İngilizce Öğretim Görevlilerinin Değerlendirme Kavrayışları ve Uygulamaları Arasındaki İlişki: Bir Karma Desen Araştırması

Year 2025, Volume: 33 Issue: 3, 646 - 657, 25.07.2025

İrem Aksu Muzeyyen Nazli Gungor

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1750257

Abstract

Çalışmanın amacı: Öğretmenlerin değerlendirme kavrayışları ve inançları, uyguladıkları değerlendirme yöntemleri üzerinde etkili olmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma, İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğreten eğitmenlerin değerlendirme kavrayışları ile kendi bildirdikleri değerlendirme uygulamaları arasındaki etkileşimi incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır.
Materyal ve Yöntem: Veriler, Ankara/Türkiye’de hazırlık okullarında görev yapan 101 İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğreten eğitmenden elde edilmiştir. Nicel veriler, Brown (2006) tarafından geliştirilen TCoA-IIIA aracılığıyla toplanırken, nitel veriler üç yarı yapılandırılmış odak grup görüşmesi oturumu yoluyla elde edilmiştir. Çalışmanın nicel kısmını analiz etmek için betimsel istatistikler kullanılmıştır. Nitel kısım ise, MAXQDA yazılımı kullanılarak kodların Brown’un önceden belirlenmiş dört teması (gelişim, okul hesap verebilirliği, öğrenci hesap verebilirliği ve alakasızlık) altında sınıflandırılması yoluyla içerik analiziyle incelenmiştir. Ayrıca, araştırmacılar, veri toplama ve analiz aşamalarında kendi görüş ve kararlarını yansıtmak amacıyla bir öz değerlendirme günlüğü tutmuştur.
Bulgular: Çalışmanın bulguları, gelişim ve alakasızlık kavrayışlarının en çok kabul gören kavrayışlar olduğunu ve Türkiye’deki İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğreten eğitmenlerin değerlendirme uygulamalarının Öğrenme için Değerlendirme (AfL) araçlarından Öğrenmenin Değerlendirilmesi (AoL) araçlarına kadar çeşitlilik gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Çalışma, hizmet öncesi müfredatlarda değerlendirme bileşeni, dil öğretmenlerinin değerlendirme ihtiyaçları ve öğretmen eğitimi değerlendirme politikası konularında önemli çıkarımları vurgulamıştır.
Önemli Vurgular: Eğitmenler, çeşitli değerlendirme araçları kullanmaktan yana bir tutum sergilemektedir. Biçimlendirici değerlendirmenin öğrenci motivasyonunu ve başarısını artırdığı, bu durumun eğitmenlerin Öğrenme için Değerlendirme (AfL) araçlarını tercih etmesinin nedenlerinden biri olabileceği düşünülmektedir. Ancak hizmet öncesi öğretmen eğitimi programlarındaki değerlendirme bileşeni, teori ile uygulama arasındaki bağı kurmada yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu sorun, öğretmen adaylarının daha fazla gerçek hayat deneyimi kazanmalarının sağlanmasıyla çözülebilir.

Keywords

Değerlendirme kavrayışları, Değerlendirme uygulamaları, İngilizce değerlendirme, İngilizce öğretim görevlileri

The Interplay between Assessment Conceptions and Practices of EFL Instructors: A Mixed-method Study

Abstract

Purpose: Teachers’ assessment conceptions and beliefs are influential on the assessment practices teachers apply. In that sense, this study aims to explore the interplay between the assessment conceptions of EFL instructors and their self-reported assessment practices.
Design/Methodology/Approach: Data came from 101 EFL instructors working at preparatory schools in Ankara/Türkiye. Quantitative data were collected using the TCoA-IIIA, developed by Brown (2006), while qualitative data were gathered through three semi-structured focus group interview sessions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the quantitative data. The qualitative part was analysed through coding by placing the codes under the four pre-determined themes of Brown, which are improvement, school accountability, student accountability, and irrelevance by using MAXQDA. Besides, a self-reflection journal was kept by the researchers to reflect on their opinions and decisions during the data collection and analysis stages.
Findings: The findings of the study pointed that improvement and irrelevance conceptions were the most agreed ones and assessment practices of the EFL instructors in Türkiye vary from AfL tools to AoL tools. The study highlighted some significant implications for assessment component at pre-service curricula, assessment needs of language teachers, and teacher education assessment policy.
Highlights: Instructors are in favour of using a variety of assessment tools. Formative assessment increases student motivation and achievement, which might be the reasons for their favouring AfL tools. Assessment component fails to bridge the theory and practice in pre-service teacher education. This could be solved by making PSTs gain more real-life experiences.

Keywords

Assessment conceptions, Assessment practices, English language assessment, EFL instructors

References

• Aksu Çekiç, İ. (2024). An investigation into the assessment conceptions of in-service English language instructors (Publication No. 873387) [Master’s thesis, Gazi University] https://tez.yok.gov.tr
• Azis, A. (2015). Conceptions and practices of assessment: A case of teachers representing improvement conception. TEFLIN Journal, 26(2), 129-154.
• Berry, R. (2008). Assessment for learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University.
• British Council & TEPAV (2015). The State of English in Higher Education in Turkey. Ankara. Retrieved from https://www.britishcouncil.org.tr/
• Brown, G. T. L. (2002). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/63
• Brown, G. T. L. (2004) Teachers' conceptions of assessment: Implications for policy and professional development. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(3), 301-318.
• Brown, G. T. L. (2006). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Validation of an abridged instrument. Psychological Reports, 99(1), 166-170.
• Brown, G. T. L. (2008). Conceptions of assessment: Understanding what assessment means to teachers and students. New York: Nova Science.
• Council of Higher Education (2016). [Yükseköğretim Kurumlarında Yabancı Dil Öğretimi Ve Yabancı Dille Öğretim Yapılmasında Uyulacak Esaslara İlişkin Yönetmelik]. Official Gazette, Issue: 29662.
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. The United States of America: SAGE.
• Delett, J. S., Barnhardt, S., & Kevorkian, J. A. (2008). A framework for portfolio assessment in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 34(6), 559-568.
• DeLuca, C., Chavez, T., Bellara, A., & Cao, C. (2013). Pedagogies for preservice assessment education: Supporting teacher candidates’ assessment literacy development. The Teacher Educator, 48(2), 128-142.
• DeLuca, C., Coombs, A., & LaPointe-McEwan, D. (2019). Assessment mindset: Exploring the relationship between teacher mindset and approaches to classroom assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61, 159–169.
• Fletcher, R. B., Meyer, L. H., Anderson, H., Johnston, P., & Rees M. (2012). Faculty and students conceptions of assessment in higher education. Higher Education, 64, 119-133.
• Gebril, A. (2016). Language teachers’ conceptions of assessment: An Egyptian perspective, Teacher Development, 21(1), 81-100.
• Güngör, M. A., & Güngör, M. N. (2024). Relocating assessment in pre-service teacher education: an emerging model from activity theory lens. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(2), 348-368.
• Harlen, W., & Crick, R. D. (2003). Testing and motivation for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(2), 169–207.
• Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2009). The complexity of teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Tensions between the needs of schools and students. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 16(3), 365-381.
• Kahn, E. A. (2000). A case study of assessment in a grade 10 English course. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(5), 276-286.
• Kyttälä, M., Björn, P. M., Rantamäki, M., Lehesvuori, S., Närhi, V., Aro, M., & Lerkkanen, M. K. (2022). Assessment conceptions of Finnish pre-service teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1-19.
• Lam, R. (2015). Language assessment training in Hong Kong: Implications for language assessment literacy. Language Testing, 32(2), 169-197.
• Larenas, S. V., & Brunfaut T. (2023). But who trains the language teacher educator who trains the language teacher? An empirical investigation of Chilean EFL teacher educators’ language assessment literacy. Language Testing, 40(3), 463-492.
• Lee, I. (2011). Bringing innovation to EFL writing through a focus on assessment for learning. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 19-33.
• Lutovac, S., & Flores, M. A. (2022). Conceptions of assessment in pre-service teachers’ narratives of students’ failure. Cambridge Journal of Education, 52(1), 55-71.
• Ma, M., & Bui, G. (2021). Chinese secondary school teachers’ conceptions of L2 assessment: A mixed-methods study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11(3), 445- 472.
• Mertler, C. A. (2003). Pre-service versus in-service teachers’ assessment literacy: Does classroom experience make a difference? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED482277
• Mockler, N. (2011). Beyond ‘what works’: Understanding teacher identity as a practical and political tool. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/
• Monteiro, V., Mata, L., & Santos, N. N. (2021). Assessment conceptions and practices: Perspectives of primary school teachers and students. Frontiers in Education, 6, 1-15.
• Nasab, F. G. (2015). Alternative versus traditional assessment. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(6), 165-178.
• Norris, J. M., Brown, J. D., Hudson, T., & Yoshioka, J. (1998). Designing second language performance assessments. University Of Hawaii.
• Ogan-Bekiroglu, F., & Suzuk, E. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ assessment literacy and its implementation into practice. The Curriculum Journal, 25(3), 344–371.
• Pastore, S., & Mincu, M. (2024). A feasible balance? The Italian teachers’ standpoint on assessment literacy, assessment practice, and teacher professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1-20.
• Popham, W. J. (2011). Assessment literacy overlooked: A teacher educator’s confession. The Teacher Educator, 46, 265–273.
• Schellekens, L. H., Bok, H. G. J., Jong, L. H., van der Schaaf, M. F., Kremer, W. D. J., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2021). A scoping review on the notions of assessment as learning (AaL), assessment for learning (AfL), and assessment of learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 1-15.
• Struyven, K., Dochy F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 325-341.
• 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.
• Tsagari, D., & Vogt, K. (2017). Assessment literacy of foreign language teachers around Europe: Research, challenges and future prospects. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 6(1), 41-63.
• Vardar, E. (2010). Sixth, seventh and eighth grade teachers’ conception of assessment (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/
• Wiliam, D. (2010). Standardized testing and school accountability. Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 107–122.
• Xu, Y., & He, L. (2019). How pre-service teachers’ conceptions of assessment change over practicum: Implications for teacher assessment literacy. Frontiers in Education, 4, 1-16.
• Yan, X., Zhang, C., & Fan, J. J. (2018). Assessment knowledge is important, but...: How contextual and experiential factors mediate assessment practice and training needs of language teachers. System, 74, 158–168.
• Yan, X., & Fan, J. (2021). “Am I qualified to be a language tester?”: Understanding the development of language assessment literacy across three stakeholder groups. Language Testing, 38(2), 219–246.