Figure 4.1 Sequential Equation Modelling of the Classroom Assessment Questionnaire The results from sequential equation modelling (SEM) of the classroom assessment questionnaire see (Figure 4.1) demonstrates a linear informative representative matrix of the observed variables and factors included in the classroom assessment questionnaire. In
this study, the model shows an analysis of the structural relationship between measured variables and constructs in classroom assessment. Accordingly, all the observed variables belong to the construct which they were supposed to measure (Byrne, 2016). The value that each variable in the scaffolding or supportive assessment (SU), performance assessment (PE), interactional-observational assessment (IO), self-assessment (SE), and diagnostic assessment (DI) achieved was greater .7.
Table 4.3 MANOVA Results of Classroom Assessment at Two Schools Factor Regular
school
Grammar school
Mean Differenc
F p Cohen's d (n = 159) (n = 139) e
Mean SD Mean SD
Scaffolding 4.35 .50 3.96 .60 .390 37.445 .000 .70 Performance
assessment
4.43 .57 4.36 .44 .079 1.732 .189 .15
Interactive- observational assessment
4.20 .53 4.25 .47 -.052 .777 .379 .01
Self-assessment 3.97 .54 3.78 .55 .183 8.294 .004 .33 Diagnostic
assessment
4.44 .47 4.55 .40 -.114 4.920 .027 .26
Wilks' λ= .156, F = 10.818, η2 = .156, p < .001
Results from MANOVAs provided seventh graders' reflections on L2 classroom practices at the grammar and regular junior secondary school. Students' reports showed that discrepancies were found significant (p <.05) in diagnostic assessment, self-assessment and scaffolding (see Table 4.3). In general, the difference in the practice of assessment between the two schools was significant, F = 10.818, Wilks' λ= .156, η2 = .156 (p <.01). The effect of school type on classroom assessment practice was found significant for scaffolding, F = 37.445, p < .01, with a medium effect size. There were also significant discrepancies in self-assessment (F = 8.294, p < .01) and diagnostic assessment (F = 4.920, p < .05) between the two contexts, with a small effect size. However, the practices of performance
assessment (F = 1.732, p > .05) and interactive-observational assessment (F = .777, p >
.05).
Qualitative data analyses showed insights into the classroom assessment practices in the two contexts. Classroom observations also confirmed that the teachers at the regular school practiced scaffolding more often than those at the grammar school. In contrast, the teachers at the grammar school diagnosed students' learning (e.g., prior experience, existing knowledge, and preference) more often than those at the regular school. Data from classroom observations demonstrated that the seven-grade teachers at the regular school employed different scaffolding techniques in providing the target input. First, she asked questions before introducing the target input. For instance, the following episode demonstrates the beginning of a lesson of the present progressive tense.
Teacher: Please look at the picture in the screen. Hai bạn trong hình đang làm gì? (Vietnamese)
Students: Bạn nam đang đọc sách. Bạn nữ đang xem TV. (Vietnamese) Teacher: Please the sentences about the picture. Student 1, please Student 1:
The boy is reading. The girl is watching television.
Teacher: Very good! Please underline the verbs in the sentences. (Then the Teacher pointed at the verbs and asked) Thế các con thấy mỗi câu có mấy động từ nào? (Vietnamese)
Students: Dạ, hai ạ. (Vietnamese)
Teacher: Good! Gồm có động từ gì và hình thức như thế nào? Student 2!
(Vietnamese) Student 2: Gồm có động từ “is” và 1 động từ nữa ạ. (Vietnamese) Teacher: Bạn nào trả lời cụ thể hơn nữa xem nào? (The class kept silent, and the teacher continued) Thế động từ thế hai trong câu có gì ở phía sau nào?
(Vietnamese)
Students: Dạ, có chữ “i”, “n”, “g” ạ. (Vietnamese)
Teacher: Oh, yeah. Đó là hình thức của thì hiện tại tiếp diễn, còn gọi là present continuous. (Vietnamese)
Teacher: Vậy thì hiện tại Present continuous mô tả gì và có hình thức động từ như thế nào? Bạn nào có thể nói cho cả lớp nghe được? (The class kept silent.) Thế hình trên mô tả sự việc xảy ra lúc nào và động từ được sử dụng như thế nào? (Vietnamese) Student 3!
Student 3: Dạ. Diễn tả hành động đang làm và động từ gồm “is” + động từ thêm
“-ING” ạ. (Vietnamese).
Teacher: Excellent! That’s right! Thì present continuous diễn tả hành động đang xảy ra. Động từ gồm am/is/are + động từ chính thêm “-ING”. Các con nhìn vào bài tập và chia động từ cho sẵn ở thì hiện tại tiếp diễn nhé.
The teacher then directs the students to the description of the present continuous or present progressive in the book with more details and made further explanation. The excerpt shows the teacher mainly took advantaged of questioning (a scaffolding technique) to direct the students to the target input. When the students could not find an answer to the question, the teacher provided hints or reduced cognition (the difficulty of the question). She also dominantly used compliments to motivate students' learning.
Unlike the teachers at the regular school, the teachers at the grammar school diagnose the students (needs and competence) at the beginning of the lesson and a particular task. The observation data showed that their use of the diagnostic assessment could contribute the students' comprehension and motivated the students to learn. For example, the following episode demonstrates a lesson of the present progressive tense.
Teacher: Hello, everybody!
Student: Good morning, teacher!
Teacher: How are you today?
Student: I'm fine. How about you?
Teacher: Please listen to my question. What do you often do at night? (Students kept silent, and the teacher repeated the question more slowly.) What did you do last night?
Student 1: Playing game Student 2: Xem TV ạ.
Student 3: Làm bài tập ạ.
Teacher: (Smiled and looked at Student 2) “Xem TV” nói Tiếng Anh như thế nào? Student 2: Wat TV.
Teacher: Good! Please repeat after me. Watch TV!
Student 2: Watch TV.
Teacher: (Smiled and looked at Student 3) “Làm bài tập” trong Tiếng Anh nói như thế nào?
Student 3: I did homework.
Teacher: Excellent!
Teacher: (Smiled) (The Teacher then displayed the picture in the screen.) Please look at the picture. What are the boy and the girl doing?
Students: (Excited) Bạn nam đang làm bài tập. Bạn nữ đang xem TV ạ. (Vietnamese) Teacher: (Smiled) Yes. Hai bạn này bằng tuổi các con và cũng làm những việc giống
các con hay làm vào buổi tối. (Vietnamese)
Teacher: Please read the sentences and underline the verbs… (After a few seconds) Các con nối và so sánh động từ trong 2 câu này và công thức trong sách xem nào.
(Vietnamese) (Student 4 raised her hand) Student 4, please!
Student 4: Công thức là “am/is/are” và động từ + “-ING” ạ.
Teacher: Excellent! Please read these lines in the book. (After about 2 minutes) Vậy đây là thì hiện tại tiếp diễn. Thì hiện tại tiếp diễn mô tả gì và cấu trúc như thế nào?
(Student 5 raised his hand) Student 5, please.
Student 5: Thì hiện tại tiếp diễn mô tả việc đang xảy ra ở hiện tại và cấu trúc là “am/is/are + V-ING.
Teacher: Very good! Please look at the class … (some seconds) and the school yard (The teacher directed the students' attention to the yard.). Use the present continuous to make sentences.
A comparison of the classroom assessment techniques applied at the regular school and
grammar school showed that the teachers at the regular school scaffolded students very often to direct the students to the target input. In the episodes provided, the teacher at the regular school sometimes switched scaffolding techniques because she was unaware of the students' competencies. When the students got stuck, she used another technique to assist the students' comprehension and make the lesson go further. In contrast, in the second episode, the teacher diagnosed the students before the lesson to understand the students' language competencies. When she found that a student used Vietnamese, she asked him or her to repeat it in English to better understand his or her language level. Also, she related the target language input to life by asking the students to use the main points to describe events occurring in the class and at the school yard. Finally, the teacher smiled more often, and the students demonstrated their excitement about the lesson.
Data collected from the interviews provided further information. The teachers at the regular school explained that they applied scaffolding more often because of the students' competencies. In particular, they generally held a strong belief that asking questions by level could engage students at all levels in the lesson. Also, the scaffolding techniques were supposed to help students discover the main points in the lesson. The teacher, therefore, did not need to deliver instruction on the target input. For example, the teachers at the regular school responded:
From my experience, teachers should not deliver instruction on the target input. It might be better for them to direct students to the input. Scaffolding suggests a variety of techniques that assist students' understanding. In my class, I asked questions, gave hints, and reduced the difficulty of questions. I also switched scaffolding techniques sometimes because my class had mixed-level students, which provides students at different levels with opportunities. (Teacher 1)
Teachers should gradually lead students to the target lesson. I believe that asking specific questions of different levels of difficulty may assist students considerably.
Consequently, students themselves can explore the lesson and make a conclusion for themselves. Understanding the lesson is not a target but a journey in which students engage in activities organized by the teacher. Asking questions which requires cognitive processes can help students make sense of the target input on
their own instead of relying on the teacher. (Teacher 2)
In general, the students highly appreciated the teachers' use of scaffolding. Accordingly, scaffolding strategies assisted them comparably on the journey of comprehending the target input in English as a foreign language. Also, it was scaffolding that gradually led them into the new lesson by finding answers to the teachers' questions. However, some students were confused when they dealt with difficult questions. Some students responded:
The teacher did not abruptly present the input but guided us to the new input step by step. Her questioning helps us find and make sense of the new input. I generally understand the target lesson, but her questions sometimes confused me. Some questions were difficult to answer. I think they are for higher-level students.
(Student 4)
In general, my classmates and I like the teacher's use of guiding questions. It contributes to our understanding by finding new rules, vocabulary, and so on instead of mainly listening to the teacher. However, I think the teacher should know our level to ask appropriate questions. Some of the teacher's questions were hard to understand. (Student 5) However, the teachers at the grammar school revealed that it was challenging to teach the students because they enrolled from different places throughout the province, which formed their varied preferences and prior experiences. Their responses showed that they understood their students through diagnostic assessment. They responded:
As this is a grammar school, students were not selected by using their demographic information but previous academic results. Their previous experiences were varied, and it led to their preferences. It was sometimes hard to know their needs and interests. Satisfying such needs and interests is really challenging. (Teacher 1) I update information all the time. Teaching the students in this school is very challenging. They like to learn and are very demanding. Sometimes they ask questions which are not about English but reflect their updated knowledge which I do not even know. They also use teen codes sometimes, which confuses me.
(Teacher 2)
The students at the grammar school showed their excitement about the teachers' use of
classroom assessment techniques. They believed that the assessment events satisfied their needs and met the levels. It contributed to their achievements and the success of the classes.
Some students answered as follows:
The teacher understands my level. Most of my classmates and I understand the lessons quite well. Her questions, required exercises, tasks, and explanations are clear and succinct. She is sometimes humorous. My classmates and I like both her performance and her sense of humor. (Student 6)
The teacher's examples are interesting and authentic. They are suitable for my age.
Her language use (vocabulary, structure, …) is also suitable for my level. She leads the class to the target lesson naturally. Her smiles are beautiful and relaxing.
(Student 7)
Although different students demonstrated their preferences of different assessment strategies, they preferred interactive-observational assessment. The students in both contexts expected their teachers to understand their needs, preferences, personality traits, and existing language problems.