Impact of formative assessment on students’ motivation in foreign language acquisition

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

IMPACT OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT ON STUDENTS' MOTIVATION IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Natalia Dmitrenko

Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine

Iuliia Budas

Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine

Yulia Koliadych

Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine

Nina Poliarush

Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University, Ukraine

Abstract. The article focuses on introducing formative assessment to the educational process of professionally oriented English communication and the impact of assessment on students' motivation to learn English. In the article, various types of motivation are discussed; high and low levels of formative assessment are presented; the relationship between motivation and assessment in learning English is studied. The model of high and low levels of formative assessment implementation in learning English for professional communication is tested. The levels of students' motivation to English acquisition in the conditions of low and high levels of formative assessment are compared. Special attention is paid to specific pedagogical conditions under which formative assessment has a greater impact on students' motivation. Experimental training was conducted among students of the pedagogical university who study English for professional communication. The authors compare and analyze the results of the motivation tests and diagnostic tests of language proficiency at the pre- and post- stages of experimental training. The study supports the idea about the relationship between students' motivation and their English language proficiency assessment. The results show that a high level of formative assessment can be beneficial for overcoming students' low motivation if students receive immediate feedback, evaluation of their work, teachers' recommendations and support. It is observed that the reasonable integration of students' self-assessment into teachers' formative assessment plays a vital role in increasing students' motivation to English acquisition. According to the study, regular practical implementation of high-level formative assessment methods in English acquisition increases the level of students' motivation and, consequently, the level of students' achievements in mastering professionally oriented English communication.

Keywords: English language acquisition, motivation, English language proficiency, high level of formative assessment, low level of formative assessment, feedback, self-assessment.

Дмітренко Наталя, Будас Юлія, Колядич Юлія, Поляруш Ніна

Вплив формуючого оцінювання на мотивацію студентів у процесі оволодіння англійською мовою

Анотація. Стаття присвячена проблемі застосування формуючого оцінювання у процесі навчання професійно орієнтованого англомовного спілкування і впливу оцінювання на мотивацію студентів до вивчення англійської мови. У статті розглядається різні види мотивації, високий і низький рівні формуючого оцінювання та взаємозв'язок між мотивацією і оцінюванням у процесі вивчення англійської мови. Авторами перевіряється модель застосування високого і низького рівня формуючого оцінювання у процесі вивчення англійської мови для професійного спілкування і порівнюються рівні мотивації до вивчення англійської мови у студентів, які навчалися за низьким і високим рівнем формуючого оцінювання. Особлива увага звертається на конкретні педагогічні умови, за яких формуюче оцінювання має більший вплив на мотивацію студентів. Експериментальне навчання проводилося серед студентів педагогічного університету, які вивчають англійську мову для професійного спілкування. У статті порівняно і проаналізовано результати мотиваційного тесту і зрізу знань студентів з професійно орієнтованого англомовного спілкування, які проводилися на початку і в кінці експериментального навчання. Дослідження підтвердило взаємозв'язок між мотивацією студентів та оцінкою рівня їх знань англійської мови. Доведено, що високий рівень формуючого оцінювання може бути корисним для подолання низької мотивації студентів, якщо студенти отримують своєчасний зворотний зв'язок, оцінку своєї роботи, рекомендації і підтримку викладачів. Поступова інтеграція самооцінки студентів в формуюче оцінювання викладачів також відіграє важливу роль у підвищенні рівня мотивації студентів до вивчення англійської мови. Згідно з опитуванням, регулярне практичне застосування методів високого рівня формуючого оцінювання у процесі вивчення англійської мови підвищують мотивацію студентів, в результаті чого підвищується рівень досягнень студентів в оволодінні професійно орієнтованим англомовним спілкуванням.

Ключові слова: оволодіння англійською мовою, мотивація, англомовна компетентність, високий рівень формуючого оцінювання, низький рівень формуючого оцінювання, зворотній зв 'язок, самооцінювання.

assessment professionally oriented english motivation learn students

Introduction

Cauley and McMillan (2010) differentiate achievement goals as performance goals and mastery goals. Public evaluations of individual abilities and rewarding the best performance are stressed in a performance-goal orientation, while the assessment of students' progress, improvement, developing new skills is emphasized when mastery goals are supported.

Many researchers, who concentrate on the impact of assessment on the motivation for learning, have different ideas as for its value. Though they subscribe to the “central role assessment plays in promoting intrinsic or extrinsic motivation” (A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning, 2002, p. 14), their opinions differ greatly concerning the effect of tests and exams on learners' motivation to master the language. Whereas adherents of the unfavourable role of exams on motivation to learning express their negativity, naming exam anxiety (Crooks, 1988), inability to demonstrate the students' on-going growth (Tsagari, 2004), narrowing the curriculum (Gipps, 1994) and others, their opponents contradict the harmful role of assessment, and give their proofs.

Assessment begins with teachers' educational values, and the target of the language learning surely affects the assessment. What is more, the personality of the evaluator, learners' age, reasons for assessing, types of assessment and time chosen for it correlate and influence both the assessment and the motivation. “Assessment practices have increasingly moved away from objective mastery testing of instructional syllabus content to on-going assessment of effort and contribution learners make to the process of learning.” (Ross, 2005, p. 318).

The definition of assessment largely depends on the researcher's vision of the matter. The overwhelming majority share the common view of assessment as an ongoing process with a variety of participants and techniques used. This process is considered to be crucial in effective instruction. Assessment is a term that “covers any activity in which evidence of learning is collected in a planned and systematic way, and is used to make a judgment about learning” (Assessment and Learning Research Synthesis Group, 2002, p. 1).

However, scholars have various perceptions of what assessment involves. It is a wide-spread vision of assessment nowadays as “a combination of all formal and informal judgments and findings that occur inside and outside the classroom” (Florin, 2010, p. 24).

Bachman (1990) wrote about measurement, test, and evaluation as three main concepts of the assessment process. Considering measurement to be synonymous with assessment, he presented it as the process of “quantifying the characteristics of persons according to explicit procedures and rules” (Bachman, 1990, p. 18). For Bachman, test is a measurement instrument that presents “a specific sample of an individual behaviour” (Bachman, 1990, p. 20). And evaluation is viewed as an amount of “reliable and relevant information” (Bachman, 1990, p. 22).

Witt, Elliotte, Kramer, and Gresham presume that the activities and decisions occurring “during assessment can be thought of as a process components, while the information collected represents content components” (Witt et al., 1994, p. 8).

Florin shares Herrera's opinion of assessment as a wide range of procedure s to get the information about students' knowledge and performance. He also points out that assessment is “a combination of all formal and informal judgments and findings that occur inside and outside a classroom” (Florin, 2010, p. 24). The researcher indicates that assessment is a sum of testing points and a variety of other measurements.

Simultaneously, many opponents (Gipps, 1994; Tsagari, 2004; Hosseini & Ghonsooly, 2017) feel rather sceptical about standardised language tests. They doubt the validity of these tests, their effects, and reasoning. Tests are criticized for evaluating foreign language proficiency at a certain point of time ignoring students' attitudes, interests, goals, and involvement. This scepticism has resulted in new approaches to assessment. Scientists believe assessment can be a tool that helps solve learners' problems. Its practices “can and should vary according to the type of problem that precipitated assessment” (Witt et al., 1994, p. 6). Dylan (2017) talks about assessment as a bridge between learning and teaching. He states that assessment makes it possible for a teacher to see whether the methods achieved the target of learning, and help learners overcome their problems.

Among the most significant recommended principles to assessment National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment (1996) names the fairness, the consistency of assessment with its purpose, equity of assessment with students' opportunities and its soundness, the definite correspondence between the data collected and the consequences of assessment results.

Though Bachman (1990) connected measurement with assessment, he put forward the idea of the reasoning behind the information about learner's level of knowledge. “Evaluation does not have to rely ex clusively on test scores, and test scores are not always evaluative. Tests should be used to motivate students to study more or to help identify gaps in their knowledge base” (Bachman, 1990 as cited in Florin, 2010).

Formative assessment can be interpreted as a data accumulating process of collecting information about students' learning and adjusting the instruction to improve their learning. Ideally, it is “a planned process to the extent that the teacher consciously and constantly absorbs evidence of student performance and then uses this information productively, resulting in increased student motivation and engagement” (Cauley & McMillan, 2010). It is reported that “formative assessment shows students that underperformance is not innate and that improvem ents can be made through targeted changes” (Hanover Research, 2014).

Cauley and McMillan (2010) list several possible formative assessment characteristics. Firstly, they differentiate low-level and high-level formative assessment. Low-level formative assessment (LFA) is mostly standardized, formal, with teachers who are decision-makers. Feedback is usually delayed in time, after instruction and assessment. Instructional tasks are chosen only by a teacher, and they are created on formal base. Students' self-assessment is not taken into account. Motivation is mostly extrinsic. Students consider their success or failure as attributable to external factors. In contrast, high-level formative assessment (HFA), characterized by these scholars, is spontaneous, informal, with varied assessment conducted by teachers and students. Mostly immediate feedback is specific for low achieving students and delayed for higher achieving ones. Tasks are settled by students too and adjustments may be flexible. Interactions between teachers and students are more extensive. Much attention is given to students' self-assessment and it is an integral part of the evaluation. Intrinsic motivation is a typical type. Students consider internal factors, their efforts as responsible for their results.

Methods

Instruments

The validity and reliability of Gardner's test is widely established (Hashwani, 2008; Kristmanson, 2000; Williams et al.,2002). According to Gardner and MacIntyre (1993) the validity of the Attitude / Motivation Test Battery has been supported. The internal consistence reliability was reported to be .91 (Gardner, 2005). The mean reliability of the section `Motivation' was calculated as .92 (motivational intensity: .80, attitude toward learning the target language: .91, desire to learn the target language: 0.84) (Masgoret & Gardner, 1994). In our study the reliability coefficient (Cronbach Alpha) value for the test “Motivation” was also computed to estimate the internal consistency. It was found to be quite high: 0.88. The minimum and maximum possible score on this test range from 30 to 150.

In the instruction, the students of both groups were asked to estimate the degree of their agreement with the test statements, assessing them from one to five points (a five-point Likert scale): 5 - means completely true (strongly agree); 4 - means usually true (agree); 3 - means sometimes true (uncertain/neutral); 2 - means not usually true (disagree); 1 - means never true (strongly disagree). The score range of the questionnaire is the following: 5.00-4.51 means that the level of motivation is very high, 4.50-3.51 - high, 3.50-2.51 - average, 2.50-1.51 - low, 1.50-1.00 - very low.

In the study, the preliminary and final English tests of reading comprehension, taken from Preliminary English Test (PET) (reading comprehension online pr epared tests by Cambridge), were given to the students to witness the initial and final level of students' reading comprehension skill. The total maximum practice test score is 30 (30-20 - high level, 19-13 - average level, 12-1 - low level).

The self-assessment scales from Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) as a source for students' self-assessment of English skills were used as well as the following learning materials: “Educational Psychology”, “English for Mathematics” (Dmitrenko, 2011; 2018).

Research Design

The process of the study can be presented as the following scheme: Two-part Questionnaire (Part 1 - Personal Data, Self-Assessment of English Skills, Interview; Part 2 - The Attitude / Motivation Test Battery) ^ Preliminary English Test (PET Reading Comprehension) ^ Sandwich Model ^ Final Test (PET Reading Comprehension) ^ The Attitude /Motivation Test Battery.

At the initial phase of the study the students were given a two-part questionnaire, which included personal information, scales of English skills selfassessment, and the section “Motivation” from the Attitude / Motivation Test Battery. To obtain some information about students' English learning background, they were also interviewed about any opportunities to speak English in their everyday life outside the classroom, possibilities to use English in their future workplace, the reasons that forced them to study English or supported them in learning, the influence of teachers' attitude over their desire to learn English, the necessity to get more feedback from their teacher of English. The next step was to do the reading comprehension part of PET.

The mediation (experimental) phase of the study was designed as the Sandwich model originally introduced by Sternberg and Grigorenko (as cited in Poehner, 2008). It was intended to allocate 30 minutes of the HFA group's time to reading comprehension using the high-level formative assessment during the mediation phase. The following stages were used:

1: after reading the text the students did various grammar and vocabulary tasks to test their reading comprehension. In LFA groups it was the tutor who checked and scored the test results, giving individual comments of errors and recommendations in written form after a prolonged period. He returned the papers to the learners during the next lesson, whereas in the HFA groups the immediate post-test discussion on students' doubts was welcomed. The tutor gave a chance to the students to find the correct answer by themselves. For this purpose, the teacher shared a blank response sheet and grouped students to discuss the test and present the agreed paper. Any person, interested in the subsequent to the test feedback, received it. The mediator's task was to offer immediate feedback; to brainstorm the problem points, give explanations, hints, prompts, suggestions; to ask for students' arguments over their choice; to provide different learning methods mostly with critical thinking aloud. The students' self-assessment was taken into account while marking the papers. The students were encouraged to contribute their individual tasks and write similar tests at home.

2: in a week the learners were given a reading comprehension test at the lesson and the mediator checked and scored the test results, but the discussion of results and errors was omitted during that lesson.

The procedure was rerun 5 times in the HFA group. The students of the LFA group were also given reading comprehension tests but only some elements, such as delayed feedback, of the low-level formative assessment were observed. Students' self-assessment was not taken into account.

At the final phase of the study, the students were given the final test (PET Reading Comprehension) and the same 30 items from the section “Motivation” of the Attitude / Motivation Test Battery.

Results

The results of students' self-assessment scales (CEFR) showed that 55 students consider themselves as basic users of language (A1, A2) and 25 of students estimate themselves as independent users (B1, B2).

The informal interview results demonstrated that students had never used English as a means of communication outside the classroom and disregarded the benefits of its learning. The majority (65 students) also indicated that they had never been abroad. For 30 students, the possibilities of using English in their future workplace were rather obscure, though all participants agreed that in the modern society a person without working knowledge of at least one foreign language is at a disadvantage. Only the threat of a final test or exam failure encouraged 67 students to learn a foreign language continuously during the course. Interviews with the students demonstrated that constant teachers' support influenced their desire to learn English greatly (20 students) and 72 students wanted to get more feedback from their teacher of English.

A comparison of the preliminary and final test (PET reading comprehension) results in two groups showed that at the initial phase the results of two groups differ insignificantly but at the final phase the students of the experimental HFA group obtained higher scores (Table 1).

Table 1

Results of Preliminary and Final English Tests

Also, the students were asked to respond to the questionnaire (The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery) once again to juxtapose changes in the level of their motivation toward ESL learning if there were any. The data of the questionnaire were quantified by coding the answers into data in a scale of 1 - 5 and downloaded into the statistical programme package (Table 2).

Table 2

Mean Scores and Standard Deviation of the Motivational Scales

Table 2 shows that in the control LFA group the mean scores and standard deviation of the motivational scales changed fairly in the observed period. The increasing results in the experimental HFA group could be attributed to the formative assessment scheme developed among students during the study.

The final results of descriptive statistics of the experimental HFA and control LFA groups are presented in Table 3.

Table 3

The Results of Descriptive Statistics

The students of the experimental HFA group reported being more motivated to nglish acquisition in obtained the average level of motivation in comparison with the lower level of the students in the control LFA group. In the HFA group, the smaller standard deviation shows that the values are more concentrated around the mean.

To ascertain whether the obtained results in the HFA group are obvious statistically and how variables (grades of English test and scores of motivational test) are correlated, we applied Pearson's correlation coefficient: r = .9780. The positive correlation shows a strong relationship between the two variables. The p-value is .01494 that signifies a noticeable correlation between variables. The results suggest that high-level formative assessment procedure could be helpful in predicting motivation toward professionally oriented English communication.

Discussion

The survey results can be related to regular high-level formative assessment in the process of English learning. It helped students achieve better results in their language proficiency which subsequently affected their motivation to learn a foreign language. It has been found out that implemented high -level formative assessment practices such as immediate brainstorming of students' doubts about their mistakes, their self-assessment, extensive interactions with the tu tor have increased students' level of English achievements and of their certitude that efforts are responsible for their outcomes. The same results of positive effects of formative assessment on students' proficiency were proved by other studies (Chauncey, 2009; Clark, 2013; Ross, 2005; Yin, 2005).

The findings of the study showed that after introducing high -level formative assessment the experimental (HFA) group students' desire to learn English increased to the average level; their attitudes toward learning English were on the increase; they got closer to the average level of motivational intensity. At the same time, the results of three motivational subscales of the control group students didn't change significantly.

The students' good achievement in English is reported to have a significant correlation with the motivation shown by statistical data. The correlation value between two variables is considered rather strong and might be understood as motivated individuals would be goal-directed and persistent in their effort for achieving learning goals that gives support for the arguments of Gardner (2001). The relationship is significant and was at average level. The findings of empirical studies conducted by Cauley and McMillan (2010), Gardner, Lalonde, Moorcroft and Evers (1987), Gardner (2001) agree with the findings in this study that the variable of achievement was strongly related with motivation.

At the same time, the analysis of students' self-assessment scales results demonstrates that 54 second year students have not reached the B1 level of English proficiency. Some students have so poor knowledge of the language that they experience extreme difficulties even in reading. The majority of them come from rural areas of Ukraine where English is poorly taught or neglected. These students find learning English especially tedious, useless and difficult. Being in the same group with students, already possessing B1 or A2 level, is extremely discouraging for them. It is arduous for an educator to motivate these students and properly assess them as incorrect assessment can ruin even these students' weak desire to learn English. Inappropriate evaluation of such students' efforts makes them feel like failures.

The results of the informal interview indicated that students use English in their everyday life outside the classroom very rarely. Most of them have no plans to use English in their future workplace and the main motive to learn English is to pass an exam at the end of the course. It may be sorrowfully concluded that Ukrainian students are mostly pulled by extrinsic motivation. The determination of students to master the language immensely subsides if there is no high -level formative assessment in the educational process.

The same ordeal is with the students who demonstrate higher level of the language proficiency. The educator should be very careful while assessing such learners because there is an ample possibility for these students to slack and be dissuaded. If the teacher follows the pattern of formative assessment and evaluates students' on-going progress, learners' achievement in mastering the language, it may cause misunderstanding in assessment. Some students may tend to juxtapose their level of knowledge with that of their peers. Misinterpreting tutors' evaluation, they may protest against its unfairness. The research study has made it clear that the main principles of formative assessment should be introduced to students at the beginning of the course, and clarified later again if it is necessary. Students should be explained that not their level of English proficiency is taken into account, but their achievements and improvement in mastering the language matter. Such kind of assessment gives hope to those students who lack the necessary knowledge and motivates to go on working harder those who are called independent users.

Thus, one more thing is of great importance for the beneficial use of formative assessment. The study supported the idea of creating a positive atmosphere for promoting formative assessment. A supportive, friendly atmosphere is essential for using high-level formative assessment for the sake of increasing students' motivation, and therefore their foreign language proficiency.

In our opinion, the high-level formative assessment of foreign language proficiency can stir learners' motivation if teachers make evident for students that their on-going growth is relevant and encouraged.

Teachers, creating a positive atmosphere of support in class, should explain the role of assessment for learning, promote students' interest in learning, and accentuate the importance of on-going progress instead of grade significance. The feedback is more beneficial if the information obtained during the assessment is used by the teacher to reschedule or re-teach the material, and if the student is willing to hear it and take into account. Teachers explain tricky grammar but the same should be done concerning the assessment. A lively discussion about using assessment for learning may diminish the impact of grades on students. If they know the exact rules, time and system of it, they are more likely to follow and respond to it. It is useful to emphasize students' achievement, stressing that it is impossible to master the language without making mistakes.

Comparing study results, it should be mentioned that students of the experimental groups, who had high-level formative assessment during the periods of English lessons, have manifested the higher level of motivation while being tested and interviewed. Our observation shows that some of students have become more hard-working, diligent, and responsible. They tend towards attending classes more regularly, being more inquisitive, doing their home assignments on time, and participating in discussions, regular reflection, and self-assessment. Students of control groups, who are faced with low-level formative assessment, might be more relaxed, unpunctual and irresponsible.

As a result, the implementation of interaction entailed hints, prompts, questions, suggestions, explanations, and elements of problem-based learning during the high- level formative assessment enhance students' motivation for English learning.

Conclusions

Our survey focused on formative assessment aspects which we considered to be beneficial for increasing motivation and developing foreign language proficiency. The principal findings of the present study have provided support for the idea that high-level formative assessment plays a meaningful role in developing students' achievement motivation which has a noticeable impact on improving their foreign language proficiency. Learners' foreign language proficiency and their motivation are interrelated and can be enhanced not only with efforts students are ready to invest in mastering the language but with tutor's assessment proceedings. Students' helplessness and demotivating feelings can be overcome with such characteristics of high-level formative assessment as namely teachers' support, immediate spontaneous feedback (whenever possible), appreciation of students' efforts, guidance about what should be done to achieve expected level of foreign language proficiency, the incorporation of students' self-assessment into the tutor's evaluation. To motivate students, assessment of foreign language proficiency should recognize the diversity of learners, direct them in their efforts to master the language, provide positive feedback and appreciation of work done. While a ssessing students' foreign language proficiency it is necessary to ponder over the positive and negative impact of it on their motivation, and modify its type. Though being beneficial such types as selfassessment and interactive feedback may sometimes emb arrass students who are too sensitive to criticism.

Thus, according to the results of the study, the students, who underwent the high-level formative assessment procedure, showed the higher level of motivation toward ESL learning than the students who were not taught with the same procedure. The implementation of the high-level formative assessment demonstrates a significant difference in students' motivation and a positive interrelationship between having high-level formative assessment procedure and motivated learners.

References

A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning. (2002). Review conducted by the Assessment and Learning Research Synthesis Group. http://www.storre.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/19607/1/SysRevImpSummativeAssessment2002. pdf.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative assessment Techniques to Support Student Motivation and Achievement. The Clearing House, 83 (1), 1-6.

Chauncey, P. D. (2009). Perceptions and attitudes of formative assessments in middle-school science classes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). https://adsabs.harvard.edu

Clark, K. P. (2013). The effects of formative assessment instructional practices on student academic growth and achievement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3562119)

Council of Europe. (2001). A Common European Framework of Reference for Languages Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.

Crowl, T., Kaminsky, S., Podell, D. (1997). Educational Psychology. Windowson Teaching. Brown and Benchmark publishers.

Dmitrenko, N. (2011). Educational Psychology. Vinnytsia: Vinnytsia State Pedagogical University.

Dmitrenko, N. (2016). The implementation of problem-based learning in Ukrainian higher educational institutions. Advanced Education, 5, 28-35. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.61834

Dmitrenko, N. (2018). English for Mathematics. Vinnytsia: Vinnytsia State Pedagogical University.

Dmitrenko, N. Ye. (Ed.). (2017). Problem-based learning in teaching English as a foreign language: theoretical and practical issues. Vinnytsia: FOP T. P. Baranovs'ka.

Dylan, W. (2017). Assessment: the Bridge between Teaching and Learning. Voices from the Middle, 21 (2), 15-20.

Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning. (2nd ed.) Corwin Press.

Florin, M. M. (2010). Assessing English Language Learners in the Content Areas: a research-into- practice guide. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.8912915.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). The Attitude Motivation Test Battery: Technical Report 1.University of Western Ontario: London.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London, UK: Edward Arnold Publishers.

Gardner, R. C. (2001). Language Learning Motivation: The Student, the Teacher, and the Researcher. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 6(1), 1-18.

Gardner, R. C. (2005). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics. London and Ontario. http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/

Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N., Moorcroft, R., & Evers, F. T. (1987). Second language attrition: The role of motivation and use. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 6(1), 29-47.

Gardner, R. C., & McIntyre, P. D. (1993). On the measurement of affective variables in second language learning. Language Learning, 43(2), 157-194.

Geen, R. G. (1995). Human motivation: a social psychological approach. Pacific Grove, Calif: Brooks / Cole Pub.

Gipps, C. V. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203486009.

Hanover Research. (2014). The Impact of Formative Assessment and Learning Intentions on Student Achievement. http://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/The-Impact-of-Formative-Assessment-and-Learning-Intentions-on-Student-Achievement.pdf.

Harmer, J. (2010). How to Teach English. Sixth impression, Pearson Education Limited.

Hashwani, M. S. (2008). Students' attitudes, motivation and anxiety towards English language learning. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 2(2), 121-144.

Herrera, G. H., Murry, K. G., & Cabral, R. M. (2007). Assessment Accommodations for Classroom Teachers of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students. Boston: Pearson.

Hosseini, H., & Ghonsooly, B. (2017). Integrating assessment and instruction: dynamic assessment and its criticisms examined. Advanced Education, 7, 9-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.20535/2410- 8286.84207

Kincal, R. Y., & Ozan, C. (2018). Effects of Formative Assessment on Prospective Teachers' Achievement, Attitude and Self-Regulation Skills. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(2), 77-92. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2018.139.6

Kristmanson, P. (2000). Affect in the second language classroom: How to create an emotional climate. Reflexions, 19(2), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-11-8

Kukla, A. (1972). Foundations of an Attributional Theory of Performance. Psychological Review, 79, 454-470.

Lavrysh, Yu. (2016). Peer and self-assessment at ESP classes: case study. Advances Education, 6, 60-68 https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.85351.

Masgoret, A. M., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). Attitudes, motivation and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and Associates. University of Western Ontario.

McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1958). A scoring manual for the achievement motive. In J. W. Atkinson (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action, and society (pp. 179204). Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.

Measuring What Counts. A Conceptual Guide for Mathematics Assessment. (1993). National Research Council; Mathematical Sciences Education Board. Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/2235.

National Science Education Standards (1996). National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment, National Research Council. Washington, DC.

http://www.csun.edu/science/ref/curriculum/reforms/nses/nses-complete.pdf.

Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr166oa

Popham, J. (2006). Defining and Enhancing Formative Assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Large-Scale Assessment Conference, Council of Chief State School Officers, San Francisco, C A.

http://www.cpre.org/ccii/images/stories/ccii pdfs/defining%20formative%20assessment pop ham.pdf.

Ross, S. J. (2005). The Impact of Assessment Method on Foreign Language Proficiency Growth. Applied Linguistics 26(3), 317-342.

Scriven, M. S. (1967). The Methodology of Evaluation. In Ralph Tyler, Robert Gagne, and Michael Scriven (Eds.). Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation (39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Tomak, T., & Sendula-Pavelic, M. (2017). Motivation towards studying English for specific purpose among students of medical and healthcare studies. JAHR, 8/2(16), 151-170.

Tsagari, D. (2004). Is here life beyond language testing? An introduction to alternative language testing. Centre for Research in Language Education, CRILE Working Papers, 58, 1-23.

Weiner, B. (1972). Attribution theory, Achievement Motivation, and the Educational Process. Review of Educational Research, 42(2), 203-215.

https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042002203.

Williams, M., Burden, R., & Lanvers, U. (2002). French is the language of love and stuff: Student perceptions of issues related to motivation in learning a foreign language. British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 503-528.

Witt, J. C., Elliott, S. N., Kramer, J. J., & Gresham, F. M. (1994). Assessment of Children. Fundamental Methods and Practices. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown and Benchmark Publishers.

Wood, S. E., & Wood, E. G. (1999). The World of Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Yin, Y. (2005). The influence of formative assessments on student motivation, achievement, and conceptual change. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3186430)

Zoghi, M., & Malmeer, E. (2013). The Effect of Dynamic Assessment a EFL Learners' Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(3), 584-594. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.3.584-591

Размещено на Allbest.ru