See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257717156

Assessment of Psychomotor Domain in Materials Technology Laboratory

Work

Article  in  Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · October 2012

DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.708

CITATIONS READS

4 603

6 authors, including:

Roszilah Hamid Shahrizan Bin Baharom

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
98 PUBLICATIONS   334 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   141 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Noraini Hamzah Wan Hamidon Wan Badaruzzaman

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
35 PUBLICATIONS   212 CITATIONS    113 PUBLICATIONS   355 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

IRPA Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia View project

Stabilization of clayey soil View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Riza ATIQ Rahmat on 14 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723

International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (ICTLHE 2012) in

conjunction with RCEE & RHED 2012

Assessment of Psychomotor Domain in Materials Technology

Laboratory Work
Roszilah Hamidb,*, Shahrizan Baharomb, Noraini Hamzahb, Wan Hamidon Wan
Badaruzzamana,b, Riza Atiq O.K. Rahmata,b, Mohd RaihanTahab
a
Centre for Engineering Education Research, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, 43600, Selangor, Malaysia
b
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Building Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
Bangi, 43600, Selangor, Malaysia

Abstract

The learning domains (cognitive, affective and psychomotor) for each program outcome for the Civil and Structural
Engineering (C and SE) program are identified. Two programs outcomes which are identified as the outcomes where the
psychomotor leaning domains are to be developed in C and SE students. Key performance indicators are written so as to
assess the student performance in achieving the identified outcomes. In Materials Technology course, the rubrics of the
chosen key performance indicators for the laboratory work component of this course are prepared to assess the student
psychomotor achievement in the subject.

© 2012
© 2012Published
Publishedbyby Elsevier
Elsevier Ltd.Ltd. Selection
Selection and/or
and/or peer-review
peer-review underunder responsibility
responsibility of Centre
of Centre of Engineering
of Engineering Education,
Education,
UniversitiTeknologi
Universiti TeknologiMalaysia
Malaysia

Keywords: Laboratory work; materials technology; psychomotor domain

1. Introduction

The domains of learning as described by Bloom’s Taxonomy are the cognitive, affective and psychomotor
(Dooley et al., 2005). Most of the student’s cognitive mental skills (Knowledge) are developed through
classroom instruction. The student’s affective skills component, a growth in feelings or emotional areas
(Attitude), is developed through structured leadership in grouped design project (capstone), career development
activities and events (co-curricular activities), competitions, cornerstone and final year project presentation and

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +603-89216447; fax: +603-89216417.

E-mail address: rsozilah@eng.ukm.my

1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Centre of Engineering Education, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.708
 Roszilah Hamid et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723 719

such. The student’s psychomotor skills, commonly called manual or physical skills (Skills), are normally
developed through laboratory setting. The Program Outcomes (PO) of the Civil and Structural Engineering
Program (C and SE) are set as such to emphasize all three domains of learning. Table 1 shows the PO of the C
and SE program and their allocated domains of learning.

Table 1. The program outcomes of the civil and structural engineering program and their allocated learning domain

PO Knowledge Components Domain

1 Has adequate background knowledge and able to apply it Cognitive
2 Has the ability to undertake engineering problem identification and provide solutions Cognitive
3 Has the ability to design a Civil and Structural or Environmental Engineering project Cognitive
within social and environmental constraints.
4 Is able to behave professionally and practice moral ethics Affective
5 Has the ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyse and interpret Cognitive and
data. Psychomotor
6 Has the ability to use the techniques, skills and modern engineering tools necessary Cognitive and
for civil engineering practice Psychomotor
7 Has the ability to convey spoken or written ideas not only with engineers but also with Affective
community
8 Has the ability to function effectively as an individual and in a group with capacity to Affective
be a leader or manager as well as effective team member
9 Recognizes the needs of lifelong learning Cognitive
10 Has the ability to adopt elements of construction project management, asset Cognitive
management, public policy, administration, business and entrepreneurship.

Materials Technology (coded KKKH2164) course is a first semester second year course taught at the
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). The course deals
with the introduction of construction materials, their manufacturing processes, their characteristics and properties.
This course consists of lectures; project; and laboratory work on the concrete mixing and testing. The mix design
method of concrete (the most widely used construction material) is emphasized. The improvement on the
delivery methods of the class instruction and the laboratory work were described previously (Hamid et al., 2008,
Hamid et al., 2009 and Hamid & Mohammed, 2010). The assessment of the final examination questions was also
analyzed elsewhere (Hamid et al. 2011). This paper describes the improvement in the laboratory work report
assessment to include the assessment of the psychomotor domain. Previously, the laboratory report was assessed
based on the cognitive domain only. Key performance indicators for each level in the psychomotor domain
identified for this course are determined and the assessment rubrics for each level are prepared.

2. Key Performance Indicators

There are 8 levels in the psychomotor domain as shown in Table 2 (Simpson, 1972). Table 3 shows that action
verbs provided for levels mechanism and complex overt response are the same, as such in this paper both level
are labelled as Level 4. The key performance indicators written for the Material Technology lab report
assessment should include adverbs or adjectives that will indicate that the performance is quicker, better, more
accurate, and so forth.
720 Roszilah Hamid et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723

Table 2. Psychomotor domain levels and verbs

Perception Set Guided Mechanism Complex Overt Adaption Origination

(Level 1) (Level 2) response (Level 4) Response (Level 5) (Level 6)
(Level 3) (Level 4)
Sense organs Readiness Institution; Do alone in less Do without error; skilful Do in a different Do in a new way;
guide motor to take trial and time without performance of motor way; skills are create new
activity actions error describing the acts that involve well developed movement pattern
steps; responses complex movement and can be to fit a particular
become habitual; patterns; performing modified to fit situations or
move with some without hesitation; special problem; highly
confidence and quick; accurate; and requirements developed skills
proficiency highly coordinated
performance

Choose Begin Copy Assemble Assemble Adapt Arrange

Describe Display Trace Calibrate Calibrate Alter Build
Detect Explain Follow Construct Construct Change Combine
Differentiate Move React Dismantle Dismantle Rearrange Compose
Draw Proceed Response Display Display Re- Construct
Feel React Respond Fasten Fasten organize Create
Identify Show watch Fix Fix Revise Design
Isolate State Grind Grind Vary Initiate
Relate Volunteer Heat Heat Make
select Manipulate Manipulate Organize
Measure Measure
Mix Mix
Sketch Sketch

Table 3 shows the key performance indicator (KPI) for PO5 (has the ability to design and conduct
experiments, as well as to analyse and interpret data) which its learning domains are cognitive and psychomotor.
When writing the key performance indicator for the psychomotor domain, according to [1], we must remember:
(1) that a level of terminal behaviour is expected and accepted as evidence, (2) the conditions under which that
desired or expected behaviour to occur must be defined, and (3) criteria of acceptable performance must be
established by describing how well the learner must perform in order for that performance to be considered
acceptable. When preparing the KPI for the psychomotor learning domain in Material Technology course, the
highest level of the domain are assessed since the students are expected to have achieved the lower level to arrive
to the higher competency level.
 Roszilah Hamid et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723 721

Table 3. Key Performance Indicator for Program Outcome 5

Code Key Performance Indicator Learning Domain

(5C5) Ability to design experiment based on the research objective Cognitive
(5C2) Ability to observed and gather data Cognitive
(5C4) Ability to analyse data Cognitive
(5C6) Ability to present data in graphical form Cognitive
(5C6) Ability to interpret data critically Cognitive
5C6) Ability to infer such as able to conclude and explain the phenomenon occurred during experiment Cognitive
(5P5) Ability to perform experiment successfully without supervision Psychomotor
(5P5) Ability to organise and perform experiment safely and aware of priority in the workplace Psychomotor
(5P6) Ability to revise procedures and adapts the experiment tools to meet a problem situation Psychomotor

3. Assessment Rubric

The assessment rubrics for the KPIs in Table 3 were prepared as in Appendix A. Appendix A shows that the
psychomotor learning domain are also assessed for the laboratory work component of the Material Technology
course as stated in the program outcomes of the Civil and Structural Engineering program.

4. Conclusion

The learning domains (cognitive, affective and psychomotor) for each program outcome for the Civil and
Structural Engineering program are identified. Program outcomes 5 and 6 are identified as the outcomes where
psychomotor leaning domains are to be developed in C and SE students. Key performance indicators are written
so as to assess the student performance in achieving PO5. For Materials Technology course, the rubrics of the
chosen key performance indicators for the laboratory work of this course are prepared to assess the student
psychomotor achievement in the subject.

References

1. Dooley, K. E., Lindner, J. R., Dooley, L. McCoy. (2005). Advanced methods in distance education: applications and practices for
educators, trainers and learners. Information Science publishing Hershey, PA 17033. ISBN 1591404878. Pg 123
2. Hamid, R., Yusof, K.M. and Osman, S. A. (2008), Improvement of Delivery Methods in Teaching Materials Technology Proceedings of
the 7th WSEAS International Conference on Education and Educational Technology (EDU`08). Venice, Italy. 15-17.
3. Hamid, R., Yusof, K. M., Osman, S.A. and Rahmat, R.A.O.K. (2009) , Improvement in Delivery Methods in Teaching Materials
Technology, WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education 6(3):77-86
4. Hamid R. and Mohammed, S. A, (2010), Remote access Laboratory System for Material Technology Laboratory Work Proceedings of
the 7th. WSEAS Int. Conf. On Engineering Education (Education’10), Greece, , 311-316
5. Hamid, R., Othman, E., Osman, S. A., Hamzah, N., Jaafar, O. and Kasim, A. A. A. (2011), Determination of Materials Technology
Course Final Examination Questions Construct Validity through Rasch Model Approach 10th WSEAS International Conference on
Education and Educational Technology (EDU '11), Penang, Malaysia, 130-136.
6. Simpson, E. J. (1972). The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain, Vol 3. Washington, DC: Gryphon
House.
 722
R. Hamid et. al. / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2012) 000–000

Appendix A - LABORATORY - GROUP REPORT EVALUATION

Laboratory: ___________________________________________________________________ Course: _________ Group no.: _________

Title of project/ problem: ________________________________________________________________________ Report due date: _________

Group members: 1) ___________________________________ 2) ______________________________________

3) ___________________________________ 4) ___________________________________ 5) ___________________________________

No Criteria 4 3 2 1 Score KPI

Excellent Good Fair Poor
1 Abstract / Executive report The abstract is generally solid (all main Only two main points of the abstract is Only one main point of the abstract is All main points of the abstract are not 5C4
Short statement on purpose of work, points present) present present present
pertinent conditions, results in brief

2 Project Introduction, Background & x Good project introduction with x Good project introduction x Fair project introduction x Very brief project introduction 5C6
Problem Statement supportive evidence and substance x Background information is relevant x Background information is relevant x Background information somewhat
x Background information is very and provide a clear lead-in to research and provide a fair lead-in to research relevant but does not provide a clear
relevant and provides a very clear problem problem lead-in to the research problem
lead-in to the research problem x Problem statement articulated clearly x Problem statement articulated clearly x Problem statement not articulated
x Problem statement articulated very and supported/justified by theory but only fairly supported/ justified by clearly and hardly supported/
clearly & well supported/justified by and/or past research theory and/or past research justified by theory and/or past
theory and/or past research research

3 Procedures Presents easy-to-follow steps which are Most of the steps are understandable; Some of the steps are understandable; Not sequential, most steps are missing 5C6
Steps taken, method used, circuit logical and adequately detailed. some lack detail or are confusing. most are confusing and lack detail. or are confusing.
diagrams, design calculations, flow X 1.5
chart etcs

4 Data & Results Data table and graph neatly completed Both accurate, some ill-formed Both complete, minor inaccuracies Data table and/or graph missing 5C2
Results in the form of data, graphs etc. and totally accurate. characters. and/or illegible characters. information and are inaccurate. X2

Findings & Discussion xThe discussion soundly interprets the xThe discussion interprets the findings xThe discussion fair interprets the xThe discussion may be incomplete or C6
findings and is carefully connected and is connected with other sections of findings and is connected with other partially/ not clearly connected to the
with other sections of the report such the report such as the background, sections of the report such as the results. The connection with other
as the background, problem statement, problem statement, research questions, background, problem statement, sections is vague.
research questions, instruments and instruments and results. research questions, instruments and
xThe findings presented are mere
results. xThe findings are either superficially results.
repetitions of the results without
xThe findings are judiciously discussed discussed or not discussed in relation xThe findings are either fairly appropriate interpretation
in relation to theory and findings of to theory and findings of past studies discussed or not discussed in relation
Roszilah Hamid et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723

past studies cited in literature review. cited in literature review. to theory and findings of past studies xImplications, recommendations and
xImplications, recommendations and x Implications, recommendations and cited in literature review. directions for future research are not
directions for future research are directions for future research are drawn xImplications, recommendations and drawn from the research findings.
carefully drawn from the research from the research findings. directions for future research are fair xLimitations of the study are irrelevant.
findings. x Limitations of the study are relevant drawn from the research findings.
xLimitations of the study are relevant and adequately described. xLimitations of the study are relevant
X2
 R. Hamid et. al. / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2012) 000–000

View publication stats

and extensively described. and adequately described.

6 Conclusion The closing paragraph summarizes and The closing paragraph summarizes and The closing paragraph attempts to Concluding paragraph is not apparent 5C6
Provide answers to objectives stated draws a clear and well developed draws a sufficiently supported conclusion summarize but draws a weak
earlier conclusion conclusion

7 Writing format and style Precise and reasonable Effective, contains very few errors Contents many errors that garble the Contains serious and multiple errors 5C6
meaning or intent that hinder readability

8 Group Organization xExcellent work planning x Good work planning x Fair work planning x Poor work planning A
xMore than four times of meetings are x Three times of meetings are conducted xTwo times of meetings are conducted x One or no meetings are conducted
conducted

9 Ability to perform experiment Able to perform all experiments without Able to perform 80% of the experiments x Able to perform 50% of the Not able to perform the experiment 5P5
successfully without supervision assistance and supervision successfully without assistance and supervision experiments without assistance without assistance and supervision
and safely. successfully and safely. successfully and safely.
x Able to perform the experiment
safely under supervision

10 Ability to organise, and perform x Able to perform experiments safely x Able to perform experiments safely x Able to perform experiments safely x Fail to identify the important 5P5
experiment safely and aware of without supervision and assistance; without supervision; seek for with 50% assistance information in the laboratory
priority in the laboratory work in a group effectively assistance x Able to perform experiments safely x Need continuous assistance (100%)
x Able to determine the priority of the x Able to determine the priority of the with continuous supervision x Not being able to decide on their own
laboratory environment laboratory environment x Understand the problem statement x Unsafe work
x Supervise own work in achieving x Perform experiments based on protocol and ask questions x Do not ask around for assistance
experimental objectives and procedures and understand the x Perform experiments based on
problem statement; critical on the protocol and procedures and
reasons for doing experiments and understand the problem statement;
strategised effectively not critical on the reasons for doing
experiments and do not strategised
effectively.

11 Ability to revise procedures and adapts x Able to utilize the experimental x Able to utilize the experimental x Not confident; need assistance but x Not confident in utilizing the
the experiment tools to meet a problem apparatus without assistance apparatus without assistance can perform experiments own their apparatus
situation confidently confidently own x Need assistance continuously
x Understand the apparatus’ method of x Understand the apparatus’ method of x Follow normal procedures without
principle principle understanding the apparatus’ method
x Able to utilize experimental apparatus of principle
other than normal practice
x Utilize experimental apparatus
creatively and innovatively
Roszilah Hamid et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 56 (2012) 718 – 723
723