Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Imam Ali University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Lecturer in TEFL, Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Islamshahr Branch, Islamshahr, Iran.

3 Ph.D. Candidate of TEFL, Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The increasing demand for lifelong learners and reflective practitioners has re-‎conceptualized the ‎connection between assessment and learning to the extent ‎that alternative assessment methods (i.e., self-, ‎peer and teacher-assessment, etc.) ‎have emerged. However, their incorporation into various language ‎skills might ‎bring about certain consequences. Among them, the writing skill is often ‎perceived as unique in ‎its nature in terms of both teaching practices and ‎assessment modalities. In a bid to exercise a Learner-‎Oriented Assessment ‎‎(LOA) practice, the present study was designed to comparatively implement ‎self-, ‎peer-, and teacher-assessments in a writing course, and explore the ‎experiences and perceptions of the ‎learners towards the three assessment ‎alternatives. Pertinent statistical analyses revealed significant ‎differences among ‎them such that higher proficiency level learners evaluated their writings more ‎‎realistically, while lower proficiency level over estimated their abilities. ‎Moreover, most of them had ‎positive attitudes towards this novel assessment ‎experience, holding that LOA could scaffold them in ‎gaining a lot and arousing ‎their awareness of their weaknesses and strengths.‎

Keywords

Main Subjects

Article Title [Persian]

بررسی روشهای خودارزیابی، ارزیابی همتایان، و ارزیابی معلم در کلاس مهارت نوشتاری: مقایسه نتایج و ارائه دیدگاهها و نظرات زبان آموزان

Abstract [Persian]

نیاز روزافزون به تربیت یادگیرندگان مادام العمر که یادگیری را تنها به کلاس درس محدود نمی‌دانند و همچنین معلمین فکوری که همواره کار خود را مورد بازنگری و اصلاح قرار می‌دهند، مفهوم ارتباط میان یادگیری و ارزیابیرا تغییر داده و باعث ایجاد روشهای ارزیابی جایگزین نظیر خودارزیابی، ارزیابی همتایان، و ارزیابی معلم شده، به نحوی که استفاده از این روش‌های جایگزین در سنجش مهارت‌های مختلف زبانی، نتایج خاصی را به همراه دارد. در این میان به نظر می‌رسد که توانایی نوشتاری، بدلیل ماهیت خاصی که دارد، هم از نظر آموزش و هم از نظر روش‌های ارزیابی، با سایر مهارت‌های زبانی متفاوت باشد. در تحقیق حاضر، در چند کلاس مهارت نوشتاری، نتایجارزیابیهای یادگیرنده محور شامل خودارزیابی، ارزیابی همتایان، و ارزیابی معلم با یکدیگر مقایسه شده و دیدگاهها و نظرات یادگیرنده ها نیز مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. تحلیل های آماری انجام شده،تفاوت معناداری را میان سه گروه ارزیابی نشان می‌دهد بطوری که هرچه مهارت زبانی یادگیرندگان بالاتر می‌رفت، ارزیابی های واقع گرایانه تری ارائه می‌دادند. از طرف دیگر، افرادی که از مهارت زبانی پایین‌تری برخوردار بودند، معمولا در ارزیابی های خود، نمرات بالاتری را درنظر گرفتند. در هرحال، نظرسنجی های انجام شده نشان می‌دهد که اغلب زبان آموزان، نظرات مثبتی نسبت به این تجربه جدید داشتند و اظهار کردند که ارزیابی یادگیرنده محور توانست کمک شایانی به افزایش میزانیادگیری و همچنین بالابردن سطح آگاهی آنها نسبت به نقاط قوت و ضعفشان داشته باشد.

Keywords [Persian]

  • روشهای ارزیابی جایگزین
  • مهارت نوشتاری
  • و ارزیابی یادگیرنده محور
Ahmadpour, L., &Yousefi, M. H. (2016). Group collaboration, scaffolding instruction, and peer assessment of Iranian EFL learners oral tasks. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances(JALDA), 4(1), 31-44.
Alderson, J. C., & Banerjee, J. (2001). Language testing and assessment (Part I). Language Teaching, 34(4), 213-236. doi:10.1017/s0261444800014464
Andrade, H., &Valtcheva, A. (2009).Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 12-19. doi:10.1080/00405840802577544
Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007).Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159-181. doi:10.1080/02602930600801928
Bachman, L. F. (2000). Modern language testing at the turn of the century: Assuring that we count counts. Language Testing 17(1), 1-42.doi:10.1177/026553220001700101 
Bell, J. (1991). Using peer responses in ESL writing classes. TESL Canada Journal, 8, 65-71. doi:10.18806/tesl.v8i2.589
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Birdsong, T., &Sharplin, W. (1986). Peer evaluation enhances students’ critical judgment. Highway One, 9, 23-28.
Birenbaum, M., &Dochy, F. (1996).Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Blatchford, P. (1997). Students’ self-assessment of academic attainment: Accuracy and stability from 7 to 16 years and influence of domain and social comparison group. Educational Psychology, 17(3), 345-360. doi:10.1080/0144341970170308 
Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought? Mandarian and English speakers' conception if time.Cognitive Psychology, 43, 1-22. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.
Boud, D., &Falchikov, N. (2007).Rethinking assessment in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practice. New York: Longman.
Brown, G., Bull, J., &Pendlebury, M. (1997).Assessing students’ learning in higher education. London: Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th‎ed.).‎ NY: ‎Pearson Education.‎
Brown, J. D. (1991). Breaking the language barrier.Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Brown, J. D., & Hudson, T. (2002).Criterion-referenced language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22(1), 93-121. doi:10.1191/0265532205lt298oa
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010).Student revision with peer and expert reviewing.Learning and Instruction, 20, 328–338. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
Cho, Y., & Cho, K. (2011). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science, 39, 629-643. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1
Connor, U. (1996).Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139524599
Cyboran, V. (2006). Self-assessment: Grading or knowing? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(3), 183-186.
Davies, P. (2006). Peer assessment: Judging the quality of students’ work by comments rather than marks. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 69-82.doi:10.1080/14703290500467566 
Devenny, R. (1989). How ESL teachers and peers evaluate and respond to student writing. RELC Journal, 20, 77-90. doi:10.1177/003368828902000106 
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), 331-51.doi:10.1080/03075079912331379935 
Earl, S.E. (1986). Staff and peer assessment: Measuring an individual’s contribution group performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 60-69. doi:10.1080/0260293860110105 
Entwhistle, N.J. (1987). A model of the teaching process. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. W. Piper (Eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
Entwhistle, N.J. (1993). Recent research on student learning and the learning environment. Paper presented at the ‘New Developments in Learning’ Conference, Napier University, Edinburgh.
Eva, K. W. &Regehr, G. (2005). Self-assessment in the health professions: A reformulation and research agenda. Academic Medicine, 80(10), 546-554. doi:10.1080/0260293860110105 
Freeman, M. (1995).Peer-assessment by groups of group work.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20(3), 289-300. doi:10.1080/0260293950200305
Gibbs, G. (1992). Improving the quality of student learning. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services.
Habeshaw, S. Gibbs, G., &Habeshaw, T. (1995).53 Interesting ways to assess your students. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services.
Hamayan, E. V. (1995). Approaches to alternative assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 212-226. doi:10.1017/s0267190500002695
Hart, D. (1994). Authentic assessment: A handbook for educators. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Huerta-Macias, A. (1995). Alternative assessment: Responses to commonly asked questions. TESOL Journal, 5(1), 8-11. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511667190.048
Jafarpur, A. (1991). Can naive EFL learners estimate their own proficiency?Evaluation and Research in Education, 5, 145-57.
Kaplan, R. B. (1972). Contrastive rhetoric and second language learning: Notes toward a theory of contrastive rhetoric. In A. C. Purves (Ed.), Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric (pp. 257-304). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Kohonen, V. (1997). Authentic assessment as an integration of language learning, teaching, evaluation and the teacher’s professional growth. In A. Huhta, V. Kohonen, L. Kurki-Suonio, & S. Luoma (Eds.), Current development and alternatives in language assessment (pp. 6-15). Proceedings of LTRC 1996.University of Jyväskylä.
Langan, A. M., &Wheater, P. (2003). Can students assess students effectively? Some insights into peer-assessment.Learning and Teaching in Action, 2(1), Retrieved from http://www.celt.mmu.ac.uk/ltia/issue4/langanwheater.shtml
Lay, N. (1982). Composing processes of adult ESL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 406.
LeBlanc, R., &Painchaud, G. (1985).Self-assessment as a second language placement instrument. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 673-687. doi:10.2307/3586670
Lejk, M. &Wyvill, M. (2001). The effect of the inclusion of self-assessment with peer-assessment of contributions to a group project: A quantitative study of secret and agreed assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6), 551-561. doi:10.1080/02602930120093887 
Lew, M. D. N, Alwis, W. A. M, & Schmidt, H. G. (2010).Accuracy of students’ self-assessment and their beliefs about its utility.Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 135-156. doi:10.1080/02602930802687737
Lindblom-Ylänne, S., &Lonka, K. (2001).Students’ perceptions of assessment practices in a traditional medical curriculum.Advances in Health Sciences Education, 6(2), 121-40.doi:10.1023/a:1011422517238 
Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Pihlajamäki, H., &Kotkas, T. (2006).Self-, peer- and teacher-assessment of student essays.Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), 51-62. doi:10.1177/1469787406061148
Magin, D., &Helmore, P. (2001). Peer and teacher assessments of oral presentations: How reliable are they? Studies in Higher Education, 26, 287-298. doi:10.1080/03075070120076264
Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do students think? ELT Journal, 46, 158-72.doi:10.1093/elt/46.3.274
Martin-Kniep, G. O. (2000). Standards, feedback, and diversified assessment: Addressing equity issues at the classroom level. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 16, 239-256. doi:10.1080/105735600406733
Mendonca, C., & Johnson, K. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-69. doi:10.2307/3587558
Mousavi, A. (2011). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing (5thed.). Tehran: Rahnama Press.
Nilson, L. B. (2003). Improving student peer feedback.College Teaching, 51(1), 34–38.doi:10.1080/87567550309596408
O’Malley, M., & Valdez Pierce, L. (1996).Authentic assessment for English language learners. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Oldfield, K., &MacAlpine, M. (1995). Peer and self-assessment at tertiary level an experiential report. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 125-32.doi:10.1080/0260293950200113
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., &Reiling, K. (1996).The importance of marking criteria in peer assessment.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-49.doi:10.1080/0260293960210304
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., &Reiling, K. (1997). A study in self-assessment: Tutor and students’ perceptions of performance criteria. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 357-69.doi:10.1080/0260293970220401
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., &Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23-38. doi:10.1080/02602930050025006
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., &Reiling, K. (2002).The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer- and self-assessment, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 309-23.doi:10.1080/0260293022000001337
Oscarson, M. (1989). Self-assessment of language proficiency: Rationale and applications. Language Testing, 6(1), 1-13. doi:10.1177/026553228900600103
Patri, M. (2002).The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 19(2), 109-131. doi:10.1191/0265532202lt224oa
Peng, J. (2010). Peer assessment in an EFL context: Attitudes and correlations. In M. T. Prior et al. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2008 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 89-107). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Race, P. (1999).2000 Tips for lecturers. London: Kogan Page.
Rolheiser, C., & Ross, J. A. (2000). Student self-evaluation-What do we know? Orbit, 30(4), 33-36.
Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity and utility of self-assessment.Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 11(10), 1-13. doi:10.1007/0-306-48125-1_4
Segers, M., &Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value added of the students’ perspective, Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327-43. doi:10.1080/03075070120076291
Sivan, A. (2000). The implementation of peer assessment: An action research approach. Assessment in education: Principles, policy & practice, 7(2), 193-213. doi:10.1080/713613328
Smith, K. (1999). Language testing: Alternative methods. In B. Spolsky (Ed.).Concise encyclopedia of educational linguistics, (pp. 703-706). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Soodak, L. C. (2000). Performance assessment: Exploring issues of equity and fairness. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 175-178. doi:10.1080/105735600406706
Spiller, D. (2012).Assessment matters: Self-assessment and peer assessment. Teaching Development Unit, the University of Waikato. Hamilton, New Zealand.
Stefani, A.J. (1994). Self, peer and group assessment procedures. In I. Sneddon& J. Kramer (Eds.), An enterprising curriculum: Teaching innovations in Higher education (pp. 24-46). Belfast: HMSO.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276. doi:10.2307/1170598
Topping, K. (2003). Self- and peer-assessment in school and university: Reliability, validity and utility. In M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.) Optimizing new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 55-87). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27. doi:10.1080/00405840802577569
Willey, K. & Garner, A. (2010). Investigating the capacity of self & peer assessment activities to engage students & promote learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(4), 429-443. doi:10.1080/03043797.2010.490577
Williams, E. (1992). Student attitudes towards approaches to learning and assessment.Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 17(1), 45–58. doi:10.1080/0260293920170105
Worthen, B. R. (1993). Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(6), 444-456. doi:10.1177/003172170808900811
Zoller, U., & Ben-Chaim, D. (1997, August).Student self-assessment in HOCS science examinations: Is it compatible with that of teachers? Paper presented at the 7th EARLI conference, Athens, Greece.