Evaluation

Evaluation as we all know is something that we do as part of our

everyday lives. If we are involved in any activity, we normally know
which aspect of it is going well and which is not and why. We can
then say that we are evaluating the activity.
In the classroom too, if you ask yourself the question, ‘Did all
students participate in the class? or Did some students find it
difficult?’ you probably know the answer. If you do, then you have
been evaluating your own teaching.
Evaluation, then, is quite a natural activity, something that we
normally do as a part of our everyday work. This we do consciously
or unconsciously and formally or informally. It is not something
that we always do consciously and systematically.
It is commonly believed that evaluation is the same as testing and
that when students are taking a test or exam, we are evaluating
them.
 Testing is only one aspect of evaluation and that evaluation
involves more than just testing student outcomes. When we carry
out assessment or administer a test, we measure the performance
of students and the results of such a procedure may determine
whether a learner moves into a higher class or may inform us how
well s/he has performed in the test. Assessment is also made
towards the end of a course to find out what the learner has
learnt. It therefore has a limited perspective with focus on the
product of learning, while evaluation focuses on the means and is
intended to serve the learning process.
A teaching-learning context includes all the factors that contribute to
the learning process such as the syllabus/objectives, materials,
methodology, teacher input/performance and student
input/performance. These are all part of the curriculum and must
be evaluated to get a complete, holistic picture of the whole
process.
Therefore evaluation involves examining the various aspects of the
teaching-learning process to get a better understanding of what is
not effective, what is more effective and what appears to be of no
use at all. In order to do this, evaluation must focus on both the
means(process) and the product of the teaching-learning process.
Evaluation that focuses on monitoring the on-going development of a
course is known as formative evaluation. Such an evaluation
involves getting information/feedback about the various aspects
of the programme, during the course itself.
On the other hand, Summative evaluation focuses on the overall
outcome i.e., the end product of a programme which usually
tends to involve tests and measurements. Information from
evaluation is usually used to decide whether students have passed
the course or not, as in our final exams.
 How should we evaluate
It is desirable that we study as many factors as possible that contribute to
teaching-learning in order to get a holistic picture of the situation. One
point that emerges when we talk about the on going nature of teaching
and evaluation is that both are inextricably linked with each other and
that one feeds into the other. In fact, it is difficult to say when one stops
and the other begins. Therefore one significant feature of classroom
evaluation which is essentially within a formative mode is that of
feedback.
We are perhaps only too familiar with how even class tests/exams (of
language ability) have always tended to serve the function of summative
assessments. That is, scores on a 100 mark paper pencil test are
awarded for tasks which only reflect a product orientation. Qualitative
descriptions focussing on on-the-way skills or on the different steps the
learner takes to complete the task are seldom a part of a class test.
Discussions of how a student has performed, where s/he has gone
wrong and why, what will fetch a better score i.e., how exactly s/he can
improve the skill, get a low priority compared to the main job of
teachers, as we very well know , is syllabus completion!
Giving feedback for developing language skills seems only secondary
and incidental. On the contrary we are here stressing the utmost
value of feedback for evaluation in the classroom.
The second question that arises is that of the modes or means we
should adopt for evaluating the different factors. Many of us use
these quite often in our day-to-day teaching. These could be
informal as well as formal means of evaluation. What are the
different modes available to the teacher? Classroom observations,
diaries, journals, questionnaires, checklists, quizzes, tests etc. are
all we know. These could be broadly seen as measurement-based
methods, e.g. tests, quizzes, checklists; and descriptive data-based
methods e.g. classroom observations, diaries, journals. These
could be used to evaluate any of the factors affecting classroom
processes. For example, the teacher might want to evaluate
his/her own teaching – the kinds of interventions/inputs s/he
provides – for learning to happen. Or s/he may look at the
interactions/processes that are generated as a result of the inputs.
 Testing Language Ability
Testing involves, quantification of attitudes and abilities, sometimes
called traits or constructs, which can only be observed indirectly.
These attitudes include characteristics such as aptitude,
intelligence, motivation, field dependence, independent attitude,
native language, fluency in speaking and achievement in reading
comprehension.
Knowing how well a learner has performed or learned in a
programme of study is an integral part of education. In fact
without a proper knowledge of where the learner was, how far
s/he has got, how far s/he can go, s/he won’t be encouraged to
continue. Therefore testing/appraisal or stock-taking is inextricably
linked with learning teaching. This is also known as Achievement
Testing.
 Types of Test
1) Summative/Final exams
2) Progress Tests
3) Proficiency Tests
4) Entry/Placement Tests
5) Diagnostic Tests

Summative/Final exams: are administered at the end of a course to

find out student achievement i.e., how much and how well
students have learnt to use the language. While these exams are
effective for certification purposes and to decide whether
students can move on to a higher level, a lot of information that a
summative test can provide is often wasted, because it does not
feedback into the learning process. These tests put a lot of stress
on teachers and students and may not tap the full potential of
students.
Progress Test: Another kind of achievement test which aims to find
out, on an on-going basis, information about how well classes as a
whole and individual students have worked in the test. These in
our school/college contexts are the unit tests, half yearly/annual
exams which are class based and which teachers conduct during
the course. These can provide a great deal of information about
the objectives(how realistic they are), materials used (appropriacy,
interest, challenge), methodology/strategies used (techniques,
class organisation, interaction) and student outcomes (sub-skills,
writing/reading strategies) not only to the teacher but also to the
student when linked with self-assessment, feedback can help
learners to identify their own problems and to set their own goals
for the future.
Proficiency tests: aim to describe what students are
capable of doing regardless of any training they might
have had in the language. They enable students to have
some proof of their ability which other
Boards/Universities/Potential employers can use for
their own purposes. Although the tests are not based on
the content of a particular course, they may exercise
considerable influence over the method and content of
language courses in general and on courses that are
taught for such professional tests. For example, coaching
classes for trainning learners in taking, say, the Test of
English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) or the
International English Language Testing System (IELTS ),
may have a beneficial or a harmful backwash effect,
depending on the content and format of the test.
Entry/Placement tests: will indicate at which level a
learner will learn most effectively in a situation where
there are different levels and streams. The aim is to
produce groups which are homogenous so that teacher
time can be used most efficiently. However, the need for
these tests can be questioned on the grounds that
students learn best where there are learners of different
abilities in a class which can be exploited through
cooperative/collaborative learning .
Diagnostic tests: as the name suggests, are used to find
out students’ problem areas as well as areas of
strength. Diagnostic information is vital for teachers in
order to design further remedial activities. This
information can also be useful for learners as they can
analyze their own strengths and weaknesses.
 General Considerations in Testing
• Bias for test
• Test those abilities that you want to develop in
class.
• Make tests as direct as possible
• Make testing criterion-referenced.
• Grade tests wherever possible.
• Ensure that the testing method/format is familiar
to students.