sociocultural approach: the inclusion of alternative oral assessment in second-year language courses...

Universidad Austral de Chile

Facultad de Filosofa y Humanidades

Pedagoga en Comunicacin en Lengua Inglesa

Lead Advisor:

MA. Katherina Walper Gormz

Sociocultural Approach: the Inclusion of Alternative Oral Assessment in

Second-year Language Courses of the ELT Training Program at

Universidad Austral de Chile

Seminario de Tesis para optar al Ttulo de Profesor en Comunicacin en Lengua Inglesa y

al Grado de Licenciado en Educacin

This research project is part of the innovation project DEP-2013-02

Improving EFL Competence through Critical Thinking and Collaboration

Solange Eunice Lovera Agero

Evelyn Margarita Vera Flndez

Valdivia, Chile

2013

SOCIOCULTURAL APPROACH IN LANGUAGE LESSONS

Acknowledgements

When we thought of the thesis project, the first word that came to our minds was

uncertainty as we did not know the obstacles that we had to face. However, we decided to take

this process as a challenge and after many months of hard work we can say: we did it! From

this, we are truly indebted and thankful to our lead advisor Miss Katherina Walper Gormz since

without her support, encouragement and wisdom, it would have been more difficult to reach

each step until the final stage. To Miss Gisela Niklitschek Toro and Miss Andrea Lizasoain

Conejeros that allowed us to develop this thesis under their Innovation Project. Moreover, it is

a pleasure for us to extend our appreciation to our teachers Miss Juanita Barrientos Villanueva

and Miss Marta Silva Fernndez who provided us with pleasant environments to develop

ourselves as people and professionals. Our sincere gratitude is extended to the support staff of

CIDFIL building: Don Juan Carlos Guzmn, Don Alfredo Mella, Bernab Lpez and Yonatan

Casas who gave us moments of joy and happiness during our time at Universidad Austral de

Chile. We would also like to extend our deepest thankfulness to our families that have always

guided and motivated us to follow our dreams and to keep going in spite of the adversities of

life. Finally, we are grateful to all our friends and beloved people that have been present

throughout this process and who have helped us make this possible.

Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself

John Dewey

I never teach my pupils, I only provided the conditions in which they can learn

Albert Einstein

Solange Lovera & Evelyn Vera


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgments

Abstract i

Introduction 1

Antecedents 4

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 6

1.1. State of the Art 6

1.1.1 Development of the Sociocultural Approach 6

1.1.2 Development of Alternative Assessment Methods 7

1.1.3 Sociocultural Approach in the World and in Chile 9

1.1.4 Assessment in the World and in Chile 9

1.2. Sociocultural Approach 10

1.2.1 The Sociocultural Approach in the EFL Classroom 11

1.2.2 Aspects of the Sociocultural Theory and Foreign Language Acquisition 12

1.2.3 Teachers and Students Roles 19

1.3 Assessment 23

1.3.1 Functions of Assessment 24

1.3.2 Alternative Assessment 25

1.3.3 Alternative vs. Traditional Assessment 27

1.3.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Assessment Methods 30

1.3.5 Performance-based Assessment 33

1.4. Communicative Competence 36

1.4.1 Components of Communicative Competence 37

1.4.2 Communicative Competence and Assessment 39

1.5 Affective Domain 42

1.5.1 Attitudes 42

1.5.2 Motivation 44

1.5.3 Anxiety 46

CHAPTER 2: CORPUS 49

2.1 SCA & Oral Production 49

2.1.1 Development of Oral Production Skills 50

2.1.2 Interaction and Collaborative Work 52

2.1.3 Communication between Students and Teachers 56


2.2 SCA & Alternative Assessment 58

2.2.1 Performance-Based Assessment Methods to Evaluate Students Oral

Production Skills 59

2.2.2 Possible Problems and Solutions when Using Alternative Assessment 61

CHAPTER 3: TEACHING PROPOSAL 66

3.1 Summary Guide 67

3.2 Activities to Evaluate Students Oral Production 68

3.3 Tips

Conclusions

References

Appendices

Appendix A1: Interview to Experts A1

Appendix A2: Interview to Experts A2

SOCIOCULTURAL APPROACH IN LANGUAGE LESSONS i

ABSTRACT

One of the most difficult tasks for a teacher in EFL classrooms is to help students

improve their oral production skills and to establish parameters that measure them in a proper

manner. In this regard, the sociocultural approach and alternative assessment, particularly

performance-based methods, are conceived as suitable ways to offer students instances to

practice the language orally in authentic settings reducing their affective issues and fostering

communication. From that perspective, a theoretical framework and a discussion will be

undertaken around the concepts sociocultural approach, alternative assessment,

communicative competence and affective domain. A teaching proposal will be developed in

order to facilitate the evaluation process of second-year students of the English Language

Teaching Training Program (ELT) who are being taught under the implementation of the

sociocultural approach at Universidad Austral de Chile is proposed.

Key Concepts: oral production skills, sociocultural approach, alternative assessment,

communicative competence, affective domain.

SOCIOCULTURAL APPROACH IN LANGUAGE LESSONS 1

INTRODUCTION

Oral production is one of the most complex skills to develop, especially when dealing

with EFL students since there are diverse factors which may interfere in the acquisition

process. These elements are mainly connected with the affective domain which can have a

positive or negative influence on students cognitive and language development. At this level,

teachers play an indispensable role as they are in charge of guiding and monitoring students

learning progression; in this regard, they should provide students with opportunities and tools

to lead and construct their own knowledge in order to reach meaningful learning.

With respect to the Chilean educational context, it is possible to state that traditional

methods of teaching and evaluation have hindered the development of Chilean students

productive skills. This occurs due to the fact that traditional methods oblige teachers to design

lessons that are mainly based on specific contents which do not allow students to practice the

language and demonstrate their capacities and abilities. Therefore, lessons are mostly centered

on teachers rather than students, which means that learners are not accustomed to using their

oral skills; quite the opposite, they are seen as receptive individuals who do not have an active

role in the classroom.

From what has been exposed, this research suggests the implementation of the

sociocultural approach as an option to help students improve their oral production skills

because it is learner-centered. This means that it promotes interaction, communication,

collaborative work and critical thinking among students, allowing them to establish

relationships between previous knowledge and new contents. Furthermore, alternative

assessment is presented as an adequate vehicle to evaluate the oral production skills of the


students who are being taught under the sociocultural approach as both follow the same

principles and expect to reach similar goals.

In this context, this research is part of the innovation project: Improving EFL

Competence through Critical Thinking and Collaboration (DEP-2013-02)1 developed by the

researchers Prof. Andrea Lizasoain and Prof. Gisela Niklitschek and the co-researchers Prof.

Amalia Ortiz de Zrate and Prof. Katherina Walper at Universidad Austral de Chile. The

general objective of this project is to validate a methodological proposal which, according to

the founders of the project, seeks to strengthen the development of English through the

implementation of methodologies which foster critical thinking skills (such as the

Sociocultural Approach), collaboration within the classroom and more hours of production

than more traditional methods (Lizasoain & Niklitschek, 2012).

Taking into consideration the information above, a teaching proposal will be developed

to suggest activities which facilitate the evaluation process. These activities will be focused on

assessing students oral production skills on the basis of their critical thinking and cognitive

processes. To achieve this aim, performance-based assessment methods will be utilized to

make students use the language in a natural way, diminishing their affective issues. Moreover,

it is important to mention that each activity will reinforce a specific component of

communicative competence and that, at the same time, these activities will be divided into

diagnostic, formative or summative evaluations.

This Undergraduate Research Paper will include three chapters: Theoretical

Framework, Discussion and Teaching Proposal. In the first chapter the concepts, aspects and

characteristics of the sociocultural approach, assessment, communicative competence and

1 This project was developed in 2013 and was funded by the Department of Undergraduate Studies (Direccin de

Estudios de Pregrado)


affective domain will be covered in-depth through a literature review. It will be seen that these

four concepts are correlated since they are associated with the development of students oral

production skills in a direct manner. The second chapter, the discussion, will analyze and draw

parallels between the concepts previously exposed with the purpose of setting the theoretical

foundations for the design of the teaching proposal. The third chapter will involve a summary

guide that will ease the understanding of the proposal, the evaluation activities, and a set of

tips that will facilitate the evaluation procedure in classrooms.

Finally, the implications of this paper rely on the fact that the four key concepts

previously mentioned are combined in order to foster students oral production skills in their

language lessons at Universidad Austral de Chile.


ANTECEDENTS

Research Questions:

- How does the sociocultural approach improve and promote oral production skills of

second-year students of the English Language Teaching Training Program (ELT) at

Universidad Austral de Chile during their language lessons?

- How can the inclusion of alternative assessment methods facilitate the evaluation of

students oral production skills?

Hypothesis:

- The inclusion of alternative oral assessment methods in language lessons of

second-year students of the ELT Training Program at Universidad Austral de Chile

will facilitate the evaluation process by taking into account students sociocultural

backgrounds and cognitive processes.

General Objective:

- To propose a set of activities to evaluate oral production under the sociocultural

approach for second-year students of the ELT Training Program at Universidad

Austral.

Specific Objectives:

1. To describe the sociocultural approach in terms of the sociocultural theory, its

application in the foreign language and the roles of the participants.

2. To identify the most appropriate alternative assessment methods to evaluate

students oral production skills under the sociocultural approach.


3. To design activities which are part of the alternative assessment methods chosen in

order to evaluate students oral production under the sociocultural approach.

Justification:

Once students have reached an intermediate level of language acquisition, the oral

skill is given a prominent role in every language course at Universidad austral de Chile. In

most of the cases, it is very common that students do not want to participate and to produce

the foreign language since they may not feel comfortable. However, it is thought that if

they are immersed in an environment which takes into consideration their sociocultural

backgrounds, making them feel relaxed and secure, students will be capable of improving

their oral skills and communicating with their classmates and teachers without major

problems. For that reason, the significance of this research lies in the implementation of the

sociocultural approach since it is conceived as a suitable vehicle to help students improve

their oral production skills. Furthermore, alternative assessment is considered an

appropriate tool to evaluate students who are being taught under the sociocultural approach

because they support the same principles: they respect students learning processes,

diminishing the affective issues and enhancing interaction, collaborative work and

communication among students.

Course and Class Description

This proposal has been designed for the teachers who work with second- year

students of the ELT Training Program at Universidad Austral de Chile that are

implementing the sociocultural approach and that are part of the project DEP-2013-02.


CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The theoretical framework of this research will cover four concepts which are

strongly connected with the improvement of students oral production skills: sociocultural

approach, alternative assessment, communicative competence and the affective domain.

Afterwards, these will be analyzed and discussed in detail in order to determine the basis of

the teaching proposal.

1.1 State of the Art

In the following section, two leading threads of this investigation, the sociocultural

approach and alternative assessment, will be exposed and described in order to make

connections and to draw implications which permit the reader to have a more profound

understanding about the origins and development of these key concepts.

1.1.1 Development of the Sociocultural Approach

Throughout the years many perspectives, methods and approaches have arisen in

order to address and respond to the question of how human beings acquire languages. In

this section, the development of the sociocultural approach will be covered. To achieve

that, certain theories that belong to socio-cultural approaches and that are related to socio-

cultural perspectives will be identified. Furthermore, in order to have a deeper

understanding of what the sociocultural approach is, its origins, and how it works, it will be

essential to describe Vygotskys sociocultural theory2 (SCT) and its framework.

To start, it is important to mention that within the theories that have attempted to

comprehend the language acquisition process, there are five that have set certain patterns

regarding the sociocultural approach: the behaviorist perspective, the interactionist or

2 Theory: a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general

principles independent of the thing to be explained (Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, Hornby

McIntosh & Wehmeier, (Eds). 2005, p. 1590)


developmental perspective, Jean Piagets and Lev Vygotskys theory, and cross-cultural

research (Lightbown & Spada, 2006). These have given way to new approaches and

theories regarding peoples second or foreign language acquisition process. In relation to

that fact, there are two views on acquisition: the psycholinguistic and the socio-cultural

perspective (Cardenas, 2008). The latter gives place to the emergence of sociocultural

theories from which Lev Vygotskys theory develops.

Thus, it is from the sociocultural theory that the sociocultural approach emerges.

The sociocultural approach may be described as one that, similarly to the SCT, places

greater importance to the connection between students own processes and those shared in

the classroom when forging interrelationships during the learning process (John-Steiner &

Mahn, 2011). These bonds will, then, be helpful for their future as part of the social and

professional world (Warschauer, 1997). In other words, the sociocultural approach

postulates that independently of peoples age, society and social environments as well as

individuals social contexts and backgrounds learners are capable of modeling their

internal processes through which individuals are able to associate their previous

experiences with the new ones, reaching a higher mental development.

1.1.2 Development of Alternative Assessment Methods

Over the years, standardized tests have led students evaluation process because of

their practicality in terms of time, cost, design and structure (Brown, 2010). Additionally,

they are based on the notion that there are only wrong or right answers, which leaves no

room for demonstration of knowledge and thought process (Federal Grant from the

Foreign Language Assistance Program, 1999, p. 11). At the same time, traditional methods

measure students outcomes and not the process behind the evaluation, which means that

they do not assess progression neither the particular difficulties that may arise during the


test (Law & Eckes in Dikli, 2003, p. 15). This has increased the misconception about the

real meaning of assessment, and has consequently accentuated educational problems

regarding the way in which evaluations are developed.

With the purpose of improving the shortcomings of traditional assessment methods,

in 1989, Grant Wiggins, president of Authentic Education, expressed that assessment in

education has clearly become . . . a problem (Wiggins, 1989, p. 81). That is, the issue of

assessment in education has been completely vitiated by traditional assessment, which has

created the necessity of facing the problem from another point of view. In the words of

Wiggins (1989) when an educational problem persists despite the well-intentioned efforts

of many people to solve it, [it is] a safe bet that the problem has not been properly framed

(ibid). From this need, the first approach to alternative assessment emerged, suggesting:

. . . a system that integrated teaching and testing. Just as a sports team trains for a

game, Wiggins believes students should train for their future performance perhaps

a presentation, recital, or debate. Though the performance can be evaluated, the

primary goal is the performance itself (Johnston, n.d., p. 41)

This demonstrates that contrary to traditional assessment, alternative assessment integrates

teaching and evaluation. Thus, it is centered on students performance rather than marks,

i.e., students learning and cognitive process without displaying students knowledge in a

predetermined manner.

To conclude, one may say that both the sociocultural approach and alternative

assessment are strongly connected because they are addressed to learner-centered teaching.

To exemplify that, alternative assessment methods attempt to evaluate students under real-

life contexts advocating authenticity; whereas the sociocultural approach proposes that


students should learn from their experiences and sociocultural backgrounds on the basis of

real and natural settings.

1.1.3 Sociocultural Approach in the World and in Chile

In general terms, until the 60s, grammar-based methods for teaching were

prominently used in the world since it was believed that the only component which was

needed to learn a foreign language was the linguistic knowledge. After that, other

methodologies arose whose main focus was on reaching communicative goals and

promoting communicative instances among students. However, due to the importance of

the context in the development of a foreign language, the sociocultural approach started

being implemented (Canale & Swain, 1980). Nowadays, in the words of Gisela Niklitschek

(2013) the sociocultural approach is widely known in the United States not only for

foreign language teaching, but also for other subjects (Niklitschek, personal

communication, November 27th

). Nevertheless, despite the significance that the

sociocultural approach has in other countries, Chilean students are still unfamiliar with this

approach since most professors make use of traditional methods for teaching and

evaluation (Lizasoain, personal communication, October 21st, 2013).

1.1.4 Assessment in the World and in Chile

In general, assessment has been contemplated as an independent portion of the

teaching/learning process and it has often been underestimated and taken into account after

the curricula have been designed (James, 2002). In this sense, the use of alternative

assessment propelled an educational reform and, thus, testing processes in the form of

alternative assessment became more common than traditional tools (Wiggins in Dietel et

al. in Dikli, 2003). In other words, assessment in the world has been reoriented, and

nowadays it is understood as a central element in the overall quality of teaching and


learning (James, 2002, p. 4). This way, the two elements, curriculum and assessing, are

interrelated in the teaching learning process (Wiggins and McTighe in Hargreaves et al.,

2002); therefore, it can be inferred that the evaluation process has become more

comfortable as teachers role is now centered on students learning.

In spite of the fact that Chile is considered a developing country, it has made many

and diverse changes in the student assessment system. In the words of Mara-Jos Ramirez

(2012), there are three traditional and standardized types of assessment activities that can

be identified within the educational system: the national large-scale assessment program,

the university entrance examinations, and classroom assessment activities by teachers and

students (p. 13). It is also important to highlight that every type of assessment has been

developed in a distinct path and they have required the adaptation of the contexts in which

the assessment system works (Ramirez, 2012). Some of the changes that have been

implemented to improve assessment activities are the policy framework that supports the

assessment, the right institutions and organizational structures, together with the

appropriate human and fiscal resources (Ramirez, 2012, p. 2). Nevertheless, despite the

improvements already mentioned, in Chilean educational system, traditional assessment is

still being used. In this sense, this research will propose alternative assessment as a fitting

option to enhance students oral skills.

1.2 Sociocultural Approach

In this section, the sociocultural approach will be covered from three different

perspectives in order to allow the reader to understand the significance this approach has in

learners cognitive and language development. The three subtopics are: the sociocultural

approach in EFL classrooms; aspects of the sociocultural theory in foreign language

acquisition; and teachers and students roles in the sociocultural approach.


1.2.1 Sociocultural Approach in the EFL classroom

At this stage, it is a well-known fact that the sociocultural approach postulates the

interdependence between individuals sociocultural backgrounds and their cognitive and

language development. Nonetheless, not only does the sociocultural approach contribute to

literacy in general terms, but also to cognitive development in language learning and

teaching in EFL classrooms. As reported by Mark Warschauer (1997), the sociocultural

approach places individuals in certain contexts that allow them to use the foreign language

through dialogic communication3 and interaction, not through the decontextualized

acquisition of vocabulary or skills (ibid.). In other words, the sociocultural approach

encourages individuals to develop their sociolinguistic competence, through which they are

able to interact in specific contexts and use the language to be understood and to

understand what other people are saying, as well as to develop their discourse

competence4, which helps them to compensate possible gaps in the foreign language.

As it was mentioned before, the basic goal of sociocultural approach to mind is to

create an account of human mental processes that recognize the essential relationship

between these processes and their cultural, historical, and institutional settings (Wertsch,

1991, p. 6). In EFL classrooms, the sociocultural approach establishes contextualized

settings and situations that permit students to create instances of dialogues and interactions

in which they are able to socialize, share personal experiences and knowledge to reach a

new level of mental development and thereby enhance their language proficiency. In order

to achieve this aim, the sociocultural approach promotes students critical thinking, which

entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities (The Critical Thinking

3 According to Warschauer (1997) by setting the principles of dialogism, the meaning is found neither in the

text nor in the individual learner, but rather is developed in interaction between individual and social

audience. 4 For a thorough description of the different components of the communicative competence see section 1.2

Communicative Competence.


Community, 2013, n. p), teamwork and interaction among the students by setting dialogic

instances.

1.2.2 Aspects of the Sociocultural Theory and Foreign Language Acquisition

With regard to the pedagogical implications of the sociocultural approach in EFL

classrooms, and according to what is exposed by Lev Vygotskys SCT, the present section

will describe six fundamental components of the sociocultural theory. These elements are

mainly focused on the conception that human mental functioning is fundamentally a

mediated process that is organized by cultural artifacts, activities, and concepts (Ratner in

Lantolf & Thorne, 2006, p. 197). They can be classified as mediation, regulation,

internalization, the zone of proximal development, verbal thought and activity theory

(Aimin, 2013). In order to understand the connections between the sociocultural theory

and the pedagogical implications regarding EFL learning and teaching, the SCT elements

are going to be presented below.

Mediation and Foreign Language Acquisition

As it can be inferred by its name, this component is directly connected with the act of

mediation, that is to say, the use of specific elements or tools in order to reach major goals.

As indicated by Liang Aimin (2013):

mediation is the principle construct that unites varieties of SCT and is rooted in the

observation that humans do not act directly on the world- rather their cognitive and

material activities are mediated by symbolic tools as well as by physical tools. (p.

162)

This means that external factors such as culture, social contexts and communities

encourage individuals to use thought in order to modify specific social activities, in other


words, the external world modifies the mind and determines cognitive development

(Vygotsky in Stoica, 2008).

In mediation, language is one the most fundamental tools since it is used by

individuals to mediate social activities to internalize social environments and to reach

private speech (Lantolf &Thorne, 2006). In regard to pedagogical implications, mediation

is a process that can be divided into three stages (Aimin, 2013). The first stage, known as

other-mediation, is connected with collaborative work. At this point, teachers or advanced

individuals support is essential in order to supply students needs; as a matter of fact, this

stage is also associated with the ZPD element which will be further developed below. The

second stage is called self-mediation and is linked to private speech and gestures. It refers

to the stage in which students have already reached a higher language development; they

are able to monitor themselves and their behaviors to improve their language proficiency

and communicative competence. Finally, one can recognize the mediation of the socio-

cultural environment in which the context acts as a mediator over students first language

to acquire the foreign language (ibid.).

Regulation and Foreign Language Acquisition

In the section regarding socio-cultural theories, the behaviorist perspective was

described which proposes that people acquire languages by imitating the behaviors of

others. However, Patsy Lightbown & Nina Spada (2006) indicate that this imitation is

selective and that children do not only imitate words but they choose what to imitate and

eventually they are able to produce their own sentences and speeches. During regulation, a

similar phenomenon happens, since children by subordinating their behavior to adult

speech acquire the particular language used by other members of a community (usually

adults and older children) and eventually utilize this language to regulate their own


behavior (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006, p. 199). It is important to mention that despite the fact

that during regulation children subordinate their behavior in order to use the language and

to model their external world, they select what they want to acquire as well as what they

want to imitate in order to structure their own language.

On the contrary to what happens with mediation, regulation does not refer to a set

of rules that people use to control facts or specific elements (Aimin, 2013). In accordance

with James Lantolf & Steven Thorne (2006), regulation is one form of mediation (p.

199) through which children are able to adjust their own behavior and language.

Furthermore, Aimin (2013) states that [this stage] refers to childrens capacity to regulate

their own activity through linguistic means by participating in [actions] (mental and

physical) in which their activity is initially subordinated or regulated by others (p. 162). In

regard to what is exposed, regulation in EFL teaching and learning plays an important role

during the students foreign language acquisition process since once the mediation process

occurs, it needs to be improved to reach higher cognitive development. For that, students

need to continue interacting and socializing; as this happens, they will be able to

communicate socially [and] appropriate the patterns and meanings of speech (Lantolf &

Thorne, 2006, p. 201).

Internalization and Foreign Language Acquisition

Internalization is the next step after regulation and is defined as a negotiated

process that reorganizes the relationship of the individual to her or his social environment

and generally carries it into future performance (Aimin, 2013, p. 163). This means that

through internalization, individuals are able to choose or discern what applies to their

cognitive processes and language development, as it allows people to control their brains

(Aimin, 2013). Above, it was exposed that under the sociocultural theory, cognitive

processes and language development occur first socially and then internally; this shows


itself clearly at this point, because everything that was once external is now a resource

that is internally available to the individual (Donato in Aimin, 2013, p. 163). With

reference to that, Vygotsky states that every psychological function appears twice, first

between people on the psychological plane and then within the individual on the intra-

psychological plane (Vygotsky in Aimin, 2013, p. 163). Another important component

associated with internalization is imitation and, as it was described before, it involves goal

directed cognitive activities that can result in the creative and active transformations from

inter-psychological plane to intra-psychological plane (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006, p. 203)

since it is based on social interactions and teamwork.

Internalization in EFL teaching embodies a representational activity, a process that

occurs simultaneously in social practice and in the human mind (John-Steiner & Mahn,

2011), which indicates that the process is based on practice and continuity. Vygotsky

postulates that language emerges from the interaction between the child and the

individuals who surround him/her. After that, the child is able to manage their thought

process and internalize speech (Vygotsky in Gauvain & Cole, 1997). This implies that after

students regulate their behavior through social activities to reach a new level of language

development, they are able to internalize the language and negotiate meaning. In relation to

the negotiation of meaning, Artin Gnc & Mary Gauvain (n.d.) declare that

internalization is not an all or none process of transferring knowledge from the external to

the internal plane of existence. Rather, internalization is an ongoing process of

appropriation (p. 27). In other words, children, based on their own experiences and

sociocultural backgrounds negotiate meaning in order to create their own ways of thinking

and to internalize what they have imitated from external environments and contexts.


Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

The fourth element that can be distinguished as part of the sociocultural theory and

that is interconnected with foreign language acquisition is the ZPD or scaffolding as it

was denominated by Bruner (Aimin, 2013). This is a zone in which teachers and learners

participate to reach a specific objective, thus, it is important to note that ZPD is

conceptualized as something that emerges through participation in collaborative activities,

not as an attribute of learners (Ellis & Barkhuizen in Allahyar & Nazari, 2012). In

Vygotskys words, ZPD is defined as the difference between the actual development

level as determined by individual problem solving and the level of potential development

as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or collaboration with more

knowledgeable peers(Vygotsky in Gauvain & Cole, 1997, p. 33). That is, ZPD is the stage

in which students have to work collaboratively with their peers and to communicate to

each other in an effective way because the result of this process is [that] children become

more socialized in the dominant culture and it induces cognitive development (Moll in

Gallagher, 1999).

Additionally, it is important to establish that the ZPD element is incorporated by

Vygotskys theory to facilitate the achievement of a task or learning purpose with help of

another person who is more knowledgeable in the area. At this point, it is when the

communication and teamwork are needed in the EFL classrooms. As consequence of that

communication in the learning process, Vygotsky believes that in social interactions with

their parents, teachers and more capable peers, children achieve more sophisticated goals

than they do on their own (Ellis, Barkhuizen in Allahyar & Nazari, 2012). Finally, another

relevant fact that is related to ZPD and pedagogical implication for EFL learning and

teaching is the significance of the context in the learning process since it has an important


role in the interaction between the novice and capable person (Allahyar & Nazari, 2012,

p. 82). This is supported by Richard Donato (2007), who states that learning can be

developed in different ways and circumstances, and not necessarily in the regular

classroom environments (Donato in Allahyar & Nazari, 2012). As a result, teachers and

learners have multiple options to create new spaces for the learning process.

Verbal Thought

As it has been exposed throughout the chapter, Vygotskys sociocultural theory

states a correlation between language development and thought. As a complement to that,

Aimin (2013) declares that language belongs to society, and consequently, speech belongs

to individuals. This shows that every person has the possibility to communicate verbally if

s/he does not have any impairment. Besides, Vygotsky recognizes that language and

speech [have] close connections so that they cannot be separated, which means that in

Socio-Cultural Theory, language and speech have almost the same connotation (Aimin,

2013). This expresses that language and speech are two essential elements to develop

during the implementation of a sociocultural approach with the purpose of generating the

verbal thought of students.

At the same time, to reach language development, it is necessary to accomplish

some stages that are described by Vygotskys theory in Aimin (2013). The first stage,

called Social speech, is one in which the students or learners are able to use a simple

speech to express simple thoughts and emotions in order to control other peoples

behaviors. The second stage, named Egocentric speech or Private speech, is typically the

type of speech found in three to seven old children. It serves as a bridge between the

primitive and highly public social speech of the first stage and the more sophisticated and

inner speech (Aimin, 2013, p. 164). One of the most relevant characteristics of this stage


is that children often talk to themselves, regardless of someone listening to them. They

think out loud in an attempt to guide their own behavior. They may speak about what they

are doing as they do it (ibid.). This demonstrates that young learners do not necessary

need a person to listen to them when speaking, since they only speak loud to conduct their

behaviors. The third and last stage is Inner speech or Verbal thought, which allows

[individuals] to direct our thinking and behavior (ibid.). At this level, learners are able to

connect their speeches and thinking properly without any problems.

Activity Theory

Another relevant contribution of Vygotskys theory subsequently developed by his

student Leontev as an independent system is the Activity theory that deals with the

unified nature of human behavior, which is considered to be the result of the integration of

social and cultural mediations (Aimin, 2013, p. 164). In regard to the main postulate of

this theory, it is possible to mention that social activity is the consequence of peoples

interactions (Aimin, 2013). For instance, Coghlan & Duff propose that learners are active

agents who, according to their own goals, give specific directions to the activities and even

different times and conditions have different impacts on their performance on the same

task (in Aimin, 2013). This evidences that every student or learner responds differently to

the same task; thus, they give distinct connotation to the activities in second language

acquisition. As Aimin (2013) affirms:

The activity becomes unique for each learner because it emerges from the

interaction between the speakers and the interviewer, the setting, the subjects

motivations and histories. Therefore, it cannot be separated from its social-

cultural context, from which it is co-constructed. (p. 165)


From the perspective that every student has different sociocultural background,

teachers cannot pretend that all learners give the same significance to the learning process;

teachers cannot separate the previous knowledge of students and the way in which they

construct the new knowledge. In other words, and as B. Gillette (2002) mentions, the

success of the students in the learning process depends on the motive that the learners

have, their goals and values that are built due to social and historical backgrounds (Gillette

in Aimin, 2013).

As it was previously mentioned, the components of the sociocultural approach are

part of a mediated process, that is, they are developed on the basis of communication and

social interactions between environment and individuals, in pedagogical terms, among

educational contexts, learners and educators. These components are essential to achieve the

objectives of this research; for that reason, they will be taken into account to design the

proposal in which alternative assessment methods will be developed to evaluate students

oral production under the implementation of the sociocultural approach.

1.2.3 Teachers and Students Roles

One of the most relevant aspects of the sociocultural approach that can be

highlighted is the role of teachers and learners in EFL classrooms. In the majority of the

approaches that are used to teach a second or foreign language, the role of the teacher [in

the classroom] is of paramount significance because it is central to the way in which the

classroom environment evolves (Syam, 2011, p. 34). On the contrary, in atmospheres in

which a sociocultural approach is being implemented, the teachers role is not more

important than students role; this indicates that the learning process is also centered on

students behaviors, development and cognitive processes. In order to understand teachers


and learners roles, it is crucial to explain them in detail with the purpose of noting their

differences.

As every lesson should have objectives to be achieved, teachers who are working

under the sociocultural approach are considered as personal assistances in the learning

process because they help each learner work in a personal way toward his/her own goals

(Grabinger, Aplin & Gitanjali, 2007, n.p). This means that educators guide students

learning process in an individualized and independent form; additionally, teachers do not

impose the aims of the lessons because it is the learner who is in charge of setting the goals

for his/her own learning process. This is explained by Paul Shoebottom (2013), who

postulates that:

Clearly, some language learners are successful by virtue of their sheer

determination, hard work and persistence. However there are other crucial factors

influencing success that are largely beyond the control of the learner. These

factors can be broadly categorized as internal and external. It is their complex

interplay that determines the speed and facility with which the new language is

learned. (n.p)

Thus, it can be comprehended that every student has different rhythms, different

strategies and consequently different objectives to acquire a foreign or second language.

Moreover, other relevant concepts to be exposed concerning the sociocultural

approach are co-participation and cooperative learning, processes in which teachers and

learners have an active role since teachers bring existing knowledge to students by co-

constructing it with them (John-Steiner & Mahn, 2011, p.199). What has been exposed

demonstrates that students have previous knowledge and teachers are only in charge of

helping them use it to co-construct their learning process. Nonetheless, to achieve the co-


construction of that process, it is essential to have a guided participation that is moderated

by the teacher where children internalize or appropriate their affective, social, and

intellectual significance (ibid.).

In addition, teachers and learners have to work collaboratively during the

acquisition of a second or foreign language in order to provide functional and purposeful

uses for language, literacy, and learning processes (John-Steiner & Mahn, 2011, p. 200).

For instance, while teachers are guiding the learning process, students select groups,

reading materials, writing topics, theme topics, and language to use for each (John-Steiner

& Mahn, 2011, p. 201). If there is no proper organization between teachers and learners,

it will be almost impossible to accomplish the personal goals determined by the students.

For that reason, not only does the teacher have to be a guide, but also a facilitator and

planner who organizes the environment, curriculum, and materials (John-Steiner &

Mahn, 2011, p. 200). At this level, it is when the organization of the lessons plays a

crucial function since it cannot be improvised; it needs to be perfectly planned with

anticipation and dedication.

As it was mentioned before, the sociocultural approach traces its origins in the

sociocultural theory which has a completely different view of the second or foreign

language acquisition process in relation to the psycholinguistic perspective. In the

sociocultural approach, learners are encouraged or required to think as well as speak in

the target language, that is to say, language and thought should be closely connected with

each other. The root for this connection lies in social communication activities (ibid.).

Hence, under this approach, the teacher has to be a good planner in order to make the

connection between language and thought in communicative activities without the

necessity of forcing students to produce the target language. The only way to reach that

purpose is to incorporate students sociocultural backgrounds, which allow teachers to


create environments where students feel more comfortable reducing their levels of anxiety

(Richard-Amato, 2003). It is also important to state that the teacher does not only have to

worry about the set of activities s/he will do during the lesson, but s/he must also be

careful with the distribution of the students inside the classroom because s/he always has

to think about promoting communication.

The interaction among students is also part of the job that a teacher has to develop

inside the classroom. For example, the teacher must create the instances that allow

students to interact and communicate. This aspect is completely associated with the

principle of internalization, which, as it was defined before, is based on the enhancement

of interactions among the learners (Aimin, 2013, p. 164). With respect to students role

during the interaction, one can say that they have to communicate to each other by using

their sociocultural backgrounds to connect their learning process with their previous

knowledge. During this process, the teacher has to allow individuals to apply the socio-

cultural environment and first language to acquire the target language (Aimin, 2013, p.

165). In that sense, students will produce the language in an environment that is well-

known for them.

The characteristics that a teacher working under the sociocultural approach should

have or develop are compared with the ones that are present in scaffolds. These are: to

provide support, function as a tool, extend the range of the learner, permit attainment of

task otherwise possible, use selectively only as needed (Oxbridge Writers, 2013, n.p). By

contrast, the role of the learners is related to their own realities, cognitive processes,

sociocultural backgrounds and previous knowledge. Lastly, an important fact that must be

highlighted is that both teachers and learners are extremely significant to develop or

implement the sociocultural approach since they have to work together with the purpose

of constructing significant knowledge.


1.3 Assessment

Assessment may be defined as the process of gathering and interpreting evidence

to make judgments about students learning. It is the crucial link between learning

outcomes, content and teaching and learning activities (Association of Independent

Schools of the ACT Incorporated, 2011, p. 6). In other words, assessment is an essential

part of students learning process, and, as such, it cannot be understood as an independent

portion since it is the connection that allows educators to be aware of students progresses

and cognitive development. In order to assess students achievement, Douglas Brown

(2010) explains that assessment must be based on five principles: Practicality, Reliability,

Validity, Authenticity and Washback.

Moreover, it is possible to distinguish formal and informal assessment. On the one

hand, Brown (2010) expresses that informal assessment can take a number of forms,

starting with incidental, unplanned comments and responses, along with coaching and

other impromptu feedback to the student (p. 5). In short, informal assessment refers to the

different types of rewards and stimulus that a student may receive as recognition of his/her

achievement either a phrase as good job! or a happy face on students tasks. On the

other hand, he states that formal assessment consists of exercises of procedures

specifically designed to tap into a storehouse of skills and knowledge [which] are

systematic, planned sampling techniques constructed to give teacher and student an

appraisal of students achievement (Brown, 2010, p. 6). This indicates that formal

assessment allows teachers and students to maintain constant feedback without being

testing, for example through students journals or diaries.


1.3.1 Functions of Assessment

A significant distinction that has to be considered when assessing is the function of

evaluation, that is, the aim of the assessment, what it expects to evaluate, and what

instruments will be needed in order to achieve that purpose. In regard to this distinction,

four types of assessment are identified: Formative, diagnostic, summative and evaluative.

The first two are essential to help the childs development. The latter two are more

concerned with testing what kind of help and support the child is getting (Cullingford in

Alarcn & Neguimn, 2013, p. 31). These will be described extensively below.

Diagnostic Assessment: this type of assessment helps [teachers] identify students current

knowledge of a subject, their skill sets and capabilities, and to clarify misconceptions

before teaching takes place (Just Science Now in Northern Illinois University, n.d., p. 1).

In this regard, diagnostic assessment permits educators to recognize students weaknesses

and strengths, and consequently, to create their teaching plans on the basis of what their

students really know.

Formative Assessment: this type is well known for evaluating students in the process of

forming their competencies and skills with the goal of helping them to contribute to that

growth process (Brown, 2010, p. 6). This means that formative assessment keeps its focus

on the process behind the outcomes and products. At this point, while teachers provide

feedback and information, students monitor and reflect on their learning process drawing

parallels and contributing to their own mental development (Association of Independent,

n.d.).

Summative and Evaluative Assessment5: contrary to formative evaluation, summative and

evaluative assessment are more product-oriented and assess the final product (Northern

5 In this research summative and evaluative assessment will be used as similar concepts.


Illinois University, n.d., p. 3). This indicates that this type of evaluation aims to measure,

or summarize, what a student has grasped, and typically occurs at the end of a course or

unit instruction (Brown, 2010, p. 6). In other words, the role of summative and evaluative

assessment is to evaluate learning concerning students final achievements and teachers

instruction methods over a certain period of time.

To sum up, one may say that through the different functions of assessment, teachers

are provided with the tools to recognize learners weaknesses and strengths, which helps

them to make future decisions in relation to students achievements and learning progress.

At the same time, during the teaching process, they are able to gather information of

students improvements, outcomes and results regarding their cognitive and language

development. This demonstrates that not only does assessment play an essential role in the

development of students learning process, but also contributes to educators teaching

methods since it provides them with crucial information about students backgrounds,

learning development, and outcomes.

1.3.2 Alternative Assessment

As previously stated, testing the students learning process is one of the most

complex activities that teachers have in the classroom since there are many and different

options that can be used for the same purpose depending on the skill that needs evaluation.

For instance, there are many standardized tests that are commonly utilized by teachers. In

this regard, alternative assessment tries to find a way to change the traditional methods to

assess students skills, especially the productive ones (speaking and writing) because they

cannot be measured appropriately through traditional assessment (Federal Grant from the

Foreign Language Assistance Program, 1999, p. 25). Moreover, it is relevant to highlight

that alternative assessment methods keep their focus on students strengths rather than


weaknesses. Consequently, these kinds of assessment methods are present in learner-

centered classrooms because they are based on the idea that students can evaluate their

own learning and learn from the evaluation process (The National Capital Language

Resource Center, 2004, n. p). Besides, in a classroom where alternative assessment is used,

students have more opportunities to reflect on their learning process and linguistic

development.

Other significant aspects to reveal regarding alternative assessment are its main

characteristics, classified by The National Capital Resource Center (2004) according to

four main features: (1) it has to include authentic tasks in order to evidence the ability of

the learners to achieve communication goals; (2) there has to be a relationship between

instructor and learners because both must have, as a main objective, to enhance

communication and must not be concerned with correct or wrong answers during the

process; (3) it must allow students to help their instructors to select the criteria that will be

used to complete communication tasks; (4) it has to attempt to reach more participation of

the students during the evaluation process. In that sense, students have the opportunity to

receive and give feedback, that is, to assess themselves as well as their classmates; beside,

they are able to understand how the evaluation process works and consequently how to use

it for their advantage.

With the purpose of gathering information regarding students learning processes

and providing them with constant feedback, rubrics are commonly utilized when using

alternative assessment. According to the University of Colorado (2006) a rubric is a

scoring guide that helps teachers evaluate students performance, based on a range of

criteria. [It] lists the criteria, or characteristics, that students work should exhibit and

describes specific quality levels for those criteria (n.p). In this regard, rubrics can

facilitate the evaluation process and help teachers avoid external factors which may


negatively influence students outcomes. To exemplify, rubrics can reduce the grading

time as they offer professors descriptions and explanations linked to specific scores.

Moreover, they are useful when having a course with multiple teachers since they permit

educators to keep consistency across students. At the same time, when providing students

with the assignment report, they are given instances to monitor and guide their own

progress, recognizing their strengths and weaknesses (Carnegie Mellon University, n.d.).

1.3.3 Alternative vs. Traditional Assessment

As mentioned before, alternative assessment is a blanket that covers any number

of alternatives to standardized tests (Federal Grant, 1999, p. 11), that is to say, under the

term alternative assessment there is a wide range of methods and techniques which permit

educators to evaluate students based on their own learning rhythm. Nevertheless, in spite

of the benefits that come with alternative assessment, traditional ways of evaluating, such

as quizzes and multiple-choice tests, still play a leading role in evaluation process. For that

reason, in order to establish differences and to highlight the importance and significance

that alternative assessment methods currently have in the EFL classrooms, alternative and

traditional assessments will be compared in terms of what and how they assess.

First, alternative assessment methods are mainly focused on the productive skills,

speaking and writing, which make students produce the language (British Council BBC,

n.d.). Likewise, they look for sophisticated vs. naive responses (Federal Grant, 1999, p.

13) which are based on students competence and performance and focused on broader

areas, such as critical thinking and problem solving (Miller & Legg in Stecher et al, 1997,

p. 32). This indicates that these methods are strongly related to the way people

communicate and the form communicative competence or proficiency works. At the same

time, alternative assessment methods provide multiple measures and various opportunities


for students to create and demonstrate what they can do with the second language

(Federal Grant, 1999, p. 11). This shows that alternative assessment keeps its focus on

learners instead of contents since it gives students the tools to construct their knowledge,

that is, its emphasis is on guiding students learning process and monitoring the way they

improve their cognitive and language development.

In relation to traditional assessment methods, it is stated that students who are

assessed under these are tested on the basis of what they are taught instead of their

performance, because traditional assessment methods rely on the students achievement in

a given day (Federal Grant, 1999, p. 11). Besides, the emphasis of the evaluation is on

grammatical accuracy rather than students learning progress. This demonstrates that

traditional assessment attempts to test students and to measure how much they know and

how well they manage the contents developed in the classroom. To support that, Beng

Aksu (2012) states that traditional evaluations have been based on standard tests called

pen and paper tests (p. 8), focusing only on contents and proposing the view that

knowledge exists separately from learner (Worley, n.d., p. 1). In other words, traditional

assessment sees students as containers who accumulate contents without processing and

constructing real knowledge related to real-world contexts and experiences6.

Second, in terms of how alternative assessment evaluates, one may say that it

assesses through students performance since it gives [the teacher] the picture album of

the students ability (Federal Grant, 1999, p. 11). This means that by using alternative

assessment methods, teachers are able to draw implications about learners thought process

and to make them use language creatively and to express their own meanings with learned

materials (Federal Grant, 1999, p. 13). Furthermore, as the emphasis of alternative

6 This belief is grounded in a traditional approach to the educational endeavor based on Behaviorist

theories (Worley, n.d., p. 1)


assessment methods is on the construction of knowledge rather than the accumulation of

contents, it hypothesizes that the method to evaluate learners outcomes and learning must

be centered on continuity and that it should be known as much as possible in advance.

Not a gotcha experience7 (ibid.).This indicates that learners outcomes should be

evaluated over a long period of time emphasizing their strengths and progresses since they

are seen as independent people who are capable of thinking critically and guiding their

own learning process (Aksu, 2012).

In respect to traditional assessment methods, they differ from alternative ones

because their forms of evaluating are not focused on learners performance but on their

ability to manipulate the language in discrete items taken out of context (Federal Grant,

1999, p. 11). Additionally, despite the fact that alternative assessment methods provide

teachers with all the information they need to make decisions about their students

instructional needs and progress (Worley, n.d., p. 1), traditional assessment methods

support the idea that standardized tests may be easy to administer, easy to score and easy

to interpret (ibid). In other words, traditional assessment methods evaluate learners

outcomes and learning under contrived contexts instead of real-life setting as alternative

assessment methods do, because under simulated circumstances, it is easier to evaluate,

and objectivity and reliability are assured as well (Aksu, 2012). The previously described

indicates that learners who are evaluated with traditional methods are not able to associate

what they are learning with previous knowledge, or more specifically, with their

experiences, backgrounds, strengths and learning rhythms. In consequence, they cannot

construct knowledge since, as traditional assessment methods accustom them to

accumulate and store contents in their minds, they do not have the foundation for

constructing and applying what they have learnt.

7 Gotcha: an unexpected usually disconcerting challenge, revelation, or catch (Merriam-Websters online

dictionary, 2014)


After comparing alternative and traditional assessment, one may infer that there are

many differences between them which characterize every evaluation process, that is, both

kinds of assessment have positive and negative aspects which are covered in the following

section. This research stands for alternative assessment because it is considered more

suitable in terms of assessing oral production skills since it respects students learning

styles and rhythms. In other words, it is based on students learning process rather than the

contents that the students may learn in a specific period of time.

1.3.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Assessment Methods

With regard to alternative assessment methods, advantages and disadvantages can

be distinguished. In order to clarify what they are and how they may affect students

evaluation process, they will be identified and described below since they will take a

leading role in the design of the teaching proposal.

Advantages of Alternative Assessment Methods

There are many advantages of alternative assessment methods that can be

described. These pertain to the following areas: communication, critical thinking, and

authentic assessment, among others. In accordance with the Federal Grant from the

Foreign Language Assistance Program (1999) some of the most highlighted aspects are

that alternative assessment methods can:

Reach complex or difficult outcomes: this kind of assessment is able to measure not only

the knowledge about the language, but also the entire learning process; to be exact, the

product and the process have the same degree of importance for the evaluator.


Be focused on realistic tasks: it is possible for the students to be completely immersed in

the evaluation process due to the fact that it is mainly centered on their own backgrounds

giving them the opportunity to attribute significance to this process.

Incorporate good instructional tools: as assessment and instruction are constantly

interacting, it is possible to adapt instructions with the purpose of monitoring students

during the learning process. Therefore, the alternative assessment is centered on students

strengths and not on the goals they are supposed to accomplish.

Communicate what the evaluator appreciates: through evaluation, it is possible for

students to understand what elements will be measured; because of that fact, alternative

assessment methods have concordance with the instructions the evaluator gives to the

learners.

Take into account students different learning styles: when a teacher uses alternative

assessment to evaluate his/her students, it is possible to adapt that process according to

students learning styles, which means that teachers have the freedom to modify the

assessment to include different skills and reach students needs.

Collaborate and interact with the students: one of the most significant advantages of

alternative assessment is that teachers and students have the opportunity to interact within

the evaluation process. This occurs because alternative assessment methods try to imitate

the real world and context of the students where they can communicate and work

collaboratively.

Disadvantages of Alternative Assessment Methods

It is elemental for teachers to take into account the disadvantages that alternative

assessment methods have during the evaluation process. It is evident that


those methods cannot be considered as the perfect via to evaluate learners, since the

challenge to modify existing methods of assessment and to develop new approaches is not

an easy one (Tannenbaum, 1996, n.p). In view of that and in the words of Nola Aitken &

Lydia Pungur (n.d.), it is necessary to reveal the disadvantages these methods have.

Therefore, it is indispensable to describe the ones that are considered as more important by

the two authors previously mentioned:

Problems with quantitative data for schools: in educational systems, it is more common

to measure the progress of students through the creation of comparative tables with the

marks of the tests. In the case that an alternative assessment method is being used in a

classroom, it can be almost impossible for teachers to illustrate the results in quantitative

data because in order to do that, teachers have to apply the same test for every student,

which is not the case of alternative assessment methods.

Differences in equality: over the years, it has been considered that standardized tests are

able to impede differences among students that come from diverse schools. In some cases,

it is thought that students who have been evaluated with alternative assessment methods

could not be prepared to face the standardized tests they have to take in the future to apply

for a job, for a scholarship or for another college.

Time limitation (restrictions for students): due to the fact that alternative assessment

allows teachers to design distinct ways to evaluate every student, in some occasions it can

be complicated for teachers to assess all the students during one lesson because of the time

it would probably take. The previously declared means that the evaluation process under

alternative assessment needs long periods of time that have to be considered by the

evaluators.

Cost (more materials and resources): standardized tests do not need many resources for

their implementation since the preparation of sheets of paper to write the questions and


answers is all that is needed. In contrast, alternative assessment methods in general require

a variety of materials and equipment that sometimes may be expensive for the school. That

happens because teachers must have a diversity of resources in order to suit students

learning styles.

Probability to bias students results in tests: the possibility to influence students marks

in the evaluation process is a situation that cannot happen. Unfortunately, when a teacher is

applying an alternative assessment method to measure students progress, there is a high

probability to bias the results, as most of the time the evaluation is performed through

direct observation. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to be as objective as they can, not

to give personal opinions regarding students performance in the evaluation and just refer

to the tasks that students do during the evaluation process.

Despite the disadvantages of alternative assessment methods, one may say that

their extra efforts result in more direct and more accurate testing because students are

assessed as they perform actual or simulated real-world tasks (Brown & Abeywickrama,

2010, p. 16). In other words, alternative assessment methods attempt to go beyond right or

wrong answers and to what is taught since they respect students mental thought and

learning process. In addition, it is fundamental for the teachers to be aware of those

weaknesses in order to adapt the evaluation process as many times as it may be required. In

this regard, the proposal of this research will be focused on suggesting evaluation activities

that try to diminish the negative aspects of alternative assessment methods and that

facilitate the evaluation process of second-year students of the ELT Training Program at

Universidad Austral de Chile.

1.3.5 Performance-based Assessment

Alternative assessment is an umbrella term which includes different types of

methods (Lizasoain, 2013). Therefore, various are the models that are used in order to


provide teachers with the necessary information to help their students guide their own

learning process. In the following section, performance-based assessment8 will be covered

in order to have a deeper understanding of the way alternative assessment methods work

along with the sociocultural approach and, consequently, help students improve their oral

production skills.

Performance-based assessment is defined by Project Appleseed (2010) as one

alternative to traditional methods of testing students achievement . . . which requires

students to demonstrate knowledge and skills, including the process by which they solve

their problems (n. p). This implies that learners are the ones who create their own

responses and seek solutions to different kinds of situations and circumstances that are set

in a real-life context. Under performance-based assessment, teachers are able to guide

students learning process and to offer them the necessary tools in order to make this

process a more manageable one. Likewise, as this assessment is student-oriented, it gives

them opportunities to show their mastery of subjects area content and procedures

(Project Appleseed, 2010, n. p), in that way, students are active participants and

responsible for their learning process. It is also important to mention that although Brown

(2004) warns that preparing performance-based assessment is time consuming, . . . [it]

gives more accurate and objective results as it evaluates students abilities in simulated/real

tasks (Alarcn & Neguimn, 2013, p. 34). That is, performance-based assessment allows

students to develop their speaking and writing skills on the basis of their capacities and

progresses.

In connection with performance-based assessment and its advantages over the

improvement of students oral production skills, one can say that as it was previously

8 The researchers have chosen performance-based methods because they are more suitable for the evaluation

of oral production skills


described it integrates teaching, learning and evaluation, which provide[s] a model for

what teachers should be teaching and students should be learning (Barn in Lai, 2011, p.

1). Further, it permits students to develop extended performances over a long period of

time, which gives teachers the opportunity to evaluate process and product, since behind

every product there has been a continuous work, as well as a series of previous tasks that

have assisted learners in achieving the outcome (Lai, 2011). Another advantage of the

performance-based assessment that can be highlighted and which is described by Norman

Frederiksen (1984), specifies that performance-based methods are able to assess students

knowledge and skills at deeper levels than traditional assessment approaches and are better

suited to measuring certain skill types, such as writing and critical thinking (Frederiksen

in Lai et al, 2012, p. 4). This shows that performance-based assessment is a valid and more

meaningful form of assessing students learning since it works over a large time-frame,

which means that it follows students learning process and consequently respects students

learning rhythms.

As it has been stated throughout this section, there is a vast range of performance-

based assessment methods; nevertheless, they are divided into two subsections: speaking

and writing. As this research is focused on oral production, the following methods are

highlighted since they are directly linked to speaking skills. In this regard, it is relevant to

indicate that these will be the basis of the evaluation activities that will be part of the

proposal.

Projects and Exhibitions

Oral presentations

Role playing

Interviews

Story of text retelling


Experiments and demonstrations

To summarize, one may state that assessment is divided into four categories

depending on the function or purpose of the evaluation: diagnosed, formative, summative

and evaluative assessment. In addition, it is possible to distinguish informal from formal

evaluation; at the same time, one may distinguish traditional assessment from alternative

assessment which are differentiated by the manner they are developed and the objectives

they attempt to reach. In this section, alternative assessment was covered with the purpose

of identifying and choosing methods which will be part of the proposal, allowing the

researchers to propose activities that fit and facilitate the evaluation process of students

who are being taught under the sociocultural approach

1.4 Communicative Competence

The term competence in applied linguistics was first introduced by Noam

Chomskys theory which was based on linguistic competence and the idea of using the

concept of idealized, purely linguistic competence as a theoretical ground of the

methodology for learning, teaching and testing languages (Bagari & Djigunovi, 2007,

p. 95). In 1971, Dell Hymes, following from Chomskys theory, distinguishes competence

from performance. Hymes (1971) declares that linguistic competence is not sufficient to

perform properly since it proposes ideal objects (speaker-listener) who are abstracted from

real sociocultural contexts; additionally, he states that there are many factors that may

affect individuals performances; consequently, linguistic competence does not reflect

linguistic knowledge9 (Pilleux, 2001). Afterwards, Michael Canale (1980) and Merrill

Swain (1983), based on four major components, understood communicative competence

as a synthesis of an underlying system of knowledge and skill needed for communication

9 Passage translated by the researchers


(Bagari & Djigunovi, 2007, p. 95). This indicates that not only is it necessary to

differentiate linguistic competence from performance competence, but also indispensable

to have a set of abilities that makes it possible to develop the communicative competence.

Nowadays, it is centered on the four major components that emerged from Canale (1980)

and Swain (1983) and it is defined as the ability to use the language correctly and

appropriately to accomplish communication goals (The National Capital Language

Resource Center, 2004, n. p).

1.4.1 Components of Communicative Competence

As described above, four components can be recognized in relation to

communicative competence: grammatical/linguistic competence, sociolinguistic

competence, discourse and strategic competence (Lee & VanPatten, 2003, p. 53). They

involve the use of a large range of factors such us linguistic knowledge, capacity to use

language in diverse settings, and the ability to adjust the registers of the spoken language,

among others. Those components will be briefly described below.

Grammatical/Linguistic Competence10

: it refers to the the knowledge of the language

code (grammatical rules, vocabulary, pronunciation, spelling, etc) (Celce-Murcia,

Drnyei & Thurrell, 1995, p. 7). In addition, it enables recognition and production of

grammatically correct sentences as well as comprehension of their prepositional content

(Bagari & Djigunovi, 2007, p. 98). This shows that not only does this competence

include grammar, but also other elements that are part of language systems and that allow

individuals to create comprehensible sentences in terms of syntax, phonology, morphology

and graphology.

10

Competence: (in generative grammar) the implicit system of rules that constitutes a persons knowledge of a language (Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, Richards & Schmidt, 2002, p. 93).

Competency: (in competency based teaching) descriptions of the essential skills, knowledge and behaviours required for the effective performance of a real world task of activity (ibid., p. 94).


Sociolinguistic Competence: it is understood as the ability to interpret the social meaning

of the choice of linguistic varieties and to use language with the appropriate social meaning

for the communicative situation (SIL International, 1990, n. p). In other words, the

sociolinguistic competence refers to individuals ability to use the language in different

communicative situations in order to understand and to be understood in a proper manner

in various contexts.

Discourse Competence: it is the ability of knowing how to interpret the larger context

and how to construct longer stretches of language so that the parts make up a coherent

whole (The National Capital Resource Center, 2004, n. p). This demonstrates that

discourse competence is the capacity to combine and select ideas and language structures

in order to achieve coherence and cohesion whether in written or oral texts.

Strategic Competence: it concerns the knowledge of verbal and non-verbal

communication strategies which enhance the efficiency of communication and, where

necessary, enable the learner to overcome difficulties when communication breakdowns

occur (Celce-Murcia, Drnyei & Thurrell, 1995, p. 7). More specifically, strategic

competence helps speakers enrich the effectiveness of communication and compensate the

possible gaps that may exist in their language knowledge due to insufficient competence

in one or more components of communicative competence (Bagari & Djigunovi, 2007,

pp. 97-98)

The previous description of the components of communicative competence is of

paramount significance to this research because of the goals it aims at. In order to propose

activities that facilitate the evaluation process of second-year students of the ELT Training

Program in respect to their oral skills, it is mandatory to make connections between


assessment instruments and communicative competence principles; otherwise, the

evaluation methods proposed would not be authentic, valid and reliable.

1.4.2 Communicative Competence and Assessment

In the past decades, language pedagogy has moved toward communicative goals,

which indicates that instructional methods that are focused on linguistic elements, have

been sidelined by communicative theories and approaches which claim that the whole of

the communicative event [is] considerably greater than the sum of its linguistic elements

(Clark in Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010, p. 13). In short, these new approaches emphasize

communication, authenticity, and context (ibid., 2010, p. 13), that is, they argue that

language competence [is] a unified set of interacting abilities that [cannot] be tested

separately (Oller in Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010, p. 13). From that, Douglas Brown

and Priyanvada Abeywickrama (2010) declare that communicative competence is so

global and requires such integration that it cannot be captured in additive tests of grammar,

reading, vocabulary, and other discrete points of language (p. 13). This means that the

four major components of communicative competence cannot be assessed in isolation but

as a whole in order to help learners develop their language skills, learning processes, and

the ability to negotiate meaning (Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010, p. 18).

With regard to what has been exposed, current research advocates for

communicative language ability, which is defined as the ability to express ones self and

to understand others it develops as learners engage in communication and not as a result

of habit formation with grammatical items (Lee & VanPattern, 2003, p. 51). Besides,

communicative language ability postulates that mastery of the mechanics of a language

does not ensure the ability to use the language for communication (Savignon, 1972, p.

10). This supports the idea that communicative competence cannot be divided into small


measurable units neither be evaluated by discrete-point tests. This way, when assessing

communicative competence, it is elemental to be aware of the fact that one is evaluating

proficiency based on four underlying competences and that linguistic competence and

performance are not similar elements. Thus, the use of language in diverse communicative

situations implies the development of communicative competence rather than the

memorization of isolated words and grammatical structures which are taught in unreal

contexts such us laboratories and classrooms.

To measure communicative competence is a complicated task, even more difficult

if one is focuse

sociocultural approach: the inclusion of alternative oral assessment in second-year language courses...

Documents

traditional assessment

functions of assessment

sociocultural theory

performancebased assessment

chile seminario

chile facultad

universidad austral

thesis project