Skip to main content

Problematizing Teachers’ Exclusion from Designing Exit Tests

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evaluation in Foreign Language Education in the Middle East and North Africa

Part of the book series: Second Language Learning and Teaching ((SLLT))

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2003). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edge, J., & Richards, K. (1998). May I see your warrant please? Justifying outcomes in qualitative research. Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 334–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillham, B. (2000). Developing a questionnaire. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a post method pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange, 17(4), 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, T. (2012). Language assessment as shibboleths: A Poststructuralist perspective. Applied Linguistics, 33(5), 564–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. London: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennycook, A. (2010). Critical and alternative directions in applied linguistics. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 16.1–16.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch, K. F. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shohamy, E. (1997). Testing methods, testing consequences: Are they ethical? Are they fair? Language Testing, 14(3), 340–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spolsky, B. (1997). The ethics of gatekeeping tests: What have we learned in a hundred years? Language Testing, 14(3), 242–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abderrazak Dammak .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1

Interview prompts

Good morning

  1. 1.

    Can you please introduce yourself?

  2. 2.

    Do classroom teachers design weekly tests?

  3. 3.

    Are classroom teachers involved in designing exit tests?

  4. 4.

    Why are classroom teachers excluded from designing exit tests?

  5. 5.

    What are your comments about the following results from teachers’ questionnaires?

  6. 6.

    Will you reconsider the decision of exclusion?

  7. 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

Reprints 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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics