EXPLORING TEACHERS’ PRACTICE OF CLASSROOM-BASED ASSESSMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2025-0125Keywords:
classroom-based assessment, assessment for learning, teacher assessment identity, teacher identityAbstract
This study explores teachers’ practice of classroom-based assessment (CBA) and how the institutional guidelines affect their practice, using the grounded theory approach. Data were collected from interviews with four EFL teachers from a Vietnamese university and the syllabus documents they used for their classes. Results demonstrate that the participants actively planned assessment opportunities, provided necessary information of assessment to their students, and carried out the planned or unplanned assessments. All teachers reported using the assessment information to improve their teaching activities. Lastly, syllabus documents had a strong impact on the teacher’s CBA practice. Based on these findings, a conceptual model is proposed to represent the relationship between teachers’ practice and contexts and teacher assessment identity.
Downloads
References
[1] Ngo XM, (2024). English assessment in Vietnam: status quo, major tensions, and underlying ideological conflicts. Asian Englishes, 26(1), 280-292.
[2] Nguyen H & Yongqi G, (2020). Impact of TOEIC listening and reading as a university exit test in Vietnam. Language Assessment Quarterly, 17(2), 147-167, https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1722672.
[3] Tran HQ, Nguyen HL, Tran HA & Dinh TVD, (2024). A Toolkit to Integrate Media & Information Literacy into English Learning for High School Students: the Design Thinking Process Method. Journal of Science Educational Science, 69(4), 56-65, https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2024-0063.
[4] Brown JD & Hudson T, (1998). The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 653-675, doi: 10.2307/3587999
[5] Clapham C, (2000). Assessment and testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500200093
[6] Hamayan EV, (1995). Approaches to alternative assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 212-226, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002695.
[7] Lewkowicz J & Leung C, (2021). Classroom-based assessment. Language Teaching, 54(1), 47-57, doi:10.1017/S0261444820000506.
[8] Nguyen TC, (2022). Challenges for college English teachers as assessors. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 38(5), 34-52, https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4817.
[9] Nguyen QTN, Sheehan S, Nguyen CT, Nguyen HQ, Nguyen TTP, Thai T,... & Bui S, (2023). English Language Assessment Practice in Vietnam: Interplay between Macro and Micro Context. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 66, 127-167.
[10] Hill K & McNamara T, (2012). Developing a comprehensive, empirically based research framework for classroom-based assessment. Language Testing, 29(3), 395-420, doi: 10.1177/0265532211428317.
[11] Black P & Wiliam D, (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. DOI: 10.1080/0969595980050102
[12] Bachman L & Damböck B, (2018). Language assessment for classroom teachers. Oxford University Press.
[13] Song B & August B, (2002). Using portfolios to assess the writing of ESL students: A powerful alternative?. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(1), 49-72, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00053-X
[14] Lam R, (2017). Taking stock of portfolio assessment scholarship: From research to practice. Assessing Writing, 31, 84-97, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.08.003.
[15] Saito H, (2008). EFL classroom peer assessment: Training effects on rating and commenting. Language Testing, 25(4), 553-581. DOI: 10.1177/0265532208094276
[16] Crusan D, Plakans L & Gebril A, (2016). Writing assessment literacy: Surveying second language teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and practices. Assessing Writing, 28, 43-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2016.03.001
[17] Corbin JM & Strauss A, (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
[18] Asamoah D, Shahrill M & Abdul Latif SN, (2024, April). Teachers’ perceptions of school assessment climate and realities of assessment practices in two educational contexts. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 9, p. 1278187). Frontiers Media SA.
[19] Doyle A, Donlon E, Conroy Johnson M, McDonald E & Sexton PJ, (2024). Re-envisioning pre-service teachers’ beliefs and feelings about assessment: the important space of authentic assignments. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(2), 246-266. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2338854.
[20] Haddadian G, Radmanesh S & Haddadian N, (2024). Construction and validation of a Computerized Formative Assessment Literacy (CFAL) questionnaire for language teachers: an exploratory sequential mixed-methods investigation. Language Testing in Asia, 14(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-024-00303-2.
[21] Looney A, Cumming J, van Der Kleij F & Harris K, (2018). Reconceptualising the role of teachers as assessors: teacher assessment identity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(5), 442-467. DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2016.1268090
[22] Nguyen NQ & Nguyen TC, (2023). Empowering teachers to innovate assessment: A collaborative research project. Vietnam Language Assessment Symposium. Ho Chi Minh City/2023/British Council.
[23] Nguyen NQ, (2023). English Language Assessment Practice in Vietnam: Interplay between Macro and Micro Context. PASAA Journal, 66, 127‒167.
[24] Estaji M, Banitalebi Z & Brown GT, (2024). The key competencies and components of teacher assessment literacy in digital environments: A scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 141, 104497, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104497.
