将替代评估与课程设计和教学实践相结合:以埃塞俄比亚三所大学的英语交际技能课程为例

Minda Hirpassa Motuma, Chaka Chaka
{"title":"将替代评估与课程设计和教学实践相结合:以埃塞俄比亚三所大学的英语交际技能课程为例","authors":"Minda Hirpassa Motuma, Chaka Chaka","doi":"10.30870/jels.v8i1.17924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current study set out to investigate the alignment of alternative assessment (AA) with the communicative English skills course (CESC) curriculum design and the CESC teaching practices at three Ethiopian universities. Employing a mixed-methods design, it was guided by three research questions. The study utilised summative content data and quantitative content data, and subjected them to descriptive statistics, and Mann-Whitney U Test and Kruskal-Wallis Test. Some of its main results are worth mentioning. Firstly, out of a total of 632 assessment items in CESC, only 30.22% of them were found to be communicatively using AA, while 69.78% of the items in the module were found to be using traditional assessment (TA). Secondly, the instructors’ assessment practices in CESC were inconsistent with AA, and varied across the three universities and from instructor to instructor. The assessment items were disproportionate to the language objectives in CESC because the instructors mainly devoted more time to assessing reading skills, grammar, and vocabulary knowledge. For example, the correlation coefficients of the assessment items for grammar (0.142), vocabulary (0.139), and reading (0.115) were better aligned with the content items in the CESC module than the assessment","PeriodicalId":44950,"journal":{"name":"3L-Language Linguistics Literature-The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aligning Alternative Assessment with Curriculum Design and Teaching Practices: The Case of Communicative English Skills Course at Three Ethiopian Universities\",\"authors\":\"Minda Hirpassa Motuma, Chaka Chaka\",\"doi\":\"10.30870/jels.v8i1.17924\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The current study set out to investigate the alignment of alternative assessment (AA) with the communicative English skills course (CESC) curriculum design and the CESC teaching practices at three Ethiopian universities. Employing a mixed-methods design, it was guided by three research questions. The study utilised summative content data and quantitative content data, and subjected them to descriptive statistics, and Mann-Whitney U Test and Kruskal-Wallis Test. Some of its main results are worth mentioning. Firstly, out of a total of 632 assessment items in CESC, only 30.22% of them were found to be communicatively using AA, while 69.78% of the items in the module were found to be using traditional assessment (TA). Secondly, the instructors’ assessment practices in CESC were inconsistent with AA, and varied across the three universities and from instructor to instructor. The assessment items were disproportionate to the language objectives in CESC because the instructors mainly devoted more time to assessing reading skills, grammar, and vocabulary knowledge. For example, the correlation coefficients of the assessment items for grammar (0.142), vocabulary (0.139), and reading (0.115) were better aligned with the content items in the CESC module than the assessment\",\"PeriodicalId\":44950,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"3L-Language Linguistics Literature-The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"3L-Language Linguistics Literature-The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30870/jels.v8i1.17924\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"3L-Language Linguistics Literature-The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30870/jels.v8i1.17924","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前的研究旨在调查埃塞俄比亚三所大学的替代评估(AA)与英语交际技能课程(CESC)课程设计和CESC教学实践的一致性。采用混合方法设计,以三个研究问题为指导。本研究采用总结性内容数据和定量内容数据,并对其进行描述性统计、Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验。它的一些主要成果值得一提。首先,在CESC的632个评估项目中,只有30.22%的项目被发现使用了AA,而模块中69.78%的项目被发现使用了传统评估(TA)。其次,CESC讲师的评估实践与AA不一致,并且在三所大学之间和讲师之间存在差异。由于教师主要将更多的时间用于评估阅读技能、语法和词汇知识,因此评估项目与CESC的语言目标不成比例。例如,语法(0.142)、词汇(0.139)和阅读(0.115)三个评估项目的相关系数与CESC模块中的内容项目比评估项目更吻合
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Aligning Alternative Assessment with Curriculum Design and Teaching Practices: The Case of Communicative English Skills Course at Three Ethiopian Universities
The current study set out to investigate the alignment of alternative assessment (AA) with the communicative English skills course (CESC) curriculum design and the CESC teaching practices at three Ethiopian universities. Employing a mixed-methods design, it was guided by three research questions. The study utilised summative content data and quantitative content data, and subjected them to descriptive statistics, and Mann-Whitney U Test and Kruskal-Wallis Test. Some of its main results are worth mentioning. Firstly, out of a total of 632 assessment items in CESC, only 30.22% of them were found to be communicatively using AA, while 69.78% of the items in the module were found to be using traditional assessment (TA). Secondly, the instructors’ assessment practices in CESC were inconsistent with AA, and varied across the three universities and from instructor to instructor. The assessment items were disproportionate to the language objectives in CESC because the instructors mainly devoted more time to assessing reading skills, grammar, and vocabulary knowledge. For example, the correlation coefficients of the assessment items for grammar (0.142), vocabulary (0.139), and reading (0.115) were better aligned with the content items in the CESC module than the assessment
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
28.60%
发文量
52
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: The editorial board welcomes submissions that provide insights into key issues dealing with the English Language in a region that hosts multicultural/lingual communities and contexts. Our policy is to enable the advancement of knowledge dealing with English Language studies in these communities and contexts by providing a publication avenue for new and insightful multidisciplinary work in the region. The ultimate objective of the journal is to create critical awareness of Southeast Asian concerns with all areas of English language Studies. Submissions that draw parallels between regional and global concerns of English Language Studies are also welome. 3L publishes issues in March, June, September and December. Please visit the website to have a better idea of the kinds of articles published and the submission guidelines.
期刊最新文献
Ecological Crises of the Capitalocene: A Study on Colleen Murphy’s The Breathing Hole Retranslation in the Malaysian Context: The Case of Two Malay Translations of Almayer’s Folly A Corpus-Assisted Critical Discourse Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccination-Related News Discourse in the Malaysian Mainstream Media Spaces for Literary Production in New Order Indonesia and Beyond Rerouting The Worlding of Inter-Ethnic Estrangement Through Critical Solace: Shivani Sivagurunathan’s Yalpanam
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1