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 Davison, C.
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?

The contradictory culture of teacher-based assessment: ESL teacher assessment practices in Australian and Hong Kong secondary schools

Chris Davison

The University of Hong Kong, cdavison{at}hkucc.hku.hk

A growing concern in teacher-based assessment, particularly in assessing English language development in high-stakes contexts, is our inadequate understanding of the means by which teachers make assessment decisions. This article adopts a sociocultural approach to report on the background and findings of a comparative study of ESL teachers’ assessment of written argument in the final years of secondary school in Australia and Hong Kong. Using verbal protocols, individual and group interviews and self-reports, the study explored the different assessment beliefs, attitudes and practices of teachers working with senior secondary Cantonese-speaking students acquiring English as a second language. The study found that the Australian teachers varied considerably in their approach to assessing student work with two somewhat conflicting assessment orientations revealed: the legalistic assessors who ‘ticked the boxes’ according to the published assessment guidelines and those assessors who relied much more on professional judgment. In Hong Kong, there was much more variability in the underlying assessment criteria with consensus reached through reference to community norms rather than explicit statements of performance. The article concludes that traditional notions of validity may need to be reconceptualized in high-stakes teacher-based assessment, with professional judgment, interaction and trust given much higher priority in the assessment process.

Language Testing, Vol. 21, No. 3, 305-334 (2004)
DOI: 10.1191/0265532204lt286oa


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. Huhta, P. Kalaja, and A. Pitkanen-Huhta
Discursive construction of a high-stakes test: the many faces of a test-taker
Language Testing, July 1, 2006; 23(3): 326 - 350.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied LinguisticsHome page
S. J. Ross
The Impact of Assessment Method on Foreign Language Proficiency Growth
Applied Linguistics, September 1, 2005; 26(3): 317 - 342.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]