Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language Testing
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brindley, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: a review of the issues

Geoff Brindley

Macquarie University, gbrindleKlaurel.ocs.mq.edu.au

In recent years educational authorities in many countries have introduced outcomes-based assessment and reporting systems in the form of national standards, frameworks and benchmarks of various kinds which are used both for purposes of system accountability and for assessing individual progress and achievement in language learning. However, in some cases the introduction of these systems has proved problematic, owing to a number of political, technical and practical factors. These include the difficulty of combining formative assessment with summative reporting, the differing information requirements of different audiences, concerns about the validity and reliability of outcome statements and the lack of appropriate resources to support implementation. Such problems may be able to be alleviated by closer consultation between policy-makers, administrators and practitioners, by undertaking further research into the validity and consistency of outcome statements and by strengthening the links between assessment and reporting. A major investment in teacher professional development is necessary if teachers are to be responsible for carrying out their own assessments. Ongoing research needs to be conducted into the effects of outcomes-based assessment and reporting on student learning.

Language Testing, Vol. 15, No. 1, 45-85 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/026553229801500103
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Language TestingHome page
L. Llosa
Validating a standards-based classroom assessment of English proficiency: A multitrait-multimethod approach
Language Testing, October 1, 2007; 24(4): 489 - 515.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
A. Cumming
Book reviews: Lumley, T. 2005: Assessing second language writing: the rater's perspective. Frankfurt: Peter Lang (Volume 3, Language Testing and Evaluation Series, edited by Rudiger Grotjahn and Gunther Sigott). 368 pp. ISBN 3-631-53327-6 US-ISBN 0-8204-7655-2 US$62.95
Language Testing, April 1, 2007; 24(2): 287 - 291.
[PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
S. Arkoudis and K. O'Loughlin
Tensions between validity and outcomes: teacher assessment of written work of recently arrived immigrant ESL students
Language Testing, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 284 - 304.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
C. Davison
The contradictory culture of teacher-based assessment: ESL teacher assessment practices in Australian and Hong Kong secondary schools
Language Testing, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 305 - 334.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
C. Scott and S. Erduran
Learning from international frameworks for assessment: EAL descriptors in Australia and the USA
Language Testing, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 409 - 431.
[PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
A. Cumming, L. Grant, P. Mulcahy-Ernt, and D. E. Powers
A teacher-verification study of speaking and writing prototype tasks for a new TOEFL
Language Testing, April 1, 2004; 21(2): 107 - 145.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
T. McNamara
Book Review: Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Language testing in practice: designing and developing useful language tests
Language Testing, October 1, 2003; 20(4): 466 - 473.
[PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
G. Brindley and H. Slatyer
Exploring task difficulty in ESL listening assessment
Language Testing, October 1, 2002; 19(4): 369 - 394.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
T. McNamara
Language assessment as social practice: challenges for research
Language Testing, October 1, 2001; 18(4): 333 - 349.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
G. Brindley
Outcomes-based assessment in practice: some examples and emerging insights
Language Testing, October 1, 2001; 18(4): 393 - 407.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
P. Rea-Dickins
Mirror, mirror on the wall: identifying processes of classroom assessment
Language Testing, October 1, 2001; 18(4): 429 - 462.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
J. Read and C. A. Chapelle
A framework for second language vocabulary assessment
Language Testing, January 1, 2001; 18(1): 1 - 32.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
R. Salaberry
Revising the revised format of the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview
Language Testing, July 1, 2000; 17(3): 289 - 310.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
P. McKay
On ESL standards for school-age learners
Language Testing, April 1, 2000; 17(2): 185 - 214.
[Abstract] [PDF]