‫‪1-‬‬

‫‪86 -87‬‬

‫)‬ ‫(‬ ‫‪1‬‬

‫‪ 85400921‬رشته وگرايش‪:‬آموزش زبان انگلیسي‬ ‫شماره دانشجويي‪:‬‬ ‫دانشجو‪:‬سید حمید رضا علیکی‬
‫د انشكده‪ :‬ادبیا ت و علوم انساني‬ ‫گروه‪ :‬زبان و ادبیات انگلیسي‬ ‫شبانه‬ ‫دوره ‪ :‬روزانه‬
‫مرتبه دانشگاهي‪/‬تخصص‪:‬‬ ‫استاد راهنما(‪ :)1‬دکتر هوشنگ خوش سیما‬
‫از‪:‬‬
‫از‪:‬‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي‪/‬تخصص‬ ‫استاد راهنما(‪:)2‬‬
‫از‪:‬‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي‪/‬تخصص ‪:‬‬ ‫استاد مشاور(‪)1‬‬
‫از‪:‬‬ ‫مرتبه دانشگاهي‪/‬تخصص‬ ‫استاد مشاور(‪: )2‬‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫بررسي تاثیر روشهای سنجش تناوبی بر میزان کار آیی دانش آموزان دبیرستانی‬ ‫الف‪ -‬عنوان به فارسي‪:‬‬
‫ب‪ -‬عنوان به انگلیسي‬

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

‫ج‪ -‬كلید واژه به انگلیسي‪:‬‬

‫‪assessment; alternative assessment ; portfolio; performance assessment‬‬

‫نیمه تجربي(نیمه عملي)‬ ‫تجربي(عملي)‬ ‫د‪ -‬نوع كار تحقیقاتي‪ :‬نظري‬

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

‫‪Introduction‬‬

‫‪One of the most challenging tasks for language instructors is finding effective ways to determine what and‬‬
how much their students are actually learning. Instructors need to think carefully about what kinds of
knowledge their tests allow students to demonstrate.

Language testing, generally associated with formal assessment procedures such as tests and examinations
carried out at specified times and serving a variety of purposes )i.e. diagnostic, achievement, progress, etc.(,
is a vital component of instructional language programmes throughout the world.
While this type of assessment is a mainstay of educational programmes )Butterfield et al., 1999(, educators
and critics from various backgrounds have raised a number of concerns about its usefulness as the primary
measure of student achievements. these concerns lead them to alternative assessment.
What is alternative assessment )1
Definitions
There is no single definition of ‘alternative assessment’ in the relevant literature. For some educators,
alternative assessment is a term adopted to contrast with standardised assessment, e.g. professionally-
prepared objective tests consisting mostly of multiple choice items especially in the US tradition )Huerta-
Macias, 1995(. Others look at alternative assessment in more general terms. For instance, Hamayan )1995(
sees that alternative assessment “refers to procedures and techniques which can be used within the context of
instruction and can be easily incorporated into the daily activities of the school or classroom” )ibid:213(. To
this Smith )1999( adds that “[a]lternative assessment might take place outside the classroom or even the
institution at various points in time, and the subjects being tested may be asked to present their knowledge in
)various ways” )ibid:703
)Kohonen )1997( makes the point that alternative assessment )the author uses the term authentic assessment
emphasizes the communicative meaningfulness of evaluation and the commitment to measure that which we
value in education. It uses such forms of assessment that reflect student learning, achievement, motivation
and attitudes on instructionally-relevant classroom activities . Its results can be used to improve instruction,
.)based on the knowledge of learner progress )ibid:13
:In a more recent publication, Alderson and Banerjee )2001( provide the following definition
Alternative assessment’ is usually taken to mean assessment procedures which are less formal than’
traditional testing, which are gathered over a period of time rather than being taken at one point in time,
which are usually formative rather than summative in function, are often low-stakes in terms of
)consequences, and are claimed to have beneficial washback effects )ibid: 228
Benefits of alternative assessment .2
:Researchers and practitioners in the field believe that alternative assessment can
a. Evaluate the process and product of learning as well as other important learning behaviours
It is stressed that because most alternative assessment is ongoing in nature, the picture that emerges about the
learner and his or her language proficiency also reflects the developmental processes that take place in
language learning over time. Thus, through alternative assessment, it is possible to focus on both the process
,and the product of language learning )Belanoff & Dickson, 1991; Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Hamayan
.)Wiggins, 1989a, 1989b ;1995
Other than the above belief, educationists also claim that through alternative assessment it is possible to
collect information about some of the factors that influence achievement found in the students’ linguistic,
cultural, familial or educational backgrounds, e.g. their prior educational experiences, their family
education, etc. which can be especially important when planning and evaluating the effectiveness of
.)instruction )Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Kohonen, 1997; O’ Malley and Valdez Pierce, 1996
Furthermore, Genesee and Upshur )1996( stress that alternative assessment methods can also gather
information about those factors that affect student achievement which, according to the authors, should be
.seen as an integral part of students’ assessment, e.g
learning strategies )e.g. whether the student takes risks, improvises, focuses on meaning/form, self-orrects, •
)uses first language strategies
)affective and personality styles )e.g. whether the student is enthusiastic, self-reliant, resourceful, passive •
students’ work habits )e.g. whether the student is punctual, follows instructions well, meets goals, prepares •
)for class homework, seeks assistance when needed
students’ social behaviour )e.g. whether the student works cooperatively, socialises with peers, participates •
)in class discussion
reactions to the course )e.g. student participates actively in class activities, requires extra guidance, shows •
)initiative
b. Evaluate and monitor instruction
Alternative assessment is also believed to provide a strong link between instruction and assessment by
forming part of a feedback loop that allows classroom teachers to monitor and modify instruction continually
.in response to results of student assessment
c. Produce meaningful results to a variety of stakeholders
It is also believed that information obtained from alternative methods of assessment can be much more
useful and informative compared to test scores and easy to interpret and understand )Alderson and Banerjee,
2001; Clapham, 2000(.
Hamayan )1995( makes the point that this represents a tremendous benefit not only for teachers but other
‘clients’ of assessment, e.g. students, parents and administrators. In particular she sees that alternative
assessment methods allow students to “see their own accomplishments in terms that they can understand
and,consequently, it allows them to assume responsibility for their learning” )ibid: 215( while parents are
offered a clear insight into what their children are doing in school.
Teachers are also provided with “data on their students and their classroom for educational decision-
making….” )ibid: 215(. Alternative assessment also gives them the opportunity to chronicle the success of
the curriculum and can present them with a framework for organising students’ work. Even administrators
can benefit from alternative assessment. According to Hamayan, “administrators, who are typically least
convinced of the advantages of alternative assessment, can benefit from the clear information about student
and teacher attainment over time” )1995: 215(.
d. Relate to cognitive psychology and related fields
Furthermore, alternative assessment is also said to be in line with views expressed in cognitive psychology,
which suggest that learning is not linear, but proceeds in many directions at once and at an uneven pace.
Under this perspective, as Dietel et al.)1991:4( argue, students should be given the opportunity to use the
strategies they acquired at the right time and in the right way so as to apply them for the realization
of particular tasks. They also stress that alternative assessment techniques allow learners plenty of time to
‘generate’ rather than ‘choose’ a response: after recentlyacquired knowledge is brought to the forefront of
their minds, the higher-order thinking skills of synthesis and analysis are required for the learners when
participating in alternative assessment activities, which they can later reconsider by critically working
together with the teacher or other learners in sharing perceptions.
e. Represent a collaborative approach to assessment
Alternative assessment also represents a collaborative approach to assessment that enables teachers and
students to interact in the teaching/learning process )Barootchi & Keshvarz, 2002(. Thus, in the context of
alternative assessment, collaborative work is reinforced among students and/or between students and
teachers within a relaxed classroom atmosphere.
f. Support students’ psychologically
In addition to the above, alternative assessment is said to enhance learners’ self-esteem and feelings of
efficacy as a growing person. Furthermore, it is believed that alternative assessment can foster intrinsic
learning motivation and learner involvement )Broadfoot, 1986, 2003; Gardner, 1993; Gottlieb, 1995;
Kohonen, 1997; Leach et al., 1998; Mortimer, 1998; Wiggins, 1993; Wolf et al., 1991; inter alia(.
g. Promote autonomous and self-directed learning
It has also been argued that participating in alternative assessment can assist learners in becoming skilled
judges of their own strengths and weaknesses and in setting realistic goals for themselves which can develop
their capacity to become self-directed and autonomous learners )by acquiring the necessary metacognitive
knowledge and strategies, language learning strategies and cognitive styles( and thus develop lifelong
learning skills )Brindley, 2001; Council of Europe, 2001; Kohonen 1999, 2000; Leites & Butureira, 2000;
Lemos, 1999; Luoma and Tarnanen, 2003; inter alia(.
h. Provide new roles for teachers
With regard to the role of teachers within the alternative assessment paradigm, Genesee )2001( points out
that “[t]hese new evaluation approaches recognise classroom teachers as reflective, self-motivated
professionals” )ibid:150( while Kohonen )1997( points that alternative assessment allows teachers more
 space for developing criteria )ibid:14( and strengthens “the importance of the teacher’s professional
judgement and commitment to enhancing student learning” )ibid:13(.
3) Alternative Methods of Assessment
The following list summarises some of the most commonly used types or methods of alternative assessment
)based on Brown, 1998; Cohen, 1994; Genesee & Hamayan, 1994; Genesee and Upshur 1996; Hamayan,
1995; Ioannou-Georgiou and Pavlou, 2003; Newman and Smolen, 1993; O’Malley and Valdez Pierce 1996;
Short, 1993(:
• Conferences
• Debates
• Demonstrations
• Diaries/Journals
• Dramatizations
• Exhibitions
• Games
• Observations
• Peer-assessment
• Portfolios
• Projects
• Self-assessment
• Story retelling
• Think-alouds
It is important to note here, following Hamayan’s suggestion )1995:218( that the above methods of
assessment need to be distinguished from tools or ways which educators can use to record alternative
assessment information. The author cites the following as the most frequent ways of recording alternative
assessment:
• Anecdotal records
• Checklists
• Learner profiles
• Progress cards
• Questionnaires
• Rating Scales
)for a different classification of methods of alternative assessment, see also Herman et al., 1992; Navarrete
et al., 1990 and Short, 1993(.
Conclusion
The alternative assessment paradigm, as discussed in the present paper, is seen to embody a different concept
of assessment, i.e. assessment as an essential part of the learning process. However, further theoretical and
empirical work needs to be done to examine alternative assessment practices in depth. For example, we need
to reconceptualise alternative assessment and its relationship to standardised testing, to
understand how the aspects of alternative assessment are actually accomplished in classroom interaction and
to develop appropriate theory and research methods in the study of this highly complex and dynamic
teaching-learning-assessing interface before any definite conclusions about its positive effects on teaching
and learning are drawn. Therefore, the present paper makes an urgent appeal to future researchers with
an interest in the area to conduct empirical research in this exciting field within foreign/second language
settings.

Research Questions

This study tries to answer the following questions:

1- Is it possible to enhance students’ achievement utilizing alternative assessment techniques?

2- In which skill alternative assessment techniques work better?

3- Is there any relationship between alternative assessment and students’ proficiency?

4- Is there any relationship between alternative assessment and students’ motivation?

Research Hypothesis

Alternative assessment techniques significantly enhance students’ proficiency in learning.1

English
Alternative assessment techniques significantly enhance students’ motivation.2
There is a positive correlation between the performances of subjects and alternative .3
assessment

Methods

A) Participants

60 students from Bakharz ) a city in Razavi Khorasan ( high schools at the second grade are selected . 30
of them are assessed traditionally and the other 30 students are assessed by alternative methods and then they
will be examined according their performances at the end of term.
3

:Bibliography
Alderson, J. C. and Banerjee, J. 2001. Language testing and assessment )Part 1(.Language Teaching .
Alderson, J. C. and Wall, D. 1993. Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics
Archbald, D. A. 1991. Authentic assessment: an introduction to a neo-behavioural approach to classroom
assessment. School Psychology Quarterly
Aschbacher, P. R. 1991. Performance assessment: State activity, interest and concerns. Applied Measurement
in Education
Bachman, L. F. 2000. Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that we count counts.
Language Testing 17, 1: 1-42.
Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S. 1996. Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bailey, K. M. 1999. Washback in Language Testing. TOEFL Monograph Series MS-15. Princeton, NJ:
Educational Testing Service.
Balliro, L. 1993. What kind of alternative? Examining alternative assessment. TESOL Quarterly
Barootchi, N. and Keshavarz, M. H. 2002. Assessment of achievement through portfolio and teacher-made
tests. Educational Research
Belanoff, P. and Dickson, M. eds. 1991. Portfolios: Process and Product. Portmouth, NH: Boyton/Cook.
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 1998. Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: principles,
policy and practice
Black, P. J. 1993. Formative and summative assessment by teachers. Studies in Science Education
Breen, M., Baratt-Pugh, C., Derewianka, B., House, H., Hudson, C., Lumley T. and Roth, M. 1997. Profiling
ESL children. Volume 1: Key issues and findings. Canberra; Department of Employment, education, Training
and Youth Affairs.
Brindley, G. 1998. Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: A review of
the issues. Language Testing.
Brindley, G. 2001. Outcomes-based assessment in practice: some examples and emerging insights.
Language Testing
Broadfoot, P. M. ed. 1986. Profiles and records of achievement. London: Holt,Rinehart and Wilson.
Broadfoot, P. M. 2003. Dark Alleys and Blind Bends: Testing the Language of Learning. Paper presented
over the 25th Language Testing Research Colloquium, 22-25 July, University of Reading.
Brown, J. B. ed. 1998. New Ways of Classroom Assessment. USA: TESOL.
Brown, J. B. and Hudson, T. 1998a. The alternatives in language assessment’
TESOL Quarterly 32, 4:653-675.
Brown, J. B. and Hudson, T. 1998b. The alternatives in language assessment:
Advantages and Disadvantages. University of Hawai’i Working Papers in ESL,
Bruton, A. 1991. Testing round the world: continuous assessment in Spanish State Schools. Language
Testing Update,
Butterfield, S., Williams, A. and Marr, A. 1999. Talking about Assessment: mentor student dialogues about
pupil assessment in initial teacher training. Assessment in Education.
Carbery, S. 1999. Fundamentals of on-going assessment. Shiken: JALT Testing &Evaluation SIG Newsletter
Clapham, C. 2000. Assessment and Testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
Clark, S. and Gipps, C. 2000. The role of teachers in teacher assessment in England 1996-1998. Evaluation
and Research in Education
Cohen, A. D. 1994. Assessing language ability in the classroom. 2nd edition. Boston,MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Council of Europe 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:Learning, teaching,
assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crooks, T. J. 1988. The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational
Research
Cumming, J. J. and Maxwell, G. S. 1999. Contextualising Authentic Assessment’Assessment in Education
Darling-Hammond, L. 1994. Performance-based assessment and educational equity.
Harvard Educational Review
Elliott, S. 1991. Authentic assessment: an introduction to a neobehavioral approach to classroom assessment.
School Psychology Quarterly
Genesee, F. 2001. Evaluation. In The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other
Languages, eds. T. Carter and D. Nunan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Genesee, F. and Hamayan, E.1994. Classroom-based assessment. In Educating Second Language Children.
eds. F. Genesee Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Genesee, F. and Upshur, J. 1996. Classroom-based Evaluation in Second Language Education. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gipps, C. and Stobbart, G. 2003. Alternative Assessment. In International Handbook of Educational
Evaluation, eds. T. Kellaghan, D. L. Stufflebeam and L. A.Wingate. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Gipps, C. V. 1994. Beyond Testing: towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press.
Glover, P. and Thomas, R. 1999. Coming to grips with continuous assessment. Assessment in Education
Gottlieb, M. 1995. Nurturing student learning through portfolios. TESOL Journal
Haladyna, T. M., Nolen, S. B. and Haas, N. S. 1991. Raising standardized achievement tests scores and the
origins of test score pollution. Educational Research
Hamayan, E. V. 1995. Approaches to Alternative Assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
Hamp-Lyons, L. 1996. Applying ethical standards to portfolio assessments in writing in English as a second
language. In Performance Testing, Cognition and Assessment, eds. M. Milanovic and N. Saville. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hamp-Lyons, L. 1997. Washback, impact and validity: ethical concerns. Language Testing,
Hamp-Lyons, L. 1998. Ethical Test Preparation Practice: The Case of the TOEFL.TESOL QUARTERLY
)Forum Commentary(
Hamp-Lyons, L. and Condon W. 2000. Assessing the Portfolio. New Jersey: Hampton Press Inc.Cresskill.
Hancock, C. R. 1994. Glossary of Selected Terms. In Teaching, Testing and Assessment: Making the
Connection, ed. C. R. Hancock .Lincolnwood, Illinois, USA:National Textbook Company.
Harlen, W. and Deakin-Crick, R. 2002. A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests
on students’ motivation for learning )EPPI- CentreReview, version 1.1( Research Evidence in Education
Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
Harlen, W. and Deakin-Crick, R. 2003. Testing and motivation for learning.Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice.
Hart, D. 1994. Authentic assessment: a handbook for educators. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R. and Winters, L. 1992. A practical guide to alternative assessment.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Herman, J. L. and Golan, S. 1993. The effects of standardized testing on teaching and schools. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practices.
Herman, J. and Winters, L. 1994. Portfolio research: a slim collection. Educational Leadership
Hilke, R. and Wadden, P.1997. The TOEFL and its Imitators: Analyzing the TOEFL and Evaluating TOEFL-
prep texts. RELC Journal
Huerta-Macias, A. 1995. Alternative assessment: responses to commonly asked questions. TESOL Journal
Ioannou-Georgiou, S. and Pavlou, P. 2003. Assessing Young Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnstone, P., Guice, S., Baker, K., Malone, J. and Michelson, N. 1995. Assessment of teaching and learning
in literature-based classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education .
Lynch, B. 2001. Rethinking assessment from a critical perspective. Language Testing
Madaus, G. F. 1988. The influence of Testing on the Curriculum. In Critical Issues in Curriculum: 87th
Yearbook for the National Society for the Study of Education, ed.L. N. Tanner. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. Pp. 83-121.
Martin-Kniep, G. O. 2000. Standards, feedback, and diversified assessment: addressing equity issues at the
classroom level. Reading & Writing Quarterly
Mortimer, J. 1998. Motivating Student Learning through Facilitating Independence: Self and Peer
Assessment of Reflective Practice – An Action Research Project. In Motivating Students, eds. S. Brown, S.
Armstrong and G. Thompson. England: Kogan Page.
Newman, F., Brandt, R. and Wiggins, G. 1998. An exchange of views on ‘semantics, psychometrics, and
assessment reform: a close look at “authentic” assessments. Educational Researcher
O’Malley, M. and Valdez Pierce, L. 1996. Authentic assessment for English language learners. New York:
Addison-Wesley.
Puhl, C. A. 1997. Develop, Not Judge: Continuous Assessment in the ESL Classroom.English Teaching
Forum 35, 2:2-9.
Shohamy, E. 1998. Alternative assessment in language testing: applying a Multiplism approach. In Testing
and Evaluation in Second Language Education, eds.
Short, D. J. 1993. Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly
Smith, K. 1999. Language Testing: Alternative Methods. In Concise Encyclopedia of Educational
Linguistics, ed. B. Spolsky. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Soodak, L. C. 2000. Performance assesement: exploring issues of equity and fairness.Reading and Writing
Quarterly
Van Daalen, M. 1999. Test Usefulness in Alternative Assessment. Dialog on Language Instruction 1
Vernon, P. E. 1956. The Measurement of Abilities )2nd edition(. London: University of London Press.
Wall, D. 1996. Introducing new tests into traditional systems: insights from general
education and from innovation theory. Language Testing
Wiggins, G. 1989a. A true test: Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan
Wiggins, G. 1989b. Teaching to the )authentic( test. Educational Leadership 4
Wiggins, G. 1993. Assessing student performance. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Wiggins, G. 1994. Toward more authentic assessment of language performances. In
Worthen, B. R 1993. Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta
Kappan
Zeidner, M. 1996. How do high school and college students cope with test situations? British Journal of
Educational Psychology
.
 ‫‪4‬‬

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

‫امضاي استاد(ان) مشاور‬ ‫امضاي استاد(ان) راهنما‬ ‫امضاي دانشجو‬

‫تاريخ‬ ‫تاريخ‬ ‫تاريخ‬

‫‪5‬‬
 ‫با انجام پايان نامه آقاي‪/‬خانم‬ ‫در جلسه تحصیلت تكمیلي مورخ‬ ‫‪ -‬گروه‬
‫موافقت كرد‪.‬‬
‫امضاي مدير گروه‪-‬‬
‫تاريخ‬
‫با انجام پايان نامه نامبرده موافقت كرد‪.‬‬ ‫در جلسه تحصیلت تكمیلي مورخ‬ ‫‪ -‬دانشكده‬
‫امضاي رئیس دانشكده يا مدير تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشكده‪ -‬تاريخ‬

‫باانجام پايان نامه نامبرده را تصويب كرد‪..‬‬ ‫‪ -‬شوراي تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه در جلسه مورخ‬
‫امضاي مدير تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه‪ -‬تاريخ‬

‫در دفتر تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه ثبت شد‪.‬‬ ‫‪ -‬پايان نامه با شماره‬
‫امضاي كارشناس تحصیلت تكمیلي دانشگاه‪-‬تاريخ‬