College of Teacher Education

Second Semester, A.Y. 2020-2021

MODULE 5
Assessment in the Affective Domain

Introduction

This module entitled ‘Assessment in the Affective Domain’ would discuss the creation of appropriate
assessment tools for the affective domain.

Date and Time Allotment

Feb. 1 (3 hours)

I. Objectives

At the end of the end of this module, students should be able to:
1. Explain the different taxonomy under the affective domain.
2. Set affective learning competencies on a given task.
3. Enumerate the focal concepts used in setting learning competencies in the affective domain.
4. Manufacture their own assessment tools for the affective domain.

II. Lecture
The domains of learning have been one of the foundations of learning objectives and assessment.
The performance tasks we have discussed in Modules 3 and 4 are usually involved in the cognitive learning
competencies. In this module, we are going to focus on the affective domain of learning.
According to Navarro and Santos (2013), the affective domain of learning focuses on learning
objectives that target feelings, emotions, or the acceptance or rejection of a particular object. The duo added
that this domain of learning is more difficult to assess due to its nature of involving non-observable qualities
such as emotions and values such as conscience and empathy. Nonetheless, it is an undeniable fact that
the development of affective domain is necessary to the learners as teachers strive to have ‘educated’, and
not simply ‘learned’, individuals (Navarro and Santos, 2013).

Taxonomy on the Affective Domain

When Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues released the original taxonomy of learning, they also
established the domains of learning. Bloom’s Taxonomy focused on the cognitive domain while a separate
taxonomy by Krathwohl focused on the affective domain.
The taxonomy itself contains various objectives that are rooted in interests, values, appreciations,
attitudes, and emotional sets and biases (Karthwohl et.al, 1964, as cited in Navarro and Santos, 2013).
Several studies have already concluded the effects of a developed or stimulated affective capabilities of the
learners towards the improvement of the learning process. Combining this with the notion that learners should
be able to exhibit emotional control during the learning process, one could conclude that developing the
affective domain is both an end and means to the holistic development of learners.
According to Corpuz and Salandanan (2015), “Krathwohl’s affective learning is demonstrated by
behaviors indicating attitudes of awareness, interest, attention, and values of concern, and responsibility,
ability to listen and respond in interactions with others, and ability to demonstrate those attitudinal
characteristics or values which are appropriate to the test situation and field of study.” What this means,
effectively, is that affective learning focuses on the task of instilling humanity in a human and forming their
own personalities, set of values, and sense of morality and appropriateness.
The taxonomy published by Krathwohl is leveled based on the internalization principle. That is to say
the capability of learners to incorporate a particular value in their everyday lives. This principle starts with
recognizing the value and ends with complete integration of the learners.
 Figure 1. Krathwohl's Affective Learning Taxonomy (Retrieved from Photopedagogy.com, 2021)

As with Bloom’s Taxonomy, a learner cannot progress into higher levels of learning in Krathwohl’s
Taxonomy without mastering the current level they are in. As such, a student who doesn’t know or recognize
the value cannot be expected to manifest it. As it stands, most teachers have difficulty in setting learning
objectives based around developing the affective domain of learners. In this regard, Corpuz and Salandanan
(2015) have listed several key points of each level and how they could be worded into proper objectives.
These are listed in the table below:

Table 1. Krathwohl's Taxonomy of Objectives in the Affective Domain (Retrieved from Corpuz and Salandanan, 2015)
Level Description Learning Verbs Sample Objectives
Outcome(s)
Receiving Refers to the learner’s Learning outcomes Differentiates, Listens attentively, shows
sensitivity to the existence of range from simple accepts, listens sensitivity to social
certain ideas, materials, or awareness that a (for), responds to. problems.
phenomena and the thing exists to
willingness to respond to selective attention of Asks, chooses,
particular phenomena of the part of the identifies, locates,
stimuli such as classroom learner. points to, sits
activities, textbooks, music, erect, etc.
etc.
Responding Is not only being aware of the Answers, assists, To contribute to group
stimulus but also reacting and complies, discussions by asking
responding to the stimulus. discusses, helps, questions, to listen
performs, attentively during group
practices, presentation, to complete
presents, reads, homework, to read beyond
reports, writes, assignment, to obey rules,
etc. to participate in class
discussion, to show
interest in subject, to enjoy
helping others, to read for
enjoyment.
Valuing Concerned with the worth or This ranges in To improve group skills.
value a student attaches to a degree from the
particular object, phenomena, simpler acceptance To assume responsibility
or behavior. of a value to more for the effective
complex level of functioning of the group.
Willingness to be perceived by commitment.
others as valuing certain To appreciate the role of
ideas, materials, or science in daily life, shows
phenomena. concern for the welfare of
Examples include: to increase others, demonstrates a
measured proficiency in, to
 relinquish, to subsidize, to problem-solving
support, to debate e.g., to approach, etc.
argue over an issue involving
health care.
Organizing Relating the value to those To recognize the need for
already held and bringing it balance between freedom
into a harmonious and and responsibility in a
internally consistent value democracy, understands
system or philosophy. the role of systematic
planning in solving
Bringing together different problems, accepts
values, resolving conflicts responsibility for own
among them, and starting to behavior.
build an internally consistent
value system.

Comparing, relating and

synthesizing values and
developing a philosophy of
life.
Characterization At this level, the person has To display self-reliance in
held a value system that has working independently,
controlled his behavior for a cooperates in group
sufficiently long time that a activities, maintains good
characteristic “lifestyle” has health habits,
been developed.
Behavior is pervasive, To use an objective
consistent and predictable. approach in problem
Objectives are concerned with solving,
personal, social, and
emotional adjustment. To display professional
commitment to ethical
practice on a daily basis.

To revise judgements and

changes.

While the affective domain is a common topic in the research community and is asserted as a
common denominator in the proper development and implementation of the teaching-learning process, it is
still largely an untapped source of learning experiences as practitioners of education find it to be the most
difficult to assess and evaluate compared to the other domains of learning (Navarro and Santos, 2013).
Nonetheless, the successful integration of learning objectives in the affective domain could result to the most
authentic and meaningful learning experiences due to the nature of values and attitudes highly ingrained in
the everyday lives of the learners.

Affective Learning Competencies

Learning competencies in the affective domain come as instructional objectives which are defined
by Navarro and Santos (2013) as “specific, measurable, short-term, observable student behaviors”. They
further asserted these instructional objectives serve as the foundation for lessons and assessment methods
which will be used to achieve the content standards of the course. However, the duo also added that these
objectives should not eradicate spontaneity nor limit the vision for education that the teacher wants to enforce
in the class.
With regards in setting instructional objectives, Navarro and Santos (2013) has created a table for
the definition of each level in Krathwohl’s Taxonomy and example objectives under each. That table is listed
below:
 Table 2. Krathwohl's Taxonomy of Affective Domain (retrieved from Navarro and Santos, 2013)
Level Definition Example
Receiving Being aware of or attending to Individual would read a book
something in the environment passage about civil rights.
Responding Showing some new behaviors as Individual would answer
a result of experience questions about the book, read
another book by the same author
another book about civil rights,
etc.
Valuing Showing some definite The individual might demonstrate
involvement of commitment this by voluntarily attending a
lecture on civil rights.
Organization Integrating a new value into one’s The individual might arrange a
general set of values and giving it civil rights rally.
some ranking among one’s
general priorities
Characterization by Value Acting consistently with the new The individual is firmly committed
value to the value, perhaps becoming a
civil rights leader.

Navarro and Santos (2013) noted that assessing the affective domain would only be used to describe
the learners’ characteristics and cannot be used as a grade. One may also point out the difficulty in setting
affective objectives compared to cognitive objectives. This is the common conception and reality of
practitioners in the field as affective qualities are internally manifested, thus hardly observable. Fortunately,
Navarro and Santos (2013) also suggested the use of several key words for each level of the taxonomy. We
must stress that instructional objectives in this domain should focus on observable behaviors that could be
transformed into quantitative data with relative ease.

Receiving Responding Valuing Organization Characterization

Accept Complete Accept Codify Internalize
Attend Comply Defend Discriminate Verify
Develop Cooperate Devote Display
Recognize Discuss Pursue Order
Examine Seek Organize
Obey Systematize
Respond Weigh

For example, we could have the instructional objective to be “The student should be able to recognize
the feelings of empathy by describing the hardships endured by the characters in the story using less than
100 words and in impromptu.” This instructional objective is specific, measurable, terminal, and observable.
Remember that it is better to state the objectives under the SMART Principle (you may research it as it will
be helpful in your study).

Focal Concepts in Affective Learning

Navarro and Santos (2013) recognized the need to preliminarily define the important terms when
teaching on the affective domain. For starters, they have defined attitude as “a mental predisposition to act
that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor.” Humans exhibit
their attitudes towards different objects such as physical materials, and even abstract concepts such as love
through opinions, values, and the like. These mental orientations towards concepts are called as values
(Navarro and Santos, 2013). Further, attitude could be divided into four components.
A. Cognitions - In the words of Navarro and Santos (2013), cognitions are “our beliefs, theories,
expectancies, cause-and-effect beliefs, and perceptions relative to the focal object.” This means
that cognitions refer to our mental statements and predispositions on a certain object. The pair
also differentiated cognitions from feelings.
B. Affect – This is the feelings we have towards a focal object; feelings such as fear, love, hate,
anger, sympathy, mercy, and the like. For example, seeing images of homeless people suffering
through malnutrition evokes mercy. Another example is seeing a color and associating it with a
particular feeling such as blue for loneliness or red for anger or love.
 C. Behavioral Intentions – the collection of the person’s goals, aspirations, and predisposed
responses towards the attitude object (Navarro and Santos, 2013). What this means in that this
is our collective intentions towards the future regarding a certain object. For example, if we are
made to discuss our plans for security, we tend to have a diverse view for it.
D. Evaluation – This component serves as the central piece of our attitude which consists of the
accusations on the attitude whether it be good or bad (Navarro and Santos, 2013). For example,
we see the attitude of narcissism to be a negative attitude. This vision is the evaluative
component of our attitude. Scholl (2002, as cited from Navarro and Santos, 2013) has stated
that evaluation is stored in memory even if it is not often accompanied by the affect and
cognitions responsible for creating such evaluations.

Cajigal and Mantuano (2014) were also able to retrieve the description of affective traits as they
asserted that the affective domain is not only about emotions and feelings but a plethora of non-cognitive
traits. The description of terms are as follows:

Table 3. Affective Traits by McMillan (2007, retrieved from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014)
TRAIT DESCRIPTION
Attitudes Predisposition to respond favorably or unfavorably
to specified situations, concepts, objects,
institutions, or persons
Interests Personal preference for certain kinds of activities
Values Importance, worth, or usefulness of modes or
conducts and end states of existence
Opinions Beliefs about specific occurrences and situations
Preferences Desire to select one object over another
Motivation Desire and willingness to be engaged in behavior
including intensity of involvement
Academic Self-Concept Self-perception of competence in school and
learning
Self-Esteem Attitudes towards oneself; degree of self-respect,
worthiness, or desirability of self-concept
Locus of Control Self-perception of whether success and failure are
controlled by the student or by external influences
Emotional Development Growth, change, and awareness of emotions and
ability to regulate emotional expression
Social Relationships Nature of interpersonal interactions and functioning
in a group setting
Altruism Willingness and propensity to help others
Moral Development Attainment of ethical principles that guide decision-
making and behavior
Classroom Development Nature of feeling tones and interpersonal
relationship in a class

The affective domain of learning is explicably broad and needs further specific descriptions in order
to be assessed or studied more appropriately. This is one of the reasons why a multitude of research has
already been published on different concepts listed above.

Importance of the Study of Affective Domain and Targets

Countless studies relating to the attitude of learners has already been done over the course of time.
Most of these researches yielded results that collectively say that learning is not reliant on the cognitive skills
of the learner but rather on their affective traits towards the learning process or subject matter.
In regards to research variables, motivation is well-known choice for the affective domain. Motivation,
as defined by Navarro and Santos (2013), is the “reason or set of reasons for engaging in a particular
behavior, especially human behavior as studied in psychology or neuropsychology.”
One of the theories surrounding motivation is the proposed by Abraham Maslow in his work on
Hierarchy of Needs which, according to Navarro and Santos (2013), states that:
• Human beings have wants and desires which influence their behavior; only
unsatisfied needs can influence behavior, satisfied needs cannot.
 • Since needs are many, they are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to
the complex.
• The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at
least minimally satisfied.
• The further the progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness, and
psychological health a person will show.

Figure 2. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (retrieved from SimplyPsychology.com, 2021)

Another theory for motivation is proposed by Frederick Herzberg as the ‘two-factor theory’. This
theory concludes that some factors in the workplace leads to job satisfaction while some factors only affect
job satisfaction if such factors are absent. He categorized these factors into two types: motivators, and
hygiene factors.
Motivators are factors that refer to activities that reward people with their effort. For example, being
recognized after finishing a complex task, feeling successful or victorious after achieving a difficult feat, and
the like.
Hygiene factors refer to factors that adversely affect the workplace if not established. Example of
these factors include salary, benefits, job security, and tenure.
This theory is more often used in practical fields rather than the academic field as it shows a more
understandable framework for motivating workers. Findings using this theory shows that most employees
have a high level of motivator, however the lack of hygiene factors result to a low score on the Employee
Management skills of their employers. What this means is that managers must address the hygiene factors
before establishing motivators.
Clayton Alderfer also provided a different motivation theory which simplified Maslow’s Hierarchy of
Needs by categorizing the motivators into three forms: existence, relatedness, and growth. This theory is
also considered as the ERG Theory. The lower level needs, specifically physiological needs and safety
needs, are under existence. Love and self-esteem are under the relatedness form, while self-actualization
and some parts of self-esteem are under the growth factor.
Moving on to motivation in the education sector, Ormrod (2003, cited from Navarro and Santos,
2013) has published his findings on its effect to learners and concluded that motivation can;
• direct behavior towards a particular goal;
• lead to increased enthusiasm;
• increased initiation and tenacity towards activities;
• improve cognitive processing;
• evaluate which consequences are effective in reinforcement; and
• lead to better performance in multiple settings.
It is also worth noting that the motivation in the educational context is different from motivation studied
by psychologists. Motivation in education is often divided into two types: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic
motivation.
Intrinsic motivation refers to the internal motivation to perform an activity because of the emotional
benefits to oneself in doing said activity. For example, the pleasure received when finishing the research
paper or the sheer want to study or read or watch a particular series because of the enthusiasm and passion
connected to it.
Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation brought about by external factors that satisfy a certain
need of the individual. For example, doing an assignment early due to the reward given by the teacher for
early passers.
 Another concept stated Navarro and Santos (2013) is the concept of self-efficacy which is,
according to them, the person’s impression on his capability to perform a particular action or achieve a goal.
Note that efficacy alone refers to the ability to make an action towards the achievement of a specified goal
while self-efficacy refers to the belief in oneself to actually do an action. Additionally, self-efficacy should not
be confused with self-esteem as the latter pertains to a person’s sense of self-worth (Navarro and Santos,
2013). For example, a person may have low self-efficacy in bartending which simply means that the individual
doesn’t believe that they could perform the skill gracefully. However, that lack of self-efficacy will not
necessarily affect their self-esteem due to the fact that only a small number of people actually invest in the
skill of bartending.
A number of researches has asserted that having a high self-efficacy could actually hinder the
learning process and having a negative attitude towards the learner’s own skill to learn could actually benefit
the same process. This is evident in the research conducted by Christine Jernigan (cited from Navarro and
Santos, 2013)
It is given that numerous research and possible topics were not included in this part. That is left for
the reader to find out as the affective domain provides a rich environment for educational research and
improvement.

Assessment Tools in the Affective Domain

As with the cognitive domain, the affective domain is also assessed through a variety of assessment
tools. These tools could be teacher observations, self-reports, rating scales, semantic differential scales,
Likert scales, and checklists.
Teacher observations can be divided into two types: unstructured and structured observation.
Unstructured observation is also known as anecdotal records of an individual and is used for making
summative judgements. Cajigal and Mantuano (2014) described these observations as “open-ended, no
checklist or rating scale used, and everything is recorded is just simply recorded.” The pair also emphasized
the need to have guidelines in performing this type of observation and record behaviors that indicate an
affective trait as well as other actions that reflect a trait. Furthermore, this type of observation provides a more
realistic view of the learners due to being unrestricted by checklists or rating scales. However, it is also
impractical as the teacher cannot regularly and frequently implement unstructured observation.
Structured observation refers to the use of checklists or rating scales in observing. The checklists
and rating scales are derived from positive and negative behaviors that made them easy to record (Cajigal
and Mantuano, 2014). It is worth noting that positive behaviors are called approach behaviors which results
from direct and intense contact in frequent intervals while negative behaviors are called avoidance behaviors
which results from less contact. Before parting, Cajigal and Mantuano (2014) has left several considerations
when using observations to assess affect which are:
• Determine behaviors to be observed in advance.
• Record student’s important state such as time, date, and place.
• If unstructured, record brief descriptors of relevant behavior.
• Keep interpretations separate from description.
• Record both positive and negative behaviors.
• Have as much observations of each student as necessary.
• Avoid personal bias.
• Record immediately the observations.
• Apply a simple and efficient procedure.

ANECDOTAL RECORD
Name of Child: Chris Sarmiento Teacher: Charles Lago Date Observed: Jan. 5
Age of Child: 4 Place: Classroom Doorway Time: 8:30 AM

Behavior:
Chris abruptly held his feet on the pathway as Jessa was running towards the classroom which
resulted in the latter tripping and falling towards the ground. Chris laughed as he watched Jessa got
back up.
During the class, Chris seemed to grabbed Kenny’s pen as he was writing the activity.
Afterwards, Chris threw the pen outside the window.

Evaluation:
It would seem that Chris is an eccentric child in regards to causing harm to others. These
behaviors need to be addressed through positive punishment as he would seem to enjoy causing
inconveniences to his classmates.
Figure 3. Sample Anecdotal Record
 Before proceeding with self-reports, let us skip ahead to rating scales which is defined by Nitko
(2001, cited from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014) as a tool for teaching and assessment which could aid
students in understanding and focusing on learning outcomes, give feedback to learners about their strengths
and weaknesses in regards to the standards with which they are measured, and allow learners to internalize
the standards resulting to their growth and progress.
There are two generally two types of rating scales: numerical and descriptive graphic. Numerical
rating scales allows the translation of judgements and opinions into quantitative data through the use of
integers. These scales are usually accompanied by short descriptions of the quality levels attached to each
numerical value. An example is listed below.

Numerical Rating Scale on Teamwork on Team Activities

Direction: Indicate the degree to which the student contributes to team activity by encircling the
appropriate number. The number represents the following:
4 – constantly appropriate and effective;
3 – generally appropriate and effective;
2 – needs improvement, may do other unrelated task; and
1 – unsatisfactory, disruptive, and do other tasks not related to the activity.
Ratings
Questions
4 3 2 1
1. To what extent does the student participate in team meetings and
discussions?
2. To what extent are tasks being done related to team activity?
3. To what extent did the student contributions show initiative in practicing
originality?
Figure 4. Sample Numerical Rating Scale (adapted from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014)
Descriptive graphic rating scales are better versions of a numerical rating scale due to the use of
short behavioral descriptors of various places along the scale instead of simply using single ambiguous
words. Using descriptors would lead to increased consistency of ratings across the users of the scale (Cajigal
and Mantuano, 2014).

Example:

Direction: Place an X on the line at the place which best describes the pupil’s performance on team
activities. In the space for comment(s), include anything that helps clarify your ratings.

1. To what extent does the student participate in team meetings and discussions?

Never participates, quiet, passive Participates as much as other Participates more than any other
team members team member

Comment(s): ____________________________________________________________

Figure 5. Sample Descriptive Graphic Rating Scale (retrieved from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014)

Before using rating scales, we must take note of the errors that may occur during its implementation.
These errors were listed by Cajigal and Mantuano (2014).
 Table 4. Common Errors in Using Rating Scales (retrieved from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014)
Error Description
Leniency Error Occurs when a teacher tends to make almost all
ratings towards the high end of the scale, avoiding
the low end of the scale.
Severity Error A teacher tends to make almost all ratings toward
the low end of the scale. This is the opposite of
leniency error.
Central Tendency Error Occurs when a teacher hesitates to use extremes
and uses only the middle part of the scale. (Could
be reduced by removing the neutral part on the
scale.)
Halo Effect Occurs when a teacher lets his/her general
impression of the student affect how he/she rates
the student on specific dimension.
Personal bias Occurs when a teacher has a general tendency to
use inappropriate or irrelevant stereotypes favoring
boys over girls, from rich families over poor ones,
etc.
Logical Error Occurs when a teacher gives similar ratings to two
or more dimensions that the teacher believes to be
related where in fact, they are not related at all.
Rater Drift Occurs when the raters, whose ratings originally
agreed, begin to redefine the rubrics for themselves.

At this juncture, we could move on to Likert Scales which is one of the, if not the best, known
affective assessment tool. This tool essentially lets the learners select a degree of response, usually ranging
from Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Undecided (U), Disagree (D), to Strongly Disagree (SD), to several
items or statements concerning a single value, concept, object, or stimulus. The responses mentioned earlier
is assigned a number from 1 to 5 which will later be used in getting the arithmetic average of the opinions on
a particular item; which is, after all, the main goal of using Likert scale: having a quantitative representation
of responses.
Cajigal and Mantuano (2014) have enumerated five steps in constructing Likert scales.
1. Write a series of statements expressing positive and negative options toward
attitude object.
2. Select the best statements (at least 10) with a balance of positive and negative
opinions and edit as necessary.
3. List the statements combining the positive and negative and put the letters of
the five-point scale to the left of each statement for easy marking.
4. Add the directions, indicating how to mark the answer and include a key at the
top of the page if letters are used for each statement.
5. Some prefer to drop the undecided category so that respondents will be forced
to indicate agreement or disagreement.

An example of a Likert Scale provided by Hena (2015) could be found below.

Example:
Directions: Below are statements that describe student’s feeling toward chemistry. Please answer them by
checking the appropriate column which you think accurately describes your reaction as each statement applies
to you in chemistry. Please answer all the items.
Legend: 4– SA – Strongly Agree
3– A – Agree
2– D – Disagree
1– SD – Strongly Disagree

Statements SA A D SD
1. I find chemistry interesting.
2. I believe chemistry is one of the most useful subjects.
3. Chemistry topic challenges me more to study.
4. Knowledge of chemistry is not useful in life.
5. I do not see any value in chemistry.
6. I like studying chemistry more than any other academic
subject.
7. Chemistry lessons confuse me.
8. I spend less time for my chemistry lessons than for other
subjects.
9. I feel that I have a good foundation in chemistry.
10. I feel like I am being forced to study chemistry.

Another type of rating scale is called Semantic Differential Scales which uses bipolar scales (scales
having two completely opposite concepts, values, or opinions at each end of the scale) to asses an
individual’s reaction to a set of words, ideas, or concepts (Navarro and Santos, 2013). One example of an
SD scale is:

Strong ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ Weak

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

Other variations include removing the blanks and simply state the number between the two opposing
concepts. For ease of mathematical solving, it is better to use negative numbers for the right side instead of
going up again. For example, the arrangement could be 3, 2, 1, 0, -1, -2, -3 which is easier to interpret
quantitatively.
Navarro and Santos (2013) have reiterated the use of the three dimensions on SD scales which are
Evaluation, Potency, and Activity (EPA). Evaluation refers to good-bad contrast, Potency for powerful-
powerless contrast like the one given above, and the Activity refers to fast-slow or always-never contrasts.
These dimensions provide a reliable measure on the overall response of respondents toward one particular
value or object. An example of proper SD item is:

1. Encircle the number that corresponds to the pain you experienced during the trip.
Painful 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Painless
2. How often do you feel the pain?
Always 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Never

Self-reports are basically written reflections towards a particular subject. For example, a teacher
could task his/her students to write a reflection paper entitled “Why I Like or Dislike Science”. These activities
allow individuals to comprehensively express their affective tendencies and emotions towards the topic.
Additionally, teachers may be able to address emotional lapses in the implementation of the lesson. Note
that reflection papers are assessed but should not be a part of the grades of the learners as these works
contain emotional expressions. Furthermore, teachers should stress to the learners that they must
demonstrate the various levels of Krathwohl’s Taxonomy in writing (Navarro and Santos, 2013).
Checklists, as previously encountered in Module 3, are lists that contain behaviors that is to be
observed or tacitly performed by learners at the behest of the teacher. According to Burke (2009, as cited
from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014), “checklist is one of the effective formative assessment strategies to
monitor specific skills, behaviors, or dispositions of individual or group of students.” Let us note the word
‘specific’ as we must always set specific and observable behaviors in a checklist. Items such as “appreciates
the works of art’ is specific but are not observable and is still not an advisable item to put in a checklist.
 An example of checklist is provided by Cajigal and Mantuano (2014).

Table 5. Sample Checklist in the Affective Domain (retrieved from Cajigal and Mantuano, 2014)
Observation Checklist
Student: Subject: Date:
Directions: Put a check on the box to determine the frequency
Not Yet Sometimes Frequently
in which the student performs the actions listed below.
Work Habits
• Gets work done on time
• Asks for help when needed
• Takes Initiative
Study Habits
• Organizes work
• Takes good notes
• Uses time well
Social Skills
• Works well with others
• Listens to others
• Helps others
Comment(s): __________________________________________________________________

Notice that the items are not entirely specific since the focus of the checklist is not on the expertise
of an individual in a particular item but on the frequency of each action. Thus, in an affective checklist, a
teacher must specify what factors should be assessed: frequency (quantity) or proficiency (quality)? Though
it is most often frequency since one cannot entirely distinguish ‘proficient’ from ‘lacking’ students when it
comes to the affective domain.
And with that, you are now able to try your best in creating and understanding the affective domain
of the learners. It will be a tedious task, but it will be rewarding.

III. Activity
For your activity, two sets of Google Forms will be posted in our Google Classroom. These forms will
have to be answered INDIVIDUALLY. Ensure that you have double-checked your answers and that Google
actually received your response by trying to answer the form again. Also, select the CORRECT SECTION.

IV. Assessment
You will do your assessment in groups of 4.
Your task is to make a three assessment tools on the affective domain: an observational checklist,
a Likert Scale, and a Semantic Differential Scale.
For the observational checklist, you will focus on a particular value (like teamwork, empathy, charity)
and create observable tasks regarding such a value to be placed inside the observational checklist. For
example, choosing the value of empathy, we could have the item “Listens attentively to his peers” or “Offers
comfort through giving resources like food.” You will make only one (1) observational checklist that contains
at least ten (10) of these observable items for one chosen value.
For the Likert Scale, you will use a particular value towards your area of specification. For example,
English Majors could focus on ‘Motivation on Learning Sonnets’ as their overall value while having an item
such as “I like reading Sonnets.” Be sure to follow the rules in constructing items for Likert Scale, especially
having positive and negative statements for the value. Be mindful of the fact that your statements should
actually be related with your desired value. You will make only one (1) Likert scale containing at least 20
items regarding the chosen topic.
For the Semantic Differential Scale, you will focus on at least 4 different values regarding your major
of specialization. Under each value, you will make one item each for Evaluation, Potency, and Activity,
meaning a minimum of 3 items for each value. The values may focus on one construct, such as “Self-
Efficacy”, related to 4 (four) topics in your major of specialization. Or vice versa (4 constructs for 1 topic). For
example, your four topics could be “Self-Efficacy (SE) in solving fractions, SE in drawing shapes, SE in
solving problems on integers, and SE on writing equations”. Conversely, you could have “self-efficacy,
motivation, self-esteem, and tenacity towards Algebra”. Thus, you will have a total of 12 items since you have
4 topics and 3 items under each topic.
 Encode your work in a single document and upload it in our Google Classroom. Do not forget to put
your name and the name of your groupmates, course, section, and date on the upper part of the document.
Only one member of the group has to upload their work. Put your name and your group mates name on the
private comment (description box) when you upload the file.

V. Other References
• Navarro, Rosita L. and De Guzman-Santos, Rosita (2013) Authentic Assessment of Student
Learning Outcomes 2 (2nd Edition). Lorimar Publishing, Inc. Quezon City, Manila
• Jazmin-Hena, Lilia (2015) Classroom Assessment 2. Great Books Trading. Quezon City,
Manila
• Corpuz, Brenda B. and Salandanan, Gloria G. (2015) Principles of Teaching 1, 4th Edition.
Lorimar Publishing, Inc. Quezon City, Manila
• https://www.simplypsychology.org/

Prepared by:

ALLEN CHRISTIAN V. TORRES, MSEd

Instructor, CTE

Checked by:

GLORIA C. NEMEDEZ, MAEd

Program Head, CTE

Approved by:

EVELYN ABALOS-TOMBOC, DBA

President, University of Eastern Pangasinan