43 While all the reasons given for assessing students were rated as very important by all the participants, helping students pass national and International examinations and helping teachers to become aware of their strengths and weaknesses had a closer mean of 3.85 and 3.90, a difference of only .5 Section C of the questionnaire focused on Assessment in the English language classroom, to answer Part b of Research Question 2 aimed at determining the respondents’ profile characteristics in terms of actual practices in English language classrooms. Data in Table 3 relates to the respondents’ profile characteristics in terms of their actual practices in the English Language Classrooms. The three methods that were always used in the participants classes are reading text with a mean of 3.77, writing essays 3.49, group discussions 3.44 and listening to audio texts 3.28. Other methods which were sometimes used by teachers which were rated quite highly were information on charts 3.21, storytelling 3.15, speeches 3.05 and research projects 3.03. A further group of teaching methods which were also sometimes used but have achieved lower means are analyzing literature 2.97, reading projects 2.95, debates 2.82, writing journals, role plays, interviews 2.69, and using graphic organizers 2.59. The use of port folios with a mean of 2.36 and skits were methods rarely used by the participants. Question 2 of Section C, which considered how the participants complement end of term examinations and common assessments done to further assess students’ grasp of what is taught, yielded the result that all the options given are always done but with a difference in mean. Giving homework achieved a higher mean of 3.95, followed by giving them the chance to orally tell what they have learnt 3.56 and giving them short written tests 3.41. Despite the fact that students are always given
44 Table 3. Profile characteristics of respondents in terms of their actual practices in the English language classrooms Questions Results Categories How often do you use the following in your English class to assess your students’ grasp of the four language skills? Mean Rank Interpretation Role plays 2.69 12 Sometimes Skits 2.21 15 Rarely Speeches 3.05 7 Sometimes Interviews 2.69 12 Sometimes Group discussions 3.44 3 Always Debates 2.82 11 Sometimes Storytelling 3.15 6 Sometimes Information on charts 3.21 5 Sometimes Graphic organizers 2.59 13 Sometimes Listening to audio texts 3.28 4 Always Write essays 3.49 2 Always Write journals 2.82 11 Sometimes Read a text 3.77 1 Always Analyze literature 2.97 9 Sometimes Reading projects 2.95 10 Sometimes Research projects 3.03 8 Sometimes Use portfolios 2.36 14 Rarely Other than the common assessments and end of term examinations, how else do you assess your students’ grasp of what you have taught them in the classroom? I give them home-work 3.95 1 Always I give them short written tests in the classroom 3.41 3 Always I give them a summary to write of what they have learnt 2.72 4 Always I get them to tell me orally what they have learnt 3.56 2 Always What type(s) of feedback do you give to your students? Frequency Percentage Oral - I explain their mistakes to them one on one 15 38.5 I make general comments to the whole class 14 35.9 I write comments at the end of their work 15 38.5 I give them marks and grades 14 35.9 I use correction codes to highlight their mistakes 5 12.8
45 Table 3.Continued Questions Results Categories How often do you give the types of feedback indicated above? Mean Interpretation Oral - I explain their mistakes to them one on one 3.69 Always I make general comments to the whole class 3.92 Always I write comments at the end of their work 3.90 Always I give them marks and grades 3.72 Always I use correction codes to highlight their mistakes 3.18 Sometimes Do you give students opportunity to assess their own work and/ or that of their peers? Frequency Percentage Their own work 37 94.9 The work of their peers 34 87.2 How often do you get them to do that? Mean Interpretation Their own work 3.36 Always The work of their peers 2.87 Sometimes Legend: 3.26 – 4.00 Very high Always Most recent Very important 2.51 – 3.25 High Sometimes Recent Quite important 1.76 – 2.50 Low Rarely Not so recent Not so important 1.00 – 1.75 Very low Never Obsolete Not at all important summaries to write about what they have learnt, it generated still a high mean of 2.72 but the lowest in the group. Through Question 3 of Section C, the researcher attempted to find out what types of feedback students receive from their teachers and the frequency that they are given. All but the use of correction codes to highlight students’ mistakes were said to be used always by the respondents. The former gained a percentage of 12.8 as only 5 respondents chose it as a type of feedback given. Its frequency of use also acquired the lowest mean of 3.18. Participants seemed more prone to using one-on-one oral feedback and writing comments at the end of students’ work to give feedback. Both were rated with high percentages of 38.5. However, in terms of the frequency that
46 they are used, more teachers are always making general comments to the whole class 3.92 and writing comments at the end of their work, mean of 3.90. The last question was geared towards analyzing whether teachers allow their students to self-assess and assess their peers. According to the data from the responses, students are always allowed to self-assess depicted by a very high mean of 3.26 while they are sometimes allowed to assess their peers, shown by the high mean of 2.87. As it relates to percentages, the same is reflected where 94.7% of respondents say they give students the opportunity to assess their work and 87.2 that of their peers. There were two main objectives to this study. The first one was to establish English teachers’ perceptions of classroom assessments and how it related to their assessment practices. The second one was aimed at finding out whether variables such as age, educational attainment, ethnicity, length of teaching bracket and the levels teachers are teaching at, contribute to forming teachers’ perceptions on assessments. Three statistical tests were used to analyze the correlation between the variables and to test the various hypotheses. (See Table 4) Spearman rho was used as an alternative to Pearson r. It is a statistical test of correlation that permits that researcher determine the significance of the relationship between two variables being studied. Mann-Whitney was used as an alternative to T test. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to establish whether a difference exists in the dependent variable for two independent groups. In the case of this research the dependent variable gender for the two independent groups “male’ and “female”. The Krushal-Wallis test was used to determine the statistical differences of two or more groups of independent variables on a continuous dependent variable.
47 Table 4. Hypotheses testing summary Questions Test/Results Interpretation Baseline grand mean scores: Mean Perceptions on assessment 3.24 High Actual practices in English language classroom 3.01 High There is no significant relationship between the teachers’ perceptions on assessment and their actual practices in the English language classrooms. Spearman rho Alternative for Pearson r R value 0.406 (moderate positive) p value 0.01 (significant) Decision – reject H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to gender. Mann-Whitney Alternative for Td p value 0.501 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to cultural identity. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.084 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to age group. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.365 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to length of teaching bracket. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.158 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to educational attainment. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.750 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to number of levels taught. p value Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test
48 Table 4 continued Questions Test/Results Interpretation p value 0.641 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to gender. Mann-Whitney Alternative for Td p value 0.883 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to cultural identity. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.102 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to age group. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.305 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to length of teaching bracket. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.513 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to educational attainment Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.241 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 There is no significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to number of levels taught. Kruskal-Wallis Alternative for F-test p value 0.463 (not significant) Decision – retain H0 With margin of error = 0.05 Legend: 3.26 – 4.00 Very high 2.51 – 3.25 High 1.76 – 2.50 Low
49 1.00 – 1.75 Very low What are the basis for interpreting correlation coefficient (r)? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ± Parameters Interpretation --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Perfect correlation 0.80 – 0.99 Very high correlation 0.60 – 0.79 High correlation 0.40 – 0.59 Moderate correlation 0.20 – 0.39 Low correlation 0.01 – 1.10 Very low correlation 0.00 No correlation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Research Question 3 Are the teachers’ perceptions on assessment significantly related to their actual practices in the English language classrooms? The test to answer the above research question was administered based on the hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between the teachers’ perceptions on assessment and their actual practices in the English language classrooms. Spearman’s rho was used to establish whether there is a significant relationship between teachers’ perceptions on classroom assessment and their actual assessment practices. The coefficient R value was 0.406, noting that an R value of 0.40 to 0.69 shows a moderate correlation. And the p value was 0.01 which is less than the alpha 0.05, therefore, p = 0.01 < 0.05. This means that there is a significant relationship between teacher perceptions and their actual classroom assessment practices. The hypothesis is thus rejected. Moreover, as can be seen (See scatter plot above), the R2 value is 0.186. Looking for the coefficient of determination (COD) with the formula COD = R2 (100%), therefore, the COD is 18.6%. Therefore, 18.6% is the amount of variance explained teachers' perception on assessment about their actual practices regarding English classroom assessment.
50 Figure 3: Scatter Plot Meanwhile, COA or coefficient of alienation refers to the amount of variance left unexplained by the included independent variable (say X), about the dependent variable (say Y), and therefore is attributed to other variable(s) not included in the study, or to sampling error. Since its formula is 100% - COD, therefore 100 – 18.6 = 91.4%. The COA value therefore is 91.4%. This is the amount of changes in teachers’ actual practices left unexplained by their perception on assessment degrees and can be therefore attributed to other variable(s) not included in the study.
51 Research Question 4 Are there significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to profile characteristics? The following was the result of the test analyzing the differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to gender. Significance level alpha = 0.05 and the Mann-Whitney p value was 0.501. Since the p-value > alpha, then the difference is not significant. The result of the test analyzing the differences in the perceptions of teachers when grouped according to cultural identity is as follows: Significance level alpha =0.05 and the Krushal-Wallis p value was 0.084, then 0.084 > 0.05. Therefore, the difference is not significant. Krushal-Wallis test analyzing the differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to age group gave these results. Significance level alpha = 0.05 and the Krushal-Wallis p value was 0.365. Since 0.365 > 0.05, then the difference is not significant. The differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to length of teaching bracket was tested for its significance leading to a Krushal-Wallis p value of 0.158. Given that 0.158 > 0.05, then the difference is not significant. Teachers’ perceptions on classroom assessments when grouped according to educational attainment were tested for apparent significance. The test of difference in significance was performed using the Krushal-Wallis test. Since the p value of 0.750 > 0.05, the difference is not significant. Finally, significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to number of levels taught was again investigated using Krushal-
52 Wallis Test. The result of the p value was 0.641> 0.05 so there is no significant difference. Consequently, research hypothesis 2 that there is no significant difference in teachers’ perceptions of classroom assessments when grouped according to profile characteristics is retained. Research Question 5 Are there significant differences in the teachers’ actual practices in English language classrooms? Again, the significance in differences between the variables age group, educational attainment, ethnicity, length of teaching bracket and the levels teachers are teaching and actual assessment practices in English Language classrooms were evaluated. Mann-Whitney test was used to ascertain difference in significance in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to gender. A p value of 0.883 > 0.05 was recorded. Therefore, the difference is not significant. The remaining tests were Krushal-Wallis tests. The significant differences in teachers’ actual practices in English language classroom assessments when grouped according to cultural identity was tested. P was 0.102 > 0.05 declaring the difference not significant. For age group, p was 0.305 > 0.05 = Not significant. Length of teaching bracket p was 0.513 > 0.05 = Not significant. Where educational attainment is concerned p was 0.241 > 0.05 = Not significant. Lastly, the differences in significance between actual assessment practices and number of levels taught, p was 0.463 > 0.05 = differences in the relationship is not significant.
53 Hence, the hypothesis is retained that there is no significant differences in teachers’ actual classroom assessment practices in language classrooms.
54 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION The study was aimed at discovering the perceptions of classroom assessment held by Secondary School English teachers in Seychelles and if their perceptions relate to their classroom assessment practices. It further tried to establish the English teachers’ understanding of what good classroom assessment practices entail and the kind of practices they were actually exposing their students to in their classrooms. The results revealed disparity in gender amongst English language teachers namely 76.9% females and 23.1% males. This is consistent with that of other studies by Zulaiha et al, 2020; Yusuk, 2020; and Kirkgoz et al, 2017. This shows that context and sample size does not affect gender disparity in studies related to aspects of English Language teaching. Most teachers in this study noted having had recent training in broader notions of assessment and subsequently, assessment in the English language classroom. These results should be taken into account in the light of findings by Narathakoon et al (2020) which upheld theories by Acar-Erdol & Yıldızlı, 2018; Hussain et al, 2019, that a relationship exists between training gained and teachers’ perceptions and assessment practices. Their research findings indicated that teachers who have had no training or even those that have had some training in assessment did not have the knowledge to form beliefs of what good assessment practices are, those beliefs that are needed to convert into good classroom assessment experiences.(p. 153)
55 Participants’ teaching experience is generally explained by the length of teaching bracket. The longer someone has been in the profession, the more experience he/she is expected to have garnered to impact on classroom activities, including assessment activities. Thus it would be expected that a significant difference should exist between the length of teaching bracket and actual classroom assessment practices. The result of this study however, indicated that there was no significant difference in teachers’ length of teaching bracket and their practices in the language classroom. Contrary to this study, Chalachew & Terefe (2020) in their study analyzing Teachers’ Self-perceived Skills as the function of Gender and Teaching Experiences in the Classroom Assessment undertaken in High Schools of South West Shewa Zone, Ethiopia, discovered that “... most experienced teachers indicated highest self-perceived skillfulness than less experienced teachers.” (p. 22) Additionally, Tajeddin et al (2018) agreed about more consistency existing in experienced teachers’ assessment knowledge and practice than in that of novice teachers. (p. 71) The difference between this study and the earlier ones aforementioned, may be attributed to its relatively small sample size n =39. Research in statistics suggest that statistically, through a small sample size only fairly large differences will appear as significant. Having had training in assessment can be said to be crucial in enabling teachers adopt good classroom assessment practices in the classroom. This study discovered 71.2% of teachers having had training in assessment between 1 to less than 9 years ago and 69.2% having had training specifically in line with assessment in the English language classroom during the same period of time. Table 5 below shows a significant relationship between both aspects of training as a component of perception and actual practices in the English language Classroom.
56 Table 5. Relationship between components of perceptions on assessment and actual practices in the English language classrooms Item or statement p value r value Interpretation 1 How conversant are you in terms of classroom assessment practices? 0.621 0.082 Not significant 2 How conversant are you in terms of dynamic assessment practices? 0.494 0.113 Not significant 3 How conversant are you in terms of performance assessment practices? 0.856 0.03 Not significant 4 Had a training on assessment 0.019 0.375 Significant 5 Had a training specifically on assessment in the English language classroom 0.009 0.411 Significant 6 The National Curriculum Framework 0.003 0.465 Significant 7 The National Assessment Framework 0.405 0.137 Not significant 8 Local School Assessment Guidelines 0.451 0.124 Not significant 9 Suggestions from textbooks being used 0.149 0.235 Not significant 10 To compare their level with others in the same year level 0.614 0.083 Not significant 11 To give them marks so as to motivate 0.047 0.32 Significant 12 To help them pass the national and international examinations 0.229 0.197 Not significant 13 To help me evaluate my teaching 0.231 0.196 Not significant 14 To help me become aware of my students’ strengths and weaknesses 0.749 0.053 Not significant Training is an important component in language teaching as it encourages the acquisition of knowledge which helps form perceptions. One can also keep abreast with new developments that can assist in improving classroom practice. The importance of training in informing classroom assessment practices agrees with research by Yilmazer & Ozkan (2017) who stated their finding that “…instructors who felt ineffective reported this fact was highly related to their limited training on
57 assessment and their need for more training on assessment.” (p. 355) and Gonzalez (2021) who also confirmed similar findings. Teachers’ actual classroom assessment practices to assess the four language skills (See Table 3), can be said to be consistent with current literature on assessment which promotes performance - based and dynamic assessments as indicated in the review of literature. The results which showed teachers rating highly the importance of self and peer assessment, were deemed to be evidences of the importance that teachers place on learners achieving some level of autonomy in classroom assessments. This is especially important since English is the medium of instruction for other subjects. Autonomy experienced in the language classroom, will encourage learners to also become independent thinkers; able to decode messages and understand instructions to complete tasks given in other subjects. In addition to their rating as very important, all the following reasons they assess their students, (1) To give them marks so as to motivate them, (3) To help me evaluate my teaching (4) To help me become aware of my students’ strengths and weaknesses are added evidence of good perceptions of what constitutes good classroom assessment practices (outlined in the National Assessment Framework.that the teachers possess, liable to be translated as actions in the classroom. These results build on existing evidence from Asare (2020) who rated teachers on 13 strategies forming the basis of formative school-based assessment, comprising most of the components highlighted above, and found that they practiced all those strategies. (pp. 183-184) Nonetheless, it is worth pointing out that these rating of high importance to the two other reasons for assessing students namely comparing their level with other students in the same grade level and to help students pass national and international
58 exams, which are not purposes of classroom assessments, can be explained by (1) the expectations set by individual schools in Seychelles to meet Ministry of Education’s standard for classification of schools as high performing schools and (2) It is also attributed to the fact that preparation for and actual sitting of high stakes examinations at secondary level namely S3 Coordinated Examinations, S4 Selection Examinations and S5 IGCSE and National Examinations, form a substantial part of schooling at secondary level in the Education system in Seychelles. The research sought to test the following hypotheses. (1) There is no significant relationship between the teachers’ perceptions on assessment and their actual practices in the English language classrooms. (2) There are no significant differences in teachers’ perceptions on assessments when grouped according to profile characteristics. (3) There are no significant differences in teachers’ actual classroom assessment practices when grouped according to profile characteristics. As evident from the results, Hypothesis 1 was rejected as the study indicated a correlation between teacher perceptions and their actual classroom assessment practices. This relationship was significant which means that as the teachers’ perceptions increased, so did their actual classroom assessment practices (see Scatter plot) These results build on findings by Aristizábal (2016) in his study entitled A Diagnostic study on teachers’ beliefs and practices in foreign language assessment in which he found that “teachers’ beliefs tend to align with their practices, but this is not always the case. (p.40) and further sustained by Zulaiha et al (2020) in their Investigation into EFL Teachers’ Assessment Literacy: Indonesian Teachers’ Perceptions and Classroom Practice which concluded “ … teachers had a good knowledge of assessment, as well as good assessment practice. (p. 198)
59 The fact however that the relationship between the two variables teacher perceptions and actual classroom assessment practices, although linear showed moderate association, suggests that there are changes in teachers’ practices that are not explained by their perceptions. One of these variables might be the context in which the assessment is being conducted. Birelo (2012) quoted Borg’s answer in an interview, who said “It is very well established from the research available that there is not much point in studying the relationship between beliefs and practices, if we omit context from the equation.” (p 92) Other variables affecting teachers’ practices might be class size, demands of the national and IGCSE curriculum in relation to syllabus coverage. Other research findings retained both hypotheses 2 and 3 that there is no significant difference in teachers’ perceptions and subsequently their practices when grouped according to profile characteristics. This could have been due to statistical data limitation in this research caused by solely collecting data using questionnaire with closed questions which required the respondents to rate their attitudes to different statements. Griffee (2012) quotes Creswell (2002) “Survey is self-reported information, reporting only what people think rather than what they do” (p. 139). This substantiates the view that the disadvantages of closed questions in questionnaires may oblige respondents according to Statistics Canada (2010) “… to choose one of the response categories whether or not her or she has formulated an answer or even has the knowledge required to answer the question… force the respondent to choose a category that does not correspond to his or her opinion, or to express an opinion when in fact he or she has none.” (p. 65). Additionally, it is to be noted that most research aimed at establishing a relationship between perceptions and practices either chose the qualitative design or
60 mixed method as methods to carry out the research. The studies of Zulaiha et al, 2020; Uddin et al, 2020; Yusak, 2020; Yook & Yongkun, 2016; Chalachew & Terefe, 2020 and Lukluh et al, 2019 are some of such studies that made use of either of the two methods mentioned earlier. The qualitative design allows for the use of interviews and/or observations that ensure validity especially in such a survey where teachers’ actual classroom assessment practices are being analyzed. Through the mixed method, relevant data that cannot be fairly validated through one instrument uniquely used with one research design, can be substantiated by another instrument unique to another design. In this study for example, observations would have given a clearer knowledge of actual classroom assessment activities being performed. Finally, this research which set out to ascertain whether there is a significant relationship between teachers’ classroom assessment perceptions and their actual classroom practices has done just that. Moreover, it has proved that assessment components that suggest more innovative practices to classroom assessment have been said to being performed by teachers and training that is a valuable component to building good perceptions are being offered to teachers by the Ministry of Education.
61 CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of the study was to explore Secondary School English teachers’ perceptions of classroom assessments and whether their perceptions influence their classroom assessment practices. Its intention was to ascertain the English teacher’s knowledge of what constitutes good classroom assessment practices and what types of assessment experiences they were exposing their students to in their English language classrooms. Summary The study comprised participants from 8 out of the 10 government-owned Secondary schools which were 39 in total. They answered a questionnaire using the Likert model with a 4 point scale. The results were examined using descriptive statistics, which included frequencies, means and the p and R values of three statistical tests namely, Spearman’s rho, Krushal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney to determine the significance of relationships between variables. The study was aimed at establishing the relationship between the perceptions and actual practices of classroom assessments of Secondary English teachers in Seychelles. The questionnaire which was intended to be mailed to all the 10 secondary schools in hard copies, had to be sent electronically to the Heads of departments through the Head teachers to be filled by teachers. This was because of the COVID 19 lockdown since December when schools were still closed for the December holidays.
62 The response rate diminished for two main reasons (1) Teachers started teaching students through online forums and that put significant pressure on them and it seemed difficult for them to find time to fill the questionnaire. For some schools, head teachers and Heads of Departments really took the lead in getting the questionnaires filled while others, could have felt overwhelmed by the amount of work required of them, thus the questionnaire was not a priority. Despite this, the study yielded the kind of information expected. It was able to establish a statistically significant relationship between teacher perceptions and their actual classroom assessment practices; although it could not establish the same kind of relationship between teacher perceptions of assessments when grouped according to profile characteristics and the relationship between their actual classroom assessment practices when grouped according to the same profile characteristics. Conclusions The study was able to establish a significant relationship between teacher perceptions and their actual classroom assessment practices which confirmed the findings in line with teachers’ ratings of items depicting perceptions on classroom assessment that are in agreement with stipulated norms in guiding frameworks and other literature on classroom assessment practices in the language classroom. It is a fact that the instrument chosen for data collection alone, would not always generate completely honest answers from the respondents. Nonetheless, the researcher believes that as intended, teachers who participated in the study have benefitted from a chance to analyze their classroom assessment practices. It was observed that a few innovative classroom assessment approaches such as the use of skits and portfolios are being used by only a small group of teachers whereas the more
63 traditional methods of reading a text and answering questions, listening to audio texts and answering questions, writing essays and writing tests were still being preferred. The fact that these latter components form part of all summative assessments in language assessment in Seychelles, might be the reason for their use to a larger extent in classrooms. Limitations Other than the limitations mentioned in Chapter 1 of this study, a further limitation that could have impacted on the external validity of the research is the fact that data collection for the research was limited to government-owned or public Secondary schools. Though they form a larger segment of schools operating in Seychelles, there are also privately-owned and /or International schools also functioning under the purview of the same Ministry of Education as the other schools and whose participation in the research would have (1) Given a more reliable evaluation on the perceptions and classroom assessment practices of teachers teaching English in Seychelles, and (2) could have made the findings not simply mere generalizations but more representative of English teachers in Seychelles. Recommendations As the researcher felt that there was data limitation because of the research design chosen, it is recommended that for future research, a qualitative or a mixed method study is carried out which would yield more reliable data. Actual practices are observable behaviors and can thus be validated by the researcher actually going into the classroom to see firsthand what is taking place. Additionally, it is recommended that future research on classroom assessment in Seychelles also includes all other Secondary schools operating in Seychelles, for as it stands now, the researcher
64 recommends caution when using data from this research alone to make generalizations on teacher perceptions and actual classroom assessment practices of English teachers in Seychelles. As the research exposed the fact that there are still teachers teaching at secondary level with only a Diploma in Education, it is recommended that the Ministry of Education considers prioritizing them in the training plan so that they benefit from further training that was seen to be important in broadening knowledge that contributes in molding perceptions and improving practice. As was also discussed, more training will build teacher confidence in making use of innovative classroom assessment practices gained in the training. A further recommendation is proposed as an answer to Research question 6 on interventions that can be proposed based upon the results of the study. The researcher therefore proposes that teacher trainers, teach trainee teachers how to use portfolio assessments in their classes and performance-based methods more frequently. Considering that at the end of Cycle 5, each student has to produce a Record of Achievement (ROA) file to Post Secondary Institutions as a support with their applications, portfolio assessments will facilitate the choice of work that they place in their ROA files as this has always proven to be a tedious endeavor for these students towards the end of secondary school. They are always seen scavenging for good pieces of work to insert in their files at the last minute. Moreover, engagement in performance based activities in the classroom will develop their confidence in interacting in English in real life situations as they leave secondary school. And lastly, that teachers are taught to differentiate common assessment of learning tasks such as listening to an audio text and the traditional read a text and
65 answer questions with Assessment for learning tasks which advocate the use of more innovative ways of assessing the four macro skills. Schools are always seeking to improve their standards, their teachers’ knowledge and practices and their students’ results. Thus, professional development programs exist so that the intended improvement can take place as strategies are carefully identified, actions are carefully planned for and executed. Language teachers are therefore encouraged to use the findings and recommendations of this study to critically reflect on the impact their previous assessment perceptions and practices have had on their students. Then, through action research, embark on their own journey of self-discovery, and discovering their students’ needs and as researchers in their own classrooms, find ways to meet those needs; some of which have been suggested in the study.
66 REFERENCE LIST
67 REFERENCE LIST Acar-Erdol, T., & Yıldızlı, H. (2018). Classroom assessment practices of teachers in Turkey. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 587-602. doi:https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11340a Airasian, P. W. (2003). Classroom Assessment: Concepts and Applications, (5thed.). New York: McGrawHill. Alavi, S.M. &Taghizadeh, M. (2014). Dynamic Assessment of Writing: The Impact of Implicit/Explicit Mediations on L2 Learners’ Internalization of Writing Skills and Strategies. Educational Assessment, 19, 1-16 Alkharusi, H., Aldhafri, S., Alnabhani, H., & Alkalbani, M. (2014). Classroom assessment: Teacher practices, student perceptions, and academic self-efficacy beliefs. Social behavior & personality: an international journal, 42(5), 835- 855. Doi:10.2224/sbp.2014.42.5.835 Asare, E. (2020) Basic Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices of Formative Assessment in the Cape Coast Metropolis of Ghana Retrieved 3 April 2020 from sers/pc/Desktop/Research1/Basic_Teachers_Perceptions_and_Practices.pdf Assessment & Certification Section. (2020). Lower Secondary Assessment Syllabi. Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development. Aubrey, S., King, J., & Almukhaild, H. (2020). Language Learner Engagement During Speaking Tasks: A Longitudinal Study. RELC Journal, 1. Retrieved on 5 April 2021 from https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220945418 Bentea, Cristina & Anghelache, Valerica. (2012). Teachers’ Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Professional Activity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 51. 167– 171. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.139. Black, P et al. (2003).Assessment For Learning: Putting it into Practice: New York: McGrawHill. Bhattacherjee, A. (2012) Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices: (2nd Ed.). Retrieved 20 November 2016, from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=oa _textbooks Butler, S.M. & McMunn, N.D. (2006).A Guide to Classroom Assessment: Understanding and Using Assessment to Improve Student Learning, San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Bransford, J.D, Brown, A.L, & Cocking, R.R (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, Retrieved 28 November 2016 from http://www.colorado.edu/MCDB/LearningBiology/readings/How-peoplelearn.pdf
68 Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Washington DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University. Borg, S. (2012, April 26). Teacher Cognition and Language Teacher Education: beliefs and practice. A Conversation with Simon Borg. Interview by M. Birello. Retrieved May 12, 2021, from file:///C:/Users/pc/Downloads/253372- Article%20Text-342124-1-10-20120517%20(2).pdf Chalachew, A. T., & Terefe, (2020) A. Teachers’ Self-perceived Skills as the function of Gender and Teaching Experiences in the Classroom Assessment: A study in High Schools of South West Shewa Zone, Ethiopia. International Journal of Progressive Education, Volume 16 Number 1 Cohen, L. Manton, M. & Morrison, K. (2004).A Guide to Teaching Practice. Abingdon: Routledge. Davies, S. (2010) The Essential Guide to Secondary Teaching, New York: Pearson. Davis, D. S. & Neitzel, C. (2011). A Self-Regulated Learning Perspective on Middle Grades Classroom Assessment. Journal Of Educational Research, 104(3), 202-215. Doi:10.1080/00220671003690148 Dunbar, N.E, Brooks, C.F & Kubicka Miller, C. (2006). Oral Communication Skills in Higher Education: Using a Performance-Based Evaluation Rubric to Assess Communication Skills. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 117-130 Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2002). Strategies for Teachers: Teaching Content and Thinking Skills. 4th Ed. Needham Heights: M.A. Allyn and Bacon. Gardener, J. (2006). Assessment and learning: An introduction. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 1–6). London: Sage Gavriel, J. (2013). Assessment for Learning: a wider perspective is important for formative assessment and self-directed learning in general practice. Education for Primary Care, 24(2), 93-96 Fazlur, R, Babu, R & Ashrafuzzaman (2011) Assessment and Feedback Practices in the English Language Classroom. Retrieved 25 March, 2021 from users/pc/Desktop/Research/Assessment_and_Feedback_Practices_in_the%20( 1).pdf Ferede, T., Melese, E., & Tefera, E (2012) A descriptive Survey on Teachers’ Perception of EFL Writing and Their Practice of Teaching Writing: Preparatory Schools in Jimma Zone in Focus Jimma University, College of Social Sciences, English Department Retrieved on 18 April 2021 from 88369-Article Text-219777-1-10-20130506.pdf
69 Fulcher, G. & Davidson, F. (2007) Language Testing and Assessment: An advanced resource book: Retrieved 20 November, 2016, from http://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/ENL286/Testing%20books/La nguage,testing%20%26%20assessment_Davidson.pdf Gonzalez, E. F. (2021) The Impact of Assessment Training on EFL Writing Classroom Assessment: Voices of Mexican University Teachers PROFILE: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, v23 n1 p107-124 Jan-Jun 2021 Griffee, D.T. (2012) An introduction to second language research methods design and data. California: TESL-EJ Publications. Haines, C. (2004). Assessing Students' Written Work, Writing essays and reports. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge. Hawe, E. & Parr, J. (2014). Assessment for Learning in the writing Classroom: an incomplete realization. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 210-225 Hussain, S., Shaheen, N., Ahmad, N., & Islam, S. U. (2018). Teachers’ Classroom Assessment Practices: Challenges and Opportunities to Classroom Teachers in Pakistan. Dialogue (1819-6462), 13(4), 87–97 Íkala, A. D. G (2018). A Diagnostic study on teachers’ beliefs and practices in foreign language assessment. Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura Medellín Colombia, Vol. 23, Issue 1 (January-April, 2018),: Retrieved 4 April 2020 from www.udea.edu.co/ikala Jones, C. (2005). Assessment for Learning. Retrieved 22 December 2015, from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7800/1/AssessmentforLearning.pdf Kamal, U. Bahadur, Q. S. &; Karim, K. H. (2020) The Perceptions and Practices of University Students and Teachers about Classroom Presentations. Journal of Education and Educational Development, v7 n2 p269-285 Kazemi, A., Bagheri, M. S., Rassaei, E., & Qian, M. (2020). Dynamic assessment in English classrooms: Fostering learners’ reading comprehension and motivation. Cogent Psychology, 7(1), 1–11.Retrieved on 8 April 2021 from https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2020.1788912 Kirkgoz, Y. Babanoglu, M. P. & Reyhan, A, Turkish EFL Teachers’ (2017) Perceptions and Practices of Foreign Language Assessment in Primary Education Journal of Education and e-Learning Research Vol. 4, No. 4, 163- 170, 2017 ISSN (E)2410-9991/ ISSN(P)2518-0169 DOI Kumar, R. (2011) Research Methodology a step-by-step guide for beginners: Retrieved 20 November 2016 from http://www.sociology.kpi.ua/wpcontent/uploads/2014/06/Ranjit_Kumar-Research_Methodology_A_Step-byStep_G.pdf
70 Lalani, S., & Rodrigues, S. (2012). A Teacher's Perception and Practice of Assessing the Reading Skills of Young Learners--A Study from Pakistan. Journal on English Language Teaching, 2, 23-33. Lent, R.C. (2012). Overcoming Textbook Fatigue: 21st Century Tools to Revitalize Teaching and Learning. Alexandria: ASCD Publications Link, L. (2018). Teachers' Perceptions of Grading Practices: How Pre-Service Training Makes a Difference. Journal of Research in Education, 28, 62-91. Lukluk, A.M., Fauziati, E. & Marmanto, (2020) Performance assessment: Teachers beliefs and practices in higher education Department of English Education, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn) Vol. 13, No. 4, November 2019, pp. 518~526 ISSN: 2089-9823 DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v13i4.13068 Mackey. A. &Gass, S. M (2005) Second Language Research: Methodology and Design: Retrieved 20 November, 2016 from http://npu.edu.ua/!e book/book/djvu/A/iif_kgpm_Mackey_Second%20Language%20Methodology %20and%20Design..pdf Malik, S. (2011). Active Lecturing: An Effective Approach for Large Classes [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Social Science and Humanity, ACSIT Press, Singapore. http://www.ipedr.com/vol5/no1/46-H00098.pdf Miller, M.D, Linn, R.L & Gronland, N. E. (2009). Measurement and Assessment in Teaching. (10th ed.). : Pearson International Limited Ministry of Education. (2000). Education for a Learning Society: Policy of the Ministry of Education Seychelles. https://www.education.gov.sc/aboutus/Documents/policies/Seychelles_Educat ion_for_a_Learning_Society.pdf Marzano, R. J., Pickering D. J., & Pollock J. E. (2001) Classroom Instruction that Works: Research based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development McMillan, J. H. (1996). Educational Research: Fundamentals for the Consumer. Retrieved 22 November, 2016, from: http://ww2.odu.edu/~jritz/attachments/edrefu.pdf McTighe, J & Wiggins, G. (2013) Essential Questions: Opening Doors to Student Understanding. Alexandria: ASCD Publications. Morrell, P.D.& Carroll, J. B.(2010)Conducting Educational Research: A Primer for Teachers and Administrators: Retrieved 20 November, 2016 from https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/187-conducting-educationalresearch.pdf
71 Moumou, M. (2005) Claiming the territory: Studying Literature in the Junior Secondary Classes of the Seychelles. An action Research study into the teaching of literature in the junior secondary classes of the Seychelles: Ministry of Education. Muhammad, F.H. N., & Bardakçi, M. (2019) Iraqi EFL Teachers’ Assessment Literacy: Perceptions and Practices. Arab World English Journal, 10 (2) 420- 430 Retrieved on 3 April 2021 from https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol10no2.33 Narathakoon, Arthitaya; Sapsirin, Sutthirak; & Subphadoongchone,(2020) Beliefs and Classroom Assessment Practices of English Teachers in Primary Schools in Thailand Özdemir-Yılmazer, M., & Özkan, Y. (2017). Classroom assessment practices of English language instructor. University, School of Foreign Languages, Adana 01380, Turkey. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 324-345 National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students’ Motivation to Learn. Retrieved 28 November, 2016 from file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/10421.pdf Peck, R. Olsen, C & Jay Devore (2008) Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis. Retrieved 25 March 2021 from users/pc/Desktop/Statistics%20Textbook.pdf Pyle, A. & DeLuca, C. (2013). Assessment in the Kindergarten Classroom: An Empirical Study of Teachers' Assessment Approaches. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(5), 373-380. doi:10.1007/s10643-012-0573-2 Ratminingsih, Ni Made, R. M, Putu, A. L., & Nyoman, P.N, (2017) Incorporating Self and Peer Assessment in Reflective Teaching Practices. International Journal of Instruction, v10 n4 p165-184 Rollins, S.P. (2014) Learning in the fast Lane: 8 Ways To Put All Students On The Road To Academic Success. Alexandria: ASCD Publications. Ryu, J., & Boggs, G. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions about teaching multimodal composition: The case study of Korean English teachers at secondary schools. English Language Teaching, 9(6), 52. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n6p52 Siniscalco, M.T &Auriat, N. (2005) Quantitative research methods in educational planning: Questionnaire Design. Retrieved 28 November 2016, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002145/214555E.pdf Shayib, M. (2013) Applied Statistics 1st Edition, Bookboon.com. Retrieved on 18 April 2020 from Applied-Statistics.pdf (bvu.edu.vn) Soltanzadeh, L., Reza, S., Hashemi, N., & Shahi, S. (2013). The effect of active learning on academic achieveme nt motivation in high schools students. Archives of Applied Science Research, 5, 127-131.
72 Statistics Canada. (2010) Survey methods and practices. Ottowa: Statistics Canada. Retrieved 31 March 2021, from Survey Methods and Practices (statcan.gc.ca) Stiggins, R. (2005). Assessment for Learning: A key to Motivation and achievement. Retrieved 10 November, 2016, from http://ati.pearson.com/downloads/edgev2n2_0.pdfhttp://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7800/1/ AssessmentforLearning.pdf Stiggins, R. (2008).An Introduction to Student-Involved Assessment for Learning, (5th Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Susuwele-Banda, W. J. ( 2005). William John Classroom Assessment in Malawi: Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices in Mathematics Retrieved 25 March, 2021 from users/pc/Desktop/Research/Classroom_Assessment_in_Malawi_Teachers.pdf Tajeddin, Z. Alemi, M. Yasaei, H. & Modares, T. (2020) Classroom Assessment Literacy for Speaking: Exploring Novice and Experienced English Language Teachers’ Knowledge and Practice. University, Iran b Islamic Azad University – West Tehran Branch, Iran Witte, R. H. (2012).Classroom Assessment for Teachers, New York: McGrawHill. Yook, C., & Lee, Y. (2016). Korean EFL teachers’ perceptions of the impact of EFL teacher education upon their classroom teaching practices. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 44(5), 522–536 Yusuk, S. O. Perceptions and Practices of EFL School Teachers on Implementing Active Learning in Thai English Language Classrooms, Language Institute Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University Nakhon Pathom, Thailand Received: 6 March 2021 International Journal of Progressive Education, Volume 16 Number 1, 2020 Zulaiha, Siti; Mulyono, Herri & Ambarsari, (2020) An Investigation into EFL Teachers’ Assessment Literacy: Indonesian Teachers’ Perceptions and Classroom Practice European Journal of Contemporary Education, Vol. 9 Issue 1, p189-201. 13p. DOI: 10.13187/ejced.2020.1.189.
73
74 APPENDICE
75 APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS Beau Vallon Secondary English River Secondary Ile Perseverance Secondary La Digue School Mont-Fleuri Secondary Plaisance Secondary Pointe Larue Secondary Praslin Secondary
76 APPENDIX 2: ENGLISH TEACHERS’ CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES Dear Colleagues Thank you for taking the time to fill in this questionnaire. This questionnaire comprises three (3) sections: SECTION A: Background information SECTION B: Perceptions on Assessment SECTION C: Assessment in the English Language Classroom While your honest responses will help with gathering reliable information for the completion of this study; it is also my hope that it allows you to take some time to reflect on what has become a routine activity. Please note that (1) you do not need to write your name on the paper and that (2) your responses will remain strictly confidential and will be used solely for the purpose of this. SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Instruction: Please put a check in the box that reflects your answer 1. Gender: Female ( ) Male ( ) 2. Cultural identity: African ( ) Asian ( ) Seychellois ( ) Others ( ) 3. Age group: 22 – 35 years old ( ) 36 – 45 ( ) 46 – 55 ( ) 56 and above ( ) 4. Length of teaching bracket: 2 – 5 years ( ) 6 – 10 years ( ) 11 years and above ( ) 5. Educational attainment: Diploma in Education ( ) B.Ed / BA ( )
77 M.Ed / MA ( ) 6. Levels taught: Students from 2 levels ( ) Students from 3 – 4 levels ( ) Students from all 5 levels ( ) SECTION B: PERCEPTIONS ON ASSESSMENT 1. How conversant are you with the following assessment practices? Options: 1 = I have not heard about it 2 = I heard about it 3 = I know about it 4 = I use it in my teaching Areas: Options: Assessment for learning – classroom (1) (2) (3) (4) Assessment of learning – dynamic (1) (2) (3) (4) Assessment as learning – performance (1) (2) (3) (4) 2. Training attendance: Options: 1 = 9.1 years ago and beyond 2 = 4.1 – 9 years ago 3 = 2.1 – 4 years ago 4 = 1 to 2 years ago Areas: Options: Had a training on assessment (1) (2) (3) (4) Had a training specifically on assessment in the English language classroom? (1) (2) (3) (4) 3. What document(s) do you use to inform your assessment perceptions and practices? How often do you use these documents you ticked above? Options: 1 = Always 2 = Sometimes 3 = Rarely 4 = Never Documents: Options: The National Curriculum Framework (1) (2) (3) (4)
78 The National Assessment Framework (1) (2) (3) (4) Local School Assessment Guidelines (1) (2) (3) (4) Suggestions from textbooks being used (1) (2) (3) (4) 4. As a language teacher, how would you rate the importance of the following reasons for assessing your students? Options: 1 = Not at all important 2 = Of little importance 3 = Quite important 4 = Very important Reasons: Options: To compare their level with others in the same year level (1) (2) (3) (4) To give them marks so as to motivate (1) (2) (3) (4) To help them pass the national and International examinations (1) (2) (3) (4) To help me evaluate my teaching (1) (2) (3) (4) To help me become aware of my students’ strengths and weaknesses (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION C. ASSESSMENT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE CLASSROOM 1. Common assessment of learning methods: Options: 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = Sometimes 4 = Always Methods Options Role plays (1) (2) (3) (4) Skits (1) (2) (3) (4) Speeches (1) (2) (3) (4) Interviews (1) (2) (3) (4) Group discussions (1) (2) (3) (4) Debates (1) (2) (3) (4) Story-telling (1) (2) (3) (4) Information on charts (1) (2) (3) (4) Graphic organizers (1) (2) (3) (4) Listening to audio texts (1) (2) (3) (4) Write essays (1) (2) (3) (4) Write journals (1) (2) (3) (4) Read a text (1) (2) (3) (4) Analyze literature (1) (2) (3) (4)
79 Reading projects (1) (2) (3) (4) Research projects (1) (2) (3) (4) Use portfolios (1) (2) (3) (4) 2. Innovative approaches to classroom assessments: Options: 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = Sometimes 4 = Always Approaches: Options: I give them home-work (1) (2) (3) (4) I give them short written tests in the classroom (1) (2) (3) (4) I give them a summary to write of what they have learnt (1) (2) (3) (4) I get them to tell me orally what they have learnt (1) (2) (3) (4) 3. Type of feedbacks provided to students; frequency of using such feed backing method: Options: 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = Sometimes 4 = Always Feed-backing type: Options: Oral - I explain their mistakes to them one on one (1) (2) (3) (4) I make general comments to the whole class (1) (2) (3) (4) I write comments at the end of their work (1) (2) (3) (4) I give them marks and grades (1) (2) (3) (4) I use correction codes to highlight their mistakes (1) (2) (3) (4) 4. Do you give students opportunity to assess their own work and/or that of their peers? Options: 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = Sometimes 4 = Always Type of work: Options:
80 Their own work (1) (2) (3) (4) The work of their peers (1) (2) (3) (4)