Abstract :

Folk dance performance assessment in Philippine Physical Education is still largely conducted through paper-based rubric scoring, a process that is time-consuming, prone to computation error, and difficult to aggregate across multiple judges. This study developed and validated a rubric-based mobile scoring application for Android intended for Physical Education teachers and competition judges scoring Philippine folk dance performances. The application was built using the ADDIE framework across all five phases: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. It digitizes a five-criterion rubric covering rhythm and timing, technique and execution, expression and artistry, costume and presentation, and synchronization, with automatic weighted score computation, live ranking, and PDF or CSV export. The design was validated by a panel of nine experts drawn from Physical Education master teachers, mobile application developers, and members of the PSHS-CRC Engineering and Research Academic Unit, using a five-domain instrument covering functionality, usability, content and rubric accuracy, visual design, and overall acceptability. The panel rated the application 4.61 out of 5.00 (Highly Acceptable), with a content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) of 0.96. A usability pilot with 20 Physical Education teachers produced a mean System Usability Scale score of 84.6, corresponding to an adjective rating of Excellent and grade A. A reliability comparison scored 30 folk dance performances using both the paper rubric and the application with the same five judges; app-computed and manual totals showed a Pearson correlation of r = 0.994 (p < .001) and a two-way mixed, absolute-agreement intraclass correlation coefficient of ICC = 0.991 (95% CI 0.982 to 0.996), indicating near-perfect agreement. A paired-samples t-test found no significant difference between the two methods (t(29) = 1.42, p = .166), while the application reduced mean scoring-and-tally time per performance from 4.7 minutes to 1.3 minutes. The validated application is a complete, reusable, and empirically supported tool that resolves the multi-judge, low-connectivity constraints of live folk dance scoring, and it is now suitable for institutional adoption at PSHS-CRC with continued monitoring.

---

Keywords :

android development, developmental research, expert validation, folk dance, Mobile Application, Physical education, Reliability., rubric-based assessment, Usability Testing.

---

References :

1. Bermoy, L., & Orbegoso, J. (2026). Development and evaluation of PARBIS: A parent-guided augmented reality behavioral intervention system for children with ADHD. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(12), 2040–2061. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91200155
2. Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
3. Department of Education. (2013). K to 12 physical education curriculum guide. Bureau of Curriculum Development. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/PE-CG.pdf
4. Kundu, K., Yadav, S., & Sayyad, T. (2018). A design and development of rubrics system for Android applications. American Journal of Engineering Research, 7(3), 279–287.
5. Panadero, E., Fernández Ortube, A., Krebs, R., & Roelle, J. (2024). Analysis of online rubric platforms: Advancing toward eRubrics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 50(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2345657
6. Widyandana, D., Utomo, P. S., Setiawan, I. P., Kurniawati, Y. T., & Dandekar, S. (2024). Comparing paper-based and mobile application for rank-based peer assessment in interprofessional education: Before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Medical Education, 24, 1383. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06382-2
7. Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2009). Determining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4(3), 114–123.
8. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.
9. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
10. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012