Assignments and projects.

Another method that some participants used as a summative assessment was graded assignments. However, there is no specific criteria by which teachers should abide in relation to the course type. Only two participants (Najla and Latifa) indicated that they included

assignments as a type of assessment. They did not show that this was a response to a specific requirement or policy; it was their choice to include this type of assessment. Najla even indicated that she implements this practice in all her courses regardless of whether it is an ESP or a GE course. Latifa included written assignments in her course because it is a writing course.

For Najla, the course syllabus referred to an assignment as a “final project.” Students were required to submit a research paper of 8 to10 pages on a medical topic and present it at the end of the course that counted for 10% of their final grade. Although Najla designed a major plan for this research writing project, she allocated only 10% of the total grade to it. Perhaps she assigned the project such a low percentage because she had divided the rest of marks into different assessment tasks, as the policy mandated assigning 25–30% to midterms and 45–50%

to final tests. Another reason for assigning the project a low percentage was that Najla indicated that this course introduced students to research writing, but other available courses relied more heavily on writing. She explained that the purpose of writing the research paper was to learn how to use APA format and make presentations.

Excerpt 19: We do a research in our class, but this is really helping them for other classes. So if they can at least know the work citation—If they know the significance of the publisher or the general layout of the work cited, and form in APA . . . I think that’s enough for me. (Najla, II)

Here, Najla implied that she evaluated students on the basics of research writing but did not focus on their writing skills. She provided students with a handout that explained research paper requirements, but she did not give them a rubric. She said that she discussed in class how she would mark students’ research.

Najla also required students to present on their research topics. She did not elaborate on this assessment, but she provided a document showing presentation assessment criteria. The presentation constituted only 5% of the overall grade. The research paper was also assigned 5% of the final grade. Thus, the grade for the final project was for both the research paper and the presentation. Other than the final project, Najla asked students to write four essays and marked them out of 5% of the overall grade—but she said that the purpose of writing the essays was to prepare students for their final research paper.

Latifa’s strategy for these assignments was different. She said that such assignments were worth 5% of the overall grade. Latifa did not provide me any documentation of assignments; she only reported in the interview that she gave students one writing assignment in the summer semester, in which they were to write an email to her about their interest in the course. She stated that many students did not submit the assignment, thinking that it was not graded. When she announced that the assignment was graded, many students submitted it. This demonstrated that students in this specific case cared more about grades than actually learning the material.

According to Latifa, the purpose of such an assignment was to teach students how to write formal emails, but because she reminded those students who did not submit it that the assignment was graded, she seemed to focus on helping students get higher grades. She said,

Excerpt 20: I mean, even if it was not an assessment, they need to hear that this assignment is an

assessment, because they do not work enough if they know that it is not graded. And I was really flexible with submission. Some girls submitted it at the very end of the course. It was okay with me as long as they submitted it. They will only submit if they know it is graded. (Latifa, PI)

Latifa also referred to other purposes of this assessment:

Excerpt 21: The purpose of such homework is to assess them, but not directly. I mean they have to do it, and then I can see the homework based on my own criteria; I mean, I would provide them with feedback on their weakest points, and on the other hand, such homework assignments are also for me to check on students’ understanding, and what I need to focus more on, or they want me to focus on. I mean, I would check their writing letter assignments if one was very weak or a student was struggling with writing. (Latifa, PI)

It seems that she would ask students to do the homework so she could assess her pedagogy based on their understanding. However, because, as she reported, she was flexible with the date of submission, she would not be able to follow up with the students at the same time and assess her pedagogy accordingly. She mentioned that some students submitted the homework at the end of the semester and that practice was acceptable. She mentioned that because of the short length of the summer semester, she did not give more than one writing assignment and that she was

flexible with the submission due date, which suggests that she tended to help students get the full 5% grade.

Participants teaching GE courses (i.e., Nadia, Hajar, and Leila) said they never graded homework; it was only given to students to prepare for the next lesson and save time. Leila, for example, stated that she did not grade homework and assigned it to prepare students for the classroom assessments. She stated that in the early years of her career, she used to grade assignments but that she had abandoned that approach: “In the very first year of my teaching, I

used to give [graded] homework, but not anymore. It’s been years since I’ve given homework. I mean I don’t give [them] assignments that they submit to me.” She added,

Excerpt 22: I give them homework, but I don’t assess them on the homework. I just tell them to do an exercise as homework for the next day, [and] you see that the good students already did it, and those who are not motivated did not. When we come the next day, we answer the exercise along together. But I don’t give them homework on extra sheets and I collect it from them. (Leila, PI)

In reference to the GE course specifically, Leila stated that she had given students graded homework during the year prior to this study. This decision was a response to the coordinator’s rules:

Excerpt 23: Last year, I asked students to write homework in the GE course on writing, because the coordinators asked teacher to include writing in the course, and to teach students how to write. So I started with students—I explained everything, and then asked them to write a paragraph on specific topics—not paragraphs, I only asked them to write [simple] sentences . . . I told them to bring the homework. And honestly, when I collected the homework from them, I didn’t mark any. It was just for them to do the homework. Then, the next day, I handed them back the [homework], and I told them, “Let’s revise it together.” I sometimes attended to individual students, asking them for example, “What did you do?” “What did you write?” And I write the correct sentence, or an example sentence on the whiteboard. I mean I select one of the student’s answers—if her answer is correct. I write it on the board for those who did not write, they should learn how to write; and those who did a mistake could revise their answers. (Leila, PI)

Although she mentioned that she gave students homework the previous year, I observed her asking students to prepare writing homework for the next class. She taught students the grammar needed to write the paragraphs, and she explained the main question and vocabulary. I did not attend the class after the students did the homework, so I could not observe her strategy of conducting writing assessment tasks and homework in the classroom.

The type of feedback used in this method was mostly oral. Although this method included written assignments, no participant presented any document showing how written corrective feedback was provided. As mentioned previously, Latifa was the only participant who taught a course on writing, yet she did not express her views and practices on providing written feedback. Najla on the other hand, reported using written corrective feedback practices on written assignments, but she did not provide me with a document showing such a practice.

5.2.2 Formative Assessment Practices

All participants implemented different kinds of assessments that could be classified as being formative although none of the participants used the term formative when discussing these assessments, as noted above. This section discusses the participants’ formative assessment plans, purposes, and methods. The purposes of formative assessment are discussed with methods because the participants had different purposes for each method.