rating criteria

Abstract: Over the last few decades, several aspects of pragmatic knowledge and its effects on teaching and learning a second language (L2) have been explored in many studies. However, among various studies, the area of interlanguage pragmatic (ILP) assessment is quite novel issue and many features of it have remained unnoticed. As ILP assessment has received more attention recently, the necessity of investigation on the EFL teachers’ rating criteria for rating various speech acts has become important. In this respect, the present study aimed to investigate the native and non-native EFL teachers’ rating scores and criteria regarding the speech act of request. To this end, 50 American ESL teachers and 50 Iranian EFL teachers participated to rate the EFL learners’ responses to video-prompted Discourse Completion Tests (DCTs) regarding the speech act of request. Raters were supposed to rate the EFL learners’ responses and mention their criteria for assessment. The results of the content analysis of raters’ comments revealed nine criteria that they considered in their assessment. Moreover, the result of the t-test and chi-square analyses of raters’ rating scores and criteria proved that there are significant differences between native and non-native EFL teachers’ rating pattern. The results of this study also shed light on importance of sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic features in native and non-native teachers’ pragmatics rating, which can have several implications for L2 teachers, learners, and material developers.

The current study attempted qualitatively to explore and compare the qualities that native and Iranian English teachers (with and without related educational backgrounds) attend to while rating their students' oral productions in the classroom context. In doing so, the perceptions of 19 native English teachers (9 graduates in TEFL and 10 graduates in other majors) along with 18 Iranian English teachers (10 graduates in TEFL and 8 graduates in other majors) were sought through semi-structured interviews. The data were collected after the outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19) disease in 2020, which gave the researchers no choice but to look for haphazard cases with specific features in social networks. The recorded interviews were analyzed attentively through content analysis. The findings indicated that although all native and non-native respondents focused intensively on the structural features of language in general while rating oral interviews, they had notably different views regarding some sub-features within each category. Further results showed that the native and non-native TEFL-graduate teachers, unlike their peers with unrelated educational backgrounds, also gave credits to several message-based and pragmatic aspects of oral production. The findings have practical implications for researchers, pre-service and in-service teachers, and teacher educators.

As a formative assessment procedure, self-assessment aims to converge learners’ and teachers’ views in assessment. Hence, reducing the perceptual mismatches between the learners’ and the teachers’ assessment would positively affect the learning process. For this aim, the present study investigated to what extent the learners’ assessment of their writing before and after being provided with a list of rating criteria, agrees that of their teachers. Therefore, a body of 6 EFL writing teachers and 27 EFL learners participated in this study. The learners were asked to rate their writing before and after being provided with rating criteria developed by the researchers. The teachers also rated the students’ writings following the same criteria. The obtained results showed a significant difference between the students' scores on the first and second assessment occasions. The teachers’ and the students’ assessment on the second time also were found to significantly correlate. Moreover, the analysis of the students’ comments showed that while they rated their writing on some limited aspects of writing in the first rating occasion, they assessed their essays using more components in the second assessment phase. Overall, the findings revealed that providing the learners with rating criteria would not only reduce the perceptual mistaches between the students’ and the teachers’ assessment but through involving the students’ voices in their assessment would promote democratic classroom assessment. Pedagogical implications of the study are discussed.