Current issues in english language teacher based assessment

Current Issues in English Language Teacher-Based Assessment CHRIS DAVISON University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia CONSTANT LEUNG King’s College London London, England Teacher-based assessment (TBA) is increasingly being promoted in educational policies internationally, with English language teachers being called on to plan and/or implement appropriate assessment procedures to monitor and evaluate student progress in their own classrooms However, there has been a lack of theorization of TBA in the English language teaching field, with researchers pointing to much variability, a lack of systematic principles and procedures, and a reliance on traditional, but now outdated, psychometric assumptions This article provides an overview of some of the current issues in TBA, including its definition and key characteristics, and the complex but significant questions which its implementation pose for our understandings of language, learning, and assessment T eacher-based assessment (TBA) is policy-supported practice in a number of educational systems internationally, including Australia, New Zealand,1 Canada, and the United Kingdom (e.g., Cumming & Maxwell, 2004; Learning and Teaching Scotland, 20062; Queensland Studies Authority, 2009b; Saskatchewan Learning, 1993; Spencer, 2005) It is increasingly being adopted as national educational policy in Asia In Queensland where school-based assessment (SBA) was introduced in the 1970s (Sadler, 1989) teacher-based assessment is used for all assessment in the secondary school, even for high-stakes purposes (see Queensland Studies Authority, 2009a) The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) also uses only teacher-based assessment for senior secondary level (Department of Education and Training, Education Policy and Planning Section [Australia], n.d.) Other states such as New South Wales and Victoria have incorporated large scale teacher-based assessment into their public examinations (see, e.g., New South Wales Government, n.d.) New Zealand also has a long history of school-based assessment in the senior secondary school (see New Zealand Qualifications Authority, n.d.), and has developed a wide variety of teacher support material and associated research studies, (Ministry of Education [New Zealand], 2009) In Scotland much interesting work in TBA is being conducted by the Scottish Assessment Is for Learning (AifL) group (Learning and Teaching Scotland, 2006) supported by the Ministry of Education in Scotland and involving many classrooms TESOL QUARTERLY Vol 43, No 3, September 2009 393 (Butler, this issue; Curriculum Development Institute [Hong Kong], 2002; Ministry of Education [Singapore], 2008; Xu & Liu, this issue) as well as in some developing countries, including South Africa, Ghana, and Zambia (Pryor & Akwesi, 1998; Pryor & Lubisi, 2002) It is also actively promoted in the United States (e.g., Popham, 2008a, 2008b; Stiggins, 2008; Stiggins, Arter, Chappuis, & Chappuis, 2007), although always overshadowed by national testing programs At the same time, English language teachers are increasingly being called on to plan and implement their own assessment instruments and procedures to monitor and evaluate student progress in their classrooms, and new curriculum documents and professional teaching standards increasingly demand English language teachers be knowledgeable and skilled in TBA (see, e.g., TESOL, 2005) However, despite this widespread embrace of various forms of TBA in school and adult education, there has been comparatively little specific research into the TBA of English as a second or additional language TBA has been neglected by researchers partly because of the uncertain status of TESOL as a discrete curriculum area in schools and tertiary institutions, partly because of the traditional dominance of the field by largescale English language tests such as the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) and the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) and their research priorities and needs, and partly because of the ongoing critique of notions of standard English and models of correctness as well as debates over native versus nonnative speaking teachers and the implications for assessment What TBA research that has been done in TESOL reveals much variability, a lack of systematic principles and procedures, and a dearth of information as to the impact of TBA on learning and teaching In Australia, several studies of the use of large scale criterion-referenced English as second language (ESL) assessment frameworks in schools (Breen et al., 1997; Davison & Williams, 2002) have revealed a great diversity in teachers’ approaches to assessment, influenced by the teachers’ prior experiences and professional development, the assessment frameworks and scales they used, and the reporting requirements placed on them by schools and systems Concerns have also been raised about, on the one hand, the ad-hoc or impressionistic nature of many teacher judgments (Leung, 1999; Leung & Teasdale, 1997) and, on the other hand, mechanistic criterion-based approaches to TBA, which are often implemented in such a way that they undermine rather than support teachers’ classroom-embedded assessment processes (Arkoudis & O’Loughlin, 2004; Black & Wiliam 1998; Carless, 2005; Davison, 2004; Leung, 2004a, 2004b) Research into TBA in TESOL is further complicated by the considerable uncertainty and disagreement around the concept of TBA itself and 394 TESOL QUARTERLY by its intrinsically co-constructed and context-dependent nature (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Brookhart, 2003; McMillan, 2003; McNamara, 2001; Stiggins, 2001) When the principles and procedures underlying TBA are not clear, the basis for research and development is even muddier, hence the need for more public and mainstream discussion of the issues This review article aims, first, to define more clearly the concept of TBA in English language teaching and second to explore some of the key conceptual issues and challenges for the field, as well as the implications for practice The article concludes with a summary of some of the areas in which more research into TBA is needed DEFINING TBA There is no widely accepted common definition of teacher-based assessment in the English language teaching field, with many terms used interchangeably to refer to the same practices and procedures, including terms such as alternative assessment, classroom and/or school-based assessment, formative assessment, and more recently, assessment for learning Such terms highlight different aspects of the assessment process, but all tend to be used to signify a more teacher-mediated, context-based, classroom-embedded assessment practice, explicitly or implicitly defined in opposition to traditional externally set and assessed large scale formal examinations used primarily for selection and/or accountability purposes Thus, for the purposes of this article we take TBA to mean much more than just who is doing the assessing; TBA also has implications for the what, where, how and most importantly, the why of assessment TBA has a number of important characteristics which distinguish it from other forms of assessment: • • • • • It involves the teacher from the beginning to the end: from planning the assessment programme, through to identifying and/or developing appropriate assessment tasks right through to making the assessment judgments It allows for the collection of a number of samples of student work over a period of time, using a variety of different tasks and activities It can be adapted and modified by the teacher to match the teaching and learning goals of the particular class and students being assessed It is carried out in ordinary classrooms, not in a specialist assessment centre or examination hall It is conducted by the students’ own teacher, not a stranger CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 395 • It involves students more actively in the assessment process, especially if self and peer assessment is used in conjunction with teacher assessment • It opens up the possibility for teachers to support learner-led enquiry • It allows the teacher to give immediate and constructive feedback to students • It stimulates continuous evaluation and adjustment of the teaching and learning programme • It complements other forms of assessment, including external examinations The key steps involved in such teacher-based assessment are captured in Figure FIGURE A Framework for Teacher-Based Assessment (Davison, 2008) 396 TESOL QUARTERLY Defined in this sense, TBA shares many of the characteristics of assessment for learning (AfL), a concept first used in the United Kingdom in the late 1980s, and widely promoted through the work of the Assessment Reform Group (Assessment Reform Group, 1999, 2001; Black & Wiliam, 1998) The term was introduced to ensure “a clear distinction be made between assessment of learning for the purposes of grading and reporting, which has its own well-established procedures, and assessment for learning, which calls for different priorities, new procedures and a new commitment” (Assessment Reform Group, 1999, p 2) The Assessment Reform Group (1999, p 7) has described AfL’s defining characteristics as follows: • • • • • • • embedded in a view of teaching and learning of which it is an essential part learning goals are shared with pupils aims to help pupils know and recognise the standards they are aiming for pupils are involved in self-assessment provides feedback which helps pupils recognise their next steps and how to take them underpinned by confidence that every student can improve both teacher and pupils review and reflect on assessment data In TBA, the term assessment for learning is often used synonymously with the term formative assessment, so comprehensively documented by Black and Wiliam (1998), but more recently many researchers have been calling for a sharper distinction between the two terms (Kennedy, Chan, Yu, & Fok, 2006; Roos & Hamilton, 2005; Stiggins, 2002; Taras, 2005) Traditionally, formative assessment is seen as informal and fairly frequent, involving the gathering of information about students and their language learning needs while they are still learning Formative assessment is usually contrasted with summative assessment, generally defined as those more formal planned assessments at the end of a unit, term, or year which are used to evaluate student progress and/or grade students In an assessment of learning culture, formative and summative assessment are seen as distinctly different in both form and function, with teacher and assessor roles clearly demarcated, but in an assessment for learning culture, it is argued that even summative assessments of the students’ language skills can and should also be used formatively to give constructive student feedback and improve learning (see, e.g., Biggs, 1998; Carless, 2008; Davison, 2007, Davison & Hamp-Lyons, 2009; Hamp-Lyons, 2007; Harlen, 2005; Kennedy et al., 2006; Taras, 2005) These researchers argue that provided summative assessment is undertaken while students are still learning (and teachers are still teaching), such assessments can and CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 397 should also be used for formative purposes, that is, to improve learning and teaching, thus building a more coherent and stronger assessment for learning culture Kennedy et al propose that in this more inclusive model of assessment: All assessment needs to be conceptualized as assessment for learning Feedback needs to be seen as a key function for all forms of assessment Teachers need to be seen as playing an important role not only in relation to formative assessment but in all forms of summative assessment as well—both internal and external Decisions about assessment need to be viewed in a social context because in the end they need to be acceptable to the community Kennedy concludes that “the continuing bifurcation between formative and summative assessment is no longer useful, despite the fact that such a distinction has resulted in some excellent research and development work on formative assessment” (p 14) He joins Harlen (2005), Carless (2008), and others in calling for more research to be conducted into summative assessment, and as Carless puts it, tests as “productive learning opportunities” (p 8) However, Kennedy challenges Roos and Hamilton’s (2005) view that summative assessment as a procedure is too deeply entrenched, in Roos and Hamilton’s words, to become “a valid activating mechanism for goal-directed educational activities” (p 7) Biggs (1996, 1998) also argues that an exclusive focus on formative assessment may leave many negative summative assessment practices uncontested He points out that this is deeply problematic given summative assessment’s significant influence on student learning, often negative backwash undermining any of the positive impacts of formative assessment In fact, as has been well-documented in systems such as Hong Kong and Singapore (e.g., Cheah, 1998; Hamp-Lyons, 2007), it is extremely difficult to sustain any significant teacher-based formative assessment practices in most traditional examination-dominated cultures.3 The traditional concept of formative assessment also needs to be problematized In AfL, formative assessment is seen as having two key functions: informing and forming That is, formative assessment not only shapes the decisions about what to next, by helping the teacher to select what to teach in the next lesson, or even in the next moment in the 398 In Hong Kong studies of the implementation of teacher-based assessment innovations such as the Target-Oriented Curriculum in primary schools (e.g Cheung & Ng 2000; Carless 2004; Adamson & Davison 2003) and the Teacher Assessment Scheme in senior secondary science (Yung, 2006) found that any change in teacher assessment practice was difficult, severely constrained by traditional school culture and by teacher, parent, and student expectations TESOL QUARTERLY lesson; the student also has to understand what they have learned and what they need to learn next (Black, 2001; Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2003a, 2003b; Black & Wiliam, 1998) The learner’s role is crucial because it is the learner who does the learning This point seems obvious, even trite, but it is central to the AfL philosophy and, if treated seriously, clearly highlights where formative assessment can go wrong As Torrance (1993) argued some years ago, many teachers are at risk of assuming formative assessment is at best “fairly mechanical and behaviouristic in the graded test tradition”; at worst summative, “taking snapshots of where the children have ‘got to’, rather than where they might be going next” (p 340) Teachers coming from more traditional assessment cultures make two common misinterpretations of formative assessment First, there is a widespread assumption that any continuous assessment is by definition formative, but this is not necessarily the case—a series of weekly tests are continuous, but they are not formative if they are not used by students to improve their learning: The term ‘formative’ itself is open to a variety of interpretations and often means no more than that assessment is carried out frequently and is planned at the same time as teaching Such assessment does not necessarily have all the characteristics just identified as helping learning It may be formative in helping the teacher to identify areas where more explanation or practice is needed But for the pupils, the marks or remarks on their work may tell them about their success or failure but not about how to make progress towards further learning (Assessment Reform Group, 1999, p 7) Second, there is a common misconception that a so-called alternative form of the assessment automatically makes it formative; that is, assessments like portfolios and oral presentations are by definition formative However, such assessments can be and sometimes are components of large-scale externally set and assessed examinations, for example, the ubiquitous external oral examinations of many Asian educational systems which are not used at all for formative purposes To summarize, then, in an AfL culture, TBA needs to be continuous and embedded naturally into every stage of the teaching–learning cycle, not just at the end (see Ministry of Education [Singapore], 2008, for an example of this in a K–12 curriculum) All assessments (even those for accountability purposes) need to be designed and implemented with the overriding aim of improving student learning, with AfL as the dominant educational ethos In such a classroom or institution, teachers would be continually engaged in various forms of formative assessment, even at the end of the course In this model of TBA, outlined in Table 1, CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 399 400 TESOL QUARTERLY Often spontaneous and contingent when the need arises Learner referenced; focus on the learning process Indirect or implied feedback, or direct, coconstructed by students and teacher Degree of preplanning Focus Typical kinds of feedback Informal analysis of patterns in student language use NA Analysis Test Informal quizzes, diagnostic tests, student-developed tests Analysis of drafts/video and audio samples of work Focused open questions to Peer conferencing; informal elicit/check understanding; student self and peer opportunity for student reflections/learning logs self-reflections More structured self, peer and teacher observation using anecdotal records/observation checklists/self and peer evaluations Direct qualitative feedback, may involve multiple and varied sources e.g., self, peers, teacher, etc Criterion referenced, but in relation to learner’s starting point; focus on the learning process and student progress An informal planned process during the course of the year tailored to the needs of the individual students and class An integral part of the learning and teaching cycle, i.e., part of effective teaching and planning for the future More planned integrated formative assessment Inquiry Types of assessments: Observe Informal observation of learner behavior/ language use An integral but very informal part of every teacher’s daily practice Definition In-class contingent formative assessment-while-teaching More formal tests Portfolios/collections of student work/presentation Teacher-student conferencing; structured student self and peer reflections/learning logs Systematic observation of language samples using scales/profiles/rubrics Direct qualitative feedback, may indicate profiles or grades, but still extensive student involvement Criterion referenced, but in relation to system-level norms; focus on student progress and gap between what should be and is Usually predesigned, sensitive to needs of students but also to the demands of external requirements A time for taking stock, assessing how individuals are performing compared with whole group More formal mock or trial assessments modeled on summative assessments but used for formative purposes Formal tests, exams Formal portfolio/project/ videotaped presentations NA Formal moderated mapping of students performance on system-wide published standards/scales Report in profiles, levels, and marks by teacher, but preceded and/or followed by formative self and peer evaluation and extensive teacher feedback Criterion referenced, but in relation to system-level norms; focus mainly on the product of learning, and what student needs to next Predetermined, relatively formal and set at beginning of unit of learning and teaching A distinctive stage at the end of a unit of learning and teaching Prescribed summative assessments, but results also used formatively to guide future teaching/learning TABLE Assessment for Learning in the Classroom: A Typology of Possibilities (Davison, 2008) assessment includes not only the formal planned moments when students undertake an assessment task but also the far more informal, even spontaneous moments when teachers are monitoring student group work and notice one student speaking more confidently or another failing to take an offered turn Because the goal of TBA is to improve student learning, self and peer assessment are an integral component of all assessment activity Feedback is also a defining element, with opportunities for constructive and specific feedback related to specific assessment criteria and curriculum goals and content regularly reviewed by students and teachers Such an integrated approach to assessment underpinned the recent development of a school-based assessment (SBA) component in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (HKCEE) in English Language (Davison, 2007; Davison & Hamp-Lyons, 2009) The stated purpose of the SBA component was to provide a more comprehensive appraisal of Forms 4–5 (Grades 9–10) learners’ achievement by assessing learning objectives which could not be easily assessed in public examinations while at the same time enhancing teaching and learning The initiative marked a shift from traditional norm-referenced externally set and assessed examinations toward a more student-centered TBA system that drew its philosophical basis from the assessment for learning movement discussed earlier Teachers are involved at all stages of the assessment cycle, from planning the assessment programme to identifying and developing appropriate formative and summative assessment activities right through to making the final judgments In-class formal and informal performance assessment of students’ authentic oral language skills using a range of tasks and guiding questions and the use of teacher judgments of student performance using common assessment criteria are innovative aspects of the new SBA, as is the insistence that students play an active role in the assessment process and the vigorous promotion of self and/or peer assessment and feedback (for a fuller discussion, see Davison, 2007; Davison & HampLyons, 2009) Such TBA is assumed to have a number of advantages over external examinations, especially in assessing language, because effective language development requires not just knowledge but skill and application in a wide range of situations and modes of communication Hence, like other performance-based subjects such as music, art, drama, and various vocational subjects, it is often argued that languages are better assessed through more authentic-like, performance-based assessments Table summarizes some of the common advantages attributed to TBA compared with external examinations However, a number of these claims made for the efficacy, or even superiority, of TBA over traditional assessments, especially those relating to CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 401 TABLE Advantages of TBA Compared With External Examinations for Oral Language Assessment (Adapted From SBA Consultancy Team, 2005) Characteristics of classroom-based TBA Scope Authenticity Validity Reliability Fairness Feedback Positive washback (beneficial influence on teaching and learning) Teacher and student empowerment Extends the range and diversity of assessment collection opportunities, task types, and assessors Assesses work being done within the classroom; less possibility of cheating as teacher knows student capabilities; assessments more likely to be realistic Improves validity through assessing factors that cannot be included in public exam settings Improves reliability by having more than one assessment by a teacher who is familiar with the student; allows for multiple opportunities for assessor reflection/ standardization Fairness is achieved by following commonly agreed processes, outcomes and standards; teacher assumptions about students and their oral language levels are made explicit through collaborative sharing and discussion with other teachers Students can receive constructive feedback immediately after the assessment has finished, hence improving learning Ongoing assessment encourages students to work consistently; provides important data for evaluation of teaching and assessment practices in general Teachers and students become part of the assessment process; collaboration and sharing of expertise takes place within and across schools Characteristics of exams Much narrower range of assessment opportunities: less diverse assessment; one exam per year Removes assessment entirely from teaching and learning; stressful conditions may lead to students not demonstrating real capacities Limits validity by limiting scope of assessment, e.g., difficult to assess interaction skills in exam environment Even with double marking, examiners’ judgments can be affected by various factors (task difficulty, topic, interest level, tiredness, etc.), but little opportunity for assessor reflection/review Fairness can only be achieved by treating everyone the same, i.e., setting the same task at the same time for all students The only feedback is usually a grade at the end of the exam; generally no opportunities for interaction with assessor; no chance to ask how to improve Examinations by their nature can only be purely summative, and not serve any teachingrelated purpose; effects on teaching and learning may even be negative; may encourage teaching to the test and a focus on exam technique, rather than outcomes Teachers play little to no role in assessment of their students and have no opportunity to share their expertise or knowledge of their students; students treated as numbers (Continued) 402 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE (Continued) Characteristics of classroom-based TBA Professional development Builds teacher assessment skills, which can be transferred to other areas of the curriculum Practicality and cost Once teachers are trained, TBA is much cheaper as integrated into normal curriculum; undertaken by class teacher as part of everyday teaching; avoids wasting valuable teaching time on practice tests Characteristics of exams Teachers have no opportunity to build their assessment skills; get little or no feedback on how to improve as teachers Language assessment as currently practiced is very expensive in terms of task development (especially as multiple stimulus material is often needed to avoid cheating), assessor training and moderation and teaching/learning time validity and reliability, need to be explored further because they raise important theoretical issues that go to the heart of TBA and when applied to the English language teaching field CONCEPTUAL ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN TBA IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING There are obviously many issues and challenges confronting English language education in its movement toward greater use of high-quality TBA, ranging from the very practical concerns associated with any significant change in classroom practice, including the need to develop confidence to overcome the inevitable implementation dip through to the more technical problems associated with learning how to construct explicit assessment criteria and tasks appropriate for range of individual student needs (e.g., Fox, 2008), through to the significant challenge of changing deeply entrenched sociocultural attitudes and expectations (for a fuller discussion, see Brindley, 1995; Davison, 2007, Rea-Dickins, 2008) However, in this article we are more concerned with conceptual issues, in which questions of validity and reliability are central As others have pointed out (e.g., Rea-Dickins, 2007), in TBA there is much debate over evaluation criteria with researchers such as Leung (2004a, 2004b) and Teasdale and Leung (2000), on one hand, arguing that the evaluation criteria traditionally associated with psychometric testing such as reliability and validity need to be reinterpreted in TBA, particularly in relation to in-class contingent assessment in interaction, but testers such as Clapham (2000) insisting that traditional test criteria apply to alternative TBA: CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 403 A problem with methods of alternative assessment, however, lies with their validity and reliability: Tasks are often not tried out to see whether they produce the desired linguistic information; marking criteria are not investigated to see whether they ‘work’; and raters are often not trained to give consistent marks (p 152) However, these points represent two quite different levels of concern Clapham’s arguments are primarily to with the quality of assessment practice, whereas Leung’s problematize the underlying assessment theory.4 Even when TBA is “best” practice, many theoretical issues remain unresolved; in fact, we would argue they are even more obvious As an example, take the development of the SBA system in Hong Kong (SBA Consultancy Team, 2005), outlined earlier, involving more than 1,800 teachers in more than 650 schools and institutions Conducted over years of schooling, and contributing 15% toward each student’s final English score, it consists of the assessment of English oral language skills based on topics and texts drawn from a program of independent reading or viewing (“texts” encompass print, video, film, fiction, and nonfiction material) The spoken language tasks are of two broad kinds: group interaction and individual presentation Students choose at least three texts to read or view over the course of years, keeping a logbook or brief notes, and undertaking a number of activities in and out of class to develop their independent reading, speaking, and thinking skills For assessment they participate in several interactions with classmates on a particular aspect of the text they have read or viewed, leading up to making an individual presentation or group interaction on a specific text and responding to questions from their audience (for a full description of the assessment requirements, see SBA Consultancy Team, 2005) A range of assessment tasks has been provided that teachers can choose from and adapt, including teacher-made tasks adapted from those used by teachers who took part in the initial development of the assessment initiative Assessment tasks can vary in length and complexity, enabling teachers to provide students with appropriate, multiple, and varied opportunities to demonstrate their oral language abilities individually tailored to their language levels and interests At the same time, however, the teacher and the school need to be sure that the oral language produced is the student’s own work, not the result of memorization without understanding Hence, there are some important requirements or conditions that teachers and students must follow, including the assessment being conducted by the usual English teacher, in the presence of one or more 404 See Chapelle (1999), for a more detailed discussion of current debates over validity in language testing TESOL QUARTERLY classmate(s) Students are assessed according to a set of assessment criteria consisting of a set of descriptors at each of six levels across four domains: (a) pronunciation and delivery, (b) communication strategies, (c) vocabulary and language patterns, and (d) ideas and organization Teachers are encouraged to video or audio record a range of student assessments to assist with standardization and feedback, involving the students as much as possible During the class assessments, which might span a number of weeks, individual teachers at the same level are encouraged to meet informally to compare their assessments and make adjustments to their own scores as necessary Such informal interactions give teachers the opportunity to share opinions on how to score performances and interpret the assessment criteria Near the end of the school year, all the English teachers at each level hold a formal meeting, chaired by a coordinator in each school, to review performance samples and standardize scores Such meetings are critical for developing consistency in and between teacher-assessors, for public accountability, and for professional collaboration and support At the end of each year, a district-level meeting is held for professional sharing and further standardization Each coordinator is encouraged to share a range of typical and atypical individual assessment records (along with the video or audio recordings) and the class records Once any necessary changes are made, the performance samples are archived and the scores are submitted to the HKEAA for review Maintaining notes of all standardization meetings and any follow up action is also encouraged so schools can show parents and the public that it has applied the assessment procedures consistently and fairly The HKEAA then undertakes a process of statistical moderation5 to ensure the comparability of scores across the whole Hong Kong school system This TBA system is supported by a comprehensive teacher training package (SBA Consultancy Team, 2005) which includes an introductory DVD and booklet, and two training CD-ROMs containing a range of student samples for benchmarking purposes In addition, 39 district-level group coordinators, mostly serving teachers, were used to coordinate training and standardization sessions with school coordinators and with the teachers involved within each school A 12-hour supplementary professional development program with comprehensive course and video notes on DVD (SBA Consultancy Team, 2007) was also developed, and all teachers are encouraged to complete the program in their first year of such assessment Careful monitoring of the assessment process shows that teachers are able to reliably mark students’ work with high It is difficult to justify statistical moderation from a theoretical perspective, given SBA and the external examination are measuring different things under very different conditions, but it is considered essential to ensure public confidence in the examination system is maintained, while allowing the HKEAA to be more innovative in its assessment practices CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 405 levels of interrater reliability and that a higher correlation exists between SBA and other components of the external exam than between the external oral exam and other components This TBA system aims to ensure, to paraphrase Clapham (2000), that tasks are tried out, marking criteria work, and raters are trained; however, theoretical problems to with the nature of what is assessed and how it is assessed in English language education still arise and are, in fact, foregrounded by TBA in ways which challenge the English language teaching field In the interests of brevity, we will look at three key sets of issues arising from TBA which problematize our theorization of language, language learning, and assessment Implications of TBA for the Theorization of Language All language use implicates meaning making (and meaning taking) In English language classes, almost all language is taught (and learned) through carrier content, for example, the language use one might engage in when arriving at an airport, or reviewing and discussing a film.6 Thus, TBA, whether we are talking about assessment embedded in in-class contingent interaction or more formal assessment at the end of the teaching and learning cycle, is inextricably connected to meaning making with reference to content meaning in context If we look at what is assessed in the example from Hong Kong outlined earlier, we see language use being embedded into other forms of social and cognitive activity, then being “pulled out” for separate assessment in ways which raise real issues of validity: Are we assessing speaking? Are we assessing cognition? Are we assessing reading? Are we assessing cultural knowledge? Are we assessing interactive style or personality? Such concerns about validity are somewhat ironic given that the direct assessment and real-world (even if simulated) nature of TBA tasks is supposed to be one of the key advantages TBA has over external exams Thus, somewhat paradoxically, TBA raises two problems to with the nature of language assessment that are relatively invisible in traditional testing First, TBA, in its emphasis on language use in context, calls into action a multifaceted combination of linguistic, pragmatic, and cultural resources Models of second language competence (e.g., Bachman, 1990; Canale & Swain 1980) have set out components such as grammatical competence, sociocultural competence, and strategic competence These components have been used to inform model building for proficiency levels and assessment (e.g., Council of Europe, 2001; Griffin & McKay, 1992) 406 It is rare in these communicative language teaching days for language use to be solely concerned with a display of linguistic knowledge (as in grammar drill exercises) TESOL QUARTERLY However, as Widdowson (2001) noted, there is as yet no clear understanding of how these different components relate to one another, particularly in specific contexts One consequence of this lack of understanding is that assessment has a built-in arbitrariness; for example, should pragmatic competence be regarded as being more important than linguistic competence in classroom discussions? Do we need a model(s) of language that would articulate the different component competences in different contexts? Second, insofar as language use almost always involves some content meaning (even in formal language learning activities), then assessing language means inevitably assessing content to some degree This is particularly the case for the TBA of English that takes place in a subject learning contexts, for example, English language learners in mainstream English-medium school and university classrooms (e.g., in North America, Australia, and the United Kingdom as well as in English-medium institutions around the world), and in content-language integrated learning programmes (increasingly popular in Europe where the teaching and learning of English as a foreign language is carried out through a school subject such as science) But assessing English in subject learning contexts raises certain questions: Do teacher-assessors need a framework for language assessment as well as a separate framework for content? Or can they adopt a content-language integrated view, as argued by Mohan, Leung, and Slater (in press), that proceeds on the assumption that there is no separation between meaning and wording? These are critical questions to with validity highlighted by TBA, but they have widespread significance in the English language teaching field Implications of TBA for the Theorization of Language Learning The second key set of problems highlighted in TBA relate to the theorization of language learning TBA, particularly for formative purposes, has generally put a high premium on teacher–student dialogue involving appropriate use of questioning and feedback, either as part of live contingent interaction or in the form of written comments This practice generally, and mainly implicitly, assumes that language learning takes place through interaction between the teacher and the student with the guidance and advice given by the teacher advancing the student’s knowledge and skills Until recently, such formative assessment appears to have been much more interested in practice than theory Lantolf and Pohener (2004), Poehner and Lantolf (2005), and Poehner (2007, 2008) argue that formative TBA has been atheoretical and overly task oriented, without paying sufficient attention to a learner’s overall cognitive CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 407 development; furthermore, such formative assessment seems to rely on teacher intuition rather than any systematic theory of learning In contrast to most forms of teacher-based formative assessment, their preferred model of assessment, dynamic assessment, works explicitly within a Vygotskyan sociocultural paradigm, using the twin constructs of teachermediated assistance and the zone of proximal development to theorize the process of learning through assessment A similar approach grounded in sociocultural theory, called interactive assessment (see SBA Consultancy Team, 2008, for a fuller explanation), is also being promoted in the Hong Kong assessment initiative Teachers are given a framework of guiding questions which make increasing cognitive and linguistic demands on the learner, and their teacher-assessors are encouraged to interact individually with a student at any time, asking specific question(s) to clarify and encourage the student to extend ideas, help prompt and scaffold the students’ oral interaction, probe the range and depth of their oral language skills, and verify the student’s understanding of what he or she is saying The questions are meant to be used flexibly to ensure that students have the opportunity to show the full range of their responses, hence achieving the most valid “true” judgment of students’ ability However, such approaches raise key questions not only about the nature of second language learning and its stages of development, but also about the role of assessment criteria and the teacher-assessor Where learners of English need support to understand and express meaning, elements of teaching and scaffolding of the medium of communication may be built into formative guidance How should this aspect of teacher–student interaction be considered in any theorizing of TBA? How does a teacher decide what to foreground in any set of assessment criteria and what to downplay or even ignore? Do we need to adopt an explicit theory of interaction and its relationship with learning? Is there something unique about TBA of language that requires special and additional attention? In a discussion on the development of a theory of formative assessment in general, Black and Wiliam (2009) suggest that theory building “must bring into relationship three spheres, the teacher’s agenda, the internal world of each student, and the inter-subjective” (p 26) TBA in English language teaching highlights the complexity of these relationships and problematizes the teacher-assessor’s own beliefs and constructions of their discipline (for a further discussion, see Leung, 2007) in ways which challenge all in English language teaching Implications of TBA for the Theorization of Assessment The series of questions raised in the discussion so far are implicated in the third—and final—set of issues to be addressed in this article, that is, 408 TESOL QUARTERLY the theorization of assessment It is a fundamental paradox of TBA that its inherent strengths are viewed by many psychometricians as its greatest weaknesses In many ways TBA is the opposite to traditional forms of examination and testing in which context is regarded as an extraneous variable that must be controlled and neutralized and the assessor as someone who must remain objective and uninvolved throughout the whole assessment process (Davison, 2007) TBA, in contrast, derives a major part of its validity and reliability from its location in the actual classroom where assessment activities are embedded in the regular curriculum and assessed by a teacher who is familiar with the student’s work and presumably has a stake in their improvement To work effectively, however, TBA needs a theory of assessment which is aligned with and which exploits these inherent features Thus, in the TBA initiative in Hong Kong, schools and teachers were granted a large degree of trust and autonomy in the design, implementation, and specific timing of assessment tasks The criteria for evaluating reliability shifted from a focus on input to a focus on output; that is, no assessment tasks are the same across all schools; rather a standard set of expectations of students’ language use (i.e., assessment standards or criteria) were developed based on the curriculum goals, past performances, and the teachers own judgments, and are now used by all teachers—and more importantly, students— to generate tasks appropriate to the students’ language level, context, and needs (SBA Consultancy team, 2005) All students are given sufficient time and support to demonstrate their best—to show what they can do—and for the assessor to be able to confidently assess their output, but even more importantly, validate their informal judgments of students’ language levels and achievements In other words, the more formal assessment tasks are designed to encourage the teacher to stand back and reflect on their implicit or explicit assumptions about individual students’ capacities, compare those assumptions with careful analysis of examples of students’ actual performance, and then subject their judgments to explicit scrutiny and challenge or confirmation by others This TBA initiative does not assume that the class teacher is objective or has no preconceived ideas or assumptions about a student’s level To the contrary, it seeks to make such assumptions explicit and open to discussion with fellow teachers Thus, it is not necessary to have complete consensus; that is, teachers not need to agree to give identical marks; some variation within the range is to be expected As Davison (2004) argues, in TBA trustworthiness comes more from the process of expressing disagreements, justifying opinions, and so on than from absolute agreement This theorization of assessment is obviously very different from that associated with large-scale testing, one that has as core criteria for evaluation not just learning outcomes, but the explicit enhancement of CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 409 learning and teaching As such, the traditional conceptions of validity and reliability associated with the still-dominant psychometric tradition of testing are themselves a potential threat to the development of the necessarily highly contextualized and dialogic practices of TBA (ReaDickins, 2007) Given that TBA spans from in-class contingent formative assessment as part of teaching to prescribed relative formal summative assessment, the following questions need to be asked: How can we develop a view of validity and reliability in terms of learning (not solely in terms of learning outcomes)? Is there a place for differentiated criteria of validity and reliability for different kinds of TBA? How can we further strengthen TBA and its nexus with learning and teaching while at the same time enhancing community confidence in our assessment systems? How can we better align traditional theorizations of assessment with those needed for TBA and vice versa? Is such alignment theoretically possible? CONCLUSION There are obviously areas of TBA other than those explored in this article in which further research and conceptualization is needed In particular, more thinking is needed around ethics, trustworthiness, and fairness (e.g., see Lynch, 2001; Lynch & Shaw, 2005), and the relationship between assessment, feedback, and learning More research is also needed into the effects of system-level change, including the impact on teachers and learners of the adoption, implementation, or evaluation of school-based TBA systems; the effect of importation of assessment approaches from other cultures; comparative perspectives on assessment policies and programs; and the impact of standards-based assessment on teachers and students More research into teacher training and professional development in assessment is also necessary: what this kind of teacher development comprises and how it is perceived, the quality and progress indicators of TBA, and different approaches to teacher development in assessment However, TBA, in all its incarnations, has been around English language teaching long enough to demonstrate its powerful potential to improve learning and teaching in a range of different contexts What it has lacked until recently has been sufficient engagement with theory and a sense of a research agenda Perhaps more tellingly, the highly contextualized and variable nature of TBA has meant it lacks the capacity to be reduced to an off the shelf for-profit product and thus has always been relegated to the status of the Other However, as this special issue demonstrates, TBA appears to be gaining enough critical mass and common interest to generate a new level of discussion about core concepts This is 410 TESOL QUARTERLY to be applauded because many of the key questions and issues raised by TBA are of central interest to the English language teaching world ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the important contribution of discussions with their colleagues at King’s College, London, and the University of Hong Kong to the ideas expressed in this article THE AUTHORS Chris Davison is Professor of Education and Head of the School of Education at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia Before going to Hong Kong, she worked as a teacher educator for 15 years She is also actively involved in the research and development of English as a second language and languages other than English policy and programs in Australia and the Asia-Pacific area Constant Leung is Professor of Educational Linguistics in the Department of Education and Professional Studies at King’s College London He has written and published widely on additional and second language education and language assessment issues He is also the director of a master of arts program in English language teaching and applied linguistics REFERENCES Adamson, B., & Davison, C (2003) Innovation in English language teaching in Hong Kong primary schools: One step forwards, two steps sideways Prospect, 18, 27–41 Arkoudis, S., & O’Loughlin, K (2004) Tensions between validity and outcomes: Teachers’ assessment of written work of recently arrived immigrant ESL students Language Testing, 20, 284–304 Assessment Reform Group (1999) Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box Cambridge: University of Cambridge School of Education Retrieved on October 2007 from http://arg.educ.cam.ac.uk/AssessInsides.pdf Assessment Reform Group (2001) Assessment for learning: 10 principles Retrieved July 2009 from http://www.assessment-reform-group.org.uk Bachman, L (1990) Fundamental considerations in language testing Oxford: Oxford University Press Biggs, J (1996) Assessing learning quality: Reconciling institutional, staff, and educational demands Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2, 3–25 Biggs, J (1998) Assessment and classroom learning: A role for formative assessment? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 103–110 Black, P (2001) Formative assessment and curriculum consequences In D Scott (Ed.), Curriculum and assessment Westport, CT: Ablex Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D (2003a, April) Formative and summative assessment: Can they serve learning together? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL Retrieved October 2007 from http://www.kcl.ac.uk/education/papers/ AERA%20ClassAsst.pdf CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 411 Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D (2003b, April) The nature and value of formative assessment for learning Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL Retrieved on October 2007 from http://www.kcl.ac.uk/education/papers/AERA%20Pres.pdf Black, P., & Wiliam, D (1998) Assessment and classroom learning Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 7–74 Black, P., & Wiliam, D (2009) Developing the theory of formative assessment Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31 Breen, M., Barratt-Pugh, C., Derewianka, B., House, H., Hudson, C., Lumley, T., et al (1997) Profiling ESL children: How teachers interpret and use national and state assessment frameworks Canberra, Australia: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs Brindley, G (1995) Assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: Purposes, problems and pitfalls In E Li & G James (Eds.) Testing and evaluation in second language education (pp 133–162) Hong Kong SAR, China: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Brookhart, S (2003) Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 5–12 Canale, M., & Swain, M (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47 Carless, D (2005) Prospects for the implementation of assessment for learning Assessment in Education, 12, 39–54 Carless, D (2008) Developing productive synergies between formative and summative assessment processes In M F Hui & D Grossman (Eds.), Improving teacher education through action research (pp 9–23) New York: Routledge Chapelle, C (1999) Validity in language assessment Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 254–272 Cheah, Y M (1998) The examination culture and its impact on literacy innovations: The case of Singapore Language and Education, 12, 192–209 Cheung, D., & Ng, D (2000) Teachers’ stages of concern about the target-oriented curriculum Education Journal, 28, 109–122 Clapham, C (2000) Assessment and testing Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 147–161 Council of Europe (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cumming, J J., & Maxwell, G S (2004) Assessment in Australian schools: Current practice and trends Assessment in Education, 11, 89–108 Curriculum Development Institute (2002) School policy on assessment: Changing assessment practices Chapter in Basic education curriculum guide: Building on strength Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Institute Davison, C (2004) The contradictory culture of classroom-based assessment: Teacher-based assessment practices in senior secondary English Language Testing, 21, 304–333 Davison, C (2007) Views from the chalkface: School-based assessment in Hong Kong Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 37–68 Davison, C (2008, March) Assessment for learning: Building inquiry-oriented assessment communities Paper presented at 42nd Annual TESOL Convention and Exhibit, New York, NY Davison, C., & Hamp-Lyons, L (2009) The Hong Kong Certificate of Education: School-based assessment reform in Hong Kong English language education In L.-Y Cheng & A Curtis (Eds.), English language assessment and the Chinese learner New York: Routledge 412 TESOL QUARTERLY Davison, C., & Williams, A (Eds.) (2002) Learning from each other: Literacy, labels and limitations Studies of child English language and literacy development K-12, Volume Melbourne: Language Australia Department of Education and Training, Education Policy and Planning Section (Australia) (n.d.) School excellence initiative Teachers: The key to student success A discussion paper for government schools Tuggeranong, Australian Capital Territory: Author Retrieved 15 September 2009 from http://www.det.act.gov.au/ data/ assets/pdf_file/0009/17964/sei_TeachersKeyToStudentSuccess.pdf Fox, J (2008) Alternative assessment In E Shohamy & N H Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education Vol 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp 97–108) New York: Springer Griffin, P., & McKay, P (1992) Assessing and reporting in the ESL language and literacy in schools project In P McKay (Ed.), ESL development: Language and literacy in schools project, Vol (pp 9–16) Canberra, Australia: Department of Employment, Education and Training Hamp-Lyons, L (2007) The impact of testing practices on teaching: Ideologies and alternatives In J Cummins & C Davison (Eds.), The international handbook of English language teaching, Vol (pp 487–504) Norwell, MA: Springer Harlen, W (2005) Teachers’ summative assessment practices and assessment for learning: Tensions and synergies Curriculum Journal, 16, 207–223 Kennedy, K J., Chan, K S J., Yu, W M., & Fok, P K (2006, May) Assessment for productive learning: Forms of assessment and their potential for enhancing learning Paper presented at the 32nd Annual Conference of the International Association for Educational Assessment, Singapore Lantolf, J P., & Poehner, M (2004) Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 49–74 Learning and Teaching Scotland (2006) Assessment Is for Learning Programme Retrieved October 2007 from http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/assess/about/index.asp Leung, C (1999) Teachers’ response to linguistic diversity In A Tosi & C Leung (Eds.), Rethinking language education: From a monolingual to a multilingual perspective (pp 225–240) London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research, the National Centre for Languages Leung, C (2004a) Classroom teacher-based assessment of second language development: Construct as practice In E Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning and teaching Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Leung, C (2004b) Developing formative teacher-based assessment: Knowledge, practice, and change Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 19–41 Leung, C (2007) Dynamic assessment: Assessment as teaching? Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 257–278 Leung, C., & Teasdale, A (1997) Raters’ understanding of rating scales as abstracted concept and as instruments for decision-making Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 6, 45–70 Lynch, B (2001) Rethinking assessment from a critical perspective Language Testing, 18, 351–372 Lynch, B., & Shaw, P (2005) Portfolios, power, and ethics TESOL Quarterly, 39, 263–297 McMillan, J (2003) Understanding and improving teachers’ classroom assessment decision-making: Implications for theory and practice Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 34–43 McNamara, T (2001) Language assessment as social practice: Challenges for research Language Testing, 18, 333–349 CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 413 Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Slater, T (In press) Assessing language and content: A functional perspective In A Paran & L Sercu (Eds.), Testing the untestable in language and education Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters Ministry of Education (New Zealand) (2009) Assessment resources banks: English, mathematics, and science Retrieved 15 September 2009 from http://arb.nzcer.org.nz/ assessment/ Ministry of Education (Singapore) (2008) 2012 English language syllabus Singapore: Government Printer New South Wales Government (n.d.) Assessment for learning in the new years 7–10 syllabuses Retrieved 10 September 2009 from http://arc.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/ go/sc/afl/ New Zealand Qualifications Authority (n.d.) Assessment and examination rules and procedures for secondary schools—2009 Retrieved 10 September 2009 from http: //www.nzqa.govt.nz/ncea/acrp/secondary/5/5.html Poehner, M (2007) Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning Modern Language Journal, 91, 323–340 Poehner, M E (2008) Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development New York: Springer Poehner, M E., & Lantolf, J (2005) Dynamic assessment in the language classroom Language Teaching Research, 9, 233–265 Popham, W J (2008a) Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (5th ed.) Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon Popham, W J (2008b) Transformative assessment Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Pryor, J., & Akwesi, A (1998) Assessment in Ghana and England: Putting reform to the test of practice Compare, 28, 263–275 Pryor, J., & Lubisi, C (2002) Reconceptualizing educational assessment in South Africa—Testing times for teachers International Journal of Educational Development, 22, 673–686 Queensland Studies Authority (Australia) (2009a) PD packages Retrieved 15 September 2009 from http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/learning/3166.html Queensland Studies Authority (Australia) (2009b) Senior assessment general information [Web site] Retrieved 24 August 2009 from http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/ assessment/2130.html Rea-Dickins, P (2007) Classroom-based assessment: Possibilities and pitfalls In J Cummins & C Davison (Eds.), The international handbook of English language teaching, Vol (pp 505–520) Norwell, MA: Springer Rea-Dickins, P (2008) Classroom-based language assessment In E Shohamy & N H Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education Vol 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp 257–271) New York: Springer Science + Business Roos, B., & Hamilton, D (2005) Formative assessment: A cybernetic viewpoint Assessment in Education, 12, 7–20 Sadler, D R (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems Instructional Science, 18, 119–144 Saskatchewan Learning (Canada) (1993) Learning assessment program Retrieved 24 August 2009 from http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/Assessment-for-Learning SBA Consultancy Team (2005) 2007 HKCE English Language Examination: Introduction to the school-based assessment component (Training Package) Hong Kong SAR, China: Hong Kong Examination and Assessment Authority/Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong SBA Consultancy Team (2007) Professional development for the school-based assessment component of the 2007 HKCE English Language Examination Hong Kong SAR, China: Hong Kong Examination and Assessment Authority 414 TESOL QUARTERLY SBA Consultancy Team (2008) Aligning assessment with curriculum reform in junior secondary English language teaching Hong Kong SAR China: Quality Education Fund Spencer, E (2005, February) Assessment in Scotland: ‘Assessment for learning.’ Formative assessment in a coherent system PowerPoint presentation at the International Conference on Improving Learning Through Formative Assessment, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France Retrieved on October 2006 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/40/54/34488069.ppt#7 Stiggins, R (2001) The unfulfilled promise of classroom assessment Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(3), 5–15 Stiggins, R (2002) Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 758–765 Stiggins, R (2008) An introduction to student-involved assessment for learning (5th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S (2007) Classroom assessment for student learning Upper Saddle River, NJ: Educational Testing Service & Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall Taras, M (2005) Assessment—summative and formative: Some theoretical reflections British Journal of Educational Studies, 53, 466–478 Teasdale, A., & Leung, C (2000) Teacher-based assessment and psychometric theory: A case of paradigm crossing? Language Testing, 17, 163–184 TESOL (2005) TESOL/NCATE program standards Standards for the accreditation of initial programs in P–12 ESL teacher education Alexandria, VA: Author Torrance, H (1993) Formative assessment: Some theoretical problems and empirical questions Cambridge Journal of Education, 23, 333–343 Widdowson, H G (2001) Communicative language testing: The art of the possible In C Elder, N Brown, E Iwashita, E Grove, K Hill, T Lumley et al., (Eds.), Experimenting with uncertainty: Essays in honour of Alan Davies (pp 12–21) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Yung, B (2006) Assessment reform in science: Fairness or fear Norwell MA: Springer CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER-BASED ASSESSMENT 415 ... the English language teaching field CONCEPTUAL ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN TBA IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING There are obviously many issues and challenges confronting English language education in. .. Kingdom as well as in English- medium institutions around the world), and in content -language integrated learning programmes (increasingly popular in Europe where the teaching and learning of English. .. provided summative assessment is undertaken while students are still learning (and teachers are still teaching), such assessments can and CURRENT ISSUES IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER- BASED ASSESSMENT 397