İngilizce Öğretmenliği Programında Standart Değerlendirme ve Alternatif Değerlendirme

ÖZ İkinci/yabancı dil olarak öğretildiği ortamlarda İngilizce nin sınıf-temelli değerlendirilmesi, alanyazında son zamanlarda yer almaya başlamıştır. Yabancı dil öğretiminde değerlendirmenin önemine rağmen, üniversite düzeyinde yabancı dil öğretiminde farklı değerlendirme yöntemleri konusundaki araştırmalar sınırlı sayıda olmuştur. Bu çalışmada, İngilizce Öğretmenliği Programındaki öğrencilerin çoktan seçmeli bir sınavdan, bir sözlü sunumdan ve bir çeviri görevinden aldıkları puanlar incelenmekte; çoktan seçmeli sınavdan en yüksek notu alan on öğrenciyle, en düşük notu alan on öğrencinin iki alternatif değerlendirme aracındaki başarı düzeyleri karşılaştırılmaktadır. Bulgular, İngilizce öğrenenleri yalnızca bir araçla değerlendirmenin nesnel olmayabileceğini ve değerlendirme araçlarının çeşitlendirilmesinin faydalı olacağını ortaya koymaktadır.

Standard Assessment and Alternative Assessment in English Language Teaching Program

Classroom-based assessment practices within English as Second/Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) contexts have started to appear in the literature. Despite the importance of assessment in FL teaching, studies on different assessment methods at college level FL have remained limited. In this study, scores of EFL trainee teachers from a multiple-choice test, an oral presentation, and a translation are analyzed, and success levels of ten highest multiple-choice test scorers and ten lowest multiple-choice test scorers in two alternative assessment tools are compared. Results reveal that assessing EFL learners only through a single tool may not be objective, and that assessment tools should be diversified.

___

  • Balliro, L. (1993). What kind of alternative? Examining alternative assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (3), 558-561.
  • Barootchi, N., & Keshavarz, M. H. (2002). Assessment of achievement through portfolios and teacher-made tests. Educational Research, 44 (3), 279–288.
  • Braun, H. I., & Mislevy, R. (2005).
  • Intuitive test theory. Phi Delta Kappan, 86 (7), 489- 497.
  • Brown, J. D., & Hudson, T. (1998). The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 653-675.
  • Brown, J. D., & Hudson, T. (1999). The authors respond. TESOL Quarterly, 33 (4), 734-735.
  • Bruton, A. (1999). Comments on James D. Brown and Thom Hudson’s “the alternatives in language assessment” a reader reacts. TESOL Quarterly, 33 (4), 729-734.
  • Cheng, L., Rogers, T., & Hu, H. (2004). ESL/EFL instructors’ classroom assessment practices: Purposes, methods, and procedures. Language Testing, 21 (3), 360– 389.
  • Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Edelenbos, P., & Kubanek-German, A. (2004). Teacher assessment: The concept of ‘diagnostic competence’. Language Testing, 21 (3), 259–283.
  • Gottlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Henning, G. H.,
  • Ghawaby, S. M., Saadalla, W. Z., El-Rifai, M. A., Hannallah, R. K., & Mattar, M. S.(1981). Comprehensive assessment of language proficiency and achievement among learners of English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 15 (4), 457-466.
  • House, J. (2006). Text and context in translation. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 338-358.
  • Hughes, A. (1990). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leung, C., & Lewkowicz, J. (2006). Expanding horizons and unresolved conundrums: Language testing and assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 211-234.
  • Louma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lynch, B. K. (2003). Language assessment and programme evaluation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • McNamara, T. (2001). Editorial: Rethinking alternative assessment. Language Testing, 18 (4), 329–332.
  • Norris, J. M. (2006). The why (and how) of assessing student learning outcomes in college foreign language programs. The Modern Language Journal, 90 (4), 574– 601.
  • Norris, J. M., Brown, J. D., Hudson, T., & Yoshioka, J. (1998). Designing second language performance assessments. USA: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. University Of Hawai’i. Rowley, G. L. (1974). Which examinees are most favoured by the use of multiple choice tests? Journal of Educational Measurement, 11 (1), 15-23.
  • Simkin, M. G., & Kuechler, W. L. (2005). Multiple-choice tests and student understanding: What is the connection? Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 3 (1), 73-97.
  • Sullivan, J. H. (2006). The importance of program evaluation in collegiate foreign language programs. The Modern Language Journal, 90 (4), 574– 601.
  • Tomlinson, B. (2005). Testing to learn: A personal view of language testing. ELT Journal, 59 (1), 39-46.
  • Underhill, N. (1992). Testing spoken language: a handbook of oral testing techniques. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Upshur, J. A., & Turner, C. E. (1999).
  • Systematic effects in the rating of second- language speaking ability: Test method and learner discourse. Language Testing, 16 (1), 82-111.
  • Varela, E. (1997). Review: Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 31 (1), 188-189.
  • Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation: an evidence-based approach. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.