Speaker
Description
Although the teacher’s role in the secondary language classroom is reduced as facilitator, this study advocates the significance of exploring teacher cognition and assessment practices within the EAP context. This phenomenological study of six non-native speakers as evaluators of academic 36 texts found that assessment priorities and mitigation strategies in giving feedback need to be re-introduced in a professional development workshop on language assessment using Fives et al.'s (2017) 3R-EC framework.
Abstract section 1: Relevance
Emphasizing the teacher’s central figure in the English for Academic Purposes writing classroom, this study explored non-native language teacher cognition and reflection as a rater in using a performance-based assessment rubric for a collaborative writing project.
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
Because no study has been conducted on the cognition, practices, experiences, and reflections of the Filipino teacher of the English for Academic Purposes subject in using a collaborative performance-based writing assessment, the study answered the research question: Given a postpositivist paradigm, how is writing assessment perceived and performed by EAP teachers from an epistemological and sociocultural perspective using a phenomenological research method?
Abstract section 3: Content/method
Six teachers of the EAP subject in a Philippine university Senior High School setting participated as raters in a think-aloud marking session, post-marking interview, and reflection writing. As a phenomenological descriptive study, Bingham and Witkowsky’s (as cited in Vanover, 2022) five analysis cycles, Saldana’s (2021) two coding cycles, and Mayring’s (2022) qualitative content analysis process were used on the 36 written corrective feedback (WCF) on concept papers with think aloud transcripts and six reflection notes.
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
Using (Eckes, 2008) operational rater variability hypothesis on the deductive attribute coding of the global-local assessment priorities showed that syntax and correctness are the most common clusters. Moreover, the deductive analysis on the think-aloud transcripts reflected the influences of the rater’s language and education background, teaching and rating experience, and active involvement in professional development activities on the rater’s assessment decisions and practice. Additionally, the inductive coding of the WCFs reflected classifications of varying levels of harshness (indirect, mitigated, or direct). These results were used to design a professional development workshop using Fives et al.'s (2017) 3R-EC framework.
Abstract section 5: References
Eckes, T. (2008). Rater types in writing assessments: A classification approach to rater variability. Language Testing 25 (2) 155-185.
Fives, H., Barnes, N., Buehl, M., Mascardi, J., & Ziegler, N. (2017). Teachers’ epistemic cognition on classroom assessment. Educational Psychologist 1532-6985. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1323218
Mayring, P. (2022). Qualitative content analysis: A step-by-step guide. Los Angeles, USA; Sage Publishing House.
Saldana, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
Vanover, C., Mihas, P., & Saldana, J. (2022). Analyzing and interpreting qualitative research: After the interview. Los Angeles, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
| Title | Unmasking the Hidden World of the EAP Rater's Cognition |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |