ELT Research Papers 17.

08

Assessment: attitudes, practices and needs

Susan Sheehan and Sonia Munro
ISBN 978-0-86355-845-0
© British Council 2017 Design /G239
10 Spring Gardens
London SW1A 2BN, UK
www.britishcouncil.org
ELT Research Papers 17.08

Assessment: attitudes, practices and needs

Susan Sheehan and Sonia Munro
 Contents
About the authors.............................................................................................................................................. 2

Abstract................................................................................................................................................................ 3

Glossary................................................................................................................................................................ 4

Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................................... 5

Introduction......................................................................................................................................................... 6

Literature review................................................................................................................................................ 8
2.1 Assessment literacy....................................................................................................................................................8
2.2 Research into language assessment literacy (LAL)...........................................................................................9
2.3 Assessment literacy materials...............................................................................................................................11
2.4 Teacher cognition......................................................................................................................................................11

Methodology..................................................................................................................................................... 13

Data collection sites....................................................................................................................................... 14

Participants ...................................................................................................................................................... 15

Data collection instruments......................................................................................................................... 16

Results and analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 17

7.1 What impact does testing have on the classroom?......................................................................................... 17
7.2 How confident do teachers feel about engaging in assessment activities?........................................... 18
7.3 What are teacher attitudes to assessment?..................................................................................................... 19
7.4 What are the assessment literacy needs of teachers?.................................................................................. 20

The materials ...................................................................................................................................................22

Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................23

References.........................................................................................................................................................25

Contents  | 1
 About the authors
Susan Sheehan is a Senior Lecturer in TESOL at the
University of Huddersfield. Her research interests
include assessment and the CEFR (Common
European Framework of Reference for Languages).
She worked at the British Council before coming
to Huddersfield, where she is course leader for
the BA TESOL.

Sonia Munro is a Senior Lecturer in TESOL at the

University of Huddersfield, where she is course
leader for the MA TESOL. She has been involved
with TESOL and teacher education for nearly 20
years, working in a variety of contexts both in the
UK and overseas. Her research interests include
teacher education, materials development and
the use of technology in language learning.

2 |  About the authors

 Abstract
This project investigated language assessment
literacy practices in the classroom. We sought to
bring teachers more directly into the assessment
literacy debate and provide them with training
materials which meet their stated needs.

Teachers’ attitudes and beliefs are frequently cited

as exerting a powerful role in shaping their decisions,
judgements and behaviour (see, for example, Borg,
2006; Kagan, 1992). Therefore, exploring teachers’
current levels of assessment literacy may help
teacher educators to better understand the factors
which promote or prevent effective assessment, and
thus contribute to more targeted teacher education.
However, an investigation into what is happening in
classes may be of little value without exploring why it
is happening.

A qualitative approach was adopted and methods

used included interviews, observations and focus
group discussions. The interviews drew on Davies’
(2008) components of assessment literacy which
he defined as Skills, Knowledge and Principles.
Observations were conducted which focused on
teacher assessment practices. Post-observation
interviews were conducted with the teachers.
The observations and interviews were conducted
at the international study centre of a British
university. Focus group discussions were held at
teaching centres attached to a major international
organisation overseas. A workshop was held at an
international teacher conference to pilot the online
training materials.

The training materials cover five topics:

■■ CEFR and levelness
■■ assessing young learners
■■ assessment for learning
■■ language assessment for teachers
■■ assessment resources.

The emphasis in the materials is on practical

approaches, but in line with our participants’ stated
needs it includes a basic introduction to theoretical
perspectives.

Abstract  | 3
 Glossary
CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment

CELTA: Certificate in Teaching English to Speakers

of Other Languages

CPD: continuous/continuing professional

development

EFL: English as a foreign language

ELT: English language teaching

IATEFL: International Association of Teachers

of English as a Foreign Language

IELTS: International English Language Testing System

LAL: language assessment literacy

LTA: language testing and assessment

4 |  Glossary
 Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible without
the teachers who participated in each stage of the
project. We are grateful for their generosity of
time and willingness to share their thoughts and
experiences with us.

Thanks are also due to Louisa Dunne and Bernadette

Maguire for their support with the focus groups.

We gratefully acknowledge funding received

from the British Council through the ELTRA
scheme and from the Assessment Research Group.
We are particularly indebted to Vivien Berry, Senior
Researcher English Language Assessment at the
British Council, for her unstinting support with this
project. Her words of wisdom and encouragement
have been greatly appreciated.

Acknowledgements  | 5
 1
Introduction
Testing and assessment is an under-taught area in them an understanding of the subject and its context
many EFL teacher training programmes and, as a within the wider field of knowledge’ (Wallace, 2009).
result, many teachers have received little or no
training in the subject (Taylor, 2009). However, As Wallace suggests, the pressure from students,
testing and assessment have become an increasingly parents and other interested stakeholders may result
important part of classroom practice. The impact of in teachers offering a restricted curriculum which, by
globalisation is felt keenly in the world of language focusing only on test requirements, limits students’
teaching, and English has never been more popular overall language development and potential
than it is now. Success in high-stakes English engagement with English.
examinations can be a passport to study overseas A teacher’s ability to engage with a range of
and a conduit to a successful career. Innovations teaching, learning and assessment practices is,
such as the Common European Framework of therefore, essential as effective assessment can
Reference for Languages (CEFR) have led to greater support and promote learning. However, many
focus on standardisation (Hulstijn, 2007). This in turn teachers receive little or no training in either the
has led to a greater emphasis on students taking theory or practice of testing and/or assessment
assessments to demonstrate they have reached (see for example, Hasselgreen et al., 2004, and
particular CEFR levels, and therefore teachers are Taylor, 2009). Moreover, some teachers report
faced with preparing more students to take more feeling afraid of assessment or lacking the
examinations. Assessment is even being used as a resources to engage effectively with it (Coombe et
form of gatekeeping in the area of citizenship, with al., 2012). This suggests a need to explore teachers’
migrants in some countries required to demonstrate engagement with assessment more fully, and
certain levels of language proficiency before they develop strategies to support teachers’ knowledge,
can gain permanent residency (Fulcher, 2012). skills and confidence in this area.
The pressure to pass these exams is felt not just by The aim of this project was to investigate what
students, but also by teachers. In private language teachers wanted to know about assessment and
centres, students (or their parents) expect to get to develop a set of training materials for teachers.
what they are paying for, namely exam success. To achieve this aim, we worked with ELT practitioners
Learning is seen not as an intellectual endeavour, from Europe who have experiences teaching across
but as a commodity. In both the public and private the globe, interviewing them individually and in
sectors, teachers may be expected to reach targets groups, exploring their views on assessment. In
related to student achievement. This could be in the addition, we observed lessons in which teachers
form of the numbers of students achieving passes, assessed students, and interviewed them afterwards.
or even specific grades in examinations. The intense The materials we have designed respond to the
pressure felt by teachers to achieve these targets stated needs of the teachers who participated in
means that teachers feel the need to engage with the project. This report provides an overview of
techniques commonly associated with the notion the project and locates its findings in relevant
of ‘teaching to the test’ (Stiggens, 2014). This term literature. The following research questions
encompasses any strategies which teachers use informed the project:
to help students perform better in tests. This might
■■ What impact does testing have on the classroom?
include practising specific tasks or language known
to feature in the exam, or providing practice tests. ■■ How confident do teachers feel to engage in
Used appropriately, these techniques can help assessment activities?
students to prepare effectively for their exam and be ■■ What are teacher attitudes to assessment?
used as a form of formative assessment, highlighting
■■ What are the assessment literacy needs of
both what they can already do, and what they need
teachers?
to improve. However, the impact of teaching to the
test can also be negative as teachers ‘focus too
narrowly on the knowledge necessary to enable
learners to pass the test, rather than developing in

6 |  Introduction
 This report starts with a literature review. The
methodology adopted is then outlined. This section
includes descriptions of the context and the
participants. The results are then presented.
The report concludes with a description of the
materials created following evaluations of the
findings of this project.

At the start of the project we used the term language

assessment literacy to describe teacher knowledge
of assessment. More complete definitions of the term
will be given in the literature review. The teachers
we spoke to did not feel that the term was relevant
to them. In this report we will use ‘language testing
and assessment’, or LTA, to describe the topic. This
follows an approach adopted by Vogt and Tsagari
(2014). In the literature section the term ‘language
assessment literacy’, or LAL, will feature. This is
because the term is used so prevalently in the
studies of teachers and assessment that any review
which avoided using the term would exclude much
of the literature on the topic.

Introduction  | 7
 2
Literature review
This literature review will focus on two main areas. to engage in assessment activities with insufficient
First, assessment literacy will be discussed. Then training and understanding of the subject.
research into teacher cognition will be discussed.
It is not appropriate to consider assessment as
divorced from other types of knowledge which
2.1 Assessment literacy
teachers need to be good teachers. Davies points
Assessment literacy is a topic which has only out that assessment literacy is not purely confined to
relatively recently come to be discussed. A knowledge of assessment. He posits the opinion that:
consensus is starting to develop around how ‘What Lado was keenly aware of was that language
assessment literacy could be defined. Inbar-Lourie teachers need to know about language as well as
(2008: 389) writes of assessment literacy as: ‘having about language testing’ (2008: 330). Teachers need
the capacity to ask and answer critical questions to have a good understanding about the nature of
about the purpose for assessment, about the fitness language in order to assess it effectively. Assessment
of the tool being used, about testing conditions, and literacy is more than just a series of methods or
about what is going to happen on the basis of the techniques. Rather, it is a fundamental question of
results.’ This is a widely accepted definition of what it is to know a language and then how this
assessment literacy for English language teachers. knowledge informs both the teaching of English and
Malone (2013: 332) argues that a number of leaders the assessment of it. It could, therefore, be argued
in the fields of language testing and teaching that not only does teacher education fail to develop a
recognise: ‘the importance of assessment knowledge knowledge of assessment, it also fails to develop this
among language instructors and suggest that such knowledge of language and is instead overly focused
knowledge must be imparted through more than just on classroom technique.
pre-service teaching efforts.’ She goes on to state
that the changing nature of language testing means Teacher assessment literacy is, as Willis et al. (2013:
that teachers need regular updating in the topic. 32) note: ‘a phrase that is often used but rarely
defined’. In terms of English language teaching there
The increasing importance of assessment literacy have been numerous definitions written but there is
can be ascribed to the increasing importance of still some doubt as to exactly what a teacher needs
assessment. Taylor (2009: 21) states that: ‘There can to do or to know in order to be considered language
be no doubt that testing and assessment are growing assessment literate. There is also a question as to
in importance and influence around the world today.’ who confers this title or status to teachers. Can
She identified two reasons for this growth. The first teachers define themselves as language assessment
is globalisation, which leads to a desire to align literate? Are they awarded this title by testing
assessment frameworks with internationally experts? There is also debate about whether literacy
accepted standards. The second is the increasing should be used in the singular or plural. Willis et al.
reliance on test scores in education, the workplace (2013) maintain that using the singular is reductive.
and, perhaps most controversially, in migration The use of the plural would seem to capture the
and citizenship practice. Vogt and Tsagari (2014) complexity of the topic better. The reasons for
add school leaving exams to the list of pressures. these complexities are the varieties of assessment
They also note that teachers have a role in advising practices used and the motivations for assessment.
students which external tests to take and that some It would also seem to solve the problem of someone
schools function as test centres. Thus, more people who has little or no literacy in the topic and removes
are taking language tests and more decisions are the need for that person to be considered, or to
being taken based on the evidence of test scores. consider themselves, illiterate.
Despite this, teacher education does not appear to
have taken into account the increased importance of The following definition comes from general
testing and assessment. As Taylor (2009) notes, many education but would seem to be equally applicable
graduate language education programmes devote to ELT. ‘Assessment literacy is a dynamic context-
little or no time to assessment theory or practice. dependent social practice that involves teachers
This, it could be argued, has created a situation articulating and negotiating classroom and cultural
whereby many language teachers are being asked knowledges with one another and with learners, in

8 |  Literature review
 the initiation, development and practice of 2.2 Research into language assessment
assessment to achieve learning goals of students’ literacy (LAL)
(Willis et al., 2013: 242). This definition appeals for Survey has been a commonly used strategy in
two reasons. First, it mentions students, and this LAL research. Hasselgreen et al. (2004) found in
group seems to be remarkable by its absence in their survey that the teachers who took part carried
most definitions. Second, the reason for engaging in out most activities related to language testing
developing a better understanding of assessment is and assessment without any formal training.
to improve student learning. Too often assessment This is not the same as saying they were performing
literacy, and its development, is seen either as a goal these tasks badly, and they may have gained their
in itself or is focused on the development of teacher knowledge from other sources, such as colleagues.
practice without reference to students or any One study which goes against the survey trend is
classroom goal. Vogt and Tsagari’s (2014) mixed-methods study. The
While there is a great deal of agreement on the quantitative aspect was based on Hasselgreen et al.’s
general need for teachers to be assessment literate, survey discussed above. In the survey the teachers
there has been less discussion about the reasons reported that they had received some training in
behind this reluctance. Coombe et al. (2012) have language testing and assessment, but they also
identified four barriers to assessment. The first of expressed a desire for more. The findings from the
these relates to fear of the topic. This may have interviews suggest that the teachers had not
developed while teachers were at school. Borg received LTA training in pre-service education.
(2006) highlights the importance of one’s own Instead, the teachers reported that they relied on
schooling in the development of a teacher’s textbook materials and learned on the job, and the
beliefs about teaching and therefore these early authors suggest that this learning strategy may stifle
experiences may impact their practice. The second innovation in the field as teachers rely on tried-and-
point is identified as the separation of teaching from tested methods which have been passed from
testing. Testing may have become separate from teacher to teacher. Vogt and Tsagari (2014) also
teaching as much of the research conducted into the found that teachers did not have clear ideas about
subject of testing is published in academic journals many aspects of language testing and assessment.
which are not easily accessible for teachers. The high For example, the teachers described oral
cost of academic papers could also be responsible assessment as impressionistic and subjective.
for this separation. Furthermore, the writers of such They describe that more than half the teachers
papers may not consider teachers as part of the they interviewed had a ‘fuzzy’ understanding of
audience for their work and may not, therefore, assessment. This is not surprising if teachers have
include implications for practice in their work. Third, not had training in language testing and assessment
there a number of organisations such as Cambridge training in their initial teacher education. It may also
English, Pearson and ETS which focus on the suggest that the teachers interviewed do have a
production of English language tests. Some teachers strong interest in the topic.
may prefer to use their time to focus on teaching Crusan et al. (2016) have conducted a language
and leave testing to well-known organisations. assessment literacy survey which focused on writing
Finally, the authors note that sufficient resources specifically. This differs from the current research
are not allocated to testing. Teachers cannot work project which covers all aspects of language rather
on assessment-related activities without time for than focusing on one skill. Notwithstanding the
such work being included on their timetables. difference in focus, some of the reasons they give
Despite the perceived importance of assessment in support of the notion that teachers should be
literacy, it is crucial that it does not become some skilled in testing and assessment can be considered
type of obligation which is imposed upon teachers. relevant here. Good assessment practices, they
There has been much discussion of how assessment contend, support learning and maintain quality in
for learning can improve student performance teaching and learning. They go on to point out that
(Wiliam, 2011). The pressures to conform to the students are the ones who could be missing out if
requirements of external tests have been well teachers are not using best practice in assessment.
documented. Inbar-Lourie (2008) makes the point They (2016: 43) posit the opinion that: ‘The
that the pressures to incorporate assessment for consequences of uninformed assessments can be
learning practices into the classroom can be equal if losses for students in time, money, motivation and
not worse than the pressures to teach to a particular confidence.’ Students may pay to take tests which
test. In the same way, there is a risk that teachers will are not appropriate for them if they are badly advised
feel coerced to engage with assessment literacy, and by teachers. They may spend more time or more
thus feel alienated further. money on learning English than necessary if their
learning is not supported with assessment for

Literature review  | 9
 learning practices. If students score poorly in tests is something which is imposed on the classroom,
they may become demotivated and never reach their and some teachers, particularly those with heavy
full potential in language learning. Low test scores workloads, may come to resent this imposition.
can make a student feel bad about themselves.
These points should not be taken as a criticism of This is a point which is also made by Weigle (2007) in
teachers. Rather, it relates to points made elsewhere an article where she describes what writing teachers
in this report that in much of the LAL debate at the should know about assessment. She characterises
level of the academy, the voice of the learner is teachers as considering assessment as a ‘necessary
largely absent. The gap between teachers and the evil’. She contends that this may lead to teachers
academy has been discussed before, but this debate avoiding assessment both in terms of learning about
does not focus on how the students may be missing it or planning how they will assess their students.
out on the best possible learning environment. This negative attitude towards assessment could
also, Weigle contends, lead to resentment of large-
Knowledge of language testing and assessment scale tests such as IELTS, with the consequence that
cannot be separated from the body of knowledge teachers do not engage with such tests and do not
teachers bring to their practice of teaching. Crusan seek to understand them. This could mean that those
et al. (2016) list a number of factors which could teachers do not help their students to prepare
impact on teachers’ philosophies and their properly for them or explain to students whether or
assessment practices. These include prior language not such tests are appropriate for the students and
learning experiences and teacher learning. There are the possible consequences of a low score in such a
links which could be made here to the claims by Vogt test. Teachers need knowledge in order to be ‘critical
and Tsagari (2014) that teachers test the same way in users’ (ibid.: 195) of large-scale tests.
which they themselves were tested. Clearly, there is
an interplay here between many different complex Some teachers may feel uncomfortable about
factors which include past learning, teaching and grading work. Two reasons have been given to
assessment practices. The complexity of these account for this feeling (ibid.). Teachers may see
factors may be one reason why relying on survey their role as being one of supporting students first
data may not be appropriate. Literacy should not be and foremost. So, there is a conflict between being
considered only in terms of lack of knowledge or supportive and being evaluative – or it may be due
gaps in knowledge. Rather it should be considered in to a lack of clarity of the criteria. The teachers write
terms of teachers’ philosophies, and these will have poor criteria and then struggle to implement them.
started to develop while teachers were at school. This could be evidence that teacher resistance to
LTA education is actually making life more difficult
Crusan et al. (2016) conducted a global survey of for teachers than it needs to be.
second language writing teachers. Respondents
came from 41 countries across five continents. In a Many of the studies conducted into LAL have
similar way to the surveys of Vogt and Tsagari (2014) deployed a survey strategy. This has as a possible
and Hasselgreen et al. (2004), the teachers reported consequence that only teachers who are interested
good levels of knowledge. The authors speculate that in assessment may choose to respond to a
the respondents were keen to claim particular levels questionnaire on assessment practices. The other
of knowledge because people prefer to be seen as possible weakness with such a survey is that teachers
knowledgeable than be seen as not knowledgeable. may feel constrained to exaggerate their training
One result which may resonate with readers of this needs, as they may fear that it would be unprofessional
report was that teachers who reported having heavy to state that they had no interest in them. Alternatively,
workloads had more negative attitudes to assessment. a desire for more training captured on a questionnaire
They may perceive assessment as an additional and may reflect simple curiosity when faced with a new
unnecessary burden. This may also suggest that or unfamiliar topic. It may not be a reflection of a
teaching takes precedence over assessment. Where strongly held need or desire to actually receive
time is limited the teachers in this survey would training in the new topic. If asked the question:
rather devote time to teaching than assessment. ‘Would you like to know more about something
It would seem to suggest that assessment practice new?’ many people would respond in the affirmative
is not fully integrated into teaching practice. It is not without really considering at length the new topic
as Crusan et al. describe it should be: ‘enmeshed with and/or their level of interest.
teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and practices’ (2016: Several authors, both from language assessment
45). This may also reflect a belief that assessment and broader educational assessment (Weigle, 2007;

10 |  Literature review
 Stiggens, 2014), have noted that some teachers place oriented research methods. Stoynoff (2012: 531)
too much confidence in the results of standardised opines: ‘survey results need to be complemented
tests. There seems to be a preference to give the with other empirical evidence of the effect of teacher
responsibility for assessment to others who can be characteristics on assessment practices.’ Thus, the
considered experts. This may reflect a lack of current project can be said to answer to Stoynoff’s
confidence in teachers about their knowledge and call for research, which goes beyond reliance on
understanding of assessment. Or it may reflect a survey data.
desire to shift responsibility to an outsider and thus
maintain for the teacher the role of being supporter Jeong (2013) describes a study of the differences
and not assessor. Stiggens (2014) blames society’s between teachers of language assessment courses
over-reliance on standardised tests as the reason for who are specialists in language testing and those
which assessment for learning has not become teachers who are not. It was found that the testing
embedded in classroom practice. specialists focused on testing theory and non-testing
specialists focused on classroom assessment and
Leong conducted a study of classroom assessment. test accommodations. This seems to lend weight to
This study was focused on general education rather the argument made above that language testers
than language education. It showed the complexity can be too inward looking and overly interested in
of the classroom and how teachers can incorporate testing theory. It would also seem to suggest that
a range of assessment practices in the same lesson. non-testing specialists are keen to avoid engaging
‘Teachers’ intentions can shift dynamically based on in testing theory even when teaching a language
circumstances or contexts of teaching and learning’ assessment course. Thus, there would appear to
(2014: 76). This reinforces findings from other studies be a separation between language testers and other
such as those conducted by Rea-Dickins (2007). parts of the language teaching community.
Here we seem to have a contradictory situation.
Teachers are criticised for their lack of knowledge, 2.4 Teacher cognition
yet when observed in the classroom teachers The growth in the importance of testing in language
display a complex and sophisticated range of teaching, and the issues relating to the level of
assessment practices. Is this due to problems with teachers’ assessment literacy described above,
survey methodology or does it show that we can highlight the need for high-quality assessment
only really come to understand teaching and training for teachers. Exploring teachers’ current
assessment practices by being in the classroom? levels of assessment literacy may help teacher
educators to better understand the factors which
2.3 Assessment literacy materials promote or prevent effective assessment, and thus
Projects have been undertaken to create assessment contribute to more targeted teacher education.
literacy materials. Malone (2013) describes a project However, we need to investigate not just what is
to create online assessment literacy materials for happening, but why it is happening. Teachers’
teachers. Both teachers and language testers attitudes and beliefs are often regarded as playing
reviewed the course and gave feedback. The an important role in the development of their
teachers discussed the clarity of the materials and decisions and behaviour (see, for example, Borg,
their presentation while the language testers focused 2006; and Kagan, 1992). Research from the field
on the content and the accuracy of the definitions. of ELT, as well as education more generally, is
This would seem to suggest there is a gap between consistent in the view that teachers’ cognitions,
how those within the language testing community or what they think, know and believe (Borg, 2006)
and those outside it view assessment literacy. may act as a filter through which new information
Therefore, materials on assessment literacy created is interpreted (see, for example, Pajares, 1992).
by language testers may not best meet the needs Moreover, these cognitions can become rigid and
of teachers. It should also be noted that the teachers difficult to change and may negate the impact of
surveyed were not involved in the creation of the teacher training courses (Kagan, 1992). Pajares
materials. Rather, they were simply reviewing them. (1992) posits that teachers’ attitudes and beliefs
Fulcher (2012) conducted a survey of teachers to are a strong predictor of a teacher’s behaviour,
establish levels of assessment literacy and used the and there is a great deal of empirical literature that
data to create online assessment literacy materials. highlights the link between teachers’ beliefs and
A self-acknowledged weakness of this study was teaching practices. In relation to assessment for
an over-reliance on quantitatively oriented data example, Chang’s (2005, cited in Yin, 2010)
collection methods. Thus, the current project has investigation into college EFL teachers found that
found a gap in the literature as it is focusing on teachers’ approach to assessment was influenced
the teachers’ needs and attitudes. In addition, it by their wider beliefs about language learning.
is broadening the approach by using qualitatively

Literature review  | 11
 However, there is also evidence that teachers In his study of classroom assessment practices Yin
sometimes cannot or do not transform these beliefs (2010) notes that teachers drew upon two different
into practice and some researchers have reported set of cognitions. These were strategic cognitions
a lack of alignment between teachers’ beliefs and and interactive cognitions. Strategic cognitions
practices (e.g. Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). include teaching approach and beliefs about
They state that although teachers’ reported practices language learning. He suggests that teachers draw
may appear to relate to their stated beliefs, their on these when planning assessments. Interactive
actual classroom practices may be inconsistent cognitions include assessment principles and
with these beliefs (Zheng, 2013). Barnard and Burns knowledge of assessment which is not directly
(2012) suggest that this mismatch between teachers’ related to language use. Yin argues that these
beliefs and practices relates to the contexts in which cognitions were mainly used in class while teachers
they work. Larsen-Freeman and Cameron (2008) assessed students. He goes on to note the role of
describe these contexts as complex and dynamic practical considerations such as time and class size
systems in which a variety of factors interact to when making assessment decisions. Thus, Yin makes
support or constrain the ability to translate one’s an explicit connection between classroom
beliefs in practice. Barriers which may prevent assessment practice and teacher cognition.
teachers from teaching or assessing students
according to their own beliefs include curriculum, Xu and Liu (2009) used narrative enquiry to explore
policy, organisational culture or a lack of training teacher assessment knowledge and practice. They
within a specific field. made a case study of one person and explored
with this teacher the influences on her assessment
Freeman (2002) argues that research into teachers’ practice. The authors point to a conflict between
mental lives is essential in understanding and teachers’ implicit knowledge of assessment and
advancing teachers’ professional practice. However, the assessment standards which can be imposed
despite a long tradition of research in the fields on teachers by authorities. This ‘calls for a new
of assessment and teacher cognition, there is methodology to address the uniqueness and
little empirical research which links the two (Yin, individuality of teachers’ assessment practices’
2010). This research aims to address this gap by (2009: 496). They also highlight that teacher capacity
investigating teachers’ assessment practices, building is a slow process and real commitment is
their level of assessment literacy and attitudes needed if we really want to see any change in
to assessment. practices. Scarino argues that we need to recognise:
‘the “inner” world of teachers and their personal
frameworks of knowledge and understanding and
the way these shape their conceptualisations,
interpretations, decisions and judgments in
assessment’ (2013: 316).

12 |  Literature review
 3
Methodology
The overall approach used in the project was ■■ What are teacher attitudes to assessment?
qualitative. As outlined in the literature review there ■■ What are the assessment literacy needs
has been a lack of qualitative research into the topic. of teachers?
Interviews and observations were the main data
collection methods. The following research questions These questions were created after conducting
informed the project: an initial literature review of the topic. There were
■■ What impact does testing have on the classroom? four main data collection stages. These have been
summarised in Table 1, which includes information
How confident do teachers feel to engage in
about the participants and their location.
■■
assessment activities?

Table 1: A summary of the four stages of data collection

Data collection stage Location Participants

1. Baseline interviews UK university Three experienced teachers with a

variety of qualifications

2. Observations and interviews Language centre at a UK university Three experienced teachers with a
variety of qualifications

3. Focus group interviews English language teaching centres in 48 experienced teachers with a
European capital cities variety of qualifications

4. Workshop IATEFL annual conference, 20 people – a diverse group which

Birmingham comprised some practising teachers,
some testing and assessment
experts, and some students on
master’s programmes at UK
universities

Methodology  | 13
 4
Data collection sites
Data was collected at a variety of locations. The
interviews were held in the UK with teachers who had
taught English in a variety of different countries and
contexts. The interviewees all worked at the same
UK university. The classroom observations were
conducted at a language centre at a UK university.
The focus group interviews were held at English
language teaching centres in Europe. The fourth and
final stage of data collection was a workshop held in
Birmingham at the annual IATEFL conference.

14 |  Data collection sites

 5
Participants
As a qualitatively oriented study we were not aiming
to speak to large numbers of people. We cannot
claim to have spoken to every teacher in the
world. We spoke to teachers with a wide variety of
experiences and who had entered training through
different routes. The overall sampling strategy was
convenience. This strategy was appropriate as it
enabled us to speak to a range of teachers from
a wide variety of countries, which brought a global
perspective to a project where the researchers
were UK-based. The potential disadvantage of using
convenience sampling is that it can also be described
as self-selecting. That is to say, only people who have
an interest in the topic attend. This is especially true
of the workshop as we were entirely dependent on
who chose to attend our session. Some of the
participants who attended the workshop were
testing and assessment experts who were known
to us, while others were teachers from a variety of
different countries. Biographical information was not
taken for all participants as our focus was on what
they were telling us rather than making comparisons
between the responses of different groups of
teacher. This reflects the exploratory nature of the
project. The definition of ‘teacher’, which was used
to inform this study, was that of Vogt and Tsagari
(2014: 377) which was: ‘“regular” foreign language
teachers who have undergone regular training who
teach foreign languages at state tertiary institutions,
colleges and schools’. The broad definition allowed
us to speak to teachers who had entered through a
variety of different routes. The broad definition was
also consistent with convenience sampling strategy.

Participants  | 15
 6
Data collection instruments
The baseline interview schedule was developed The focus group interview schedule was also
using Davies’ (2008) components of language developed using Davies’ (2008) components. Much
assessment, which have been discussed in the of the discussions during the focus group interviews
literature above. In these interviews we developed were on the training materials – both the form these
an understanding of the boundaries of our topic. should take and the contents of them. At the
The interviews were semi-structured. We discussed workshop we presented our proposal for the toolkit.
the participants’ routes into teaching and their initial We gathered feedback from written comments on
and subsequent teaching training. We asked about Post-it notes and notes taken during the discussions.
the role of assessment in their practice and how
confident they felt themselves to be when dealing
with assessment.

The observation schedule was inspired by a study of

teacher classroom assessment practices undertaken
by Colby-Kelly and Turner (2007). They focused on
assessment for learning practices, whereas this
study wanted to look at assessment practices more
broadly. We created a checklist of 16 assessment
practices. Every three minutes we ticked which
of the practices we were observing and took notes
about them. Some three-minute sections contained
more than one assessment practice, while others
did not contain any examples of the assessment
activities included on our checklist. Following the
observations, we interviewed the teachers and asked
them about practices we had observed. These were
semi-structured interviews which also covered the
teachers’ general experiences of assessment and
their training experiences.

16 |  Data collection instruments

 7
Results and analysis
The results have been organised according to
the research questions. We have focused on the
highlights of the data. Space precludes a detailed
discussion of all the collected data. The following
codes have been applied to the participants. The
teachers who participated in the baseline interviews
are referred to as IT. Those who were observed and
interviewed are referred to as OT. The focus group
participants are referred to as FGT. Finally, the
workshop participants are referred to as WSP. The
participants have been assigned a number. In order
to ensure the anonymity of the participants, the
pronouns he and she have been used randomly.

7.1 What impact does testing have

on the classroom?
The teachers who took part in the focus groups
considered tests to have a considerable impact on
the classroom. FGT 16 talked about: ‘…the impact of
exams on students’ lives – more people need English
qualifications.’ Students, therefore, are aware of
pressures to take exams for work or study reasons.
Teachers reported that the students are bringing
pressure to bear on teachers to engage with exams
as conditions of economic uncertainty drive people
to obtain certificates of proficiency in English. Other
teachers mentioned that many professionals are now
required to demonstrate a particular level of
proficiency in English. For example, university
teachers in one of the countries where focus groups
were held, are required to pass a C1 level English
examination or risk losing their position.

OT1 stated that tests do have an impact on the

classroom, but she also worries about this impact.
She reported: ‘You give exams out and all they are
bothered about is the score … they just fixate on the
numbers and they’re not looking at what they’ve
done.’ The teacher seems to be concerned that tests
promote a superficial approach to learning. In the
lesson we observed she used self-assessment and
peer assessment as ways for students to understand
what they had wrong on the test and what they
needed to do better in order to improve. She used
techniques associated with assessment for learning
in order to counter-balance the impact of testing in
the classroom.

Results and analysis  | 17

 A way to measure the impact of testing in the It may be the case that a lack of training in the practical
classroom is to consider the amount of time devoted aspects of assessment has left teachers feeling a lack
to preparing the tests. OT2 stated that he could of confidence. For example, IT2 stated: ‘I would have
spend a day or two at the start of the course creating liked more practical elements in my training about
essay tasks. He described some of the pressures testing and assessment – more situation based.’ This
teachers are under when creating assessments. would seem to suggest that this teacher feels her
He stated: ‘I’m hourly paid so the extra time has to training did not adequately prepare her for the types
be claimed for.’ Creating tests is a time-intensive of assessment she engages with as a teacher. We are
activity but the required resources may not be likely to lack confidence when engaged in an activity
made available to teachers. we feel unprepared for. In addition, this is a further
request for training to be practical rather than
OT2 stated that ‘Every week we will have a really theoretical. The teacher, it could be argued, wanted
thorough mark of a test.’ This would seem to suggest training which would be activity-based and which
that testing is a weekly activity and therefore can would provide her with assessment activities which
be described as having considerable impact. At she could incorporate into her teaching practice.
the same time, OT2 claimed that he wanted to keep
the classroom light-hearted and that ‘doing more OT1 stated she often engaged in self-assessment and
stressful assessment is not productive.’ Here, there peer assessment activities and that she considered
seems to a divide between teaching, which is the reflective nature of these activities necessary
enjoyable for the students, and assessment, which to be a good language learner. She stated: ‘If you
is stressful. The good guys in the classroom are are going to be successful as a language learner and
the teachers and not the assessors. in life, you need to reflect.’ She was very confident
in her assessment practices. She ascribed the
It seems that the influence of tests can be described source of her confidence and knowledge to be
as all pervasive. OT1 stated: ‘Everything I do in class, the classroom. She stated: ‘It’s experience in the
I’m conscious of how it will help them when they are classroom that has changed me, rather than
tested and I always mention that to them as well.’ So, experiences.’ This would seem to confirm some of
although we observed this teacher using a range of the findings by Vogt and Tsagari (2014) that teachers
techniques associated with assessment for learning, develop their assessment practices through their
the test is still a dominant force in the classroom. This own experiences. While they see this as a block on
may be due to the nature of the class we observed. innovation, OT1 seems to see this as a positive.
The students needed to gain high test scores in
order to progress to a university course. This may OT2 seemed to be very confident in his assessment
indicate a conflict between a teacher’s stated beliefs practices despite his self-acknowledged lack of
about teaching and learning, and imposed training. He stated that he ‘assessed students after
institutional requirements. each activity.’ In the observed lesson OT2 simplified
an activity as, in his judgement, the activity as
7.2 How confident do teachers feel about originally planned was too difficult for the students.
engaging in assessment activities? This could be seen as an example of what McKay
One focus group participant expressed her lack (2006) classifies as ‘on-the-fly’ assessment. Again
of confidence in engaging in assessment activities there seems to a contradiction between a stated
in rather strong terms. FGT24 stated that she ‘felt claim not to have had training in assessment in initial
blindfolded when trying to create assessment tasks.’ and in-service teacher training and yet being able to
It would appear that she feels she does not have the successfully deploy a range of assessment activities
knowledge or skills to create assessment tasks. She in the classroom. This would seem to be part of the
would seem to be groping around in the dark, and classroom practice of most teachers even though
does not have the vision necessary to devise they may choose not to classify it as assessment.
assessments. They may prefer to consider it as part of teaching.
Like OT1, OT2 was confident in using a range of
practices, and discussed using both peer and
self-assessment in classes.

Some of those interviewed also expressed confidence

in engaging in assessment activities, notwithstanding
a lack of training in the subject. IT1 stated: ‘You do it

18 |  Results and analysis

 automatically as a teacher but I have never received about testing it was from the perspective of being
training in how to do this ... we didn’t receive training interested in researching the language classroom
on the ethical aspects.’ Assessment is considered to and sometimes in classroom research you need
be part of teaching and, as such, it comes naturally to tests.’ The classroom is clearly being privileged
teachers. For this teacher it is not necessary to here, and testing should be subservient to teaching
engage with all three of Davies’ (2008) components – or testing only has value when it can be used to
of language testing knowledge to be confident in improve teaching in some way. It would seem that
assessment. Davies highlights the importance the topic of testing is not considered to be an
of an understanding of ethical issues in his third attractive proposition for teachers.
component: principles. Further discussion of Davies’
work has been included in the literature review. IT2 made a relevant point about how teachers are
often marginalised in the assessment process. She
The majority of the participants in the project stated: ‘In most places testing and assessment is
reported feeling unconfident about assessment. out of the hands of teachers … they are told this is
A manifestation of this lack of confidence was the the assessment you are using.’ In such situations
willingness to assign responsibility for assessment it is easy to see why teachers disengage from the
to outside agencies. One focus group participant topic. If the opinions of teachers are not listened
stated that he felt: ‘unconfident about creating test to then there would seem to be little incentive for
materials and so we defer to Cambridge.’ Another teachers to spend time reading about assessment.
participant described Cambridge as ‘a crutch to This echoes points made by Crusan et al. (2016) that
lean on.’ These comments are not intended to be teachers feel assessment is a top-down imposition.
a criticism of large-scale exam providers. Rather, it It may also reinforce the practices described by
is a sign that the lack of training in assessment leads Vogt and Tsagari (2014) of using colleagues and
to teachers disengaging with the subject. Links from the staffroom as the main sources of information
these findings can be made to claims that teachers on testing and assessment. It would seem natural
and society as a whole place too much confidence for colleagues to turn to each other for support
in standardised tests (Stiggens, 2014; Weigle, 2014). and advice when jointly facing a top-down imposed
assessment system.
7.3 What are teacher attitudes to
Only three teachers could describe at length their
assessment?
training in testing and assessment. Two gave detailed
OT2 perceived knowledge of assessment as being descriptions of their pre-service training. The third
important professionally. He acknowledged that he described working in a country with an assessment-
had not received much training in LTA and stated: focused education system and having attended
‘it would have been nice if there had been more.’ many CPD sessions which focused on testing and
When OT2 wanted to obtain promotion he considered assessment. The other participants did not describe
it necessary to engage with the topic of assessment: training experiences related to the topic. This may
‘I would have really needed to able to develop be due to the nature of training courses such as
assessments.’ This seems to suggest that assessment CELTA, which focus mainly on the classroom. It may
knowledge is considered to be necessary to gain also be indicative of their attitude to assessment.
promotion. It also reinforces the idea that assessment The training which they may have received on LTA
is a top-down imposition on teachers: the management may not live long in the memory of the teachers we
of the institution creates the assessments, which the spoke to as they are not really interested in the topic.
teachers implement. This also seems to be evidence
that assessment is, as described above, ‘a necessary All the teachers interviewed in the focus groups
evil’. Classroom teachers are supportive, while acknowledged a lack of training in testing and
managers and language testers are separated or assessment. This led us to wonder how teachers
removed from the classroom. Assessment knowledge developed their assessment practices. FGT4 stated:
should be developed for instrumental purposes, ‘You build up your own ideas of assessment just
i.e. to get a new job, rather than from any intrinsic through experience of what your learners are doing
interest in testing and assessment. – you form an image of levels like that.’ It would seem
that for this teacher, assessment practices developed
IT3 made a clear difference between teaching, out of his observations of students. Experience
which he was interested in, and testing, which would, thus, be a key factor in learning about
did not interest him. He stated: ‘If I have read books assessment. This result is somewhat contradicted

Results and analysis  | 19

 by requests for examples of student language at Some teachers reported feeling excluded from
particular levels. Another focus group participant the assessment process. As stated above, many
stated that: ‘You bring conceptions of how you were assessment practices are imposed on teachers,
tested at school and you apply them to language and teachers are subject to top-down pressures.
learning – a lot of them are not valid.’ Past learning One focus group participant keenly felt the division
experiences seem to play a role in the development between teaching and assessment. He defined
of teacher assessment practice. Vogt and Tsagari himself as ‘a user of assessments, not a creator –
(2014) make an analogy between teaching how literacy is for creators.’ For this participant teachers
you were taught and testing how you were tested. have no need to be assessment literate as they
This project would seem to offer some support do not create assessments or participate in their
for this notion. creation. This would seem to provide further support
for the notion that teachers feel assessment is a
One of the focus groups was concerned that top-down imposition (Crusan et al., 2016).
language proficiency and gains in language learning
could not be captured by a number. They questioned
7.4 What are the assessment literacy
‘the value of assessing language with numbers.’ This
needs of teachers?
would seem to echo points made by Weigle (2007)
that teachers prefer to see themselves in the role of In the focus groups there were some teachers who
a supporter of students, rather than as an assessor discussed their perceived need to be assessment
of students. This would suggest that some participants literate. FGT22 stated: ‘You need to be literate to be
feel very uncomfortable around assessment and do critical of the materials you used to assess – to know
not perceive it to be part of their role as teacher. if it is testing that you want to assess.’ Support for
this claim came from FGT19, who considered that:
Giving students a score or grade seemed to be an ‘Understanding principles is quite important –
activity which some of the participants found to be important to be aware of the different types of
problematic. One focus group participant stated: assessment.’ These teachers were, however, in the
‘When you make speaking assessments you guess minority. As will be discussed below, most of the
the level and give the mark like a 7 or a 9.’ This would teachers we talked to expressed their needs in terms
seem to confirm Vogt and Tsagari’s (2014) finding of requests for activities, and not in terms of theory
that there can be an element of ‘fuzziness’ in teacher or principles.
assessments. This may be due to teachers feeling
uncomfortable in the role of assessor, as discussed This has echoes in Davies’ (2008) critique of Hughes’
above. It may be that teachers feel hampered in book on language testing for teachers, which does
making judgements due to the lack of training which not include theory. This would suggest, Davies
they have received in assessment. The comment continues, that there is little demand for theory
made above suggests that some teachers may among teachers. This project would seem to support
lack confidence when assigning a student to a Davies’ assertion and suggest that the antipathy
level. It may also be the case that teachers feel to testing theory is longstanding among teachers.
uncomfortable about grading work (Weigle, 2007). If there were demand for it, Hughes would have
included it in his book.
During the focus group interviews many teachers
acknowledged that testing and assessment training Teachers requested materials for assessing skills.
had not featured in their pre-service training. Most, This result replicates the findings of Hasselgreen
however, did not view this as being problematic. et al.’s (2004) survey of training needs. This may
FGT9, when reflecting on her pre-service training, suggest that this is an area of concern which is
stated: ‘There are so many things that I didn’t have a commonly shared. In addition, this result was also
clue about how to do, so I wouldn’t put assessment at shared by Berry and O’Sullivan’s (2014, 2015) survey.
the top of the list of things I would have wanted more Although the groups of teachers who participated
of.’ This would seem to indicate that assessment was in this project were quite diverse, there was a high
not a priority for the teachers we spoke to. They level of commonality among the stated needs. OT2
wanted more training in matters related to teaching. requested training materials which focused on the
In addition, it could also be indicative of the divide assessment of the four skills. He also wanted criteria
between teaching and assessment with teaching to guide his development of new assessments.
clearly taking precedence over assessment. FGT3 The teachers in the focus groups also requested
stated: ‘CELTA/Trinity focus on the classroom – information on assessing skills. The following
assessment is seen as external to the class.’ The comments were made by focus group participants
divide may start at the time when people are when asked about the topics which should be
engaged in pre-service training. included in the training materials. FGT7 stated:
‘We’d like speaking tasks – task and criteria.’ FGT14

20 |  Results and analysis

 wanted suggestions for assessing live listening.
FGT2 wanted objectives for student performance.

A request which was made in a number of focus

groups was for examples of level. FGT24 stated a
need for ‘videos of people in everyday situations
using the language.’ The focus group participants
felt that exam providers had provided useful
examples of level relevant for the exams they
produce. The teachers wanted examples from
non-exam contexts. One participant described the
CEFR as ‘a universal source of levels.’ It could be the
case that the participants in this project feel that the
CEFR does not help them to perceive or understand
level. This may suggest that the way the CEFR is
currently being used is not appropriate for teachers.

When discussing their assessment literacy needs

teachers in all four groups made the point that
they did not want to spend a lot of time engaging
in training. They wanted materials to be short and
snappy. The teachers responded positively to the
suggestion that the materials should be online.
This request for brief materials may also be another
indication that the teachers we spoke to were
not interested in theory. The teachers were not
interested in committing the time which would
be necessary to read such theory, which can be,
at times, rather dense. OT1 stated that she felt
that teachers needed more information about
fundamental assessment techniques. She stated
there needs to be ‘The basics with some theory.’
This seems to provide yet more evidence that
techniques are more important than theory.

Results and analysis  | 21

 8
The materials
As stated at the start of this report, a goal of this Not all of the participants were enthusiastic about
project was to create training materials which the concept of online training materials on testing
responded to the stated needs of the teachers who and assessment. One participant stated: ‘Lots of
had spoken to us. At every stage of data collection teachers don’t want to know about assessment,
we asked participants what they thought should be so offering something that people don’t want
included in the training materials in terms of topic doesn’t always lead to delivery of aims.’ Given the
and in terms of format. There were two consistent importance of assessment for promoting learning,
messages from the participants. The materials we feel that these materials provide a valuable
had to be easily accessible and not require a great opportunity for teachers to engage with practical
investment of time from the user. They also stated and theoretical aspects of assessment. The emphasis
that practical ideas were more important than in the materials is on practical approaches, but, in
theory. For example, WSP9 stated: ‘Assessment line with our participants’ stated needs, includes a
literature is very dense, so an accessible series of basic introduction to theoretical perspectives.
tips would be useful.’ We have threaded practical
ideas which relate to the testing of the four language
skills throughout the toolkit. This was done to show
the inter-dependent nature of all aspects of language
assessment. We considered all the suggestions made
and have brought together materials which reflect
key themes in assessment and the broad needs of
the participants.

The materials cover five topics:

■■ CEFR and levelness
■■ assessing young learners
■■ assessment for learning
■■ language assessment for teaching
■■ assessment resources.
The materials are designed to be read online. The
texts are short and a range of text types has been
included. The materials can be used for self-study or
used as prompts for discussion in a training session.
Opportunities to reflect on practice are included
throughout the materials. The resources section
offers teachers a range of freely available materials
on assessment if they want to develop their
knowledge of a particular aspect of the topic.

22 |  The materials
 9
Conclusions
This study has used a broad definition of ‘teacher’ training in assessment may demonstrate a range
and has involved speaking to teachers who have of assessment strategies in their repertoire. This
experienced a variety of training routes into may suggest that teacher knowledge should not be
teaching, and have worked in countries all over underestimated. There appears to be a disconnection
the world. A qualitatively oriented study cannot between teachers and what can be termed ‘the
make claims to generalisability. It must also be academy’, that is to say, people engaged in
borne in mind that assessment is situated practice. researching language testing theory.
By adopting a qualitatively oriented approach, it has
been possible to gain insights into the assessment The observations of practice would suggest that
practices and beliefs of four groups of teachers. teachers engage in a variety of assessment practices
Some of the results are contradictory in nature. successfully. It would seem that assessment and
This may reflect the complexities of the topic and teaching practices are so intertwined in teaching
of the contexts the teachers work in. practice that teachers do not recognise that
techniques associated with assessment for learning,
The results of the project confirm those of other or learning-oriented language assessment are part
researchers (Vogt and Tsagari, 2014; Crusan et al. of assessment. Teaching is the focus of their activities
2016; Fulcher, 2012; Berry and O’Sullivan, 2014, and all activities which promote teaching and learning
2015). Teachers have had little training in issues are classified as teaching. This is suggestive of the
related to assessment and do not report interest rift between teaching and assessment. The focus on
in the theoretical underpinnings of assessment. teaching in pre-service and in-service training seems
In contrast to other studies, this study has focused to have led to a negation of the assessment practices
on teacher knowledge and how teachers develop which are a fundamental part of classroom practice.
their assessment practices. There is evidence to This type of practice is covered in McKay’s (2006)
suggest that assessment practices are rooted in description of ‘on-the-fly’ assessment.
past learning experiences, and through knowledge
sharing with colleagues. Fulcher (2016) proposed a This, like all research projects, has limitations.
guild master and apprenticeship model for teachers The sample strategy used was one of convenience
to become assessment literate. He argued that this and this limits the representativeness of the sample.
model is appropriate as apprenticeships combine While the teachers have worked in a number of
theory and practice, and LAL involves both theory countries around the world at the time of the project,
and practice. In addition, apprenticeships focus they were all based in Europe, and this may mean
on the making of a final product, and a testing that we have not fully captured the experiences
apprenticeship would centre on the development and attitudes of teachers from outside Europe.
of testing and assessment products. The findings Berger (2011: 80) argues that for teacher assessment
of this project would seem to suggest that teachers literacy to improve: ‘What is needed on a large scale
are already engaging in developing their assessment is the provision of teacher education programmes to
practices by learning from each other. educate pre- and in-service practitioners to use
One of the key findings of this project is that teachers the principles and tools of language assessment
develop their assessment practices through their effectively in their classrooms to promote learning.’
own experiences. While some have characterised The results of this project would suggest that such
this approach as a brake on innovation (Vogt and top-down imposition of assessment training would
Tsagari, 2014), we would argue that it could have the not be effective. Some of the participants in this
potential to have a positive impact on classroom project expressed their lack of interest in the topic
practice, as teachers can learn strategies which of assessment, and forcing teachers to engage
have been successfully deployed. The teachers we as a group with the theoretical underpinnings of
observed used a range of assessment practices assessment could be counter-productive in terms
successfully. Although this represents a small of promoting a positive attitude towards assessment
percentage of the sample of teachers in the project, among teachers. Rather, training should focus
it does indicate that even teachers who have little on teachers reflecting on their own experiences
of assessment.

Conclusions  | 23
The results of this project would seem to suggest the The plural of literacies should be adopted and a
following recommendations for practice and research. sociocultural perspective should be brought to the
■■ The academy needs to recognise the levels of issue. As Willis et al. (2013: 246) write: ‘A sociocultural
knowledge teachers have in assessment, and the view of assessment literacies thus acknowledges that
debate needs to move away from being framed in assessment literacy is not a singular or fixed set of
terms of lack of knowledge, or deficit. capabilities but a capability that is situated and needs
to be understood within the assessment culture and
■■ Assessment training needs to be developed with
policy.’ Thus, there is not one version of assessment
the premise that teachers bring considerable
literacy which is applicable globally.
knowledge and experience of LTA to any training
they may choose to engage with. A last conclusion would be that anyone wishing to
■■ Teacher educators need to consider the role of engage with teachers on the topic of assessment
assessment in initial training and ensure it is a should avoid using the term language
prominent part of teacher education programmes. assessment literacy.

■■ Institutions should encourage staff to explore the At the end of this project, we would encourage
CPD options available to them. readers to access the materials and engage
■■ Those working in assessment need to find more with them.
innovative ways of engaging with teachers.
■■ Further, qualitatively oriented research should be
undertaken with a focus on observations and how
teachers develop their knowledge about
assessment and their practices.
 References
Barnard, R and Burns, A (2012) Researching Language Freeman, D (2002) The hidden side of the work:
Teacher Cognition and Practice: International Case Teacher knowledge and learning to teach. Language
Studies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Teaching 35/1: 1–13.

Berger, A (2011) ‘Creating Language-Assessment Fulcher, G (2012) Assessment Literacy for the
Literacy: A Model for Teacher Education’, in Hüttner, Language Classroom. Language Assessment
J, Mehlmauer-Larcher, B, Reichl, S and Schiftner, B Quarterly 9/2: 113–132.
(eds) Theory and Practice in EFL Teacher Education:
Bridging the Gap. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 57–82. Fulcher, G (2016) Operationalising language
assessment literacy. Plenary paper presented at
Berry, V and O’Sullivan, B (2014) The symbiosis of Language Assessment Literacy Symposium 2016,
teachers’ language assessment literacy and learning- Enhancing Language Assessment Literacy: Sharing,
oriented outcomes. Paper presented at the IATEFL Broadening, Innovating, September 2016, Lancaster
TEASIG Conference, October 2014, Granada, Spain. University, Lancaster, UK.

Berry, V and O’Sullivan, B (2015) Enhancing Hasselgreen, A, Carlsen, C and Helness, H (2004)
assessment literacy: Nurturing learning-oriented European Survey of Language Testing and Assessment
outcomes in the language classroom. Paper Needs. General Findings. Available online at
presented at the IATEFL Conference, April 2015, www.ealta.eu.org/resources.htm
Manchester, UK.
Hulstijn, JH (2007) The Shaky Ground Beneath the
Borg, S (2006) Teacher cognition and language CEFR: Quantitative and Qualitative Dimensions of
education: Research and practice. London: Continuum. Language Proficiency. The Modern Language Journal
91/4: 663–667.
Colby-Kelly, C and Turner, CE (2007) AFL Research
in the L2 Classroom and Evidence of Usefulness: Inbar-Lourie, O (2008) Constructing a language
Taking Formative Assessment to the Next Level. assessment knowledge base: A focus on language
The Canadian Modern Language Review assessment courses. Language Testing 25/3:
64/1: 9–37. DOI: 10.3138/cmlr.64.1.009 385–402. DOI: 10.1177/0265532208090158

Coombe, C, Troudi, S, and Al-Hamly, M (2012) Jeong, H (2013) Defining assessment literacy: Is it
Foreign and Second Language Teacher Assessment different for language testers and non-language
Literacy: Issues, Challenges and Recommendations. testers? Language Testing 30/3: 345–362. DOI:
In Coombe, C, Davidson, P, O’Sullivan, B, and Stoynoff, 10.1177/0265532213480334
S (eds.) The Cambridge Guide to Second Language
Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kagan, DM (1992) Implications of Research on
Teacher Belief. Educational Psychologist 27/1: 65–90.
Council for Cultural Co-operation. Education
Committee, and Council of Europe (2001) Common Larsen-Freeman, D and Cameron, L (2008) Complex
European Framework of Reference for Languages: Systems and Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: University Press.
Cambridge University Press. Leong, WS (2014) Knowing the intentions, meaning
Crusan, D, Plakans, L and Gebril, A (2016) Writing and context of classroom assessment: A case study
assessment literacy: Surveying second language of Singaporean teachers’ conception and practice.
teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and practices. Studies in Educational Evaluation 43: 70–78. DOI:
Assessing Writing 28: 43–56. DOI: 10.1016/j. 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.12.005
asw.2016.03.001 Malone, ME (2013) The essentials of assessment
Davies, A (2008) Textbook trends in teaching literacy: Contrasts between testers and users.
language testing. Language Testing 25/3: 327–347. Language Testing 30/3: 329–344. DOI:
10.1177/0265532213480129
Ertmer, PA and Ottenbreit-Leftwich, AT (2010)
Teacher Technology Change: How Knowledge, McKay, P (2006) Assessing Young Language Learners.
Confidence, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect. Journal of Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Research on Technology in Education 42/3: 255–284. Pajares, MF (1992) Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational
Research: Cleaning up a Messy Construct. Review of
Educational Research 62/3: 307–332.

References  | 25
 Rea-Dickins, P (2007) ‘Learning or measuring? Wallace, S (ed) (2009) A Dictionary of Education.
Exploring teacher decision-making in planning for Oxford: Oxford University Press.
classroom-based language assessment’, in Fotos,
S and Nassaji, H (eds) Form-focused Instruction and Weigle, SC (2007) Teaching writing teachers about
Teacher Education: Studies in honour of Rod Ellis. assessment. Journal of Second Language Writing
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 193–210. 16/3: 194–209. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.004

Scarino, A (2013) Language assessment literacy Wiliam, D (2011) What is assessment for learning?
as self-awareness: Understanding the role of Studies in Educational Evaluation 37/1: 3–14. DOI:
interpretation in assessment and in teacher 10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001
learning. Language Testing 30/3: 309–327. DOI: Willis, J, Adie, L and Klenowski, V (2013)
10.1177/0265532213480128 Conceptualising teachers’ assessment literacies in
Stoynoff, S (2012) Looking backward and forward at an era of curriculum and assessment reform. The
classroom-based language assessment. ELT Journal Australian Educational Researcher 40/2: 241–256.
66/4: 523–532. DOI: 10.1007/s13384-013-0089-9

Stiggins, R (2014) Improve assessment literacy Xu, Y and Liu, Y (2009) Teacher Assessment
outside of schools too: Teaching and assessment Knowledge and Practice: A Narrative Inquiry
have become separated, which has kept teachers of a Chinese College EFL Teacher’s Experience.
from developing the assessment skills they need to TESOL Quarterly 43/3: 492–513. DOI:
truly enhance learning. Phi Delta Kappan 96/2: 67. 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00246.x

Taylor, L (2009) Developing Assessment Literacy. Yin, M (2010) Understanding Classroom Language
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 29: 21–36. DOI: Assessment Through Teacher Thinking Research.
10.1017/S0267190509090035 Language Assessment Quarterly 7/2: 175–194.

Vogt, K and Tsagari, D (2014) Assessment Literacy Zheng, H (2013) The dynamic interactive relationship
of Foreign Language Teachers: Findings of a between Chinese secondary school EFL teachers’
European Study. Language Assessment Quarterly beliefs and practice. The Language Learning Journal
11/4: 374–402. DOI: 10.1080/15434303.2014.960046 41/2: 192–204.

26 |  References
www.teachingenglish.org.uk/publications
ISBN 978-0-86355-845-0

© British Council 2017 / G239

The British Council is the United Kingdom’s international organisation for cultural relations and educational opportunities.