English Language has gained importance in Ethiopia since 1940s. The need for the language arose from the desire to establish contacts with the outside world and the   introduction of modern education to the country (Dejene, 1990).

As regards its status in modern education, English language has played a significant practice in the educational system of the country ever since. It has been offered to students as a subject beginning from nursery or elementary to high school and preparatory levels. In addition, the English language has been used as a medium of instruction from general secondary school to university level. In recognition of this, the language has received due attention in that more time i.e. four periods per week is given to its lesson as is to Mathematics than any other subjects (The Institute of International Education, 2012).               

However, nowadays, there is a widely prevailing complaint among English language teachers, trainers and other stakeholders that many students, even on the completion of university education, are far from the standard in their English language ability (The Institute of International Education, 2012; Haregewoin, 2003; Mekasha, 2007).  One possible factor seems to be the failure to use classroom assessment feedback to apply appropriate teaching technique (Diribsa, 2009).

Classroom assessment is an integral part of the instructional process (Black and William, 1998; Hall and Burke, 2003; Stiggins, 1991; Tierney, 2006). It establishes where learners are at present and what level they have achieved; it gives learners feedback on their learning; it diagnoses learners’ needs for further development; and it enables the planning of curricula, materials, and activities. When teachers place meaningful assessment at the center of instruction, they give students insights into their own thinking and growth, and students gain new perspectives on their potential to learn and use the language (Alderson, 2005).

The importance of the teachers’ practice in assessment is inevitable as they are the core of this process: making decisions about the process of the lessons, determining the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives available to them, making selections on their experience and making judgments about learners’ progress (Rea-Dickins, 2004). Teachers need to use assessments (e.g. as simple as effective verbal questioning, observation of student behavior) and provide immediate feedback to enhance students’ learning in everyday classroom lessons. The focus is on why they do not learn well and how to help them to improve rather than just to use assessments to find out what knowledge students have learned.

The Institute of International Education (2012) explains that in Ethiopian context, English classroom instruction at school level is more of exam oriented.  To overcome this problem, attention is being given to classroom assess-ment. Current Ethiopian curriculum guides and student texts suggest the implementation of classroom assessments. According to grade nine teacher’s guide (2012), suggestions are included throughout the teacher’s guide for conducting ongoing assessment during the lesson.

Linn and Gronland (2005) suggest that a shift from testing for achievement to assess how students are learning (assessment for learning) would help the teachers explore better ways of supporting the students in learning the language. Additionally, emphasis on classroom assessment would help the students to know the areas they need to work on. However, classroom assessment by itself does not guarantee the students’ learning unless it is practiced properly (Angelo, 1995).   In line with this, Lott and Yang (1998) state that an accurate classroom assessment is only obtained by the use of a variety of techniques. The use of one or two techniques exclusively, will not give an accurate picture of a student’s growth and development in any subject area. Unfortunately, teachers do not assess their students the way they need to be (Lott and Yang, 1998). Diribsa (2009) asserts, “no or less attention is given to the teaching-learning process, the dimension which involves what really happens in the classroom” (p.4).

The above discussion suggests the need for using varieties of classroom assessment techniques in order for teachers to get feedback and adjust their teaching techniques accordingly.

Theoretical background

The word “assessment” has taken on a variety of meanings within the educational background (Burke et al., 2009). The term can refer to the process teachers use to grade students, subject assignments (Harlen, 2008), to standardized testing imposed in the schools (Stiggins and Chappus, 2005), to any activity designed to collect information to be used as feedback to modify teaching and learning activities (Black and William, 1998), or to improve instruction and students’ performance (Cohen and Hill, 2000). Accurate and valid information about students’ achievement is widely understood to be essential for effective instruction, as it enables teachers to give appropriate feedback and adapt their instruction to match students’ need (Borko  et al., 2009).

The traditional concept of assessment is heavily influenced by conventional theories, such as the behaviorist learning theory, objective and standardized testing (Sheppard, 2000), and testing being separated from instruction. However, in the last few decades, the shift to a constructivist learning paradigm, with the imple-mentation of new learning environments has changed the practice of assessment in education and has widened the concept of assessment (Dochy et al., 2008). They are rooted in constructivist theory and intend to develop an educational setting to meet the challenge for today’s educational system, making the students’ learning the core issue and defining instruction as enhancing the teaching and learning process.

Currently assessment is used for three different but inter-related purposes.

 

These are (1) assessment OF learning (Bennet and Gitomer, 2009); (2) assessment FOR learning (Stiggins, 2008); and (3) assessment AS learning (Biggs, 1995;Earl and Katz, 2006). The study bases itself on the three roles of assessments.

General objective of the study

The general objective of the study was to investigate the practice of classroom assessment in adjusting English language teachers teaching techniques.

Specific objectives

Specifically, it sought to attain the following objectives:-

1. To find out classroom assessment techniques English language teachers employ in English classroom;

2. To identify for the purposes of which assessment, the assessment techniques are used by English language teachers;

3. To investigate the feedback English language teachers obtain using classroom assessment techniques; and

4. To see whether they use the assessment feedbacks to adjust their teaching techniques.

Definition of key terms and abbreviation

Definition of key terms

Classroom assessment is an approach designed to help teachers find out of classroom what students are learning in the classroom and how well they are learning it (Angelo and Cross, 1993)

Teaching technique is an implementation- which actually takes place in a classroom. It is a particular trick, strategy, or contrivance used to accomplish an immediate objective (Richards and Rodgers, 1999).

 

Feedback: refers to the information teachers give to students about their progress/performance.

Assessment OF learning is concerned with how students have performed at the end of the instructional process. The main purpose of assessment of learning is to make use of the results of the assessment process in making instructional and educational decisions.

Assessment FOR learning is designed to give teachers information to modify and differentiate teaching and learning activities. It is roughly equivalent to formative assessment. It intends to promote further improvement of student learning by performing assessment procedures while the instructional process is going o  (Angelo and Cross, 1993).

Assessment AS learning develops and supports meta-cognition of students – the knowledge of one’s own thought processes. Earl and Katz (2006) explain that assessment as learning emerges from the idea that learning is not just a matter of  transferring ideas from someone who is knowledgeable (in this case, the teacher) to someone who is not (the students), but it is an active process of cognitive restructuring that occurs when individuals interact with new ideas.

Sampling

The total number of population participated in the study was twenty one English language teachers of three government secondary schools at Fitche Town based on available sampling technique. The data for the study were collected through questionnaire, classroom observation, interview and lesson plan analysis. English teacher who performed well in the classroom was purposively selected by the department heads from the schools for the classroom observation and interview.

Data collection instruments and procedures

Four research instruments were employed to collect relevant information for the study. These were questionnaire, classroom observation, interview, and lesson plan analysis. In order to administer the questionnaire, the researcher first contacted school directors and vice directors and made a request for cooperation with a letter from the Department of Social Science and Language Education, College of Education and Behavioral Studies, Addis Ababa University. The respective school administrators then directly introduced the researcher to the heads of English Departments in each school. The heads further introduced the researcher to the English teachers in each school. Then, the researcher informed the English language teachers of the aim of the study. A questionnaire was distributed to the English language teachers; twenty one teachers (4 females and 17 males) returned the filled in questionnaire.

When it comes to classroom observation, the researcher asked each of the teachers to get permission for observing their classes. All of the teachers volunteered to let the researcher conduct the observations in each selected schools. Moreover, the researcher promised them that all information would be kept confidential and their names would not be disclosed in the data analysis and discussion.

Interview was another instrument to gather information from the teachers.  To be able to validate the information solicited via questionnaires and classroom observation, an interview was employed. Besides, the researcher believes that it gives him flexibility to probe his respondents’ responses more deeply. The researcher acted as the interviewer in the study. The participants were interviewed from the three high schools. With the teachers’ agreement, the interview was arranged in the schools. The participants were notified and agreed to arrange their free time to take part in the interview. The interview was audio-recorded with the participants’ consent. The names of the participants were kept anonymous. Before the interview, a brief introduction was given. They were allowed to talk freely and to explain what they usually do and feel about English language teaching process. They were also told that data from the interview including the audio recordings would be kept confidential and no other people will have access to them except the researcher. Moreover, to ensure communication between the interviewer and the interviewees, interview was conducted in Afan Oromo and Amharic in order to let teachers feel more at ease in expressing their ideas and then it was translated into English for the analysis. At the end, all the data collected were further structured and analyzed.

The researcher collected three lesson plans of the three English teachers whose classes were observed. The lesson plan structure was categorized into three major parts: (part one shows information about the lesson, and part two displays the structure of the actual lesson including teacher’s, student’s practice and assessment techniques). It was analyzed accordingly.

Methods of data analysis

The study employed both quantitative and qualitative data. Percentage and frequency have been used to analyze the quantitative data; whereas the qualitative data have been categorized into themes for further analysis.

Pilot Testing

Pilot testing was conducted for a total of 10 English teachers of Gebre Guracha Preparatory School. The item in the questionnaire, which was assessed in the pilot test, was used to look the items’ internal consistency. Teachers were told how to respond to the questionnaire given to them. Vague questions, which were raised by the teachers, were made clearer during the pilot distribution.

Finally, the responses of the participants were entered into SPSS version 17 to compute items’ internal consistency and Cronbach-Alpha in order to evaluate the scales and their reliability. The measure was found to be reliable with Alpha 0.86 (for 33 items). Therefore, some of the questionnaires were edited and corrected for the final distribution to the main study.

Results of Quantitative Data

Question items in the questionnaire were grouped into major parts: the purpose of classroom assessment and classroom assessment techniques. The purposes of classroom assessment, in turn, are grouped in to three categories: assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning. Then, descriptive analysis was employed to analyze responses to the questionnaire.

Classroom assessment techniques

This section deals with classroom assessment techniques that English language teachers employ in the classes. Based on the existing literature, nineteen different classroom techniques were identified and included into the questionnaire. These items were grouped into six categories: written assessment techniques through home works and assignments, questioning and answering, teachers’ observation of students’ work, students' effort exertion (through independent activities), giving feedback, and testing, to minimize the complexity of the analysis. Finally, frequency and percentages were used to analyze teachers’ responses to each item of categories.

Written classroom assessment techniques

The result in Table 1 shows that the majority of English language teachers (83.33%) from the three schools use written classroom assessment techniques through assignment and homework to assess their students in English classroom. From this 83.33%, 23.81% said they use always, 27.38% said they use usually, 20.24% said they use sometimes and 19.05% said they use rarely. On the other hand, 16.67% of the respondents said for assignment and homework they never use written classroom assessment techniques through teachers’ observation. 

 

 

Observed classroom assessment techniques

As shown in Table 2, majority (93.88%) of the respon-dents said that they used classroom assessment technique through teachers’ observation. From the 93.88%, 14.29% said they use always, 27.21% said they use it usually, 30.61% said they use it sometimes and 21.77% said they use it rarely. Only 6.12% of the respondents said that never use classroom assessment technique through teachers’ observation.

 

 

Classroom assessment techniques through students’ exerted effort (through independent activity)

As it could be seen from Table 3, the majority (95.24%) of the respondents said they use students’ exerted effort(through independent activity) as classroom assessment technique. From this 95.24%, 25.81% said they use it always, 38.71% said they use it usually, 58.06% said they use it sometimes, and 9.68% said they use it rarely. Only 3.23% of the respondents said they never use students’ exerted effort as a classroom assessment technique.

 

 

Classroom assessment through question and answer

As it could be inferred from Table 4, (n=21)100% of the respondents said they use classroom assessment techniques through questioning and answering. When it comes to the detail, 38.71% said they use always, 48.39% said they use usually, 35.48% said they use sometimes, and 12.90% said they use rarely. None of the respondents said they never use the techniques. 

 

 

Classroom assessment through giving feedback

 In Table 5, nearly all (97.62%) of the respondents said they use classroom assessment technique through giving feedback. When it comes to the detail, 45.24% said they use always, 28.57% said they use usually, 19.05% said they use sometimes and 4.76% said they use rarely. Only 1.61% of the respondents said they did not use the techniques.

 

 

Classroom assessment through testing

As it can be inferred from Table 6, all the respondents (100%) said they use classroom assessment techniques through testing and quizzes. 19.05% the respondents said they use it always, 33.33% said they use it usually, 35.71% said they use it sometimes, and 11% said they use it rarely. None of the respondents said they never use the techniques.

 

 

The purpose of Classroom Assessment

English teachers’ responses from the three secondary schools (Fitche Number Two, Abdissa Aga and Fitche Secondary Schools) were catego-rized according to the purposes of classroom assessment categories: assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning. The teachers’ purpose for using class-room assessment was the engine that drove implementation choices (Steadman, 1998). Des-criptive statistics, i.e. frequency and percentage were used to compute each category.

Assessment of Learning

Assessment of learning, as stated earlier, is primarily meant for determining the status of students’ achievement against learning outcomes. It is often given to students at the end of the instructional process to check if the instructional objectives are attained or not.

From the questionnaire items (Q1, Q2, and Q13) are identified to belong to category of assessment of learning. Table 7 indicates the English language teachers’ responses to these question items to show how often they use classroom assessment for this given purpose. The responses are further categorized in to three: Positive, undecided, and negative responses.

 

 

As depicted in Table 7, the majority (66.7%) of the respondents said that they used classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment of learning. 25.40% of them strongly agree while 41.27% of them agree. When it comes to the detail, the Table 7 shows that 28.57%, 23.81%, and 23.81% of the respondents strongly agree while 42.86%, 47.86%, and 33.33% agree to Q1, Q2, and Q13 respectively.

On the other hand, 20.6% of the respondents strongly disagree, that is, they said they did not use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment of learning. Of this, 6.35 % of them strongly disagree while 14.29% of them disagree. The detail shows that 9.52%, 4.76%, and 4.76% said they strongly disagree whereas 4.76%, 19.05%, and 19.05% said they disagree to Q1,Q2, and Q13 respectively.

When it comes to the third category, 20.63% of the respondents gave undecided responses. 14.29%, 4.76%, and 19.05% of the respondents’ responses were undecided to Q1, Q2, and Q13 respectively. In general, Table 7 shows that most of English language teachers agree that they used classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment of learning.

Assessment for learning

As is shown in Table 8, the majority (78.6%) of the respondents agreed that they use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment for learning. From this, 37.30% of them strongly agree whereas 41.27% agree.  When each of the items’ responses were seen, 32.25, 35.48, 19.35, 29.03, 19.35 and 16.13% of them agree strongly whereas 22.58, 19.35, 41.94, 25.81, 29.03 and 29.03% of them agree to Q3, Q4, Q9, Q10, Q11 and Q12 respectively.

On the other hand, as it could be seen from Table 8 only 8.7% of the respondents did not use classroom assessment for the purpose of class-room assessment for learning. More specifically, 6.45% of them disagree while 3.23% of them strongly disagree to the use of the given items for the purpose of assessment for learning.

 

 

As for the remaining category, i.e., category of ‘Undecided Response’, 16.67% of the respondents said they did not know if they used classroom assessment or not for the purpose of assessment for learning. When the respondents’ responses to each item are seen, it can be noticed that 6.45, 3.23, 3.23, 9.68, 12.90 and 16.13% of the respon-dents said their responses are undecided to Q3, Q4, Q9, Q10, Q11 and Q12 respectively.

As is shown in Table 8, majority (78.6%) of the respondents agreed that they use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment for learning.

Assessment as learning

From Table 9, one can see that 76.2% of the respondents said they use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment as learning. From this 76.2%, 40.95% strongly agreed that they use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment as learning whereas 35.24% agreed. When it comes to their responses to individual question item, it can be seen that 29.03, 29.03, 32.26, 22.58 and 25.81% of the respondents said they strongly agree to Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q14 respectively and 22.58, 22.58, 19.35, 29.03 and 25.81% of the respondents said they agree to the items mentioned respectively. 

 

 

On the other hand, only 13.3% of the respondents said they do not use classroom assessment for the purpose of assessment as learning. The detail shows that 8.57% of the respondents said they disagree whereas 4.76% of the respondents said they strongly disagree. Further detail shows that 3.23, 3.23, 6.45, 9.68, and 6.45% of them responded disagree to Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q14 whereas 6.45, 3.23, 3.23, 0.00, and 3.23% of the respondents said that they strongly disagree to the items respectively.

From the total respondents, 11.43% respondents said their responses lie in either of the two; i.e., they said their response is undecided. When each item’ responses was noticed, 6.5, 9.7, 6.5, 6.5 and 6.5% of the respondents said their responses to Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, and Q14 respectively were not decided.

To sum up, from Table 9, it can be seen that classroom assessment is used for the purpose of assessment as learning by the majority of English teachers. 76.2% of them said they use it for the mentioned purpose whereas only 13.3% said they do not use it for the given purpose; while 11.43% of them said their responses are undecided.

Results of Qualitative Data

This section presents and discusses data gathered through classroom observation, interview, and lesson plan analysis. Data gathered through each tool are analyzed separately.

Classroom Observation

Classroom observation is a major qualitative data gathe-ring tool for the purpose of the study as it helped the researcher to get firsthand information. The researcher used observation checklist and note-book to capture relevant information for the purpose of the study. Three English language teachers (T1, T2, T3) were observed three times each while they were conducting lessons. This means that each English language teacher in the given sample was observed three times for three periods of 40 min. The researcher, thus, made the observation for six hours as a whole. Observations were made with each of the sample teacher were analyzed separately as follows.

Observations made with T1

Each English language teacher was observed three times for three different periods of 40 min duration. Each observation was discussed one after the other. 

T1 was teaching in Abdissa Aga Secondary School, in Grade 9 section 4. My first observation with him was when he was conducting a lesson on Revision of (past continuous Tense), which is found on page 195 of student textbook on April 22, 2014 during the third period (9:20-10:00 AM).

He started the lesson with revision of the previous lesson about simple past and past continuous tense. Then he started the lesson by asking the students the following two questions: ‘What is simple past?’ And ‘What is past continuous tense?’ The majority of the students in the class raised their hands and some of them were given the chance and they gave correct answers, in fact some of them with receiving support from the teacher.

The teacher, after assuring that the students could define the two types of tenses, went on to doing activities given as homework. He named students in their row as groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 and asked them to compete in writing grammatically correct statements using past continuous tense on the blackboard. One of the phrases that students had to make was ‘Father/writing a letter; the children/playing football outside’. They had to write ‘Father was writing a letter while the children were playing football outside’ correctly on the blackboard. After the teacher spend more time in giving further explanations and clarifications of what and how students required doing before engaging students with the intended exercises. If a student from the first row failed to write the correct answer, chance would be given to a student from the other row and competition was assumed to go this way. When a student gave incorrect answer, peers would immediately raise hands and gave correction when given chance though it failed in actual classroom practice. Finally, the class failed writing grammatical correct sentences from the given prompts. It can be seen from here that written assessment through homework and peer-correction/feedback were not used by the teacher, for the purpose of checking students’ learning, which is assessment as learning.

The second lesson observation was made with the same teacher on April 23, 2014, during the sixth period (11:25-12:15 AM). The teacher began with introducing the day’s lesson, which is about present perfect tense (Exercise 11.6 p, 196) of student text-book. He started the lesson with creating a situation where present perfect tense could be used. He produced sentences such as ‘Have you ever visited Addis Ababa?’, and ‘Have you ever seen a lion?’ and sought answers from the students. The students responded ‘Yes, I have’ and ‘No, I have not’ to the two questions respectively. Then, the teacher asked the students to produce similar questions and practice application of present perfect tense using ‘Have you ever….?’ He, then, gave activities on page 196 of student textbook to do them as homework.

Having done that, he moved on to the second part of the lesson, which is about articles. He started the lesson with classifying articles into two: indefinite article (a, an) and definite article (the). He explained where the two types of articles could be used. He said, “We use ‘a’ when a word begins with consonant sounds, and ‘an’ when a word begins with a vowel sound”.

As to the when-to-use the definite article, he asked the students to refer to the rules given on pages 196-197 of student textbook, and they did on the spot. After that, he gave (Activity 11.7 number 1), an activity related to the rules. The activity requires the students to match situations where the articles are used and which rule could be applied. After the students attempted on their own, he asked randomly some of the students to give the response. When a student failed to give correct answer, the teacher gave chance to another student and went on that way. One can see from this particular activity that class work as assessment technique was applied.

The other activity, Activity A 11.7 number 2 on page 197 of student textbook, was given as homework. The activity is about a story of a woman whose purse was stolen by a thief with blank spaces which could be filled by ‘a’ ‘an’ or ‘the’ in the missing articles. 

The third lesson observation was conducted again with T1 on April 24, 2014 during the third period (9:20-4:00 AM). The teacher started the day’s lesson by asking about the previous given homework which is filled with a/an/the in the given blank space which made the story meaningful, that is, ‘ about the story of a woman whose purse was stolen’ and  then he began asking them to show him their exercise books. After he finished checking students’ exercise book he started the discussion about the activity which was given as a home work. Only few students who had done the activity actively participated during the discussion. 

Having done that, the teacher moved on to the second part of the lesson, which is about countable and uncountable nouns. He started the lesson by defining what countable and uncountable nouns are. He continued the discussion saying countable things are things which can be counted i.e. things we can count, e.g. books, pens. Uncountable nouns, i.e. things which we cannot count, e.g. oil, sugar.

After the discussion, the teacher gave the activity on page 197 number 4 as a class work. The activity was about countable and uncountable nouns to be placed into two columns either for countable or uncountable nouns. After they accomplished the activity the teacher asked how many of them attempted the given activity. Then he checked their exercise book in order to check their attempt. Very few students attempted the class activity.

As can be seen from the above discussion, even if the teacher tried to use class work and home work as classroom assessment technique, in this particular classroom situation, the teacher implemented assessment for learning, which is used to check students’ under-standing of the activities.

Observations made with T2

T2 was from Fitche Number Two Secondary School. He taught English language as a subject for Grade 9 Section 2 students. My first observation with him was when he taught a lesson about reading activity. It was entitled ‘How Lion and Warthog Became Enemies’. The reading passage is found on page 202 of student text book. The lesson was conducted on April 22, 2014 in the second period (1:25-2:05 PM).

The teacher began the day’s lesson by writing the topic on the black board. He asked the meaning of the word ‘warthog’ and told the students to read the passage silently. While they were reading the passage, the teacher was rounding and observing how the reading was going on. After students finished reading the text the teacher read the passage again loudly for them. Then, he told them to write all new words in their vocabulary exercise book. Since he gave more time for reading he did not get time to discuss even the comprehension questions with them. So he gave it as a home work for the next period.

The second lesson observation was made with the same teacher on April 23, 2014, in the third period (2:05-2:45 PM). The teacher began by revising the previous lesson and introducing the day’s lesson, which is about Relative clause (Ex, 11.11 p, 207). He started the lesson doing the given home work with the students but before he began the discussion he asked them to raise their hands to check if they did the home work. They raised their hands and he praised them for what they did.

When it comes to the lesson, after they discussed comprehension questions the teacher introduced a new lesson which was about Relative Clause. He told them to read and did the activities (p, 206-207, Ex, 11.10) which was not discussed with the teacher because he said they were very simple. No one reacted negatively to the teacher’s order.

The researcher guesses that teachers use this kind of strategy to finish the portion of the text within the specified schedule. This forced teachers to focus on some parts of the lessons of textbook (grammar and vocabulary focused).

The third observation was made on April 24, 2014 fourth period (3:00-3:40 PM). The lesson was unit 12, about Stigma and discrimination p, 208. He started the lesson by introducing the day’s lesson. The teacher discussed the exercises and activities given in the introduction part together with a few volunteer students. The teacher mainly read each item loudly and a student responded voluntarily to the teacher’s questions. Thus, it was a form of interaction dominated by questioning and answering. The teacher asked students to give answers for each items or questions from the textbook exercise by reading each item loudly or by calling the number of the questions.

The teacher’s major activities in the above lesson presentation included informing lesson topics to students, and giving brief explanations on them, reading instructions of activities and inquiring students to work out the exercises. Especially, giving brief explanations about instructions of activities or exercises and inquiring students to work on them was the predominant practice of the teacher in the lesson.  This shows that the teacher was practicing assessment of learning which inhibits students’ independent learning (assessment as learning/ assessment for learning).

Observations made with T3

T3 was from Fitche Secondary School which was in Grade 9 Section 1. My first observation with her was when she was conducting a lesson on Revision of Tense (present perfect tense), page, 196 on student textbook on April 25, 2014 during the third period (2:05-2:45 PM). The teacher first took students’ attendance and then she asked the students if they had any given home works. The teacher explained the note which was given in the text book and then asked them to do activity A 11.6 p, 196 in which the students were expected to change the sentences into present perfect tense. From the questions:

Q1.  My father is working in his office.

ST.  My father has worked in his office.

Having done the activity with the students the teacher moved to the next lesson which was the same statements to change into question forms.

ST.  My father has worked in his office.

ST.   Has my father worked in his office?

After the students completed the activities the teacher began to call by name and asked for the answer.

The second lesson observation was made with the same teacher on April 28, 2014, in the fifth period (3:40-4:20 PM). The teacher began by introducing the day’s lesson, which is about Articles (a/an/the). She wrote the words definite and indefinite articles and asked them to put a/an/the under each. No one could answer the question raised by the teacher, so she began to explain what definite and indefinite articles are. After the explanation she asked them to match the rules on p, 196 with the sample sentences on p, 197 individually. After they finished the given activities the teacher told the students to do the other activity on the same page as a home work.

The third lesson observation was conducted with T3 on April 29, 2014 in the sixth period (4:20 5:00 PM). The activity was about definite/indefinite article. During the discussion the teacher was writing the correct answer on the blackboard for correction.

After the discussion, the teacher directly moved on to the day’s lesson which was about countable and uncountable nouns and asked them to check their background about the topic. She told them they had 10 min to do the activities.

Here also the teacher mostly used doing activities, home works, asking and questioning as classroom assessment techniques.

Results of Classroom Observations

The classroom observation data revealed that teachers only use some common kind of classroom assessment techniques such as giving home works, class works, asking and questioning used repeatedly by the observed English teachers. The teachers made presentations of activities and exercises from the textbook mainly through reading instructions to students. They tried to discuss the given activities.

Considerable variations were also observed among the observed teachers in using variety of classroom assessment techniques during the teaching learning process. For example, Teacher 1 and Teacher 3 depended more on discussing home works, using questioning and answering but teacher 2 depends more on pair and group work in addition to questioning and answering discussing home-works as classroom assessment technique. On the other hand, Teacher 1 seemed to spend more time in giving further explanations and clarifications of what and how students required doing before engaging students with the intended exercises.

Nevertheless, none of the teachers seemed to succeed in engaging more students with the classroom activities and exercises since most of the time they gave the chances for the students who participate voluntarily. They all tended to focus on a few volunteered students in each instructional procedure. This means the teachers predominantly used assessment of learning in their class lesson which hinders students’ independent learning (assessment for learning/assessment as learning) which is also against the syllabi and textbook that initiate assessment for learning and assessment as learning to improve student’s performance.

Interview Results

This section presents and discusses the results of the study concerning the data obtained from the teachers’ interview.

In order to expand the current research on classroom assessment practice, three purposively selected English teachers from the three secondary schools were inter-viewed after the class observation had been completed. The interview protocol contained a range of questions that focused on various classroom assessment techniques that are associated with improvements of teaching and learning. At the interview, the teachers responded to seven open-ended questions regarding teaching tech-niques adjustment, practice of classroom assessment, the classroom assessment techniques they use, how they attain the specific objectives, problems (factors) in implementing classroom assessment techniques and any possible suggestion. This was later transcribed and analyzed. Results were given in the order of the questions being asked.

Interview question number 1: What is (are) the purposes classroom assessment?

One of the interviewees explained the purposes of assessment as:

“I use classroom assessment for identifying my students, to know students’ progress, to know to what extent students understand the given lesson, and also to look in to my teaching techniques.” Interviewed in April, 2014

Another interviewee responded stating the practices of classroom assessment as

“It helps me to know how much my students understand the lesson”.

The third interviewee answered that

“Classroom assessment is the assessment that teachers use to help the teaching and learning process, to check students’ understanding of particular information.” Interviewed April, 2014

As can be seen from the interviewees’ responses, the three teachers have tried to explain that they used classroom assessment to check students’ understanding of a particular lesson. This definition shows teachers use classroom assessment only from one side, that is, to learn students’ level of understanding which leads the practice towards assessment of learning. But teachers are not only expected to use classroom assessment only for this purpose. Assessment needs to be used for learning and as learning, too. Hence, teachers are not clearly able to state what the practices of assessments are.

Interview question number 2: What are classroom assessment techniques you use in English classroom?

Teachers were interviewed to state the classroom assessments they employed in their classes. The first teacher explained that he usually uses homework, questioning and answering, group work as classroom assessment techniques. In the same way, the second interviewee stated that he used homework, and questioning and answering as classroom assessments techniques. The third interviewee has listed a variety of classroom assessments she used in her class. These classroom assessments are: peer assessment, group work, homework, questioning and answering, quiz, presentation, and test.

As Gonzales and Aliponga (2012, p.3) state “In conducting an assessment for learning, it is necessary that there is a balance in the types of test items and more complex performance assessment tasks need to be selected with care to ensure that the full range of critical instructional objectives is assessed.” When we see the three interviewees’ responses from these authors’ angle, only the third interviewee tried to use the balance in the assessment techniques. The first two interviewees listed that they only use questioning and answering and home-work as classroom assessment techniques. From this, one can conclude that teachers are not employing variety of classroom assessment techniques, which, of course, contradicts with the results obtained through quantitative data (Questionnaire) where, the majority pretended as if they are using various classroom assessment techniques. 

Interview question number 3: For what purpose do you use classroom assessment techniques in English classroom?

One of the teachers explained the purpose of classroom assessment to obtain feedback on the effectiveness and satisfaction of his students with teaching. He further elaborated:

 “Well, I think it really helps me, to be a better teacher, and I think it helps the students get more out of the class. So that is the main purpose of classroom for me.” Interviewed April, 2014

Another interviewee from enlightened the practice of classroom assessment as,

 “for me the practice of classroom assessment is to monitor students’ learning, that is,  helps me to check whether the students are actually learning or not. Also to see if they are getting what I am teaching them”. Interviewed April, 2014

The third interviewee expressed her view from students’ interpersonal communication perspective. According to her, the practice of classroom assessment is,

 “to improve communication and collaboration among students. When you make classrooms much more collaborative, students feel that they are part of teaching and learning, and start assessing themselves. In fact, I have benefited a lot by maximizing collaboration among my students.” Interviewed April, 2014

From the explanations given by three interviewees regarding the practices of classroom assessment, three major points can be deduced: improving teaching process, monitoring students’ learning, and improving students’ collaboration.

Interview question number 4: How do you know whether you attain the specific objectives or not?

Teachers were interviewed to explain their view on the means they use in learning whether they achieved a particular lesson objective or not. Surprisingly, all of the interviewees made clear that they use questioning and answering. According to these interviewees, if the majority of students raised their hands to take part in the questions they asked students, it meant for them that the objective of the lesson has been attained. During the lesson observation made by the researcher, this kind of approach was found confusing. Because, many students have been seen raising their hands but failed to give the correct answer. This shows, by only asking questions, it is difficult to reach at the conclusion that a particular objective of the lesson has been attained.  Regarding this point, Gonzales and Aliponga (2012) clearly stated that a variety of assessment techniques need to be in place to ensure that the full range of critical instructional objectives is assessed.” Hence, teachers are expected to use various assessment techniques in order to attain the intended learning outcomes.

Interview question number 5: Is there any problem you face during the implementation of classroom assessment techniques?

With regard to the problem teacher faced during the implementation of classroom assessment techniques, the respondents explained that the students were not that much motivated to learn and participate in English class. One of the interviewee further explained that,

“The structures of the classroom, as the desks are not at ease to make groups in the classroom, which renders group work. As a form of teacher centered, teachers mostly lecture the subject matter that proved more practice to the teachers than to the students. The number of students in the classrooms is mostly eighty to eighty five students in a class and that make difficult for instructor to impart skills and knowledge among learners in a crowded and noisy environment”. Interviewed in April, 2014.

The interviewee explained more on the challenges he faced in applying the different classroom assessment techniques in light of classroom conditions such as large class size and fixed desks. He responded about the large class saying that,

“This year we are facing a big problem because of large number of students in the classroom. Last year, we had at least 50- 55 students in the classroom but now we have 80-85 students. Let alone to check students’ progress daily, I could not check my students’ exercise book. When I checked their exercise book the time allotments in a period is not even enough.” Interviewed on April, 2014

The second interviewee also expressed his view that the physical, environmental conditions of the schools and large class are not conducive to implement classroom assessment effectively.

“English teachers who want to make additional teaching materials have no place to either store or display them. Besides, English language classes, at school levels, include frequent and considerable use of local language (Amharic/Afan Oromo), and students hardly get exposed to English. Because of high number of students in the classroom, we usually face challenges, for instance, unable to check individual students progress, low motivation to learn as of high suffocation in the class due to the weather condition (it is very hot 5^th, 6th periods in the morning and the afternoon shifts.), Teachers are usually run to cover the portion of the course (textbook) rather than assisting students to understand the concept of the subject matter. Most of the time the students didn’t come up with the textbook during English class, the reason the student gave to the subject teacher was that they complain that they were exposed to  theft because of this they will be requested by the school to pay three fold of the price of the book” Interviewed on April, 2014.

The last interviewee has explained her view saying:

 “Some of the students do not know their goal and they do not come to the school with exercise-book and textbook. In the absence of these tools, you can imagine how to run effective teaching learning processes. In addition, it is obvious that in language teaching, some of the classroom assessment techniques, in fact, require good physical condition. If we take practice play, students can’t practice it in their class due to the fixed nature of benches and desks in the classroom. Because of this, I can’t really fully say that I am implementing a variety of classroom assessment techniques effectively” Interviewed on April, 2014.

Additionally, the interviewee responded about her students’ motivation saying.

 “I don’t know the reason behind but nowadays students are not ready to learn, even students who do well in the classroom are not motivated to do activities in the classroom…this really needs in-depth investigation” interviewed in, April 2014.

From the explanation given by the three interviewees, teachers encountered various challenges in applying classroom assessment techniques effectively in their class. Students’ low motivation of learning, classroom conditions, large class size, weather condition of the town and so forth have been elicited as major challenges the teacher came across. The data obtained from classroom observation also proved that the classroom condition and seating arrangement is not convenient to employ classroom assessment techniques effectively. It could be said that each observed classes’ result indicates that the classroom lay out is not arranged to facilitate and implement effective classroom assessment techniques. Classroom assessment techniques may not bring the desired results unless learning and teaching environment are smooth and supportive for both the teachers and the students. Irregularity (absence) of the students in the classroom is also seen a major problem in the schools that the researcher has observed.

Interview question number 6: what do you do when your teaching techniques fail to make the teaching effective?

With regard to the question with failing of teaching techniques to make the teaching effective, each interviewee responded as the following:

“I personally use different techniques when I feel that my current teaching technique is not convenient or ineffective, but it depends on the situation of the classroom, i.e. some of classrooms are more participatory than others and my teaching techniques also depend on such situations like students motivation”.

The other respondent explained the following:

“When I realized that I am not teaching well, I try to change my teaching style. When I teach, I usually ask my students whether they are following me or not, and whether they understood the lesson on progress or not. Sometimes, they ask me the questions when they are not clear with what I teach them. By this time, I try to change my teaching style and let them clear with what they failed to grasp. I try to give them explanation; sometimes, I give them as homework to look for the points by themselves”. 

The last respondent explained that it is so difficult for her to make any adjustment towards her teaching techniques. She explained it like:  

“For me, everything is stated in the teacher’s guide; students also know what they are expected to do from textbook. If I manage to implement what is stated in teacher’s guide, I know my teaching will be effective. Hence, because of time; it is difficult to follow all the details in the teacher’s guide. Sometimes, we rush to cover the portion instead of teaching what the students intend to know. To be frank, we teach few weeks. We don’t start the class as per the set school calendar, that is, every semester we miss classes because of examinations, for holydays (Easter, x-mass) and so on. So, with all these facts, it is not possible to employ effective classroom assessment techniques”.

Interview question number 7: Would you suggest possible solutions that help to get effective classroom assessment?

With regard to the problem the teachers faced during the implementation of classroom assessment techniques, they suggest solutions to make classroom assessment more effective.

“More effort to be done with the students’ motivation, if students are not motivated to learn nothing can help them even if teachers try to do their best”.

Results of Teachers’ Lesson Plans

In order to substantiate the data from classroom observation three lesson plans (one lesson plan for each of the observed teacher’s lesson) were analyzed as follows.

As mentioned above, the teachers’ lesson plans were presented based on two major sections. The first section, presented information about the lesson (only the topic of the lesson) the teachers are going to teach (e.g., grade level, period, section, topic, lesson objectives, etc.). Section two shows the actual instructional practices that the teachers planned to do in a particular period (e.g., teacher’s activity, students’ activity, assessment). This part of the teachers’ lesson mainly provides them information about not only what to do with the given lesson topic but also how to conduct the lesson. Generally, both parts of the lesson plans mainly specify which areas of the textbook activities and exercises to be taught; teachers’ practice and students’ practice and assessment techniques.

However, the lesson plans are too short to grasp detail information about the actual lessons enacted in classrooms.

Thus, as the observation data revealed, that the listed teachers’ and students’ practices in the lesson plans could not clearly show what was going on in the classrooms during instruction. That is, the teachers’ lesson plans could not reveal their classroom instructions as revealed from the observation data for two major reasons.

First, the nature of lesson plan phases (introduction, presentation, and evaluation) did not clearly show each activity separately. Second, though the lesson plan documents presumed students’ active practices, the classroom observation data showed that more students were not cooperative and attentive in participating during instructions expected.

The structure of the lesson plan include students’ and teachers’ practices and section for evaluation (assessment) as described in the lesson plans seems to reinforce active participation of students in classroom instructions though students were not actively taking part in the observed lessons. Teachers are expected to assess their students after they have taught the lesson. Ideally, it is supposed to be a record of how well the students learned and how effective the teaching was. Teachers can then use this information to refocus their teaching to help students make their learning more efficient and meaningful.

In general, from the classroom observation result and lesson plan analysis, it is difficult to conclude that teachers have been implementing effective classroom assessment techniques in English classroom.

Feedback obtained by teachers

In the open-ended part of the questionnaire, the respondents filled for the items they were asked what feedback they obtained from their students using during conducting instruction and what they did based on the feedback they got.

The teachers responded that they obtained feedback like answering to questions (wrong and right answers); silence, low participation, etc. At the time like this, some of the teachers said they changed their teaching technique and the others said students did not have bases in the subject hence, we teach them what is intended in the daily lessons. For most of the teachers students’ motivation is an important criterion that made them adjust their techniques.   

This section presents results and conclusions reached based on the analysis and interpretation of the data and recommendations suggested on the basis the findings.

Results and Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the practice of classroom assessment in adjusting English language teachers’ teaching techniques in the three secondary schools in Fitche town. Specifically, it sought to attain the following objectives;

1. To find out classroom assessment techniques English language teachers employ in English classroom;

2. To identify the purposes of assessment, the assessment techniques used by English language teachers;

3. To investigate the feedback English language teachers obtain using classroom assessment techniques; and

4. To see whether they use the assessment feedbacks to adjust their teaching techniques.

To meet the objectives of the study, data were gathered through questionnaire, classroom assessment, interview and lesson plan analysis from available, purposive and simple random selected sample subjects (teachers and schools, observed & interviewed teachers, observed sections) respectively. Thorough review of literature was made to arrive at the research gap and a conclusion has been reached for each objective after processing and interpreting the data.  

As to the assessment techniques, which are employed by English language teachers, nineteen different class-room assessment techniques were identified based on the existing literature, classified into six, made into questionnaire and administered to all English language teachers in the three schools. Classifications of the assessment techniques are: written assessment techniques through home works and assignments, questioning and answering, teachers’ observation of students’ work, students' effort exertion (through independent activities), giving feedback, and testing.

Results of the interpretation of the quantitative data gathered in relation to this indicated that majority of the teachers employ almost all the assessment techniques with some variations in degree. Written assessment through questioning and answering, and tests and quizzes were found to be used by all (100%%) of the respondents. Similarly, giving feedback and students' effort exertion as assessment techniques were found to be employed by the majority, i.e., by 97.62  and 95.24% of the respondents respectively. Teachers’ observation of students’ work and written classroom assessment techniques through home works are also reported to be used by 93.88 and 83.33% of the respondents. 

However, the results of the qualitative data showed that only a few of the assessment techniques were employed by the teachers. Results of the observation showed that only questioning and answering, and written assessment through home works were used repeatedly by all the observed teachers. Only one teacher (T2) employed more assessment technique (teachers’ observation of students’ work, grouping). Similarly, results of the interview are found to mismatch results of the questionnaire. All the interviewees reported that they commonly use written assessment through home works and questioning and answering as assessment techniques.

From the discussion, there is a mismatch between findings of the quantitative and the qualitative data. The disparity can be attributed to the factors hindering effective implementation of various assessment techniques, as reported by the interviewees. They listed that the large class size, lack of motivation on the side of the students, and the inconvenient nature of classroom facilities.

It can be reasonably argued that results of the quailtative data reflect the reality because if lists of factors that hinder implementation of varieties of classroom assessments are given by the respondents themselves, it is fair to tend to accept results of the qualitative data as reliable. The conclusion is, thus, that a few assessment techniques are employed by English language teachers, though teachers have already accumulated fair teaching experiences, and qualification at secondary school.

As regards the purpose of classroom assessment, the quantitative data showed that the majority of the teachers employ classroom assessment for the three purposes of assessment; i.e., for assessment of learning (which means using assessment to check attainment of learning objectives at the end of instructional process), assessment for learning (which is designed to give teachers information to modify and differentiate teaching and learning activities, and assessment as learning (which is used to develop and support meta-cognition of students the knowledge of one’s own thought processes). According to the findings 66.7, 78.6 and 76.2% of the respondents reported that they use classroom assessments for the purpose of assessment as learning; assessment for learning; and assessment of learning respectively. Though the teachers used them for mentioned purposes, the qualitative data revealed that majority of the teachers failed to succeed in engaging more students in the discussion of activities and exercises.

In line with this, Bonweel and Eison (2003) noticed that students must do more than just listen. They need to read, write, discuss or engage in problem solving activities. Most of the time; teachers give the chances for the students who participate voluntarily.

Concerning the third objective, the study disclosed that teachers obtained different feedbacks from the classroom assessment techniques they employed in their classes. These are: students’ questions, silence, low participation, and low motivation.

Regarding the forth objective, whether the teachers use the assessment feedbacks to adjust their teaching techniques, the result from qualitative data (interview, open-ended question and classroom observation) showed that only some of the teachers attempted to make use of assessment feedbacks to improve their teaching process depending on the classroom situation, i.e. some of the classrooms were more participatory than others. According to the respondents adjusting teaching techniques depends on students’ motivation of learning. The rest of the teachers have not been able to use the feedbacks in adjusting their teaching techniques for various reasons. During the interview, the respondents stated that it is difficult to follow all the details in the teacher’s guide depending on the given techniques because of time, sometimes, they rushed to cover the portion instead of teaching the detail information that students must know. They also stressed that they missed classes for different reasons (exams, holidays, meetings etc.) and had a pressure to finish on time. Hence, with all these factors, it is impossible to implement effective teaching techniques which improve the teaching learning process.

In general, the study indicated that English language teachers have not fully managed to use the feedbacks obtained from classroom assessment techniques in adjusting their teaching techniques. However, as Gonzales and Aliponga (2012, p.3) state “In conducting an assessment for learning, it is necessary that there is a balance in the types of test items and more complex performance assessment tasks need to be selected with care to ensure that the full range of critical instructional objectives is assessed.”  In the contemporary language instruction, the purpose of assessment has been shifted from assessment of learning to assessment for learning or assessment as learning (Angelo and Cross, 1993; Benett and Gitomer, 2009; Biggs, 1995; Earl and Katz, 2006). Contrary to the previous study, the finding of this study shows teachers predominately implement assessment for the purpose of assessment of learning which inhibits students’ independent learning.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, the researcher would like to forward the following recommendations. As the result of the study revealed, teachers are not fully mana-ged to implement classroom assessment techniques. Therefore, teachers need to be given training on how to use a variety of classroom assessment techniques in order to enhance students’ learning. Nunan (1989) also explains that if students' objective and subjective needs are not recognized by their teacher, there will be a mismatch between what they are expected to do and what they want to do.

As the study revealed, only some of the teachers attempted to use classroom assessment feedbacks to improve their teaching techniques even based on the classroom situation. However, the majority of the teachers have not been able to use the feedbacks in adjusting their teaching techniques for various reasons. Therefore, the schools should work out to minimize the problems mentioned by the respondents and used school calendar in such a way that it does not affect the teaching and learning processes. Tutorial programs can also be thought as a means of managing the time.

From the feedbacks teachers obtained through classroom assessment, they are expected to work more to make their lesson interesting and participatory.  Besides, teachers need to make their own personal efforts to address the need of their students by using variety of classroom assessment techniques. Some of the feed-backs seen by the teachers: low participation, and low motivation also need the attention of school administration and other stakeholders; parents, teacher association (PTA), district education officials etc in order to raise student learning motivation at school level. Class size was one of the major factors which hinder the implementation of effective classroom assessment techniques in the teaching learning process. Having appropriate class size may not always be possible. Therefore, teachers should use alternative techniques such as, dividing the whole class into groups, using whole class, etc.

In addition, the Ministry of Education and higher institutions need to consider introducing interventions of courses as pre-service and in-service programs in colleges and universities. Furthermore, to increase the awareness about the classroom assessment techniques short-term courses, workshops and seminars need to be conducted and supported.  Regional education bureau’s language experts, school administrators, department heads and the teachers themselves should also take responsibility to capacitate English language teachers in this regard.

The author has not declared any conflict of interests.