Some Alternatives of English Assessment

Some Alternatives of English Assessment

Wasimin

Widyaiswara Muda at LPMP Jawa Tengah,

e-mail: was_lpmpjateng@yahoo.com

Abstract: The role of assessment for students is an essential element in the teaching and learning process. Yet, the practices of assessment in undergraduate formal school do not meet the need of English language learners. This is the effect of standardized test administered by the government which is commonly in merely multiple-choice item test. This article is aimed to encourage teachers to give alternative assessment in their language teaching and learning so as the students have the right of improving their language skills. The alternatives of the assessment comprise composition, interview, listening comprehension, short answer test items as well as dictation. It is hoped that teachers are facilitated with various kinds of assessment to meet the need of ELL students, especially non-threatening informal techniques. However, there are still lots of alternatives which are not presented here. The role of instructors for teachers is strategic, as they have chance to give understanding and encouragement for the school stakeholders about the essence functions of assessment.

Key words: assessment, alternative assessment, language teaching and learning

Abstrak: Peran penilaian bagi siswa merupakan elemen penting dalam proses pembelajaran. Namun, praktik penilaian di sekolah tidak memenuhi kebutuhan siswa yang belajar bahasa Inggris. Ini adalah akitab tes standar yang diwajibkan oleh pemerintah yang umumnya hanya dalam bentuk tes pilihan ganda. Artikel ini ditujukan untuk memberikan beberapa alternative pemberian tes untuk penilaian dalam proses pembelajaran bahasa. Para siswa siswa memiliki hak untuk meningkatkan kemampuan bahasa mereka. Alternatif penilaian terdiri atas mengarang, wawancara, kemampuan mendengarkan, jawaban singkat serta tes dikte. Diharapkan guru akan terfasilitasi dengan berbagai jenis penilaian untuk memenuhi kebutuhan siswa yang belajar bahasa Inggris. Namun, masih ada banyak alternatif yang tidak disajikan di sini. Peran instruktur sangat strategis, karena mereka memiliki kesempatan untuk memberikan pemahaman dan dorongan bagi para pemangku kepentingan sekolah tentang fungsi penilaian.

Kata-kata kunci: penilaian, penilaian alternatif, pembelajaran bahasa

INTRODUCTION

The current school reform movement has emphasized that the educational experience of all students must be improved and that assessment is an essential element in the teaching and learning process (Gomez, 1998). The government views that assessment takes important roles in education. Educators base their teachings on the national education system law. The law clearly states that assessment is done sustainable to control the learning process, progress as well as to improve learning outcome.

    The practices of assessment in schools are not done as they should be. It is due to the existence of formal evaluation done by the government. The society so far sees that the success of a school is seen through the success of the students to achieve the highest score in the formal evaluation. This effects on the trend of the learning process as well as the classroom assessment. Most teachers tend to give their students practices to face the national examination. This becomes a problem when the valuable process of learning is sacrificed.

    This paper is aimed at giving alternatives for the teachers to give other forms of assessment rather than just merely objective test items as always appear in the national examination.

DISCUSSION

The Role of Assessment for Students

In all academic settings, assessment is viewed at closely related to instruction. Assessment is needed to help teachers and administrators in selection, make decisions about students' linguistic abilities, their placement in appropriate levels, and their achievement. The success of any assessment depends on the effective selection and use of appropriate tools and procedure. In addition to being essential for evaluating students' progress and achievement, also help in evaluating the suitability and effectiveness of the curriculum, the teaching methodology, and the instructional materials (Shaaban, 2005: 35).

For final evaluation of a certain level of education, the government administers the tools and procedure of the assessment. However there have been some pros and contras about the policy of the national examination. The objection is based on the views that the policy does not go for learner-centered and communicative teaching methodologies. With the advent of learner-centered and communicative teaching methodologies, however, in many setting control over the collection and interpretation of assessment information has shifted from centralized authority towards the classrooms where assessment occurs on a regular basis. This shift gives the classroom teacher a decisive role in assessing students and makes it necessary for the teacher to look for new assessment techniques to evaluate students' achievement and progress.

Teachers find dilemmas on choosing the appropriate tools of assessment. Schools are evaluated by the society as well as the government in the success of the evaluation administered by the government. The customers give great appreciation on the schools which achieve the highest score in the national examination. The backwash effect of the centralized assessment, the teachers focus the learning process on how to make the students successful in the national examination. Various ways are done to make the students successful. Sometimes the communicative activities are strongly neglected for the sake of the success of the national examination. In some ways, students have the right to have activities to improve their communicative skills, but the communicative skills will not be assessed in the final judging assessment.

This problem can be solved when teachers and school administrators are aware of the needs of the students. Teachers have to wisely select assessment for different purposes of assessment. Teacher-based assessments are those selected and administrated by the classroom teacher in order to determine what information about their students' knowledge of literacy and evaluate literacy events such as book talks and oral readings to gauge students' progress and drive future instruction. Wise teachers recognize the value of such assessments as a rich source of data (Frey and Fisher, 2003:63). It is hoped that teachers know very well when they have to be 'on the track' on what kind of assessment that gives positive and appropriate backwash effect on the success of students who learn a language. Teachers question the overdependence on a single type of assessment because test scores sometimes disagree with conclusions they have reached from observing how students actually perform in classrooms. Teachers need information to gauge whether students are making progress, if they respond to instructional approaches and materials, and if they accomplish the kinds of complex learning expected in today's curriculum. The information teachers need for instructional planning concerns the very type of complex and varied student learning that is difficult to assess with multiple-choice tests. Teachers need information about integrative language and content knowledge rather than isolated pieces of knowledge and skills (O'Malley and Pierce, 1996: 2).

Alternatives in Assessment

The alternatives in assessment discussed in this article are what assessment that teachers may use to cope with both broad different needs of students learning English in formal educations in Indonesia, mainly students of under graduates. As stated by Shaaban that nowadays teachers are faced with alternatives of assessment derived from traditional formal assessment to a less formal, less quantitative framework. Pierce and O'Malley in Shabaan (2005: 35) define alternative assessment as 'any method of finding out what a student knows or can do that is intended to show growth and inform instruction and is not a standardized or traditional test'. Specifically, alternative ways of assessing students take into account variation in students' needs, interests, and learning styles; and they attempt to integrate assessment and learning activities. Also they indicate successful performance, highlight positive traits, and provide formative rather summative evaluation.

    Until recently, schools in general have programs of administering summative evaluation of learner achievement, focusing on mastery of discrete language points and linguistic accuracy, rather than on communicative competence, with test items typically consisting of multiple-choice or objective. This type of test is commonly used in national standardized test. Every school must take the test as it is stated in the law. To monitor national standard achievement, the law states that the evaluation for students, educational unit and educational program is done by a legal beaureau in certain time. It is done independently, periodically, comprehensively, tranparantly and systematically (number 20 law 2003). Communicative teaching methodology brings with it a considerable emphasis on formative evaluation with more use of descriptive records of learner development in language and learning which (track) language development along with other curricular abilities.

    Therefore, assessment becomes a diagnostic tool that provides feedback to the learner and the teacher about the suitability of the curriculum and instructional materials, the effectiveness of teaching methods, and the strengths and weaknesses of the students. Things get worse when teachers are instructed to do the follow up of the test merely to fulfill the school and teacher administration. The practices in most schools after summative tests each semester are that the students achieve below the passing grade, should have remedial test. They are asked to do the same test items again and the teachers do not do anything for analyses. This happens in almost all school as the government suggests that the students should pass certain passing criteria. The process of achieving the criteria is rarely on the right path. This phenomenon effects on the methodology in teaching English. This serious problem will not come up when the school stakeholders are aware the importance of assessment on the success of students' competence achievement.

    The job of teachers' instructors is to give adequate understanding of placing assessment on the right path. For at least three decades, teachers and program administrators have struggled to identify appropriate procedures to assess the knowledge and abilities of English Language Learning (ELL) students. The path has been difficult in part because of the need to identify varying levels of knowledge and proficiency in English in part because the purposes of assessment with language minority students are so varied and complex. Assessment information is needed by administrators, teachers, staff developers, instructors, students and parents to assist in determining appropriate program placements and instructional activities as well in monitoring student progress.

    Accurate and effective assessment of language is essential to ensure that ELL students gain access to instructional programs that meet their needs. The failure of assessment and instruction to interact effectively is most evident when inappropriate assessment approaches lead to inaccurate identification, improper program placements, inadequate monitoring of student progress, and the long-term failure of instruction (Cummins in Pierce and O'Malley, 1996: 3). Conversely, appropriate assessment has the potential to ensure that these students are on course to becoming literate and able participants in English language classroom settings.

    With ELL students, assessment is far more complex and challenging than with native speakers of English. Assessment is used for at least six purposes with ELL students as stated by Piece and O'Malley:

1. 
   
   Screening and identification: to identify students eligible for special language and/or content area support programs.


2. 
   
   Placement: to determine the language proficiency and content area competencies of students in order to recommend an appropriate educational program


3. 
   
   Reclassification or exit: to determine if a student has gained the language skills and content area competencies needed to benefit from instruction in grade-level classrooms.


4. 
   
   Monitoring student progress: to review student language and content area learning in classrooms


5. 
   
   Program evaluation: to determine the effects of government or local instructional programs


6. 
   
   Accountability: to guarantee that students attain expected educational goals or standards, including testing for high school graduation.

School administrators tend to view that the sixth purpose is the main focus, so most educators choose that standardized, norm-referenced tests are chosen although they realize that those tests are inappropriate for ELL students. Traditional forms of assessment such as standardized tests are inappropriate for ELL students for a variety of reasons. Standardized tests use multiple choice items, a format that may be unfamiliar to students with limited experience in U.S. public schools. Moreover, multiple-choice items assume a level of English language proficiency that ELL students may not have acquired. The subtle distinctions made on various items for vocabulary, word analysis, reading, and listening subtests may produce information about what the student does know. This gives the teacher an incomplete picture of student needs and strengths. The language components of standardized mainly assess reading and vocabulary knowledge and ignore progress in written and oral language, important components of language based instructional programs. Standardized tests in content areas, such as math and science, may not assess what ELL students know because of the complexity of the language in which the questions are asked. These tests have not been effective in assessing the higher-order thinking skill students used in solving problems, analyzing texts, or evaluating ideas. Virtually all schools administer standardized tests each semester, leaving teachers without regular information throughout the school year on what students have learned. Teachers are unable to plan instruction effectively or make accurate decisions about students' needs and progress. When formally the teachers made teaching plan, they just make it for formal need and never use it in their teaching. In the plan, sometimes they prepare assessment tools, but most of them are not used in the teaching and learning process.

    What is mentioned above does not suggest that there is no role for standardized testing in school district or state government programs. Standardized tests have an important role in at least four components of an overall testing program: (1) to compare individual or group performance with an external normative group, (2) to identify relative strengths and weaknesses in skill areas, (3) to monitor annual growth in skills, and (4) for program evaluation.

    Besides standardized tests that are mainly designed and administered by school administrator or the government, there are some alternative assessments the teacher may design and use to meet the need of ELL students.

• 
  
  Translation
  
  
  

  Translation was formerly one of the most common teaching and testing devices, and it remains quite popular today in many parts of the world. However, with the spread of the new 'linguistically oriented' methods of instruction and measurement, translation has lost much of its appeal and highly sophisticated activity, and one which neither develops nor demonstrates the basic skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing. Indeed, the habit of translating is now felt to impede the proper learning of a foreign language, for one of the first objective s in modern foreign-language instruction is to free the learner from native-language interference-to teacher him to react in the target language without recourse to his mother tongue. To be sure, modern language departments often include advanced-level courses in translation, but here translation is treated as a creative activity in which follows, and depends upon, fairly complete mastery of the target language. In an achievement test for translation courses, there of course would be very good reasons for having the examinees translate. Secondly, translation is extremely difficult to evaluate. Is a 'good' translation one that captures the tone and mood of the original by substituting the idiom of the second language, or is translation only 'good' when it approaches a literal, word-for-word rendering of the original? The criteria and standards for judging translations depend so much on individual taste that the translation test tends to be a highly unreliable kind of measure, and particularly when large numbers of examinees require several scorers. To simplify this, the teachers should be wise in selecting the part of the language to be translated. Example to this type of assessment can be taken from a narrative text.

  
  

  There was once a very rich merchant, who had six children, three sons, and three daughters; being a man of sense, he spared no cost for their education, but gave them all kinds of masters. His daughters were extremely handsome, especially the youngest. When she was little everybody admired her, and called her "The little Beauty;" so that, as she grew up, she still went by the name of Beauty, which made her sisters very jealous.
  

  
  

  In composing the test item of translation using the text, it is better to choose one part of the piece. Then make the rest to be the context. The students will use the background story to translate the part of the text.

  
  

  The test item can be seen as follows:

  
  

  This sentence is taken from the text. How would you translate this in Indonesian?

  
  

  When she was little everybody admired her, and called her "The little Beauty;" so that, as she grew up, she still went by the name of Beauty, which made her sisters very jealous.
  

  
  

• 
  
  Dictation
  
  
  

  Dictation is another testing device that retains some of its former popularity in certain areas. Dictation is undoubtedly a useful pedagogical device (if used in moderation) with beginning and low-intermediate-level learners of a foreign language, and the responses that such students make to dictations will certainly tell the teacher something about their phonological, grammatical, and lexical weaknesses. Other types of tests, however, provide much more complete and systematic diagnosis, and in far less time. As a testing device, then, dictation must be regarded as generally both uneconomical and imprecise (Harris, 1969: 5). The problem then comes when the teacher read the pieces to be written unnaturally. She pronounces the material too slowly or too fast, too softly or in inappropriate stress and intonation. Some non native-speaker English teachers tend to read the material slowly. This does not help the students improve their listening skills.

  
  

      Dictation is a complex test. At least the students are tested their listening and writing skills. Therefore, this kind of test belongs to integrated point test. Nowadays, dictation is still done using CD recording. Using this audio media, the unnatural spoken language can be avoided. The following is an example of dictation test item designed by Byrne, G (2009: 1)

  
  

  Instruction:

  
  

  Listen to the recording and fill in the blanks with the words you hear. The teacher will pause the recording in certain time to give you time to write. Then She will repeat playing the recording once again. This time, you can check what you have written.

  
  

  Are you ready?

  
  

BACK TO SCHOOL

• 
  
  Composition
  
  
  

  A composition of test allows the examinee to compose his materials relatively free and extended written responses to problems set by the examiner. In foreign-language testing these responses may consist of single paragraphs or may be full essays in which the student is rated not only on his use of the grammatical structures and lexicon of the target language but also on his ideas and their organization. Grade for such 'free-response; tests may also take into account the examinee's employment of he graphic convention-spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, text structure and even handwriting. To limit the scope, the tester can give some hints. Below is an example of composition test.

  
  
  
  

Write an Argumentative Text of Exposition/Hortatory.

Choose one out of these themes:

1. Education


2. Technology


3. Environment

Decide your own title of composition.

Note:

Exposition/Hortatory

To persuade the reader that something should or should not be the case.

Thesis: announcement of issue concern. Arguments: reasons for concern, leading to recommendation Recommendation: statement of what ought or ought not to happen

So your composition must consist of:

• Thesis


• Arguments to support your thesis


• Recommendation

Your composition will be assessed/scored in the following aspects:

• Text Organization


• Grammar


• Content


• Use of words

To score the composition, the tester may use the following scoring rubric.

INDICATORS FOR SCORING COMPOSITION

SCORE	TEXT ORGANIZATION	GRAMMAR	CONTENT	USE OF WORDS
8 - 9	Highly organized, clearly progression of ideas well linked; opening, main paragraphs (facts, problems, arguments, solution, recommendation) and closing.	Makes few (if any) noticeable errors of grammar or word order.	The content of the composition is very well linked with the theme and title and is very reasonable.	Use of vocabulary and idioms is carefully and well chosen with accurate meanings.
6 - 7	Material well organized: opening, main, closing, but the main paragraphs do not communicate complete aspects.	Occasionally makes grammatical and/or word-order errors which do not, however, obscure meaning.	The content of the composition is well linked with the theme and title, but the writer misses some items.	Sometimes uses inappropriate terms beyond the meaning of ideas because of lexical inadequacies.
4 - 5	Little or not clear of connectivity, though readers can deduce some organization.	Makes frequent errors of grammar and word order which occasionally obscure meaning.	The content of the composition does not link with the theme and title, although still reasonable.	Frequently uses wrong words, and the use of words somewhat limited because of limited vocabulary.
2 - 3	Lack of organization so severe that communication is seriously impaired.	Grammar and word-order errors make comprehension difficult.	There is no connection between the title and the content of the text and is unreasonable.	Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary that make comprehension quite difficult.
0 - 1	The writer does not produce any organization of text.	Errors in grammar and word order so severe as to make text virtually unintelligible.	The writer writes about different things, beyond the theme, title and reasoning.	Vocabulary limitedness is so severe as to make composition impossible to understand.

• 
  
  Scored Interview
  
  
  

  Roughly parallel to the composition as a measure of students' written language is the scored interview as a device for assessing oral competence. Both are classed as free-response tests in which the subjects are allowed to express their answer in their own words in a relatively unstructured testing situation. The chief differences between these two devices, in addition to the obvious one that compositions call for writing and interviews call for speaking, are that in interviews (1) the examinee must provide a large number of cues throughout the performance and (2) the evaluation is generally made during the actual production of the responses, and there is no way for the examiner to reexamine the performance later in order to check the accuracy of his ratings. Most teachers who use the interview test do not out of any strong conviction that it is the best of all possible techniques, but simply because they have no better way of assessing the oral competence of the students. Questions for the interview may vary, however, with the proficiency level of students and classroom instructional goal and activities. Some sample interview questions are:

  
  
  
  
  
  • 
    
    Can you tell me about your family?
  
  
  • 
    
    Where have you studied English?
  
  
  • 
    
    What subjects did you like to study in your last school?
  
  
  • 
    
    Ask a friend if you can borrow a book.
  
  
  • 
    
    Ask a teacher to repeat the directions for doing homework.
  
  
  • 
    
    Describe what you did last weekend.
  
  
  • 
    
    Tell me about the kinds of movies you like.
  
  
  • 
    
    What is your favorite class and why?
  
  
  • 
    
    Ask a teacher how to solve a math problem.
  
  
  
  

  To score the interview, teachers may use the following scoring rubric.

  
  
  
  

INDICATORS FOR SCORING INTERVIEW

Scores	Indicators
8 - 9	Answers questions very confidently, loudly, fluently with acceptable pronunciation and naturally, and uses appropriate non-verbal language (gestures and mimics) to strengthen messages. All the teacher's questions are answered accurately.
6 - 7	Answers questions not so confidently, loudly fluently and naturally with some unacceptable pronunciation, yet little bit nervous and asks for confirmation. Almost all teachers' questions are answered accurately.
4 - 5	Does not answer confidently, loudly, fluently and naturally, with a lot of unacceptable pronunciation and sometimes asks for confirmation. The answers do not really answer the questions.
2 - 3	Does not answer questions confidently and fluently, voice is hardly heard, most pronunciation is unacceptable. The answers absolutely do not answer the questions.
0 - 1	The participant does not answer the questions or answers questions with no understanding at all.

• 
  
  Short-answer Items
  
  
  

  Short-answer tests combine some of the virtues of both multiple-choice and composition tests: the problems are short and highly structured, yet they provide the examinee with the opportunity to compose his own answers. As commonly used in language testing, short-answer items require the examine either to complete a sentence or to compose one of his own according to very specific directions.

  
  

  Directions – complete each sentence by writing an appropriate form of the verb that is given in parentheses.

  
  

  I wish I __________ (have) a new car.

  
  

• 
  
  Listening Comprehension Test
  
  
  

  There are some forms of Listening Comprehension Test.

  
  

  a. Using pictures.

  
  

  The students are facilitated with a set of picture. The teacher plays the recording and the students choose the picture as mentioned in the tape.

  
  

  Direction:

  
  

  Listen and circle what Alex like. Circle the right pictures.

  
  

  b. True-false item

  
  

  Direction:

  
  

  Listen the recording and write T for True and F for False.

  
  

  1. ---------- Alex's family moved here last month.

  
  

  2. ---------- Alex's mom teacher drums.

  
  

  3. ---------- Alex likes the drums more than the piano.

  
  

  4. ---------- Alex likes math.

  
  

  c. Multiple choice item

  
  

  Direction:

  
  

  Choose the best word or phrase to complete each sentence.

  
  

  Alex is introducing himself to … .

  
  

  a. his teacher

  
  

  b. Jenny

  
  

  c. all the kids in class

  
  

  d. Alice

  
  

          (Taken from Listening Success by Garret Byrne. 2009:12)

  
  

CONCLUSION

This article has given some alternatives of assessment besides the standardized tests usually administered by the government. These alternatives are hoped to encourage the teachers to give various kinds of assessment to meet the need of ELL students, especially non-threatening informal techniques. However, there are still lots of alternatives which are not presented here. Brown and Hudson in Shabaan (2005: 39) point out that performance assessments are relatively difficult to produce and relatively time-consuming to administer. Reliability may be problematic because of rather inconsistencies, limited number of observations, (and) subjectivity in the scoring process. For example, when a student is interviewed and the teacher likes the way the students behave, the pronunciation is adequate, the teacher then tends to ignore other aspects the students may have, like the fluency, grammar and the word choice. So, to limit the constraints of the alternative tests presented, scoring rubric is used. Using the rubric, the teacher has guidelines of scoring the students. The rubric also helps the teacher to keep consistency in giving the score.

For younger students, sometimes they need to memorize a dialogue. Although this method contradicts with the contextual teaching and learning, it proves that the students find self- confidence when they are able to use English in relatively fluent with proper pronunciation. However, this method should be limited before they are brought to more communicative assessment.

Many of the assessment techniques discussed in this article can be integrated into daily classroom activities and give a comprehensive picture of the students' abilities, progress and achievement. Unlike traditional tests that only provide a numerical description of students, these techniques of alternative assessment can document a story for the student--- and what is the ultimate goal of evaluation but to give us the knowledge to be able to reflect upon, discuss, and assist a student's journey in achieving language skills.

REFERENCES

Byrne, G. 2009. Listening Success with Dictation. Compass Publishing: http://www.compasspub.com.

Gomez, L, E. 1998. Portfolio Assessment and English Language Learner: An Annotated Bibliography. Washington DD: The Education Alliance, LAB at Brown University.

Hakuta, Kenji., Jacks, L,L. 2009. Guidelines for the Assessment of English Language Learners. Stamford: Educational Testing Service (ETS) 10641.

Harris, DP. 1969. Testing English as a Second Language. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Lyons, C. Bolton, S. and Gates, S. 2003. Developing an English Proficiency Test for Japan Secondary Students. Assessment Practices. Burton J, series editor. Maryland: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)

Pierce, L, V and O'Malley, M.J. 1996. Authentic Assessment for English Language. United States of America: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc.

Shaaban, K. 2005. Assessment of Young Learners. Forum English Teaching. Volume

41. November. Washington DC: The United States Department of State

for teacher