Relationship Between Assessment and Teaching in Higher Education -Thesis Project

Master´s thesis proposal

Erickzon D. Astorga Cabezas

Santiago, March 2012

Relationship between Assessment and Teaching in Higher Education

Productive skills measurement in TEFL context at a specific educational institution

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, our Society has given a huge importance to the professional formation and the

way of the responsible Educational Institutions are instructing its students to form integral

professionals. For this very reason, many Higher Education Institutions have been adopting

in their formal instruction of their majors a specific Teaching method called Competence

model (Schön, 1992). Although, this new Teaching is matched with the current social

demands, the practicality of it in each course is a real challenge both teachers

methodologies and the Institution, especially for English language instruction.

In my experience in Higher Education Institutions that are using before mentioned

Teaching, they normally determine its own methodologies and assessments for English

courses. For the former, they use a methodology closely related to Communicative

language teaching, because Competence model compel teachers to do classes using real

experience activities or simulated situations no matter what level of English students are. In

other words, English is mainly taught under a productive paradigm (speaking and writing

skills). However, when assessments and their key answers are designed and applied to their

students, they lack of productive exercises are obvious even they assess another skills. In

addition to this idea, when students of higher levels of English are assessed in terms of

productive skills, they do not produce effective English or they do not simply know how to

do it.

2 Relationship between Assessment and Teaching in Higher Education

For this very reason, my main concern is to see how coherent Assessment procedures and

Teaching are and their consequences in each process.

Therefore, in order to investigate in this issue, I will concentrate my investigations on three

big topics. One of them is Assessment in TEFL and Washback; the former is because its

controversial points related to the understanding of basic terminology used to describe

student performance, the measurement criteria of specific language abilities and

comprehension of the design, development and using of procedures to measure students

performance (Bachman, 1990). The latter, this concept is quite associated with the effect of

the tests on teachers, students, and their classroom behaviors (Alderson & Wal, 1993;

Hughes, 1989).

Also, we will deal with concept of Teaching that in capital letter is going to be understood

as methodology that some Higher Education Institutions recommend their teachers to focus

on their corresponding subjects. It is important to mention that English language course is

going to be our subject of interest.

Finally, we will refer to productive skills – Speaking and Writing- in terms of their

corresponding way to be assessed and taught in a TEFL context.

Having briefly checked the topics that are going to be used in our investigation, we can

clearly mention the reason of this review. This is intended to show the coherence between

English instruction of productive skills and assessment procedures to measure them in a

TEFL context (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) considering a specific Higher

Education Institution.


This investigation has been prompted by the observation of an apparent mismatch between

assessment procedures that are intended to being aligned with a specific Teaching and the

focus of English teachers´ techniques to deal with mentioned assessment procedures.

Apparently, English learners may be wrongly assessed in terms of the designated purpose

of institutions of higher education (Klave; 2007). On the other hand, the process of

measurement in languages possesses some terms that are being freely used interchangeably

tending obscure the distinctive characteristics of each (Bachman, 1990; Van Blerkom,

2009). This may probably produce inappropriate development and use of language tests

(Allison, 1999)

It is especially important from the prior problems to establish a clear understanding based

on the need of real determination of assessment criteria in contrast with the English

teachers’ techniques (Knight, 1992), the understanding of procedures used to measure

students’ performance to design reliable and valid assessments in Languages (Bachman,

1990) and the main purpose is to make assessments congruent with the instructions and

align it to what students should be learning (Biggs, 2003)

LITERATURE REVIEW

This thesis will be supported by scholarly literature that is widely referred to Assessment

and Teaching in a Higher Education Context, of course all literature is thought to be applied

to TEFL context. Hence, in accordance with our research project, each of its general themes

is going to be resolved around the following topics:


For assessment, early researches in TEFL context have tried to discover how English

learners can be properly assessed in terms of their language abilities and give better criteria

to be considered to measure English learners.

In 1990, Lyle Bachman proposed in his books and investigations the discussion of

fundamental issues that must be addressed at the start of any language testing effort,

whether this involves the design of new tests or the selection of existing ones. Also, he

states three important areas to be considered at the moment of developing and using

language tests such as the context that determine the uses of language tests; the nature of

the language abilities we want to measure and the nature of measurement (Bachman, 1990)

In 1995, J. Charles Alderson, Caroline Clapham and Dianne Wall, focusing more on

teachers, state principles of language ability test development both Education professionals

and to whom have some need to construct or evaluate language tests or examinations

(Alderson, Clapham & Wall, 1995)

In 2005, Charles R. Hancock proposes some methodologies to be used by English teachers

to make appropriate connections between language teaching and language testing. He

establishes also different forms to assess English learners introducing the most modern

methods to improve their language competence. (Hancock, 2005)

In 2007, David Boud and Nancy Falchivok wrote a book where they joined various authors

who developed the subject of Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. From this book,

it is going to be mentioned Ronald Barnett who deals with Assessment in Higher Education

giving a conceptual point of view of Assessment. Also, we can propose to Steinar Kvale

who talks about the relationship between assessment and Teaching in Higher Education


Institution as well as he gives a brief introduction about History of assessment in Higher

Education. Finally, some other authors assert more sustainable assessments to be used in

Higher Education Context.

Finally, in 2002 Sara Cushing Weigle and Sari Luoma exposed the nature of writing and

speaking skills, giving considerations and theory in relation to the whole process to

evaluate each of them (Luoma, 2004; Cushing, 2002)

For Teaching, in 1992 and 1988, Donald Schön reflects in terms of professional practice at

Universities giving principles how teachers thinks when they teach and the new design of

teaching and learning for future professionals. This approach currently leads the main

reason for some universities to choose the Competence Model to be used with their student

´s professional instruction. (Schön, 2011)

RESEARCH QUESTION

The aim of this research is to pay attention to the close relationship between Assessment

and Teaching in a TEFL context and the influence of the former on English teachers’

methods to instruct that language. This is mainly because it is believed that there is a lack

of connection between the Teaching adopted by Higher Education Institutions and its

assessment procedures. In turn, assessment procedures may be affecting teachers´

techniques to develop productive skills in language learners. For this very reason, this

thesis will attempt to answer the following specific research question:


Research Question:

“HOW COHERENT ARE AIEP ´S ENGLISH ASSESSMENT

PROCEDURES WITH ITS TEACHING TO DEVELOP ORAL AND

WRITTEN COMPETENCE IN ITS HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS?”

In terms of my subsidiary questions, those are going to be helpful for us because they will

give the keys to focus our investigation only on our matter of interest; also, they will allow

us to decide what data collection techniques are more useful to be implemented in our

research. These important questions are the following:

“How do students perceive the relationship between English teachers´ techniques and

Aiep´s assessment procedures to evaluate their productive skills?”

“How do teachers perceive the relationship between Aiep´s Teaching and its

assessment procedures to evaluate students´ productive skills?”

RESEARCH RELEVANCE

The relevance of this research project is to examine how related Teaching, English

assessment procedures and English teachers techniques are. By doing so, we will let us

clarify essential aspects to achieve better English assessment instruments to measure

Higher Education student performance as well as improving English practice in classrooms.

Also, this research is going to be useful to understand how often second language learners,

for us English learners, are exposed to real language and produce them in their English

classes.


RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Our investigation is built under a Constructive Paradigm. This is because our methodology

will be qualitative by resorting to a phenomenological research approach in order to reveal,

from the perspective of participants, their perceptions about a specific phenomenon

(Jackson; Verberg, 2006). Therefore, we could say that people being studied are viewed as

participants or informants, not subject of this project (Creswell, 2009). Additionally, the

core of our activities to build this project is mainly focused on qualitative researches such

as literature review centered on showing how current findings fit into what is already

known, selection of participants, setting for data collection and finally data collection

methods and analysis (Jackson; Verberg, 2006).

SAMPLING

For our review, the participants are going to be English teachers of Auditing and Nursing

majors (3 for each major) and students from the same majors. The chosen branch of Aiep is

going to be Bellavista. The reason to select teachers and students is to contrast the

perception of them for the former in Aiep´s assessment and its Teaching and for the latter in

Aiep´s assessment and their English teachers’ method to instruct English.

The selection of participants will be through purposing sample (Jackson; Verberg, 2006).

The teachers are going to be selected at random and the number of them is going to be 4.

The students in Nursing courses are 45 per sections. The sections are only two; therefore,

the total number of students in Nursing is 90. In Auditing courses, the students are 35 per

sections. The sections are two as well; thus, the total number of students is 70. To sum up,

the total number between Nursing and Auditing students is 160. Therefore, we will utilize


random selection through probability sampling (Briones, 1996). This is mainly because we

do not need any special requirement to choose students nor teachers; just we require enough

number of participants. Finally, we have to take into consideration that the level of English

of these students is English II. This is only because the students have to have experienced

assessment and teaching´s methods determined by Aiep.

DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES

For our investigation, three data collection techniques are going to be used.

Interviewing: When qualitative research takes the form of an interview, the interviewer

asks open-ended questions and simply records what the participant says. Personal bias can

be an issue, but other issues arise as well. For instance, the researcher may react to the

subject’s responses, encouraging or discouraging the dialogue in a certain direction.

Moreover, the researcher has to be careful that he does not ask leading questions (Seidman,

2006)

Questionnaires: Questionnaires are not among the most prominent methods in qualitative

research, because they commonly require subjects to respond to a stimulus, and thus they

are not acting naturally. However, they have their uses, especially as a means of collecting

information from a wider sample than can be reached by personal interview. Alternatively,

a questionnaire might be used in the first instance, followed by qualitative techniques on a

sample as a check and to fill out certain features of the questionnaire replies. (Gillham,

2007)


DATA ANALYSIS

In order to analyze our selected data collection techniques, we are going to focus our

interview data and questionnaire data on a profound and detailed descriptive analysis and

coding. For these instruments, the data will be immediately examined avoiding

accumulation. This is mainly done to evade difficulties in results analysis. Additionally, it

is going to be created a system of registering of information to keep notes, observation,

interviews and others correctly filed. For the third instrument, Graphic representations,

cross-correlation coefficients or cross tabulation are going be used.

PROBLEMATICS

As we know researches in any field are not exempted from limitations; therefore, due the

fact that our review is focused on a qualitative research method, the most significant

problems that we may face are the following; Qualitative studies cannot provide grounds

for generalization from their cases, the consumption of time to negotiate access, assemble

sample and coding can be too extensive or sometimes qualitative studies can be too much

subjective among many other obstacles. However, these problems are not the only

limitations. Some others are closely related to the gathering and interpretation of key

information in our thesis´s methodological part.

Interviews Provide indirect information filtered through the views of interviewees,

researcher´s presence may bias response.(Creswell, 2009)

Questionnaires Use unnecessary questions

Wrong interpretation of results (Gillham, 2007)


In order to avoid prior conflicts, we will have to use specific bibliography to ground rules

or norms to base and support our data collection techniques; also, it is going to be done a

piloting stage where some other teachers and students from different branches can give us

their feedback.

TIMEFRAME

There are many factors that could influence on our thesis in terms of its process and

elements. The following schedule is intended to organize our time to get the completion of

this study.

Research Timeline

Date Stage

January –

February 2012

Initial Literature Review / General theories related to the research

topic

March 2012 Final Literature Review / Preparation to apply pilot of data collection

techniques

April – May

2012

Application of data collection techniques /Revision and Interpretation

of questionnaires

June 2012 Interviewing participants / Revision and Interpretation of Interviews

July 2012 Data Analysis

August –

September 2012

Writing Result /Completion of the Study

October 2012 Thesis Submission

VALIDITY & RELIABILITY

We know that we, as researchers, need to check for accuracy of the finding and consistency

to be applied across different researchers and different projects (Creswell, 2009); in other


words, we have to bear in mind terms of qualitative validity and reliability procedures

(Gibbs, 2007).

Validity Reliability Ethics

In order to validate data

collection techniques as a

whole. (Creswell, 2009)

* Triangulation of different

data sources of information by

examining evidence from the

sources and using it to build a

coherent justification for

themes.

In order to validate each data

collection technique.

(Creswell, 2009)

* Focus group and Interviews

are going to be provided with

rich and thick description to

convey the findings and clarify

bias.

* Questionnaires are going to

be validated using factor

analysis through correlations.

In order to make data

collection techniques reliable

as a whole. (Creswell, 2009)

* Make sure that there is not a

drift in the definition of codes,

a shift in the meaning of the

codes during the process of

coding.

In order to validate each data

collection technique.

(Creswell, 2009)

* Focus group -Interview

- Check transcription or

details.

- Determine the meaning of the

codes.

- Cross-check codes.

* Questionnaires

- Application to external

participants

- Piloting.

The main ethical

debates that our review

could face are conflicts

related to overt and

covert related to specific

information. Also, we

could face with

problems of subject´s

privacy.

In order to avoid these

problems, we, as

researchers, will

negotiate all the

necessary permissions

into the institution,

informed consents,

protect students and

teachers´ identities.


CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this thesis is to investigate coherence between the Assessment procedures and a

specific Teaching in English language at a specific Professional Institute, which is using

one of the most contemporary models in Higher Education formation. Additionally, this

research is going to show us how intertwined Assessments and Teaching are each other

along with the positive and negative consequences for TEFL learning/ teaching to be so.

This will certainly make an important contribution to our profession performance in terms

of assessments and their contribution to improve the English teacher´s methods who are

involved in this popular teaching model.

In order to find a suitable method that successfully identifies our problem, we will resort to

our participant´s perception. For this very reason, we will use a qualitative research

methodology adopting a constructive paradigm; moreover, we will embrace the ways that

qualitative research choose its samples and determine its data collection techniques. Of

course, the analysis of data collection techniques is going to be influenced by the kind of

research that we are carrying out as well.

I really hope that the selected methodology for this research helps us to achieve their

purpose of our thesis. This is to identify the presence of coherence in assessment and

teaching of a specific institution, but if not, these techniques have to able to give us

important and valuable information to explain any incongruence. This means that the used

procedures will correctly recognize the different factors that are involved in failures or

improvements of our research problem topic.


Also, it is supposed that this review will provide us with parameters or principles to be

considered when we, English teachers, experience something alike. Therefore, we will

know how to face each topic in our best way or at least we may be fairly aware of the

ongoing situation in a specific context.

REFERENCES

BIBLIOGRAPHYAlderson, J., Clapham, C., & Wall, D. (1995). Language Test Construction and Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Allison, D. (1999). Language Testing and Evaluation - An Introductory course. Singapore: Singapore University Press.

Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental Considerantions in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning Teaching for Constructing Learning. Buckingham: Open University Press/Society for Research into Higher Education.

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2007). Assessment for the long term. In D. Boud, & N. Falchikov, Rethinking assessment in Higher Education - Learning for the long term (pp. 3-13). New York: Routledge.

Briones, G. (1996). Metodología de la Investigación cuantitativa en las Ciencias Sociales. ARFO Editores e Impresores Ltda: ICFES.

Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design - Qualitative, Quantitative, Mixed Methods Approaches. California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Cushing, S. (2002). Assessing Writing. In J. Alderson, & L. Bachman, The Cambrigde Language Assessment Series (pp. 1-230). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gibbs, G. (2007). Analysing Qualitative Data (Qualitative Research Kit). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Gillham, B. (2007). Developing a questionnaire (Real World Research). London: British Library.

Hancock, C. (2006). Language Teaching and Language Testing: a way and ways to make appropriate connections. Acción Pedagógica, (pp. 6-13).


Jackson, W., & Verberg, N. (2006). Methods: Doing Sociel Research. Canada: Pearson Education Canada.

Klave, S. (2007). Contradiction of Assessment for learning in Institution og Higher Learning. In D. Doud, & N. Falchikov, Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education - Learning for the long term (pp. 57-71). New York: Routledge.

Knight, P. (2007). Grading, classifying and future learning. In D. Boud, & N. Falchikov, Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education - Learning for the longer term (pp. 73-86). New York: Routledge.

Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing Speaking. In J. Alderson, & L. Bachman, The Cambridge Language Assessment Series (pp. 1-170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Morgan, D. (1997). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. California: SAGE Publications.

Schön, D. (2011). Reflective Professional Practice at the University. Compás Empresarial, 14-21.

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as a Qualitative Research: A guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.

Van Blerkom, M. L. (2009). Measurement and Statistics for Teachers. New York: Routledge.

Vicerrectoría Académica de AIEP Instituto Profesional de la Universidad Andrés Bello. (2011, Noviembre - Diciembre). Módulo de Autoinstrucción - Taller de Metodología y Didáctica. Retrieved Noviembre 2011, from http://virtual.aiep.cl/


Date post:	24-Oct-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	astorga-neko
View:	64 times
Download:	2 times

Relationship Between Assessment and Teaching in Higher Education -Thesis Project

Documents