Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAP courses
Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAP courses
Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAP courses
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
J. Banerjee, D. Wall / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5 (2006) 50–69 59<br />
9. The final form of the exit assessment checklist (Appendix B) was used during the last week of the<br />
<strong>pre</strong>-sessi<strong>on</strong>al course. Each student received their report <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> a copy was sent to the University’s<br />
postgraduate admissi<strong>on</strong>s officer <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> the admissi<strong>on</strong>s pers<strong>on</strong>nel in admitting departments.<br />
3.1. C<strong>on</strong>sulting the stakeholders <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> piloting the checklist<br />
As has already been stated, the aims of the c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> piloting phase were threefold:<br />
† To provide some of our stakeholders (the University’s admissi<strong>on</strong>s pers<strong>on</strong>nel <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> the <strong>pre</strong>sessi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
course tutors) with an opportunity to comment <strong>on</strong> the initial draft <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> suggest<br />
changes or additi<strong>on</strong>s before the piloting stage (we c<strong>on</strong>sulted students during the piloting<br />
stage).<br />
† To pilot the revised instrument in order to ascertain its usability <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> coverage.<br />
† To maximise the course tutors’ opportunities to familiarise themselves with the checklist <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
to arrive at shared inter<strong>pre</strong>tati<strong>on</strong>s of each of the ‘can-do’ statements.<br />
During the c<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> piloting phase, we received valuable feedback in a number of<br />
areas:<br />
(i) Usability of the report form—The tutors found the report form quick to complete<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>, despite some suggesti<strong>on</strong>s for changes, they believed that they understood the<br />
can-do statements. The University’s Postgraduate Admissi<strong>on</strong>s Officer noted that the<br />
form provided judgements in four skill areas, commenting that this paralleled the<br />
report formats of language proficiency test scores like the IELTS. She thought this<br />
was a step forward, arguing that this form was more transparent than its <strong>pre</strong>decessor<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> that the informati<strong>on</strong> was easy to retrieve because it was not <strong>pre</strong>sented in prose.<br />
She believed that course directors in the academic departments would be able to<br />
return to this form at a later date in order to compare the students’ <strong>on</strong>-going<br />
performance in their departments with what was reported at the end of the <strong>EAP</strong><br />
course.<br />
(ii) Format of the overall report—The tutors initially argued that if a student seemed to<br />
be satisfactory in all respects it would be sufficient to <strong>pre</strong>sent a summary judgement<br />
of his/her performance <strong>on</strong> the course. They suggested that the form for such students<br />
should c<strong>on</strong>sist of a single page with a box to tick for each of the four skills<br />
(listening, speaking, reading <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> writing). We resisted this suggesti<strong>on</strong> for two<br />
reas<strong>on</strong>s. The first was that we needed to be sure (inasmuch as this is possible) that<br />
all the tutors shared the same underst<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>ing of the c<strong>on</strong>struct for each skill area. We<br />
felt that if they had to place a tick opposite each aspect listed under each skill they<br />
would be obliged to c<strong>on</strong>sider all the traits that we c<strong>on</strong>sidered to be important. The<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d reas<strong>on</strong> had to do with accountability <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>, ultimately, face validity: we felt it<br />
unlikely that the University would accept our judgements <strong>on</strong> the adequacy or<br />
otherwise of students’ <str<strong>on</strong>g>performances</str<strong>on</strong>g> unless we dem<strong>on</strong>strated how we had arrived at<br />
our decisi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
Nevertheless, the course tutors <strong>pre</strong>vailed up<strong>on</strong> us to include a summary judgement<br />
page (this became the final page of the exit assessment form). They argued that they<br />
would feel more comfortable being “h<strong>on</strong>est” in the checklist if they could also