Learning Assessment Model for invasion category games in year 4 Physical Education

Saad Liza, Jani Julismah, Rahmat Azali, Salimin Norkhalid,

Abstract

Journal of Sports Science and Physical Education 5(1): 35-48, 2016 - This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of Learning Assessment Model for Invasion Category Games in Year 4 Physical Education. This study uses a holistic instrument for assessing student performance standards for the assessment of Invasion Category Games that includes teacher observation that consisted of psychomotor, cognitive and affective domain. Measuring instruments were constructed based on five main sources that were the Handbook of Physical Education Teaching, Curriculum and Assessment Document Standard of Physical Education, Physical Education textbooks, Professional Circular No. 1/2014 and the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. All sources are used as a guide and reference so that the instruments to assess are built in conformity with the requirements and needs of physical education. The study found that the validity of the instrument Learning Assessment Model for the invasion category games is high for both the legality of the process. The reliability of the instruments Learning Assessment Model for the offensive category game between the two testers for the achievement level of students learning in the three domains showed a strong relationship. Based on the findings, this Learning Assessment Model is suitable to be used as a standard instrument for assessing the level of student mastery of the Invasion Category Games in Physical Education. The implication of the study is Learning Assessment Model can become a more realistic and holistic assessment instrument and can be used to measure the level of students in line with school-based assessment requirements as outlined in the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025.

References

1. Abu Bakar, N., & Bhasah, A. B. (2008). Penaksiran dalam pendidikan dan sains sosial (Cetakan Pe.). Tanjong Malim: Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. 2. Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum. (2013). Dokumen Standard Kurikulum dan Pentaksiran Pendidikan Jasmani Tahun 4 (Cetakan Pe.). Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 3. Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 5–8. 4. Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as Learning, for learning and as learning. In Assessment as Learning: using classroom to maximise student learning (pp. 2–8). 5. Freeman, W. . (1997). Physical Education in a Changing Society. Boston: Houston Miffin Co. 6. Hopper, T. (2007). Teaching tennis with assessment for/as learning. Journal of Physical Health Education, 73, 1–11. 7. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. (2012). Laporan Awal Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013 - 2025. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. 8. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (1998). Surat Pekeliling Ikhtisas Bil 25/1998. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum. 9. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2014). Surat Pekeliling Lembaga Peperiksaan Bil. 1/2014: Penambahbaikan Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS). Putrajaya. 10. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2014). Buku Panduan Pengurusan Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS). Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia. 11. Lisle, J. D. (2015). The promise and reality of formative assessment practice in a continuous assessment scheme: the case of Trinidad and Tobago. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(1), 79–103. 12. Mohd Izwan, S., Norkhalid, S., & Gunathevan, E. (2015). The Validity and Reliability of ISO Test towards the Performance Assessment of Future Physical Education Teachers in Teaching and Learning Process. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195(December), 814–820. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.184. 13. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Update on the Junior Cycle Review (2004). 14. Norazilawati, A., Noorzeliana, I., Mohd Sahandri, G. H., & Saniah, S. (2015). Planning And Implementation Of School-Based Assessment ( SBA ) Among Teachers. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 15. Norkhalid, S., Julismah, J., Nur Akmal, I., Sadzali, H., Gunathevan, E., Boon, O. K., & Mohd Izwan, S. (2014). Validity and Reliability of Comprehensive Assessment Instruments for Professional Skills in Field and Court Sport Among Major Students Coaching Based on Model K. BEST: International Journal of Humanities, Arts, Medicine and Sciences (BEST: IJHAMS), 2(4), 37–44. 16. Othman, L., Siti Esah, M., Ahmad Fuaad, D., Azali, R., & Omar Hisham, B. (2013). Pembinaan Standard Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah bagi sekolah rendah di Malaysia. Tanjong Malim, Malaysia. 17. Pangrazi, R., & Darst, P. (1992). Dynamic Physical Education for Secondary School Students: Curriculum and Instruction (2nd Ed.). New York: McMillan Publishing Company. 18. Rink, J. E. (2002). (2002). Teaching physical education for learning (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. 19. Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications. 20. Sidek, M. N., & Jamaludin, A. (2008). Pembinaan Modul. Bagaimana membina modul latihaan dan modul akademik.