Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4938–4942

WCES-2010

Negative influence of large scale assessment on language learning

strategies of the Secondary School Certificate (SSC) students
Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasia *, Ayaz Ahmadb, Zafar Iqbal Khattakc
a
PhD Scholar Department of English, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, 60000, Pakistan
b
Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, 23200, Pakistan
c
Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, 23200, Pakistan
Received November 9, 2009; revised December 10, 2009; accepted January 21, 2010

Abstract

A study was conducted to know the negative influence of large scale assessment on language learning strategies of English
learners of Secondary School Certificate (SSC) level. With help of questionnaires and interviews it was known that perceived
objectives of end term examination of English paper replaced the recommended language learning strategies with
unrecommended strategies. Deficient learning, reliance on short cuts, rote learning were identified as some of the outcomes of
this negative influence on the productive language learning. Need of the reform of large scale assessment through the insight
gained from the learning of small scale assessment was pointed out.
© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Keywords: Large scale assessment; language learning strategies; language teaching; english language teaching in Pakistan.

1. Introduction

It is generally believed by Language scholars and experts of education of Pakistan that the condition of ELT in
Pakistan is very poor (Rahman, 2004; Mansoor, 2004; Naim, 2004). Substantial gap exists between the objectives
projected by National Curriculum Document and sum of objectives projected by the learning practices in the schools
and colleges of Pakistan. In Pakistan the sole criterion of the standard of learning proficiency in English is found in
the evaluation outcomes of Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education (BISE) and universities. The
examinations access the educational objective from quite a different standpoint, divorced from the standard provided
in the National Curriculum Document (NCD) and National Education Policy (NEP). This way, examination
standards poses an alternative set of educational goals. For the teachers, students and educational institutions the
sole criterion of good performance is the result of BISEs and Universities. Purpose of this study is to examine nature
and dynamics of the influence of large scale assessment on the language learning strategies of the English learners.

* Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasi. Tel.: +92-321-7372035

E-mail address: gulfrazabbasi@gmail.com

1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.799
 Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasi et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4938–4942 4939

2. Review of Literature

Our examination system produces in students a habit of rote learning (Naim, 2004). Textbooks of English are
poor in quality because of many errors of concepts, pedagogy and printing. The examination system, “encourage
poor learning and teaching methods rewarding rote-learnt answers from prescribed textbooks or guidebooks and
penalizing creative and independent thinking.” (Mansoor, 2004).
Large-scale assessment has decisive influence on the curriculum and teaching methods. These examinations do
not promote the kind of learning that is desired for example in the national standards of US as stated in National
Research Council documents (NRC, 2003). In National Education Policy it is expected that the students at the end
of their secondary level of education would be able to speak English fluently and with good communicative skills
(NEP, 1998-2010). Most of the teachers of English possess a degree in literature, therefore, they can not be
considered competent to teach English as a language (Rahman, 1998).
Dr Oxford has defined LLS as “strategies, (are) the specific behaviours or thoughts learners use to enhance their
language learning.” (Oxford, 1992) In the light of Education Policy of Pakistan (1998-2010) it appears that the
communicative ability and language skills asked in it depend greatly on the LLS for their development because they
allow learners to become more self-directed; and they expand the role of language teachers; and are influenced by a
variety of factors (Oxford, 1990a, p. 9).Oxford has categorised the LLS into six categories. I. Memory (Creating
mental linkages, applying images and sounds, reviewing well and employing action); II. Cognitive (practicing,
receiving and sending messages strategies, analysing and reasoning and creating structure for input and output); III.
Compensation strategies (guessing intelligently and overcoming limitations in speaking and writing); IV.
Metacognitive Strategies (centring learning, arranging and planning learning and evaluating learning); V. Affective
Strategies (lowering anxiety, encouragement, emotions) and V. Social Strategies (asking questions, cooperating with
others and empathy) (Oxford, 1990:17)

3. Hypotheses

1. Large Scale Assessment promotes wastage of the time resources of the learner, leaving insufficient time for
learning language through standard LLS.
2. Large Scale Assessment promotes an affinity to short cuts directed only at better test performance rather
than language learning.
3. Large Scale Assessment blinds learners and teachers to the standard objectives of learning English as
language.
4. Large Scale Assessment makes the learner negligent to the spoken and listening proficiency in English.

4. Research Methodology

Data was collected from a random sample of 231 students and 40 teachers. To make the sample representative,
urban / rural, male / female and government run / private owned school students were included in the sample.
Within this sample 40 students and 20 teachers were interviewed for further details, with the help of semi structured
interviews. Secondary sources such as BISE results of SSC and reports in News papers were.

5. Findings

5.1. English Language Proficiency and Use of LLS in Students

Majority of the respondent were found non-proficient in expressing themselves. 24% were proficient users of
English and 76% were non-proficient in English. Most of the respondent reported memorization of contents as their
most commonly used Language Learning Strategy. Upon explanation 62% (80) of these respondents, who had opted
using memorization, admitted rote learning (for short time use) rather than employing a true cognitive strategy.
4940 Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasi et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4938–4942

Affective strategy like love of the language or reward etc came next in the frequency of respondents. Least value
was given to social factor of language learning strategy.

5.2. Self-Reported Reasons for Under-Performance in the Secondary School Examination

90% of total students were found dissatisfied with the marks of their examination. Of these 39% indicated grammar
as the main cause of their under performance. 28% considered marking of the answer sheet unsatisfactory. And 30%
considered the low quality of guides/notes and poor handwriting as the reason for under performance. Surprisingly,
even the students who thought poor grammar of their sentences, did not find handicap in listening speaking and
lacking the proficiency in reading and creative writing as a serious impediment in getting respectable score in
English language tests of BISE.

5.3. Practice of Speaking in the Class of English Language

87% respondents did not practice listening and speaking at home in the preparation for examination because there
was no question to test them for their linguistic proficiency in speaking and listening.

5.4. Reported Objectives for Teaching English

Majority of teachers admitted basing their decisions in classroom on principle of preparing students for the BISE
arranged large scale assessment. 65% of the teachers reportedly based their teaching strategies on the examination
criterion of BISE Mardan.

5.5. Support for Learners’ Autonomy in Language Classroom

67% of teachers were found unwilling to let the learners have their say in the learning based issues.

5.6. Effect of Examination on Language Learning of Students

60% teachers thought the effect of annual examination on learning as negative. 46% of these thought that it made a
rote learner out of the potential language learners through its emphasis on content knowledge rather than assessing
language proficiency skills.
Figure 1: Present flow of decision in education
 Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasi et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4938–4942 4941

Figure 2: Recommended Procedure for Test Making

6. Recommendations

x Performing need analysis and research in the development of valid and reliable tests.
x Participation of stakeholders in the development of test is essential
x Text books need to be written from linguistic point of view
x Teachers need fresh training and orientation to know about productive language learning strategies.
x Learners need autonomy in classroom to be able to use recommended language learning strategies.
x Learners need comprehensive training in the proper and effective use of language learning strategies.
x Large scale assessment of English language needs reform by introducing features of assessment which
emphasise language acquisition/learning through recommended language learning strategies.
x Immediate arrangement for testing listening / speaking skills is required.
x Paper setting and checking should be performed by a person who is trained in linguistics, educational
assessment and methods of psychometry
x Papers results should include comprehensive feed back to the examinee to let him/her know her weak areas in
language proficiency
x Papers of English need to be based on the assessment of language skills instead of the present practices of
grading learner on the knowledge of content based information.
x Instead of an end-term summative assessment there need to be the introduction of a formative evaluation to
enable the teachers and learners to continually monitor the learning process.

References

Anderson J., Clapham.C., Wall. D (1995) Language Test Construction and Evaluation. Cambridge. CUP
Baker, D. (1989) Language Testing. London. EdwardArnold
Brown, J. (1989). The Second Language Curriculum. CUP.
Cohen, A. (2003). Strategy Training for Second Language Learners. Available at: <http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/0302cohen.html >
15/11/2009.
Hismanoglu, M.(2000). Language Learning Strategies in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VI, No. 8,
August 2000. Available at <http://iteslj.org/Articles/Hismanoglu-Strategies.html> 15/11/2009.
Krashen, S., Terrel, T. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Oxford:Pergamon.
4942 Muhammad Gulfraz Abbasi et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 4938–4942

Mansoor, S. et al. (Ed).2004. Language Policy Planning and Practice: A South Asian Perspective. Ed.. Agha Khan University. OUP. Karachi.
Pakistan
Michael L.(1977). Language Learning Strategies: An Overview for L2 Teachers. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol III, No. 12. December 1997.
Available at: <http://iteslj.org> 05/02/2005.
Ministry of Education.(1998).National Education Policy: 1998-2010. Available at <http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/education-ministry/index.jsp>
05/02/2005.
Ministry of Education.(2009).National Education Policy: 2009. Available at < http://www.moe.gov.pk/nepr/NEP_2009.PDF> 15/11/2009.
Ministry of Education.(2002).National Curriculum Document Class K-X. Ministry of Education, National Bureau of Curriculum, Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad
Ministry of Education.2004. The Development of Education: The National Report of Pakistan.Islamabad. Available at: <
http://www.moe.gov.pk/NationalRepondevedu.pdf> 15/11/2009.
National Research Council (2001). Knowing What Students Know: The science and design of educational assessment. Committee on the
Foundation of Assessment. Board on Testing and Assessment, Centre for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2003). Assessment in Support of Instruction and Learning: Bridging the gap between large-scale and classroom
assessment. Workshop report. Committee on Assessment in Support of Instruction and Learning. Board on Testing and Assessment.
Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
Naim, A. (2004). Changing Education in Pakistan. Daily The News, Islamabad. 30th of June, 2004.
Oxford, R. (2003). Front Page Dialogue “Styles and Strategies” Myths for Language Learning and Teaching. Available at: <
http://www.rubervalmaciel.com/arquivo/materias_aula/atividade/1202532549.doc > 15/11/2009.
Oxford, R. (2003). Language Learning Styles and Strategies: An Overview. Available at:
<http://www.education.umd.edu/EDCI/SeconLangEd/ESOL/People/faculty/D.Oxford/StylesStrategies.doc> 05/02/2005.
Rahman, T.(1999). Language, Education, and Culture.Karachi.OUP.
Rahman, Tariq.1998 Ed. Language and Politics in Pakistan. OUP. Karachi. Pakistan
Spolsky, B. (1987). Condition for Language Learning. London.OUP
Tuckman, W. (1972). Conducting Educational Research.USA. Harcour Brace Jovanovich Inc. 1988.