Volume 6, Issue 1 (3-2021)                   IJREE 2021, 6(1): 49-63 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Movahedi N, Aghajanzadeh Kiasi G. The Effect of Teacher vs. Learner-Assessment Activities on the Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ Writing Ability. IJREE. 2021; 6 (1)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-467-en.html
Department of English Language, College of Humanities, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
Abstract:   (756 Views)
The present study sought to investigate the effectiveness of teacher versus learner assessment activities on the Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ writing ability. In order to find an answer to the questions of this research, 30 intermediate students from Zaban Iran Language Institute in Rasht, Iran were selected via administering Solutions Placement Test (SPT). Next, they were divided into three groups of 10. Learners were randomly assigned into two experimental groups of peer assessment and self-assessment, and one control group, teacher assessment. A pre-test of writing was then administered before the groups received 8 sessions of treatment through peer, self-, and teacher assessment techniques. After the treatment period, a post-test of writing was administered to all groups. The results of descriptive and inferential analyses revealed that the peer assessment group attained the highest scores on the writing test, and a statistically significant difference among the effects of the teacher assessment, peer assessment, and self-assessment on Iranian Intermediate EFL students’ writing ability was reported. Also, the group using teacher assessment technique attained higher scores than the group that used the self-assessment technique. The implications of this study can be considered for EFL teachers, learners, materials developers, and syllabus designers.
Full-Text [PDF 697 kb]   (191 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special

References
1. Acat, B., & Dönmez, İ. (2009). To compare student centered education and teacher centered education in primary science and technology lesson in terms of learning environments. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 1805-1809. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.320]
2. Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Nghia, T., Boud, D., Johnson, L., & Patrick, C. (2019). Aligning assessment with the needs of work-integrated learning: The challenges of authentic assessment in a complex context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 304-316. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2019.1639613]
3. Boud, D. (2013). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781315041520]
4. Boumediene, H., Berrahal, F. K., & Harji, M. B. (2016). The effectiveness of portfolio assessment on EFL students' writing performance: The case of third year secondary students in Algeria. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 5(3), 119-127. [DOI:10.5901/ajis.2016.v5n3s1p119]
5. Brown, S., & Glasner, A. (2007). Evaluar en la Universidad. Problemas y nuevos enfoques. Madrid. Narcea S. A. Ediciones.
6. Brown, G. T., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367-393). Sage, CA: Thousand Oaks. [DOI:10.4135/9781452218649.n21]
7. Butler, Y. G., & Lee. J. (2010). The effects of self-assessment among young learners of English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5-31. doi: 10.1177/0265532209346370 [DOI:10.1177/0265532209346370]
8. Chang, C. C., Tseng, K. H., & Lou, S. J. (2011). A comparative analysis of the consistency and difference among teacher assessment, student self-assessment and peer assessment in a web-based portfolio assessment environment for high school students. Computers and Education, 58(1), 303-320. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.005]
9. Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22(1), 93-121. doi: 10.1191/0265532205lt298oa [DOI:10.1191/0265532205lt298oa]
10. Dhindsa, H., Omar, K., & Waldrip, B. (2007). Upper secondary Bruneian science students' perceptions of assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 29(10), 1261-1280. [DOI:10.1080/09500690600991149]
11. Dikel, M. R. (2009). A guide to going online for self-assessment tools. https://www.vault.com/blogs/job-search/a-guide-to-going-online-for-self-assessment-tools
12. Esfandiari, R., & Myford, C. M. (2013). Severity differences among self-assessors, peer assessors, and teacher assessors rating EFL essays. Assessing Writing, 18(2), 111-131. [DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2012.12.002]
13. Falchikov, N. (2013). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. London: Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203220993]
14. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395-430. [DOI:10.3102/00346543059004395]
15. Hinett, K. (2002). Improving learning through reflection-Part two. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228596017_Improving_learning_through_reflection-part_two
16. James, R., McInnis, C., & Devlin, M. (2002). Assessing learning in Australian universities. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
17. Jay, J., & Owen, A. (2016). Providing opportunities for student self-assessment: The impact on the acquisition of psychomotor skills in occupational therapy students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(8), 1176-1192. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2015.1071317]
18. Javaherbakhsh, M. R. (2010). The impact of self-assessment on Iranian EFL learners' writing skill. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 213- 218. [DOI:10.5539/elt.v3n2p213]
19. Jones, J. (2010). The role of assessment for learning in the management of primary to secondary transition: Implications for language teachers. Language Learning Journal, 38(2), 175-191. [DOI:10.1080/09571730902928052]
20. Kearney, S., Perkins, T., & Kennedy-Clark, S. (2016). Using self and peer-assessment for summative purposes: Analyzing the relative validity of the AASL (authentic assessment for sustainable learning) model. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 840-853. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2015.1039484]
21. Keith, J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645. [DOI:10.1080/01443410500345172]
22. Khodashenas, M. R., & Rakhshi, F. (2017). The effect of electronic portfolio assessment on the writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 2(3), 67-71. [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.3.67]
23. Khorami Fard, S., & Derakhshi, Z. (2019). On the role of dynamic assessment on promotion of writing linguistic accuracy among EFL learners: An interventionist model. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 4(2), 14-28. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.4.2.14]
24. Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Li, H., Xiong, Y., Hunter, C. V., Guo, X., & Tywoniw, R. (2019). Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 193-211. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679]
26. Linn, R. L., & Miller, M. D. (2005). Measurement and assessment in teaching (9thed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290. [DOI:10.1080/13562510600680582]
28. Liu, C. C., Lu, K. H., Wu, L. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). The impact of peer review on creative self-efficacy and learning performance in Web 2.0 learning activities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 286-297. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.2.286
29. Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer, and teacher assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26(1), 75-100. [DOI:10.1177/0265532208097337]
30. Meihami, H., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2016). An emic perspective toward challenges and solutions of self- and peer-assessment in writing courses. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(9), 1-20. doi:10.1186/s40862-016-0014-7 [DOI:10.1186/s40862-016-0014-7]
31. Mosmery, P., & Barzegar, R. (2015). The effects of using peer, self and teacher-assessment on Iranian EFL learners' writing ability at three levels of task complexity. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(4), 15-27. [DOI:10.5861/ijrsll.2015.928]
32. Neary, M., Saunders, G., Hagyard, A., & Derricott, D. (2014). Student as producer: Research-engaged teaching: An institutional strategy. New York: Higher Education Academy.
33. Nunan, D. (2003). Second language teaching and learning. Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
34. Ozogul, G., & Sullivan, H. (2007). Student performance and attitudes under formative evaluation by teacher, self and peer evaluators. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 393-410. [DOI:10.1007/s11423-007-9052-7]
35. Pourvandi Vangah, F., Jafarpur, M., & Mohammadi, M. (2016). Portfolio assessment and process writing: Its effect on EFL students' L2 writing. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(3), 224-246. http://www.jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/view/307
36. Ramani, S., Konings, K. D., Mann, K. V., Pisarski, E. E., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2018). About politeness, face, and feedback: Exploring resident and faculty perceptions of how institutional feedback culture influences feedback practices. Academic Medicine, 93(9), 1348-1358. [DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002193]
37. Rezaee, A., Rahimi, S., & Mehrabi, M. (2019). Cultivating grammar knowledge of EFL learners through informed peer-dynamic assessment. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 4(3), 70-83. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.4.3.70]
38. Schut, S., Driessen, E., van Tartwijk, J., van der Vleuten, C., & Heeneman, S. (2018). Stakes in the eye of the beholder: An international study of learners' perceptions within programmatic assessment. Medical Education, 52(6), 654-663. [DOI:10.1111/medu.13532]
39. Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process and students' reflections. Journal for Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002]
40. Suri, H., & Krishnan, S. (2019). Assessment hurdles in core first year courses in Australian universities: Are we trying to catch out students? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 251-265. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2019.1632795]
41. Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgment: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467-481. [DOI:10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3]
42. Telio, S., Ajjawi, R., & Regehr, G. (2015). The educational alliance as a framework for reconceptualizing feedback in medical education. Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 90(5), 609-614. [DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000560]
43. Thomas, G., Martin, D., & Pleasant, K. (2011). Using self- and peer-assessment to enhance students' future-learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 8(1), 1-17. http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol8/iss1/5
44. Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27. [DOI:10.1080/00405840802577569]
45. Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna, C., & Herrera-Seda, C. (2018). Authentic assessment: Creating a blueprint for course design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 840-854. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396]
46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47. Watling, C., & LaDonna, K. (2019). Where philosophy meets culture: Exploring how coaches conceptualize their roles. Medical Education, 53(5), 467-476. [DOI:10.1111/medu.13799]
48. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design: Expanded (2nd ed.) Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
49. Wood, W. B. (2009). Innovations in teaching undergraduate biology and why we need them. Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology, 25, 93-112. [DOI:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.24.110707.175306]
50. Yan, Z., & Brown, G. T. (2017). A cyclical self-assessment process: Towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1247-1262. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2016.1260091]
51. Zare Toofan, Z., Vaseghi, R., & Zare, M. (2019). Iranian EFL learners' perceptions toward paper assessment in mid-term and final exams in an English language institute. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 4(3), 21-41. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.4.3.21]
52. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-247-en.html
53. Zohrabi, M., Torabi, M.A., & Baybourdiani, P. (2012). Teacher-centered and/or student-centered learning: English language in Iran. English Language and Literature Studies, 2(3), 18-30. [DOI:10.5539/ells.v2n3p18]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


© 2021 CC BY-NC 4.0 | International Journal of Research in English Education

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb