|
|
|
| 2019年度 異文化言語教育評価論 |
CH5 The Advantages of Interact
5.1
Introduction
5.2
The National Wide Teacher Survey
5.3
Advantages of Interact─Survey Data
5.4
Advantages of Interact─Interviews
5.5
Conclusion
5.1 Introduction
n The main purpose of this
chapter:
To know how teachers and
stakeholders think about the usefulness of Interact
n National wide teacher survey and interview
n Paper-based national wide
teacher survey
Participants: Teachers
who taught international languages at New Zealand (Chinese, French, German,
Japanese and Spanish)
n Interview
Participants: Teachers
who had been using Interact since its
introduction
5.2 The National Wide Teacher
Survey
5.2.1 Basic information of the
survey
n Number of Survey
respondents and Numbers of NCEA students
n Number of Respondents
using/not using interact
5.2.2 Perceived Relativeness of
Interact and Converse
n Comparison between Interact and Converse assessment from 4 perspectives
l Validity and reliability
l Authenticity and
interactiveness
l Impact
l Practicality
n Results
n The Tables showed that:
l Interact to be a more valid and
reliable assessment than converse
l Interact to be more authentic
and interactive than converse
l Interact to be more considerably
less practical to administer than converse
l Both assessment types
were regarded as equally stressful for students (see measure 7)
n Further Analyses from
three perspectives
l The strengthens of
differences of response across each measure
l Whether principal
language taught influences teachers perceptions of difference
l Whether using or not
using interact influences teachers perceptions of difference
n The strengthens of
differences of response across each measure
Those
responses fall to the left of centre indicate a perception that converse
outperformed interact.
l The Tables showed that:
è The majority of the
responses for measure 1-8 fall to the right of the midline: interact
outperformed converse assessment
è The majority of teachers
considered interact to be an
improvement over converse on all measures of usefulness apart from practicality
(see measure 9 and 10)
n Whether principal language taught
influences teachers perceptions of difference
The
results showed that when the variable of interest was principle language
taught, the differences were not statistically significant.
è Language taught made no
difference to teachers’ perceptions of the relative usefulness of interact
compared to converse
n Whether using or not using interact influences
teachers perceptions of difference
The
results showed that respondents who were using interact perceived its benefits over converse more favorably and judged its cost in terms of
practicality less harshly.
Discussion
point:
According
to the results of the survey, do you agree that Interact assessments are indeed better than Converse assessments? Why?