In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

9 Autonomy in the classroom: peer assessment Lindsay Miller and Raymond Ng Introduction Promoting learner autonom y i n the classroom has taken on a new focu s recently wit h th e establishmen t o f self-acces s centre s in man y institute s throughout th e world. Self-acces s centre s rely not onl y o n well-planne d implementation an d goo d management, but als o on the learners' abilit y and willingness to use them. Miller and Gardner (1994) point out that much more research needs to be conducted into self-access language learning for it to become a viable supplement to classroom-based teaching. The project described in this chapter reports on one way of preparing learners for the responsibilities of monitoring and assessing their own language skills. In so doing , learner s ca n wor k mor e efficientl y an d effectivel y i n a n autonomous environment such as a self-access centre. Involving learners in their own language learnin g is not a new idea . There are many ways in which learners can become involved in curriculum decisions. They can help to define the input of a language programme as in a negotiated syllabus (Clarke 1991), they can actively participate in course management a s a cours e progresse s (Littlejoh n 1983) , or the y ca n b e involved i n assessmen t o f thei r learning . Thi s chapte r discusse s ho w learners can be involved in their assessment. Background Various studie s hav e bee n conducte d int o learne r involvemen t i n assessment. The following examples from the literature show how learners can be involved a t the initial stage when placed ont o a course, while the course i s i n progres s throug h pee r feedback , an d i n negotiatin g fina l assessment grades. 134 Lindsa y Miller and Raymond Ng Spaventa and Williamson (1989) demonstrate how learner involvement can take place at the beginning of a course. These authors describ e thei r experience in changing the placement procedure of a language programme in a large American university. According to the authors, the old placement battery wa s replace d wit h a new procedur e whic h incorporate d a n ora l exercise to gauge face-to-face communicatio n skills. In this "synchronou s discussion exercise " the teacher s plac e themselve s unde r a sig n fo r th e course levels, from Beginne r to Advanced. Individual students then go to talk with a teacher at the level they think they can cope with. If the teacher feels that the student is at the wrong level, he or she can recommend tha t the student talk to someone at another level, and the procedure is repeated until both teache r an d studen t fee l that the student i s at the appropriat e course level. In evaluating this procedure, Spaventa and Williamson (ibid.: 90) observe: "Teachers meet students first as walking, talking wholes, not as a series of numbe r tw o penci l marking s o n Scantron scorin g paper" . They maintai n tha t ".. . a placemen t proces s i n whic h administrators , students, and teachers participate as subjects of their own learning is better than a placement battery in which they are passive executors and recipients of standardized testing measures" (ibid.: 75). Learners can also be involved in their assessment as a course progresses through peer review or peer evaluation. The purpose here is to turn passive recipients into active participants on a language programme. Peer review/ evaluation, whereby student s comment o n and/or evaluat e each others' drafts, ha s become a popular activit y i n process writing courses . Man y writers have commented o n the value of these methods. Jacobs (1988: 74) remarks that peer review "ca n play a role in the development o f writin g ability by giving students additional perspectives from which to learn and apply writing skills". Mittan (1989) observes that peer evaluation provides students with an authentic audience, allows them to read their own writing critically, and helps students to gain confidence i n their writing. An extra benefit o f peer evaluation, according to Lockhart and Ng (1993), is that it promotes a high degre e o f interactio n amon...

Share