Factors in Using Workbooks and/or Worksheets for English Classroom Assessment

英語課堂評量中作業本與學習單的使用因素

10.6384/CIQ.201107.0200

謝麗雪(Li-Hsueh Hsieh)

教室評量 ； 英語教學 ； 多元評量 ； classroom assessment ； English teaching ； multiple assessments

課程與教學

14卷3期（2011 / 07 / 01）

199 - 238

英文

依據學生能力所設計的課堂評量能促進學習，而使用書面評量又比其他方式更有效率。但是不同因素，例如時間、人力等限制，可能會影響老師課堂使用的評量方式。因此本文之研究目的為探討教室評量使用的情形，包括：1.作業本或學習單是否為受試者喜歡的評量方式；2.英文老師是否使用作業本或學習單作為課堂評量；3.受試者背景是否影響其作決定使用作業本或學習單的過程；4.三個最明顯影響使用作業本或學習單的因素。研究情境及方式為要求1472研究所考生寫一篇英文作文，題目為：如果他們是英文老師時，是否會使用作業本或學習單，原因為何？作者收集及分析1442 有效受試者之答案。結果顯示：1.比起作業本，受試者較喜歡使用學習單；2.共14種理由可解釋受試者使用的作業評量因素；3.欲就讀之不同研究所的考生表達喜歡不同的作業評量方式；其中4.教學、練習及感覺為最明顯的作業評量因素。有鑑於此，作者提出一些英語教學上之建議。

Classroom assessment can facilitate students' learning process by assessing their competencies, and using written forms is substantially more efficient than the alternatives, such as performance assessment or portfolio assessment. However, various factors, such as time and labor constraints, may encourage or hinder teachers' use of classroom tests. The aims of this paper are to explore the use of classroom assessment, including (1) to identify a favorable assessment form (workbooks (WBs) or worksheets (WSs)); 2) to discover possible factors underlying English teachers' decisions to use WBs or WSs in class; 3) to explore whether test takers' backgrounds influence their decision-making process; and 4) to justify the three most prevalent reasons for using WBs or WSs. For this study, 1,472 students taking a graduate school entrance examination wrote an English essay discussing whether they would use WBs or WSs if they were English teachers. Hand-written notes from 1,442 valid passages were collected and analyzed. The responses indicated a preference for teaching with WSs rather than WBs, and the candidates' reasons for using the forms were classified into 14 categories. Candidates interested in different graduate programs expressed varying preferences. Above all, pedagogy, practice and emotion emerged as the top three categories, and suggestions are offered to improve educational curriculum design.

1. Liao, B.S.(2007).Teachers' beliefs about teaching English to elementary school children.English Teaching & Learning,31(1),43-76.
   連結：
2. Yang, T. L.(2008).Factors affecting EFL teachers' use of multiple classroom assessment practices with young language learners.English Teaching & Learning,32(94),85-123.
   連結：
3. Wolf, N. (2003). Functions of worksheets. A speech given at Caves Books in Tainan City..
4. (1995).Longman dictionary of contemporary English.London:Longman.
5. Hsieh, L. H., & Hsiao, Y. P. (2003). The perceived assessment concepts of elementary school English teachers in Tainan City. Unpublished manuscript.
6. Chen, S. W. (陳信文) (2003, June, 25)。Happy learning and terrible assessment [快樂學習與恐怖評量]。China Times [中國時報]，A15
7. (2001).Collins Cobuild English dictionary for advanced learners.Scarborough, England:Harper Collins.
8. Wallinger, L. M. (1997). Foreign language homework from beginning to end: A case study of homework practices in foreign language classes. Unpublished manuscripts, College of William and Mary at Williamsburg, VA..
9. Bada, E.,Okan, Z.(2000).Students' language learning preferences.TESL-EJ,4(3),1-15.
10. Beghetto, R. A.(2005).Preservice teachers' self-judgments of testing taking.The Journal of Educational Research,98(6),376-380.
11. Birdsall, M.(2003).Time saver cross-curricular English activities.Taipei:Shider.
12. Brophy, J.(1987).Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students to learn.Educational Leadership,45(2),40-48.
13. Brown, H. D.(2007).Teaching by principle: An interactive approach to language pedagogy.New York:Pearson Education.
14. Brown, H. D.(2004).Language assessment: Principles and classroom practice.New York:Pearson Education.
15. Chen, Y. M.(2006).Toward student and teacher development: Applying a multiple approach to English classroom assessment.English Teaching & Learning,30(3),1-22.
16. Cheng, H. F.,Dornyei, Z.(2007).The use of motivational strategies in language instruction: The case of EFL teaching in Taiwan.Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching,1(1),153-174.
17. Cohen, A.D.(1994).Assessing language ability in the classroom.Boston, Mass.:Heinle & Heinle.
18. Cool, V. A.,Keith, T. Z.(1991).Testing a model of school learning: Direct and indirect effects on academic achievement.Contemporary Educational Psychology,16,28-44.
19. Cooper, H.(1989).Homework.White Plains, New York:Longman.
20. Cooper, H.(2001).The battle over homework: Common ground for administrators, teachers, and parents.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
21. Epstein, J. L.,Van Voorhis, F. L.(2001).More than minutes: Teachers' roles in designing homework.Educational Psychologist,36(3),181-193.
22. Foyle, H.,Bailey, G.(1988).Homework experiments in social studies: Implications for teaching.Social Education,52(4),292-294.
23. Freeman, D.(ed.),Richards, J. C.(ed.)(1996).Teacher learning in language teaching.New York:Cambridge University Press.
24. Gill, B.,Schlossman, S. L.(2003).Parents and the politics of homework: Some historical perspectives.Teachers College Record,105(5),846-871.
25. Gower, R.,Phillips, D.,Walters, S.(1995).Teaching practice handbook.New York:Heinemann.
26. Green, K. E.(1992).Different opinions on testing between preservice and inservice teachers.The Journal of Educational Research,86,37-42.
27. Harmer, J.(1998).How to teach English.Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex:Addison Wesley Longman.
28. Heaton, J. B.(1990).Writing English language tests.London:Longman.
29. Heaton, J. B.(1991).Classroom testing.London:Longman.
30. Hsieh, L. H.,Hsiao, Y. P.(2004).On the background and assessment perception of elementary school English teachers in Kaohsiung County.The Journal of National Tainan Teachers College,38(1),237-261.
31. Hsu, Y. K.(2003).Researching multiple assessment: Evidence from EFL elementary school classrooms.English Teaching & Learning,28(1),29-60.
32. Ioannou-Georgiou, S.,Pavlou, P.(2003).Assessing young learners.New York:Oxford University Press.
33. Klenowski, V.(2002).Developing portfolios for learning and assessment.New York:Routledge Falmer.
34. Klenowski, V.(2009).Assessment for learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective.Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,16(3),263-268.
35. Lee, J. F.,Pruitt, K. W.(1979).Homework assignments: Classroom games or teaching tools?.Clearinghouse,53,31-35.
36. Marzano, R. J.,Pickering, D. J.(2007).Errors and allegations about research on homework.Phi Delta Kappan,88(7),507-517.
37. Marzano, R. J.,Pickering, D. J.(2007).The case for and against homework.Educational Leadership,March,74-79.
38. May, P.(1997).Exam classes.New York:Oxford University Press.
39. McCalman, L.,Adeyemi, M.(2001).Homework: Pupils' views from Botswana and England.Curriculum and Teaching,16(1),75-86.
40. McKay, P.(2006).Assessing young language learners.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
41. Murphy, J.,Decker, K.(1990).Homework use at the high school level: Implications for principles.NASSP Bulletin,74,40-43.
42. Nunan, D.(1987).The teacher as curriculum developer.Sydney:National Center for English Language Teaching and Research.
43. Paschal, R. A.,Weinstein, T.,Walberg, H. J.(1984).The effects of homework on learning: A quantitative synthesis.Journal of Educational Research,78(2),97-104.
44. Patton, M.Q.、吳芝儀、李奉儒(2005)。質的評鑑與研究。臺北市:桂冠。
45. Rixon, S.(ed.)(2000).Young learners of English: Some research perspectives.Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex:Pearson Education.
46. Sachs, J.,Chan, C.(2003).Dual scaling analysis of Chinese students' conceptions of learning.Educational Psychology,23(2),181-193.
47. Stefanou, C.,Parkes, J.(2003).Effects of classroom assessment on student motivation in fifth-grade science.The Journal of Educational Research,96(3),152-162.
48. Tavares, L.(1998).Changing homework habits: Rethinking attitudes.English Teaching Forum,Jan-Mar,36-37.
49. Thomas, A. H.(1992).Homework: How effective? How much to assign? The need for clear policies.Eugene, OR:Oregon School Study Council.
50. Trautwein, U.,Koller, O.(2003).The relationship between homework and achievement- Still much of a mystery.Educational Psychology Review,15(2),115-145.
51. Tsai, C. H.(2005).Junior college students' perceptions of English vacation homework.English Teaching & Learning,30(1),69-91.
52. Voorhis, E. V.(2003).Interactive homework in middle school: Effects on family involvement and science achievement.The Journal of Educational Research,96(6),323-338.
53. Wallinger, L. M.(1998).The impact of alternative scheduling practices on students' performance in French I. Ph.D. dissertation, College of William and Mary at Williamsburg, VA.Dissertation Abstracts International,59(9),3315A.
54. Wallinger, L. M.(2000).The role of homework in foreign language learning.Foreign Language Annals,33(5),483-497.
55. Warton, P. M.(2001).The forgotten voices in homework: Views of students.Educational Psychologist,36(3),155-165.
56. Xu, J.(2004).Family help and homework management in urban and rural secondary schools.Teachers College Record,106(9),1786-1803.
57. Xu, J.(2005).Purposes for doing homework reported by middle and high school students.The Journal of Educational Research,99(1),46-55.
58. Xu, J.,Corno, L.(2003).Family help and homework management reported by middle school students.The Elementary School Journal,103(5),503-517.
59. Xu, J.,Corno, L.(1998).Case studies of families doing third-grade homework.Teachers College Record,100(2),402-436.
60. Xu, J.,Yuan, R.(2003).Doing homework: Listening to students' , parents' , and teachers' voices in one urban middle school community.School Community Journal,13(2),25-44.
61. Yalden, J.(1987).The communicative syllabus: Evaluation, design and implementation.Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.
62. 何宜康(2006)。學習單的美麗與哀愁。師友月刊，469，78-81。
63. 吳裕益(2002)。多元評量之發展與改進。教育研究月刊，98，18-23。
64. 李坤崇(2004)。多元化教學評量。臺北市:心理。
65. 李坤崇(2002)。多元化教學評量理念與推動策略。教育研究月刊，98，24-36。
66. 周淑卿、陳麗華(2007)。教育改革的挑戰與省思。高雄市:麗文。
67. 林進材(2000)。有效教學─理論與策略。臺北市:五南。
68. 洪文慧(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學英語教育學系英語教學碩士班。
69. 教育部編(2001)。國民中小學英語教學活動設計及評量指引。教育部。
70. 教育部(2001)。教學創新九年一貫課程問題與解答。教育部=Ministry of Education。
71. 郭生玉(2002)。如何落實多元評量。教育研究月刊，98，11-17。
72. 陳仕芳(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺南大學教育學系課程與教學研究所碩士班。
73. 陳秀美(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院兒童英語教育學系英語教學碩士班。
74. 黃政傑編(1997)。教學原理。臺北市:師大書苑。
75. 黃政傑(1997)。當代師資培育的課程教材教法。臺北市:漢文。
76. 詹餘靜(2004)。教師、教學、評量與教材：九年一貫課程國小英與教學探究。國立臺北師範學院學報，17(1)，167-196。
77. 廖曉青(2002)。英語教學法。臺北市:五南。
78. 劉安彥(2003)。教學評量的理論與實用。教育資料與研究，55，100-107。