 |
2.2 Assessment techniques of writing and speaking skills
|
|
|
|
2. 2 Assessment techniques of writing and speaking skills
Assessment is the process of collecting and interpreting evidence to make judgments about pupils’ educational achievements, which is a central task of school administrators and teachers. In most academic environments, the basis for assessing pupils’ work places the teacher or external evaluator in the position of the authority figure to judge a student’s or school’s progress based on evidence. There are several types of assessment, including: diagnostic at the beginning of an academic term to gage pupils’ previous knowledge on a topic; benchmark, occurring intermittently to measure progress; summative, which is administered at the end of the learning process to make a judgment on pupils’ mastery of the material, usually in the form of an exam; and formative, which encompasses an ongoing process that may be administered through various means during the academic year [43, p. 98].
Differences between summative and formative assessment lie not only in the type of evaluation being used, but also the function of this evaluation. The distinction becomes clear when considering the alternative names for both techniques: Assessment OF learning (summative assessment) and Assessment FOR Learning (formative assessment). Assessment for learning becomes formative assessment when the teacher uses evidence gained to adapt their teaching framework or curriculum to ensure that learning needs are met. While both measure pupils’ knowledge, the purposes of the measurements differ: Assessment for learning seeks to integrate assessment as a tool to increase learning while Assessment of learning seeks to provide a measurement of learned knowledge. Summative assessment is concerned with the degree to which learning outcomes have been achieved. Cumulative in nature, this type of assessment is administered as a means of collecting statistical data to be used as a tool for teachers to see where the pupils stand academically. In general, an exam is given, testing pupils on their knowledge gained throughout the unit, term or academic year. Pupils are assessed and given a score, which is reflected in their final grade. Research has linked summative assessment to ‘motivation to learn, ’ as tests and classroom grading may provide a drive for pupils to apply rigorous study habits to learning the material as they prepare to be tested.
Table 1 Summative versus formative assessment
| Summative Assessment | Formative Assessment | |
| Assessment OFLearning | Assessment FORLearning | |
| When administered? | At the end of an academic unit, term or year | Occurs on an ongoing basis |
| Method of Administration | Test, quiz, exam, high stakes testing | Teacher’s questions, portfolios, pupils set short term goals with teacher acting as a facilitator in order to achieve these goals |
| What is covered? | Summative review of everything that pupils have learned during the unit, term or academic year | Tailored to pupils needs; varies depending on the nature of the lesson |
| Type of Correction | Teacher corrects student errors | Peer correction, self correction, teacher feedback |
| Type of Evaluation | Numerical score, mark (A, B+, sobresaliente, notable2) or percentage. | Detailed teacher feedback (oral or written) focuses on pupils’ strengths and weaknesses, peer feedback, self-‐ assessment |
| Results given | Pupils are given results at a later date ranging from several days to several weeks after the exam has been completed. | Pupils given results instantaneously or more detailed results intermittently throughout the academic term |
| Goal of evaluation | To measure student achievement, certify student competence, grading | To measure student achievement, point out strengths and weaknesses, provide ways to improve and find solutions to fill learning gaps |
|
|
|
As table 1 shows, summative assessment takes place at the end of an academic unit and is often administered in the form of a written exam measuring pupils’ retention of the material covered throughout the unit. The exam is returned to the student several days or weeks later with a grade (and perhaps some form of error correction), yet pupils are most likely not given extensive feedback on their mistakes or the opportunity to correct them. Conversely, Assessment occurs at various points throughout the unit and most often on a daily basis, taking many forms, such as: portfolios, group or pair tasks, or even responses to teacher’s questions. The evaluation of tasks also takes on many forms, such as feedback given by teachers (this feedback should be more than a numerical grade or error correction) and peer and self-‐ correction. Assessment also stresses the importance of explaining learning objectives to pupils at the beginning of a unit and setting goals.
Over the past several decades, summative assessment has been criticized by researchers who claim that it does not offer an accurate representation of knowledge. Additionally, some claim that summative assessment, namely high stakes testing, may put undue pressure on pupils. With the goal of measuring student achievement and raising standards, in many cases summative assessment may instill anxiety. Pupils sense the fact that they are being evaluated and become preoccupied with avoiding failure (, to the extent that learning objectives may be lost in the interest of achieving a high grade or test score [44, p. 147].
The aim of this research is to provide analysis of assessment techniques that may be used in the classroom, which are later referred to in the findings. Over the past years, the use of formative assessment and assessment for learning has become integrated into teacher training curriculums in Kazakhstan, and is encouraged by schools.
Effective assessment is a key part of good teaching in all subjects. The best schools use regular formative assessment to assess what their pupils know and identify where they need additional support. This in turn allows meaningful feedback to individual pupils and parents.
The new national curriculum programs of study set out what pupils should be taught by the end of each key stage. Teachers will develop a school curriculum, which is relevant to their pupils. Schools will be able to introduce their own approaches to formative assessment.
|
|
|
Changes in the assessment process involve several factors, including: sharing learning goals with pupils; providing feedback; encouraging pupils to self-‐ assess based on previously established criteria; and finally, using the data gained to adapt teaching strategies.
These changes are designed to help pupils benefit from assessment in order to facilitate learning. Therefore, five critical factors of Assessment are: stating the purpose of the lesson; effective questioning techniques; feedback; peer and self-‐ assessment strategies and using summative assessment for formative purposes.
Asking questions should be regarded as a process of collecting evidence and may also be used as a form of diagnostic assessment to determine what pupils have studied in previous units. This is an important way to measure student progress and provide continuity from course to course without repeating the same knowledge or omitting elements that pupils may not have previously covered. Questioning at the beginning of the unit is a key factor in measuring previous knowledge and adapting planning accordingly. Studies show that while some teachers are adept at judging student work, many struggle to diagnose through questioning, therefore training in this area is required.
Question type is an important factor in implementing assessment and holds a direct correlation with engaging pupils in lower or higher order thinking skills. A study by Stiggins et al. investigated questioning techniques in primary classrooms over a range of subjects [46]. The findings indicate that the most frequently used questions were recall questions, which prompted pupils to recount facts learned in previous lessons. However, the number of higher-‐ order thinking questions was infrequent. When self-‐ reflecting on their questioning techniques in class, some teachers reported that many of the questions that they used were closed, requiring only one-‐ word or “yes or no” answers, and expressed a desire to change this tendency. Assessment for Language teachers view questioning as a valuable tool to promote thinking and rich classroom discourse, which provides a wealth of information by which to evaluate their pupils’ understanding of the subject matter. Therefore, training to recognize and utilize questions that produce lengthy student responses is crucial.
Feedback is one of the most important elements in assessment for learning, as it focuses on developing understanding and treats mistakes as learning opportunities. In other words, feedback acts as a way of showing pupils frequent errors or misunderstandings and teaching them how to change their approach so as to correct these errors and maximize learning.
The use of effective feedback is a key factor in helping pupils cross their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Vygotsky’s theory of the Zone of Proximal Development describes a threshold that pupils have allowing them to work up to a certain ability level [47, p. 88-89]. Working alone, the student is able to complete activities only up to this level. However, with intervention, or assistance from a teacher or mediator, the student’s ZPD is crossed, allowing them to work at a higher ability level. This makes it possible for pupils to work at a higher level during group collaboration or while receiving help on a task from their teacher through effective feedback.
The intervention occurs as the teacher gives oral or written feedback to pupils. The traditional approach to providing feedback involves grading and giving comments on summative assessments. However, this approach provides little more than error correction. Even if the student did choose to revise and learn based on error corrections, the assessment window has been closed. The same rule applies for writing. Rather than focusing on the pupils’ errors, the focus should be on what they did well and what can be done to improve.
|
|
|
Tunstall and Gipps developed a typology for teacher feedback including two major categories: the first relates to socialization and the second relates to assessment. Socialization feedback refers to the teacher giving pupils messages regarding respectful behavior toward their peers in the classroom.
A key, though frequently overlooked, learning tool that plays a role in returning ownership of learning to learners is self-‐ assessment. According to Leitch et al. pupils seem to lack an active voice in the classroom, inhibiting participation. Self-‐ assessment is a way to return the voice to pupils while developing metacognitive abilities and self-‐ esteem. Challenges arise with self-‐ assessment because it is not intuitive; pupils must be trained before being able to evaluate their own work. To train pupils on how to self-‐ assess, some teachers provide additional materials such as rubrics or checklists and exemplars (examples of stellar work) to which pupils may compare their own work to effectively self-‐ assess [48, p. 104]
Self-‐ assessment builds autonomy by training pupils to recognize what constitutes “good work” to attain the best results possible for their own work. This is one of the key tenants of theory-‐ making inferences and planning for further steps. To build autonomy, pupils must have intrinsic, or internal, learning goals that they work toward attaining. Therefore, the task of the teacher becomes providing a risk free learning environment that promotes the emotional and psychological health of the pupils. Achievement of this goal involves training pupils to successfully self-‐ assess, which for younger learners often requires the integration of mediating artifacts, such as posters or signs. These methods were put into practice by the AfL teachers involved in the present study, and are therefore described in detail.
Some methods of self-‐ assessment techniques in the classroom are traffic lights, thumbs up/ down and smiley faces. All three tools are used in a similar way: after the teacher has presented the content of the class, they ask pupils whether they have understood the basic concepts or if more explanation is necessary. In the case of traffic lights, pupils hold up a green light, meaning that they have understood the concept and feel prepared to move on; a yellow light indicating that they have further doubts; or a red light, which indicates a need to dedicate more time to explanation of the material. Thumbs up/ down and smiley faces mimic this approach, substituting a sad face or thumbs down for a red light.
All are simple and quick forms of self-‐ assessment, which allow the teacher to instantaneously evaluate the pupils’ comprehension of the material. In addition to engaging the pupils with the use of visual aids, traffic lights help pupils, especially lower achievers, to express their lack of comprehension in a way that does not expose them to judgment or embarrassment in front of their peers. In other words, it is far more desirable to hold up a red card than raising one’s hand and saying, “I don’t understand” in front of a group of peers. It creates a sense of equality or inclusion for pupils who feel on the margins of classroom learning and ensures the positive emotional and psychological circumstances are being maintained in the classroom environment.
While traffic lights, smiley faces and thumbs up/ thumbs down provide instantaneous self-‐ assessment that take very little classroom time, these methods do not provide insight into the concepts that require further elaboration. In order to determine this reasoning, some teachers supplement traffic lights with meta-‐ reflection at the end of each class or unit. This reflection involves asking pupils to write “minute papers” a brief summary of the topic at the end of the lesson allowing them to retroactively reflect on their knowledge. Keeping a regular reflection journal allows pupils to look back on what they have found difficult in the past, boosting their confidence as they see their progress in addressing each point [3, p. 347].
|
|
|
