Abstract
This paper investigates teachers’ exclusion from designing exit tests and the justifications of different stakeholders. Teachers and decision-makers can justify exclusion from different perspectives. This small-scale critical exploratory study, which was conducted in a vocational institute in the United Arab Emirates, aims at problematizing the issue of depriving teachers from designing exit tests. It also intends to raise teachers’ awareness about this issue. According to proponents of the critical theory, questioning perpetuated situations and raising others’ awareness about similar experiences can lead to a change in the dominating culture of many workplaces. In this study, the researcher used questionnaires and semi-structured interviews as tools of data collection to problematize this issue and compare the various justifications of the two main stakeholders: Teachers and decision makers. Results of this critical exploratory study showed that most teachers are not allowed to participate in designing exit tests. Results also revealed that most of the excluded teachers are assessment literate, aware of the objectives and principles of testing, which may refute the alleged assumptions about teachers’ incompetence. Moreover, results of the study showed that the impact of the study was immediate as most of the excluded teachers expressed their intention to discuss this issue with decision makers.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2003). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Edge, J., & Richards, K. (1998). May I see your warrant please? Justifying outcomes in qualitative research. Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 334–356.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage book.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Gillham, B. (2000). Developing a questionnaire. London: Continuum.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a post method pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537–560.
Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange, 17(4), 63–84.
McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McNamara, T. (2012). Language assessment as shibboleths: A Poststructuralist perspective. Applied Linguistics, 33(5), 564–581.
Mertens, D. M. (2008). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory perspective. In V. P. Clark & J. W. Creswell (Eds.), The mixed methods reader (pp. 68–104). California: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. California: Sage.
Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. London: LEA.
Pennycook, A. (2010). Critical and alternative directions in applied linguistics. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 16.1–16.16.
Punch, K. F. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage.
Rea-Dickins, P. (1997). So, why do we need relationship with stakeholders in language testing? A view from the UK. Language Testing, 14(3), 304–314.
Shohamy, E. (1997). Testing methods, testing consequences: Are they ethical? Are they fair? Language Testing, 14(3), 340–349.
Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Shohamy, E. (2005). The power of tests over teachers: The power of teachers over tests. In D. J. Tedick (Ed.), Second language teacher education: International perspectives (pp. 101–111). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Spolsky, B. (1997). The ethics of gatekeeping tests: What have we learned in a hundred years? Language Testing, 14(3), 242–247.
Troudi, S., Coombe, C., & Al-Hamly, M. (2009). EFL teachers’ views of English language assessment in higher education in the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 546–555.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1
Interview prompts
Good morning
-
1.
Can you please introduce yourself?
-
2.
Do classroom teachers design weekly tests?
-
3.
Are classroom teachers involved in designing exit tests?
-
4.
Why are classroom teachers excluded from designing exit tests?
-
5.
What are your comments about the following results from teachers’ questionnaires?
-
6.
Will you reconsider the decision of exclusion?
-
7.
Are there any issues you would like to add or talk about?
Thank you.
Appendix 2
Questionnaire
Dear colleagues
I kindly request you to help me by answering the following questions concerning the issue of who should design exit tests. This questionnaire is conducted for the purpose of research as part of my doctoral studies at the University of Exeter. This is not a test so there are no “right” or “wrong” answers and you don’t even have to write your name on it. The outcome of this questionnaire will be used for research purposes. I am interested in your personal opinion. Please give your answers sincerely as only this will guarantee the success of the investigation. I will collect the questionnaires next week. In case you need any help, you can contact me at: damarazak@yahoo.com; Tel: 0551611205
Thank you very much in participation
Section 1: Demographic information
Section 2: Testing and tests’ variables
The purpose of this section is to elicit your perception of testing and the different variables involved/not involved in designing tests. The following are a number of statements with which some people agree and others disagree. I would like you to indicate your opinion after each statement by putting an ‘X’ in the box that best indicates the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
Strongly Disagree (SD)
Disagree (D)
Neutral (N)
Agree (A)
Strongly Agree (SA)
SD | D | N | A | SA | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Weekly tests | ||||||
1 | Weekly tests can be formative | |||||
2 | Weekly tests can have an impact on teaching materials | |||||
3 | Weekly tests can help you modify your teaching materials | |||||
4 | Weekly tests can have an impact on teaching practices | |||||
Exit tests | ||||||
5 | Exit tests can be formative | |||||
6 | Exit tests can have an impact on teaching materials | |||||
7 | Exit tests can help you modify your teaching materials | |||||
8 | Exit tests can have an impact on teaching practices | |||||
Reliability and validity | ||||||
9 | Teachers should be aware of test purposes (formative or summative) | |||||
10 | Teachers should test what they teach | |||||
11 | Teachers should tackle the learning standards while designing tests | |||||
12 | Items should measure the intended point to be tested | |||||
13 | Teachers should design reliable tests that enable students to perform regularly if the test is given at different times | |||||
14 | Teachers should include more test items to supply more reliable scores | |||||
15 | In designing tests, teachers should provide learners with multiple opportunities to show what they know and can do | |||||
Levels of proficiency | ||||||
16 | While designing tests, teachers should consider the varying levels of proficiency | |||||
17 | Teachers should design tests according to the level of low performers | |||||
18 | Teachers should design tests according to the level of high performers | |||||
Tests’ specs | ||||||
19 | Teachers should be aware of the duration of tests. | |||||
20 | Teachers should be aware of the importance of wording | |||||
21 | Words in questions should be familiar | |||||
22 | Test questions should be short | |||||
23 | Language for directions should be simple | |||||
24 | Students should be familiar with types of questions | |||||
25 | Teachers should expose learners to exam question types | |||||
26 | Teachers should consider content and cultural differences | |||||
27 | Teachers should consider how tests will be presented (booklets, test papers, lab based) | |||||
28 | Teachers should consider how students are expected to answer: Answer sheets, writing on test papers, using computers |
Section 3: Exit tests
Do you design exit tests? | YES ( ) | NO ( ) |
If your answer is “NO”, respond to the following statements:
SD | D | N | A | SA | ||
1 | You don’t design exit tests because you are not qualified | |||||
2 | You cannot design exit tests because you did not study techniques of designing tests | |||||
3 | You don’t design exit tests because you need special training | |||||
4 | You don’t design exit tests because you have a heavy teaching load | |||||
5 | You cannot design exit tests because it is time consuming | |||||
6 | You don’t design exit tests because you cannot be trusted | |||||
7 | Teachers are not involved in designing exit tests for fear of test leakage | |||||
8 | You don’t design exit tests because the institute is using a standardized test in the final exams | |||||
9 | You should design exit tests because you are aware of most of the variables discussed in section 1 | |||||
10 | Classroom teachers should be involved in designing exit tests | |||||
11 | External test designers should be aware of all the variables discussed in section 1 | |||||
12 | External test designers can design reliable and valid tests without teaching | |||||
13 | External test designers should consult classroom teachers before designing exit tests |
Section 4: Open ended question
Section 5: Future action
Please answer with YES or NO
Yes | No | ||
Will you discuss this issue with your supervisor/colleagues? |
Thank you very much for devoting time to answer this questionnaire. I will provide you with a brief summary of the findings if you are interested.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dammak, A. (2017). Problematizing Teachers’ Exclusion from Designing Exit Tests. In: Hidri, S., Coombe, C. (eds) Evaluation in Foreign Language Education in the Middle East and North Africa. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43234-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43234-2_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43233-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43234-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)