The effects of formative assessments on listening skills performance of non english major students at a university in ho chi minh city

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY - HO CHI MINH CITY
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

THE EFFECTS OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS
ON LISTENING SKILLS PERFORMANCE OF NONENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT A UNIVERSITY
IN HO CHI MINH CITY

A research study submitted to
the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature
in partial fulfillment of the Master's degree in TESOL
By
NGUYEN ANH THI
Supervised by
PHAN THANH HUNG, Ph.D.

HO CHI MINH CITY APRIL 2023


THE EFFECTS OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ON
LISTENING SKILLS PERFORMANCE OF NON- ENGLISH
MAJOR STUDENTS AT A UNIVERSITY IN HO CHI MINH
CITY


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Phan Thanh Hung, who is
my thesis supervisor, for his enthusiastic guidance, valuable comments and support
in the preparation and completion of this thesis.
I am greatly indebted to all the lecturers in the TESOL graduate program at the
University of Social Science and Humanities for their dedication and helpful

instruction during the course from the year 2019 to 2021.
My special thanks go to my fellows who are Mr. Pham Huynh Phu Quy, Ms.
Ky Tran Minh Uyen, Mr. Nguyen Huu Ngoc, Ms. Nguyen Thi Hoai Anh, Ms. Ngo
Thi Ngoc Tram, Ms. Pham To Quyen, M. Bui Thi Truc Linh, and Mr. Tieu Tieu
Long, who have given me useful advice and support on my thesis proposal.
I am also thankful to the students in the class Foundation 2 Group 2020, Group
2027, Group 2016, Group 115 and Group 107 for their great cooperation in the study.
Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to my family for their love and support.

i


STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
I certify that this thesis entitled "THE EFFECTS OF FORMATIVE
ASSESSMENTS ON LISTENING SKILLS PERFORMANCE OF NONENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT A UNIVERSITY IN HO CHI MINH
CITY" is my own work.
This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in
any other institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, April 2023

NGUYEN ANH THI

ii


RETENTION OF USE
Being a candidate for the MA degree, I agree to the University's standards for
the preservation and use of theses deposited in the Library. I agree that the original
of my thesis deposited in the Library should be available for study and research

purposes, subject to the Librarian's standard rules for the preservation, lending, or
replication of theses.
I agree to follow any general terms imposed by the University for the
preservation, lending, or replication of theses, as well as any specific usage conditions
in regard to this thesis titled
By signing this form, I agree that a copy of my thesis will be preserved in the
University of Social Sciences and Humanities, and allow it to be published online in
full text. I confirm that the necessary copyright licenses for any original materials
included in my thesis have been secured.
Date: ____________
Candidate’s signature

NGUYEN ANH THI

iii


CONTENTS
CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Background to the study .................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Aim of the study................................................................................................................. 3
1.3. Research questions ............................................................................................................ 3
1.4. Significance of the study .................................................................................................... 4
1.5. Organization of thesis chapters ......................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 6
2.1. Formative assessment ........................................................................................................ 6

2.1.1. Theoretical definition .................................................................................................... 6
2.1.2. Operational definition .................................................................................................... 8
2.1.3. Characteristics of formative assessment ...................................................................... 11
2.1.4. Comparison between formative assessment and summative assessment .................... 16
2.1.5. Formative assessment and motivation in EFL classroom ........................................... 20
2.2. Formative assessment and teaching English listening ................................................. 22
2.3. Previous research studies ................................................................................................ 25
2.4. Conceptual framework .................................................................................................... 30
2.5. Research gap ..................................................................................................................... 33
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................................................... 34
3.1. Research design ................................................................................................................ 34
3.2. Participants ....................................................................................................................... 35
3.3. Sampling............................................................................................................................ 36
3.4. Research instruments....................................................................................................... 36
3.4.1. Pretest and posttest ...................................................................................................... 38
3.4.2. Questionnaire ............................................................................................................... 38
3.4.3. Unit progress tests ...................................................................................................... 39
3.5. Research procedure.......................................................................................................... 41
3.6. Data analysis scheme........................................................................................................ 44

iv


CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................ 46
4.1. Results ................................................................................................................................... 46
4.1.1. Results of the pretest and the posttest .......................................................................... 46
4.1.1.1. Comparison of the pretest results between two groups ........................................ 47
4.1.1.2. Control group: Comparison of the pretest and posttest ....................................... 49
4.1.1.3. Experimental group: comparison of the pretest and posttest ................................ 50
4.1.1.4. Comparison of the posttest results between two groups ....................................... 51

4.1.2. Results of the questionnaire ......................................................................................... 51
4.1.2.1. Reliability of the questionnaire ............................................................................. 52
4.1.2.2. Students’ respondents to the questionnaire ........................................................... 54
4.2. Discussion.............................................................................................................................. 58
4.2.1. Research question 1 ......................................................................................................... 58
4.2.2. Research question 2 ......................................................................................................... 60
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 62
5.1. Summary of findings............................................................................................................ 62
5.2. Implication ............................................................................................................................ 63
5.3. Limitation ............................................................................................................................. 65
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 67
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 74
Appendix 1 ................................................................................................................................ 74
Appendix 2 ................................................................................................................................ 78
Appendix 3 ................................................................................................................................ 80
Appendix 4 ................................................................................................................................ 85
Appendix 5 ................................................................................................................................ 96
Appendix 6 .............................................................................................................................. 101
Appendix 7 .............................................................................................................................. 102
Appendix 8 .............................................................................................................................. 104
Appendix 9 .............................................................................................................................. 105
Appendix 10 ............................................................................................................................ 105
Appendix 11 ............................................................................................................................ 106

v


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Comparison between formative assessment and summative assessment
Table 2. The aspects of micro-listening skills that are assessed in Key English Test

Table 3. Research design in the study
Table 4. Aspects of language that are assessed in each unit progress test
Table 5. Implementation of the experimental group and control group during the
experiment
Table 6. Data analysis scheme
Table 7. Comparison between pretest and posttest of the experimental and control
group in terms of mean values
Table 8. Comparison of the results of the pretest between the experimental group and
the controlled group
Table 9. Comparison of the results between the pretest and the posttest in the control
group
Table 10. Comparison of the results between the pretest and the posttest in the
experimental group
Table 11. Comparison of the results of the posttest between the experimental group
and the control group
Table 12. Measurement indicators and Cronbach’s alpha
Table 13. The ranges of means scores and their meaning
Table 14. Students’ attitude toward the six unit progress tests in their learning
Table 15. Students’ attitude toward teacher's feedback of the six unit progress tests
Table 16. Students’ attitude toward the motivation they have when doing formative
assessment in their learning

vi


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Aspects of Formative Assessment
Figure 2. Formative assessment cycle
Figure 3. Conceptual framework of formative assessment

Figure 4. Conceptual framework of the study

vii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
EFL

English as Foreign Language

ELT

English Language Teaching

viii


ABSTRACT
Listening seems to be one of the most difficult skills that many freshmen who
are not majoring in English at Ton Duc Thang University have to face in their EFL
courses. This is because they lack adequate training since they were at secondary or
high schools. Therefore, they need a way that can enable them to study harder for the
listening skills beside many listening strategies that they are learning in class. The
study examined the effectiveness of formative assessment on students' listening
performance and their attitude toward it. The researcher carried out this study with
the aim to help students improve their listening skills by using formative assessment
which is the method of deploying a progress test at the end of each unit. With the
number of 122 freshmen at a university in Ho Chi Minh City as the participants, this
study employed a quantitative quasi-experimental approach, including a pre-test, a
post-test, and a questionnaire. The study was based on two sources of data. Firstly, it

was the comparison of the scores between the pretest and posttest which were taken
by the students who were classified into the experimental group and the control group.
This was to identify whether there were any differences between the two groups and
whether the listening performances in the experimental group were improved or not.
Secondly, the data from the questionnaire respondents of the experimental group were
analyzed to investigate their attitude toward the use of formative assessment in their
learning process. The data analysis revealed that (1) with the use of formative
assessment, students in the experimental group achieved more progress than those
who were in the control group. This means that the formative assessments positively
affect the EFL students’ listening performance; (2) Students in the experimental
groups showed positive attitudes towards the use of formative assessment in their
EFL learning in terms of the use of the six unit progress tests, teacher’s feedback, and
motivation.
Keywords: Formative Assessment, Teaching listening

ix


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the background to the
study, research purposes, research questions, significance of the study, and
organization of the study. The purpose of this study is to thoroughly investigate the
impact of formative assessment on students’ learning outcomes of listening skills and
to provide answers to the two research questions. The study is significant because it
will contribute to the existing body of knowledge on the subject matter, and will
provide insights that can be used to address practical issues. The organization of the
study is structured in a way that allows for a clear understanding of the research
process and findings.
1.1. Background to the study
Listening is regarded as an essential element of learning a foreign language, and

thus it plays an important role in teaching and learning in language classrooms.
According to Croom (1998), without listening skill, no communication can be
achieved. Although listening is one of the most crucial skills that learners need to
improve, it is undoubtedly one of the most difficult skills in teaching a foreign
language because it is regarded as least studied of the four skills in language
(Vandergrift, 2007). Additionally, listening is also neglected in the classrooms. Field
(2008) states that listening was primarily used in the early stages of ELT to introduce
new grammar through model dialogues. In order to teach listening skills effectively,
teachers have used many strategies which are techniques or activities that help
students develop a set of listening strategies or listening skills. Those strategies are
top-down processing, bottom-up processing, and interactive processing. A
considerable body of research reveals that one of the best ways to help students
improve their listening skills is to use listening strategies (Nunan, 1995; Peterson,
1991; Willis, 1981). Furthermore, Celce- Murcia & Olshtain (2000) states that two
listening strategies frequently applied most popularly for finding necessary

1


information are bottom- up strategies and top-down strategies. Besides, another way
is by the assessment of context or speaker's intention.
Many freshmen whose majors are not English linguistics have troubles when
learning English listening skills and doing listening tests. The reason is because the
students might not learn English listening skills well at primary schools, secondary
schools and high schools because with the characteristic of teaching and learning
English just for examination at many public schools in the formal educational system,
mainly grammar, vocabulary, reading and writing skills are the main focus (Vu &
Shah, 2016). Therefore, they normally lack English listening skills. When entering
the university, they face many troubles in doing English listening tests. Besides, as
English is not their major, some of the students may not find the motivation to pursue

this subject. This makes them feel lazy and they do not make an effort in learning
English as a result (Huynh et al, 2021).
In order to improve listening skill, different listening strategies are applied
where formative assessments are becoming more and more popular around the world
(Black & Wiliam, 1998, 2000; Cauley & McMillan, 2009; Gikandi et al, 2011;
Kerekovic, 2020; Lee & Coniam, 2013; Leung & Mohan, 2004), especially listening
skill in English education in Vietnam (Le, 2021; Nguyen, 2018; Tran, 2015 ).
Formative assessment has been conducted in classroom assessment practices and
brought out huge impacts upon learning outcomes of students and used as a way to
motivate students in their learning (Brookhart, 1997, 2004, 2007; Black and Wiliam
1998; McMillan 2007). From all the above reasons, there is a need to investigate the
scale of influence towards EFL learners’ listening skill caused by formative
assessments and students’ attitudes toward the use of it in teaching and learning
English listening skills.

2


1.2. Aim of the study
The aim of this research is to investigate the impact of formative assessment on
students’ learning outcomes of listening skills at A2 level according to the CEFR
scale at a university in Ho Chi Minh City to see whether there are improvements when
using formative assessment in teaching listening skills and to find out students’
attitude toward the use of formative assessment in their learning process. The study
is carried out in four classes which are divided into two groups at a university in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam. It involves 122 students who share the same classroom
instructors. The research focuses on the experiment, and a survey on learning
listening skills only, which is limited in context and in terms of generalization in a
research. Before conducting the study, a pretest is organized to identify the level of
homogeneity among the participants based on the numbers of correct answers that

each of the students have got from the test. Then the participants are classified into a
control group and an experimental group. The experimental group studies the same
program and materials as the control group. Both groups also share the same teacher
and are treated equally in the same learning environment in order to guarantee the
homogeneity of the study. The key difference between experimental group and
control group is that students in the experimental group are assessed formatively
while those in the control group do not; they take summative assessment. The
experimental group also does a progress test, using formative assessment only after
finishing each unit, which means they will do six unit progress tests in total. When
the course finishes, both groups do the same posttest so that the researcher can
compare the results and find out whether there are any differences between the results
of the two groups. After that, a survey is conducted to find out how the formative
assessment affects the learning attitude of the learners of the experimental group.
1.3. Research questions
The aim of this research is to explore the effect of formative assessment on the
listening performance of students whose majors are not English linguistics at the
university where the researcher is working by answering the following questions:
3


Research question 1: To what extent do formative assessments affect the EFL
students’ listening performance?
Research question 2: What is the students’ attitude toward the use of formative
assessment in learning listening skills?
1.4. Significance of the study
This study contributes to the development of formative assessment in Vietnam.
Although there have been many research studies to find out the advantages of
formative assessment in teaching English as a second language, there is still a lack of
those in the context of Viet nam. Additionally, the application of formative
assessment in teaching listening skills has yet drawn much attention as in speaking

and writing skills. Turning to the listening skills, this is regarded as one of the most
difficult in teaching and learning English, especially when many of the students are
from provinces in Vietnam and have studied English for more than five years with
the main focus on grammar and reading. Learning English listening skills is a big
challenge they have to face when learning English at university to complete their
competency. They need frequent motivation in order to put in more effort. This study
recommends that teachers should deploy frequent tests as a way of formative
assessment in order to motivate students in learning and practicing listening skills. A
flexible combination of formative and summative assessment during the teaching and
learning process can offer considerable benefits to learners.
1.5. Organization of thesis chapters
This thesis includes five chapters. In chapter 1, the researcher presents the
background and the rationale of the study. Chapter 2 which is named literature review
provides a theoretical background of the study. Next, in chapter 3, the researcher
describes the research methodology which is about the method, the participants and
the research instruments that are deployed in the study. Following that, chapter 4
illustrates the data analysis and discussion to find out the effects of formative

4


assessment on students’ performance, and their attitude toward the use of it. Finally,
the researcher draws conclusions based on the results from the previous chapter.

5


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This section aims to provide an understanding of the existing research and
debates relevant to formative assessment. In research, the definitions of formative

assessment being studied are crucial both to the research process itself and its
practical application. Therefore, in this section, the theoretical definitions of
formative assessment and related relevant terms will be discussed and compared, in
order to build the operational definition which is deployed in the study. Moreover,
the characteristics of formative assessment are also clarified in order to have a full
view of how they work. Additionally, a comparison between formative assessment
and summative assessment should be taken into account to find out the use of
summative tests within formative assessment. Besides, Many previous studies have
been conducted to confirm the effects of formative assessment, while there were some
opposite results toward it. Finally, a new conceptual framework for this study is
formed and applied.
2.1. Formative assessment
For both the research process itself and its practical application, it is essential
that the key constructs being researched in a study be defined. If definitions are
unclear, it is challenging to meaningfully document effectiveness; as a result, it is also
challenging to apply the study in a particular setting (Black & Wiliam, 2004; Bennett,
2011). The definition of FA and other relevant terms will be examined and compared
in this section in order to lay the foundation for the rest of the thesis.

2.1.1. Theoretical definition
There has recently been a rise in the importance of formative evaluation as
compared to summative assessment in research which is making formative
assessment get more attention and more research has been done on it. As a result,
numerous titles, including formative assessment, classroom assessment, learnercentered assessment, ongoing assessment, assessment for learning, and alternative
6


assessment, have been used to describe this style of assessment. In the scope of this
study, only

formative assessment is used and discussed in detail for a better

understanding of the term.
Formative assessment was first used by Scriven in 1967 but it did not become
popular until 1998 when Black and Wiliam defined the term “formative assessment”
as all activities performed by teacher and his or her students in assessing themselves,
which were as feedback to change the ways that are used in teaching and learning.
Later than that, Bell and Cowie (2001) also stated that formative assessment is the
process used by teacher and students to recognize and respond to student learning for
the purpose of improving that learning. In 2005, Clarke put forward the claim that it
was a tool rather than simply as evaluation devices marking the end of instruction
that teachers use to measure students grasp of specific topics and skills they were
teaching. This assessment, according to Looney (2005), was the frequent, interactive
evaluation of students' learning and development that identifies areas for
improvement and allows teachers to modify their instruction accordingly. According
to Black (2003) and Stiggins (2006), formative assessment were tools for assessing
students at the points in learning process that they were at currently, or it was called
assessment for learning. Colby- Kelly and Turner (2007) defined formative
assessment as the process of looking for and interpreting evidence to make
substantively grounded decisions or judgements about the output of an instructional
task in order to determine where the learners are in their learning, where they need to
go, and how to get there. The definition of formative assessment by Cauley and
McMillan in 2010 was a process where assessment-elicited evidence of student
learning was obtained and instruction was changed in response to feedback. A more
focused definition of formative assessment was developed by Wiliam (2011). It states
that it functions formatively when teachers, students, or their peers use it to elicit,
interpret, and use data about student achievement to make decisions about the
instruction's next steps that are more likely to be better than those they would have

7

made without it. According to Nguyen (2018), formative assessment is frequently
carried out by teachers, students, or their peers during an instructional process, a
course or a program to serve the purpose of identifying student's current situation and
making appropriate adjustments to improve their learning.

2.1.2. Operational definition
From the theoretical definitions above, in this part, the researcher describes the
definition of formative assessment that is deployed in the study. It is the process of
carrying an assessment at the end of each unit in order to foster students’ motivation
and giving them feedback with the aim to enhance their listening performance via test
scores. Aligned with the characteristics of the formative assessment which are
mentioned in the previous part, some main characteristics are shown in order to fit
the teaching and learning context. The characteristics of the formative assessments
that are utilized in the study include:
(1) It provides feedback to students.
(2) It provides instructional adjustments or corrections.
(3) It identifies the student's current knowledge/ skills and the necessary steps
for reaching desired goals.
(4) It provides frequent assessment
(5) It includes feedback that is non-evaluative, specific, timely, related to
learning goals, and provides opportunities for the student to revise and improve work
products and deepen understanding.
Brown and Abeywickrama (2010) stated that the performance of receptive
skills, such as listening and reading, cannot be observed. We can only observe the
result of listening or reading. Therefore, the researcher chooses to conduct progress
tests after finishing each lesson rather than other forms of formative assessment such
as portfolio, observation, peer-feedback or self-assessment.
Teachers assess a learner's competence, but they observe that learner's

8


performance. Therefore, beside the summative tests, in order to measure students'
competence as precisely as possible, teachers need to triangulate at least two or more
performances by utilizing formative assessment during the teaching process.
Formative assessments can be considered that it should be designed with a
concise and clear aim in advance of how to proceed in order to gain many positive
effects on students’ learning outcomes. According to Black and William (1998),
formative assessment had five features which are:
(1) It is a process, not simply a specific test or other assessment.
(2) It is undertaken by teachers and students.
(3) It takes during instruction.
(4) It provides feedback to students.
(5) It provides instructional adjustments or corrections.
In 2006, Shepard described a more detailed list of the key characteristics of
formative assessment as below:
(1) Requires students to take responsibility for their own learning.
(2) Communicates clear, specific learning goals.
(3) Focuses on goals that represent valuable educational outcomes with
applicability and beyond the learning context.
(4) Identifies the student's current knowledge/ skills and the necessary steps for
reaching the desired goals.
(5) Requires development of plans for attaining the desired goals.
(6) Encourages students to self- monitor progress towards their learning goals.
(7) Provides examples of learning goals including, when relevant, the specific
grading criteria or rubrics that will be used to evaluate the students' work.
9

(8) Provide frequent assessment, including peer and student self- assessment
and assessment embedded within learning activities.
(9) Includes feedback that is non-evaluative, specific, timely, related to learning
goals, and provides opportunities for the student to revise and improve work products
and deepen understanding.
(10) Promotes metacognition and reflection by students on their work.
Wiliam (2011) also continued listing six of commands involving formative
assessment as followed.
(1)It describes the function of evidence from the assessment that really matters.
(2)Involves teachers, learners, or their peers to make decisions.
(3)Focus is on the decisions made based on the data.
(4)Focus is on the resulting action.
(5)Focus is on the next instructional steps.
(6)May or may not change the course of action.
These theories tend to emphasize the instructions based on the data collected
from formative assessment tests. Therefore, classroom instructors have to be more
determined in making instructional decisions regarding the process of how to proceed
the in-classroom frequent assessment.
The seminal study by Black and William (1998) called ‘Inside the Black Box’,
featured the formative assessment and its effect on student improvement as well as
the procedure of classroom implementation of the assessment tool. It was pointed out
that formative assessment improved student achievement if it was carried out
properly. It also showed that with adequate support and instructions, formative
assessment showed prominent achievements in student learning outcomes. Another
world-renowned educator, Brown (2004) also pointed out that formative assessment
assists students continue the process of forming their competencies and skills, and
this process should focus on the ongoing development of the learner's language.
10

2.1.3. Characteristics of formative assessment
Formative assessment is an essential aspect of the teaching and learning
process in the English language classroom. It is a tool that helps teachers to evaluate
student learning and adjust their instructional strategies to meet the needs of
individual students. According to Wiliam and Thompson (2007), formative
assessment is a continuous process that takes place throughout the learning cycle. It
is not a one-time event that occurs at the end of a unit or semester. Instead, it involves
continuous monitoring of student progress, which allows teachers to make necessary
adjustments to their teaching strategies and provide timely feedback to students.
Furthermore, Formative assessment is student-centered, meaning that it focuses on
the individual needs and progress of each student. It is not a one-size-fits-all approach
that treats all students as if they have the same needs and abilities. Instead, it takes
into account the unique learning styles, preferences, and abilities of each student.
Besides, Formative assessment is designed to help students learn and improve their
performance. It is not simply a measure of what they have learned, but a tool that
helps them to identify areas where they need to improve and to develop strategies for
doing so. Last but not least, Formative assessment involves providing students with
timely and specific feedback on their progress. This feedback is used to set goals and
develop strategies for improvement. It is not simply a grade or score, but a detailed
analysis of strengths and weaknesses and a plan for moving forward.

11


Figure 1. Aspects of Formative Assessment (Wiliam & Thompson, 2007).

Black & Wiliam (2009) stated that formative assessment aims to present
students with explicit goals or outcome of instruction, which helps students access
their current position in relation to these goals, and to equip them with the tools to
bridge the gap between the goals and current positions. As can be seen from Figure

1, Black and William classified five main types of formative assessment tasks which
are:
(1) Sharing success criteria with learners
(2) Classroom questioning
(3) Teacher’s feedback
(4) Peer-assessment and self-assessment
(5) Formative use of summative test
According to Black and William (2009), these five tasks can be viewed as the
way of putting into practice the five elements of Willam and Thompson's formative
assessment paradigm. They claim that the second element, which entails engineering
effective classroom discussions and other learning tasks that elicit evidence of student
understanding, is carried through using classroom questioning. The third element,
giving feedback that helps learners advance, is served by comments only marking.
The final two components—activating students as instructional resources for one
12


another and activating students as owners of their own learning—can be both
implemented through peer and self evaluation. Black and William deem the final
activity, the formative use of summative tests, to be more challenging than the others.
When used properly, summative tests, or tests made to suit summative purposes, can
offer feedback that fosters learning. Students can learn from them about the standards
for good learning. Additionally, they give students the opportunity to support one
another and organize their own revision using the results of these assessments.
The roles of teachers are emphasized in setting clear goals, making aspects of
success explicit, providing useful feedback, and encouraging peer‐ and self‐
reflection. Peer and learner requirements center on understanding learning objectives
and continuously assessing progress against these. In this study, it is the teacher who
provides feedback after each unit progress tests while the role of peer feedback and
self-feedback are not focused.

Since some of the formative assessment activities including sharing success
criteria, teacher’s feedback, and formative use of summative tests recommended by
Black and William (2009) will be used by the researcher of this study, the chosen
activities will be detailed as below to give a broad overview of the problem.

2.1.3.1. Sharing success criteria
At the start of the class, the teacher explains the objectives and success criteria
to the students or co-construct them with the students, setting explicit expectations
for both teacher and students regarding the lesson's content focus and the
opportunities presented by the learning environment for linguistic activity (Van Lier,
2000). This approach encourages students to learn with goals in mind, which has been
linked to higher levels of motivation and self-control and has consequences for
students' engagement and perseverance in the classroom.
By establishing clear objectives, criteria and goal-setting, students are
encouraged to participate in lessons and the learning process. Students must
comprehend and be aware of the learning target or goal, as well as the requirements
13


for meeting it, in order to succeed. This method can be used, for instance, to jointly
define excellent work, to involve students in creating normative classroom behavior,
and to decide what should be part of success criteria. Students can better grasp where
they are, where they need to be, and how to get there by using their own work,
classroom tests, or examples of what is required. Additionally, assessment must be
an essential part of a teacher's planning in order for it to play a formative role in
teaching and learning. Instead of describing what the students will do, learning
intentions describe what the students will learn. They put learning first instead of the
assignment.
According to Black & Wiliam (2009), sharing success criteria can have a variety
of positive effects. Firstly, when education is driven by clearly defined aims,

motivation and achievement are increased. Secondly, when students are aware of
what is expected of them and how their progress will be measured, they can be more
responsible for their learning. Thirdly, by participating in this exercise, students will
become better at making decisions about how to approach tasks.
2.1.3.2. Teacher’s feedback
Colby-Kelly and Turner (2007) defined feedback as the comment or
information that students get on their performance of a learning task from a teacher,
from other students, or from themselves. Hattie (2007) stated that feedback is among
the most powerful influences on achievement. Black and Wiliam (1998) emphasized
that the characteristic of good feedback should be about the particular qualities of
students' work, with advice on what they can do to improve, and should avoid
comparison with other students, and feedback on tests or homework should give each
student guidance on how to improve, and each student must be given help and an
opportunity to work on improvement.
Feedback is categorized in many ways. Black and Wiliam (1998) classified
feedback into directive feedback and facilitative feedback. The function of directive
feedback is to tell students what needs to be corrected or revised while facilitative
feedback aims at providing comments and suggestions on how to carry out the
14