Discrepancies in assessing undergraduates' pragmatics learning

Authors

Oscar Ndayizeye, Department of Languages and Social Sciences Higher Teacher-Training School of Burundi (Ecole Normale Supérieure (ENS) du Burundi) Burundi

Keywords

Authentic assessment, program evaluation, pragmatics, Rasch Model

Document Type

Article

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to reveal the level of implementation of authentic assessment in the pragmatics course at the English Education Department of a university. Discrepancy Evaluation Model (DEM) was used. The instruments were questionnaire, documentation, and observation. The result of the research shows that respectively, the effectiveness of definition, installation, process, and production stages in logits are -0.06, -0.14, 0.45, and 0.02 on its aspect of the assessment methods' effectiveness in uncovering students' ability. Such values indicate that the level of implementation fell respectively into 'very high','high', 'low', and 'very low' categories. The students' success rate is in 'very high' category with the average score of 3.22. However, the overall implementation of the authentic assessment fell into a 'low' category with the average score of 0.06. Discrepancies leading to such a low implementation are the unavailability of the assessment scheme, that of scoring rubric, minimal (only 54.54%) diversification of assessment methods, infrequency of the lecturer's feedback on the students' academic achievement, and the non-use of portfolio assessment.

Page Range

133-143

Issue

2

Volume

3

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.21831/reid.v3i2.14487

Source

https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/reid/article/view/14487

Recommended Citation

Ndayizeye, O. (2017). Discrepancies in assessing undergraduates' pragmatics learning. REID (Research and Evaluation in Education), 3(2), 133-143. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v3i2.14487

References

Bentley, Y., & Warwick, S. (2013). An investigation into students' perceptions of group assignments. Journal of Pedagogic Development, 3(3), 11-19. Retrieved from https://journals.beds.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/jpd/article/view/199/310

Brown, S. A., & Glasner, A. (1999). Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Christie, M. F., Grainger, P., Dahlgren, R., Call, K., Heck, D., & Simon, S. (2015). Improving the quality of assessment grading tools in Master of Education courses: A comparative case study in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(5), 22-35. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v15i5.13783

DiRanna, K., Osmundson, E., Topps, J., Barakos, L., Gearhart, M., Cerwin, K., “¦ Strang, C. (2008). Assessment-centered teaching: A reflective practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Fernandes, H. J. X. (1984). Evaluation of educational programs. Jakarta: National Education Planning Evaluation and Curriculum Development.

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Fook, C. Y., & Sidhu, G. K. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153-161. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.153.161

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2009). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Irons, A. (2008). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. London: Routledge.

Joughin, G. (Ed.). (2009). Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education: A critical review. Wollongong: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8905-3_2

Mardapi, D. (2008). Teknik penyusunan instrumen tes dan nontes. Yogyakarta: Mitra Cendekia.

Mardapi, D. (2012). Pengukuran penilaian dan evaluasi pendidikan. Yogyakarta: Nuha Medika.

McNamara, T. F., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Suarta, I. M., Hardika, N. S., Sanjaya, I. G. N., & Arjana, I. W. B. (2015). Model authentic self-assessment dalam pengembangan employability skills mahasiswa pendidikan tinggi vokasi. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 19(1), 46-57. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v19i1.4555

Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2015). Aplikasi pemodelan Rasch pada asesmen pendidikan. Cimahi: Trim Komunikata.

Tim Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran. (2014). Buku kurikulum pendidikan tinggi. Jakarta: Directorate of Learning and Student Affairs, Directorate General of Higher Education, Ministry of Education and Culture.

Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. (2014). Buku peraturan akademik Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (Revised ed.). Yogyakarta: UNY Press.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.