EDUP 3153 TASK 2

1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.006 Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com International Conference on Learner Diversity 2010 Teachers’ Perception on Alternative Assessment Nurfaradilla Nasriª, Siti Norhidayah Roslanª, Mohammad Iskandar Sekuanª, Kasmah Abu Bakarª, Sharifah Nor Putehª,* ªFaculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia Abstract Assessment is important to provide us the picture of curricular goals attainment and quality of our instruction. Currently, in Brunei, government use large-scale assessment of academic achievement. This paper discusses teacher perceptions on using alternative assessment. A sample of 50 secondary teachers in Brunei was involved and their perceptions were collected using instrument developed by researcher. The result shows that teachers have positive perceptions on alternative assessment but they reported that the most significant impact of alternative assessments is the increase in paperwork and demands on their time. © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Keywords: Assessment; Alternative assessment; Secondary teacher; Academic achievement; Perception. 1. Introduction Assessment is a part of teaching and learning process, aim to bring improvement for the assessor and the individual assessed. Therefore, assessment can be concluded as a method used to improve the quality of education because it can enhance life-long learning skills and elevate performance in various educational contexts. According to Belk and Calais (1998), assessment enables the teacher to gather information about the students’ progress, program goals and objectives as well as the extent to which methods of instruction deployed in the classroom are helping the students achieve these goals. Huba and Freed (2000) define assessment as a process of gathering and discussing information from various sources in order to develop a deep understanding of what students know, understand and can do with their knowledge as a result of the educational experiences. Whereas, Grounlund (1998) defines assessment as methods used to determine the extent to which students are achieving the intended learning outcomes of instruction. Based on definitions given, assessment encompasses four steps which are; (a) measuring students’ achievement, (b) defining student performance, (c) summarizing what students can do, (d) inferring what students could do. Nowadays, acquiring as many A’s as possible has been the main objective in education because this guarantees placement in prestigious universities and places of employment. Therefore, parents put on pressure to the teacher to produce excellent results. Due to the pressure, the teachers tend to teach to the test and gaining creative and critical thinking skills is no longer the main objective of instruction. __________ *Corresponding author. Tel: +60136201371 fax: +60389254372 E-mail address: [email protected] Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

38 Nurfaradilla Nasri et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 According to Olu Aina (2005), education should focus on students’ totality-cognitive, affective and psychomotor skills in order to produce students that are balanced physically, emotionally and intellectually. However, Rashid Mohamed, Abdul Ghani Abdullah and Shaik Abdul Malik Mohamed Ismail (2006) state that assessment practices today emphasis too much on assessing content mastered by the students and give too little attention to the skills. Rashid Mohamed, Abdul Ghani Abdullah and Shaik Abdul Malik Mohamed Ismail (2006) stressed that, educators must not only assess content but also emphasize on knowledge and skills such as to create, reflect, solve problems, collect and use information. According to assessment experts (Agrey, 2004; Kohn, 2000; Peterson and Neil, 1999; Sacks, 2000), standardized assessment (paper-and-pencil test) were used to assess students because it take relatively little time to develop and inexpensive to administer. Additionally, the assessment results are simple to report and understand. Finally, and very significantly, standardized assessments are promoted as objective measures of achievement. This means the results are not affected by the personal values or biases of the person who evaluated the assessment. However, the lack of using standardized assessment is that it tends to assess students’ cognitive aspect only. Therefore, assessment in schools has always been a topic of contention especially with regards to whether the present system of assessment reflects the actual potential of students. Even though there have been calls to abolish, reform, revamp and add value to current assessment system, however, not much had been done because of many barriers shielding it. One of the ways to overcome the standardized assessment symptom is to conduct alternative assessment. 1.1 The Education System of Brunei Darussalam Brunei Darussalam is situated on the north-west coast of the island of Borneo. It is bounded on the north by the South China Sea and on all sides by the Malaysia state of Sarawak. Brunei Darussalam’s people enjoy high standard of living and the education is free for all citizens from the primary level to the tertiary level. Education in Brunei Darussalam is heavily subsidized by substantial funding averaging at nine percent of the national budget per year. The education philosophy in Brunei is based on the corresponding national philosophy of a Malay Islamic monarchy. In addition to classic reading, mathematics and science skills, students are taught a curriculum which incorporates the elements of naqli (study of the Koran) and aqli (reasoning). The two underlying Islamic elements are believed to produce citizens who are knowledgeable and skilled, as well as pious and loyal to the monarchy of Brunei. The Ministry of Education strives to provide the highest possible education to produce citizens who are committed and able to contribute to the future growth, prosperity and stability of Brunei Darussalam. The school system consists of primary education (seven years), secondary education (five years) and higher education. The education system in Brunei Darussalam is centralised and examination oriented which emphasis on students passing the examination with excellent results. Students attending school in Brunei Darussalam are expected to sit for three public examinations, which are conducted by the Ministry of Education. The Primary Certificate of Education Examination (PCE) is taken at the end of primary school; the Brunei Junior Certificate of Education Examination (BJCE) is taken after three years at senior school; and the General Certificate of Education Examination (GCE ' O ' Level) is taken at the end of five years at senior school. 1.2 Justification to do away with high stakes Standardized Assessments Assessment experts (Agrey, 2004; Kohn, 2000; Sacks, 2000) claimed that standardized assessments are easy to develop, inexpensive to administer and results of standardized assessment are simple to report and understand. Besides that, standardized assessment also is an objective measure of achievement as the results are not affected by personal values or biases of the person who evaluated the assessment. As standardized assessment are seen as an objective measures of achievement, so it is regarded as a sound device that are valid and reliable indicators of students’ knowledge and skills. The standardized assessment results are also used to compare students’ performance in order to place them into groups or programs. However, time and again we have heard criticism levied against the standardized assessments. Many experts indicated that standardized assessment is abusive to students, parents and teachers (Kohn, 2000; Peterson & Neil, 1999). Examples of the criticisms of standardized assessment are as follows:

Nurfaradilla Nasri et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 39 x Peterson and Neil (1999) Many people tend to believe that standardized assessment will give them accurate indication of their children performance. However, they do not realized that most of the tests were intended to get the kids and schools to perform better, and if they don’t they will be penalized. Therefore, this approach seems to forgets that assessment must be used to improve student learning and not to fail students, not to wave fingers at bad teachers, not to make bold pronouncements that will be remembered at election time but to provide information to help the student learn better. x Agrey (2004) Current trend on high-stakes standardized assessments becomes a self-perpetuating loop when what is assessed becomes what is learn or valued, which then led to teaching to the test. The emphasis on tests has forced teachers to become managers of students’ performance rather than facilitators of knowledge and social values. x Sacks (2000) Stacks highlighted that standardized assessments generally do not have the ability to predict a student’s academic success. Some students might perform better than others in certain test but this cannot confirm their success later. 2. Assessment as a means not an end Assessment of students’ performance and abilities accurately and reliably has always been a challenge. Traditional approaches of assessment such as paper and pencil tests although widely used do not accurately reflect the true potential of students. Moreover, paper and pencil test tend to produce students who are test-smart but poor problem solvers in real situations. Besides that, students also seem to lack in communication and other soft skills including social skills. Even though assessment are still widely used in grading and categorizing students based on their performances, there is a growing realization that assessment should be used to facilitate learning and skills development. Besides that, many educators are now looking at assessment as a way to motivate students to perform better and prepare students for self-directed and lifelong learning. The reason for these views is that assessments are beginning to take out the fun from learning. Students are learning just for the examinations. However, when assessment is used to diagnose areas of weaknesses and then it is used to develop remedial instruction to facilitate mastery of content and skills. It acts as a motivator where it can prevent truancy, reduce the drop-out rate and overcome discipline problems. It is suggested that assessment be revamped and transformed to incorporate a more humanistic modality serving the following functions: a) diagnostic b) remedial/ enhancement c) motivation 2.1 Alternative Assessments According to Gronlund (1998), alternative assessment refers to assessment methods that provide an alternative to the traditional paper-and-pencil tests. Puhl (1997) states that alternative assessments allow students to demonstrate their understanding and personal meaning of what they have learnt in class. Whereas, Suzieleez Syrene Abdul and Tajularipin Sulaiman (2006) states that alternative assessment techniques encourages higher-order creative and critical thinking where students has more control of his/her learning. The rationales to have alternative assessment are: a) Students do not learn in the same way, therefore they cannot be assessed only in a uniform manner (Brualdi, 1996) b) Traditional assessment (paper-and-pencil tests) only examine students knowledge (Rudman, 1989) c) Alternative assessment can emphasize on “real-life” skills such as problem-solving skills and decisionmaking skills to prepare students for the work force in the real world (Brualdi, 1996) d) Alternative assessment allows teachers to monitor the effectiveness of their lessons on student understanding and to modify the mode of instruction whenever necessary (Wiggins, 1990) Some of the alternative assessment techniques are (Knight & Mantz, 2003):

40 Nurfaradilla Nasri et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 a) Fieldwork, lab work: A type of authentic assessment where teachers should decide to sample to avoid overwhelming volume to be checked. b) Posters: An efficient way of seeing how students understand complex content and relationships of components. This task is best done in groups because students can learn by perusing each other’s posters. c) Presentations: This activity encourages students to become better at oral communication. They can be authentic and also invite peer assessment, which is a way of giving teachers supplementary evidence for grading. d) Article review: This sort of task encourages critical, analytical and evaluative thinking. e) Concept maps: Students identify the main points in an argument, view, claim, concept or system. They will then group like points with like in a way that shows the relationship between them. This technique is an efficient way of portraying how students understand conceptual relationship. f) Role-play: Students take on part of certain characters in specific situation. This task can be a good way of identifying students’ understanding of different perspectives. g) Projects: Authentic and complex tasks. Students may have to use several concepts and skills to complete the task h) Portfolio: Allow students to establish their own claims to achievement, using what they see as the best evidence to hand. However, before the alternative assessment is integrated to the school system, teacher perceptions on alternative assessment should be collected and analyzed. This is because; teacher is an important agent of change in education. If the teacher accept or have positive perceptions on alternative assessment, they will surely support the assessment and make sure the alternative assessment succeeded in reality. 2.2 Concept Mapping According to Novak & Gowin (1984), concept map is a diagram that represents organized knowledge where it comprised of concepts or ideas and the relationship between them. Concepts are enclosed in boxes or circles and linked to another concept/ concepts by lines or arrows. Arrows are being used to denote the direction of the relationship while the lines are used to show the flow of relationship from top to down or sideways starting with the main concept. The main feature in the concept map is that the concepts are arranged in hierarchies. Concept map also can be used as an alternative assessment tool. Ruiz-Primo and Shavelson (1996) proposed the framework of concept map as an assessment tool having three main components: (i) the task requiring students to provide evidence on his or her knowledge in a domain, (ii) the format for student’s response, and (iii) the scoring system for evaluating accurately and consistently student’s concept map. The three assessment components in concept map influence one another and the goal or construct of the assessment. Figure 1 shows the interaction among the three assessment components and the construct. 3. Limitations Due to constraints in time and finance, this study only involved 50 secondary teachers in Brunei which is only a small proportion of teacher population in Brunei. The teachers were selected randomly. However, researcher make sure that all of the respondent chosen to be involve in this research are committed and willing to give full cooperation during the research. 4. Methodology This research aims to discuss teacher perceptions on using alternative assessment. This research is a survey design research which use questionnaire in order to collect data. The questionnaires were distributed to 50 secondary teachers in Brunei. Respondents are required to state their opinion based on 5 scales; HDA= Highly Disagreed, DA= Disagree, A= Agree and, HA= Highly Agree. The reliability of the questionnaire is 0.72. Examples of item used in the questionnaire are as follows (Table 1):

Nurfaradilla Nasri et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 41 Figure 1. Interactions of the assessment components in concept map Table 1. Examples of items used in the questionnaire. ITEMS Alternative assessment can promote active learning and self confidence among students. By conducting alternative assessment, I am aware of my teaching strength and weakness. I become more responsive by conducting alternative assessment. Alternative assessment caused me to have limited time to make teaching preparation. 5. Results Data collected from the questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive statistic (frequency and percentage). From this research, most of the respondents agree that alternative assessment can promote active learning and self confidence among students (95%) and 80% of the respondents states that alternative assessment is suitable to cultivate critical and creative thinking skills. 85% of the respondents state that alternative assessment does not interrupt their job (to teach). 6. Discussion and recommendation Alternative assessment is the best method to enhance students’ potential. Besides, alternative assessment also provides information on achievement of particular levels of skills, understanding and knowledge as oppose to achievement of certain marks or scores provided by traditional paper-and-pencil test. However, before alternative assessment is integrated in Brunei education system, many aspects should be change. Especially on teachers perceptions’ and knowledge regarding the concept of alternative assessment and ways to conduct the assessment. Based on this research, researcher can conclude that Brunei teachers have positive perceptions on alternative assessment. Because alternative assessment can help them to cultivate their students’ critical and creative thinking skills. However, the respondents’ claim that, alternative assessment increase their work. Therefore, before the alternative assessment is integrated to all schools in Brunei, many aspects must review. Firstly, teacher should be Scoring of response Assessment task reflect CONSTRUCT evoke used to infer Student’s response influence based on Influence

42 Nurfaradilla Nasri et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 37–42 informed about the concept of alternative assessment through in-house training and short-courses. Secondly, teachers should be inform about the interrelationship of pedagogy, assessment and curriculum. However, any change in implementation of alternatives assessment in the Brunei education system should be done gradually to allow the teachers and students adapt to the “new” teaching and learning environment. References Abdul Rashid Mohamed, Abdul Ghani Abdullah and Shaik Abdul Malik Mohamed Ismail. (2006). It’s about time that teachers unlock the mysteries of assessment in Malaysia school: Authentic assessment as a tool for students’ self-assessment and self-adjustment. Humanising assessment: Compilation of Presentation Papers. (pp. 289-300). Agrey. (2004). The Pressure Cooker in Education: Standardized Assessment and High-Stakes. Canadian Social Studies. 38(3). http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css Belk, J.A. & Calais, G.J. (1993). Portfolio Assessment in Reading and Writing: Linking Assessment and Instruction to Learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Mid South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, November 10-12 (ERIC document Reproduction Service No. ED 365732) Brualdi, A.C. (1996). Multiple intelligence: Gardner’s Theory: Washington D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. (ED 410226) Grounlund, N.E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Huba, M.B., & Freed, J.E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Knight, P.T. & Mantz, Y. (2003). Assessment, learning and employability. Berkshire, England: Open University Press Kohn. (2000). Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann Novak, J.D., & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Olu Aina. (2005). Review of Abuja Conference. Proceeding of 31st Annual Conference Abuja Peterson, B., & Neil, M. (1999). Alternatives to Standardized Tests. Rethinking Schools. 13(3). http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archieve/13_03/13_03.shtml Puhl, C.A. (1997). Develop, Not Judge: Continuous Assessment in the ESL classroom. Forum Online, 35(2). Available at: http://exchages.state.gov/forum/vols/vol35/no2/p2.htm Rudman, H.C. (1989). Integrating testing with teaching. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 1(6). Available at: http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=1&n=6 Ruiz-Primo, M.A., & Shavelson, R.J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 33(6): 560-600 Sacks. (2000). Standardized Minds: The high price of America’s testing culture and what we can do to change it. Cambridge, Mass: Perseus Books Suzieleez Syrene Abdul Rahim & Tajularipin Sulaiman. (2006). Classroom Assessment: Paper-pencil vs Alternative Humanising Assessment: Compilation of presentation papers (pp. 49-52) Wiggins, G.D. (1993). Assessing Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345504100 The Significance of Non-traditional and Alternative Assessment in English Language Teaching: Evidence From Literature Article  in  International Journal of Linguistics · October 2020 DOI: 10.5296/ijl.v12i5.17782 CITATIONS 7 READS 2,044 1 author: Mazin Mansory King Abdulaziz University 8 PUBLICATIONS   13 CITATIONS    SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Mazin Mansory on 08 November 2020. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 210 The Significance of Non-traditional and Alternative Assessment in English Language Teaching: Evidence From Literature Mazin Mansory English Language Institute (ELI), King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia E-mail: [email protected] Received: September 5, 2020 Accepted: October 18, 2020 Published: October 25, 2020 doi:10.5296/ijl.v12i5.17782 URL: https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v12i5.17782 Abstract Assessment is an integral part of teaching and learning in educational organizations that requires teachers to prepare tests in order to evaluate their learners‟ performance. In language teaching contexts, traditional assessment often evaluates learners‟ knowledge of previously learned language items. It is a mandatory process that determines the progress of language learners and the effectiveness of teaching/learning materials. This theoretical article reviews the literature on the notion of traditional assessment or static assessment which has certain shortcomings. Owing to the various drawbacks of static assessment, the review of related literature on the topic highlights and proposes alternative assessment methods, such as authentic assessment, dynamic assessment, peer assessment, and self-assessment. In contrast to traditional assessment, these different forms of alternative assessment share a common purpose that is to provide language learners with an opportunity to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses and set their future learning goals. The most common of the assessment methods that encourage learners' reflection were peer assessment and self-assessment which involve learners to assess their own progress as well as engage with peers in classrooms to give each other feedback on their language learning tasks assigned by teachers. The studies reviewed in this article illustrate that alternative assessment methods in the form of peer and self-assessment have a positive influence on the language learners' performance and their learning outcomes. Keywords: Authentic assessment, Alternative assessment, EFL context, Evaluation, Peer assessment, Self-assessment, Testing

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 211 1. Introduction Teachers around the world find it a challenging task to assess their learners in a classroom environment. It is not a smooth process to assess learners as teachers, in general, perceive it differently based on their academic, professional and contextual understanding of assessment. It might vary from teacher to teacher or context to context; however, we can safely put it that it is a mandatory part of teaching and learning since evaluation is always important to see and determine the progress of second or foreign language learners. As an integral part of learning, "evaluation is not restricted to the context of education; it is part of our everyday lives" (Dickins & Germaine. 1992, p: 3), and we evaluate and assess our daily actions and day-to-day activities to understand how we can improve ourselves. This can be applied to the context of language teaching and learning as well. As language learners are given a different language point to learn and practice in a classroom environment, it becomes essential for teachers to test learners on previously taught language points, assess their progress, identify their strengths and weaknesses in order to plan, modify and adjust the teaching method and material accordingly. However, in most cases, teachers have an exam-oriented and teacher-oriented culture in which students are often ignored and learners are tested to determine their next level. This is perceived as a traditional way of assessing language learners who do not achieve the full potential of the learners. Therefore, the literature suggests alternative ways of assessment, such as self-assessment, dynamic assessment, peer assessment, and authentic assessment. Traditional assessment is usually considered a mandatory tool of evaluation that is imposed on teachers and learners to follow a certain set of procedures. This sort of evaluation often lacks learners' and teachers' voice in the procedure which leads to inappropriate and unsuitable forms of evaluation (Mastuno, 2009). Since traditional assessment has been widely criticized for its shortcomings, alternative assessment in the form of authentic assessment, dynamic assessment, self-assessment, portfolio assessment, performance assessment, and peer assessment have been introduced and promulgated by scholars (Chen, 2008; HuertaMacias, 1995). As the role of assessment is widely acknowledged in educational contexts around the world, this conceptual paper takes into consideration the meaning and significance of assessment and its various types that are considered alternative to traditional assessment. This paper also reviews the literature on the significance of alternative assessment tools in the field of English language teaching (ELT) and more specifically in English as a foreign language (EFL) context. 2. The Meaning of Assessment In general, assessment is a time-consuming process that is aimed at understanding and improving the students' learning progress (Cowie & Bell, 1999). Assessment is an integral part of the educational system and it plays a pivotal role in learning and teaching (Pierce, 2002; cited in Kırmızı & K me 2016). The process of assessment informs instructional decisions related to curriculum and syllabus and assists teachers and students to diagnose learners‟ strengths and weaknesses related to classroom teaching and learning. When students

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 212 receive feedback on their performance, it gives them a chance to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses and plan their learning accordingly. Moreover, teachers also customize and supplement their teaching materials and activities according to the learning needs of the students. Assessment has been seen as a process of collecting information about learners‟ performance to understand and determine their existing level of knowledge (Baily, 1996; McNamara, 2004). In educational contexts around the world, it is a common practice to evaluate and measure students‟ actual level of development and see what they have learned and what they need to further improve on. This common practice of assessment is called static assessment (Feuerstein et al., 1979), which is more of a traditional evaluative nature. Researchers advocate that learners often fail to develop owing to static assessment which results in students‟ as well as teachers‟ lack of motivation affecting the pedagogical process in classrooms. Poehner (2008) highlighted this issue from teachers' perspective who perceived it "distinct from, and perhaps even at odds with, the goals of teaching" (p. 4). This static assessment not only contradicts the teaching goals, but it also forces teachers to prepare students for the tests at the cost of learning. This problem is apparent in the field of English language teaching too as Poehmer (2008) states that “language assessment and pedagogy have emerged as distinct subfields with their own professional journals and meetings” (p. 4). Ideally, the learners‟ knowledge should be tested frequently, and tests should serve as a tool for learning in the language teaching context. Static assessment is a traditional way of measuring learners‟ performances, which does not enable the assessors to work on the learners‟ weaknesses and improve them. In a conducive learning milieu, it can be assumed that tests do not assess the learners‟ ability to learn, rather they help them to show their existing level of knowledge and connect it to their future learning goals. Literature shows that a paradigm shift is required, and we need to move from static assessment to dynamic assessment (Kozulin & Garb, 2002; Poehner, 2008) in order to enhance teaching and learning outcomes. The dynamic assessment looks into assessment of learners from a different perspective. It is mainly a collaboration between teachers and students which aims to identify learners' problems, the causes of the problems, and assist them to overcome their learning problems. 3. Alternative Assessments Richards and Renandya (2002) state that alternative assessment is an alternative approach to standardized testing and all the issues related to traditional testing and evaluation. Looking at the shortcomings of the traditional and static assessment tools, English language teachers, test designers and test administrators have reached a consensus that they need to adopt new and alternative assessments tools, methods and strategies in a bid to effectively monitor learners' progress and cater to the learning needs of the English language learners. The alternative way of assessment will have a goal to undertake tasks and measure learners' proficiency in a real-life situation. The new assessment tools can have the element of surprise, competition, enjoyment and fun. Using authentic and different non-traditional tools, teachers can opt for projects, concept maps, performance assignments, peer assessment, self-assessment, portfolio

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 213 assessment, observation, drama, journals, diagnostic tree, teacher and student interviews, and posters (Anıl & Acar, 2008; ktokatlı & Bayraktar, 2014). These alternative assessment tools provide learners with opportunities to integrate and produce various aspects of language. In addition, teachers can reflect on teaching contents and make them more suitable to the learners' needs. Since the information teachers collect are based on real-life situations, students do not focus on recalling and reproducing the language items; rather, focus on producing authentic language in a given situation. As alternative assessment consisted of spontaneous and real-life tasks, students develop and improve their reflective, problem solving and decision-making skills (Brualdi, 1996). Classroom assessment is mainly focused on giving continuous feedback to the learners that optimizes the learning outcomes of the students. It is important to mention that classroom feedback should bring positivity and encouragement to learners, so they feel that assessment is not for grades, but it is to improve and develop their language skills. This approach will help teachers to reduce learner anxiety about assessment and give them a model of assessment that is different to a traditional one. As it is well known, traditional assessment often checks students' performances related to recently taught material via tools, such as multiple-choice questions, cloze tests, and test questions, this performance-oriented test can be useful to determine students' short-term learning goals; however, it may not effective in setting and achieving long term objectives. In order to make language learning a long-term plan for the students and create an anxiety-free classroom environment, teachers need to make sure that learners remain highly motivated before, while and after the test. To achieve that, language teachers should have knowledge about the different types of assessment to collect data with an aim of recognizing students‟ problems. In a language classroom, assessment involves knowing about learners' awareness, their understanding of language items, their attitude to language learning and their perceptions of language. Through assessment, teachers come to know about the learners' learning needs which are extremely pivotal to successful teaching. Planning lessons can be influenced by the process of assessment, therefore, if assessment tools do not yield valid results teaching goals may not be realized (Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010; arı o an 2011). 4. The Significance of Alternative Assessment Assessment is the key part of classroom learning and teaching which involves methods and techniques to collect information about learners‟ understanding, knowledge and motivation (Allan, 1999; Ekbatani & Pierson, 2000; Lambert & Lines, 2000) and make informed decisions. Assessment plays a key role to know whether organizational goals have been achieved and the learners' grades reflect their linguistic ability. Without assessment, teachers and educators cannot determine the proficiency, s, ills and knowledge of language learners (Taras, 2005). Once the students are aware of their strengths and weaknesses, it motivates and encourages them to design their plan and overcome language-related problems (Wojtczak, 2002). Moreover, students receive constructive and valuable feedback on their learning acquisition and teachers can use that information to make decisions related to content material (Taras, 2005; Stiggins, 1992).

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 214 Assessment is undoubtedly an important part of education systems, however, in the EFL learning and teaching contexts it is highly valued and performed in various forms. The organizational objectives of EFL institutes are often written and linked to the learning progress of the students, therefore, assessment enables the management to see if the learning objectives are achieved or not. This valuable information can influence administrative decisions, pedagogical practices and teaching materials. Teachers and administrators have different options to analyze students‟ performance through different assessment formats (Black & William, 1998; Wang, Wang, Wang, & Huang, 2006; Watering, Gijbels, Dochy, & Rijt, 2008). As testing, evaluation and assessment are sources of anxiety, stress and burnout for students, they might also trigger negative feelings, perceptions and memories resulting in under- or poor performances (Berry, 2010). It is therefore recommended to create a test meets meet the learners' expectation and does not challenge the learners' level of understanding. More importantly, teachers may think out of the box and develop tests using alternative ways of assessment in order to create a comfortable learning environment in classrooms. If alternative ways are not developed and implemented, learners can lose interest in language learning and teaching, thus spoiling the whole purpose of the language program. 5. The Authentic Assessment Authentic assessment was introduced by O'Malley and Pierce (1996) which assesses and shows that learners' development, achievement and their attitudes toward learning and teaching in classroom environment. This kind of assessment involves activities that take place in classroom. For example, portfolio assessment, self-assessment by the students and performance assessment. These activities are often integrated into teaching framework and applied in a way that triggers learners' interest in pedagogical process, as a result, their learning outcomes are positively influenced. Authentic assessment has been seen as a great way of enhancing reading and writing skills of native English learners (e.g. French, 2003; Montgomery, 2002; Valeri-Gold et al., 1992). It is also considered an effective tool for English language learners (ELLs) (DelliCarpini, 2009; Murphy, 2009; Lenski et al., 2006), and EFL learners (Geeslin, 2003). The meta-analysis by French (2003) suggests that authentic assessment helps teachers to assess language learners' reading skills which is used as an alternative way of assessment to collect information about learners' progress in reading. In an identical review of literature, Geeslin (2003) also acknowledged its relevance in Spanish EFL context. Similarly, Montgomery (2002) found the application of authentic assessment as a useful way of recording and assessing learners‟ progress in reading comprehension. Moreover, DelliCarpini (2009) has highlighted its relevance with respect to teaching and developing the literacy of English language learners as authentic assessment is a tool to collect precise information about the language learners‟ development of English language proficiency. Literature sample empirical evidence that highlights the significance and relevance of authentic assessment in language teaching contexts. Studies that support authentic assessment mainly consider its application as an alternative assessment to standardized assessment tools

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 215 (DelliCarpini, 2009; French, 2003). As its usefulness is widely cited, it can be noticed that authentic assessment can contribute to language learners‟ language proficiency (French, 2003; Montgomery, 2002; Valeri-Gold et al., 1992). However, there is a dearth of empirical evidence on the effectiveness of authentic assessment in EFL contexts in general and Saudi EFL context in particular, as standardized testing is still a dominating practice in this part of the world. 6. Dynamic Assessment Dynamic assessment is not a traditional way of measuring learners‟ performance. In other words, we should consider assessment as part of instruction and not apart from it (Popham, 1997), and this is not possible in a context where traditional assessment methods prevail. In traditional assessment, teachers have to be neutral; however, in dynamic assessment, teachers cannot play a neutral role and they have to mediate and collaborate with learners in order to “find routes to move the learner to the next level of development” (Haywood & Lidz, 2007, p. 41). Unlike static assessment, teachers can engage with learners if they require guidance to improve on their weaknesses. Hence, it can be inferred that dynamic assessment is not simply a way of assessment, it can be seen as a tool to bring about difference in the learners' skills and find out the learners' potential and their ability of undertaking various tasks (Lidz & Elliott (2000). In the field of English language teaching, dynamic assessment has been widely investigated (Leung, 2007). Studies by Poehner‟s (2007) and Lin‟s (2010) mainly explored the influence of dynamic assessment on the learners‟ use of grammar in relation to narration. In these studies, the core of the dynamic assessment was included, and teachers acted as mediators and collaborators. Through dynamic assessment, learners were able to identify their problems and work with their teachers to work on their improvement. 7. Peer Assessment As part of alternative assessment, peer assessment is a widely used assessment methods is different educational contexts. Peer assessment is “an arrangement for learners to consider and specify the level, value or quality of a product or performance of other equal status learners” (Topping (2009, p. 20). According to Falchikov and Goldfinch (2000), in the process of peer assessment, students "are engaging with criteria and standards" (p. 287) that enables them to a judgment about their peers' work in pair or in groups. This engaging practice of peer assessment is a learning opportunity for students as they give feedback to each other, suggest changes and correct mistakes in their oral presentations, writings, test performance and portfolios (Topping, 2009). Literature shows that peer assessment has been influenced by different theories, such as social constructionism, andragogy and the theory of active learning (Falchikov & Goldfinch 2000). These theories have shaped the design, structure and formation of peer assessment tools. Topping (2003, p. 65) has mentioned different ways that can be used to vary and apply peer assessment.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 216 a) Peer assessment can be used in a wide range of different subjects and thus, the product or output can vary (e.g. portfolios, oral presentations, writing, test performance etc); b) Peer assessment can be formative or summative. c) The organization of the assessors can be different (e.g. individual assessors, assessors in pairs or groups); d) Assesses and assessors may belong to the same or different year of study and be of the same or different ability. e) The directionality can vary as peer assessment can be one-way, mutual or reciprocal. f) Place and time can vary as peer assessment can occur formally in class, or informally out of class. g) The objectives of using peer assessment may vary. (Topping, 2003, p. 65) Literature indicates that peer assessment compared to other forms of traditional assessment has a number of advantages for students (Topping 2003, 2009; Falchikov 2005; Butt 2010; Douglas 2010; Sebba et al., 2008). As an interactive activity, the first and foremost objective is “to provide feedback to learners” (Topping, 2009, p. 22). This feedback session involves getting feedback from teachers and giving feedback to peers. While giving feedback to each other, students are reminded to keep the objectives of the work in mind. The pre-determined criteria help them ve a constructive feedback to each other. As this is a rigorous process of reflecting upon each other mistakes, strengths and areas that need development, students raise awareness of their learning goals and learn to apply the criteria judgment to see the quality of learning and acquire knowledge (Douglas, 2010). Moreover, increased engagement with other learners and learning goals, students often become responsible learners who not only think about their own learning but focus on the learning of other students (Sebba et al., 2008). Since it involves learners to assess the work of other learners, peer assessment leaves a positive impact on the learners‟ effort of self-assessment (Butt 2010: 83). Maiz Arevalo (2008) concludes that the practice of peer assessment enables students to “assess themselves in their future performances” (p. 128). In EFL contexts, peer assessment has attracted researchers to investigate its impact on learners' English language proficiency. Although the topic is not new to EFL settings, fewer studies have focused on investigating the influence of peer assessment on learners' performance in EFL contexts. Topping (2003) used this technique to understand the effect of peer assessment on the learners' writing tasks. As it involves giving feedback to overcome possible weaknesses, it can focus on the whole writing piece as well as the process of writing, such as editing, modifying and improving ideas and structures. Topping (2003) maintains that learners can improve a great deal when they peer assess each other writing tasks. He believes that "peer assessment seems to be at least as efficient formative terms as teacher assessment, and sometimes more effective" (Topping 2003, p. 76). Similarly, Jahin (2012) examined the influence of peer reviewing on EFL essay writing and established a positive effect on the learners‟ ability to write well. The findings also suggest

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 217 that learners were in a comfortable situation and they did not have exam anxiety. In a similar study, Birjandi and Siyyari (2010) found the positive influence of peer assessment on EFL learners‟ writing skills. Apart from the writing skills, studies also show that peer assessment can positively affect EFL learners' speaking skills. Researchers examined EFL learners' oral presentations to measure their speaking skills and their attitude to speaking. For example, Nakamura (2002), Cheng and Warren (2005), and White (2009) established that peer assessment was a useful tool to improve the EFL learners' oral skills in different EFL contexts. Similarly, Falchikov (2005) found that students engaging in oral presentations and assessing each other oral presentations lead to improved speaking skills of their students. 8. Self-assessment Self-assessment is “the ability to recognize good work as such, and to correct one's performance so that better work is produced” (Claxton,1995, p. 339). It is “the ability to assess one‟s work” (Paris & Paris, 2001, p. 96). According to Richards and Schmidt (1985), self-assessment is "checking one‟s own performance on a language learning task after it has been completed or checking one‟s own success in using a language... [It] is an example of a metacognitive strategy in language learning" (p. 475). El Jawhari (1988) considers self-assessment as the language learning ability of learners to see their actual performances and evaluate the effectiveness of the procedure while focusing on the practice of four language skills. Self-assessment provides learners opportunities to assess their own learning progress (Blanche & Merino, 1989). As a learner-centered approach requires techniques that engage students in classroom activities, self-assessment becomes an important tool for teachers to encourage and train students on self-assessment. As opposed to traditional and static methods of assessment, self-assessment is deemed as an alternative way of assessment which encompasses "various types of assessment procedures that are seen as alternatives or complements to traditional standardized testing...Procedures used in alternative assessment include self- assessment, peer assessment, portfolios, learner diaries or journals, student-teacher conferences, interviews, and observation" (Richards & Schmidt, 1985, p. 23). One of the key qualities of self-assessment is that it involves reflection which is a great way of learning and developing various skills, particularly, in language learning contexts, it adds to the learners' achievement, self-efficacy, autonomy and motivation. Self-assessment can yield various advantages for learners and teachers. According to Aeginitou et al. (2007), it has six benefits: a) It can help teachers to monitor the progress of the learners; b) teachers can encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning; c) students and teachers can set future goals and steer their teaching and learning accordingly; d) learners can construct and reconstruct knowledge; e) teachers can promote critical thinking; and f) teachers can manage to fill the gap between high achieving and low achieving students. Similarly, Tan (2008) has found that self-assessment can lead to learners‟ lifelong learning in higher education.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 218 Self-assessment has been widely investigated to determine its effects on learners‟ language proficiency (e.g. Matsuno, 2009; Birjandi and Siyyari, 2010; Srichanyachon, 2011; Larsari, 2012). Dickinson (1987) has pointed out that self-assessment can lead to achieving significant educational objectives as it develops learners‟ autonomy and reduces teachers‟ burden of evaluation. A plethora of studies has shown the usefulness of self-assessment (Black & William, 1998; Gardner, 1999; Wei & Chen, 2004; Coronado-Aliegro, 2006; avistanavi ien et al., 2006; Kavaliauskien 2007; Martin, 2008;). These researchers underline the importance of self-assessment as the part of formative assessment which can produce more pertinent results; however, the goals of the assessment need to be clearly defined at the outset. Moreover, to optimize the maximum potential of learners, it is very important to train students on various aspects of self-assessment and familiarize with the procedures. This will enable them set and achieve their goals in a much better way. To further underscore its significant impact on the learners‟ sense of fulfillment, Anderson (1998) maintains that self-assessment is a tool that can affect our pedagogical practices. He is of the view that self-assessment is the only alternative way to shift our focus from traditional or static assessment methods and take a more student-centered approach towards the assessment in classroom. The last decade has seen the emergence of self-assessment and peer assessment in the domain of education. These new techniques have widely acknowledged for their ability to offer learners new opportunities of learning new forms of a language in classroom environment (Hargreaves, Earl, & Schmidt, 2001; Esfandiari & Myford, 2013). These newly emerged assessment tools have developed their frameworks that keep learners at their center. More recently, peer assessment is seen as a great example of a learner-centered learning and evaluation (Birjandi & Hadidi, 2012), which allows learners to look into their peers‟ performance. This is considered a reciprocal process that engages the students of a target language to assess each other and learn from each other. This learner-centered approach led to the development of self-assessment technique, which shows that language learners should know about their existing linguistic capabilities, their learning progress, their strengths and weaknesses in a classroom environment. Oscarson and Apelgren (2011) have precisely concluded that in language education of 21st century, language learners should have the right to monitor their language learning progress. As the learning outcomes of the students is the key goal of the educational organization, new or alternative ways of assessment is the need of the hour as the traditional assessment tools do not yield the desired results. As part of the alternative assessment, peer assessment and self-assessment have taken over traditional assessment tools which guarantee increased learners' interest, learners' autonomy and increased outcomes for students (Birjandi & Hadidi, 2012). Birjandi and Sayyari (2010) also state that peer assessment and self-assessment are two pivotal ways of achieving the objectives of educational assessment and learner-centered education. Although the significance of self-assessment is widely acknowledged in different educational contexts, students usually do not get a chance to evaluate their own performance

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 219 (Luoma & Tarnanen, 2003) as the educational systems still continue to stick to the traditional assessment. 9. Self-assessment in English Language Teaching Self-assessment is commonly used in language teaching context which aims to provide learners with opportunities of evaluating their own progress. The published literature on self-assessment is mainly available in the form of literature reviews and meta-analysis (Andrade & Valtcheva, 2009; Dochy et al., 1999, Geesline, 2003). More recently, empirical studies focused on evaluating the suitability and effectiveness of self-assessment in order to motivate learners and optimize their learning potential (e.g. Mican & Medina, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2016; Andrade et al., 2009; Dochy et al., 1999; Geeslin, 2003; Mican, 2015). In terms of reading skills Nguyen, Janssen, Rijlaarsdam, and Admiraal (2016) in their experimental study established that self-assessment on learners‟ reading tasks can enhance their awareness of their reading skills. Self-assessment allows learners to evaluate their own performance by reflecting up their strengths and weaknesses to achieve their learning goals and objectives (North Carolina State Department, 1999). Boud and Falchikov (1989) define self- assessment as "the involvement of learners in making judgments about their own learning, particularly about their achievements and the outcomes of their learning" (p. 529). More precisely, if is considered as a formative tool (Falchikov, 2005; Geeslin, 2003) that offers students opportunities to recognize their learning progress and pay heed to those areas of their language performance which require improvement. The process of self-assessment encourages learners‟ involvement; however, they do not become graders of their own language (Moheidat & Baniabdelrahman, 2011). In fact, it is a reflective practice that motivates learners to assess their language proficiency. Since it is a great way to encourage learner autonomy, teachers often apply this technique and expect their learners to explore “what is missing on their own, figure out what to do next, and then take responsibility for following through on next steps” (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD], 2005, p. 65). The practice of self-assessment is not novel to the field of EFL and it is used in different EFL contexts as the “procedures by which the learners themselves evaluate their language skills and knowledge” (Bailey, 1998, p. 227). It is applied and realized in different forms and compositions, such as learners‟ individual tasks and learners‟ participation and portfolio (Geeslin, 2003). A large variety of techniques, such as rubrics, checklist, reflective exercises are mixed up and applied by teachers to match the level, age and ability of language learners. 10. Conclusion This paper has reviewed literature on the notion of assessment. As the meaning and significance of assessment have been recognized in the first part of the article, it has described the traditional or static assessment in educational contexts. The article has reviewed studies which show that assessment is an integral part of teaching and learning. Although literature has identified various issues with traditional assessment, it is still a common practice in most of the institutions around the world. The article suggests an alternative

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 220 assessment in the form of authentic and dynamic assessment tools and peer and self-assessment. The reviewed literature argues that traditional assessment cannot help students realize their learning goals and teachers need to adopt alternative assessment tools in order to optimize their learning goals. To achieve these goals, the article has identified various assessment methods, such as authentic assessment, dynamic assessment, peer assessment, and self-assessment. These different forms of assessment provide learners with an opportunity to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses and link them to their future learning goals. The most common of the assessment methods that encourage learners' revision are peer assessment and self-assessment which involve learners to assess their own progress as well as engage with their peers in classroom and give each other feedback on their work. The studies reviewed in this article show that alternative assessment in the form of peer and self-assessment have a positive influence on the language learners‟ performance and their learning outcomes. Future research on the notion of assessment should focus on the effectiveness of peer and self-assessment in EFL contexts. More importantly, researchers should focus on how learners develop their four language skills with the help of self-assessment and peer assessment in a language classroom. References Aeginitou, V., Nteliou, E., & Vlahoyanni, N. (2007). Reflections in the mirror: The contribution of self and peer assessment in the teaching of speaking skills. Retrieved from http://my.enl.auth.gr/gala/ppts/aeginitou.ppt Allan, D. (1999). Testing and Assessment. English Teaching Professional, 11, 19-20. Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 5-16. Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 12-19. Anıl Acar M ( ınıf retmenlerinin l me de erlendirme s recinde kar ıla tıkları sorunlara ili kin g r leri 5(11), 44-66. https://doi.org/10.14527/ pegegog.2014.006 Bailey, K. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language testing. Language Testing, 13(3), 257-279. Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about language assessment. Cambridge, MA. err R A ( 1 Preservice and earl career teachers‟ attitudes toward inclusion, instructional accommodations and fairness: three profiles. The Teacher Educator, 45(2), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878731003623677 Birjandi, P., & Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2012). The role of self-, peer and teacher assessment in promoting Iranian EFL learners‟ writing performance Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 513-533.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 221 Birjandi, P., & Siyyari, M. (2010). Self-assessment and Peer-assessment: A Comparative Study of Their Effect on Writing Performance and Rating Accuracy. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 23-45. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/464232/Selfassessment_and_Peerassessment_A_ComparativeStud y_of_Their_Effect_on_Writing_Performance_and_Rating_Accuracy Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Granada Learning. Blanche, P., & Merino, B. J. (1989). Self-assessment of foreign-language skills: Implications for teachers and researchers. Language Learning, 39(3), 313-338. Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings. Higher Education, 18, 529-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138746 Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education, Inc. Brualdi, A. C. (1996). Multiple Intelligences: Gardner's theory, ERIC, Clearing house on Assessment and Evaluation. Washington, DC. Butt, G. (2010). Making Assessment Matter. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. ktokatlı N a raktar ( 1 Fen e itiminde alternatif l me de erlendirme u gulamaları (1), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2014.006 Chen, Y. M. (2008). Learning to self-assess oral performance in English: A longitudinal case study. Language Teaching Research, 12, 235-262. Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22(1), 93-121. Claxton, G. (1995). What Kind of Learning Does Self-assessment rive? eveloping a „nose‟ for quality: comments on Klenowski. Assessment in Education, 2(3), 339-343. Coronado-Aliegro, J. (2006). The effect of self-assessment on the self-efficacy of students studying Spanish as a foreign language. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh. Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A Model of Formative Assessment in Science Education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 6(1), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695949993026 DelliCarpini, M. (2009). Success with ELLs: Authentic assessment for ELLs in the ELA classroom. The English Journal, 98(5), 116-119. Dickins, R., & Germaine, K. (1992). Evaluation. Oxford University Press.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 222 Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. London: Cambridge University Press. Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer, and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding Language Testing. London: Hodder Education. Ekbatani, G., & Pierson, H. (2000). Learner-Directed Assessment in ESL. Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. El Jawhari, M., & Inspector, F. (1988). Self-assessment in language learning. In Proceedings of the eighth national conference (pp. 35-39). Esfandiari, R., & Myford, C. (2013). Severity differences among self-assessors, peer-assessors, and teacher assessors rating EFL essays. Assessing Writing, 18, 111-131. Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving Assessment through Student Involvement: Practical Solutions for Aiding Learning in Higher and Further Education. Oxon: Routledge Falmer. Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322. French, D. (2003). A new vision of authentic assessment to overcome the flaws in high stakes testing. Middle School Journal, 35(1), 14-23. Gardner, D. (1999, May). Self-assessment for self-access language learners. Paper presented at the workshop entitled Accessing self-access: Practical discussions and workshops, English Centre, Hong Kung University, Hong Kung. Retrieved from http://www.cityu.edu.hk/elc/HASALD/meeting/99workshop/workshop99davidgardner.m Geeslin, K. L. (2003). Student self-assessment in the foreign language classroom: The place of authentic assessment instruments in the Spanish language classroom. Hispania, 86(4), 857-868. Hamed, J. J. (2012). The Effect of Peer Reviewing on Writing Apprehension and Essay Writing Ability of Prospective EFL Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(11), 59-84. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol37/iss11/4 Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Schmidt, M. (2001). Perspectives on alternative assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 69-95. Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice: Clinical and educational applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heinle, H., Baleghizadeh, S., & Masoun, A. (2013). The effect of self -assessment on EFL learners‟ selfefficacy. TESL Canada Journal, 31(1), 42-58. Huerta-Macias, A. (1995). Alternative assessment: Response to commonly asked questions. TESOL Journal, 5, 8-11.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 223 Judy, S., Crick, D., Yu, G., Lawson, H., Harlen, W., & Durant, K. (2008). Systematic review of research evidence of the impact on students in secondary schools of self and peer assessment. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London. Retrieved from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=2415 Kavaliauskien G ( tudents‟ reflections on learning English for specific purposes English for Specific Purposes World Online Journal for Teachers. Retrieved from http://www.espworld.info/Articles_15/ESP_REFLECTIONS_ON_LEARNING.htm Kırmızı K me F ( 1 An Investigation of Performance-Based Assessment at High Schools. , 5(1-2), 53-65. https://doi.org/10.22521/unibulletin.2016.512.5 Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at-risk students. School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127. Lambert, D., & Lines, D. (2000). Understanding Assessment: Purposes, Perceptions, Practices. London, Routledge Falmer. Lenski, S. D., Ehlers-Zavala, F., Daniel, M. C., & Sun-Irminger, X. (2006). Assessing English language learners in mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 60(1), 24-34. Leung, C. (2007). Dynamic assessment: Assessment for and as teaching?. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(3), 257-278. Lidz, C. S., & Elliott, J. G. (2000). Introduction. In C. S. Lidz, & J. G. Elliott (Eds.), Dynamic assessment: Prevailing models and applications (pp. 3-13). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Lin, Z. (2010). Interactive dynamic assessment with children learning EFL in kindergarten. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 279-287. Luoma, S., & Tarnanen, M. (2003). Creating a self-rating instrument for second language writing: From idea to implementation. Language Testing, 20, 440-465. Martin, R. (2008). Using the common European framework for self-Assessment in EFL classes. Proceedings of 25th International Conference of English Teaching and Learning: International Conference on English Instruction and Assessment (pp.1-8). Retrieved from http://www.ccu.edu.tw/fllcccu/2008EIA/zh/C32.pdf Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26, 75-100. McNamara, T. (2004). Language testing. In A. Davies, & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 763-783). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Mican, A. D., & Medina, L. C. (2015). Boosting vocabulary learning through self-assessment in an English language teaching context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 1-15. Moheidat, A. S., & Baniabdelrahman, A. A. (2011). The impact of Omani twelfth-grade students‟ self-assessment on their performance in reading in English. Asian EFL Journal, 13(1), 48-84.

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 224 Montgomery, K. (2002). Authentic tasks and rubrics: Going beyond traditional assessments in college teaching. College Teaching, 50(1), 34-39. Murphy, A. F. (2009). Tracking the progress of English language learners. The Phi Delta Kappa International, 91(3), 25-31. Nguyen, P. N. T., Janssen, T., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2016). Effects of self-questioning on EFL students‟ engagement in literar reading Culture and Education, 28(4), 702-737. North Carolina State Department of Public Instruction. (1999). Assessment articulation, and accountability, 1999: A foreign language project. Raleigh, NC. O‟Malle J M Pierce L V (199 Authentic assessment for English language learners: practical approaches for teachers. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. Oscarson M Apelgren M ( 11 Mapping language teachers‟ conceptions of student assessment procedures in relation to grading: A two-stage empirical inquiry. System, 39, 2-16. Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101. Poehner, M. E. (2007). Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 323-340. Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development issues and implications. University Park, PA: Springer. Popham, W. J. (1997). What's wrong-and what's right-with rubrics. Educational Leadership, 55, 72-75. Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190 Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (1985). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Routledge. arı o an A ( 11 A tud on the English language teachers‟ preparations of tests Hacettepe , 41(41), 398-410. Srichanyachon, N. (2011). A comparative study of three revision methods in EFL writing. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 8(9), 1-8. Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment Crisis: The Absence of Assessment for Learning. Phi-Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170208301010 Tan, H. K. (2008). Qualitatively different ways of experiencing student self-assessment. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(1), 15-29. Retrieved from http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/07294360701658708 Taras, M. (2005). Assessment- summative and formative-some theoretical reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 466-478. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14678527.2005.00307.x

International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020, Vol. 12, No. 5 www.macrothink.org/ijl 225 Topping, K. (2003). Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reliability, Validity, Utility. In M. Segers, J. R. C. Filip, & D. E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimizing New Modes of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27. Topping, K., Smith, F. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/713611428 Valeri-Gold, M., Olson, J. R., & Denning, M. P. (1992). Portfolios: Collaborative authentic assessment opportunities for college developmental learners. Journal of Reading, 35(4), 298-305. Wang, K. H., Wang, T. H., Wang, W. L., & Huang, S. C. (2006). Learning styles and formative assessment strategy: enhancing student achievement in Web-based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(3), 207-217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652729.2006.00166.x Watering G Gij els och F Rijt J ( tudents‟ Assessment Preferences Perceptions of Assessment and Their Relationships to Study Results. High Education, 56, 645-658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9116-6 Wei, Y., & Chen, Y. (2004). Supporting chinese learners of English to implement self-assessment in L2 writing. Proceedings of the Independent Learning Conference. White, E. (2009). Student Perspectives of Peer Assessment for Learning in a Public Speaking Course. Asian EFL Journal, 33(1), 1-55. Wojtczak, A. (2002). Medical Education Terminology. Medical Teacher, 24(4), 357-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590220145699 Yuji, N. (2002). Teacher assessment and peer assessment in practice. Educational Studies, 44, 203-215. Zavistanaviciene, Nedzinskait I ven ionien ( Achievements in language learning through students' self-assessment. Studies About Languages, 84-87. Retrieved from http://www.ceeol.com Copyrights Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) View publication stats

3/25/24, 10:48 PM KPM | Dasar https://www.moe.gov.my/index.php/falsafah-pendidikan-kebangsaan 1/1 Selamat Datang ke PORTALKPM Carian... A+ A A- BM EN Korporat Dasar Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan Pendidikan di Malaysia adalah suatu usaha berterusan ke arah lebih memperkembangkan potensi individu secara menyeluruh dan bersepadu untuk mewujudkan insan yang seimbang dan harmonis dari segi intelek, rohani, emosi dan jasmani, berdasarkan kepercayaan dan kepatuhan kepada Tuhan. Usaha ini adalah bagi melahirkan warganegara Malaysia yang berilmu pengetahuan, berketerampilan, berakhlak mulia, bertanggungjawab dan berkeupayaan mencapai kesejahteraan diri, serta memberi sumbangan terhadap keharmonian dan kemakmuran keluarga, masyarakat dan negara. Hits : 564573 Kerajaan Malaysia (MyGOV Jabatan Perdana Menteri (JPM Unit Pemodenan Tadbiran dan Perancangan Pengurusan Malaysia (MAMPU Unit Perancang Ekonomi (EPU Data Terbuka PAUTAN LUAR Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP Majlis Peperiksaan Malaysia (MPM Institut Terjemahan dan Buku Malaysia (ITBM Suruhanjaya Kebangsaan PAUTAN DALAM AN Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, Blok E8, Kompleks E, Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan, 62604 W.P. Putrajaya, Malaysia Telefon : 03-8000 8000 E-mel : ALAM AT KE M ENTERIAN FACEBOOK TWITTER INSTAGRAM YOUTUBE PORTALRASMI KEMENTERIAN PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA UTAMA KORPORAT  PENDIDIKAN EPERKHIDMATAN PORTAL DALAMAN DIREKTORI

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 1/6 Striving for ‘ABC’ students Sunday, 05 Feb 2023 EDUCATION KARAMAH Insaniah, or human dignity, will be the focus of the Education Ministry. By emphasising soft skills to inculcate good manners, good morals and integrity among students, the ministry aspires to produce “Anak yang Baik Lagi Cerdik (ABC)” (children who are good and smart), said its minister Fadhlina Sidek. Fostering positive values, attitudes and behaviours is important for building the good character of holistic students in transforming our education sector, said Fadhlina, who is also the Malaysian National Commission for Unesco president.The national education system, she said, would promote a culture of peace, nonviolence, and respect for human rights. “My hope is to cultivate a harmonious educational ecosystem,” she said in a video message on Jan 24 to mark the International Day of Education 2023 (pic). Privacy - Terms oviding RM600 airfare subsidy y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search X

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 2/6 She added that the ministry was working towards creating a more equitable, inclusive, relevant and resilient educational system. The ministry, she said, was looking at multisectoral investments focused on early learning and childhood development. “Education must start early. STARPICKS Create your own adventures with Australia's exhilarating beauty “We will prioritise evidence collection, predictive data analysis on student learning loss, and early warning data systems derived from well-coordinated communication among all stakeholders and schools nationwide, to develop and implement targeted interventions and reduce the possibility of students dropping out. “Poverty, which has a direct impact on children’s education, will also be addressed,” she said, adding that the Malaysia Education Blueprint, which was introduced in 2013, was in line with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4.SDG 4 aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Education was an inalienable human right and it was vital for a sustainable, just and harmonious society, she said, adding that the ministry would continue to strengthen the country’s digital education policy framework. ICT infostructure and infrastructure at all schools would be upgraded and developed but the ministry, she noted, was mindful of the digital divide, especially among vulnerable students such as children from disadvantaged and low-income families, as well as those living in remote areas. Their learning, she said, must be well facilitated to prevent such students from being left behind. “We also realised that success in digital learning must be supported by teachers with IT knowledge and skills. “Teachers and students must be equipped with digital literacy and competencies to better prepare them for the future. “Providing teachers with professional support and focusing on their welfare can enhance their ability to teach,” she said, adding that collaborations with technology service providers and international bodies to enhance digital competency was crucial. Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates! oviding RM600 airfare subsidy y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 3/6 How useful is this article to you? 100% of our readers find this article useful Found a mistake in this article? Report it to us. Others Also Read FOREX 3h ago Ringgit ends firmer against US$, other major currencies STARPLUS 20 Mar 2024 INTERACTIVE: Most Malaysian adults face dental issues ENTERTAINMENT 4h ago Kim Kardashian taken to task for not removing ‘insensitive’... STARPICKS oviTdihngeR iMm60p0oa rir tfaarne csuebsoid fynurturing intimate health y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 4/6 SMARTPHONES 4h ago Has China lostits taste for the iPhone? ENTERTAINMENT 5h ago Cameron Diaz and Benji Madden announce birth of... SOCIAL MEDIA 6h ago Woman defrauded of RM118,000 by man claiming... INDIA 6h ago Indian minister Jaishankar's official visitto Malaysia a big... oviding RM600 airfare subsidy y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 5/6 Load More SOCIAL MEDIA 7h ago Teen kills 12-year-old, shows acquaintance her body on... FAMILY 7h ago Cancer studies should focus on Asian women, says Malaysian... ENTERTAINMENT 8h ago ‘Mortified’ Blake Lively apologises to Kate Middleton... INTERNET 8h ago Padu registration surge to 7.7 million – Rafizi oviding RM600 airfare subsidy y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search

3/25/24, 10:47 PM Striving for ‘ABC’ students | The Star https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2023/02/05/striving-for-abc-students 6/6 Subscriptions The Star Digital Access Newsstand Advertising Our Rate Card Classifieds Company Info About Us Job Opportunities Investor Relations Help Contact Us FAQs Policies Privacy Statement Terms & Conditions Subscribe to our FREE newsletter! Enter Your Email Address Here Subscribe Copyright © 1995- 2024 Star Media Group Berhad [197101000523 (10894-D)] Best viewed on Chrome browsers. oviding RM600 airfare subsidy y... We will nottolerate sexual harassment, says Education... No Home For You Bookmark Audio Search

1 Retrieved from- http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/ Sociocultural Theory Author: Sarah Scott | Annemarie Palincsar Source: The Gale Group The work of sociocultural theory is to explain how individual mental functioning is related to cultural, institutional, and historical context; hence, the focus of the sociocultural perspective is on the roles that participation in social interactions and culturally organized activities play in influencing psychological development. While much of the framework for sociocultural theory was put forth by Lev Vygotsky (1931/1997), extensions, elaborations, and refinements of sociocultural theory can be found in writings regarding activity theory (Chaiklin & Lave, 1993; Leontiev, 1981) and cultural-historical activity theory (Cole, 1996; Cole & Engestrom, 1994). THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY Lev S. Vygotksy, a psychologist in Russia who began his work following the Russian Revolution of 1917, is most closely identified with sociocultural theory. Vygotsky, argued: “The social dimension of consciousness is primary in time and in fact. The individual dimension of consciousness is derivative and secondary” (Vygotsky, 1979, p. 30, cited in Wertsch & Bivens, 1992). From this perspective, mental functioning of the individual is not simply derived from social interaction; rather, the specific structures and processes revealed by individuals can be traced to their interactions with others. Wertsch (1991) proposed three major themes in Vygotsky's writings that elucidate the nature of this interdependence between individual and social processes in learning and development. The first is that individual development, including higher mental functioning, has its origins in social sources. This theme is best represented in Vygotsky's “genetic law of development”: “Any function of the child's cultural development appears on the stage twice, or on two planes, first the social, then the psychological, first between people as an intermental category, then within the child as an intramental category” (Vygotsky, 1931/1997, pp. 105–106). From this perspective, as learners participate in a broad range of joint activities and internalize the effects of working together, they acquire new strategies and knowledge of the world and culture. Typically this tenet has been illustrated by examining the interactions between individuals with disparate knowledge levels; for example, children and their caregivers, or experts and novices. However, as Tudge and Scrimsher (2003) note, Vygotsky was not only interested in what more knowledgeable others brought to the interaction, but also in what the child himself or herself brought to the interaction, as well as how the broader cultural and historical setting shaped the interaction.

2 The second Vygotskian theme that Wertsch (1991) has identified is that human action, on both the social and individual planes, is mediated by tools and signs— semiotics. These semiotic means include: “language; various systems of counting; mnemonic techniques; algebraic symbol systems; works of art; writing; schemes, diagrams, maps and mechanical drawings; all sorts of conventional signs and so on” (Vygotsky, 1981, p. 137). Additional semiotic means include: computers, calculators, paint brushes and the like, all of which are useful in representational activity. These semiotic means are both the tools that facilitate the co-construction of knowledge and the means that are internalized to aid future independent problem solving activity. Leontiev (1981), a colleague of Vygotsky, used the term “appropriation” to characterize this process of internalization: [Children] cannot and need not reinvent artifacts that have taken millennia to evolve in order to appropriate such objects into their own system of activity. The child has only to come to an understanding that it is adequate for using the culturally elaborated object in the novel life circumstances he encounters. (Quoted in Newman, Griffin, & Cole, 1989, p. 63) The third theme that Wertsch (1991) proposes from Vygotsky's writing is that the first two themes are best examined through genetic, or developmental, analysis: To study something historically means to study it in the process of change; that is the dialectical method's basic demand. To encompass in research the process of a given thing's development in all its phases and changes—from birth to death—fundamentally means to discover its nature, its essence, for it is only in movement that a body shows what it is. Thus the historical study of behavior is not an auxiliary aspect of theoretical study, but rather forms its very base. (Vygotsky, 1978, pp. 64–65) In contrast to prevailing views of his time, in which learning was regarded as an external process and development an internal process, Vygotsky was concerned with the unity and interdependence of learning and development. For example, he was critical of Piaget's theory in which “maturation is viewed as a precondition of learning but never the result of it” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 80). In contrast, Vygotsky proposed: Learning awakens a variety of internal developmental processes that are able to operate only when the child is interacting with people in his environment and with his peers…. learning is not development; however, properly organized learning results in mental development and sets in motion a variety of developmental processes that would be impossible apart from learning. Thus learning is a necessary and universal aspect of the process of developing culturally organized, specifically human, psychological functions. (p. 90) In support of this perspective, Vygotsky (1978) introduced the construct of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as a fundamentally new approach to the problem that learning should be matched in some manner with the child's level of development. He argued that to understand the relationship between development and learning, two developmental levels must be distinguished: the actual and the potential levels of development. The actual refers to those accomplishments a child can demonstrate alone or perform independently; in contrast to potential levels of

3 development as suggested by the ZPD—what children can do with assistance: “The distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 85). The ZPD was regarded as a better, more dynamic and relative indicator of cognitive development than what children accomplished alone. In summary, productive interactions are those which orient instruction toward the ZPD; otherwise, instruction lags behind the development of the child. “The only good learning is that which is in advance of development.” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 89). Hence, from a Vygotskian perspective, cognitive development is studied by examining the processes that one participates in when engaged in shared endeavors and how this engagement influences engagement in other activities. Development occurs as children learn general concepts and principles that can be applied to new tasks and problems; whereas from a Piagetian perspective, learning is constrained by development. Vygotksy was a prolific writer; he advanced a vast number of ideas in his brief life as a scholar (he died when he was but 37), some of which are appropriately characterized as underspecified and emergent. One of the most frequently criticized facets of Vygotksy's theory is its model of internalization. For example, Cobb and Yackel (1996) have argued that this aspect of Vygotskian theory constitutes a transmission model in which “students inherit the cultural meanings that constitute their intellectual bequest from prior generations” (p. 186). There is an alternative model, the participation model of cultural development (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 1990), which seems useful to overcoming dualisms, such as the society and the individual. The participation model represents development as the transformation of individual participation in sociocultural activity. Transformation (rather than internalization) occurs as participants in the activity assume increasing responsibility for the activity; in essence, redefining membership in a community of practice, and, in fact, changing the sociocul-tural practice itself. These ideas are elaborated on below. THE CONCEPT OF GUIDED PARTICIPATION The concept of guided participation highlights that cognitive development occurs in a social context while extending sociocultural theory beyond language-based dialogue. Importantly, guided participation builds on and extends Vygotsky's notion of ZPD. Rogoff (1990) writes, “Children's cognitive development is an apprenticeship—it occurs through guided participation in social activity with companions who support and stretch children's understanding of and skill in using the tools of the culture” (p. vii). While this sounds very similar to ZPD, Rogoff explicitly states that guided participation focuses more centrally on the interrelatedness of children and caregiver interactions and the fact that the “guided” does not necessarily mean face to face. For example, a student working on a research report in isolation is still “guided” by the teacher, librarians, classmates, the publishing industry, and parents who help shape the writing of the research report as a cultural activity. Emphasis on tacit, distal, and non-verbal forms of communication stands in contrast to Vygotsky's emphasis on didactic dialogue. This helps broaden the lens of sociocultural theory beyond language-based interactions as the primary source of learning culture. Finally, socioculturally oriented research, generally, and research on guided participation, specifically, have played important roles in bridging research on in-school and out-of-school learning.

4 HOW SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY DIFFERS FROM CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORY Similar to sociocultural theory, constructivism emerged as a theory of knowledge in response to behaviorism. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) and Jean Piaget (1896– 1980) are two theorists whose thinking and research significantly shaped constructivist theory. Kant (1951) significantly influenced Piaget's thinking when he proposed that it is the mind that provides the categories of knowing, while experience yields the content. Piaget (1955) argued that it is through the child's experiences manipulating and changing the world that the child acquires knowledge about relations within and between people and objects. Both constructivism and sociocultural theory, when applied to learning, are concerned with the activities that children engage in to learn. However, constructivist theory suggests one should attend to the learning and mental representations of the individual while sociocultural theory is more concerned with the ways in which learning is an act of enculturation. Many learning situations attempt to accommodate both, for example, the mathematics teaching of Ball (1993). Cobb (1994), in looking at Ball's dilemma of attending to students' individual knowledge (math as an active construction) and the traditions that have grown out of centuries of mathematics as a discipline (math learning as enculturation), notes that the dual presence of both sociocultural and constructivist theory can act as competing aims for teachers. The lens of sociocultural theory is considerably wide when compared to constructivist theory. A sociocultural theorist, when interpreting a learning situation, might attend to the broader social system in which the learning is happening and will draw interpretations about an individual's thinking and development based on his or her participation in culturally organized activities. An account of learning and development through the lens of construc-tivist theory, in contrast, is concerned with the individual— and the ways in which sense making happens through the individual's accommodation of experience (Cobb, 1994). Giyoo Hatano was most skillful at bridging socio-cultural perspectives on learning with constructivist theories of learning that resulted in a “mixed” theory of conceptual knowledge that successfully accommodated both perspectives (Cole & Miyake, 2006). In an attempt to understand whether cognitive development proceeded along a predetermined innate set of principles, Hatano and Inagaki (1994) explored the long-held theory, first put forth by Piaget (1929) that children come to develop theories of biology rather late in the course of development. Through experimental work with Japanese schoolchildren, they demonstrated that theories of cognitive development must also account for the role that experience plays in advancing development, thus accommodating Vygotskian ideas about the social nature of learning. THE EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY Given the comprehensive nature of sociocultural theory, its educational implications for assessment, curriculum, and instruction are broad-ranging, and only a glimpse of them can be provided in this entry. For example, socio-cultural theory—in particular the notion of zones of proximal development—would suggest that the goals of educational assessment should be to: (a) identify abilities that are in the process of developing, and (b) attempt to predict what the learner

5 will do independently in the future. A line of inquiry consistent with these assessment goals is dynamic assessment. Dynamic assessment is a term used to characterize a number of distinct approaches that feature guided learning for the purpose of determining a learner's potential for change. In contrast to traditional and static procedures that focus on the products of assessment, dynamic assessment is concerned with the different ways in which individuals who earned the same score achieved that score. Furthermore, while traditional measures reveal only those abilities that are completely developed, dynamic measures are concerned with how well a learner performs when provided assistance. Initial inquiry into the design and use of dynamic assessment used domain-general types of problem-solving tasks (e.g., Campione & Brown, 1984; Feuerstein, 1980). These studies suggested that dynamic assessment measures did indeed reveal a different picture of competence than do static measures, which typically underestimate children's ability to learn in a domain in which they initially performed poorly. More recent research suggests that the principles of dynamic assessment can also be applied within academic contexts. For example, Magnusson, Templin, and Boyle (1997) conducted research on the use of dynamic assessment to determine students' conceptions regarding the flow of electricity. They devised a context in which students could test out their conceptions and revise their thinking based upon the outcomes of their investigations. In this context, the researchers determined that students were, indeed, able to understand more about electrical behavior than had been determined on static measures used in previous research. Instructional Implications. Informed by a sociocultural perspective, learning is thought to occur through interaction, negotiation, and collaboration. While these features are characteristic of “cooperative learning,” what sets instruction that is informed by sociocultural theory apart is that there is also attention to the discourse, norms, and practices associated with particular discourse and practice communities. The goal of instruction is to support students to engage in the activities, talk, and use of tools in a manner that is consistent with the practices of the community to which students are being introduced (e.g., scientists, mathematicians, historians). These tenets are consistent with inquiry-based approaches, in which teachers and students are coinquirers, but with teachers mediating among students' personal meanings, the meanings emerging from the collective thinking and talk of the students, and the culturally established (scientific, mathematical, historical, literary) meanings of the wider society. Examples of research of this kind can be found in mathematics (Ball, 1993; Cobb, Wood, & Yackel, 1993; science (Engle & Conant, 2002; Magnusson & Palincsar, 2005; Wells & Chang-Wells, 1992), history (Bain, 2006), and literary studies (Smagor-insky & O'Donnell-Allen, 2000; Lee, 2007). Sociocultural theory has also been called upon to advance instructional practice that might redress disparities in the current educational system. Forty-two percent of school-aged children in the United States struggle to advance beyond basic levels of reading comprehension. Minority students and children living in poverty disproportionately perform in the lowest quartile on standardized measures of reading ability (Perie, Grigg, & Donahue, 2005). Given these distressing statistics, the increasing diversity in U.S. classrooms, and the proliferation of literacy technologies (e.g, multimedia and information and communications technologies), teachers have been challenged to reconsider the canonical approach to literacy instruction (e.g., Lee, 2007). A view of literacy instruction through the lens of sociocultural theory helps educators understand

6 the situational specificity of literacy practice. From this perspective, educators would consider literacy as a tool for use in specific contexts; thus, children would be taught how to negotiate multiple literacies for use in multiple contexts. Some researchers (Bhaba, 1994; Gutiérrez, Baque-dano-Lopez, & Tejeda, 1999; Moje et al., 2004; Soja, 1996) have advanced the idea that educators work to develop a third space in which students' primary discourses (those used in the home, community, and informal social interactions) and students' secondary discourses (those endorsed in school and other formal institutions) intersect to form this third space, where primary and secondary discourses are merged. Were educators to be more attentive to the creation of these third spaces in school, greater attention would be paid to incorporating students' prior knowledge and experience, as well as current literacy practices in the school curriculum. Research conducted by Varellas and Pappas (2006) illustrates the productive instructional use of discourse in third spaces to promote science learning. Working in primary-grade classrooms in an urban school, teachers encouraged their students to draw upon: (a) their own explorations of scientific phenomena (such as the water cycle) in classroom, home, and community settings; (b) prior conversations, and (c) other books read in and out of school in the course of read-aloud sessions. Varellas and Pappas documented numerous examples of young children bringing their own funds of knowledge to the classroom setting, but they also documented how the teachers made facile use of these funds and promoted the children's learning of scientific language and concepts. Use of New Technologies. With the proliferation of information and communication technologies in educational and everyday settings, scholars, working from a sociocultural perspective, are working to expand concepts, such as distributed cognition, to include not only people and artifacts, but also digital technologies. For example, Shaffer and Clinton (2006) introduce a new category of tool, which they call, toolforthoughts and, in doing so, challenge the idea that humans occupy a privileged position in psychological analyses. They argue that media, such as video games, word processors, and analytical tools create new skills and habits of mind, in addition to shifting the focus from reading and writing the printed word to multimodal literacy. Recently, sociocultural theory has been taken into consideration in the design of online distance education technologies. Research on the social context of learning has provided ample evidence that traditional teacher-centered approaches would be inappropriate in an online setting. It is less clear, however, how to design online learning environments in which students feel connected to peers and professors in a virtual classroom community. Community building in asynchronous learning networks poses a particular challenge from the perspective of socio-cultural theory because students are often not together physically or even virtually. Brigham Young University (BYU), a large provider of accredited online distance education in the United States, has adopted a model of online distance learning that is designed with sociocul-tural theory in mind. ProfessorsPlusTM carefully integrates social interaction among participants, substantive and interactive assistance from the course facilitators, and dynamic course content that is responsive to student learning (Teemant, 2005). Research Applied to Institutional Settings. Research conducted from a sociocultural perspective has focused traditionally on the interactions of individuals and groups of individuals.

7 However, research has also applied this lens to much larger institutional settings. For example, Cobb and McClain (2006) illustrate how efforts toward a mathematics reform effort need to be analyzed at a teacher, classroom, school, district, and indeed state and federal policy levels, to provide a more complete accounting of the reform effort. Broad-scale use of assessments represent another approach to educational reform, and similarly, must also attend to the larger institutional settings in which the assessment instrument is positioned. Moss and her colleagues (Moss, Girard, & Haniford, 2006), in their work on validity theory, describe educational measurement as a cultural tool situated within a larger institutional, social, and national context. Applying the lens of sociocultural theory, they urge that interpretations of student performance on these tests must be made with attention to the local context, the purposes for which the test was written, and the larger policy context in which the test is situated. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bain, R. B. (2006). Rounding Up Unusual Suspects: Facing the Authority Hidden in the History Classroom. Teachers College Record, 108(10), 2080–2114. Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93, 373–397. Bhaba, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge. Campione, J. C., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Learning ability and transfer propensity as sources of individual differences in intelligence. In P.H. Brooks, R. Sperber, & C. McCauley (Eds.) Learning and Cognition in the Mentally Retarded (pp. 137–150). Baltimore: University Park Press. Chaiklin, S., & Lave, J. (1993). Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Cobb, P. (1994). Where Is the Mind? Constructivist and Sociocultural Perspectives on Mathematical Development, Educational Researcher, 23, 13–20. Cobb, P., & McClain, K. (2006). The collective mediation of a high-stakes accountability program: Communities and networks of practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(2), 80–100. Cobb P., Wood T., & Yackel, E. (1993). Discourse, mathematical thinking, and classroom practice. In E. A. Forman, N. Minich, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for Learning (pp. 91–119). New York: Oxford University Press. Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivism, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychology, 31, 175–190. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

8 Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1994). Introduction. Mind, culture and activity. An International Journal, 1(4), 201. Cole, M., & Miyake, N. (2006). Remembering Giyoo Hatano. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 429–430. Engle, R.A., & Conant, F.R. (2002). Guiding Principles for Fostering Productive Disciplinary Engagement: Explaining an Emergent Argument in a Community of Learners Classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–484. Feuerstein, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment: An Intervention Program for Cognitive Modifiability. Baltimore: University Park Press. Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., and Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 6(4), 286–303. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1994). Young children's naive theory of biology. Cognition, 50, 171– 188. Kant, I. (1951). Critique of judgment (J. H. Bernard, Trans.). New York: Hafner. (Original work published 1790) Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lee, C. D. (2007). Culture, literacy, and learning: Blooming in the midst of the whirlwind. New York: Teachers College Press. Leontiev, A.N. (1981). Problems of the development of mind. Moscow: Progress Press. Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A S. (2005). Teaching to promote the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning about light at the elementary school level. In J. Bransford and S. Donovan (Eds.), How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 421–474). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Magnusson, S. J., Templin, M., and Boyle, R. (1997). Documenting and promoting conceptual change toward scientific knowledge: Children's emerging understandings of electricity. Journal of Learning Sciences, 6, 91–142. Moje, E. B., McIntosh-Ciechanowski, K., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–71. Moss, P. A., Girard, B. J., and Haniford, L. C. (2006) Validity in Educational Assessment. Review of Research in Education, 30, 109–162.

9 Newman, D., Griffin P., and Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in schools. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Piaget, J. (1929). The child's conception of the world. New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich. Piaget, J. (1955). The Child's Construction of Reality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Shaffer, D. W., & Clinton, K. A. (2006). Toolforthoughts: Reexamining thinking in the digital age. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), pp. 283–300. Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (2000). Idiocultural diversity in small groups: The role of the relational framework in collaborative learning. In C.D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry (pp. 165–190). New York: Cambridge University Press. Soja, E.W. (1996) Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell. Teemant, A. (2005). Evaluating socio-cultural pedagogy in a distance teacher education program. Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(3) 49–62. Tudge, J., & Scrimsher, S. (2003). Lev S. Vygotsky on education: A cultural-historical, interpersonal, and individual approach to development. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Educational psychology: A century of contributions (pp. 207–228) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Varellas, M., & Pappas, C. (2006). Intertextuality in read-alouds of integrated science-literacy units in urban primary classrooms: Opportunities for the development of thought and language. Cognition and Instruction, 24 (2), 211–259. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions (R. W. Rieber, Vol. Ed; M. J. Hall, Trans.). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1941) Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1979). Consciousness as a problem in the psychology of behaviour. Soviet Psychology, 17(4), 3–35. Wells, G., & Chang-Wells, G. L. (1992). Constructing knowledge together. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

10 Wertsch J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A Sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J. V., & Bivens, J. A. (1992). The social origins of individual mental functioning: Alternatives and perspectives. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratoryof Comparative Human Cognition, 14(2), 35–44.

Using Group Oral Presentations as a Formative Assessment in Teaching English for Vietnamese EFL Students Vu Tran Le Hoai 1* 1 Language Institution, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT English is a compulsory subject at Van Lang University, and students studying at this University have to match the program outcome standard in English. To achieve this requirement, the students have to get IELTS 4.5 before they graduate. It requires that the students must achieve English ability equivalent to level B1, according to CEFR, to graduate. However, there are a great number of students at Van Lang University showing incompetence in English, especially in speaking. Thus, to enhance students' English competence, the researcher implemented a teaching method used as a formative assessment in classrooms, called group oral presentations (GOPs). This paper explores the attitudes and perceptions of both students and teachers on the method. The participants are 53 EFL students studying at Van Lang University and five teachers teaching General English. We used a questionnaire for students and interviews for teachers to find out the results. The findings revealed that most students have positive attitudes towards this teaching method, although some face problems when they make presentations in classrooms. Besides, most teachers claimed that GOPs assisted students in enhancing their speaking ability. However, employing this method too much made students who were not good at English less confident, even scared of speaking English. In general, even though there were some drawbacks, this method could be seen as an effective assessment that helped students improve their speaking ability. Keywords: Group Oral Presentations, EFL students, Attitudes, Perceptions, Speaking ability, Cooperative Learning. 1. INTRODUCTION In recent years, as a result of globalization and the significant development of the economy, English has increasingly become more and more necessary for Vietnamese, especially for students. In this day and age, most businesses or enterprises require their employees or applicants to have enough English competence, especially English speaking proficiency when working or applying for the given careers. In addition, according to MOET [21], the Vietnamese Government issued the National Foreign Language Project scheme for the 2008- 2020 periods, which aims to improve teaching and learning English processes in Vietnam. Consequently, English has been considered a compulsory subject at schools and universities. In this context, Van Lang University has begun to teach English for all students for many years and applied the Program Outcome Standards on English competence for graduated students. According to this outcome standard, students majoring in English have to achieve C1 level in English, and students not majoring in English are B1 level. To meet the demand, teachers have improved their teaching technique and assessments, and management has innovated educational circumstances and policies at Van Lang University. In particular, teachers play an important role in enhancing students' abilities. Besides employing various teaching techniques in the classroom, teachers should also consider assessment during the teaching process. However, in the past few years, due to discrepancies in using teaching techniques and assessment among teachers at the university, there are differences in English ability in general and students' speaking ability in particular among classes. As a result, when graduated, there were many students who did not equip themselves with sufficient English ability. In this paper, we will take consideration using group oral presentation as a formative assessment, which can be seen as a teaching technique to engage students in lessons, develop communication skills, and help students Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the Asia Association of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (AsiaCALL 2021) Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press SARL. This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license -http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. 288

match the requirements of their future careers [24]. And then, we analyze its impacts on improving students' speaking ability at the university. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. A Brief Introduction on Assessment According to Brown [4], assessment is defined as "an ongoing process that encompasses a much wider domain" (p.5). It includes all occasions from answering a question in the classroom, giving comments up to and consisting of tests. Thus, it seems that assessment has a broader concept than tests. Similarly, Mihai [20] stated that assessment is "much more than tests and test scores" (p.22). In fact, the assessment includes all kinds of formal or informal feedback, comment, and testing. Mihai [20] also classified assessment clearly in accordance with intention, purpose, interpretation, and administration. Regarding intention, if an assessment is an unplanned comment, it can be informal. But, if it is prepared carefully, it can be formal. In regard to purpose, an assessment can be formative if it emphasizes learners' learning process. It can be summative if we use it to evaluate learners' learning outcomes after a period of the course. Regarding interpretation, an assessment can be used to compare the learning performance among students and the learning outcomes and performance of students with the content of the course. In terms of administration, an assessment can be used on a smallscale such as in classrooms, or on a large scale, such as nationwide. 2.1.1. Principles of Second Language Assessment In his book, Brown [4] pointed out some fundamental assessment principles, including validity, reliability, practicality, authenticity, and wash-back. In terms of validity, Brown [4] also asserted that a test is valid when it only measures what it intends to be measured, does not measure anything else. Regarding reliability, Brown [4] said that if a test is reliable, it is consistent and dependable. If a reliable test is distributed to many students on the same or different occasions, the results of the test are always similar. Regarding practicality, Bachman and Palmer [2] defined practicality as “the relationship between the resources that will be required in the design, development, and use of the test and the resources that will be available for these activities” (p.36). Brown [4] also suggested that a practical test is a test that is not too much expensive, is administered easily, has a specific and time-efficient scoring/evaluation procedure. In regards to authenticity, Bachman and Palmer [2] defined authenticity as “the degree of correspondence of the characteristics of a given language test task to the features of a target language task” (p.23). Brown [4] also stated that an authentic test is a test that has some characteristics as follows: natural language in the text; contextualized items; meaningful, relevant, and interesting topics; thematic organization to items; realwork tasks. In terms of wash-back, according to Brown and Hudson [5], it is considered as “the effect of testing and assessment on the language teaching curriculum that is related to it” (p.667). Similarly, Hughes [13] indicated that wash-back is the influence of the test on teaching and learning. Thus, it can be both positive and negative effects. 2.2. Types of Assessment According to Brown [4], assessment can be divided into two types according to the function of assessment: formative assessment and summative assessment. 2.2.1. Formative Assessment Black and Wiliam [3] defined formative assessment as "activities undertaken by teachers and by their students in assessing themselves that provide information to be used as feedback to modify teaching and learning activities." Thus, formative assessment aims to provide ongoing feedback not only for students to improve their learning but also for teachers to improve their teaching. Cook [8] asserted that formative assessment has two primary forms: unplanned and planned form. Unplanned or spontaneous formative assessments are incidental, unplanned comments and responses; coaching or impromptu feedback to students, such as oral feedback. Planed formative assessments consist of assignments such as quizzes, homework exercises used to assess student learning process and help them improve their learning. 2.2.2. Summative Assessment In contrast to formative assessment, summative assessment aims to measure or summarize what students obtain after a period of a course. It usually occurs at the end of the course or unit of instruction [4]. Examples of summative assessments are final exams, entrance exams, and state tests. Besides the goal to examine the ability of students after a particular time of a course, Harlen and Gardner [12] also pointed out some aims of summative assessment are: To determine competence for special education programs such as gifted and talented education; To evaluate ability of students for advancement to next learning level; To provide employment guidance; To assess qualifications for awards. According to Earl [10] while formative assessment is assessment for learning, summative assessment can be considered as an assessment of learning which "is designed to provide evidence of achievement to parents, other educators, the students themselves and sometimes to outside groups (e.g., employers, other educational Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 289

institutions)" (p.55). This assessment usually has a farreaching and significant influence on students in the future. 2.3. Group Work (Cooperative Learning) Group work or Cooperative learning is one of the most effective teaching approaches that significantly benefits learners [23]. Slavin [23] also pointed out many significant benefits of Cooperative learning on learners, including improving critical thinking skills, enhancing self-confidence and self-esteem, developing social skills, and engaging in learning. Johnson and Johnson [15] asserted that learners maximized their own and each other's learning when working in a group. They were also aware of having higher responsibility in learning. However, to apply Cooperative learning efficiently in the classroom, teachers should guarantee five Cooperative learning principles: positive interdependence, individual responsibility, face-to-face interaction, interpersonal and social skills, and group processing [16]. Regarding the first principle, Kagan [17] suggested that it might be seen as the most important principle that guaranteed Cooperative learning success. Each member in the group would try their best to fulfill the group's tasks and get the best results in learning. The second principle lets every member in the group have strong responsibility for their job in order to finish the group work successfully. The third and the fourth ones are principles that help create an interactional environment in the classroom, leading to improved speaking skills and sharing knowledge among students. In terms of the last principle, Kagan [17] emphasized teachers' role in teaching students' discussion skills, decision-making skills, effective leadership skills, trust-building skills, etc., so that students can easily discuss and fulfill their tasks in group-working environment. Group oral presentation also can be seen as one kind of Cooperative learning. 2.4. Oral Presentations According to Chen [7], oral presentation in EFL context is a form of public speaking in which speakers use visual aids to present their ideas in a group or individually on a particular English topic. Mallette and Clare [19] stated that oral presentation is considered as "the most common method for presenting information and is usually done with a computer and projector" (p.161). In fact, most of the teachers who teach speaking for EFL learners use the oral presentation as an oral assessment, which is defined by Joughin [14] as “any assessment of learning which is conducted by the spoken word” (p.1), to assess students’ speaking ability. 2.4.1. Characteristics Of Oral Presentations There are many different elements that make an oral presentation become effective. According to DuddleyEvans and Maggie [9], a good oral presentation's most important characteristics are structuring, visuals, voice, advanced signaling, and delivering a presentation. It is important to recognize that an effective oral presentation must have a clear structure. Structuring an oral presentation clearly helps listeners follow the presentation easily. In addition, when structuring an oral presentation, speakers should take the presentation's content and knowledge into account. Using visual aids in the presentation improves the effectiveness of the presentation. It makes listeners more engaged and interested in the presentation and helps speakers make their speech effectively. Regarding the voice element, Powell [22] asserted that “as a presenter, the ability to pace your speech and use your voice to create impact is the single most important skill you need. You will be more effective if you are in control of your voice by your use of stress, pausing, intonation, volume, and silence” (p.6). Thus, speaking clearly will make listeners easy to follow the presentation and more eager to listen. Besides, an oral presentation is successful when speakers know how to use signaling transitions so that listeners can follow the structure and catch the main points of the presentation. The last element is delivering the presentation. This is the way speakers deliver their presentations. According to Chikh and Dich [6], one presentation might be failed if the ways speakers deliver it is ineffective. Speakers have to maintain eye contact, use both non-verbal and verbal language, and have an appropriate tone of voice. 2.4.2. Benefits of Oral Presentations According to Girard and Trapp [11], an oral presentation has many significant benefits on students' learning as follows: Enhancing interaction in the classroom; Engaging students in learning; Motivating students in learning the language; Improving students' communication skills and presentation skills significantly. King [18] also said that oral presentation helps learners use four language skills in an integrated way. Moreover, it promotes learner’s autonomy and collaboration in learning. 2.5. Previous Studies on Oral Presentations A variety of oral presentation studies have been conducted to investigate its impacts on learner's language ability. Chikh and Dich [6] also conducted a study investigate the impacts of an oral presentation on developing EFL students' communicative competence. The participants were EFL students and teachers at Tlemcen University. The results revealed that students recognized that oral presentation brought many significant benefits and usefulness for their learning. In addition, it also helped to develop the communicative competence of the learners, fulfill their future careers. In a study by Atmane [1], 40 EFL students and 6 EFL Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 290

teachers at Bejaia University were surveyed and interviewed to identify the positive impacts of applying oral presentation in teaching communication and explore the students' attitude to this teaching assessment. The results found that oral presentation had positive effects on students' communicative skills. Besides, an oral presentation was also affected by many factors such as anxiety and teaching strategies. 3. METHODOLOGY To investigate the use of oral presentation as an assessment in teaching English for students at Van Lang University, a questionnaire for EFL students and an interview for teachers teaching English at this university were used. A critical analysis of this assessment was given depending on the results of the questionnaire and the interview. The study participants are 53 students studying in English courses at Van Lang University. The majority of them are third-year students. A questionnaire was distributed to them to investigate both the effectiveness of group oral presentation as an alternative assessment on their English competence and their perceptions on group oral presentations. Besides, five teachers teaching English at English Department of Van Lang University were interviewed to determine the teachers' perceptions of using this teaching assessment. They are teachers with over five years of teaching experience. The students' questionnaire (see appendix A) and teachers' interviews (see appendix B) are adapted from the study of Atmane [1]. They were then translated into Vietnamese so that both students and teachers could understand and gave their answers easily. 4. RESULTS AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS 4.1. Results and Analysis from Students’ Questionnaire 4.1.1. The Level and Attitude of Students in English Classroom From the chart below, in terms of English level, over half of the students, of which 31 students, answered that they are good at English. Besides, 10 students could not evaluate their English level. The others (12 students) confirmed that their English levels were low. Regarding students' shyness, over 50% of students said they are shy and less confident. 12 students are confident, and the others do not determine themselves. Regarding participation in the classroom, 30 students answered that they often participated in the classroom discussion. Only 7 students are not willing to participate in the discussion activities. The others didn't remember whether they took part in the discussion or not. In terms of the problems that students were facing when expressing themselves orally in English, up to 47 students, which occupies over 88% of the sample, agree with the statement, "I often have a problem expressing myself orally." These results indicate that although students at Van Lang University believe that their English level is not low and often discuss in the classroom, they are still shy and have many problems expressing ideas orally. This problem can be interpreted as good at grammar, writing, or listening skills, but not speaking skills. Or maybe students feel less confident due to inappropriate teaching strategies that were applied in the classroom. These results are similar to the results of Atmane’s study [1]. Figure 1 The English level and attitude of students in English classroom 4.1.2. The Practice and Preference in Group Oral Presentations of Students As the questionnaire results, 20 students agreed that they have already given many GOPs before. Fourteen students were neutral with this statement. 19 students were never given GOPs before. Regarding the statement, "my teachers often asked me to prepare GOP projects, 26 students agreed with 18 neutral answers, and 9 disagreed answers. In terms of interest in giving GOPs, 20 students agreed, 20 students were neutral, the rest were not interested in giving GOPs. These results indicate that all students' changes to give GOPs in the classroom are still limited. This may be due to teachers not requiring students to give GOPs or to work in group work, and some students gave oral presentations on behalf of the whole group. As a result, some shy students do not give an oral presentation. From these results, teachers should consider assigning equal students in groups to give an oral presentation. Regarding students' interest in giving GOPs, only 13 students cannot give an oral presentation. These numbers indicate that the majority of students like participating in GOPs. These results imply that GOPs increases student engagement. It can be seen as an 2 2 5 21 29 29 25 26 10 10 16 3 9 10 7 3 2 2 0 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 HD D NAD A HA Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 291

appropriate teaching method that helps students enhance their speaking skills. Figure 2 Students’ practice and interest in GOPs 4.1.3. Students’ Problems and Opinions on GOPs Figure 3 Students’ problems on GOPs The chart above shows that the majority of students, over 80% of the participants, agree with the statement, "I feel anxious or worried when I have to deal with an Oral Presentation." In response to the statement "I can give a presentation without any basic speaking skills and pronunciation mistakes," up to 32 students, nearly 60%, disagreed with this, whereas 21 students agreed. Regarding confidence during giving oral presentations, as we can see from the chart, 43 students, over 80% of the sample, accept that they feel less confident when making oral presentations in the classroom. From these results, we can conclude that students make common mistakes such as pronunciation and basic speaking skills due to a lack of confidence and anxiety. This can result from students' insufficient speaking competence or can be from teaching techniques. Therefore, teachers should take teaching techniques and learning input into account in order to engage students and let them get rid of anxiety. Questions/ Statements HA A NAD D HD Q11: Oral presentations give me a chance to practice my English 9 34 8 2 0 Q12: Oral presentations favor the use of some communication techniques 9 35 6 3 0 Q13: Oral Presentations activities help me to develop my communication skills 6 33 11 3 0 Q14: Oral Presentations is an effective way to practice speaking 13 32 7 1 0 Q15: To communicate well, Oral Presentations should be conducted regularly in the classroom 8 39 5 1 0 Table 1. Students’ opinion on GOPs The table above illustrates the role of oral presentation in developing speaking skills and communication skills. As we can see from the table, from question 11 to 14, most students agree with the significant role of GOPs in enhancing speaking competence. And the last question expresses students' opinions on applying GOPs in the classroom. These results reflect that most students like practicing GOPs, and they accept this teaching technique as an effective way to improve their speaking and communicative skills. In conclusion, group oral presentation can be seen as an efficient formative assessment to support Van Lang University's learning processes at present. 5 2 5 15 24 25 14 18 10 17 7 12 2 2 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Q5: The frequency of giving GOPs Q6: GOPs projects Q7: Students' interest in GOPs HD D NAD A HA 14 9 14 29 12 29 6 0 6 3 26 4 1 6 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Q8: Students' Anxiety Q9: Don't make mistakes Q10: Lack of confident HD D NAD A HA Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 292

4.1.4. General Suggestions from Students on GOPs Some of the students have given suggestions to deal with problems they cope with when giving oral presentations. They said to reduce anxiety and confusion when preparing and making oral presentations. Teachers should teach them how to make a good oral presentation and guide them clearly. Besides, one student said, "due to lack of background knowledge on a given topic, we have difficulty preparing the oral presentation content." Thus, the oral presentation can be made after some units have enough knowledge and vocabulary about the topic. Teachers should require students to present topics ranging from easy to difficult ones. As one student suggested, "the topic should be easy at the beginning of the course and more difficult till the end of the course." 4.2. Results and Analysis from Teachers’ Interviews 4.2.1. The Performance of Students in GOPs In response to question number 2, each teacher had a different comment on this issue. They said because students' English abilities and personalities were different from others, they performed differently in GOPs. There are 3 out of 5 teachers confirmed that their students felt shy and less confident when conducting an oral presentation in front of audiences. As a teacher said, "some of my students are shy and lose their words when they speak in front of the classroom." This teacher also commented as follows: "I don't think that shyness is the personality of these students because when I observe these students inside the classroom, they are very active." According to this teacher, shyness in giving oral presentations maybe comes from a lack of knowledge and ability in English. Another teacher added, "sometimes, some of my students just read words in the slide. This is not a presentation at all." However, the other teacher agreed that the majority of their students were good at English. They were confident when making oral presentations, even they made some mistakes. 4.2.2. Teachers' role in the classroom In response to question number 3, all teachers confirmed that they played roles as guides, tutors, observers, and evaluators. As one teacher said: “I usually give clear instruction on the given topics and presentation techniques to my students before requiring them to make group oral presentation. Before the presentation day, they submit their presentation slides to me, and I give them feedback. When they make a presentation, I often observe them, note some mistakes, and then give comments and fix their mistakes at the end of the presentation. Besides, other classroom groups are also expected to give peer-feedback on their classmates' work." 4.2.3. Difficulties in Applying GOPs In response to question number 4, most of the teachers confirmed that they had difficulty implementing group oral presentations in their classrooms. They listed some difficulties as follow: The large size of the class Lack of facility Inequality in students’ English ability Lack of students’ participation Cultural barriers leading to misunderstanding Unfamiliar topics 4.2.4. Impacts of GOPs on students’ communication skills In response to the three last questions, most teachers said that by making oral presentations regularly, students could improve their speaking skills, leading to better communication skills. As one teacher said: "According to the speaking test results at the end of the course, I realize that many students in my classrooms applying group oral presentation have improved their speaking skills. They perform much better than at the beginning of the course." Another teacher said, "most of my students are interested in making oral presentations. They like preparing and discussing in groups. They also pay a lot of attention in the classroom." From this result, we can see that most students have a positive attitude towards oral projects. However, one teacher said that giving too many GOPs in the classroom had some drawbacks. He said: "If you require students to prepare and make too many GOPs, they will feel bored and under pressure. Even making too many GOPs can cause many negative problems. Students who have insufficient English ability will feel more and more unconfident, even having a fear of making an oral presentation". 5. CONCLUSION This study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of using group oral presentations as a formative assessment to develop students' speaking ability and support students' learning. The results from the questionnaire given to students and from interviews with teachers revealed that most students were willing to make an oral presentation and accepted that this method Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 293

was ideal for improving their speaking skills and communicative skills. They also confirmed that this method would be effective if they had more chances to practice and under teachers' clear instruction. Through questionnaire, we also acknowledge that there were some difficulties in making GOPs of students such as lack of knowledge, lack of confidence, shyness, especially insufficient English ability of students. The teachers' perceptions pointed out some problems when applying this assessment in the classroom. In general, this assessment has been distributed into developing and improving students' speaking ability in particular, and students' learning ability in general. This method can be seen as an effective formative assessment for Van Lang University students. The study still has limitations that need to be investigated in further studies. Firstly, the study sample is still small compared to the total students and teachers at University. Moreover, it will be more reliable if the students are divided into two groups, majoring in English and not majoring in English. If so, we can have a clear picture of students' perceptions and the impacts of GOPs on students' ability. Secondly, if we can triangulate the results with more research instruments such as observations from teachers, peer-feedback from students, the study's validity and reliability may be better. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I want to express my gratitude to my instructor, the teachers, and the students who participated in this study. I am also grateful to the professor of the English Institution at Van Lang University who agreed to collaborate with me. REFERENCES [1] M.A. Atmane. Investigating the Role of Oral Presentation Projects in Enhancing EFL Learners’ Oral Proficiency (Master’s thesis). Bejaia University, Algeria. (2016). [2] L. Bachman, A.S. Palmer. Language testing in practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (1996). [3] P. Black, D. Wiliam. Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan. 92(1)(2010) 81–90. [4] Brown, H. Douglas. Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education. (2004). [5] J.D. Brown, T. Hudson. The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly. 32 (4)(1998) 653- 675. [6] M.K. Chikh, Y. Dich. The Impact of Oral Presentations on Developing EFL Students’ Communicative Competence: Case of Second Year LMD Students at the University of Tlemcen (Master’s thesis). Tlemcen University, Algeria. (2016). [7] L. Chen. A study of EFL graduate students' oral presentation anxiety. Unpublished master thesis, national Chung Cheng University, College of Education, Graduate Institute of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature. (2009). [8] H.G. Cook. Formative assessment: Best practices part 1 [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://flareassessment.org/resources/PA_PD_Form _%20Assess_Ppt_1_rev050709.pdf . (2009). [9] T. Dudley-Evans, J.S.J. Maggie. Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: CUP. (1998). [10] S.E. Earl, S.E. Staff and peer assessment: measuring an individual’s contribution group performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 11(1986) 60-69. [11] M.P. Girard, P. Trapp. An exploratory study of class presentations and peer evaluations: Do students perceive benefits? Academy of Educational Leadership Journal. 15(1)(2011) 77-94. [12] W. Harlen, J. Gardner. Assessment to support learning. In J. Gardner, W. Harlen, L. Hayward, G. Stobart, & M. Montgomery (Eds.), developing teacher assessment. New York, NY: Open University Press.(2010) 15-28. [13] Hughes, A. Testing for language teachers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. (2003). [14] G. Joughin. “A short guide to oral assessment” version 2, 17 February 2010, CEDIR, University of Wollongong, Leeds, metropolitan University. (2020) 1-22. [15] D.W. Johnson, R.T. Johnson. Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th Eds.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (1999). [16] D.W. Johnson, R.T. Johnson. (2008). Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning: The Teacher's Role. In R. M. Gillies, A. Ashman & J. Terwel (Eds.), Teacher's Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom. New York, U.S.A: Springer. (2008) 9-37. [17] S. Kagan. Cooperative learning. San Clemente, California: Kagan Publishing. (1994). Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 294

[18] J. King. Preparing EFL learners for oral presentations. Dong Hwa Journal of Humanistic Studies. 4 (2002) 401-418. [19] L. Mallete, B. Clare. Writing for Conferences: A Handbook for Graduate Students and Faculty. USA: Greenwood. (2011). [20] F.M. Mihai. Assessing English language learners in the content areas: A research-into practice guide for educators. Ann Arbor, MA: University of Michigan Press.(2010). [21] Ministry of Education and Training of Vietnam [MOET]. Development Strategy from 2009 to year 2020 for the Cause of Industrialization and Modernization of Vietnam. Hanoi: Vietnamese Government. (2009). [22] M. Powell. Presenting in English: How to Give Successful Presentations. USA: Heinle. (2002). [23] R.E. Slavin. Cooperative learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (1995). [24] S. Živković. The Importance of Oral Presentations for University Students. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy. 5(19) (2014) 468-475. APPENDIXES Appendix A: Students’ Questionnaire Dear Students, We are conducting a research for the fulfilment of a master degree in Linguistics (TESOL). This Questionnaire is designed to support our investigation on “The Effects of Using Group Oral Presentation Projects, in EFL Context, to Enhance Learners’ English ability”. Thus, you are kindly asked to answer the following questions by selecting the answer which best reflects your opinion. Your contribution is appreciated. Tick the appropriate answer from 1. Highly Agree (HA) to 5. Highly Disagree (HD) for each statement/ question in the table below. 1. Highly Agree: HA 2. Agree: A 3. Neither Agree nor Disagree: NAD 4. Disagree: D 5. Highly Disagree: HD Item Statement / Question HA A NAD D HD 1 I have a good level in English 2 I am a shy learner 3 I often take part in classroom discussion 4 I often have a problem expressing myself orally 5 I have already given many group oral presentations 6 My teachers often ask me to prepare oral presentation projects 7 I like dealing with group oral presentations assignments 8 I feel anxious/worried when I have to deal with an group oral presentation 9 I can give a presentation without any basic speaking skills and pronunciation mistakes 10 I hesitate when I have to speak in public because I lack confidence 11 Group oral presentations give me a chance to practice my English 12 Group oral presentations favour the use of some communication techniques 13 Group oral presentations activities help me to develop my communication skills 14 Group oral presentations is an effective way to practice speaking 15 To communicate well, group oral presentations should be conducted regularly in the classroom Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 295

General suggestions on group oral presentation: …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………................................................................................................................ Thanks for your contribution! Appendix B: Teachers’ Interview Dear Teachers, This interview questions aim at collecting information about the effects of using group oral presentation as a formative assessment in EFL Classrooms to enhance and develop learners’ oral communication performance. We would be very grateful if you answer the following questions which will help us in our research for the fulfillment of Master degree in Linguistics (TESOL). Your point of view is very important. Please answer the questions below. 1. How long have you been teaching English? 2. Based on your experience as a teacher of English, how do you perceive your students' performance in group oral presentations? Please explain. 3. Generally, what is your role during an oral presentation session? Please provide as many details as possible. 4. Can you name difficulties when applying group oral presentation in your classrooms? 5. Most literature in the field of oral communication shows that group oral presentations in EFL classroom have a positive impact on students' oral communicative skills. What is your comment on the matter? 6. Many approaches to foreign language teaching stress the fact that conducting oral presentation projects in EFL classrooms helps to form communicatively competent students. Comment! 7. In general, do you think that group oral presentation can be seen as a good assessment to support students’ learning, especially students’ speaking competence? Why? Thank you for your collaboration! Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 533 296

Assessing Iraqi EFL Teachers' Alert and Practice of Traditional and Alternative Assessments Asst.Prof. Faris Kadhim Te’ima Al-Atabi, Ph. D University of Wassit/ College of Education for Humanities Abstract Teaching and testing are interrelated since the are undispensable and inseparable processes; that is, the success of former depends on the latter and vice versa. As new techniques of assessments as alternative assesssments are emerged as a reaction and a remedying for the gaps and the suffers of the old or the traditional techniques of language testing. Iraqi EFL teachers, along a long period of English language teaching and testing are said to be traditional in their testing due to their unalert and inability to practise the alternative methods of assessments. One huderd male and female teachers are chosen to achieve the aims of the study by exposing them to a questionnaire and an interview after securing the fundementals of these two tools. The results of the obtained data show that Iraqi EFL teachers are unalert of the alternative assessments beside their inability to practise them due to the fact that they are ignorant of these modren techniques and their traditionalism since they follow outdated methods of English language testing. Section One: Introduction The Problem of the Study Assessment, as an integral part of the process of English language teaching and testing, is defined as an inclusive process of gathering information about the students’ performance throughout the use of written and non written tests. It is used instead of the word “test” for its wider view and coverage. Teaching without testing wouldn’t meet the intended goals, so assessment is considered the outcome of the process of teaching on which many decisions and judgements are made including; providing remedial actions, changing the methods of teaching, and other unnecessary ajustments. In fact, most people are confused and unable to make distinctions between the two terms “assessment” and “test” thinking that they are alike yet they are considerably different. Testing is a formal process and often standardized, assessment, on the Journal of Xi'an University of Architecture & Technology Volume XII, Issue II, 2020 Issn No : 1006-7930 Page No: 3213