Introduction
The study titled “Developing a Comprehensive, Empirically Based Research Framework for Classroom-Based Assessment” was conducted in 2011 by Kathryn Hill and Tim McNamara. The central themes of the article revolve around decentralizing responsibility for assessment to classroom teachers, dimensions and scope of the classroom-based assessment, and underscoring the immense significance of assessment on learning.
Summary
This study used a qualitative research design (ethnographic methods) to develop “a comprehensive framework for conducting research on classroom-based assessment” (Hill and McNamara 395). The proposed framework was based on two themes namely dimensions (evidence, interpretation, and use) and scope (how language teachers carry out CBA, what they look for when evaluating students, and what theory or standards do they employ in assessing students). The qualitative design was employed to investigate and broaden the variety and type of questions that should be included in CBA research. A summary of the results demonstrates that the classroom-based assessment framework was effective in helping language teachers to (1) plan, frame, conduct, and use assessment, (2) know what to look for in advance learning, feedback, and reporting, (3) understand the standards to use in teaching Indonesian as a foreign language, and (4) comprehend learner understandings of language learning and assessment.
Critique
The main argument of the article is that a classroom-based assessment framework based on the summarized themes (assessment dimensions and scope) may be effective in assisting language teachers to assess a whole range of issues in language learning. The writers’ perspective is to develop a classroom-based assessment model that innovates in considering epistemological basis for observed assessment practices, allows for the inclusion of a diverse range of data including the more intuitive forms of teacher decision-making, and uses a school-based foreign language setting. These ideas are more inclusive than those of other writers and they help shape the writers’ argument about the validity and viability of the framework.
The authors are university professors, hence are qualified to write in this area. Although the writers appear unbiased in their arguments and reporting, it is difficult to agree with their argument that a process-oriented classroom-based assessment model represents an improvement from earlier models that used criteria and standards. As reported in the literature, criteria, and standards of assessment still represent some of the best approaches used in evaluating language learners (Parker et al. 34). Although the introductory sections of the study are easy to understand, it is generally felt that the findings and discussion should have been presented in a much simpler format for ease of understanding. A good practice for presenting the findings revolves around the use of the deductive approach (using a structure or predetermined framework) with the view to achieving a sense of direction and logical flow (Chenail 67). Although the writers use reputable sources to strengthen their arguments, they nevertheless seem to make simple concepts harder based on their way of analyzing the qualitative findings. Overall, the work can be recommended to researchers and classroom practitioners with an interest in language learning and assessment.
Conclusion
The study has been effective in demonstrating how the actual classroom processes revolving around assessment dimensions and scope can be effective in researching classroom-based assessment. This article is useful in assisting teachers to develop effective standards and benchmarks for language assessment in a school-based foreign language setting.
Works Cited
Chenail, Ronald J. “Conducting Qualitative Data Analysis: Reading Line-by-Line, but Analyzing by Meaningful Qualitative Units.” Qualitative Report. 17.1 (2012): 266-269. ERIC. Web.
Hill, Kathryn, and Tim McNamara. “Developing a Comprehensive, Empirically Based Research Framework for Classroom-Based Assessment.” Language Testing. 29.3 (2011): 395-420. ERIC. Web.
Parker, David C., Mathew K. Burns, Kristen L. McMaster, and Edward S. Shapiro. “Extending Curriculum-Based Assessment to Early Writing.” Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 27.1 (2012): 33-43. Academic Search Premier. Web.