4.2 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.2.6. Theme 6: Assessment
101
Participants’ responses show that English lecturers see themselves primarily as facilitators in their lecture venues, which is in line with what was revealed by the literature. As a result, all the participants (P1, P2, P3, P4 and P5) indicated that they do not see themselves as carriers and givers of information to students, but they are there as facilitators. On the other hand, lecturers also affirmed that they automatically have to be instructors to ensure order and discipline, but they allow students to learn for themselves. However, only P2 and P3 asserted that they were definitely driven by content, because it is a fact that students will be tested at the end and they are not to fail their sections. Contrary to this, P1 and P4 indicated that they are not driven by content at all; P1 emphasised that what matters is not how much content he has taught but that the students master the section he has taught, no matter how small it is. In addition, it was also indicated that for him to cover small portion of work does not matter, but what matters is that students have learnt something rather than rushing to finish the syllabus.
Findings revealed that all lecturers believed in playing the role of facilitators in their teaching which encourages students to learn on their own through social and cognitive constructivism (student-centred teaching). This suggests that lecturers used verbal strategies to decolonise the English Major 420 curriculum since strategies were derived from students’ opinions and beliefs. In this case students were given a chance to share their ideas about teaching and learning and other social issues. Moreover, the findings also revealed that lecturers also acted as instructors and as educational leaders in the lectures, which sought them to control group discussions, time used as well as activities during teaching process. This suggests that lecturers also used habitual strategies because before coming to class they already had ideas of what they wanted to achieve or to pass across through the lesson. On the other hand, the findings also indicated that two lecturers acted as assessors as they were driven by the content they want to finish in a specified period of time, while another two participants disagreed with this. This suggests that only two lecturers were driven by written strategies to decolonise the English curriculum which sought them to cover the content stipulated in the written documents (templates, course outline) on time. However, the English Major 420 course outline (2018) was silent regarding the role the lecturers are to play when teaching the module.
102
P1: “We use all the types of assessment … we have prescribed test assessments, tests or essays that we give to our students, assignments to write, so we have a fixed way of assessing them and sometimes we make them write tests, they write essays.”
P2: “… a little task, sometimes a task a week … We used to use peer assessment when our numbers were smaller… I do encourage our students to use peer evaluation.”
P3: “… it’s obviously formative and summative but I also when I walk into class I don’t take the register any longer because students are using the paper. They can talk about it in groups with questions for 10 minutes…. In pairs, in groups and even in little groups of 4-5, they just talk to the people around them.”
P4: “I use all forms of assessments, formative assessment helps me because I know how I am going to give feedback … peer assessment is the students teaching each other as well because they learn from one another.”
P5: “… a test or assignment or given as essay, we don’t have much time to say this is your first draft and exchange it to get feedback from your peer.”
P1 stated that “we have prescribed test assessments, tests or essays that we give to our students, assignments to write”. P5 stated “a test or assignment or essay, we don’t have much time to say this is your first draft and exchange it to get feedback from your peer” (summative assessment). In addition to this, P3 stated “it’s obviously formative and summative but also when I walk into class I don’t take the register any longer because students are using the paper.
They can talk about it in groups with questions for 10 minutes”. P2 added “a little task, sometimes a task a week”. In line with this, P4 affirmed that “I use all forms of assessments, formative assessment helps me because I know how I am going to give feedback” (formative assessment). On the other hand, P2 asserted that “I do encourage our students to use peer evaluation…” (Peer assessment).
Studies outlined that assessment is the way to evaluate and find out if the goals of teaching and learning have been met during and by the end of the teaching period (Berkvens et al., 2014;
Black, 2015; Firmino & Leite, 2014; Khoza, 2016b; Qu & Zhang, 2013). In addition, Black and Wiliam (2009) added that assessment is used to find out if students understood what was taught in a specific period of time. Furthermore, studies also indicated that assessment has three types: summative, formative and peer assessment. Summative assessment was defined as the
103
one that is for grading (formal) and that usually takes place at the end of a teaching period to determine if students are ready to progress to the next level. Summative assessment causes lecturers to be driven by written strategies, because this type of assessment is done based on certain criteria; for instance, in the English education discipline lecturers use a formal marking scheme that looks at content and expression. Moreover, in summative assessment, Bloom’s taxonomy is used to assess students on different levels from a lower to a higher level of questioning (Earl & Giles, 2011; Khoza, 2015c).
Formative assessment was described as assessment that is not for grading and that occurs during the course of teaching to ensure that students are carried along for effective feedback.
Formative assessment causes lecturers to use habitual strategies since it’s a habit for individual lecturers to keep on asking/posing questions to students. Moreover, English lecturers choose which questions to ask as a way of preparing students for final evaluation (Didicher, 2016;
Pratt & Martin, 2017). Peer assessment was defined as allowing students to evaluate each other’s work for effective feedback. Peer assessment causes lecturers to use verbal strategies because through students evaluating each other the lecturer can determine their strong and weak points for students’ developmental feedback (Bhooth et al., 2015; Bridgstock, 2016; Didicher, 2016). Moreover, studies indicated that summative assessment is the assessment type that is most often used (Didicher, 2016; Firmino & Leite, 2014).
Research findings revealed that English lecturers mostly used formative and summative assessments, more than peer assessment was used. Consequently, all the participants (P1, P2, P3, P4 and P5) responded mostly on the use of these assessment types. This suggests that English lecturers were driven by both written and habitual strategies which sought them to use formal assessment procedures such as Bloom’s taxonomy as well as to give certain tasks to test students’ knowledge and understanding for feedback purposes. For instance, a lecturer can give students a 10-minute group exercise for them to discuss certain themes in the novel that relate to their everyday life, to bridge the gap between students’ context and content for feedback purposes. Furthermore, based on the findings, it was evident that summative assessment was used to evaluate students’ understanding for grading and progression, such as tests, assignments and examinations when teaching English Major 420. For instance, an English lecturer can set an examination question based on how students think Shakespearean texts can be decolonised with the aim of making them find ways to relate such information to students’
local context, and this can be done following levels of questioning in Bloom’s taxonomy.
104
On the other hand, only P2 responded on how she encourages her students to assess each other’s work. This suggests that lecturers hardly used verbal strategies to decolonise the curriculum.
The English Major 420 course outline (2018) indicated that the module uses formative and summative assessment, but it was silent on the use of peer assessment.