|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Abstract : |
| Twenty-eight TESL students from UPSI and one experienced English SPM Examination examiner (Expert Rater 1) assessed twenty-five samples of Form Four ESL secondary school students’ writing. Twelve of the TESL students used the analytic scoring method; seven used the primary trait scoring method; and eight used the holistic scoring method. The expert rater and one of the TESL students (Teacher A) used the English SPM Examination scoring method. Teacher A and Expert Rater 1 assessed the writing samples individually, but the other twenty-eight TESL-students were gathered during three separate seminars and workshops. The scores from the twenty-eight TESL students, Teacher A and Expert Rater 1 were correlated using descriptive statistics and non-parametric(Spearman Rho) calculations. The analysis of these scores showed that there was a significant correlation coefficient between the subjects, even though they used three different scoring methods to assess the writing samples. The TESL students who took part in the assessment during the seminars and workshops agreed that the three scoring methods were suitable for classroom assessment as compared to the English SPM Examination scoring method, which was more suitable for standardized assessment. A few strengths and weaknesses of each scoring method were identified and solutions for use in the classroom assessment were recorded in the salient features of assessment. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |