Learner Centered EFL Exams & Grading: A Classroom Study of Effectiveness

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Jun 10, 2003

Main Article Content

Morgan Lake
Silpakorn University, Thailand

Abstract

The purpose of this Classroom Action Research study was to: 1) refine the definition of the Learner Centered (LC) Learning Model, 2) develop LC Objectives based on this definition for exams and grading, 3) create a new form of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) examination and grading methodology which meet these LC Objectives, 4) measure the effectiveness of this LC exam and grading experience, and 5) compare the effectiveness of this LC experience with traditional exam and grading methods. 118 university undergraduate and graduate learners took a midterm exam (multiple choice or essay), were graded and then surveyed. Even though the majority of the learners in the study were teacher centered and had not experienced this new LC EFL Essay Exam, or this new LC Grading Method before: the learners reported that they were tested and graded more fairly and more accurately, than traditional exam and grading methods. In addition, learners in the study reported this LC EFL Essay Exam and LC Grading Method: supported their independent thinking, assessed knowledge they felt was important, and provided a valuable learning experience.

 

Article Details

How to Cite
Lake, M. (2003). Learner Centered EFL Exams & Grading: A Classroom Study of Effectiveness. Journal of Studies in the English Language, 1, 41–66. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jsel/article/view/21842
Issue
Vol. 1 (2003)
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:  Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.  Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.  Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

Campbell, C., &Kryszewska, H.(2000). Learner-based teaching.London: Oxford University Press.

Davis, G., & Rinvolucri, M. (1999). Ways of doing. London: Cambridge University Press.

Dickenson, L. (1997). Self-instruction in language learning. London: Cambridge University Press.

Dufue, B. (1995). Teaching myself. London: Oxford University Press.

Hadfield, J. (2000). Classroom dynamics. London: Oxford University Press.

Honebein, P. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design(p.11-24). NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Marsland, B. (2000). Lessons from nothing. London: Cambridge University Press.

Office of the Prime Minister. (1999). National Education Act of B.E. 2542. Bangkok: Office of the National Education Commission.

Rambush, N.,& Stoops, J. (1992). The Authentic American Montessori School: A Guide to the Self-Study, Evaluation, and Accreditation of American Schools Committed to Montessori Education. The Commission on Elementary Schools of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools and the American Montessori Society.

Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to learn for the ‘80’s. Charles E. Merrill.Tudor, I. (1997). Learner centerdness as language learning. London: Cambridge University Press.