Assessment procedures

All five teachers shared the idea of dividing language ability into writing, speaking, listening and reading skills in assessment. Two of the teachers reported that they had made efforts to emphasize all skills equally in assessment and for example in exams they test all four skills. The skills were not, however, equally present in pupils’ portfolio work as the teachers had different practices. Ulla and Tarja told that their pupils’ ELPs consist mostly of written work but the other skills are then assessed in other ways. Osmo, on the other hand said that if there are for example three pieces of work in a pupil’s ELP, at least one of them has to be an oral production. Eila and Tarja emphasised that the ready-made exams

provided by the different publishers of teaching and learning materials do not cover all skills equally but teachers need to pay attention to versatile assessment.

Furthermore, Anna-Maija pointed out that different pupils have strengths in different skills. Thus, as Eila’s comment shows, assessment has to include all aspect of language learning:

(4) … pitäis olla kaikista näistä [puhumisen, kirjoittamisen, lukemisen ja kuuntelun taidot]

opettajalla sit se mistä arvioidaan ja sit vielä ne opiskelutaidot ja sitte vielä se kulttuuri…

…a teacher should have a record of all of these [speaking, writing, listening and reading skills] and then also of learning skills and then also culture… (Eila)

In addition to the ELP, the teachers use other assessment methods. They all (5/5) reported that they use summative tests, which supports the claim made earlier in the present study about the dominating role of exams in Finnish schools (see e.g.

Vähäsarja 2014). Nevertheless, most teachers (3/5) said that they had either reduced the amount of exams per year or replaced some of the written exams by for example oral exams. Indeed, oral exams or observations of oral tasks were used by all five teachers as well. Only Osmo reported organising actual oral exams where pupils answer the teacher’s questions, interview each other and have guided dialogues in pairs, whereas the rest of the teachers told that they assess oral skills only by observing and listening to their pupils during lessons.

Tarja, for example, mentioned that sometimes she tells her pupils that she is now going to walk around in the classroom and observe the pupils’ oral skills.

According to her, this tends to motivate pupils to do the given tasks properly since often pupils have a quite relaxed attitude towards speaking activities. They tend to consider speaking activities as ‘free time’.

The teachers’ practices of assessing oral skills actually embrace the new assessment culture as the assessments are embedded in the instructions and in the classroom activities. The teachers observe their pupils while they are engaged in meaningful conversations.

Thus, none of the teachers used only portfolio work in assessment, and speaking skills were often excluded from the ELP work. Each teacher used the ELP a bit differently. Ulla told that her pupils’ portfolios include both written work and exams, and thus, the pupils have all their assessment material, except for oral tasks, in their ELPs. The other teachers’ seemed to conduct ELP work besides exams and other assessment methods, at least at the moment of the interview.

Their pupils did not all have physical portfolios but they executed different assignments according to the principles of the ELP. Indeed, assessment methods and tasks can be used in various ways. Tarja illustrates this idea well in her comment:

(5) …ei sen välttämättä tarvi olla kielisalkkua jos sä teetät kirjotelman, mutta parhaimmillaan siihen liittyy ne, niinku ne kielisalkun vaiheet, että on sitä valinnanvapautta ja seurataan sitä prosessia ja sit arvioidaan porukalla…

… a piece of writing does not necessarily have to be a part of the ELP but in an ideal situation it involves the, like, the phases of the ELP, so that there is freedom of choice and the process is monitored and assessed together… (Tarja)

Therefore, no task or method is a part of the ELP automatically, but again, it is the implementation and use of the task which makes it either ‘normal’ assessment or ELP assessment. The teachers clearly aim to assess their pupils diversely and assess also other skills than only language ability. When assessing their pupils’

ELP work, many of the teachers (3/5) reported that they view the whole process and assess not only the pupils’ language skills but also the way how the whole process was conducted. The other two teachers mentioned also that the pupils’

study and learning skills affect the assessment.

The teachers were also asked about the nature of their assessment processes, that is, what their assessment is like. One clear pattern arose from the teachers’

answers. The teachers assess and give written feedback periodically, for example when a course finishes or when pupils have returned a written assignment, whereas all teachers assess their pupils’ performances orally and continuously during lessons. The teachers have discussions, give feedback and guide their

pupils continuously. Eila particularly emphasised that she aims to give encouraging feedback to her pupils. Thus, it appears that the teachers’ feedback practices aim at enhancing their pupils’ learning. The reason for giving written feedback only periodically is certainly practical as it takes more time than oral feedback which can be for example an encouraging comment or a piece of advice given in class.