c
c




c 
c c
c 
c 

 
c
A Synthesis

Presented to

 





Presented by


  
 
BSEdIII

Second Semester. SY 2009-2010




Y ncy H. (2008) s id th t m ny of the reigning theoretic
ssumptions on

which contempor ry testing nd ssessment re
y re b sed on beh iorist iews

of cognition nd dee
opment. L ngu ge ssessment or
ngu ge testing is

fie
d of study under the umbre

of pp
ied
inguistics. Its m in focus is the

ssessment of first, second or other
ngu ge in the schoo
, co

ege, or uniersity

context; ssessment of
ngu ge use in the workp
ce; nd ssessment of

ngu ge in the immigr tion, citizenship, nd sy
um contexts. The c

for

incre sed use of me ningfu
( uthentic) ssessments th t ino
e
ngu ge

students in se
ecting nd ref
ecting on their
e rning me ns th t
ngu ge

te chers wi

h e wider r nge of eidence on which to judge whether students

re becoming competent, purposefu

ngu ge users.

In the 1990's, we h e come to re
ize th t new,
tern tie w ys of

thinking bout
e rning nd ssessing
e rning re needed. A new ssessment

initi tie in foreign nd second
ngu ge study cknow
edged the effect of

context on perform nce nd proides the most ppropri te contexts in which to

ssess competence, inc
uding ones th t ino
e the indiidu
in m king se
f-

ssessments. Ex mines
ngu ge ssessment from critic
perspectie rgues

th t
tern tie ssessment, s distinct from testing, offers p rti
response to

the ch

enges presented by critic
perspectie on
ngu ge ssessment

r ther th n the use of tr dition
ssessment (He
phrey nd Schr m, 2001). It

w s
so s id th t tr dition
testing is not enough to test students¶
ngu ge

c p bi
ities (Yoshid , 2001) nd is not effectie
y used. The s me issue w s

discussed
so in the cite-Schoo
-Psycho
ogy-Qu rter
y, 1991, but dded the

effect of cognitie bi
ity of the
e rners in
tern tie
ngu ge testing nd the

re sons th t heightened interest in
tern tie ssessment in the context of

diersity issues in schoo
psycho
ogy nd the in dequ cy of tr dition

ssessment.

This p per wi

ttempt to inestig te whether
tern tie ssessment wi

be more ppropri te in testing
ngu ge c p bi
ities r ther th n tr dition

ssessment nd ice ers . Conf
icting issues wi

be presented nd synthesis

wi

be m de out of it.


 

 Spo
sky (1992) right
y rgues th t di gnostic or form tie ssessment is

typic

y curricu
um-drien. This type of ssessment sh dows the curricu
um nd

proides feedb ck to student nd te chers. He wise
y rgues, too, for mu
ti
ee

system th t combines testing nd ssessment. A p r phr se of this mode

wou
d go something
ike this: Students re proided opportunities before nd

fter units of instruction to ssess their own perform nce (se
f-

ssessment).Te chers periodic

y ssess students' perform nce nd both

discuss their respectie ssessments (tests nd me surements).Occ sion

y,

some extern
monitor ssesses the student's ( nd perh ps the te cher's)

perform nce nd discusses it with the te cher.

Pierce, Sw in, nd H rt (1993) reported on study of 500 eighth-gr de

students, suggesting th t se
f- ssessment w s 
id nd re
i b
e me sure of

ngu ge proficiency.

P is(1988) reported simi
r resu
ts for co

ege students
e rning French

b sed on journ
writing project in which students monitored their own
e rning

nd identified prob
ems encountered s we

s ccomp
ishments oer the

course of the term.

Y p (1993) reported the resu
ts of rese rch project ino
ing thirty-fie

du
t b sic (ABE) nd Eng
ish s second
ngu ge (ESL) progr ms. Writing

ssessment, portfo
io ssessment, nd c
ssroom ssessment were shown to be


id ppro ches to the type of uthentic ssessment c

ed for within the

profession.
 DeM uro, He
prey, Schr m (2001) describes progr m designed to

comp re students' ttitudes tow rds the use of tr dition
nd
tern tie

ssessment pr ctices. The t rgeted popu
tion consisted of second nd third

gr de gener
educ tion c
ss, third gr de physic
educ tion c
ss, nd n

eighth gr de pp
ied techno
ogy c
ss in three communities in northern I

inois.

E ch community is p rt of suburb n re where the f mi
y income r nges from

ow to upper
ee
s. Eidence for the existence of prob
em c me from student

sureys nd te cher obser tions. An
ysis of prob b
e c use d t shows th t

neg tie ttitudes tow rds ssessments h e direct effect on students'

ttitudes bout
e rning. Students experience frustr tion due to the
ck of

choices they re gien bout being ssessed; they experience nxiety bec use

of the pressures to chiee, nd they demonstr te
ow se
f-esteem s resu
t of

ow test scores. Post interention d t indic te discrep ncy between the

fee
ings of prim ry nd midd
e schoo
students tow rds the  rious ssessments.

E
ement ry schoo
students tended to describe their fee
ings bout tr dition

nd
tern tie ssessments using simi
r oc bu
ry without preference for

either ppro ch. In the midd
e gr des, students preferred to eng ge in
tern tie

ssessments
though they fe
t th t tr dition
ssessments were more ref
ectie

of their bi
ities. Seen ppendixes cont in coer
etters, sureys, nd consent

forms used in the study nd ref
ection sheets.

In other studies, Kemper et
(1998) inestig ted
tern tie method of

ssessing the contribution of higher educ tion to the dee
opment of citizens,

 nd K nuk (2001) found th t tr dition
ssessment h s
imited pp
ic tion on

on
ine
e rning enironments, indic ting need for
tern tie ssessment

str tegies.

B rootchi nd Kesh rz (2002) st ted th t proponents of process-oriented

curricu
nd instruction rgue th t tr dition
testing techniques, e.g. mu
tip
e-

choice, fi

-in-the-g ps, m tching, etc., re often incongruent with current

second/foreign
ngu ge c
ssroom pr ctices. In p rticu
r, they rgue th t rich,

descriptie inform tion bout the products nd, more import nt
y, bout the

process of
e rning nd the ongoing me surement of student growth needed for

form tie e
u tion nd for p
nning instruction
str tegies c nnot be g thered

by conention
testing methods.

Shep rd (1991) rgues th t high-st kes tests ttest th t these re

responsib
e for n rrowing the schoo
curricu
um by directing te chers to focus

on
y on those subjects nd ski

s th t re inc
uded in the ex min tions. As

consequence, such tests re s id to ³domin te nd distort the who
e curricu
um´.

H m y n (1994) stress th t tests c n be usefu
for co

ecting inform tion

bout student chieement under cert in restricted conditions, but they re not

p rticu
r
y usefu
for co

ecting inform tion bout students' ttitudes, moti tion,

interests, nd
e rning str tegies.

!"#" "$$"!

With reg rds to the st tement of Spo
sky, it obious
y s ys th t

tern tie/ uthentic ssessment is not on
y for students¶ ssessment but for the

te chers themse
es which shows th t this ssessment promotes utonomous

nd se
f-directed
e rning nd proides new ro
es for te chers.

The studies conducted by Pierce, Sw in, nd H rt (1993), P is(1988),

Y p (1993) m in
y s ys one thing;
tern tie ssessment e
u te the process

nd the product of
e rning especi

y in second
ngu ge
e rning nd

proficiency.

DeM uro, He
prey, Schr m (2001) inestig tion shows th t
tern tie

ssessment not on
y produce me ningfu
resu
ts to  riety of
e rners but

supports cognitie psycho
ogy of the students.

With the issues nd findings presented boe, I m ch

enge by the use

of
tern tie ssessment in second
ngu ge proficiency. But with m ny

concerns r ised bout it cert in qu
ities
ike the fo

owing: ³
tern tie

ssessment document tion proides rich d t bout
e rning but it is much more

cost effectie nd time-consuming for the te cher to dminister nd n
yze

thoughtfu

y in order to gie ccur te feedb ck to the
e rner - especi

y in

c
sses with
rge numbers of
e rners (A
derson nd B njeree, 2001). Brown

nd Hudson (1998)
so point out th t
tern tie ssessment needs to s tisfy

the s me st nd rds or psychometric qu
ities s do conention
tests, th t is


idity, re
i bi
ity nd pr ctic
ity? nd shou
d be critic

y e
u ted for their

µfitness for purpose¶ (wh t B chm n nd P
mer (1996) c

ed µusefu
ness¶). I sti


be
iee th t
tern tie ssessment is the best ssessment th t c n be used s

of now.

In ddition to th t, s Ts g ri (2002) discussed ,the
tern tie

ssessment p r digm, is seen to embody different concept of ssessment, i.e.

ssessment s n essenti
p rt of the
e rning process. Howeer, further

theoretic
nd empiric
work needs to be done to ex mine
tern tie

ssessment pr ctices in depth.


" $"c%

 DIRECTIOY: M ke n ess y bout the Qu
ity of Educ tion in the

Phi
ippines nd present it in c
ss. Be sure th t you c n depend the inform tion

you¶e gien in the ess y. P ss your ess y next meeting nd prep re for the

present tion next week. Refer to persu sie rubrics for your guid nce.


" ! &" '

"! (!%)

* + , -
I m ke c
im I m ke
I m ke c
im
but don't c
im but it is
nd exp
in I do not m ke

!."!%!$ exp
in why it buried,
why it is c
im.
is confused, or
controersi
.
controersi
. unc
e r.
I gie 1 or 2
I gie re sons re sons which
I gie c
e r I do not gie
in support of don't support
&""!   nd ccur te conincing
the c
im, but the c
im we

,
 //0 re sons in re sons in
oer
ook nd/or
1"%!$ support of the support of the
import nt irre
e nt or
c
im. c
im.
re sons. confusing
re sons.
I discuss
I thorough
y
re sons I
discuss
g inst c
im, cknow
edge
 " re sons
but
e e out th t there re I do not gie
"!   g inst the
import nt re sons re sons g inst
!! 1" c
im nd
re sons nd/or g inst the the c
im.
%!$ exp
in why
don't exp
in c
im but don't
the c
im is
why the c
im exp
in them.

id nyw y.
sti

st nds.
My writing is
we

org nized,
h s
My writing h s My writing is
compe

ing
c
e r usu

y
opening,
beginning, org nized but
strong
midd
e nd sometimes My writing is
inform tie
!2! end. I gets off topic. im
ess nd
body nd
gener

y use H s seer
disorg nized.
s tisfying
ppropri te errors in
conc
usion.
p r gr ph p r gr ph
H s
form t. form t.
ppropri te
p r gr ph
form t.
 My words re
The words I du

, I use the s me
use re uninspired or words oer nd
I use most
y
1" striking but they sound oer nd oer....
routine words.
n tur
,  ried
ike I m trying Some words m y
nd iid. too h rd to be confusing.
impress.
My sentences M ny run-ons,
My sentences
I wrote we

- re often f
t fr gments nd
re c
e r,
""" constructed or wkw rd. wkw rd
comp
ete nd
%") but routine Some run-ons phr sings m ke
of different
sentences. nd my ess y h rd to

engths.
fr gments. re d.
I use first- My spe

ing is
Frequent
person form, correct on M ny errors in
errors re
nd I use common gr mm r,
distr cting to
correct words. Some c pit
iz tion,
the re der but
&" sentence errors in spe

ing nd
do not
structure, gr mm r nd punctu tion
interfere with
gr mm r, punctu tion. I m ke my p per
the me ning
punctu tion need to reise h rd to re d.
of my p per.
nd spe

ing. it g in.


Ad pted from Educ tion
Le dership, by Heidi Goodrich, 1997

 "0""" 


A
derson, J. C. nd B nerjee, J. 2001. L ngu ge testing nd ssessment (P rt

1).p
 ? 
?34, 4:213-236.

B rootchi, Y. nd Kesh  rz, M. H. 2002. Assessment of chieement through

portfo
io nd te cher-m de tests.
 
? ?44, 3:279-288.

H ncock, C.R. (Ed.). (1994). "Te ching, testing, nd ssessing: M king the
connection.Yorthe st Conference Reports."

H ncock, C. R. (Ed.), "Te ching, testing, nd ssessment: M king the

connection. Yorthe st conference reports." Linco
nwood, IL

Spo
sky, B. (1992). Di gnostic testing reisited. In Shoh my, E., & W
ton, R.A.,
(Eds.),"L ngu ge ssessment nd feedb ck: Testing nd other
str tegies". Y tion
Foreign L ngu ge Center. Dubuque

Y p, K.O. (1993). "Integr ting ssessment with instruction in ABE/ESL

progr ms." P per presented t the nnu
meeting of the Americ n
Educ tion
Rese rch Associ tion. (ED 359 210)