Alignment between the Learning Objectives and Examinations: A Comparative Analysis of High-School Physics Curricula in Myanmar and South Australia

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyse and compare the alignments of the Myanmar and the South Australian high-school physics curricula in relation to their respective learning objectives, learning outcomes and examinations. In both instances curricula from the completing year of high-school are examined: the Grade 10 Physics curriculum in Myanmar, and the Year 12 Physics curriculum in South Australia. 2018 materials, those most recently available, have been used for both Myanmar and South Australia. A slightly modified Porter"s alignment model is used to analyse curriculum alignment with objectives and assessment. The Myanmar physics curriculum demonstrated an alignment index with outcomes and examination of 0.58 and in the case of South Australia, the alignment index was 0.53. Both alignment indices were significantly lower than the critical values (0.839) and (0.884) at the 0.05 level. Most objectives and questions over-represented lower level cognitive skills. In Objectives: Remember (35%) and Understand (51%) for Myanmar, and Understand (54%) and Apply (31%) for South Australia; in Examinations, Remember (49%) and Apply (33%) in Myanmar and Understand (24%) and Apply (49%) in South Australia. Concerns are raised over diminished expectations of, and for, student success and discussion given on issues of validity in learning outcomes and assessments. Recommendations are then made to adjust and improve the alignment of materials used the two contexts of physics instruction.

Alignment analysis between teacher-made tests with the learning objectives in a selected school of central regional state of Ethiopia

“…As it was discussed in the conceptual framework section, the combinations of frameworks developed by Bloom and Porter categorize both content and cognitive complexities explicitly and enable one to analyze the alignment between different constructs. Bloom's and Porter's taxonomy are the most appropriate models to determine the alignment between assessment and standards [ 7 , 28 , 29 ]. Hence, for this study, the first dimension involves the science topics covered by a single semester of the high school calendar.…”