(Enclosure No. 4 to DepEd Memorandum No. 044, s.

2023)

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education

National Educators Academy of the Philippines

Detailed Professional Development Program Design Form

INSTRUCTIONS: Provide the details in the designated spaces as required. Indicate N/A if not applicable. DO NOT ABBREVIATE.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (PD) PROGRAM PROVIDER PROFILE

PD Program Owner MANAOAG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Complete Office Address Manaoag, Cauayan City, Isabela

Office Telephone No. +639195067337 Office Email Address 103197@[Link]

dioniciojr.galvizo001
PD Program Manager DIONICIO A. GALVIZO, JR. Mobile No. +639352361579
@[Link]
PD PROGRAM PROFILE

SCHOOL-BASED LEARNING ACTION CELL (SLAC) OF MANAOAG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS:

Title
FOCUSED ON MASTERING THE ART AND SCIENCE OF TEST CONSTRUCTION

Rationale ● The quality of student assessments is a critical component of effective teaching, which enables educators
to gauge learning outcomes accurately and tailor instruction accordingly. However, a gap exists in
equipping teachers with hands-on skills in essential evaluation procedures, particularly in test
development, crafting Tables of Specifications (TOS), and performing item analyses. These competencies
are foundational in ensuring assessments align with curriculum standards and support data-driven
instruction.

To address this need, Bridging Theory to Practice: A School-Based Training on Evaluation Procedures has
been designed to deepen their expertise in educational evaluation, specifically focusing on test development
methodologies. Recognizing the importance of translating these skills into practical applications.

This training aims to upskill teachers in applying effective evaluation strategies. Through focused sessions
on test development, crafting TOS, and item analysis, participants will be equipped to create assessments that
are both meaningful and aligned with learning objectives, thereby enriching educational practices within the
school.

● To ensure that the enhanced basic education program meets the demand for quality teachers and
quality outcomes through an assessment, the Manaoag Elementary School shall conduct a Learning
Action Cell (LAC) on Assessment and Reporting as one of the domains on DepEd Order no. 17, s. 2017
known as the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers.

2
 ● Based on the 2024 Individual Development Plan and ESAT analysis, the following emerged as key needs:

a) learn to analyze assessment results to identify patterns in student performance, using these insights to
adapt their instructional strategies and provide targeted support for students

b) working collaboratively with colleagues on the effectiveness of teaching strategies that promote learner
achievement

This professional development program is crafted for all the teachers of Baculod Elementary School aiming
to enhance their expertise in evaluation procedures, specifically in test development, Table of Specifications
(TOS), and item analysis. In today’s evolving educational landscape, the ability to design meaningful
assessments is essential to ensure that evaluations not only measure learning outcomes accurately but also
support data-informed instruction. This training will provide participants with the tools and strategies necessary
to create assessments that challenge students to analyze, evaluate, and apply their knowledge effectively.

Through a combination of lectures and interactive workshops, participants will explore the theoretical
Program Description
frameworks behind sound test development practices and their practical applications across various subject
areas. The program will guide educators in crafting lesson-aligned TOS, designing effective test items, and
conducting item analyses that provide valuable insights into student learning.

By the end of this training, educators will be empowered to develop high-quality assessments that foster
critical thinking and independent problem-solving skills among learners. This training aims to inspire teachers to
build a dynamic learning environment where rigorous assessment practices support enhanced student
engagement and improved educational outcomes.

Program Objectives Results objective:

By the end of this training, the participants will demonstrate improved capability in designing high-quality,
curriculum-aligned assessments that foster critical thinking, independent problem-solving, and meaningful
engagement among students. This enhanced capability will contribute to data-driven instruction and improved
student learning outcomes.

3
 Application objective:
Participants will apply learned skills to develop effective test items, craft a lesson-aligned Table of
Specifications (TOS), and conduct item analysis to gain insights into student learning. Teachers will be able to
use these skills across various subject areas to ensure assessments accurately measure learning outcomes and
inform instruction.

Terminal objective:
Upon completion of the training, all teachers will be proficient in implementing sound evaluation practices,
including test development, TOS crafting, and item analysis, enabling them to independently create and analyze
assessments that align with educational standards and enhance instructional quality.

Enabling objectives: Specifically, the participants will be able to:

1. identify and explain the foundational principles of effective assessment, including the purpose of test
development, the role of Tables of Specifications (TOS), and the importance of item analysis;
2. practice creating test items that align with specific learning objectives, demonstrating an understanding
of how to design questions that assess various cognitive levels, from recall to higher-order thinking skills;
3. learn to design a TOS by mapping learning objectives to test items, ensuring that assessments cover key
content areas and represent an appropriate balance of difficulty levels;
4. gain hands-on experience in conducting item analysis, including interpreting item difficulty and
discrimination indices to evaluate the effectiveness of each test question; and
5. learn to analyze assessment results to identify patterns in student performance, using these insights to
adapt their instructional strategies and provide targeted support for students.

Professional PPST
Standard
Target Professional

4
 Domain/s Strand/s Indicator/s

5. Assessment and 5.1 Design, selection, organization and utilization of 5.1.1 Demonstrate knowledge of
Standard with
Reporting assessment strategies the design, selection, organization
specific Domain/s,
and use of diagnostic, formative
Strand/s, and
and summative assessment
Indicator/s
strategies consistent with
curriculum requirements

Participants Profile:
Target Participants
Position Mal Fem Total Number of
e ale batches per
One (1)
implementati
on (if
applicable):

Head Teacher I 1 0 1
number of Number of
Master Teacher I 0 1 1 9
participants implementa
Teacher III 0 5 5 per batch: tions: once
Teacher I 0 1 1

LSB/PDO 0 1 1

TOTAL 1 8 9

5
 March 24, 26, 28, 31, 2025
Indicative Dates of
Delivery Platform Face-to-face to April 3, 2025 (3:45-
Implementation
5:45PM)

PD PROGRAM DESIGN

Resource
Session
Duration Topic Session Objectives Methodology Outputs Speaker/Subjec
No.
t-Matter Expert

ACTIVITY
Dionicio A.
Session 1 2 hours Theories and The participants are Accomplished Galvizo, Jr.
Principles of expected to: Situation
March 24, (3:45- Group Discussion (10
Assessment Analysis Activity Head Teacher I
2025 5:45pm) mins)
1. define foundational
assessment theories,
Divide participants into
including formative,
small groups (3-5
summative,
members each). Each
diagnostic, and
group will discuss the
authentic
following prompts for 10
assessments;
minutes:
2. key principles of
effective assessment,
such as validity,
reliability, fairness, 1. What types of
and alignment with assessments do you
learning objectives; currently use in your
and classroom
(formative,
6
3. analyze sample summative,
assessments and diagnostic,
identify how well they authentic)?
adhere to key 2. Why do you choose
assessment these assessments?
principles, discussing 3. What are the
ways to improve benefits and
alignment with challenges you
assessment goals. encounter?
4. After discussions,
each group shares
one key point with
the larger group for
5 minutes.

ANALYSIS (15 minutes)

Discussion: As a whole
group, the facilitator will
list the types of
assessments mentioned on
a flipchart or whiteboard.

Guiding Questions:

● How do these
assessments serve
different purposes?
● Are they aligned
with learning
7
 objectives?
● Discuss the validity
and reliability of the
assessments
presented.

Participants can contribute

their insights based on
their previous discussions,
encouraging deeper
reflection on the
assessments used.

ABSTRACTION (15
minutes)

Discussion:*Ask
participants to share any
experiences related to
these theories and
principles. For example:
- "Have you ever
encountered an
assessment that was
misaligned with learning
objectives? How did it

8
impact your students?"
- Provide definitions and
examples for each
principle to solidify
understanding.

APPLICATION (15
minutes)

Scenario Analysis:

Distribute handouts with

sample assessment
scenarios. Each scenario
should exemplify varying
levels of alignment with
assessment principles.

Group Activity: In small

groups, participants will
analyze the scenarios
based on the principles
discussed. They should
address the following:
- Does the assessment
align with the stated
9
 learning objectives?
- Is it valid and reliable?
- What improvements
can be suggested?
- After analysis, invite
each group to share their
insights and
recommendations with the
class.

WRAP UP (5 minutes)

Reflection: Ask participants

to reflect on what they
learned and how they plan
to implement these
principles in their own
assessment practices.

Key Takeaways:
Facilitate a brief discussion
on the key takeaways from
the session.

Session 2 2 hours Crafting The participants are ACTIVITY (15 minutes)

Table of expected to: Dionicio A.
March 26, (3:45- Table of Galvizo, Jr.
Specification
s
10
2025 5:45pm) Group Exploration: Divide Specification
participants into small Head Teacher I
1. explain what a Table
groups (3-5 members
of Specifications is
each). Provide each group
and articulate its
with a sample TOS for a
significance in
specific subject.
aligning assessments
with learning Task: Groups will analyze
objectives and the provided TOS and
curriculum standards; identify its components,
2. identify and describe including content areas,
the key components cognitive levels, and
of a Table of distribution of question
Specifications, types. After 10 minutes,
including the each group will present
alignment of content their findings to the larger
areas, cognitive group, highlighting the
levels, and the strengths and weaknesses
distribution of of the TOS they reviewed.
question types; and
3. construct a draft
Table of ANALYSIS (15 minutes)
Specifications for a
selected subject or
unit, ensuring proper Facilitated Discussion:
alignment with Lead a discussion on the
learning objectives components identified by
and appropriate each group. Compile a list
distribution of of these components on a
assessment items flipchart or whiteboard,
across various covering:
cognitive levels.
- Content areas (topics
or units)

11
 - Cognitive levels (e.g.,
knowledge,
comprehension,
application, analysis,
synthesis, evaluation)
- Distribution of
assessment items (number
and type of questions)

Guiding Questions:*
- How does a TOS
ensure alignment between
assessments and learning
objectives?
- What factors should be
considered when
determining the
distribution of questions
across cognitive levels?

ABSTRACTION (15
minutes)

Presentation: Present a
slide summarizing the
purpose of a TOS,
including its role in
ensuring assessments are
12
aligned with curriculum
standards and learning
objectives.

Discussion: Invite
participants to reflect on
their own assessment
practices and how a TOS
could enhance the quality
of their assessments.
Encourage questions and
examples, such as:
- "Have you ever felt
that an assessment didn’t
adequately cover the
material taught? How
might a TOS have helped?"

APPLICATION(15 minutes)

Drafting a TOS: Provide

participants with
templates and guidelines
for creating a Table of
Specifications. Ask them to
choose a specific subject
or unit they are teaching
and draft a TOS that

13
includes:
- Content areas
- Cognitive levels
- Distribution of
assessment items

Peer Review: After

drafting, participants will
pair up to review each
other’s TOS drafts,
providing feedback on
alignment, clarity, and
completeness.
- Encourage them to
make adjustments based
on peer feedback before
concluding the activity.

WRAP-UP (5 minutes)

Reflection: Ask participants

to take a moment to jot
down one key takeaway
from the session regarding
the importance of TOS in
their assessment
practices.

14
 Sharing: Invite a few
participants to share their
reflections with the group.

ACTIVITY(15 minutes) Crafted Dionicio A.

Session 3 2 hours Crafting The participants are Test Galvizo, Jr.
Effective Test expected to: Group Evaluation: Divide Questions
March 28, (3:45-
Questions participants into small Head Teacher I
2025 5:45pm) groups (3-5 members
each) and provide each
1. identify the key
group with a handout
characteristics that containing a mix of well-
make test questions crafted and poorly
effective, including constructed test questions
clarity, alignment with (e.g., multiple choice,
learning objectives, true/false, short answer).
and appropriate
cognitive levels; Task: Groups will spend
2. differentiate between 10 minutes discussing the
various types of test strengths and weaknesses
questions (e.g., of the questions,
considering clarity,
multiple-choice,
alignment with learning
true/false, short
objectives, and cognitive
answer, essay) and levels.
determine their
appropriate use based After discussions, each
on learning outcomes; group will share one
3. create a variety of example of an effective
high-quality test question and one of an
questions that align ineffective question with
with specific learning the larger group for 5
objectives and minutes.
effectively assess

15
student
understanding.

ANALYSIS (15 minutes)

Facilitated Discussion:
Lead a discussion focusing
on the characteristics of
effective test questions
identified by each group.
Compile a list of these
characteristics on a
flipchart or whiteboard,
covering aspects such as:

- Clarity and .
conciseness

- Alignment with
learning objectives

- Appropriate cognitive
level (knowledge,
comprehension,
application, etc.)

Guide Questions:

- What common features

did we notice in the
effective questions?

- How do poorly
constructed questions
impact student
understanding and
16
assessment results?

ABSTRACTION (15
minutes)

Presentation: Present a
slide summarizing various
types of test questions
(e.g., multiple choice,
true/false, short answer,
essay) along with their
advantages and
disadvantages.

Discussion: Invite
participants to share their
experiences with different
question types, asking
questions like:

- "In what situations do

you find multiple-choice
questions most useful?"

- "How do you
determine when to use
open-ended questions?"

- Provide definitions and

clear examples for each
question type,
emphasizing their
alignment with different
learning objectives.

17
APPLICATION (15
minutes)

Question Design: Ask

participants to choose a
specific learning objective
they are currently teaching
and create two test
questions: one multiple-
choice question and one
short answer or essay
question. Encourage them
to incorporate the
characteristics discussed
earlier.

Peer Review: After

designing their questions,
participants will pair up to
review each other's
questions using a rubric
provided. They should
provide constructive
feedback on clarity,
alignment with objectives,
and overall quality.

- After the peer review,

invite a few participants to
share their questions and
the feedback they
received.

18
 WRAP-UP (5 minutes)

Reflection: Ask participants

to take a moment to write
down one key takeaway
from the session regarding
the importance of crafting
effective test questions.

Sharing: Invite a few

participants to share their
reflections with the group.

- **Next Steps:**
Encourage participants to
implement the strategies
learned in their upcoming
assessments and remind
them to reach out with any
questions or for further
support.

The participants are

expected to: ACTIVITY (15 minutes) Item Dionicio A.
Session 4 2 hours Item Analysis Analysis Galvizo, Jr.
March 31, Group Discussion: Divide
(4:45-5:45
2025 participants into small Head Teacher I
pm) 1. explain what item groups (3-5 members
analysis is and each) and provide each
describe its group with a sample
significance in assessment that includes
evaluating the item statistics (e.g., item
effectiveness of test difficulty, discrimination
questions and index).

19
 improving future
assessments; Task: Groups will spend
2. identify and interpret 10 minutes discussing the
key metrics used in provided statistics,
item analysis, focusing on what these
metrics reveal about the
including item
effectiveness of each test
difficulty,
item.
discrimination index,
and guessing index, After discussions, each
to assess the quality group will summarize their
of test items; and insights on one effective
3. apply the concepts and one ineffective test
learned by conducting item based on the metrics,
a basic item analysis and share them with the
on a sample larger group for 5 minutes.
assessment,
interpreting the
results, and making ANALYSIS (15 minutes)
recommendations for
improving the Facilitated Discussion:
assessment based on Lead a discussion on the
their findings. metrics identified by each
group. Compile a list of
these key metrics on a
flipchart or whiteboard,
covering:

- Item Difficulty (p-

value):** The proportion of
students who answered
the item correctly.

- Discrimination Index:**
The ability of the item to
differentiate between high

20
and low performers.

- Guessing Index: The

likelihood that a student
guessed the answer
correctly.

Guide Questions:

- What do these metrics

tell us about the quality of
the test items?

- How can
understanding item
difficulty and
discrimination help
improve future
assessments?

ABSTRACTION (15
minutes)

Presentation: Present a
slide summarizing the
purpose of item analysis,
including its role in
evaluating assessment
quality and informing
instructional practices.

Discussion: Invite
participants to share
experiences where item
analysis could have
21
improved their
assessments. Ask
questions such as:

- How do you think item

analysis can impact your
future test designs?

- In what ways can it

help you identify gaps in
student understanding?

APPLICATION (15
minutes)

Instructions:

Item Analysis Exercise:

Provide participants with a
worksheet that outlines
how to conduct a basic
item analysis, including
formulas for calculating
item difficulty and
discrimination index. Ask
them to use the sample
assessment provided at
the beginning to calculate
these metrics for at least
three test items.

Discussion of Findings:
After completing the item
analysis, participants will
pair up to discuss their
22
 results, focusing on:

- Which items performed

well and why?

- Which items need

revision and what changes
could improve them?

- After discussions, invite

a few participants to share
their findings and
recommendations with the
larger group.

WRAP-UP (5 minutes)

Reflection: Ask participants

to take a moment to write
down one key takeaway
from the session regarding
the importance of item
analysis in their
assessment practices.

Sharing: Invite a few

participants to share their
reflections with the group.

Crafted TOS and

test questions Dionicio A.
Session 5 (3:45- Workshop on ● Revisit the
Galvizo, Jr.
5:45pm) crafting TOS learning
23
2 hours and Test
April 3, questions competencies
2025 taught for
alignment to the
TOS and test Head Teacher I
questions

PD Program Management Team

PD Program Management Team Name

a. Program Manager Dionicio A. Galvizo, Jr.

b. Learning Manager Janice A. Taguinod

c. Resource Speaker/Subject-Matter Expert Dionicio A. Galvizo, Jr.

d. M&E Coordinator Dermelyn A. Tolentino

e. Documenter Jeralyn A. Valenzuela

f. Secretariat Kathrina G. Acedo

g. Welfare Officer Woodrow G. Nonan

h. Logistics Officer Maria Victoria P. Bonior

i. Finance Officer Luzviminda C. Rasote

Declaration:
I hereby declare the information provided in this
application is true and correct and there have been no

24
misleading statements, omission of any relevant facts nor
any misinterpretation made.
I agree that the DepEd-National Educators Academy of
the Philippines to be the co-owner of all the data gathered
and the copyright of any publication of the use of these
data.
To be signed by the PD Program Manager

Program Manager DIONICIO A. GALVIZO, JR.

Signature

Date February 4, 2025

This Form is not valid if not signed.

Recommending Approval: Approved:

CHELO C. TANGAN EdD CESO VI CHERRY S. RAMOS EdD CESO V

Assistant Schools Division Superintendent Schools Division Superintendent

25
(Enclosure No. 4 to DepEd Memorandum No. 044, s. 2023)

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education

National Educators Academy of the Philippines

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan Form

This is the form for the M&E Plan following the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model.

Level of M&E Objectives Methods Data Sources Schedule of Person/s Support User of M&E
and Tools M&E Responsible Needed Data

Level 4 - What will What Who and/or When will M&E Who will be What resources Who will use
Results be methods/tool what activities be accountable for are needed to the data
measured? s will be documents will undertaken? ensuring that M&E implement gathered?
(The degree to
used to provide data or activities are M&E activities?
which targeted
collect data? evidence on the done?
outcomes as a
indicators?
result of the
training and
support and
accountability
package.)
Level 3 - Application Learning Learning Action End of the School Head Strong Internet Project
Behavior objectives Action Plan Plan/ Work Program connectivity Management
(LAP)/ Work Action Plan Team/ Project
(The degree to
Action Plan owner
which
(WAP)
participants
apply what they
learned during
training when
they are back on
the job. This
can be found
in the
application
objective.)

2
Level 2 - Enabling Pretest and Pretest and Post Beginning and PMT/ School Head/ Strong internet PMT/SDO,
Learning Objectives Post Test Test results end of the M&E Coordinator connectivity, School Head
program Pretest and
(The degree to
Post test
which
participants
acquire the
intended
knowledge,
skills, attitude,
confidence, and
commitment
based on their
participation in
the training.)

Level 1 – Daily End of the End of the day End of the PMT/ M&E Focal/ PMT, SDO,
Reaction lesson day evaluation program Coordinator School Head,
objectives evaluation (online Monitoring
(The degree to
(Online evaluation) Focal
which
evaluation) results Strong internet
participants find
the training connectivity
favorable,
engaging, and
relevant to their
jobs.)

3
BUDGET ESTIMATE PLAN

Budget
Requirements
Provide details on how the
Php 3,150.00
funds will be allocated. If
Php.350.00 each
registration, how much will
Funding participant
MOOE be collected in each course?
Source 50*9*5=
2,250.00 Use attached budget
(5snacks) estimate
100*9= 900.00 template as reference.
(materials)

Declaration:
I hereby declare the information provided in this
application is true and correct and there have been no
misleading statements, omission of any relevant facts nor
any misinterpretation made.
I agree that the DepEd-National Educators Academy of
the Philippines to be the co-owner of all the data gathered
and the copyright of any publication of the use of these
data.
To be signed by the PD Program Manager

Program Manager DIONICIO A. GALVIZO, JR.

Signature

4
 Date February 4, 2025

This Form is not valid if not signed.