Students perception towads formative assessment in selected english prounciation classes at ho chi minh city industry and trade college

The results showed the students‟ proper awareness of formative assessment in general and their positive perception towards the application of formative assessment tasks.. And so as to dr

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY– HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT IN SELECTED ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION CLASSES AT HO CHI MINH CITY

INDUSTRY AND TRADE COLLEGE

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature

in Partial Fulfillment of the Master’s Degree in TESOL

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY– HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT IN SELECTED ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION CLASSES AT HO CHI MINH CITY INDUSTRY AND TRADE COLLEGE

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature

in Partial Fulfillment of the Master‟s Degree in TESOL

Beside my supervisor, I would like to thank all of my teachers at Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities for their interesting and informative lectures thoughout my Master course in TESOL 2014

My sincere thanks also go to all of my friends in this Master course Especially, I thank Ms Nguyễn Mỹ Khánh for being my closest friend, Ms Nguyễn Đặng Phương Thảo for being a great supporter at my final stage of completing the thesis, and Mr Nguyễn Minh Giang for being a wonderful monitor

of our class of TESOL 2014 A

I am aslo profoundly grateful to my colleagues and students at the Faculty

of Foreign Languages at Ho Chi Minh City Industry and Trade College Their huge support and participation played a major role in the completion of my study

Last but not least, I must express my very heartfelt gratitude to my parents and my husband for providing me with unconditional love, unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my years of study and through the process

of researching and writing this thesis This accomplishment would not have been possible without them

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY

I hereby certify that this thesis entitled

“STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT IN SELECTED ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION CLASSES AT HO CHI MINH

CITY INDUSTRY AND TRADE COLLEGE”

is my own work

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma

in any other institution

Ho Chi Minh City, June 2018

NGUYEN NGOC CHAU

RETENTION OF USE

I hereby state that I, Nguyen Ngoc Chau, being the candidate for the degree

of Master in TESOL, accept the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Master‟s Thesis deposited in the Library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the original of my thesis deposited

in the Library should be accessible for the purpose of study and research in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan

or reproduction of the theses

Ho Chi Minh City, June 2018

NGUYEN NGOC CHAU

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

Acknowledgements i

Statement of originality ii

Retention of use iii

Table of contents iv

List of tables viii

List of figures x

Abstract xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background to the study 1

1.2 Aims of the study 4

1.3 Research questions 4

1.4 Significance of the study 4

1.5 Organization of the study 5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Assessment in teaching and learning 6

2.2 Formative assessment 7

2.2.1 Definition of formative assessment 7

2.2.2 Teachers and students‟ roles in formative assessment 8

2.2.3.1 Teachers‟ role in formative assessment 8

2.2.3.2 Students‟ role in formative assessment 10

2.2.3 Timing and places of formative assessment 11

2.2.4 Purpose of formative assessment 12

2.2.5 Formative assessment tasks 13

2.2.4.1 Sharing success criteria 16

2.2.4.2 Classroom questioning 17

2.2.4.3 Teacher‟s feedback 18

2.2.4.4 Peer assessment 22

2.2.4.5 Self-assessment 23

2.2.4.6 Tests 24

2.3 Formative assessment in teaching and learning pronunciation 25

2.4 Conceptual framework 28

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 31

3.1 Research design 31

3.2 Context of the study 31

3.3 Participants 32

3.4 Research tools 32

3.4.1 Treatment 33

3.4.1.1 Students‟ recordings 34

3.4.1.2 Teacher‟s feedback 34

3.4.1.3 Peer-assessment 36

3.4.1.4 Students‟ self-assessment 37

3.4.2 Teaching diary 38

3.4.3 Questionnaire to students 38

3.4.4 Interview to students 39

3.4.5 Summary of research tools 40

3.5 Data collection procedure 41

3.6 Data analysis procedure 42

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 44

4.1 Analysis of data 44

4.1.1 Analysis of students‟ responses to the questionnaire 44

4.1.1.1 Students‟ perception on who to conduct formative assessment 44

4.1.1.2 Students‟ perception on when to conduct formative assessment 46

4.1.1.3 Students‟ perception on where to conduct formative assessment 47

4.1.1.4 Students‟ perception on why to conduct formative assessment 48

4.1.1.5 Students‟ perception on teacher‟s feedback 50

4.1.1.6 Students‟ perception on peer-assessment 54

4.1.1.7 Students‟ perception on self-assessment 56

4.1.1.8 Students‟ ranking of the three formative assessment tasks 59

4.1.2 Analysis of student‟s responses to the interview 60

4.1.2.1 Students‟ opinions about teacher‟s feedback 60

4.1.2.2 Students‟ opinions about peer-assessment 62

4.1.2.3 Students‟ opinions about self-assessment 66

4.1.2.4 Students‟ suggestions for the three formative assessment tasks 69

4.1.2.5 Students‟ opinions about the pronunciation course 70

4.1.3 Analysis of teaching diary 72

4.1.3.1 Strengths 72

4.1.3.2 Weaknesses 75

4.2 Discussion of results 78

4.3 Summary of major findings 84

4.3.1 Research question 1 84

4.3.2 Research question 2 86

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 90

5.1 Conclusion 90

5.2 Suggestions 91

5.2.1 Suggestions for the administrations of HITC 92

5.2.2 Suggestions for the teachers of English pronunciation at HITC 93

5.2.2.1 Suggestions on the general application of formative assessment in a pronunciation course 93

5.2.2.2 Suggestions on the application of teacher‟s feedback 95

5.2.2.3 Suggestions on the application of peer-assessment 96

5.2.2.4 Suggestions on the application of self-assessment 98

5.3 Limitation of the study 102

5.4 Recommendation for further study 103

REFERENCES 104

APPENDICES 109

APPENDIX 1: Script for students‟ recordings 110

APPENDIX 2: Minimal pairs (Vowels) 111

APPENDIX 3: Teacher‟s feedback form 112

APPENDIX 4: Peer-assessment form 113

APPENDIX 5: Self-assessment form 114

APPENDIX 6: Script for in-class peer-assessment (Vowels) 115

APPENDIX 7: Teaching diary form 117

APPENDIX 8: Questionnaire to students 118

APPENDIX 9: Interview questions 122

APPENDIX 10: Transcription of students‟ responses in the interviews 123

APPENDIX 11: Teaching diary 142

LIST OF TABLES

Pages

Table 2.1 William and Thompson's formative assessment model (2007) 14

Table 2.2 Question Types (Harlen, 2006) 18

Table 3.1 The participants‟ background information 32

Table 3.2 Example of written feedback 36

Table 3.3 Summary of research tools 41

Table 4.1 Students‟ questionnaire responses on who to conduct formative assessment 45

Table 4.2 Students‟ questionnaire responses on when to conduct formative assessment 46

Table 4.3 Students‟ questionnaire responses on where to conduct formative assessment 47

Table 4.4 Students‟ questionnaire responses on why to conduct formative assessment 49

Table 4.5 Students‟ questionnaire responses on teacher‟s feedback 51

Table 4.6 Students‟ questionnaire responses on peer-assessment 54

Table 4.7 Students‟ questionnaire responses on self-assessment 57

Table 4.8 Students‟ ranking of the three formative assessment tasks 59

Table 4.9 Students‟ interview responses on what they liked about teacher‟s feedback 60

Table 4.10 Students‟ interview responses on what they disliked about teacher‟s feedback 61

Table 4.11 Students‟ interview responses on what they liked about peer-assessment 63

Table 4.12 Students‟ interview responses on what they disliked about peer-assessment 65

Table 4.13 Students‟ interview responses on what they liked about self-assessment 67 Table 4.14 Students‟ interview responses on what they disliked about self-assessment 68

Table 4.15 Students‟ interview responses on the suggestions for the three

formative assessment tasks 69Table 4.16 Students‟ interview responses on this pronunciation course 71Table 4.17 Major findings of research question 2 89Table 5.1 Summary of suggestions for teachers to apply formative assessment in English pronunciation classes 102

LIST OF FIGURES

Pages

Figure 2.1 Extract of Hattie and Timperley's feedback model (2007) 21 Figure 2.2 Conceptual framework of the study 28 Figure 3.1 Data collection procedure 41 Figure 4.1 Summary of students‟ general perception towards formative

assessment in a pronunciation course 85

ABSTRACT

Through the years, formative assessment has been the subject of many researches in the field of language teaching and learning Most of these studies has proved the power of formative assessment in enhancing students‟ language proficiency Focusing on the same subject but with a new perspective, this research aimed at discovering the students‟ perception towards formative assessment conducted in the pronunciation classes at Ho Chi Minh City Industry and Trade College (HITC) A total of 118 college freshmen participating in the study and its experimental pronunciation course which applied the three types of formative assessment tasks, i.e teacher‟s feedback, peer-assessment, and self-assessment Various research instruments including questionnaire, interview, and teaching diary were used to collect the data for this research The results showed the students‟ proper awareness of formative assessment in general and their positive perception towards the application of formative assessment tasks However, despite the advantages, this application was still admitted to contain some disadvantages This revelation led to some suggestions which were made at the end of the research

Key words: students‟ perception, formative assessment, teacher‟s feedback,

peer-assessment, self-assessment

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

Pronunciation has long been receiving little attention since linguists made their first attemtps at studying the subject of language teaching Pronunciation is always considered merely as a supplementary component of speaking Even as one

of the components of speaking skills, it is not as popular and well understood by language teachers as grammar and vocabulary That is why a course for pronunciation does not earn a certain place in a lot of language curriculums A lot

of curriculum developers choose either to incorporate pronunciation into speaking courses or to entirely allow their teachers to make the decision In this case, it is the teachers who will decide whether they want pronunciation in their syllabus or not As teachers do not have much time for their speaking courses and some of them, especially non-native teachers, find it hard to teach pronunciation, they tend

to neglect this part of language or just give it little attention In their study, Purcell and Suter (1980) also depreciated teachers‟ instructions in pronunciation by stating that, “teachers and classrooms seem to have had remarkably little to do with how well our students pronounce English” Since not much attention is paid to pronunciation itself, not much effort is put into finding how to assess it However,

as Celce-Murcia, Brinton and Goodwin (1996) asserted in their book that if nonnative speakers can not catch up with the “threshold level” of pronunciation, they will encounter many “oral communication problems” despite “how excellent and extensive their control of English grammar and vocabulary might be” Pronunciation should then be reserved a secured place in language curriculums and

be looked at carefully by language teachers And when it is taught, it has to be assessed Assessment for pronunciation should also be of great interest to researchers in the field of language teaching and learning

Assessment is not a new topic in educational research since there have been many studies around this issue However, the majority of these studies have their focus on one kind of assessment which is summative assessment rather than the other one which is formative assessment Lately, there tends to be a change in the focus of educational studies from being only on summative assessment to a wider approach to assessments including formative assessment This tendency of research has not only examined the application of formative assessment in classrooms but also indentified the effectiveness of formative assessment on guiding teachers to take their next moves in teaching

Many researchers consider formative assessment as one of the most effective ways to raise students‟ achievement in classrooms (Black & Wiliam, 1998) And in tertiary education in Vietnam, formative assessment is generally acknowledged and applied in classrooms However, its importance and value in students‟ learning are not well understood This is also true in the field of English teaching and learning where only a few hours of instructions are allowed per week for the coverage of a large number of required contents and units in the course As

a result, teachers will find formative assessment time-consuming and distracting to their normal practices in the classrooms In the case of students, many of them tend

to focus on marks and results rather than the quality of their learning Therefore, they aim at achieving good marks rather than seriously look at their learning process These factors lead to the lack of attention given to the appropriate application of formative assessment in the field of English teaching and learning

In the English major programs of most universities and colleges in Vietnam, the mainly used method of assessment for pronunciation has been summative assessment in which the students are given a main test at the end of the course During the teaching and learning process, teachers tend to stick on the traditional way of giving instruction and hardly use various activities to promote students‟ learning If there is any kind of formative assessment in a pronunciation classroom, there might only be mid-term tests which are given to students at the middle of the course And the purpose of these mid-term tests is no more than evaluating and

giving marks This is because teachers find it time-consuming to check and make adjustments on students‟ pronunciation, especially with a large-sized class with the normal time allowed of 45 periods which are equivalent to a total of 33.75 hours of classroom instruction Moreover, most of their instruction focuses on pronunciation theory rather than practicing As a result, teachers and researchers tend to overlook the various uses of different formative assessment tasks in pronunciation classes and not many studies seriously look at this issue

In adition to the factors that form the research gap, it is worth noting that most studies on formative assessment have their focus on writing skills, leaving little space for the other skills and areas, including pronunciation With the nature

of a productive skill which has the final product as a tangible piece of writing, writing seems to be one of the easiest skills to apply any kind of formative assessment and adjustment In order to seek for the originality and not to get involved in topics that are widely and well studied before, the researcher chooses pronunciation and how it is assessed to be her main subject of research And so as

to draw teachers and students‟ attention to formative assessment in pronunciation classrooms, a more specific study on different types of formative assessment and students‟ reactions to them is also worth conducting

The current study was conducted at Ho Chi Minh Industry and Trade College (HITC) Since 2015, the Faculty of Foreign Languages at HITC is approved to have its own English major As being involved in a new major, the faculty and the teachers have been facing a lot of difficulties in finding the effective ways and methods to teach their English major students They are also at their beginning to seek for and establish effective syllabus and assessment system for each of the English courses Beside learning the experience from studies in this field, it is also important to carry out some investigations in the specific context of HITC That is why the researcher who is also one of the teachers in the Faculty of Foreign Languages at HITC and is in charge of teaching pronunciation, wants to carry out a study on formative assessment in pronunciation classes in terms of students‟ perceptions

1.2 Aims of the study

From the theoretical and practical reasons which are discussed above, this study therefore aims at:

(1) Finding out the students‟ perception towards formative assessment in

a pronunciation course at HITC

(2) Finding out the students‟ opinions about the application of the three types of formative assessment (teacher‟s feedback, peer-assessment and self-assessment) in the selected pronunciation classes at HITC

1.3 Research questions

In order to investigate the students‟ perception towards formative assessment in pronunciation class at HITC, the following research questions were formulated:

(1) What is the students‟ perception towards formative assessment in a pronunciation course at HITC?

(2) What are the students‟ perception towards the application of the three types of formative assessment (teacher‟s feedback, peer-assessment and self-assessment) in the selected pronunciation classes

at HITC?

1.4 Significance of the study

This study when finished will hopefully be a useful source of information for English teachers at HITC It will provide teachers with new perspectives and insights regarding who, when, where, why, and how to carry out formative assessment in pronunciation class It will also give teachers an opportunity to review, reconsider and improve their current ways of giving formative assessment

in their pronunciation class Moreover, since there are not many studies focusing

on formative assessment in pronunciation class, this study is hoped to be a useful reference for later studies conducted in the same field Last but not least, the study

is believed to enlarge the researcher‟s knowledge and experience, and arouse her

enthusiasm for doing research

1.5 Organization of the study

The study is divided into five chapters Chapter one is the introduction to

the entire study, which covers the background, aims, research questions, and

significance of the study Chapter two reviews the literature, which is concerned

with all the technical terms of the study and its related studies Chapter three

introduces the methodology which the researcher follows for the whole study

Chapter four is the results and discussion which focuses much on the analysis of

the data collected from HITC, the discussion of the results and the findings of the

study Chapter five is the final words to conclude the whole work with the

researchers‟ suggestions and recommendations to help improve the situation

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Assessment in teaching and learning

Traditionally when it comes to assessment in teaching and learning, teachers and students tend to think of a major final exam which usually associates with pressure and anxiety On one hand, students often experience stress and depression after they have several exams within a few days Teachers, on the other hand, also go through some uncomfortable feelings of exhaustion when they have

to think about preparing and marking the exams However, what is described above is testing, not assessment From a general view, Bachman (2004) referred to assessment as “a process of collecting information about something that we are interested in, according to procedures that are systematic and substantially grounded” In teaching and learning, assessment is considered the act of interpreting students‟ performances and results that can be collected through various means According to Dhindsa et al

Still, the definitions above have yet to differentiate between assessment and testing while Brown (2004) stated that assessment is not the same as testing, or it is not always testing Assessment can then be considered “a process of identifying and gathering information about learners, in order to seek ways of addressing needs and means of overcoming barriers to learning” (Mohammad, 2011) With this view, assessment is no longer a mere report of students‟ results, but it also serves as an effective way to promote learning

From this perspective, Black et al (2004) distinguished “assessment for learning” which is “any assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of promoting pupils‟ learning” from the other type

of assessment which is “designed primarily to serve the purposes of accountability,

or of ranking, or of certifying competence” In her book, Keeley (2008) pointed out three common types of assessment which are diagnostic assessment, formative

assessment, and summative assessment She also differentiated these three

assessment types through their purposes of using in which diagnostic assessment

serves the purposes of identifying preconceptions, lines of reasoning, and learning

difficulties; formative assessment is used to inform instruction and provide feedback to students on their learning; and summative assessment is a mean to

measure and document the extent to which students have achieved a learning target Defining a type of assessment though its purposes is one of the effective ways to differentiate it from the others However, in order to capture a closer, clearer and better look of a type of assessment, more aspects should be put under consideration In this study, formative assessment will be defined and differentiated from the other two assessment types via five aspects, i.e (1) who does the assessment; (2) when it is conducted; (3) where it is conducted; (4) why it

is conducted; and (5) how it is conducted

2.2 Formative assessment

2.2.1 Definition of formative assessment

Recently, many reseachers consider formative assessment as important as summative assessment in improving classroom learning and teaching Therefore, more attention has been paid to formative assessment and more studies have been conducted on this subject As a result, many names have been used to refer to this type of assessment such as formative assessment, classroom assessment, learner-centered assessment, ongoing assessment, assessment for learning, alternative assessment In this study, however, only the term formative assessment is used since it is the most used and preferred term by many researchers and educationists

Several different definitions of formative assessment have been given according to the different aspects of this assessment In light of the way to implement formative assessment, Colby-Kelly and Turner (2007) defined formative assessment as “the process of seeking and interpreting evidence for making substantively grounded decisions or judgements about the product of a learning task in order to decide where the learners are in their learning, where they

need to go, and how best to get there.” In terms of the purpose to conduct this assessment, Sadler (1989) referred to formative assessment as the assessment that

is “specifically intended to provide feedback on performance to improve and accelerate learning” Black and William (1998) suggested one of the most complete definition of formative assessment with the specific mention of the parties involved in the assessment process According to them, formative assessment refers to the practice in a classroom where the “evidence about student achievement is elicited, interpreted, and used by teachers, learners, or their peers,

to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely to be better, or better founded, than the decisions they would have taken in the absence of the evidence that was elicited Looney (2005), pointed out the time of applying formative assessment when defined this assessment as the “frequent, interactive assessments of students‟ progress and understanding to identify learning needs and adjust teaching appropriately”

Each of the definition above seems not to be adequate when presented separately but very comprehensive when put together Therefore, by combining all

of the aspects above with the addition of the place to conduct formative assessment, the researcher of this study finally defines formative assessment as

“the assessment frequently carried out by teachers, students or their peers during

an instructional process, a course or a program to serve the purpose of identifying student‟s current situation and making appropriate adjustments to improve their learning”

2.2.2 Teachers and students’ roles in formative assessment

2.2.3.1 Teachers’ role in formative assessment

As stated in the previous section, there tend to be a shift from summative assessment to formative assessment, from the traditional approach to assessment to

a more modern and effective one As a result, the role of teachers in this process also has a change In the classrooms which follow the traditional way of assessment, teachers play the role of the information and knowledge provider as

well as the corrector of misconceptions In the new setting which is formative assessment-centered, the tasks that teachers have to fulfill are more challenging In these classes, according to Black and Harrison (2004), teachers are required to increase the frequency and the effectiveness of their interactions with students on a daily basis so as to enhance students‟ learning This means that it is not enough for teachers to only provide knowledge and correct mistakes Instead, they have to elicit all of students‟ ideas by encouraging them to talk no matter if they are correct or incorrect and then challenge them to think further During this kind of interactions and instructions, teachers are supposed to form appropriate directions

or instructions that have a link between students‟ current ideas and what they have

to achieve enventually In addition, the role of teachers in this type of classroom is

a monitor or a facilitator Teachers now are also responsible for providing students with effective strategies and instruct them how to use these strategies in learning and in assessing their own learning process With this act, students are expected to

be more aware of their learning process and take greater responsibility for their own learning The ability of students to get involved in the process of assesing themselves depends upon whether they are considered as cognitive agents by their teachers who are the ones to take actions to promote their learning It is teachers‟ role to enable their students to be the equal agents with the right and obligation to have a role in the reflection, analysis as well as decision-making about their own learning and what to do next

In short, there is no doubt that teachers can promote students‟ learning through their useful information and instructions Moreover, their good questioning and dialogue techniques contribute a great deal to the significant achievement in formative assessment Therefore, a lot of techniques and activities are initiated and conducted in order to assist teachers in their obtaining, interpretation, and decision on student achievement information However, it is not

a complete understanding towards formative assessment if only teachers‟ role is mentioned since students play an even more important role in formative assessment This brings the reseacher to discuss students‟ role in the next section

2.2.3.2 Students’ role in formative assessment

Up to this point, teachers‟ role and actions in formative assessment have been focused and discussed However, according to Sadler (1989), “The indispensable conditions for improvement are that the student comes to hold a concept of quality roughly similar to that held by the teacher, is able to monitor continuously the quality of what is being produced during the act of production itself, and has a repertoire of alternative moves or strategies from which to draw at any given point” By this, he put a great emphasis on students‟ ability to monitor their own learning It is agreed that this helps in engaging students in their own assessment during the lesson by enabling them to evaluate their learning strategies against some certain learning criteria

In their research, Black and William (1998) considered students as decision makers They stated, “Whatever the procedures by which the assessment message

is generated, it would be a mistake to regard the student as the passive recipient of

a call to action.” Following this perception, Shapiro (1994) pointed out that the role of students is “not to passively receive information, but to actively participate

in the construction of new meaning” A lot of other researchers also confirmed the uses and benefits of students‟ involvement in the process of assessment According

to Stiggins et al (2004), classroom assessment which involves students and focuses on promoting learning can “motivate rather than merely measure students” They also pinpointed the importance of students‟ involvement in enabling themselves to project their future plans and learning goals Students, in a formative assessment-centered classroom, learn to play an active role in the learning and assessment process They recognize that learning cannot be done for them but it has to be done by them They realize that they are also involved in the learning of their peers, not only their own learning They learn by themselves or from the teachers how to use various formative assessment tasks to monitor their own learning as well as assess their current capabilities against certain learning criteria and goals By knowing the learning goals and different types of formative assessment tasks, students are able to keep their learning in the right direction

In conclusion, the issue regarding who to conduct formative assessment and use the results of formative assessment is worth considering since it can distinguish this assessment from the other types of assessment Diagnostic assessment and its results, with the function of placing the students in the right course and the right program, are used only by teachers and schools Summative assessment, following the same path, is also used by the teachers and schools since its results serve the mere purpose of assessing and ranking students The direction, however, is no longer the same in the case of formative assessment In their most detailed definition of formative assessment, Black and William (2009) mentioned the agents in the process of formative assessment by stating that the practice in a classroom is called formative if the students‟ results or achivements are used by

“teachers, learners, or their peers” to make decisions about what to do next in

both teaching and learning According to them, “while it is clear that in many cases, the decisions will be made by the teacher, the definition also includes peers,

or the individual learner, as agents in making such decisions” Therefore the agents

involved in formative assessment should be teachers, students, and their peers

2.2.3 Timing and places of formative assessment

In Shepard‟s definition (2008), he mentioned the time of conducting formative assessment which is “during the instructional process” This may help in differentiating formative assessment from diagnostic assessment and summative assessment since these two types of assessment take place at some other points of time Diagnostic assessment often takes place before students start a course or a program as it has a function of placing students in the appropriate courses or classes as well as preventing them from being placed in the wrong one Summative assessment, on the other hand, refers to assessments that take place at the end of a course, a program, a term, or an academic year for the purpose of grading and evaluating a student‟s progress in learning (Bloom et al., 1971) as well as evaluating the effectiveness of instructional curriculum and services (Fisher & Frey, 2007) Formative assessment, with its aim of using the results to improve teachers‟ instruction and students‟ learning, is agreed by a lot of researchers to

occur as the course is in progress and during the learning process Looney (2005) made it more adequate by considering formative assessment as a “frequent” assessment Overall, in terms of time, formative assessment can be concluded to take place frequently during a course or program

The places of conducting assessment tend to be different among the three types of assessment This difference might come from the purpose of using these assessments Diagnostic assessment and summative assessment are carried out by teachers, schools, or institutions to serve their purposes of choosing the appropriate syllabus, seeking the effective pedagogical solutions, managing classes, ranking the students, evaluating the effectiveness of the schools, etc These assessments are highly expected to generate accurate and fair results, so they tend to be conducted

at schools or institutions Formative assessement, on the other hand, has the students‟ improvement as its focus Therefore, not only the teachers carry out the assessment to modify their teaching but the students should also take part in this process and do the assessment themselves so as to be aware of their learning and make adjustments In this case, the students should be encouraged to do the assessment not only at schools but also at home or any other places where they feel comfortable and willing to do In short, formative assessment can be conducted both at school and out of school

2.2.4 Purpose of formative assessment

Formative assessment, according to Lynch (2003), refers to “the decisions being made concerning the progress and needs of students in a language program

to determine what elements of the program are working well and what needs to be modified” In this definition, the purpose of formative assessment is seen as determining student‟s learning situation Adding more function to the term formative assessment, Wiliam and Leahy (2007) asserted that “an assessment is formative to the extent that information from the assessment is fed back within the system and actually used to improve the performance of the system in some way” Formative assessment, then, is not only used to determine situation but also to

improve students‟ learning Following the same perspective, Shepard (2008) agreed on the function of improving learning by considering formative assessment

as “assessment carried out during the instructional process for the purpose of improving teaching or learning […] What makes formative assessment formative

is that it is immediately used to make adjustments so as to form new learning” Making adjustments to current situation is an important use of formative assessment

Clarke (as cited in Marsh, 2007) pointed out what formative assessment aims to bring to teaching and learning These benefits are listed as follow:

(1) the provision of effective feedback to students

(2) the active involvement of students in their own learning

(3) the adjustments of teaching based on the result of assessment

(4) the influence of assessment on the students‟ motivation

(5) the need for students to be able to assess their work and their peers‟ work

From all the suggestions made by the above researchers, the purpose of formative assessment can be classified according to the recipients of its benefits For teachers, formative assessement is used to assist them in making appropriate adjustments of their teaching by using the result of this assessment For students, formative assessment aims at helping them:

(1) accurately assess their own learning;

(2) improve their learning;

(3) be aware of and responsible for their own learning; and

(4) increase their motivation for learning

2.2.5 Formative assessment tasks

According to Black and Wiliam (1998), formative assessment are all activities carried out by both teachers and students in the process of assessment as long as the information obtained serves the purpose of modifying and improving

teaching and learning activities Therefore, in order to ensure effective formative assessment, teachers are advised to conduct formative assessment during learning, and to make use of carefully chosen activities designed to enhance learning by involving students in the process There are many terms which are used to refer to the different types of formative assessment tasks such as formative assessment methods, techniques, strategies, and tasks In this study, the reseacher apply the term “formative assessment tasks” so as to make it consistent in the entire research

In their study, Wiliam and Thompson (2007) decided to provide a model for formative assessment They proposed three key aspects in learning and teaching which are described in Table 2.1

Where the learner is

going

Where the learner is right

now

How to get there

Teacher

Clarifying and sharing

learning intentions and

criteria for success

Engineering effective classroom discussions and tasks that elicit evidence of learning

Providing feedback that moves leaners forward

Table 2.1 William and Thompson's formative assessment model (2007)

The model shows the three different agents that take part in the process of formative assessment, namely teacher, peer, and learner Apart from that, Black and William (2009) pointed out five key components that can be conceptalized from the model They are:

(1) Clarifying and sharing learning intentions and criteria for success;

(2) Engineering effective classroom discussions and other learning tasks that elicit evidence of student understanding;

(3) Providing feedback that moves learners forward;

(4) Activating students as instructional resources for one another; and

(5) Activating students as the owners of their own learning

From this framework, Black and William classified five main types of formative assessment tasks which are:

(1) Sharing success criteria with learners

(2) Classroom questioning

(3) Comment-only marking

(4) Peer-assessment and self-assessment

(5) Formative use of summative tests

Black and William stated that these five tasks that they classified can be seen as the means of enacting the five components of Willam and Thompson‟s formative assessment model According to them, classroom questioning is used to conduct the second component which is engineering effective classroom discussions and other learning tasks that elicit evidence of student understanding Comment-only marking serves the second component which is providing feedback that moves learners forward Peer-assessment and self-assessment, similarly, are the ways to implement the last two components which are activating students as instructional resources for one another and activating students as the owners of their own learning As for the last activity which is formative use of summative tests, Black and William considered it more complex than the others Summative tests, i.e tests designed to serve summative functions, when used properly, can provide feedback that promote learning They can also inform students the criteria for successful learning Moreover, they enable students to help each other as well

as to use these tests to plan their own revision

Since the reseacher of this study will use some of the FA activities suggested by Black and William (2009), all the activities will be discussed next in this section in order to provide a general look over the issue

2.2.4.1 Sharing success criteria

The teacher communicates the goals and success criteria to students at the beginning of the lesson, or co-constructs them with the students, providing both teacher and students with clear expectations of the content focus of the lesson and the affordances of the learning situation for linguistic action (Van Lier, 2000) This practice supports a goal-oriented learning experience, which has been associated with increased motivation and self-regulation, and has implications for students‟ engagement and persistence in learning

Criteria and goal setting with students engages them in instruction and the learning process by creating clear expectations In order to be successful, students need to understand and know the learning target/goal and the criteria for reaching

it Establishing and defining quality work together, asking students to participate in establishing norm behaviors for classroom culture, and determining what should

be included in criteria for success are all examples of this strategy Using student work, classroom tests, or exemplars of what is expected helps students understand where they are, where they need to be, and an effective process for getting there Moreover, in order for assessment to play a formative role in teaching and learning, it must be integral to a teacher‟s planning Learning intentions describe what children are going to learn, rather than what they are about to do They focus

on the learning, not the task

The process of sharing success criteria can generate many benefits First, it increases motivation and achievement when instruction is guided by clearly defined targets Second, students can be more responsible for their leaning when they know what they are expected to learn and how they will know that they have been successful Third, with this activity, students will improve their decision-

making about how to go about tasks

2.2.4.2 Classroom questioning

After sharing the criteria for success and making sure that students are aware of what is expected to achieve, teachers need to ask questions in order to ensure that students‟ learning are moving towards the learning intentions and objectives Many differents classifications have been made for teachers‟ questions Bloom's Taxonomy (1956), proposed one of the most common and useful systems for designing questions His system includes questions placed in six cogitive levels, namely: (1) knowledge, (2) comprehension, (3) application, (4) analysis, (5) synthesis, and (6) evaluation These six levels of questions are categorized into two groups which are called higher and lower cognitive questions Higher cognitive questions, which are called opended, inquiry, or divergent questions, require students to recall and use their previous knowledge to answer a question On the contrary, lower cognitive questions, which are so called closed, direct, or convergent questions, only ask students to recollect what they have learnt previously

Another researcher who also developed a system to classify questions is Harlen (2006) She claimed that this classification, unlike Bloom‟s, is not dependent on the different cognitive levels but it still contributes to eliciting students‟ ideas This classification includes three types of questions presented in Table 2.2:

Question Type Description

Subject-centered questions Questions that have one right answer because they

ask for explanations of phenomena

Person-centered questions Questions that ask students what they think are

possible explanations of the phenomena involved There is no “right” or “wrong” answer

Process-centered questions Questions that ask students to do something such as

observing, planning, measuring, etc which requires them to use process skills, but without asking of the phenomena involved

Other types of questions Questions that do not fit into any of the above

categories

Table 2.2 Question Types (Harlen, 2006)

Harlen (2006) pointed out that the most effective and powerful questions are those which are both open and person-centered This is because with this type

of question in the classroom, students are free to express their ideas rather than only agree or disagree with a stated idea Moreover, with person-centered characteristic, students are not put under any pressure since the questions only ask them what they think without any need of a “right” answer

2.2.4.3 Teacher’s feedback

Feedback is considered the key element in formative assessment (Sadler, 1989) In their studies of a wide range of various types of feedback, many researchers, including Hattie (2009), agree that feedback is “among the most powerful influences on achievement” In terms of definition, Ramaprasad (1983) referred to feedback as the “information about the gap between the actual level and the reference level of a system parameter which is used to alter the gap in some way” This definition has its focus on the “gap” and points out the purpose of feedback which is to eliminate this gap From a different approach, Colby-Kelly and Turner (2007) defined feedback as “the comment or information that learners receive from a teacher, from other learners, or from themselves upon reflection, on the product of a learning task (including self-assessment, peer-assessment, and teacher-student, teacher-group, and teacher-class feedback)” With this definition, Colby-Kelly and Turner clearly identified the parties being involved in the process

of giving and receiving feedback In addition, Black and William (1998), in emphasizing the characteristics of good feedback, stated that feedback to students

“should be about the particular qualities of his or her work, with advice on what he

or she can do to improve, and should avoid comparison with other pupils” and feedback on tests, homework “should give each pupil guidance on how to improve, and each pupil must be given help and an opportunity to work on the improvement”

Beside defining feedback, educational reseachers also categorize feedback

in many ways Shute (2008) classified feedback into verification feedback and

elaboration feedback According to Shute, verification involves simply judging

whether an answer is correct or not while elaboration involves providing relevant cues to guide the learner toward the correct answer Moreover, Black and William

(1998) added another classification in which they divided feedback into directive

feedback and facilitative feedback By this, the reseachers pointed out the

functions of directive feedback which is to tell students what need to be corrected

or revised and facilitative feedback which is to provide comments and suggestions

on how to carry out the revision therefore helping conceptualization

In addition, Rodet (2000) classified feedback according to its content and form The content of the feedback provides students with a chance to access their

cognitive, metacognitive, and methodological processes in which cognitive

feedback concerns students‟ conceptual errors; metacognitive feedback helps

students to assess their own learning and encourages them to reflect and be

involved in their learning; and methodological feedback focuses on students‟

learning progress in the procedural aspect In terms of the feedback form, Rodet suggested that feedback can be in the form of oral, written, or both which depends

upon teachers‟ decision and on program choices or specifications Oral feedback

can be beneficial if it is “interactive” and “synchronic, which means students can

ask for precisions so that the negotiation of meaning occurs easily Written

feedback gives the evaluator enough time to write and reflect on the comment they

make

Apart from that, Lyster and Ranta (1997) also identifies six different feedback strategies, which are so-called “corrective feedback”, namely: explicit

correction, recasts, clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition This classification is withdrawn from their “error treatment sequence” (Lyster & Ranta, 1997) containing three moves for error treatment: the error, feedback, and uptake The six strategies are described as follow:

1) Explicit correction occurs when the teacher directly points out the student‟s

error and provides the students with the correct form For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: No, not /fi:ʃ/, it‟s /fɪʃ/

2) Recasts occurs when the teacher repeats what the student has said replacing the

error For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: Okay, you like fish /fɪʃ/

3) Clarification requests occurs when the teacher asks for repetition or

reformulation of what the student has said For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: Sorry? Could you say that again?

4) Metalinguistic feedback occurs when the teacher provides information or

questions related to an error the student has made without explicitly providing the correct form For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: Do we say fish /fi:ʃ/ with a long vowel?

5) Elicitation occurs when the teacher provides a sentence and strategically

pauses to allow students to “fill in the blank” For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: You like

6) Repetition occurs when the teacher repeats the student‟s error in isolation In

most cases, teachers also adjust their intonation so as to highlight the error For example:

Student: I like fish /fi:ʃ/

Teacher: Fish /fi:ʃ/?

Beside Lyster and Ranta (1997), Hattie and Timperley (2007) suggested a feedback model containing three critical questions for feedback and four levels that each questions works The extract of this model is presented in Figure 2.3 below:

Figure 2.1 Extract of Hattie and Timperley's feedback model (2007)

According to Hattie and Timperley (2007), teachers and students can create

an “ideal learning environment or experience” if they try to find out the answers

for the three questions stated above The first question, which is “Where am I

going?”, refers to the goals students should aim at It is critically important that

students know exactly what a well-produced piece of language should be like If feedback does not help to narrow the gap between students‟ current understanding and the goals, any effort to enhance learning will be useless That is because students will choose to believe what they are doing is good enough and there is no need for further effort and engagement In this case, the criteria of a successful production should be given and clarified in the very beginning to help form a concrete idea of what students should achieve and guide all of what students will

do The second question, which is “How am I going?”, addresses students‟ current

performance In response to this question, most teachers and students pay their entire attention to the use of tests However, the mere use of tests is not enough to show both teachers and students how they are progressing The answer to this question should include the descriptions of what students are doing and guidelines

Effective feedback answers three questions:

1 Where am I going? (the goals)

2 How am I going?

3 Where to next?

Task level Process level Self-regulation

Each feedback question works

at four levels

on how students should proceed The third question, which is “Where to next?”,

relates to the actions that students should take to improve their current learning The answer to this question should be based on the answers to the second question, which is all about students‟ performance, and from that it should include instructions on how to improve that performance and also the whole learning process These improvements, as stated in Hattie and Timperley‟s study (2007), consist of “enhanced challenges, more self-regulation over the learning process, greater fluency and automaticity, more strategies and processes to work on the tasks, deeper understanding, and more information about what is and what is not understood”

Also according to Hattie and Timperley (2007), the above three questions work at four levels, namely task level, process level, self-regulation level, and self level Task level concerns the errors or mistakes during the interpretation stage of the task and in the outcome of the task Process level works on the process that students need to understand and perform the task This process should link to students‟ “error-detection strategies” and provide students with cues to lead to better strategies The self-regulation level is related to the aspects such as self-monitoring, directing, and regulating of actions The final level, which is all about the self, focuses on personal assessment and affect Feedback on this level includes some features such as praise and judgement At this level, the two aspects that are taken into consideration are positive feedback which can increase motivation; and negative feedback which can challege and help by enable self-regulation

2.2.4.4 Peer assessment

Students are beneficial not only from assessing their own learning but also evaluating their peers‟ work as well as receiving their peers‟ feedback on their work Peer-assessment receives as much attention as self-assessment Peer-assessment is defined as “an arrangement for peers to consider the level, value, worth, quality or successfulness of the products or outcomes of learning of others

of similar status” (Topping et al., 2000) In peer-assessment, students evaluate

other students‟ work against the criteria previously set up by teachers, or both teachers and students One of the important characteristics of peer-assessment is that it involves students in conversations with their classmates and comments on each other‟s work rather than the one-way feedback process from teachers to students

Many researchers consider peer-assessment an important way of enhancing learning This is because this type of formative assessment can generate a lot of benefits First, when provided with authentic evaluative activities, peer-assessment helps students become self-monitoring and gains their knowledge and experience

in working in groups Second, peer-feedback also enables students to compare between assessing their peers‟ work and assessing their own work based on the stated criteria so that they can improve this process to a more effective one Third,

it gives students a chance to think and understand the requirements and criteria that the teachers or the schools have for their learning Finally, it increases students‟ confidence by providing them with the opportunity to experience the power of making judgement on their peers

2.2.4.5 Self-assessment

Self-assessment is a process that takes the form of enabling and involving students to evaluate their own work, monitoring their progress, and guiding revisions Andrade and Cizek (2010) defined self-assessment as a process of formative assessment in which students reflect on the quality of their work, compare their work with explicitly stated goals or criteria, and revise their work accordingly Self-assessment is considered to be effective when students are trained […] so that they can understand the main purposes of their learning and thereby grasp what they need to do to achieve” (Black & Wiliam, 1998) There are two aspects that are needed to be mentioned while discussing self-assessment They are self-marking and self-regulation According to Clarke (2001), self-marking, which is a process of self-assessment, is dependent on the success criteria provided to students so that teachers can build a strategy of coded marking that

helps students based on their success and improvement Self-regulation involves a series of strategies and tactics that helps in boosting students‟ learning such as goal planning, setting and selecting learning strategies, adaptation and seeking feedback Self-regulated learning, in fact, is a process of supporting students in achieving their learning goals by creating ideas, monitoring and modifying thought

or behaviour

Self-assessment, when it is conducted appropriately, can yield many positive effects on students‟ learning First, it can promote learning and achievement (Schunk, 2003) Second, it can result in a higher level of students‟ reflection, independence, and responsibilities Third, it raises students‟ awareness

of success against criteria on specified tasks and on the whole learning process Fourth, self-assessment also increases students‟ meta-cognition, self-esteem, and self-efficacy (Schunk, 2003) Fifth, it supports the process of giving choices to students and encourages their decision-making Finally, it is of great assisstance to those students who are less confident, do not seek for help and do not engage in

learning due to low self-esteem (Hattie & Timperley, 2007)

2.2.4.6 Tests

Tests have been the main use in all types of assessment In SA, it tends to

be the only tool to assess students‟ ability However, the use of tests in FA is different In terms of the purpose of testing, tests in FA mostly aim at enhancing students‟ learning, not only to assess students‟ performance and ability Therefore, concerning the frequency of testing, tests in FA are given to students more frequently than those in SA

Some researchers refused the effectiveness of frequent tests Iverson et al (1994), in their study, discovered that the additional frequency to tests generated

no significant enhancement in students‟ performance and results even though the students reported that they prefer this way of testing Strawitz (1989) also conducted a study on this issue and had the same conclusion

However, many other researchers have pointed out the benefits of frequent tests in FA According to Martinez and Martinez (1992), frequent testing can lead

to improved learning In their analysis of 40 relative studies, Bangert-Drowns et al (1991) suggested that students‟ results improved when they were given frequent testing and increased when the frequency of testing increased However, when this frequency was over a certain level, students‟ performance could decline The reserchers also provided evidence showing that several short tests were more effective and beneficial than fewer but long ones Also supporting the positive effect of frequent tests, Schloss et al.‟s study (1990) suggested that students performed completely better when they received short formative quizzes and tests after each lesson than when nothing of that test types were given

2.3 Formative assessment in teaching and learning pronunciation

Although formative assessment has been given great attention, there is a surprising lack of studies and contribution to the use of formative assessment in L2 pronunciation Most of the studies on formative assessment tend to focus on writing skills One possible reason for this situation is that it is time-consuming to carry out assessment on a regular basis, especially with large-sized classes As a result, it is believed that only a test at the end or middle of a pronunciation course

is enough to assess students‟ pronunciation However, as stated earlier, summative assessment tends to serve the only purpose of grading, marking and assessing students‟ ability without the help to improve their learning while the best type of assessment that can enhance students‟ learning is formative assessment This is an inadequacy since all language skills and areas need to have the equal chance to develop and improve This is also the reason why the researcher of this study wants to discover the formative assessment application in the field of pronunciation

Among the few researchers who pay their attention to formative assessment

in pronunciation, Chu (2011) carried out a research in the Chinese context This research aimed at indentifying the frequency and the degree that the students

perceive corrective feedback from their teacher The participants, who were second-year English majors, were divided into three groups: one control group and two experimental groups Participants in the control group did not receive corrective feedback and those in the two experimental groups received explicit and recast feedback After a period of 6 weeks, the researcher found that corrective feedback had a positive effect on the improvement of the students‟ oral English accuracy In the two types of feedback, recast led the students to better performance since it brought them the chance to self-correct their pronunciation errors This study supports the effect of teacher correction on students‟ pronunciation improvement

Ahangari (2014) conducted a study on the effect of self, peer and teacher correction on students‟ pronunciation improvement This study was carried out in the Iranian context and on Iranian EFL learners In this study, 45 out of 60 students were chosen to participate and they are divided into three groups: self correction group, peer correction group, and teacher correction group Participants in the self correction group had to correct their own pronunciation errors; those in peer correction group corrected each other‟s pronunciation errors in pairs; and those pronunciation errors of the participants in the teacher correction group were corrected by their teacher Within the period of 15 sessions, the treatment was applied and a pre-test and post-test were administered In the end, the results revealed that the participants in the self correction group showed more pronunciation improvement than those in the other two groups and the peer correction group achieved better result than the teacher correction group With this result, the researcher stated that self and peer correction were surprisingly more effective than teacher correction when they aimed at improving students‟ pronunciation

In terms of self-assessment, Salimi, Kargar and Zareian (2014) conducted a study in the Iranian context in order to find out the impact of self-assessment on EFL leaners‟ pronunciation ability 30 intermediate students were asked to be the paticipants of this study and they were divided into two groups: control group and

experimental group While the control group received no treatment, the participants in the experimental group were asked to complete questionnaires by answering yes or no to whether or not their pronunciation in their speeches, which were recorded in advance, was the same as native speakers‟ pronunciation After analysing the data from a pre-test and post-test, the result showed that Iranian EFL students had positive attitudes toward using self-assessment and they pointed out numberous benefits that self-assessment brought to their pronunciation learning

On the contrary, Kermad‟s study (2015) showed an opposite side of assessment on pronunciation The study was conducted on 19 participants from various countries such as Arab, China, Turkey, Russia, and Spain The paricipant were asked to self-assess their recording of segmentals, scripted speech, a dialogue, and free speech The result suggested that the participants were unable to identify their errors This study had the same perspective with Morley (1991) when they pointed out that before the students can begin their self-assessment and adjustment of their pronunciation, they have to be aware of the areas in which they will assess themselves and make adjustments

self-In terms of assessment, some reseachers value the effect of assessment on studens‟ pronunciation by stating that assessment and correction are more effective when they receive the help of peers In 2006, Yurick and others carried out three experimental studies on the effect of peer-mediated repeated readings on students‟ fluency and pronunciation The result showed that peer-assessment in this form significantly contributed to the students‟ improvement in their fluency and pronunciation Holding the same point of view, Tost (2013) examined the effect of partner reading out aloud on students‟ pronunciation, fluency and expression The findings suggested that assessment by students‟ cooperation had a positive effect on the imrovement of students‟ reading pronunciation and fluency

peer-In conclusion, there is a lack of studies on formative assessment in the area

of pronunciation Only a few studies on this topic were conducted and their results