INSTITUT PENDIDIKAN

GURU
KAMPUS TEMENGGONG IBRAHIM,
JOHOR BAHRU
JOHOR DARUL TAZIM
PROGRAM IJAZAH SARJANA MUDA
PENDIDIKAN

LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT
(TSL 3123)
6 PISMP TESL 4
Coursework 1: Classroom observation
Coursework 2: Test Design, Construction and Use in the
Language Classroom
Coursework 3: Critical Report

NAME

INDEX NUMBER

IC NUMBER

LECTURER

SUBMISSION DATE: 7TH SEPTEMBER 2014

Coursework 1: Classroom observation. Appendix 1.

Assessment tools are materials that enable you to collect evidence using your
chosen assessment method. Assessment tools are the instruments and procedures used to
gather and interpret evidence of competence. The instrument is the activity or specific
questions used to assess competence by the assessment method selected. An assessment
instrument may be supported by a profile of acceptable performance and the decisionmaking rules or guidelines to be used by assessors. Procedures are the information or
instructions given to the candidate and the assessor about how the assessment is to be
conducted and recorded. When developing assessment tools, you need to ensure that the
principles of assessment are met. This is not only good practice but also a requirement of
the language assessment. The assessment principles require that assessment is valid,
reliable, practical, authentic and washback.
Validity refers to the extent to which the interpretation and use of an assessment
outcome can be supported by evidence. An assessment is valid if the assessment methods
and materials reflect the elements, performance criteria and critical aspects of evidence in
the evidence guide of the unit(s) of competency, and if the assessment outcome is fully
supported by the evidence gathered. In my assessment that I implemented on my students, I
design it so that it gives similar results to already validate tests or other immediate external
criteria. Therefore, the task is at the appropriate level for the pupils whereby it tests on the
pupils ability to identify and use the words with phoneme ear and air through listening,
forming, finding and filling in the blanks. They have learned the words before answering the
worksheet. The task is also appropriate to assess the listening skill.
Next, is the reliability of the assessment? Reliability refers to the degree of
consistency and accuracy of the assessment outcomes. That is, the extent to which the
assessment will provide similar outcomes for candidates with equal competence at different
times or places, regardless of the assessor conducting the assessment. Before conducting
the assessment, I did my oral assessment with the students using word attack skill. I state
few examples and then the others are done by my students. I use picture cards and ask
them to pronounce the words by saying the first part of the words and students continue.
The words and example are all same in the fill in the blanks questions. So it is almost the
same assessment that I give, as the oral test is only for practice and they must do on their

own in the worksheet. The results were almost the same. Most of the student score as same
as the frequencies of the correct answers in the oral sessions, thus I can conclude that my
assessment is reliable.
Before we even examine the content of the test, we must ask if it is feasible. A good
test must be practical. Whether a test is practical or not is a matter of examining available
resources. It may be possible to develop a test which is highly valid and reliable for a
particular situation, but if that test requires more resources than what are available, it is
doomed. It is possible that the test may initially be used if test development does not exceed
available resources. But cutting corners in administering or marking the test, in order to
make savings in time or money, will immediately lead to an unacceptable deterioration in
reliability. Test practicality involves the nitty-gritty (H.D. Brown, 2001) of man-power,
materials and time. We can only make the best use of what is available to us. It refers to
facilities available to test developers regarding both administration and scoring procedures of
a test. My test is only done in simple one paper worksheet, does not energy and cost
consuming. Other than that, the assessment is done in the classroom during the end of the
lesson which is the production stage. It is time efficient. From what is stated above, my
assessment is practical for daily classroom use.
In authenticity of the assessment, this is where my weakness is. I do not use any
authentic resources nor natural spoken language for my assessment. The fill-in-the blanks
questions are just merely based on the students prior knowledge and it is so simple that
students can finish it in a jiffy. It also does not involve any writing, daily conversations, or
natural use of target language outside the classroom use. I should involve more example
that are low frequencies words and sentences from other resources such as journal or article
to expose students with more vocabulary and authentic examples of the phonemes.
One way to ensure positive washback is through instructional planning that links
teaching and testing. By selecting a test that reflects the instructional and program goals,
you can more closely align testing with instruction (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Washback, a
concept prominent in applied linguistics, refers to the extent to which the introduction and
use of a test influences language teachers and learners to do things they would not
otherwise do that promote or inhibit language learning. Rephrasing it differently, washback is
supposedly done to improve teaching and learning process. This assessment is a positive
washback where the fill-in-the blanks questions are observable when assessments and
assessment objectives gauge the same skills outlined in the course objectives and taught on
a course.

Conclusively, I must be always alert in constructing and implementing my lessons

and also my assessment for students to have better insight of their own progress of their
learning.

Coursework 2: Test design, Construction, and use in Language Classroom.

Subject

: English Language

Date

Time

Enrolment

Theme

: World of knowledge

Topic

: Hobbies

Focal skill

: Reading

Other skill

: Writing

Previous knowledge

: Students have learned about prepositions such as in, under, behind,

in front of.

Learning standards

: 2.3.1 able to read simple text with guidance:

b) Non-fiction
3.1.1 able to write in legible print
a) Words
b) Phrases

Learning outcomes

: At the end of the lesson, student should be able to:

1. read simple non-fiction text with guidance
2. able to write at leat 3 words and phrases based on the questions
after reading the given text.

Stage/Time

Content

Teaching-Learning Activities

Notes/Resources

Set Induction

Questions:

1. students recalling what is being learned in

the previous lesson.

CCTS:

(5 minutes)

What did you do

during your free

2. Students answer few questions regarding

Creative thinking
Making connection

time yesterday?

previous lessons.

Can you tell me

your hobby?
Presentation
(10 minutes)

Linguistic

Title :My friends

hobbies.

1. Students are introduced to the title of the

activity.

2.students watch My friends hobbies chart that

are being displays in front of the classroom.
3. students will listen when teacher explains
the chart.
4. Teacher asks few WH-questions about the
chart.
5.Students are divided into 3 groups and come
out with own chart by asking their friends
hobbies.

Practice

(15 minutes)

M.I :

Title : Sarah the

pianist.

1. Students listen when teacher read the story

of the Sarah the young pianist.

Worksheet.

2. Students do shared reading with teacher.

3. Teacher asks students for words or
sentences that they do not understand.

CCTS:
Synthesizing

Creating mental pictu

analyzing
M.I
Linguistic
Verbal-spatial

Interpersonal/intraper
CCTS:
Collect and classify
information
Analyze

Translate information

4. Teacher asks students to complete the

worksheet in pair based on the text.
M.I :
Linguistic
Interpersonal
intrapersonal

Production

Worksheet 2

1. Teacher distributes the worksheet for each

student.
2. Students must complete the task in
allocated time.

(15 minutes)

CCTS:
Making associations
application

3. Teacher facilitates students with the

contextual clues.

M.I:

4. Teacher and students discuss the answers.

Logical

Intrapersonal

linguistic

Moral values
Closure

(5 minutes)

1. Teacher recaps the lesson.

CCTS:

2. Teacher elicits the moral values from the

lesson.

Application

3. Teacher and students gives feedbacks about

the lesson.

Making inferences
MV:

Be friendly and respe

each other.

Coursework 3: Critical Report.

AMIRRUL ZARITH BIN AMINUL RAZIN

There are many insights, knowledge and experiences that I gained from the
assessment practice in my classroom. Among the knowledge that I gained is for an
assessment to be useful and effective, evaluation and assessment requires planning.
Preparing for evaluation should be an integral part of planning each lesson or unit as well as
general planning at the beginning of the school year or course. Instruction and evaluation
should be considered together in order to ensure that instruction provides itself to evaluation
and that the results of evaluation can direct ongoing instructional planning. Moreover, if
evaluation is not planned along with instruction, the time required for assessment activities
will most likely not be available. As pointed earlier, clearly an important focus of classroom
assessment and evaluation is student achievement. Teachers need to know what and how
much students have learned in order to monitor the effectiveness of instruction, to plan
ongoing instruction, and for accountability purposes.
According to Gensee and Upshur (1996), in order to plan and make instruction that is
appropriate for individual students or groups of students, it is necessary to understand the
factors that influence student performance in class. This means going beyond the
assessment of achievement. I believes that teachers need to evaluate constantly their

teaching on the basis of student reaction, interest, motivation, preparation, participation,

perseverance, and achievement. The conclusions drawn from such an evaluation constitute
their main source for measuring the effectiveness of selected learning activities. As a matter
of fact, testing in language classes is often inadequate. Before this I was so preoccupied
with classroom activities that I fails to maintain a comprehensive perspectives of the flow of
the language learning sequence from objectives to activities to testing. This is the point
where we can give priority to evaluation over tests claiming that the primary aim of
evaluation in the classroom is to judge the achievement of both students and the teacher.
Evaluation of achievement is the feedback that makes improvement possible. By
means of evaluation, strengths and weaknesses are identified. Evaluation, in this sense, is
another aspect of learning, one that enables learners to grasp what they missed previously
and the teacher to comprehend what can be done in subsequent lessons to improve
learning. To do so, alternative methods (e.g. dialogue journals, portfolio conferences,
interviews and questionnaires, observation, etc) are available for collecting useful
information about language learning and about student related factors which influence the
processes of language teaching and learning.
There are still many ways to improve the assessment. Pupil assessment should
involve a combination of formal and informal assessment. Teacher must alternates between
marking the work themselves, allowing the pupils to mark their own and getting them to mark
each others work. Pupils know their targets and their performance is judged against their
own goals rather than against the rest of the class. This leads to a positive, secure,
encouraging and supportive environment where making mistakes is part of the learning
curve, (Patcham, N.D). Pupils will then discuss the test afterwards, allowing them to
address any fears, insecurities or simple mistakes and to learn from each other. How
assessment is implemented will depend on the pupils, their age and stage, the purpose of
the assessment, the subject area and, importantly, the priorities and direction of the school.
In school, pupils must be assessed at the end of every topic. The whole point with this is that
the pupils can mark the work but I still have to mark them for target purposes as they may
not mark them correctly. We can collect all the papers and then hand them back out
randomly and we go through the answers as a class.
Conclusively, There will be acceptance of the principle that all people can learn under
the right conditions. An implication is that "If a program does not achieve the intended goals.
Then it is redesigned until it does. There are no learner failures only program failures."
(Fantini,1986). An effective, goal-oriented, teaching-learning sequence contains clearly
understood objectives, productive classroom activities, and a sufficient amount of feedback
to make students aware of the strengths and weaknesses of their performances.

References
1. Alderson, J. C. & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1996). TOEFL preparation courses: A study of
washback. Language Testing. 13, 280-297.
2. Bachman, L. (1991). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
3. Buck, G. (2001). Assessing Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
4. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
5. Davidson, F. & B. K. Lynch (2002). Testcraft: A Teacher's Guide to Writing and Using
Language Test Specifications.London: Yale University Press.
6. International
Language
Testing
Association

(ILTA)

(2002).

http://www.surrey.ac.uk/ELI/ILTA/faqs
7. Multilingual Glossary of Language Testing Terms (1998). Edited by ALTE members.
8. Wall, D. (1997). Impact and Washback in Language Testing. In C. Clapham & D.
Corson (eds), Encyclopaedia of Language and Education 7: Language Testing and
Assessment, 291-302. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
9. Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.