INNOVATIVE ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES IN TESOL: EVALUATING THE EFFICACY OF PORTFOLIO-BASED AND DYNAMIC ASSESSMENTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE LANGUAGE LEARNER EVALUATION
Main Article Content
Abstract
Traditional testing methods in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) often fail to comprehensively evaluate English language learners. This seminar/project aims to address this gap by exploring alternative assessment techniques tailored to TESOL contexts. Specifically, it delves into portfolio-based assessments and dynamic assessments, highlighting their advantages and practical applications.
Methodologies: This project employs a comprehensive literature review approach to analyze various assessment innovations in TESOL, including portfolio-based assessments, dynamic assessments, performance assessments, and other emerging techniques. Additionally, it incorporates case studies and expert interviews to gain practical insights into the implementation and effectiveness of these techniques in real-world TESOL settings.
Research Design: A survey questionnaire approach was employed to investigate students' perceptions of alternative assessment practices in English language learning. The survey questionnaire, comprising 12 questions, was distributed to 60 students in grades 1 to 6 across four schools in Duhok city.
Findings: Initial findings suggest that alternative assessment techniques offer numerous benefits, including a more authentic representation of learners' language proficiency and better alignment with real-world language use. Among the anticipated results, students showed varying levels of familiarity with alternative assessment, recognized advantages such as improved understanding of English concepts and increased engagement in learning, and expressed preferences for certain types of alternative assessment activities, notably projects and portfolios. Despite perceived effectiveness, challenges such as lack of resources and time constraints were identified.
Recommendations: Based on the findings, recommendations are proposed for educators and policymakers in the TESOL field. These include investing in professional development for educators, providing support and resources for assessment innovation, and promoting collaboration among practitioners. By addressing these recommendations, stakeholders can enhance the quality of English language education and better meet the needs of diverse learners in TESOL contexts.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
ABDULLAH, R. S., MOHAMMAD, Z. H., & AMEEN, S. T. (2024). FOSTERING MOTIVATION IN SECONDARY SCHOOL ENGLISH CLASSROOMS THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LEARNER-CENTERED APPROACHES. Russian Law Journal, 12(1).
Ameen, S. T. (2020). Should the Modern Idea of Individual Autonomy Continue to Influence Understandings about the Goal of Education. A Critical Discussion with Reference to Paulo Freire’s Critical… International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13, 12.
Ameen, S. T. and Ahmed, S. M. (2023 ‘Fishbowl Technique at TESOL classes and figuring out speaking skills limitations and solutions (a various schools in Duhok City)’. International Journal on Humanities and Social Sciences, 45.
Ameen, S. T. and Ismail, A. M. (2023)‘TESOL practices with constructivism prospective within adult and higher education with focus to Iraq and China models’. International Journal on Humanities and SocialSciences, 44.
Ameen, S.T. (2020) ‘Glasgow and Shanghai Cities as Learning Cities for Continuous Education: What impact on society as a whole?’, European Scientific Journal ESJ, 16(13).
Angus, S. D., & Watson, J. (2009). Does regular online testing enhance student learning in the numerical sciences? Robust evidence from a large data set. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 255-272.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press.
Collier, V. (1988). The effect of age on acquisition of a second language for school. New Focus, 2, 1-8.
Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering Minority Students. Sacramento, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 5-30.
Dermo, J. (2009). e-Assessment and the student learning experience: A survey of student perceptions of e-assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 203-214.
Dikli, S. (2003). Assessment at a distance: Traditional vs. alternative assessments. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(3), 13-19.
Figueroa, R. A. (1990). Assessment of linguistic minority group children. In: Handbook of Psychological and Educational Assessment of Children: Intelligence and Achievement, 671-696.
Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2007). Language testing and assessment: An advanced resource book. Routledge.
Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A Practical Guide to Alternative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Leung, C., & Lewkowicz, J. (2006). Expanding horizons and unresolved conundrums: Language testing and assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 211-234.
Lynch, B. K. (2001). Language assessment and programme evaluation. Edinburgh University Press.
Marriott, P., & Lau, A. (2008). The impact of phased on-line summative assessment on students’ learning on one fresher undergraduate accounting major course–a case study. Journal of Accounting Education, 26(2), 73-90.
McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Blackwell.
Meyer, C. (1992). What’s the difference between authentic and performance assessment? Education Leader, 48(5), 60-63.
North Carolina State Department of Public Instruction. (1999). Assessment, Articulation and Accountability: A Foreign Language Project. ERIC.
O’Day, J. A., & Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. Designing Coherent Education Policy: Improving the System, 1993, 250-312.
Paulson, F. L. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Education Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.
Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory into Practice, 48(1), 4-11.
Reeves, T. C. (2000). Alternative assessment approaches for online learning environments in higher education. Educational Computing Research, 3(1), 101-111.
Stoller, F. (2002). Project work: A means to promote language and content. Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice, 10, 107-119.
Valdés, G. (1998). The world outside and inside schools: Language and immigrant children. Educational Research, 27(6), 4-18.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
Williams, B. (1996). Closing the Achievement Gap: A Vision for Changing Beliefs and Practices. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.