 Distance of school from home 4. EDQ#6 Comm. Skills - English 5. EDQ#7 Working at Home 6. EDQ#8 Access to learning resources

50.56 48.89

Not at All Not at All Not at All

Not at All

51.82 52.47 51.88

50.10

*Sources of data: Examiners Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) School Header (SH)

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT Y4 Performance*

Area Variable EDQ Variables 1.EDQ #9 Use of ICT 2.EDQ #10 Short Tests 3.EDQ #11 Active Participation 4.EDQ#12 Feedback of assignments 5.EDQ #13 - English Category with Best Performance Seldom Often Often Strongly Agree Presenting first the concept/theory followed by a variety of examples and/or situational roles and then application concept. Presenting first the concept/theory followed by a variety of examples and/or situational roles and then application concept. Presenting first the formula followed by varied examples or situational cases.

47

MPS 50.91 50.95 50.91 49.99 51.36

Teacher Factor 6.EDQ #14 - Science

52.29

7.EDQ#15 - Math

50.50

*Sources of data: Examiners Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) School Header (SH)

Factors Associated with the 2012 NAT Y4 Performance* Category with Best Performance Salary from domestic (goverment or private) Two to Three Textbooks, supplementary books, newspapers, and magazines

48

Area

Variable
EDQ Variable: 1. EDQ #1 Family Income

MPS
50.34

Home Background Variables

2. EDQ #2 Family Size

3. EDQ#3 Educational Facilities at Home

49.32
48.92

*Sources of data: Examiners Descriptive Questionnaire (EDQ) School Header (SH)

49

Correlates of the NAT 2012 Overall Score Grade Three Grade Six Fourth Year

Correlates of the 2012 NAT G3 Overall Score

Model 8
Correlates of NAY G3 (Constant) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

50

R .330m

R Square .109

B Std. Error -21.141 .384

t -55.123

Description

Grade in English
Grade in Science RegionCluster Grade in Filipino Grade in Mathematics

.303
.170 2.021 .165 .152

.003
.003 .028 .003 .003

93.355 Higher Grade In English

61.155 Higher Grade In Science 71.053 Regions with small number of examinees 61.557 Higher Grade In Filipino 57.369 Higher Grade In Mathematics

Shifts per Day

Age Class Size

-2.327
-.068 .017

.046
.004 .002

-50.075 Single Shift

-17.206 Younger examinees 8.659 Small Class Size

Note: The eight variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

51

Correlates of the 2012 NAT G3 Overall Score

Eight variables out of 14 surfaced as correlates of NAT G3 Overall Score The correlation between NAT G3 Overall Score and the variables was found to be less moderate (0.330)
The identified variables could be accounted for only 10.90% (R Square) of NAT G3 Overall Score

Correlates of the 2012 NAT G6 Overall Score

Model 14 R .330n R Square .109
Description

52

Correlates of NAT G6

14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12

(Constant) School Cluster

Grade in Mathematics TEEP Grade in HEKASI Shifts per Day Grade in English Class Size Region Cluster Grade in Filipino Grade in Science Age

B .281

Std. Error .635

3.477
.430 13.889 .325 -7.923 .277 .231 2.938 .242 .189 -.091

.024
.004 .093 .005 .070 .004 .003 .038 .004 .004 .022

142.978
95.849 149.798 69.759 -112.653 64.632 85.461 78.223 56.858 46.761 -4.206

School with Small Number of examinees Higher Grade in Mathematics Teep Schools Higher Grade in HeKaSi Single Shift Higher Grade in English Small Class Size Regions with small number of examinees Higher Grade in Filipino Higher Grade in Science Younger Examinees

Note: The twelve variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

53

Correlates of the 2012 NAT G6 Overall Score

Twelve variables out of 14 surfaced as correlates of NAT G6 Overall Score The correlation between NAT G6 Overall Score and the variables was found to be less moderate ( 0.330)

The identified variables could be accounted for only 10.90% (R Square) of NAT G6 Overall Score

Correlates of the 2012 NAT Y4 Overall Score

Number of Variables Included 11
11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Correlates of NAT Y4 Overall Score (Constant) Grade in English Grade in AP Grade in Mathematics Teep Grade in Science Grade in Filipino DivisionCluster Shifts per Day B -99.901 .808 .674 .597 17.105 .585 .496 3.620 -3.831

54

R .443m
Std. Error .785 .006 .006 .006 .129 .006 .005 .046 .061 t -127.327

R Square .196
Description

138.723 Higher Grade in English 113.191 Higher Grade in Aralin Panlipunan 108.174 Higher Grade in Mathematics 132.347 TEEP Schools 100.004 Higher Grade in Science 93.159 Higher Grade in Filipino 79.500 Divisions With Small Number of Examinees -62.336 Single Shift

Class Size
RegionCluster Age

.116
-1.890 -.179

.003
.050 .006

35.964 Small Class Size

-37.546 Small Number of Examinees -28.933 Younger

Note: The eleven variables were found to be significant at 0.000 level.

55

Correlates of the 2012 NAT Y4 Overall Score

All variables surfaced as correlates of NAT Y4 Overall Score The correlation between NAT Y4 Overall Score and the variables was found to be moderate ( 0.443)

The identified variables could be accounted for only 19.60% (R Square) of NAT Y4 Overall Score

56

Policy Recommendations
- School Level - Division Level - For Teachers - Central Office Level

Policy Recommendations NAT G3, G6 and Y4

SCHOOL LEVEL

57

1. Provide remedial classes to poor readers. 2. Early detection of potential non-readers in the first grade should be a primary concern in each school. 3. Producing fluent readers in the third grade should form part of the crafted vision in each school. 4. Developing reading comprehension skills should permeate all learning areas not only in reading. 5. Maximize the implementation of ECARP at the school level. 6. Expose students to authentic learning activities using constructivist approach (learning by doing). 7. School-based assessment for learning (formative assessment) should utilize varied forms of assessment. 8. Conduct Parent-Teacher-Child Conferencing on the childs progress in school. 9. Maximize the utilization of NAT results for intervention and remedial instruction.

Policy Recommendations NAT G3, G6 and Y4

DIVISION LEVEL 1. Support sustainable implementation of programs geared towards raising learning outcomes School commitment R.O., C.O. support 2.Strengthen educational supervision at the school level. 3.Subject area specialists be made available to schools without specialists (twinning system). 4.Provide supplementary materials (modular form) to enhance the competencies of those in schools with more than one shift as an enabling mechanism to extend time on task.

58

Policy Recommendations NAT G3, G6 and Y4

CAPABILITY BUILDING FOR TEACHERS 1. Make developing genuine love for reading among children a part of the in-service training for teachers. 2.Provide training for teachers on developing childrens strategies in reading. 3.Provide formative assessment/evaluation training. CENTRAL OFFICE 1. Reinforce the stipulations of the DECS Order No. 34, s. 2001, requiring all students to read two books a year and must show evidence of having at least read one book in the vernacular and one book in English per year before being promoted to the next grade or year level.

59

60

End of Presentation