Language assessment training in Hong Kong: Implications for language assessment literacy

Ricky C K LAM*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

    118 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Despite the call for using assessment to promote effective learning, most language teachers remain underprepared to conduct classroom-based formative assessment and interpret the summative assessment information for improving instruction as well as learning. Drawing upon a survey of programme and government documents, interviews, student assessment tasks, and teaching evaluation, this paper aims to explore the overall language assessment training landscape in five Hong Kong teacher education institutions against the backdrop of assessment reforms in primary/secondary school contexts. It specifically attempts to investigate the extent to which two assessment courses may facilitate and/or inhibit the development of pre-service teachers’ language assessment literacy in one teacher education institution. Findings indicate that language assessment training in Hong Kong remains inadequate and selected language assessment courses are still unable to bridge the theory-practice gap within the assessment reform context. Implications and recommendations for promoting language assessment literacy are discussed.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)169-197
    Number of pages29
    JournalLanguage Testing
    Volume32
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 27 Apr 2015

    Scopus Subject Areas

    • Language and Linguistics
    • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
    • Linguistics and Language

    User-Defined Keywords

    • Assessment reform
    • English language education
    • language assessment literacy
    • language assessment training
    • pre-service teachers

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Language assessment training in Hong Kong: Implications for language assessment literacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this