Home⇛The Advanced Social Science in Research Journal⇛vol. 1 no. 3 (2026)

Toward Competent Graduates: A Systems – Level Review of PNTC Colleges’ Summative Assessment Framework

Patrick Mark M. Del Rosario

Discipline: maritime technology

 

Abstract:

Maritime Higher Education Institutions maintain strong summative assessment systems to ensure graduates possess competencies re-quired. This study conducted a systems-level review of PNTC Col-leges’ summative assessment framework for its Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation program to determine the extent of align-ment with Regulatory Driven Assessment Framework, examine oper-ational practices by faculty and assessors, identify implementation challenges, and develop recommendations for strengthening gradu-ate competencies. A qualitative descriptive design was employed. Document trailing using a protocol with a four-point alignment scale applied to three courses, while semi-structured interviews were con-ducted with institutional leaders, assessors, faculty, and administra-tion representative. Thematic analysis was used to interpret data. Findings showed that the framework is Substantially Aligned. Ap-proved practical assessments and grading achieved full alignment, minor gaps in the table of specification of formative and summative assessments within a single document and physical and digital ar-chiving of assessment evidence. Operationalization reflects a clear preparation, validation, and approval process, mapping of competen-cies, simulator-based scenarios that test adaptability, standardized rubrics, pre-and post-assessment calibration, and continuous im-provement through item analysis. Key challenges include large class sizes and simulator availability, documentation and grading that re-duce time for students, and difficulties in applying uniform compe-tency across learners. The study concludes that PNTC Colleges has de-veloped clear and effective summative assessment system supporting competency verification. Targeted improvements in tool design, rec-ord-keeping protocols, validator participation, and technology-ena-bled documentation are needed to ensure competent graduates. These insights contribute to quality assurance in maritime education and provide model for other institutions undergoing regulatory tran-sitions.



References:

  1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
  2. Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
  3. Biggs, J. (2014). Constructive alignment in university teaching. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 1, 5–22.
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  5. Calambuhay, J., & Macasio, R. (2022). Title of the study on maritime education and training. International Journal of Maritime Studies, 15(2), 45–60.
  6. Child, J., & Shaw, S. (2023). Identifying challenges in designing and implementing a skills and competency framework for future seafarers: A systematic literature review. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2024.2356365 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2024.2356365
  7. Commission on Higher Education. (2012). CHED Memorandum Order No. 46, series of 2012: Policy-standard to enhance quality assurance (QA) in Philippine higher education through an outcomes-based and typology-based QA. Commission on Higher Education. https://ched.gov.ph
  8. Commission on Higher Education & Maritime Industry Authority. (2023). Joint CHED-MARINA Memorandum Circular No. 1, series of 2023: Policies, standards and guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering programs. Commission on Higher Education; Maritime Industry Authority. https://ched.gov.ph; https://marina.gov.ph
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  10. Daiz, J. (2024). Teaching strategies, pedagogical competence, and challenges among maritime professional instructors of maritime higher education institutions (MHEIs): Bases for an enhancement program. Maritime Research and Technology, 3(2). https://apc.aast.edu/ojs/index.php/MRT/article/view/MRT.2024.03.2.948 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21622/MRT.2024.03.2.948
  11. De Guzman, M. F. (2024). Alignment of written examinations to STCW shipboard performance requirements: A gap analysis. International Journal of Maritime Education and Training, 20(1), 78–95.
  12. Dewan, M. H., et al. (2023). Immersive and non-immersive simulators for the maritime sector: A systematic literature review. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(1), 147. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11010147 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11010147
  13. Ford, K. (2014). Competency-based education: History, opportunities, and challenges. Center for Innovation and Research in Graduate Education, University of Washington.
  14. Formeloza, R. M., & Formeloza, R. S. (2014). Integration of research competencies in outcome-based assessment: Challenges and opportunities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Maritime Education, 1(1), 23–34.
  15. Garay-Rondero, C. L., & Issa-Zadeh, S. B. (2025). Integrating sustainability thinking in maritime education. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.1234567 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2479205
  16. Gervais, J. (2016). The operational definition of competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(2), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1011
  17. Ghosh, S., Bowles, M., Ranmuthugala, D., & Bowles, B. (2021). Reviewing seafarer assessment methods to determine their effectiveness. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 20(2), 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-021-00249-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-021-00249-9
  18. Guico, M. T., & Dolor, G. A. (2013). Faculty awareness and readiness for outcome-based education in maritime institutions. Lyceum Maritime Journal, 5(1), 34–49.
  19. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
  20. International Maritime Organization. (2011). STCW Convention and STCW Code: Including 2010 Manila Amendments. International Maritime Organization.
  21. International Maritime Organization. (2017). STCW Convention and STCW Code (2017 ed.). International Maritime Organization.
  22. Macapaz, R. D. (2020). Technology-enhanced authentic assessment and its impact on competency mastery in maritime education [Doctoral dissertation, Philippine Merchant Marine Academy]. PMMA Repository.
  23. Manuel, J. P. (2023). Standardization of performance tasks for higher-order STCW competencies: A national survey. Journal of Maritime Studies and Training, 15(3), 201–218.
  24. Maritime Industry Authority. (2026). Regulatory-driven competency assessment framework and the MARINA Competency Assessment System (MCAS). Maritime Industry Authority.
  25. Mendezabal, M. J. N., & Tindowen, D. J. (2022). Compensatory averaging and inconsistent rubric application in Philippine maritime schools: Violations of JCMMC No. 01 s. 2023. International Journal of Instruction, 15(4), 567–584.
  26. Miller, G. E. (1990). The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Academic Medicine, 65(9 Suppl), S63–S67. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045
  27. Mori, M., et al. (2025). A systematic literature review on artificial intelligence in recruiting and selection: A matter of ethics. Personnel Review, 54(3), 854–878. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2023-0257 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2023-0257
  28. Navarro, R. L., Cruz, A. M., & Santos, R. (2015). Impact of calibrated OBE rubrics on English proficiency outcomes in maritime education. Maritime Education Review, 12(2), 89–104.
  29. PNTC Colleges. (2025). Assessment manual (AM-CME 22 001). PNTC Colleges.
  30. PNTC Colleges. (2025). College of Maritime Education manual (PG-CME 25 008). PNTC Colleges.
  31. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
  32. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667305
  33. Santos, R. M., & Reyes, L. T. (2024). Best practices in 50–60% summative weighting and mandatory CO-passing: A multi-case study of top-performing MHEIs. Journal of Maritime Higher Education, 21(1), 101–125.
  34. Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers. American Association of School Administrators.
  35. Sturgis, C., & Casey, K. (2018). Quality principles for competency-based education. iNACOL.
  36. Sutrisno, A., & Wijaya, A. (2023). The influence of competency-based training on the readiness of nautical cadets in the maritime industry. Journal of Maritime Research and Technology, 10(2), 45–62.
  37. Tei, Y. A. (2015). Outcome-based education and the STCW Convention: The death of competence? WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 14(2), 345–362.
  38. Tisoy, R. I. (2025). Competencies of maritime students in professional courses: A study at a Philippine university in the context of Joint CHED-MARINA Memorandum Circular. Journal of Education, Learning, and Management. https://journals.stecab.com/jelm/article/view/1133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.69739/jelm.v2i2.1133
  39. Tusher, H. M., Nazir, S., Ghosh, S., & Rusli, R. (2023). Seeking the best practices of assessment in maritime simulator training. TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 17(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.17.01.10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.17.01.10
  40. Wiig, A. C., et al. (2023). Reviewing simulator-based training and assessment in maritime education: A topic modelling approach for tracing conceptual developments. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 22(2), 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-023-00307-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-023-00307-4

 


Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic