‫1‬‫78- 68‬

‫)‬ ‫12900458 رشته وگرايش:آموزش زبان انگلیسي‬ ‫د انشكده: ادبیا ت و علوم انساني‬

‫(‬

‫1‬

‫شماره دانشجويي:‬

‫دانشجو:سید حمید رضا علیکی‬

‫گروه: زبان و ادبیات انگلیسي‬ ‫شبانه‬ ‫دوره : روزانه‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي/تخصص:‬ ‫استاد راهنما(1): دکتر هوشنگ خوش سیما‬ ‫از:‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي/تخصص‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي/تخصص :‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي/تخصص‬ ‫استاد راهنما(2):‬ ‫استاد مشاور(1)‬ ‫استاد مشاور(2) :‬
‫2‬

‫از:‬ ‫از:‬ ‫از:‬

‫بررسي تاثیر روشهای سنجش تناوبی بر میزان کار آیی دانش آموزان دبیرستانی‬

‫الف- عنوان به فارسي:‬ ‫ب- عنوان به انگلیسي‬

‫‪The effect of alternative assessment methods on the proficiency of high school students‬‬

‫ج- كلید واژه به انگلیسي:‬
‫‪assessment; alternative assessment ; portfolio; performance assessment‬‬

‫نیمه تجربي(نیمه عملي)‬

‫تجربي(عملي)‬

‫د- نوع كار تحقیقاتي: نظري‬

‫هـ - توضیح مختصر مسأله، فرضیات و هدف از اجرا:‬

‫‪Introduction‬‬
‫‪One of the most challenging tasks for language instructors is finding effective ways to determine what and‬‬

how much their students are actually learning. Instructors need to think carefully about what kinds of knowledge their tests allow students to demonstrate. Language testing, generally associated with formal assessment procedures such as tests and examinations carried out at specified times and serving a variety of purposes )i.e. diagnostic, achievement, progress, etc.(, is a vital component of instructional language programmes throughout the world. While this type of assessment is a mainstay of educational programmes )Butterfield et al., 1999(, educators and critics from various backgrounds have raised a number of concerns about its usefulness as the primary measure of student achievements. these concerns lead them to alternative assessment. What is alternative assessment )1 Definitions There is no single definition of ‘alternative assessment’ in the relevant literature. For some educators, alternative assessment is a term adopted to contrast with standardised assessment, e.g. professionallyprepared objective tests consisting mostly of multiple choice items especially in the US tradition )HuertaMacias, 1995(. Others look at alternative assessment in more general terms. For instance, Hamayan )1995( sees that alternative assessment “refers to procedures and techniques which can be used within the context of instruction and can be easily incorporated into the daily activities of the school or classroom” )ibid:213(. To this Smith )1999( adds that “[a]lternative assessment might take place outside the classroom or even the institution at various points in time, and the subjects being tested may be asked to present their knowledge in )various ways” )ibid:703 )Kohonen )1997( makes the point that alternative assessment )the author uses the term authentic assessment emphasizes the communicative meaningfulness of evaluation and the commitment to measure that which we value in education. It uses such forms of assessment that reflect student learning, achievement, motivation and attitudes on instructionally-relevant classroom activities . Its results can be used to improve instruction, .)based on the knowledge of learner progress )ibid:13 :In a more recent publication, Alderson and Banerjee )2001( provide the following definition Alternative assessment’ is usually taken to mean assessment procedures which are less formal than’ traditional testing, which are gathered over a period of time rather than being taken at one point in time, which are usually formative rather than summative in function, are often low-stakes in terms of )consequences, and are claimed to have beneficial washback effects )ibid: 228 Benefits of alternative assessment .2 :Researchers and practitioners in the field believe that alternative assessment can a. Evaluate the process and product of learning as well as other important learning behaviours It is stressed that because most alternative assessment is ongoing in nature, the picture that emerges about the learner and his or her language proficiency also reflects the developmental processes that take place in language learning over time. Thus, through alternative assessment, it is possible to focus on both the process ,and the product of language learning )Belanoff & Dickson, 1991; Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Hamayan .)Wiggins, 1989a, 1989b ;1995 Other than the above belief, educationists also claim that through alternative assessment it is possible to collect information about some of the factors that influence achievement found in the students’ linguistic, cultural, familial or educational backgrounds, e.g. their prior educational experiences, their family education, etc. which can be especially important when planning and evaluating the effectiveness of .)instruction )Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Kohonen, 1997; O’ Malley and Valdez Pierce, 1996 Furthermore, Genesee and Upshur )1996( stress that alternative assessment methods can also gather information about those factors that affect student achievement which, according to the authors, should be .seen as an integral part of students’ assessment, e.g learning strategies )e.g. whether the student takes risks, improvises, focuses on meaning/form, self-orrects, • )uses first language strategies )affective and personality styles )e.g. whether the student is enthusiastic, self-reliant, resourceful, passive • students’ work habits )e.g. whether the student is punctual, follows instructions well, meets goals, prepares • )for class homework, seeks assistance when needed students’ social behaviour )e.g. whether the student works cooperatively, socialises with peers, participates •

)in class discussion reactions to the course )e.g. student participates actively in class activities, requires extra guidance, shows • )initiative b. Evaluate and monitor instruction Alternative assessment is also believed to provide a strong link between instruction and assessment by forming part of a feedback loop that allows classroom teachers to monitor and modify instruction continually .in response to results of student assessment c. Produce meaningful results to a variety of stakeholders It is also believed that information obtained from alternative methods of assessment can be much more useful and informative compared to test scores and easy to interpret and understand )Alderson and Banerjee, 2001; Clapham, 2000(. Hamayan )1995( makes the point that this represents a tremendous benefit not only for teachers but other ‘clients’ of assessment, e.g. students, parents and administrators. In particular she sees that alternative assessment methods allow students to “see their own accomplishments in terms that they can understand and,consequently, it allows them to assume responsibility for their learning” )ibid: 215( while parents are offered a clear insight into what their children are doing in school. Teachers are also provided with “data on their students and their classroom for educational decisionmaking….” )ibid: 215(. Alternative assessment also gives them the opportunity to chronicle the success of the curriculum and can present them with a framework for organising students’ work. Even administrators can benefit from alternative assessment. According to Hamayan, “administrators, who are typically least convinced of the advantages of alternative assessment, can benefit from the clear information about student and teacher attainment over time” )1995: 215(. d. Relate to cognitive psychology and related fields Furthermore, alternative assessment is also said to be in line with views expressed in cognitive psychology, which suggest that learning is not linear, but proceeds in many directions at once and at an uneven pace. Under this perspective, as Dietel et al.)1991:4( argue, students should be given the opportunity to use the strategies they acquired at the right time and in the right way so as to apply them for the realization of particular tasks. They also stress that alternative assessment techniques allow learners plenty of time to ‘generate’ rather than ‘choose’ a response: after recentlyacquired knowledge is brought to the forefront of their minds, the higher-order thinking skills of synthesis and analysis are required for the learners when participating in alternative assessment activities, which they can later reconsider by critically working together with the teacher or other learners in sharing perceptions. e. Represent a collaborative approach to assessment Alternative assessment also represents a collaborative approach to assessment that enables teachers and students to interact in the teaching/learning process )Barootchi & Keshvarz, 2002(. Thus, in the context of alternative assessment, collaborative work is reinforced among students and/or between students and teachers within a relaxed classroom atmosphere. f. Support students’ psychologically In addition to the above, alternative assessment is said to enhance learners’ self-esteem and feelings of efficacy as a growing person. Furthermore, it is believed that alternative assessment can foster intrinsic learning motivation and learner involvement )Broadfoot, 1986, 2003; Gardner, 1993; Gottlieb, 1995; Kohonen, 1997; Leach et al., 1998; Mortimer, 1998; Wiggins, 1993; Wolf et al., 1991; inter alia(. g. Promote autonomous and self-directed learning It has also been argued that participating in alternative assessment can assist learners in becoming skilled judges of their own strengths and weaknesses and in setting realistic goals for themselves which can develop their capacity to become self-directed and autonomous learners )by acquiring the necessary metacognitive knowledge and strategies, language learning strategies and cognitive styles( and thus develop lifelong learning skills )Brindley, 2001; Council of Europe, 2001; Kohonen 1999, 2000; Leites & Butureira, 2000; Lemos, 1999; Luoma and Tarnanen, 2003; inter alia(. h. Provide new roles for teachers With regard to the role of teachers within the alternative assessment paradigm, Genesee )2001( points out that “[t]hese new evaluation approaches recognise classroom teachers as reflective, self-motivated professionals” )ibid:150( while Kohonen )1997( points that alternative assessment allows teachers more

space for developing criteria )ibid:14( and strengthens “the importance of the teacher’s professional judgement and commitment to enhancing student learning” )ibid:13(. 3) Alternative Methods of Assessment The following list summarises some of the most commonly used types or methods of alternative assessment )based on Brown, 1998; Cohen, 1994; Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Genesee and Upshur 1996; Hamayan, 1995; Ioannou-Georgiou and Pavlou, 2003; Newman and Smolen, 1993; O’Malley and Valdez Pierce 1996; Short, 1993(: • Conferences • Debates • Demonstrations • Diaries/Journals • Dramatizations • Exhibitions • Games • Observations • Peer-assessment • Portfolios • Projects • Self-assessment • Story retelling • Think-alouds It is important to note here, following Hamayan’s suggestion )1995:218( that the above methods of assessment need to be distinguished from tools or ways which educators can use to record alternative assessment information. The author cites the following as the most frequent ways of recording alternative assessment: • Anecdotal records • Checklists • Learner profiles • Progress cards • Questionnaires • Rating Scales )for a different classification of methods of alternative assessment, see also Herman et al., 1992; Navarrete et al., 1990 and Short, 1993(.

Conclusion
The alternative assessment paradigm, as discussed in the present paper, is seen to embody a different concept of assessment, i.e. assessment as an essential part of the learning process. However, further theoretical and empirical work needs to be done to examine alternative assessment practices in depth. For example, we need to reconceptualise alternative assessment and its relationship to standardised testing, to understand how the aspects of alternative assessment are actually accomplished in classroom interaction and to develop appropriate theory and research methods in the study of this highly complex and dynamic teaching-learning-assessing interface before any definite conclusions about its positive effects on teaching and learning are drawn. Therefore, the present paper makes an urgent appeal to future researchers with an interest in the area to conduct empirical research in this exciting field within foreign/second language settings. Research Questions This study tries to answer the following questions: 1- Is it possible to enhance students’ achievement utilizing alternative assessment techniques?

2- In which skill alternative assessment techniques work better? 3- Is there any relationship between alternative assessment and students’ proficiency? 4- Is there any relationship between alternative assessment and students’ motivation?

Research Hypothesis Alternative assessment techniques significantly enhance students’ proficiency in learning.1 English Alternative assessment techniques significantly enhance students’ motivation.2 There is a positive correlation between the performances of subjects and alternative .3 assessment Methods A) Participants 60 students from Bakharz ) a city in Razavi Khorasan ( high schools at the second grade are selected . 30 of them are assessed traditionally and the other 30 students are assessed by alternative methods and then they will be examined according their performances at the end of term. 3

:Bibliography
Alderson, J. C. and Banerjee, J. 2001. Language testing and assessment )Part 1(.Language Teaching . Alderson, J. C. and Wall, D. 1993. Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics Archbald, D. A. 1991. Authentic assessment: an introduction to a neo-behavioural approach to classroom assessment. School Psychology Quarterly Aschbacher, P. R. 1991. Performance assessment: State activity, interest and concerns. Applied Measurement in Education Bachman, L. F. 2000. Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that we count counts. Language Testing 17, 1: 1-42. Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S. 1996. Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bailey, K. M. 1999. Washback in Language Testing. TOEFL Monograph Series MS-15. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Balliro, L. 1993. What kind of alternative? Examining alternative assessment. TESOL Quarterly Barootchi, N. and Keshavarz, M. H. 2002. Assessment of achievement through portfolio and teacher-made tests. Educational Research Belanoff, P. and Dickson, M. eds. 1991. Portfolios: Process and Product. Portmouth, NH: Boyton/Cook. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 1998. Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: principles, policy and practice Black, P. J. 1993. Formative and summative assessment by teachers. Studies in Science Education Breen, M., Baratt-Pugh, C., Derewianka, B., House, H., Hudson, C., Lumley T. and Roth, M. 1997. Profiling ESL children. Volume 1: Key issues and findings. Canberra; Department of Employment, education, Training and Youth Affairs. Brindley, G. 1998. Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: A review of

the issues. Language Testing. Brindley, G. 2001. Outcomes-based assessment in practice: some examples and emerging insights. Language Testing Broadfoot, P. M. ed. 1986. Profiles and records of achievement. London: Holt,Rinehart and Wilson. Broadfoot, P. M. 2003. Dark Alleys and Blind Bends: Testing the Language of Learning. Paper presented over the 25th Language Testing Research Colloquium, 22-25 July, University of Reading. Brown, J. B. ed. 1998. New Ways of Classroom Assessment. USA: TESOL. Brown, J. B. and Hudson, T. 1998a. The alternatives in language assessment’ TESOL Quarterly 32, 4:653-675. Brown, J. B. and Hudson, T. 1998b. The alternatives in language assessment: Advantages and Disadvantages. University of Hawai’i Working Papers in ESL, Bruton, A. 1991. Testing round the world: continuous assessment in Spanish State Schools. Language Testing Update, Butterfield, S., Williams, A. and Marr, A. 1999. Talking about Assessment: mentor student dialogues about pupil assessment in initial teacher training. Assessment in Education. Carbery, S. 1999. Fundamentals of on-going assessment. Shiken: JALT Testing &Evaluation SIG Newsletter Clapham, C. 2000. Assessment and Testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics Clark, S. and Gipps, C. 2000. The role of teachers in teacher assessment in England 1996-1998. Evaluation and Research in Education Cohen, A. D. 1994. Assessing language ability in the classroom. 2nd edition. Boston,MA: Heinle and Heinle. Council of Europe 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crooks, T. J. 1988. The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research Cumming, J. J. and Maxwell, G. S. 1999. Contextualising Authentic Assessment’Assessment in Education Darling-Hammond, L. 1994. Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review Elliott, S. 1991. Authentic assessment: an introduction to a neobehavioral approach to classroom assessment. School Psychology Quarterly Genesee, F. 2001. Evaluation. In The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, eds. T. Carter and D. Nunan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Genesee, F. and Hamayan, E.1994. Classroom-based assessment. In Educating Second Language Children. eds. F. Genesee Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Genesee, F. and Upshur, J. 1996. Classroom-based Evaluation in Second Language Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gipps, C. and Stobbart, G. 2003. Alternative Assessment. In International Handbook of Educational Evaluation, eds. T. Kellaghan, D. L. Stufflebeam and L. A.Wingate. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gipps, C. V. 1994. Beyond Testing: towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press. Glover, P. and Thomas, R. 1999. Coming to grips with continuous assessment. Assessment in Education Gottlieb, M. 1995. Nurturing student learning through portfolios. TESOL Journal Haladyna, T. M., Nolen, S. B. and Haas, N. S. 1991. Raising standardized achievement tests scores and the origins of test score pollution. Educational Research Hamayan, E. V. 1995. Approaches to Alternative Assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics Hamp-Lyons, L. 1996. Applying ethical standards to portfolio assessments in writing in English as a second language. In Performance Testing, Cognition and Assessment, eds. M. Milanovic and N. Saville. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hamp-Lyons, L. 1997. Washback, impact and validity: ethical concerns. Language Testing, Hamp-Lyons, L. 1998. Ethical Test Preparation Practice: The Case of the TOEFL.TESOL QUARTERLY )Forum Commentary( Hamp-Lyons, L. and Condon W. 2000. Assessing the Portfolio. New Jersey: Hampton Press Inc.Cresskill. Hancock, C. R. 1994. Glossary of Selected Terms. In Teaching, Testing and Assessment: Making the Connection, ed. C. R. Hancock .Lincolnwood, Illinois, USA:National Textbook Company.

Harlen, W. and Deakin-Crick, R. 2002. A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students’ motivation for learning )EPPI- CentreReview, version 1.1( Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education. Harlen, W. and Deakin-Crick, R. 2003. Testing and motivation for learning.Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. Hart, D. 1994. Authentic assessment: a handbook for educators. New York: Addison-Wesley. Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R. and Winters, L. 1992. A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Herman, J. L. and Golan, S. 1993. The effects of standardized testing on teaching and schools. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices. Herman, J. and Winters, L. 1994. Portfolio research: a slim collection. Educational Leadership Hilke, R. and Wadden, P.1997. The TOEFL and its Imitators: Analyzing the TOEFL and Evaluating TOEFLprep texts. RELC Journal Huerta-Macias, A. 1995. Alternative assessment: responses to commonly asked questions. TESOL Journal Ioannou-Georgiou, S. and Pavlou, P. 2003. Assessing Young Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Johnstone, P., Guice, S., Baker, K., Malone, J. and Michelson, N. 1995. Assessment of teaching and learning in literature-based classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education . Lynch, B. 2001. Rethinking assessment from a critical perspective. Language Testing Madaus, G. F. 1988. The influence of Testing on the Curriculum. In Critical Issues in Curriculum: 87th Yearbook for the National Society for the Study of Education, ed.L. N. Tanner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pp. 83-121. Martin-Kniep, G. O. 2000. Standards, feedback, and diversified assessment: addressing equity issues at the classroom level. Reading & Writing Quarterly Mortimer, J. 1998. Motivating Student Learning through Facilitating Independence: Self and Peer Assessment of Reflective Practice – An Action Research Project. In Motivating Students, eds. S. Brown, S. Armstrong and G. Thompson. England: Kogan Page. Newman, F., Brandt, R. and Wiggins, G. 1998. An exchange of views on ‘semantics, psychometrics, and assessment reform: a close look at “authentic” assessments. Educational Researcher O’Malley, M. and Valdez Pierce, L. 1996. Authentic assessment for English language learners. New York: Addison-Wesley. Puhl, C. A. 1997. Develop, Not Judge: Continuous Assessment in the ESL Classroom.English Teaching Forum 35, 2:2-9. Shohamy, E. 1998. Alternative assessment in language testing: applying a Multiplism approach. In Testing and Evaluation in Second Language Education, eds. Short, D. J. 1993. Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly Smith, K. 1999. Language Testing: Alternative Methods. In Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics, ed. B. Spolsky. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Soodak, L. C. 2000. Performance assesement: exploring issues of equity and fairness.Reading and Writing Quarterly Van Daalen, M. 1999. Test Usefulness in Alternative Assessment. Dialog on Language Instruction 1 Vernon, P. E. 1956. The Measurement of Abilities )2nd edition(. London: University of London Press. Wall, D. 1996. Introducing new tests into traditional systems: insights from general education and from innovation theory. Language Testing Wiggins, G. 1989a. A true test: Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan Wiggins, G. 1989b. Teaching to the )authentic( test. Educational Leadership 4 Wiggins, G. 1993. Assessing student performance. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Wiggins, G. 1994. Toward more authentic assessment of language performances. In Worthen, B. R 1993. Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan Zeidner, M. 1996. How do high school and college students cope with test situations? British Journal of Educational Psychology .

‫4‬

‫هزينـه انجام پايان نامـه هاي كارشناسـي ارشـد در هـر سـال توسـط شوراي تحصـیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه تعییـن و توسـط‬ ‫دانشكده ها قابل پرداخت خواهد بود. در صورتي كه بخشي از هزينه انجام پايان نامه از محلهاي ديگر تأمین مي شود،‬ ‫ذكر نام سازمان، مبلغ و مشخصه اي از قرارداد، الزامي است.‬ ‫مدت انجام پايان نامه كارشناسي ارشد يك سال تحصیلي است. تمديد اين زمان، منوط به موافقت شوراي تحصیلت‬ ‫تكمیلي دانشكده حسب مقررات دانشگاه است.‬ ‫امضاي استاد(ان) مشاور‬ ‫تاريخ‬ ‫امضاي استاد(ان) راهنما‬ ‫تاريخ‬ ‫امضاي دانشجو‬ ‫تاريخ‬

‫5‬

‫با انجام پايان نامه آقاي/خانم‬ ‫امضاي مدير گروه-‬ ‫تاريخ‬ ‫با انجام پايان نامه نامبرده موافقت كرد.‬

‫در جلسه تحصیلت تكمیلي مورخ‬

‫ گروه‬‫موافقت كرد.‬

‫در جلسه تحصیلت تكمیلي مورخ‬

‫- دانشكده‬

‫امضاي رئیس دانشكده يا مدير تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشكده- تاريخ‬ ‫باانجام پايان نامه نامبرده را تصويب كرد..‬ ‫امضاي مدير تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه- تاريخ‬ ‫در دفتر تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه ثبت شد.‬ ‫امضاي كارشناس تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه-تاريخ‬ ‫ پايان نامه با شماره‬‫- شوراي تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه در جلسه مورخ‬