The gaps between the teachers’ working principles and their practice

As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, this section focuses on the assessment propositions which have relatively less impact on the teachers’ assessment practice when compared with the other propositions dealt with at this stage; this in turn leads into a further investigation of why this is the case. 2 propositions were identified (Table 2.2).

Proposition 11: The appropriateness of assessment (tasks) is checked by calling for peer

comment or with reference to published guidelines (if these are available)

The teachers recognized that it was appropriate for assessment tasks to be checked in cooperation with their colleagues (m=3.93 in Table 2.1), however, the teachers did not usually participate when the opportunities presented themselves (m=2.93 in Table 2.2). Moreover, although their assessment tasks might be recognized as appropriate for the assessment, it did not necessarily mean that they were perfect or that there was no room for further improvement. The teachers interviewed mention three main reasons why their assessment tasks were not checked by the peer cooperation: working conditions, the

relationships between with the classroom teachers, and professional expertise.

Firstly, most teachers rated their working conditions as teachers of English as the most important factor.

… It might be almost impossible for the following reasons: First of all, all classroom teachers are very busy managing their routine duties, these are often not relevant to English teaching and assessment (Teacher Baekdu Interview 1).

When classroom teachers taught English, they usually had opportunities to share their ideas and experience with respect to both the development of assessments tasks and their implementation. Opportunities usually arise during the conferences held by the teachers of the same grade once or twice a week. … However, when I taught English as an English subject teacher, it was a different story, such meetings were seldom held; everything which had to do with assessment I did on my own (Teacher Bukhan Interview 4).

This indicates that teachers seemed to be involved in a range of school activities which were not necessarily relevant to English teaching and assessment. In addition, there might be some differences between situations where English was taught by English subject teachers and when it was taught by ordinary classroom teachers. This shows the contextual specificity of teaching English in the country where this study is being conducted (see Chapter 2).

Secondly, the teachers were concerned about their relationships with the classroom teachers.

Other classroom teachers were rarely willing to cooperate with me. Sometimes, they said that, ‘It’s your expertise, not mine’; or, ‘I must respect your expertise’ (Teacher Bukhan Interview 4).

There might be a few competent classroom teachers who had a reasonable knowledge of English, and skills in English teaching and assessment …but I still hesitate to contact them to discuss the assessment tasks… I would only ask them to check my assessment tasks if they suggested it to me first, or when they were personally close to me. … Asking somebody else to check my work is always difficult and makes me uneasy (Teacher Taebaek Interview 5).

This indicates the degree of the lack of communication between English subject teachers and classroom teachers which resulted in, to some extent, a breakdown of mutual support. This might also mean that English specialist teachers are rather isolated members of the school community. In addition, the teachers were aware of the social and cultural relationships that exist between the teachers in the schools. That is, they were sensitive to what they should do and should not do, considering the prevailing customs in the community of the school.

Finally, the teachers highlighted the importance of their professional expertise with regard to English language assessment. For example, Teacher Baekdu believed that:

There are still many teachers who are not yet familiar with English teaching and assessment. The assessment of English, especially, seemed to be recognized as an area which they, and me myself, had not so far adequately mastered. That is, since they felt that they did not have a reasonable level of confidence in

assessing students’ English, thus they would not be willing to participate in the development of assessment tasks (Interview 1).

This indicates that the teachers recognized that some of their colleagues are still not equipped for English teaching and assessment.

Proposition 14: I receive advance ‘informed consent’ from the students or their parents

with regard to carrying out the assessment.

The teachers were undecided regarding the issue of whether or not they received informed consent from the parents (m=2.59 in Table 2.1); it does appear, therefore, that they have hardly ever received it (m=1.84 in Table 2.2). The teachers interviewed mention two main reasons why they seldom receive informed consent: awareness of their status and position of privilege, and various practical problems. They also suggest one idea which might be used to encourage the teachers to receive informed consent.

To begin with, the teachers believed that assessing students was a basic part of a teachers’ expertise; this had been taken for granted for many years.

Nobody has asked me to seek informed consent since I began teaching English in the school. That is, assessment has been seen as being the teachers’ prerogative; this has been a socially agreed custom in this country … (Teacher

Mindung Interview 15).

I am happy to accept that I must provide the students and parents with all the relevant information concerning assessment tasks. However, this does not necessarily mean that I am willing to seek their consent regarding the

implementation of assessment. … Explicitly, the teachers have a right as well as a duty to carry out the assessment of their students (Teacher Daedun Interview 14).

This indicates that teachers were rather obstinate as regard this issue; consequently they would not embrace it when they implemented their assessment. A great number of interviewees were in broad agreement with these sentiments.

In addition, some teachers pointed out the practical problems of receiving informed consent: For example, Teacher Deogyu stated:

Since assessment is kind of mandatory work for teachers, we must carry it out … but, receiving informed consent is too complicated as well as redundant and time consuming. Another reason I believe this is that I hold that assessment should be carried out on behalf of the educational authority. That is, assessment cannot be withdrawn even if the parents do not agree to it (Interview 7).

Also, Teacher Seorak added that s/he had no ‘second best plan’ if the parents did not agree with the assessment. This indicates that the teachers were concerned about what would happen if the parents rejected their right to conduct assessments; they recognized that they could suggest no alternative if the parents’ consent was withheld. Thus, receiving informed consent should be dealt with at a higher level or as an element of the whole teaching and assessment system.

developmental issue regarding the receiving of informed consent. This was as follows.

… But, it might be good if it can be done when the curriculum of school is established. … During the preparatory, school or each grade curriculum developers, might ask the parents to give their opinions or consent regarding the implementation of the assessment which has been planned. Through this process, teachers could obtain the parents’ agreement and support. If this was the case, personally, I would do it although it would make me busier than ever … (Teacher Inwang Interview 13).

I have been familiar with a custom which is taken for granted that teachers construct assessments and implement them. But now I think that receiving informed consent can be a good device for encouraging students to prepare well for the assessments… but it would only be possible if I construct assessment tasks very well. Furthermore it is difficult if I am the only teacher who is doing it. … (Teacher Sobaek Interview 6).

These 2 teachers seem to understand that assessment is itself a part of the school curriculum and that it cannot be planned and implemented without considering the whole educational program of the school. This also indicates that teachers’ attitudes could be developed as they are exposed to different positions while they are responding to interviews. Thus, whether or not the teachers can develop good quality assessment tasks is an issue; inevitably this once again raises the issue of the availability of teacher development programs for language assessment, and the responsibility of the authorities for providing them.