Assessment Procedures for English Teaching and Learning

Shaiffadzillah OmaraliAssessment Procedures for English Teaching and Learning

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Assessment is a means to make inferences on the knowledge a

student has gained from given training or teachings. In the case of English

language assessments they are carried out ‘to make inferences about

language ability’ (Bachman & Palmer, 1996). There are many inferences that

can be deduced from such data on language ability, but in Brunei it is mainly

used in making decisions related to the students’ achievements. These

decisions, as stated by Bachman and Palmer, include ‘selection, placement,

diagnosis, progress and grading’. These will be elaborated further under ‘the

use of assessment data’.

The data that I will bring to light in this report were gathered from an

all-girls Secondary school (named withheld) that I was stationed in recently.

From my three weeks observation I have carried out candid interviews with

all the English department teaching staff, including the Head of Department

herself. I have also randomly interviewed students on their thoughts

regarding the types of assessments used. Since the school caters teachings

from Form 1 to Form 5, the differences between Forms provided data that

were too large an extent to correlate against one another. Therefore, the only

assessment procedure that is put under scrutiny in this report is that of Form

5 (both O-Levels and N-Level). The fact that it accommodates students of a

similar high-stake objective (i.e. passing O-Levels) in addition to similar age

group and level of proficiency makes it a more valid study. The report will

encompass the types of assessments preferred by the Form 5 English

01


teachers, respectively including its effectiveness and usefulness both

alongside and under separate entries.

A S S E S S M E N T T Y P E S

Major assessments for the Form 5 level are carried out according to an

agreed schedule. The formality every year is to have at least two monthly

tests (including mid-year examinations), a mock examination prior to the O-

Levels examinations, and the O-Levels examinations itself. This variety

provides different aspects of assessment procedures as the monthly tests are

usually produced by individual teachers or the English language department

as a whole, the mock exams a collaboration between teachers and the

Ministry of Education, and the O-Levels exams a collaboration between the

MOE and Cambridge International Examinations Board. Dispersed in between

these major assessments are minor ones such as class tests or assignments

that play a major role in decision making particularly the progression into a

new chapter of the syllabus.

Interviewed teachers unanimously agreed that the main objective of

giving tests and assignments to Form 5 students is to help them pass their

English O-Level papers albeit the fact that the same teachers see that the O-

Levels do not necessarily account for assessment of language ability,

especially communicatively. This is why the most common method of

assessment employed by Form 5 teachers is the use of past English

language O-Levels questions as practice drills (Appendix A; Menengah 5

02


Mid Year Exam, Paper 2). Apart from using authentic past papers, teachers

also incorporate the O-Levels papers’ format to produce their own renditions

that will be based on their students’ levels of proficiency. Examples of such

versions are included in Appendix A (Menengah 5 Mid Year Exam, Paper 1).

However, teachers rarely use the whole of Paper 1 or 2 during one

lesson. They prefer breaking the assessments according to topics or

objectives of the tasks. For example, comprehensions can be done in one

lesson while vocabulary can be assessed in another lesson.

The school’s English language department has provided its teachers

with a schedule on types of exercises to be carried out every three weeks

(Appendix B; p. 10). The types of exercises emphasized are comprehension,

summary, composition and the area of language/grammar. Paying particular

attention to the schedule of Form 5 O-Level English, the amount of exercises

for language and grammar is indefinite and thus a plethora of assessment

types are used. Grammar is usually tested in writing and the teachers

construct assessment questions according to the response they want to elicit.

Close-ended response questions demand a fixed answer that is to be derived

from prompts in the question. Multiple choice questions, true or false and

cloze passages with word lists are such questions and are suitable for

students with low levels of proficiency. Limited response questions are less

fixed where no optional answers are given other than prompts from the

context. A cloze passage without any options elicits a limited response. Open-

ended response questions are those that usually call for the creativity of

03


students since ‘the answers for open-ended questions are not limited by the

examiner or the test item’ (Genesee & Upshur, 1996). Written compositions

or other writing tasks fall under this category, as do oral interviews and

information gap activities. Open-ended questions are always used in elite

classes (e.g. Form 5 A) to cater for the proficient students in need of

improving their creativity of language use and usage. However, to make

grammar assessment communicative, teachers will initiate interaction

between and among students on topics ranging from grammatical glossary to

informal conversations.

Some assessments are constructed based on their purpose for the

teacher or the students. In the case of formative evaluation assessments,

they ‘help students guide their own subsequent learning, or for helping

teachers modify their teaching methods and materials so as to make them

more appropriate for their students’ needs, interests and capabilities’

(Bachman & Palmer, 1996). Teachers stated that they always modify their

teaching methods because sometimes they underestimate the expanse of

time needed to teach a particular problem, and at times when progress

becomes stagnant. Formative evaluation assessments usually foresee this

problem at an early stage. Summative assessments, on the other hand,

provide ‘useful information of students’ achievements or progress at the end

of a course of study which is usually reported in the form of grades on the

basis of test scores (Bachman & Palmer)’. Teachers in the school are given a

scheme of work (Appendix B, pp, 1 – 7) which includes methods of marking

04


assessment scores. Appendix C also shows a sheet on how English N-Level

papers are marked so teachers know what areas are to be emphasized.

Most assessment tasks are formally carried out, especially with the use

of past papers where teachers usually prefer to enforce the same

atmosphere as that of a real examination (i.e. time restrictions, placements

in class). One informal activity which I was fortunate to observe was the

making of pamphlets, which came out once in the O-levels examination.

C O N D U C T I N G A S S E S S M E N T S

Assessments can be given as homework or schoolwork assignments.

Schoolwork assignments are more flexible since students can be assigned to

perform tasks individually, in pairs, in groups or as a class. The teacher is also

present to provide scaffold for the students when needed. All the types of

assessments mentioned earlier can be performed as schoolwork and used

alongside the SEBD textbook if applicable.

Typical homework assignments given by the school’s teachers are

incomplete schoolwork and exercises from the SEBD. Some teachers dwell on

the idea of having students read a book for half of the year, especially for

students that need improvements in reading skills. A unique requirement for

all students to have is the schools’ work diary, where students must record

details of every assignment given and the progress that they have attained.

Although marks from assessments are added to the total marks of the exams,

05


the amount of marks allocated varies among teachers, depending on the

capability of the class as a whole.

T H E U S E O F A S S E S S M E N T D A T A

As mentioned earlier, the assessment data are used mainly for

inferences and decision making. In the Form 5 level, assessments are used

for ‘diagnosis’ and the indication of ‘progress’ through grading. Since the

students will inevitably be facing the O-Levels, teachers must diagnose areas

of students’ weaknesses. One method that the teachers use is to practice

past papers. From the feedback obtained the teachers can then create

assessments that serve the sole purpose of remedying these areas of

weakness. Teachers can also juxtapose the areas of weakness with the marks

allocated to these areas available in the scheme of work (Appendix B).

Assessments are also used by the school to indicate progress of

students. Since lessons are to be carried out according to the syllabus,

progress from chapter to chapter can be confirmed with successful

assessment results. Moreover, a drastic progress may prompt teachers to

modify their assessments to be more challenging while a slow progress

signals that another type of assessment might be needed to replace the

ineffective type. Grading is typical of ‘progress’ oriented assessments where

students are ranked according to marks attained. In the case of the mock

exams, the grading acts as predictions to potential attainments.

06


On a higher scale, the date of the Form 5 level acts as indicator as to

how well the school will perform in the upcoming O-Levels examinations.

T H E A S S E S S M E N T S ‘ U S E F U L N E S S

The most common method used in assessing Form 5 students in the

school is currently with the use of past paper examination questions. This is

quite useful in my opinion because for at least 10 years the format and layout

of both English O-Levels papers have been retained. The practice drills and

repetitive use of these past papers will undoubtedly familiarize the students

with the format of the paper and the demands that it enquires. Where the

authentic papers lack in content and interest, teachers resort to producing

their own papers from the original format to tackle specific areas of

weaknesses.

The use of cloze-passages to elicit three levels of responses is a

method most favored in the teaching of language and grammar such as

tenses and word classes. Cloze passages flexibility can cater to all levels of

students’ proficiency, from the least proficient (using close-ended cloze) to

the fluent (using open-ended cloze).

Composition assessments carry the biggest marks allocation and

therefore stand as the highest priority to a good grade. Frequent exposure to

composition exercise will hone creativity and vocabulary use. Free writing

compositions are very useful because it is a medium for testing other skills

07


such as the ability to use idioms, use impressive vocabulary, build up

arguments and so forth. Composition questions are also relatively easy to

construct by teachers. Summary writing tests the students’ skills to write

under controlled information and the ability to grasp essential points from a

given text. These two elements of the English examinations are crucial to the

students’ success and therefore repetitive practice with assessments

regarding these elements is undoubtedly very useful.

The usefulness of data from assessment tasks have been mentioned

earlier as indicators of progress. In turn, the indicators of progress signal

students to improve and motivate themselves to learn. Grading also provide

parents on their child’s weakness and may prompt them to send these

children to for extra tutorials.

All the English teachers agree that assessing students groom them to

be prepared and be as focused as possible in facing the O-Levels examination

although they do stress that assessment is not the exclusive procedure in

acquiring language.

The downside of using past paper questions is that drilling may only

contribute to superficial learning and not actual language acquisition. It is a

sad perception is that the main objective is to pass the O-levels and not to

actually learn language as a communicative device.

T H E A S S E S S M E N T S’ E F F E C T I V E N E S S

08


To determine the effectiveness of the assessments used, I randomly

interviewed several students from all different Form 5 classes and my object

of enquiry was how effective are assessments used by their teachers in

actually teaching them to understand concepts of certain areas of language.

Some students stated that assessments are adequate enough because the

constant drilling and practice makes the process of completing assignments a

habitual and automatic process. Another group of students stated that

assessments used are at times insufficient especially when the knowledge

brought into the assignments is not enough to construct answers. This is due

in part to incomplete lessons and misunderstandings.

Teachers, when questioned about the effectiveness of assessments,

voiced out a theoretical perspective. They stressed that assessments are

very effective if the concern is to pass the O-Levels examination. However, if

language acquisition and usage is of a greater concern, methods like

extensive reading and social interactions are more effective than

assessments. Due to the fact that teachers have to satisfy the demands of

parents and the Ministry of Education to see students pass their O-Levels so

as to be able to further their studies, teachers have to enforce carefully

prepared assessments to reach this shared objective.

From several lessons that I have observed using past paper

comprehension questions, it can be deduced that such materials are effective

in familiarizing students on how to effectively read a comprehension passage

09


as well as the learning of vocabulary. Since most weak students have little

chance and interest to read extensively during their free time, attempting

comprehension questions compensates for the reading skills that they

actually missed out.

Assessments become more reliable when a formal scoring system is

used. Open-ended compositions are usually problematic to be assessed.

However, the school’s English department has agreed on one scoring system

(Appendix B, pp 4 -5) to be used by all teachers and strict analyses of

students’ work is required for use alongside the scoring system. Hence, with

the presence of an efficient scoring system, assessment of students’

proficiency becomes more reliable. The same can be stated for other

elements such as summary writing and comprehension, where with the

presence of an agreed scoring system (Appendix B), the assessments can be

used to diagnose students’ strengths and weaknesses.

Formative and summative oriented assessments have been proven

quite effective in improving the quality of teaching methods employed.

Grades gathered from summative assessments provide a yardstick for the

English department to try and scaffold most, if not all, students to reach their

potential capabilities. As emphasized by the Head of Department, a

summative review will enable them to predict the ZPD (Zone of Proximal

Development) of the students. The H.o.D incorporates technical theories such

as these to produce real statistics. For the year 2004, the department

010


predicted a 50% pass for N-Level students and 95% pass for O-Levels

students.

Formative assessments allow for individual diagnosis and the

weaknesses that teachers elicit from such assessment procedures. The flaws

in turn will be tackled during afternoon extra classes (the school enforces

compulsory afternoon extra classes for Form 5 students).

Sometimes when situations become too critical or inert, the

assessments used will be more informal. This is obviously more effective than

formal assessments because students are mostly at ease in informal

interactions. Hence informal communications for questions and answers, such

as verbal comprehensions and discussions are effective in training areas that

may not work for some students.

Some assessments, however, are ineffective since errors made by

students are fossilized errors. One CFBT teacher mentioned that at present,

there have not been any methods effective enough to root out these

fossilizations. Oral assessments, in particular, proved problematic. Teachers

agree that students bring their level of oral skills from lower secondary

socializing.

C O N C L U S I O N

011


The school is one of the forerunners of English language achievement

in Brunei. The English teaching staff collectively agrees that the effective use

of their assessment procedures in parallel with a reliable scoring system

resulted to this outcome.

R E F E R E N C E S

Bachman, L. & Palmer, A. (1996) Language Testing in Practice: Designing and

Developing Useful Language Tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press (pp. 95 –

100)

012


Genesee, F. & Upshur, J. (1996) Classroom based Evaluation in Second

Language Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (pp. 168 -211)

013

Date post:	28-Nov-2014
Category:	Education
Upload:	shai-omarali
View:	377 times
Download:	4 times