A Authentic Assessment of Literacy and Numeracy Based on Local Wisdom at Elementary School Level in Ternate City
Authentic Assessment of Literacy and Numeracy Based on Local Wisdom at Elementary School Level in Ternate City
Keywords:
Authentic Assessment, Elementary School, Literacy, Local Wisdom, Numeracy
Abstract
Purpose of the study: To describe the implementation of authentic assessment of literacy and numeracy based on local wisdom in elementary schools in Ternate City and to assess the influence of authentic assessment standards based on local wisdom on improving the literacy and numeracy skills of elementary school students in Ternate City.
Methodology: This study used a mixed methods approach. The subjects were students from SDN 1, SDN 2, SDIT Nurul Hasan, and SDIT Fathul Munir. The subjects were 200 fifth-grade students, with 50 students from each school. Data collection techniques included classroom observation and local wisdom-based activities. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data, and descriptive statistical analysis was used.
Main Findings: Authentic assessment based on local wisdom in Ternate has not been fully integrated into literacy and numeracy learning practices. Several effective strategies emerged from teachers' use of local wisdom-based literacy and numeracy learning: counting numbers using the Ternate language, students interviewing market vendors, and then conducting mathematical measurements during buying and selling activities at the local market.
Novelty/Originality of this study: Focus on integrating local wisdom (Ternate's cultural heritage) as a context for authentic assessment. Develop assessment instruments that are specific and relevant to the daily lives of students in Ternate City. Address the gap between authentic assessment theory and practice in areas rich in local culture and contribute to culturally equitable and contextualized educational policies and practices.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
A.Resnick and L. Resnick, “Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform,” in Changing Assessments: Alternative Views of Aptitude, Achievement and Instruction, B. Gifford and M. O’Connor, Eds. Boston: Springer, 1992.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. ASCD.
B. S. Bloom, Handbook of Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw Hill, 1971.
B. Street, Social Literacies: Critical Approaches to Literacy in Development, Ethnography and Education. London: Longman, 1995.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2014). Beyond the bubble test: How performance assessments support 21st-century learning. Jossey-Bass.
D. H. Gitomer and A. Bell, “Evaluating teaching and teachers,” in Handbook of Research on Teaching, 5th ed., V. Richardson, Ed. Washington, DC: AERA, 2016.
E. L. Johnson, Contextual Teaching and Learning: What It Is and Why It’s Here to Stay. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2002.
Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., & Ainley, J. (2013). International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS): Assessment framework. IEA.
Gojak, L. M., & Miles, R. H. (2015). The formative 5: Everyday assessment techniques for every math classroom. Corwin Press.
G. Wiggins and J. McTighe, Understanding by Design, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2005.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2021). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hasanah, U., & Fitriyadi, Y. (2022). Penerapan pembelajaran kontekstual untuk meningkatkan kemampuan literasi dan numerasi siswa sekolah dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Nusantara, 8(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.31227/jpdn.v8i1.354
H. Freudenthal, Revisiting Mathematics Education: China Lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991.
.
J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991.
Kemendikbudristek. (2021). Asesmen Nasional: Panduan teknis pelaksanaan Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM), Survei Karakter, dan Survei Lingkungan Belajar. Pusat Asesmen dan Pembelajaran.
L. Darling Hammond et al., “Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development,” Applied Developmental Science, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 97–140, 2020.
L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1978. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4 en.wikipedia.org+11scirp.org+11anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com+11
L. S. Shulman, “Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching,” Educational Researcher, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 4–14, 1986.
L. Vygotsky, Cultural-Historical Theory, in Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy, D. C. Phillips, Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2014. doi: 10.4135/9781483346229 tandfonline.com+10researchgate.net+10en.wikipedia.org+10
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2016). TIMSS 2015 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press.
OECD, PISA 2018 Results (Vol. I): What Students Know and Can Do. Paris: OECD, 2019.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
P. Black and D. Wiliam, “Assessment and classroom learning,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 7–74, 1998. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102 sk.sagepub.com+11assess.ucr.edu+11gla.ac.uk+11
P. Black and D. Wiliam, Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 2003.
P. Black and D. Wiliam, “The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning,” Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 20–50, 2004.
P. Black et al., “Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 139–148, 1998.
S. Griffin, “Numeracy across the curriculum: Research-based strategies for teachers,” Educational Leadership, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 64–68, 2004.
Snow, C. E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003). Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap: What do we know and where do we go from here? Carnegie Corporation.
Sugiyono. (2022). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.
UNESCO, Global Education Monitoring Report: Inclusion and Education – All Means All. Paris: UNESCO, 2020.
V. John Steiner and H. Mahn, “Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 31, no. 3 4, pp. 191–206, 1996. doi: 10.1080/00461520.1996.9653266 en.wikipedia.org
Wagner, T., & Dintersmith, T. (2015). Most likely to succeed: Preparing our kids for the innovation era. Scribner.
Willms, J. D. (2006). Learning divides: Ten policy questions about the performance and equity of schools and schooling systems. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Yudha, R. P, Anggara, D. S, & Zulaeha, O, “Authentic assessment instruments for performance in mathematics learning in elementary schools,” In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1321, No. 3, p. 032012, IOP Publishing, October 2019, DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/1321/3/032012.
Zubaidah, S. (2016). Keterampilan abad ke-21: Keterampilan yang diajarkan melalui pembelajaran. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan, 1–17.
A.Resnick and L. Resnick, “Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform,” in Changing Assessments: Alternative Views of Aptitude, Achievement and Instruction, B. Gifford and M. O’Connor, Eds. Boston: Springer, 1992.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. ASCD.
B. S. Bloom, Handbook of Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw Hill, 1971.
B. Street, Social Literacies: Critical Approaches to Literacy in Development, Ethnography and Education. London: Longman, 1995.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2014). Beyond the bubble test: How performance assessments support 21st-century learning. Jossey-Bass.
D. H. Gitomer and A. Bell, “Evaluating teaching and teachers,” in Handbook of Research on Teaching, 5th ed., V. Richardson, Ed. Washington, DC: AERA, 2016.
E. L. Johnson, Contextual Teaching and Learning: What It Is and Why It’s Here to Stay. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2002.
Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., & Ainley, J. (2013). International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS): Assessment framework. IEA.
Gojak, L. M., & Miles, R. H. (2015). The formative 5: Everyday assessment techniques for every math classroom. Corwin Press.
G. Wiggins and J. McTighe, Understanding by Design, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2005.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2021). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hasanah, U., & Fitriyadi, Y. (2022). Penerapan pembelajaran kontekstual untuk meningkatkan kemampuan literasi dan numerasi siswa sekolah dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Nusantara, 8(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.31227/jpdn.v8i1.354
H. Freudenthal, Revisiting Mathematics Education: China Lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991.
.
J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991.
Kemendikbudristek. (2021). Asesmen Nasional: Panduan teknis pelaksanaan Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM), Survei Karakter, dan Survei Lingkungan Belajar. Pusat Asesmen dan Pembelajaran.
L. Darling Hammond et al., “Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development,” Applied Developmental Science, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 97–140, 2020.
L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1978. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4 en.wikipedia.org+11scirp.org+11anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com+11
L. S. Shulman, “Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching,” Educational Researcher, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 4–14, 1986.
L. Vygotsky, Cultural-Historical Theory, in Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy, D. C. Phillips, Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2014. doi: 10.4135/9781483346229 tandfonline.com+10researchgate.net+10en.wikipedia.org+10
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2016). TIMSS 2015 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press.
OECD, PISA 2018 Results (Vol. I): What Students Know and Can Do. Paris: OECD, 2019.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
P. Black and D. Wiliam, “Assessment and classroom learning,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 7–74, 1998. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102 sk.sagepub.com+11assess.ucr.edu+11gla.ac.uk+11
P. Black and D. Wiliam, Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 2003.
P. Black and D. Wiliam, “The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning,” Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 20–50, 2004.
P. Black et al., “Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 139–148, 1998.
S. Griffin, “Numeracy across the curriculum: Research-based strategies for teachers,” Educational Leadership, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 64–68, 2004.
Snow, C. E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003). Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap: What do we know and where do we go from here? Carnegie Corporation.
Sugiyono. (2022). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.
UNESCO, Global Education Monitoring Report: Inclusion and Education – All Means All. Paris: UNESCO, 2020.
V. John Steiner and H. Mahn, “Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 31, no. 3 4, pp. 191–206, 1996. doi: 10.1080/00461520.1996.9653266 en.wikipedia.org
Wagner, T., & Dintersmith, T. (2015). Most likely to succeed: Preparing our kids for the innovation era. Scribner.
Willms, J. D. (2006). Learning divides: Ten policy questions about the performance and equity of schools and schooling systems. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Yudha, R. P, Anggara, D. S, & Zulaeha, O, “Authentic assessment instruments for performance in mathematics learning in elementary schools,” In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1321, No. 3, p. 032012, IOP Publishing, October 2019, DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/1321/3/032012.
Zubaidah, S. (2016). Keterampilan abad ke-21: Keterampilan yang diajarkan melalui pembelajaran. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan, 1–17.
Published
2025-10-16
How to Cite
[1]
O. Zulaeha, “A Authentic Assessment of Literacy and Numeracy Based on Local Wisdom at Elementary School Level in Ternate City: Authentic Assessment of Literacy and Numeracy Based on Local Wisdom at Elementary School Level in Ternate City”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 6, no. 4, Oct. 2025.
Section
Articles
Copyright (c) 2025 Ode Zulaeha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Integrated Science Education Journal is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
.png)
.png)
