The Effect of The Use of Self-Assessment On EFL Students' Performance in Reading Comprehension in English

11/28/2014
TheEffectoftheUseofSelfAssessmentonEFLStudentsPerformanceinReadingComprehensioninEnglish
Typesearchtexthere!
TheElectronicJournalforEnglishasaSecondLanguage
Home
AboutTESLEJ
AllIssues
Books
HowtoSubmit
EditorialBoard
Access
Search
Sitemap
TheEffectoftheUseofSelfAssessmentonEFLStudents
PerformanceinReadingComprehensioninEnglish
September2010Volume14,Number2
TheEffectoftheUseofSelfAssessmentonEFLStudentsPerformanceinReading
ComprehensioninEnglish
AbdallahAhmadBaniabdelrahman
YarmoukUniversity,Jordan
<baniabdelrahman yahoo.com>
Abstract
ThisstudyinvestigatestheeffectofJordanianEleventhgradestudentsselfassessmentontheirperformanceinreadingin
English.Thesampleofthestudyconsistedofanexperimentalgroupandacontrolgroupeachgroupconsistedoftwo
eleventhgradesections(67maleand69femalestudents).Areadingtestwasdevelopedanditsvalidityandreliabilitywere
established.Tocollectdataaboutthestudentsprogress,Iusedstudentselfassessmentthroughoneminutepapersand
ratingscalesheets.Thefindingsofthestudyrevealedthatstudentselfassessmenthadpositiveeffectontheirperformancein
readinginEnglish.Inlightofthefindings,itisrecommendedthatstudentsbetrainedonhowtouseselfassessment,andthat
instructorsbecomeawareofthepositiveeffectofstudentselfassessmentontheirperformanceinreading.
Introduction
Inabroadsense,assessmentisanymethodsusedtobetterunderstandthecurrentknowledgethatastudentpossesses(Collins&OBrien,
2003,p.29).AccordingtoCrooks(2001),assessmentisanyprocessthatprovidesinformationaboutthethinking,achievementorprogress
ofstudents,(p.1).Becauseassessmentisimportantinteachingandlearning,instructorsassesstheirstudentslearningregularly.Someof
themethodswhichinstructorsusetomeasuretheirstudentslearningarewrittentests,bookreports,projectwork,homeworkexercises,oral
presentations,andquestionandansweractivities.Therefore,instructorsspendagreatdealoftheirclasstimeengagedinonetypeof
assessmentoranother(Stiggins,2001).Ontheotherhand,studentassessmententailsusingawellorganizedsystem,namelytests,tomake
judgmentsaboutachievement(Gronlund&Linn,1990).Thesetestsbringanxiety,fear,ordisappointmenttostudents,whichmight
negativelyaffectlanguagelearning.Studentsmightsufferfromspendinglonghoursofstudyandpreparationfortestshauntedbymixed
feelingsofhopeandfear.Unfortunately,theymightbedisappointedatthefactthatwhattheyconcentrateondiffersfromwhatthe
instructoremphasizesinhis/herquestions(Guskey,2003Shaaban,2005).
Anylearningsystemneedsfeedback(Davis,1998).Sufficientdataneedtobecollectedabouteachstudentslearningproficiencytotake
whateveractionneededtomeeteachstudentslearningneedsandtoadjustthesystem.Toreachthisend,differentkindsofassessmentcould
beusedtoprovidereliableinformationaboutstudentslearningprogress.Assessmenthasthemostpowerfulinfluenceonstudentlearning
(George&Cowan,1999,p.8).Therefore,instructorsshouldalwaysbeseekinginformationthatwillassisttheminimprovingtheirstudents
performance(Shaaban,2005Tedick&Klee,1998).
Therearetwotypesofassessment:formativeassessment,thatis,assessmentforlearning,andsummativeassessment,whichisassessmentof
http://www.teslej.org/wordpress/issues/volume14/ej54/ej54a2/
1/12
11/28/2014
learning(Stiggins,2001Tessmer,1993).Summativeassessmenttakesplaceattheendofatermoracourseandisusedtoprovide
informationabouthowmuchstudentshavelearnedorhoweffectiveacoursehasbeen(Gipps,1994).Summativeassessmentisassessment
performanceattheendofatermofinstructiontoevaluateapupilstotallearningofasubjectmatterandarriveatagrade,(Spafford,Pesce,
&Grosser,1998,p.278).Itistheassessment,usuallyoncompletionofacourse,whichsayswhetherthestudenthaspassedornot.Itis
intendedtosummarizestudentsachievementataparticulartime.Itincludestests,quizzes,assignments,andprojectwork(Boston,2002).
Thatistosay,atestisusuallygivenattheendofaterm,semesteroryearthepurposeofwhichistomeasureproficiency(Boston,2002).
However,formativeassessmenttakesplaceduringacourseofteachingandisusedessentiallyasfeedbacktotheteachinglearningprocess
(OMalley&Pierce,1996).Inotherwords,itisanongoingprocessofcollectinginformationaboutstudentsperformancethroughvarious
techniquesofclassroomassessment.Thepurposeofformativeassessmentisnotonlytomeasureproficiency,butalsotoimproveitaswell.It
isanassessmentprocessthatisongoingwhileteachingandlearningareoccurring.Thepurposeofsuchanassessmentistofurtherthe
educationprocessratherthantodecideonagrade,(Spafford,Pesce,&Grosser,1998,p.108).Continuous,diagnosticassessmentprovides
informationthatcanguideteachingandlearning,therebyimprovingstudentperformance.Itincludestheuseofchecklists,conferences,self
assessment,ratingscales,andfocusedobservation(Gipps,1994).
Formativeassessmentsdonotinundatestudentswithquestionstobeansweredwithinatimelimit.Onthecontrary,theyreflecttheconcepts
andskillsthattheinstructoremphasizedinclass,alongwiththeinstructorsclearcriteriaforjudgingstudentsperformance,(Guskey,2003,
p.8).Anassessmentissummativewhentheintentionismainlytojudgestudentsachievement.
Formativeassessment,orassessmentforlearningasitissometimescalled,isacontinuousprocessinwhichthemainpurposeisbeyond
measurement,rather,itisusedtohelpstudentsimprove.Summativeassessment,orassessmentoflearning,tendstobeanendpoint,usually
expressedingradesandconcernedwithmakingjudgment(Oskarsson,1980).
Informationcollectedthroughformativeassessmentisusedtodetectthestrengthsandweaknessesoflearnersforthepurposeofimproving
proficiency(Collins&OBrien,2003Shaaban,2005).Itprovidesusefulinformationforboththeinstructorandthestudentuponwhich
appropriateactioncanbetaken(Blanch,1988Guskey,2003Satterly,1989Shaaban,2005).Bothformsofclassroomassessment,formative
andsummative,areneededtodeterminehowmuchlearninghasoccurred.
Studentsinvolvementintheteachinglearningprocessisimportant,asthereisevidencesuggestingthatstudentselfassessmenthelps
improvestudentsperformance(Brantmeier,2005Fontana&Fernandes,1994Shaaban,2005).Selfassessmentdoesnotmeanthat
studentsareallowedtoassessthemselvesintheformofgrades.Itisaprocessofcontinuousfeedbackbystudentsontheirownprogressto
helpboththestudentsandtheinstructor.
OnetechniqueinassessmentistheOneMinutePaper.[1]AngeloandCross(1993)arguethattheOneMinutePapercanbeusedtoprovide
quickfeedbackonstudentlearning.TheyalsoclaimthatvariousstudiesdemonstratethatstudentsinclasseswhereOneMinutePapersare
usedoutgainthosenotusingthistechnique.
BlackandWiliam(1998a)definetheassessmentprocesstoincludeallactivitiesundertakeninclasseitherbyinstructorstoassesstheir
studentsorbythestudentstoassessthemselvesusedasfeedbacktoadjusttheteachinglearningstrategies.Accordingtothisdefinition,
assessmentincludesinstructorobservation,classroomdiscussion,markingtests,andcollectinginformationfromthestudentsthemselves
abouttheirownlearningnamelystudentselfassessment.
Studentselfassessmentisoneofthemostimportantformativeclassroomassessmenttechniques.Oneofthepurposesofthistechniqueisto
improvethequalityofstudentslearning.Itcanalsoleadtomodificationswhenteachingstrategieshavenotmettherequiredlearning
outcomes.Someeducatorsarguethatstudentsoftenfindexternalassessmentbyinstructorsorsupervisorsunfair.Therefore,ifstudentsare
giventhechancetoassessthemselves,theywillbemoreconfidenttogivemoreaccurateinformationabouttheirprogress(Angelo&Cross,
1993).
Studentselfassessmentishowoneviewshimself/herselfintermsofnegativeandpositivecharacteristics,(Spafford,Pesce,&Grosser,1998,
p.253).Itreferstostudentsevaluationoftheirprogressinknowledgeandtheirimprovementinlearning(McMillan,2004).Italsoreferstoa
studentsownevaluationofhis/herstrengthsandweaknessesinreading.
Byassessingtheirownlearning,studentscanincreasetheirawarenessofwhatishappeninginclass(Gipps,1994).Perhapsthemost
importantfactorofasuccessfulteachinglearningprocessisactivestudentinvolvement(Stiggins,2001).Yet,instructorsshouldprovidetheir
studentswithfeedbackandteachthemtouseiteffectivelyforlearning.Consequently,studentscanlearnhowtoassessthemselvesinorderto
learnwhatisrequiredforsuccess(Black&Wiliam,1998b).Hence,successfulformativeassessmentdependsonactivestudentinvolvement.
2/12
11/28/2014
TeachingandAssessingEnglishinJordan
Someresearchersbelievethatreadingcomprehensionisdifficulttoassessaccurately(NationalCapitalLanguageResourceCenter,2004
Abraham,2005),becausereadingisacomplexbehaviorcomposedofmanyskills(Salvia&Ysseldyke,1988,p.354).Itcannotbeassessedin
isolationfromotherskills(Rivas,1999).Inotherwords,anumberoffactorsmustbeconsideredwhenassessingreading,including:the
purposeofreading,theoveralllinguisticlevelofthestudent,andtheroleofpreviousknowledge.Assessmentofreadingabilitydepends
mainlyonthepurposeofreading.Readingforapurposeprovidesmotivationanimportantaspectofbeingagoodreader(Grabe,1991,p.
378).
Whenassessingreading,instructorsassessanumberofsubskills.Theyassesswhetherstudentsareableto:
Comprehendthegeneralideaofatext
Recognizethetypeofatext:interactive,informative,narrative,orevaluative
Arrangethesequenceofinformationinatext
Usetheprereadingactivitiestopredictwhatatextwouldbeabout
Guessthemeaningsofparticularwordsfromcontext
Extractspecificinformationfromatext
Usedifferentreadingstrategies:skimming,scanning,speedreading,pacedreading,ortimedreading
TheMinistryofEducationinJordan(MOEJ)seekstheimplementationofalltheseskillsinitsschoolsinordertoimprovestudents
achievementinreading.Ifstudentsdemonstrateacommandofthoseskills,thentheMOEJhassucceededinfulfillingitsgoals.
BecauseoftheimportanceofEnglish,theMOEJintroducedaneweducationalsysteminwhichEnglishistaughtfromGrade1insteadof
Grade4.Thischangehasbroughttolightnewcontinuousassessment(CA)techniquesthatarenowusedtoassessstudentsachievement.
Thissystemwasintroducedinthebasicandsecondarystagesatthebeginningoftheacademicyear20062007.ThissystemofCAis
currentlyimplementedalongwiththeotherformalassessmenttechniques,namelysemestertests.CAismeanttomeasurethestudentsneeds
continuouslythroughassessmentofattainment...,measurementofthevalueofteachingmethodsandprocedures,anddiagnosisof
individualorgroupdifficulties(Sasidharan,2005,p.60).EnglishistaughtasaschoolsubjecttoallJordanianstudentsfromGrade1to
Grade12,forfivetosix45minuteperiodsperweek.
TheMOEJstartedanewevaluationsysteminitsschoolsformativeassessment,seekingimprovementinstudentsperformance.However,
thereismuchtobedonetofullyimplementthisnewsystem.Theaimofthisstudyistoinvestigatemorecloselytheimpactofstudentself
assessmentontheirperformanceinreadinginEnglish.Thesignificanceofthestudyisderivedfromthefactthatstudiesinvestigatingthe
effectofstudentselfassessmentonstudentsperformanceinreadinginEnglishinJordanarerareandnoncomprehensive.Therefore,this
studywillshedsomelightonthevalueoftheselfassessmenttechniqueanditseffectonstudentsperformanceinreadinginEnglish.
StatementoftheProblem
AlthoughclassroomassessmenthasbeengivenmuchattentionintheeducationalandevaluationsysteminJordanianschools,the
performanceofstudentsisstillnotatthedesiredlevel.Ibelievethatneglectingstudentsroleinassessmentsmaybeoneofthemainfactors
behindthislowperformance.Moreover,studentselfassessment,inparticular,hassofarbeendisregarded,eventhoughitmayhavea
powerfulandpositiveeffectonstudentlearning.
InJordanianschools,studentsareassessedsolelybyinstructorsthisactivityisintendedtoimprovethestudentsperformance.However,
studentsperformanceislessthanexpected.Oneissueislargeclasssize(3545studentsineachsection),whichhasanegativeeffecton
learningandteaching.Inclassesgreaterthan25students,instructorscannotalwaysunderstandtheirstudentsneeds(Hattie,1998
Sebatane,1998).Inthesecases,itisimportantthatstudentsplayaroletohelpthemselvesbecomebetterlearners.Selfassessmentenhances
theroleandresponsibilitiesofthestudenthowever,theinstructorremainsthemainsourceofassessment(Borg,2006).Tothisend,this
studyaddressestwoquestions:
1. AretheresignificantdifferencesintheJordanianGrade11EFLstudentsperformanceinEnglishreadingduetoeitherassessment
methods(selfassessmentmethodandtraditionalmethod)orgender?
2. Whatistheeffectofselfassessmentonreading?
Thehypothesesare:
1. Therearenosignificantdifference(=0.05)betweenthemeanscoresoftheselfassessmentmethodandtraditionalmethod)inthe
3/12
11/28/2014
Englishreadingperformancetest.
2. Thereisnosignificantdifference(=0.05)betweenthemeanscoresofthemaleandfemaleeleventhgradestudentsintheEnglish
readingperformancetest.
3. Thedifferencebetweenthemeanscoresofthecontrolgroupandthemeanscoresoftheexperimentalgroupisnotpractically
significant.
TheStudyPopulation
ThepopulationofthestudyconsistedofallGrade11EFLstudents(malesandfemales)inthepublicschoolsinIrbidFirstDirectorateof
Educationduringthesecondsemesteroftheacademicyear2008/2009.Morespecifically,thepopulationofthestudyconsistedof(3,012)
maleandfemalestudents(1,537malesand1,465females).ThesampleofthestudyconsistedoffourGrade11sections(twomalesandtwo
females)fromthesamedirectorate.Onemaleandonefemalesectionwereassignedasthecontrolgroupandthetwoothersectionsasthe
experimentalgroup.Table1belowshowsthedistributionofthepopulationandthesample.
Table1.DistributionofthePopulationandtheSampleoftheStudy
Total
Population
Sample
Females
Males
3,012
1,465
1,537
136
69
67
Beforethestudystarted,permissiontocarryoutthestudywasobtainedfromtheprincipalsofthemaleandthefemaleschools.Ialso
explainedthepurposeofthestudytothesubjects.Afterthat,thesubjectsofthestudysignedtherequiredpermissionformstoconductthe
study.
TwoAssessmentMethods
Thetwosectionsoftheexperimentalgroupweretaughtbytwotrainedinstructors(onemaleandonefemale),usingstudentselfassessment
alongwithothermoretraditionalclassroomassessmentmethods.AOneMinutePaperwasusedattheendofeachreadingclassperiod
(Appendix1).Inaddition,aratingscalesheet,thatis,awrittenlistofperformancecriteriaassociatedwithaparticularactivitywhichan
observerusestoassessthequalityofperformance(Dietel,Herman,&Knuth,1991),wasusedattheendofeachtopic/unit(Appendix2).Both
wereusedasquickdiagnosticstoencouragestudentstoreflectontheirlearningandtogivetheinstructorimmediatefeedback.Thetwo
sectionsinthecontrolgroupweretaughtbythesameinstructors,usingtraditionalclassroomassessmenttechniques.
Inordertoexaminetheequivalenceoftheexperimentalandcontrolgroups,Idevelopedandadministeredareadingtestbeforethesubjects
wereexposedtothetreatment.Table2showstheresultsofANOVAtestofthestudentsscoresinthetestofequivalence.
Table2.SimpleStatistics:ReadingComprehensionPreTestScores
Source
Mean
Standard
deviation
Method
68
54.26
12.85
68
55.06
13.82
67
55.00
12.79
69
54.33
13.86
Control
Experimental
Gender
Males
Females
4/12
11/28/2014
Table2showsthatthemeanscoresofthetwogroups(ControlandExperimental)wereverysimilar.Themeanscoresofthemaleandfemale
studentswerealsosimilar.
Table3.ANOVAResults:ReadingComprehensionPreTestScores
Source
P
FValue
Mean
Square
TypeIII
Squares
DF
Method
0.733
0.12
20.92
20.92
Gender
0.776
0.08
14.59
14.59
179.28
23844.41
133
23880.44
135
Error
Grand
Total
Table3showsthattherewasnostatisticallysignificantdifferenceat=0.05betweenthemeanscoresoftheexperimentalgroupandthe
meanscoresofthecontrolgroupinthereadingcomprehensiontestbeforethestudystarted(Fvalue=0.12,P=0.733)thetwogroupswere
equivalent.Themeanofthecontrolgroupwas54.26withastandarddeviationof12.85,andthemeanoftheexperimentalgroupwas55.06
withastandarddeviationof13.82.
TheInstrument
Thestudyinstrumentwasareadingtestthatwasconductedbeforeandafterthetreatment.Initsfinalform,thetestcomprisedfourdifferent
readingquestions.Question1consistedof6items,with2markseach.Thestudentshadtomatcheachitem,locatedontheleft,withthe
suitabletext,locatedontheright.Therewerefourtextsontheright.Question2consistedof6items,with3markseach.Thestudentshadto
readthe6shorttextsgivenandthenwriteonewordtocompletethesentencesthatfolloweachtext.Question3consistedof9items,with2
markseach.Thestudentshadtoreadthetextandthenanswerthe9multiplechoiceitemsthatfollowed.Question4consistedof4items,
with3markseach.Inthis,thestudentsreadatextandthentickedtheitemsaccordingtowhethertheywereTRUE,FALSE,orDOESNT
SAY.(DoesntSaymeantthatthepieceofinformationwasnotmentionedinthetext.)Therewere60totalpointspossible,whichwaslater
scaledas100.Thetimeallottedforthetestwas60minutes.
InstrumentValidity
Toguaranteethevalidityoftheinstrument,itwasgiventoajuryofTEFLspecialists:threeprofessorsintheCurriculumandInstruction
DepartmentinthefacultyofeducationatYarmoukUniversity,threeschoolsupervisorsatIrbidFirstDirectorateofEducation,andthree
experiencedEFLinstructorsworkinginschoolsatthesamedirectorate.Thejuryexaminedthetestandprovidedtheircommentsand
suggestionsformodificationstofitthepurposeofthestudy.Theyevaluatedthetestaccordingtolanguage,clarity,appropriatenessofthe
questionstothelevelofthestudents,relevancetotheskillithasmeanttotest,andtiming.Thejurorscommentsandrecommendationswere
takenintoconsideration,andnecessarymodificationsweremade.Thetestinitsformerstructureconsistedof5questionsof30items.The
majorityofthejurorssuggestedthatthenumberofquestionsshouldbereducedto4questionsinordertofittheallottedtime.Other
modificationsconcerningstructure,choiceofwords,andlayoutofthetestwererecommended.Forexample,originally,Question1hadtwo
distracters.Thejurorsrecommendedanadditionaldistracter.Initsfinalform,thetestcomprised4questionsof25items.
InstrumentReliability
Toestablishthereliabilityoftheinstrument,apilotstudywasconductedinanearbyschoolthreeweeksbeforethepretestwasgiventothe
twogroups.TwentyfiveGrade11EFLstudentscompletedtheexam.ThetestwasconductedforthefirsttimeinearlyDecember2007.Before
theteststarted,Iexplainedtheinstructionstothestudents.Thestudentsweregivennotimelimittoanswerthefourquestionsofthetest.I
noticedthat60minuteswasenoughforaveragestudentstocompletethetest.Threeweekslater,thesametestwasgiventothesamesubjects
anothertime,usingthesameprocedures.Thisensuredthevalidityofthepreviousresults.ThePearsoncorrelationcoefficientwascalculated
atr=84.4%.
DataCollection
Tocollectthedataforthisstudy,IusedanadaptedOneMinutePaperassignment(Angelo&Cross,1993)inwhichstudentsgaveshort
answerstothreequestions(Appendix1).TheOneMinutePaperhadatypicalformatstudentsweregiventhreeshortquestionsaskingto
5/12
11/28/2014
reflectontheirlearning.Somemodificationsweremadetomeettheneedsofthestudy.ThisOneMinutePaperhelpedstudentstoreflecton
thereadinglessons,andgavetheinstructorimmediatefeedbackaboutthestudentslearning.TheOneMinutePaperwasusedattheendof
eachclassperiodtocheckthestudentsunderstandingofwhathadbeentaughtinthatclassperiod.Attheendofeachtopic/unit,arating
scalesheetwasdistributedtocheckthestudentsunderstandingofthetopicasawhole(Appendix2).
Inaddition,theinstructorsometimesaskedthestudentstodiscusstheirthoughtsinpairs.Theinstructoralsobroughtinterestingstudent
responsesforthenextclass,inordertoencouragestudentstogivethoughtfulresponses.Thepurposeofthisinstrumentwastoletthe
studentsthinkaloud,whichprovidedboththeinstructorandthestudentswithtruedataaboutthestudentslearningoutcomes.After
analyzingthestudentsfeedback,iftheinstructorfeltthatthestudentshadfailedtounderstandacertainpoint,heorshecouldtryanother
teachingstrategyforthenextclasstoteachthatparticularpointagain.Toachievethisgoal,theinstructorcollectedthestudentsfeedback
andsorteditintotopics.Forexample,somestudentsstatedthattheyfacedproblemswithreferencing.Otherssaidthattheyhaddifficulty
guessingmeaningofnewvocabularyfromcontext.Athirdgroupsaidthattheyencountereddifficultyinfindingthemainideaofagiven
paragraph.
ToensuretheappropriateuseoftheOneMinutePaper,Itrainedthesubjectsoftheexperimentalgroupfortwoweeksbeforethetreatment
onhowtoselfassesssothattheywereabletousetheOneMinutePapercorrectlyandeffectively.Iundertooktwoactionstoensurethatthe
useoftheOneMinutePaperwasgoingsmoothly.ThefirstwastoprepareprintedsheetsandgivingthemtotheEFLinstructorofthe
experimentalgroupsothathecoulddistributethemtothestudentsmoreeasily.Thesecondactionwastoemphasizethereasonbehindusing
theOneMinutePaperandwhatwehopedtoachieve.Inordertoguaranteethebestuseoftheselfassessmenttechnique,theinstructorsof
theexperimentalgrouptrainedtheirstudentsonhowtoundertakeeachofthetaskslistedintheselfassessment.
Iimplementedthereadingtesttwicewithbothgroupsbeforethetreatmenttochecktheequivalenceofthetwogroups,andafterthe
treatmenttocheckiftherewasanysignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroupsconcerningperformanceinreadingattributedtothe
treatment.
Thestudylastedforsixweeks,fromtheFebruary4toMarch15,2009,duringwhichtimeIusedstudentselfassessmenttoteachthe
experimentalgrouptomonitortheirprogressinreading.Ninereadingtextsofdifferenttopicswereincludedinthestudy.Attheendofthe
study,aposttestwasadministeredtobothgroupstoinvestigatethestudentsachievementinreading.Imarkedthetest,andtheresults,
alongwiththeresultsofthepretest,wereanalyzedusingSASsoftware.Means,standarddeviations,andanANOVAtestwereusedto
determinedifferencesbetweenthereadingachievementsofthetwogroups.
DataAnalysis
Twotechniqueswereusedtoanalyzethedata:
1. AnANOVAtestwasusedtocomparethemeansofthetwogroups.
2. Theeffectsizeequationwasusedtocheckthesignificanceofthepracticaleffectofstudentselfassessment,alongwiththestatistical
significancethroughthelevelofimprovementinstandarddeviation.
Table4presentsthemeansandstandarddeviationsofthestudentsoftheexperimentalandcontrolgroupsafterthetreatment.
Table4.MeansandStandardDeviationsofPostTreatmentReadingComprehensionScores
Source
Mean
Standard
deviation
Method
Gender
Control
68
56.40
16.41
Experimental
68
65.43
12.17
Males
67
62.01
13.76
Females
69
59.84
16.31
Method
Gender
6/12
11/28/2014
Control
Males
33
58.18
15.20
Control
Females
35
54.71
17.93
Exper.
Males
34
65.73
11.22
Exper.
Females
34
65.12
13.22
Thistableshowsthattherearedifferencesbetweenthemeanscoresofthestudentsoftheexperimentalandcontrolgroups.Themeanscore
oftheexperimentalgroupis65.43withastandarddeviationof12.17whilethemeanscoreofthecontrolgroupis56.40withastandard
deviationof16.41.Inordertotestifthedifferenceissignificant,ANOVAtestwasrun.Theresultsarepresentedintable6below.
Table5.ANOVATestResults:ScoresintheReadingComprehensionPreTestScores
Source
FValue
Mean
Square
TypeIII
Squares
DF
0.0004
17.03
2739.62
2739.62
0.41
0.67
141.79
141.79
0.57
0.33
69.01
69.01
210.30
27760.20
132
30742.94
135
Method
Gender
Method*Gender
Error
GrandTotal
Table5showsthatthereisnosignificantinteractionbetweenthemethodofassessmentandthestudentsgender(formoreclarificationsee
Figure1).Theresultsalsoshowthatthereisnosignificantdifferenceinthestudentsscoresduetogender(F=0.67,P=0.41).Themeanscore
ofthemalestudentswas62.01andthemeanscoreofthefemalestudentswas59.84.Ontheotherhand,theresultsshowthatthereisa
significantdifferencebetweenthereadingachievementofthestudentsoftheexperimentalgroupoverthestudentsofthecontrolgroupafter
treatmentduetothemethodofassessmentat=0.05(F=17.03,P=0.0004).Thisresultsupportsthealternativehypothesisofthestudy,
whichstatesthattherewouldbeasignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups.Therefore,thenullhypothesisisrejected.
Comparingtheaveragescoresofthesubjectsintheexperimentalgrouptothescoresofthestudentsinthecontrolgrouponthesametest,the
valueofFwasfoundtobe17.03.Thisindicatesthattheimplementationofstudentselfassessmenthadapositiveeffectonthestudents
performanceinreadingat=0.05.Thisresultsupportsthealternativehypothesisofthestudy.Therefore,thenullhypothesisisrejected.
Theeffectsizeequationwasusedtocheckthesignificanceofthepracticaleffectofstudentselfassessmentalongwiththestatistical
significancethroughthelevelofimprovementinstandarddeviation.Theeffectsizewascalculatedandfoundtobe0.852,whichissignificant
at=0.05.
7/12
11/28/2014
Figure1.InteractionbetweenGenderandMethodofAssessment
Figure1showsthatalthoughmalestudentsscoredbetterthanfemalestudentsinthetwomethodsofassessment,thereisnosignificant
interactionbetweenthestudentsgenderandthemethodofassessment.
Discussion
Thisstudyfoundthreesignificantdifferencesduetotheimplementationoftheselfassessmenttechnique.Therewasastatisticallysignificant
differencebetweenthemeanscoresoftheperformanceofthesubjectsoftheexperimentalgroupovertheperiodofthestudycomparedtothe
meanscoresofthesubjectsofthecontrolgroup.Moreover,theresultsofthestudyrevealthatthereisasignificantdifferenceinvarianceof
achievementbetweenthetwogroups.Theeffectsizeofselfassessmentonreadingwassignificant.Thisindicatesthattheselfassessment
methodwasmoreeffectivethanthetraditionalmethodofassessmentinimprovingstudentsreadingcomprehension.Thus,theOneMinute
Papersandratingscalesheetshadapositiveeffectonstudentsunderstandinginreading.Theseresultsmightbeduetotheeffectofactive
learningonstudentsunderstandingandachievement.Theuseofactivelearningtechniquesintheclassroomhaspowerfulimpactupon
studentslearning.Previousresearchhasshownthattraditionalteachingthroughlecturingmethodsdominatesstudentsclassrooms.Onthe
otherhand,theactivelearninginwhichstudentsareactivelyinvolvedintheclassroomdiscussion,positivelyinfluencesstudentsattitudes
andachievement(Bonwell&Eison,1991).
Throughattendingmanysectionsoftheclassesthatusedtheselfassessmentmethod,Inoticedthatstudentselfassessmenthadseveral
advantages.Itledtoimprovementinstudentslearning,astheresultsoftheposttestshowed.IalsonoticedthattheOneMinutePapersand
theratingscalesheetswereuseful,especiallyforshystudentswhowerereluctanttosaythattheydidnotunderstandsomething.
Therewere18failuresintheexperimentalgroupbeforetreatmentinthepretest.However,thenumberdecreasedinto6failures,whereas,the
numberoffailuresinthecontrolgroupdecreasedby2only(from19failuresto17).Thisindicatesthatthelowachieversintheexperimental
groupshowedprogress,whichmaybeattributabletotheimplementationofstudentselfassessment.
Comparingtherawscoresofthehighachieversinbothgroupsbeforeandafterthetreatment,theexperimentalgroupsubjectsprogressed
moreincomparisontothecontrolgroupsubjects.However,comparingtheincreaseinthescoresofthehighachieversandthelowachievers
oftheexperimentalgroup,Ifoundthatlowachievershadgreaterscoreincreases.Thisindicatesthatlowachieverscouldbenefitmorefrom
theimplementationofthetechniqueofstudentselfassessment,ofcoursehighachieverscouldbenefitfromitaswell.
ItmightalsoencourageEFLinstructorstotrythisclassroomassessmenttechnique.Moreover,studentscanbenefitfromtheresultsofthis
studybyhelpingthemconsidertheirstrengthsandweaknesses,andimprovetheirlearning.
Conclusion
Thisstudyshowsthatselfassessmentisaneffectivemethodinimprovingstudentsreadingperformance.Thismethodofassessment
encouragesstudentstoparticipatemoreopenly,aswasclearfromtheresearchersdaytodayobservations.Selfassessmenthelpsstudentsto
givemoreaccurateandhonestresponses,especiallywhentheyfeelthattheywillnotbejudgedsolelybymarks.Italsohelpsstudentstodirect
theirownlearningeffortsmoreeffectively,aswasevidencedinthisstudy.Moreimportantly,ithelpsstudentsbecomemoreinvolvedand
motivatedinthelearningprocess,whichwasclearintheirparticipationinsideandoutsidetheclassroom.
8/12
11/28/2014
Note
[1]TheOneMinutepaperisdescribedasfollows,quotedfromBressoud(n.d.):
Initsbasicformat,theinstructortakesthelastminute(or,realistically,threeminutes)ofclassandasksstudentstowritedownshortanswers
totwoquestions:
Whatwasthemostimportantpointmadeinclasstoday?
Whatunansweredquestiondoyoustillhave?
Responsescanbeputon35cardsthatareIhandout,oronthestudentsownpaper.Studentscanbeallowedtorespondanonymously,to
encouragethemtoadmitpointsofconfusiontheymighthesitatetoputtheirnameto,ortheycanbeaskedtowritetheirnamessothatthe
instructorcanwriteabrief,personalresponsetoeachquestionorencouragethoughtfulanswersbygivingextracredit.
Thequestionscanbemodifiedinvariousways,buttheyshouldremainopenended.InonevariationdescribedbyAngeloandCross,the
instructoraskedeachstudenttonamefivesignificantpointsthathadbeenmadeinthatsession.
AbouttheAuthor
Dr.AbdallahAhmadBaniabdelrahmanisanassistantprofessorattheDepartmentofCurriculumandInstructionatYarmouk
UniversityinIrbid,Jordan.HehasaPh.DinCurriculumandInstructionofEnglishfromtheUniversityofArkansas(U.S.A).Hisresearch
interestsincludeteacherpreparation,teachingEnglishtoforeignstudents,practicumteaching,andtechnologyinlanguageteaching.Dr.
Baniabdelrahmanhaspublishedarticlesinbothlocalandinternationaljournals.
References
Abraham,E.(2005).Habitsdiehard:Inculcatingreadinghabits.ProceedingsoftheFifthNationalELTConference(pp.2429).Sultan
QaboosUniversity,MuscatApril2021.
Angelo,T.,&Cross,K.(1993).Classroomassessmenttechniques:Ahandbookforcollegeinstructors(2nded.).SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey
Bass.
Black,P.,&Wiliam,D.(1998a).Assessmentandclassroomlearning.AssessmentinEducation,5(1),774.
Black,P.,&Wiliam,D.(1998b).Insidetheblackbox:Raisingstandardsthroughclassroomassessment.PhiDeltaKappan,80(2),139148.
Blanch,P.(1988).Selfassessmentofforeignlanguageskills:Implicationsforinstructorsandresearchers.RELCJournal,19(1),7593.
Bonwell,C.,&Eison,J.(1991).Activelearning:Creatingexcitementintheclassroom.ERICDigest:ED340272.
Borg,S.(2006).ClassroomresearchinEnglishlanguageteachinginOman.Muscat,MinistryofEducation,SultanateofOman:Oriental
PrintingPress.
Boston,C.(2002).Theconceptofformativeassessment.PracticalAssessment,Research&Evaluation,8(9).RetrievedJuly20,2006,from
http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=9.
Brantmeier,C.(2005).Nonlinguisticvariablesinadvancedsecondlanguagereading:Learnersselfassessmentandenjoyment.Foreign
LanguageAnnals,38,(4),494504.
Bressoud,D.M.(n.d.).TheOneMinutePaper.RetrievedSeptember9,2010from:http://www.maa.org/saum/maanotes49/87.html.
Collins,J.,&OBrien,N.(2003).TheGreenwooddictionaryofeducation.Westport,CT:GreenwoodPress.
Crooks,T.(2001).Thevalidityofformativeassessment.PaperpresentedtoTheBritishEducationalResearchAssociationAnnual
Conference,UniversityofLeeds,1315September,2001.RetrievedFebruary24,2007,from
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001862.htm.
9/12
11/28/2014
Davis,A.(1998).Thelimitsofeducationalassessment.Oxford:BlackwellPublishers.
Dietel,R.,Herman,J.,&Knuth,R.(1991).Whatdoesresearchsayaboutassessment?NCREL,OakBrook.RetrievedJuly15,2006,from
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as8lk30.htm.
Fontana,D.,&Fernandes,M.(1994).ImprovementsinmathematicsperformanceasaconsequenceofselfassessmentinPortugueseprimary
schoolpupils.BritishJournalofEducationalPsychology,64(3),407417.
George,J.,&Cowan,J.(1999).Ahandbookoftechniquesforformativeevaluation:Mappingthestudentslearningexperience.London:
KoganPageLimited.
Gipps,C.(1994)Beyondtesting:Towardsatheoryofeducationalassessment.London:FalmerPress.
Grabe,W.(1991).Currentdevelopmentinsecondlanguagereadingresearch.TESOLQuarterly,25(3),375406.
Gronlund,N.,&Linn,R.(1990).Measurementandevaluationinteaching.NewYork,NY:Macmillan.
Guskey,T.(2003).Howclassroomassessmentsimprovelearning.EducationalLeadership,60,(5),611.
Hattie,J.(1998).Assessmentandclassroomlearning:Adeductiveapproach.AssessmentinEducation:Principles,Policy&Practice,5(1),
111122.
McMillan,J.(2004).Classroomassessment:Principlesandpracticeforeffectiveinstruction(3rded.).Boston,MA:PearsonEducation,Inc.
TheNationalCapitalLanguageResourceCenter(NCLRC).(2004).Teachingreading:Goalsandtechniquesforteachingreading.Retrieved
January3,2007,fromhttp://www.nclrc.org/about.html.
OMalley,J.,&Pierce,L.(1996).AuthenticAssessmentforEnglishLanguageLearners:PracticalApproachesforInstructors.Boston:
AddisonWesleyPublishingCompany.
Oskarsson,M.(1980).Approachestoselfassessmentinforeignlanguagelearning.Oxford,UK:PergamonPress.
Rivas,R.(1999).ReadinginrecentELTcoursebooks.ELTJournal,53(1),1221.
Salvia,J.,&Ysseldyke,J.(1988).Assessmentinspecialandremedialeducation(4thed.).Boston,MA:HoughtonMifflinCompany.
Satterly,D.(1989).Assessmentinschool(2nded.).Oxford,UK:BasilBlackwell.
Sasidharan,P.(2005).Continuousassessment:Areview.MuscatMessage,MinistryofEducation.Muscat:AlNahdaPrintingPress,6062.
SaskatchewanEducation.(1998).Englishlanguagearts20:Acurriculumguideforthesecondarylevel.
Regina,SK:SaskatchewanEducation.RetrievedFebruary9,2007fromhttp://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/ela20/teach5.html.
Sebatane,E.(1998).Assessmentandclassroomlearning:AresponsetoBlack&Wiliam.AssessmentinEducation:Principles,Policy&
Practice,5(1),123130.
Shaaban,K.(2005).Assessmentofyounglearners.EnglishTeachingForum43(1),3440.
Spafford,C.,Pesce,A.,&Grosser,G.(1998).Thecyclopediceducationdictionary.NewYork,NY:DelmarPublishers.
Stiggins,R.(2001).Studentinvolvedclassroomassessment(3rded.).UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:MerrillPrenticeHall.
Tedick,D.,&Klee,C.(1998).Alternativeassessmentinthelanguageclassroom.CenterforAppliedLinguistics,Washington,DC.(ED433
720).
Tessmer,M.(1993).Planningandconductingformativeevaluation:Improvingthequalityofeducationandtraining.London:KoganPage
Limited.
10/12
11/28/2014
Copyrightrestswithauthors.PleaseciteTESLEJappropriately.
EditorsNote:TheHTMLversioncontainsnopagenumbers.PleaseusethePDFversionofthis
articleforcitations.
Appendix1
OneMinutePaper
DearStudent,
Selfassessmentisavitalcomponentinlearning.Youarekindlyrequestedtofranklycommentonyourownlearning.Youareencouragedto
shareresponsibilityforyourownlearning.Teachingcannotbeeffectiveunlesstheinstructorcomestoknowyourstrengthsandweaknesses.
Yourresponseswillhelpmefindouthowthecourseisgoingonandgivemeanideaonwhetheranychangesareneeded.Thisoneminute
paperismainlypreparedtohelpyou,anditwonttakemuchofyourtime.Themoreyouareopenandaccurateinansweringthesequestions,
themoreprogressinteachingandlearningtherewillbe.
Iappreciateyourcooperation.
AdaptedfromAngelo&Cross(1993).
Returntomaintext
Appendix2
RatingScaleSheet
(SelfassessmentforReading)
11/12
11/28/2014
Returntomaintext
Adaptedfrom:SaskatchewanEducation(1998).
Copyright19942014TESLEJ,ISSN10724303
Copyrightrestswiththeauthors.
12/12

The Effect of The Use of Self-Assessment On EFL Students' Performance in Reading Comprehension in English

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Effect of The Use of Self-Assessment On EFL Students' Performance in Reading Comprehension in English

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/28/2014

You might also like