Abstract
Assessment
has a huge impact on ESL primary pupils, in part, because on the
curriculum
English is both a subject and also a language of learning all the other
subjects. For children still acquiring L1 it is daunting sometimes to
be
expected to understand concepts in L2. It may be difficult then to
gather
information to make an impartial judgement with regards to a
pupil’s language
level.This study is a preliminary inquiry that attempts to find out
teachers’
approaches to classroom assessment in Cameroon primary schools. Using a
qualitative open-ended question the researcher finds out three main
categories
of assessment approaches used by teachers. From the categories
extrapolations
on possible assumptions that guide teachers’ choices of
assessment procedures
are described and suggested for future study.
Keywords
Classroom
assessment approach, Cameroon, scheme of work, ESL/EFL, Young Learners
Language learning in a
bilingual
context
Cameroon
has
maintained a bilingual policy since re-unification between West
Cameroon
(English-speaking) and East Cameroon (French-speaking), in 1961. In
spite of
attempts to harmonise both systems of education and develop a
“Cameroonised”
version, it has never reached a satisfactory conclusion because it is a
delicate political issue. Therefore, English-speaking Cameroon followed
its own
system of education until the 1998 when Law No. 98/004 of 14th April
was passed
organising the Cameroon educational system into two subsystems,
English-speaking and French-speaking.
Furthermore,
Article 15 (2) of the law states that “the two educational
systems shall
co-exist with either maintaining its specificity in methods of
assessment and
certification.” At the primary level Article 15 (2) seems to have
been
implemented for end of course examinations. However, at the level of
classroom
assessment this does not appear to be the case as observation and
official
texts from the Ministry of Basic Education indicate a convergence in
both
sub-systems. One reason for this state of affairs could be due to the
centralised educational policies.
The
majority
of children beginning formal primary education are bilingual or
multilingual in
Home Language (HL), Pidgin English (lingua franca), and some basic
English
language. Unlike many African countries Cameroon has no formal
education in any
HL; it is English and French for Anglophones, or French and English for
Francophones from pre-school to university (Kouega, 2002,Bobda,
2004).To
English-speaking primary school pupils, then, English is taught as a
second
language (ESL) unlike French-speaking pupils who learn English as a
foreign
language (EFL).
Broadly,
ESL
would try to access the transactional and practical side of English as
in EFL
plus the whole range of skills, abilities, cognitive processes and the
cultural
nuances of the language through space and time. The primary school
pupil has to
learn the language as subject and as language for accessing the other
subjects
on the curriculum.
English language syllabus
The
primary
school syllabus for English language informs the framework in the
process of
teaching, learning and assessment. The objectives in the Preamble to
the
English language syllabi state that after six years of study:
[T]he
primary pupil must acquire good command of the language at four levels:
listening, speaking, reading and writing. All four language skills
should be
developed to avoid training pupils who could master reading and writing
well
but not be able to express themselves orally with efficiency. This
English
syllabus tries to cater for the three domains of learning i.e. the
cognitive,
the psychomotor and the affective and also stresses the importance of
participatory
methods.(Ministry of National Education 2000:1)
Here
the
general curriculum policy clearly states the skills and competences
which are
expected for the primary school graduate to show mastery and awareness
of. A
key participant in the learning-teaching process is the teacher. There
are
other important stakeholders but the role of the teacher is primordial
especially in classroom assessment approaches.
Researching classroom
assessment:
gaining a teacher’s perspective
Studies
have
been carried out on primary classroom assessment (Rea-Dickins 2001,
Pryor and
Lubisi 2002, O’Sullivan 2004, Jane, 2012) but the present study
seeks
specifically to find out teachers’ approaches to language
classroom assessment
in the primary school in Cameroon. One way to check on the language
learning
progress of children is by examining the approaches to classroom
assessment.
The assumption is that the syllabus objectives should determine
assessment
approaches.
Much
has been
written about the various approaches to English language assessment at
the
primary level but not many on ESL primary learners. Struck by the low
level of
language development of pupils who had successful completed the primary
cycle I
wondered if the approaches in assessing pupils during English language
lessons
were appropriate to encourage the skills and competences stated in the
syllabus
objectives. The research intends to find out if there is convergence or
divergence between the syllabus objectives and assessment approach.
The
27
teachers reported in this study were part of a larger sample involved
in a
wider investigation. Teaching experiences spanned from 3 to more than
11 years,
with the majority of the sample having taught between 6 and 10 years.
Furthermore, the teachers represented all the 6 primary school levels,
to find
out if there were any differences in approaches to assessment practice.
Convenience
non-random sampling was chosen for the sample selection because
teachers wanted
payment from the researcher before taking part in the research. To
avoid this
unethical research conduct, only respondents who did not ask for
payment were
included in the sample. Again it was difficult convincing the teachers
about
the benefit of this research for teaching and learning. Cohen et al
(2011) and Denzin
and Lincoln (2011) argue that this method of sampling is sufficient for
a small
scale research where there is no desire to generalise beyond the sample
in
question. Moreover, Pryor and Lubisi (2002) and O’Sullivan (2004)
in their
empirical studies on South Africa and Namibia applied a similar
sampling
technique. In the absence of generalisability of the research results I
wanted
the research to be representative of the school levels.
The
instrument for the research problem was an open ended question that
sought from
participants what assessment procedures (approaches)were used during
English
language lessons considering the syllabus objectives. The data for this
study
was analysed using broad classifications to which, depending on a
participant’s
feedback, a descriptor was assigned.
Classifying teacher
approaches
The
feedback
from the 27 participants was classified into three clusters.
The
first
cluster I call the syllabus-bound
teachers. This cluster of 8 teachers is bound religiously to the
syllabus
not taking into consideration the fact that the syllabus may be
difficult or
too easy for the children:
The
next
cluster I call the middle-of-the-road
teachers. Like the name implies, these
are teachers (15 of them) who take from both sides. They look around
and use what
is good for a certain topic:
The
third
cluster I call syllabus-unbound
teachers. These are 4 teachers who are aware of
the syllabus but are not bound to it. The syllabus is just a reference
document
but what is done is for the well-being of the child. The syllabus or
programme
can have its content added, reduced or drawn aside depending whether it
matches
with the learners:
Middle-of-the-road
respondents form the biggest cluster of teachers and these are likely
teachers
who follow closely ministerial guidelines and at the same time carry
out
informal assessment. This cluster also has teachers representing all
school
levels.
From
the
analysis and presentation of the data some answers to the research
problem began
to emerge concerning approaches to classroom assessment used by
teachers in
English lessons.
Areas for
consideration
Teachers’
beliefs and rational choice
Significant
research in education would seem to suggest that teachers’ belief
influences
their classroom practice (Gonzales and Fuggan, 2012). Stoynoff (2012)
also
makes suggestions along similar lines that teachers need to reflect on
their
assessment practices and beliefs for the process helps them determine
how they
may use assessment results to improve learning. Even where there exists
assessment framework, reflection can serve as a guide in the classroom.
Teachers need to make a variety of options for assessment but selection
of
assessment procedure should be based on the curricular aims, purpose of
assessment and learners. Similarly, the syllabus objectives which
stress
developing a complete learner who can master reading and writing
efficiently,
as well as listening and speaking need be considered in classroom
assessment
approaches.
Bearing
this
in mind then it may be better to understand assessment approach from
the
teachers’ perspectives so as to be able to comprehend the beliefs
with which
they define their work (Jane, 2012).
Evidence
gleaned from this preliminary study indicates that teachers consider
assessment approaches which are appropriate for children still
developing not
only cognitively, but emotionally. Jane (2012) notes that no matter the
level
of experience and competence, teachers appear to make decisions which
to them
reflect rational choices that attempt to promote pupils’
learning. This could
influence approaches to assessment selected.
Teacher
training
There
is the
need for teachers to receive training, often on assessment. They need
to
understand the different approaches to assessment depending on the
purpose,
including basic concepts whether dealing with implicit or explicit
approaches
to assessment (Davidson and Leung, 2009). Some teachers seem to
construct only ‘séquence’/‘testing’,
‘assessment of learning’ (Lambert and Lines, 2001), unaware
that language
development is the key, rather than language testing. An assessment
activity
can help learning if it provides information to be used by teachers,
and by
their students to modify the teaching and learning activities in which
they are
engaged (Black et al., 2003).
Pre-service
training in assessment has to be encouraged in teacher training
colleges, while
the new teachers are given induction on assessment, and monitored by
experienced teachers. All teachers, Stoynoff (2012) suggests, need to
sustain
continuous experience in assessment so that they may be able to fulfil
their
professional responsibilities. They can gather a wealth of experiences
from
training, workshops and seminars. This may take the form of in-service
and
professional development training on assessment.
Policy and
practice
A
national
policy on assessment would probably begin to create awareness of
assessment
especially as the English language syllabus adopts a
cross-curricular/topic-based approach and a communicative language
teaching
method. Experience shows that curriculum designers may have the aim of
meeting
up with the various trends of globalisation but at the level of
implementation
very little progress is made. One reason for this is the educational
budget
which can hardly suffice for an elaborate national programme targeting
teachers. Another difficulty is bureaucracy in the ministry which makes
it hard
for upward communication between the teachers who are the implementers
of
teaching-learning programmes and those doing the planning. Maybe
teachers’
behaviour is affected by multiple pressures such as working condition,
lack of
basic didactic equipment by both pupils and teaching staff and
overcrowded
classrooms (Harris and Brown, 2008).
Summary
The
study has
indicated that teachers use formative and summative approaches under
three
categories: teachers who are always testing; those whose procedure
entails testing
and informal assessment; and those who mainly make informal assessment.
Some
light can be shed on teacher condition in the context of Cameroon to
draw
attention to variables that may have a significant influence on
teachers’ work.
This study needs to be extended with a larger sample, in-depth
interviews and
observation as instruments to collect data, and investigate in more
depth the
relation between teacher beliefs and assessment approach. A further
stage would
be to juxtapose this with the placing of the young learners themselves
at the
centre of assessment, bringing to light their perspectives regarding
the nature
of assessment approaches.
References
Black,
P. and
Wiliam,D. (1998), ‘Assessment and Classroom
Learning’.Assessment in Education,5
(1), pp.7- 75.
Black,
P.,
Harrison, C. Lee, Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (eds) (2002),Working
Inside the
Black Box: Assessment for learning in the classroom, Department of
Education
and Professional Studies: King’s College London.
Black,
P.,
Harrison,C.,Lee, C.,Marshall, B.,and William,D. (2003).Assessment for
Learning:
Putting it into Practice, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Bobda,
A. S.
(2004), ‘Linguistic apartheid: English language policy in
Africa’ English Today,77,
20/1, pp.19-26.
Cohen,
L.,
Manion,L.,and Morrison,K. (2011),Research Methods in Education.7th
Edition.
Abingdon: Routledge
Davidson,
C.
and Leung,C. 2009, Current issues in English language teacher-based
assessment,TESOL
Quarterly, 43 (3), pp.393-415
Denzin,
N.K.
and Lincoln,Y.S. (eds) (2011),The Sage Handbook Of Qualitative
Research, 4th ed.
London: Sage Publication International.
Gonzales,
R.,
and Fuggan,C.G. (2012), Exploring the conceptual and psychometric
properties of
classroom assessment,The International Journal of Educational and
Psychological
Assessment,9 (2), pp.45-60
Harris,
L.,
and Brown,G.T.L.(2008), New Zealand teachers’ conceptions of the
purpose of
assessment: Phenomenographic analyses of teachers’ thinking,
Paper presented to
the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Annual
Conference,
Brisbane, Australia
Jane,
S.M.
(2012), Primary teachers’ conceptions of classroom assessment: a
qualitative
study,International Journal for Cross-disciplinary Subjects in
Education
(IJCDSE), Vol. 3 (2), pp.699-706.
Kouega,
J-P.(2002), ‘Uses of English in Southern British
Cameroon.’English World-wide,
23 (1), pp.93-113.
Lambert,
D.
and Lines,D. (2000),Understanding Assessment: Purposes, Perceptions,
Practice,
Key Issues in Teaching and Learning Series, London and New
York:Routledge-Falmer.
Ministry
of
National Education (2000), National Syllabuses for English-speaking
Primary
Schools in Cameroon,Yaounde: L’imprimerie Saint John
O’Sullivan,
M. C. (2004), Thereconceptualisation of learner-centred approaches: a
Namibian
case study, International Journal of Educational Development, 24 (6),
pp.585-602
Pryor,
J. and
Lubisi,C. (2002), Reconceptualising educational assessment in South
Africa
—testing times for teachers,International Journal of Educational
Development,
22 (6), pp.673–686
Rea-Dickins,
P. (2001), Mirror, mirror on the wall: Identifying Processes of
Classroom
Assessment,Language Testing, 18 (4), pp.429- 46
Rea-Dickins,
P. (2008), Classroom-based language assessment, in E. Shohamy and N.
Hornberger
(eds). Encyclopedia of Language and Education,Volume 7:Language Testing
and
Assessment, New York, NY: Springer
Stoynoff,
S.
(2012), Looking backward and forward at classroom-based language
assessment,ELT
Journal, Volume 66 (4), pp.523-532
Torrance,
H.
and Pryor, J. (1998),Investigating Formative Assessment: Teaching,
Learning and
Assessment in the Classroom, Buckingham: Open University Press.