IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jcallt/v12y2022i1p1-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preservice and In-Service EFL Teachers' Assessment Preferences: Can Digitized Formative Assessment Make a Difference?

Author

Listed:
  • Marwa F. Hafour

    (Tanta University, Egypt)

Abstract

In an authentic class experience, preservice (N = 54) and in-service (N = 65) EFL teachers were assigned digitized formative assessment tasks, and their preferences were assessed using an assessment preferences questionnaire, with both open- and closed-ended questions. Following the pretest-posttest mixed-method design, data were collected and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Quantitative findings revealed that, though the variety of their preferences increased, both groups had similar preferences after the intervention. Thematic analysis of their responses showed that most preservice and in-service teachers preferred online assessment methods to traditional and formative ones. With respect to the reasons they mentioned for selecting or avoiding a particular method, in-service teachers tended to be more practical and time-oriented than preservice ones, who were more precautious about the intricacies of preparing, responding, and reviewing the assessment task. Both groups also shared a number of emotional reasons and even prioritized them over all the other reasons.

Suggested Citation

  • Marwa F. Hafour, 2022. "Preservice and In-Service EFL Teachers' Assessment Preferences: Can Digitized Formative Assessment Make a Difference?," International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), IGI Global, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jcallt:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:1-20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJCALLT.309098
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jcallt:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:1-20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.