View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies in Indonesian EFL Secondary Schools

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies in Indonesian EFL Secondary Schools
Language: English
Authors: Burhanuddin, Moh. Arsyad Arrafii (ORCID 0000-0003-4441-243X), Mahsun
Source: Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2025 34(2):803-812.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 10
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: English (Second Language), Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Language Teachers, Formative Evaluation, Feedback (Response), Secondary School Students, Foreign Countries, Educational Quality, Educational Practices, Classroom Observation Techniques, Faculty Development, Evaluation Methods, Questioning Techniques, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Teacher Effectiveness
Geographic Terms: Indonesia
DOI: 10.1007/s40299-024-00897-4
ISSN: 0119-5646
2243-7908
Abstract: This paper reports on a multiple case study classroom observation investigating the types and qualities of teachers' AfL strategies among three English teachers across three distinct types of secondary schools in Indonesia. The study found that while teachers are integrating several AfL strategies, the quality issues persist. The study highlights a significant reliance on superficial questioning and frequent confirmatory rather than formative feedback practices. These findings may reflect a lack of the teachers' understanding of formative assessment that hinders its substantive application in the class. There is an immediate need to provide teachers with professional development in questioning and feedback practice delivery to support teachers in integrating these assessment techniques tailored to the needs of students, foster an engaging learning environment, and maximize the potential of AfL to improve educational outcomes.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1461558
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHRGFkSV_izVlfQPZw2hEDRAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDBlFdB6lBTrqAbkgDAIBEICBm-tBIMB2PTGqFYmrCePBC-VzlAZeiRylBzXPVxTBndq3x9p905un3ZmdSyMWSQgWBETcEfIOgzkTE4TvFCifkMx1NMB2DV-2mvWVdByTfcHW9quhQ727vr6cdpAHI6hZkI7yq5mHk3XHI-cDSBx57n7RDmedhBGFYDIlHFmaxZsV4R0TzH1eB409u83kTKWpkb30JSjzo-Sdx0ch
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183284110;[gchw]01apr.25;2025Feb28.03:51;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183284110-1">Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies in Indonesian EFL Secondary Schools: Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies: Burhanuddin et al </title> <p>This paper reports on a multiple case study classroom observation investigating the types and qualities of teachers' AfL strategies among three English teachers across three distinct types of secondary schools in Indonesia. The study found that while teachers are integrating several AfL strategies, the quality issues persist. The study highlights a significant reliance on superficial questioning and frequent confirmatory rather than formative feedback practices. These findings may reflect a lack of the teachers' understanding of formative assessment that hinders its substantive application in the class. There is an immediate need to provide teachers with professional development in questioning and feedback practice delivery to support teachers in integrating these assessment techniques tailored to the needs of students, foster an engaging learning environment, and maximize the potential of AfL to improve educational outcomes.</p> <p>Keywords: AfL; EFL; Secondary education; Feedback; Questioning practices; Education Curriculum and Pedagogy Specialist Studies In Education</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The role of assessment in education has continuously evolved, moving from the traditional grading to embrace more formative functions (Berry and Adamson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref1">6</reflink>]). This evolution is encapsulated in the concept of AfL or formative assessment, defined as a pedagogical approach that involves gathering information about students' learning progress during the instruction to provide feedback and guide further learning (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref2">7</reflink>]). AfL has become a central aspect of educational reform movement globally (Berry and Adamson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref3">6</reflink>]), especially after the contribution of Black and Wiliam ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref4">7</reflink>]). Interest in formative assessment has been driven by the recognition of the power of AfL and feedback in improving student performance (Hattie and Timperley, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref5">12</reflink>]). Formative feedback plays a crucial role in guiding students toward achieving learning objectives and developing essential cognitive processes to improve learning (Arnold, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref6">3</reflink>]).</p> <p>In EFL context, AfL implementation can support language acquisition through ongoing, specific and timely feedback that is essential for language acquisition (Arfon, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>]). Additionally, collaborative AfL practices such as peer-assessment develop both speaking skills and enlarge learners' vocabulary size (Homayouni, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref8">13</reflink>]).</p> <p>Despite its recognized importance, substantive application of AfL encounters numerous challenges (Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref9">4</reflink>]). Research indicates varied AfL practices among EFL teachers that suggest inadequate ability to integrate deep AfL strategies into the language learning process (Wu et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref10">30</reflink>]). Teachers may face difficulties in aligning their assessment practices with curricular goals due to resource limitations and obligation to teach large classroom size (Almulla, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>]) or may lack the necessary professional development support (Koloi-Keaikitse, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref12">16</reflink>]). Recent studies also highlight disparity in AfL practices across different subjects and school settings (Arnold, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref13">3</reflink>]).</p> <p>This paper explores how Indonesian EFL teachers integrate AfL strategies into their teaching. It is a legitimate area for study because AfL in Indonesia is current and important initiative within the country's recent national curriculum (Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref14">4</reflink>]). In this context, it is plausible to explore how old and new regimes of assessment emerge in classroom. This evidence can be used to develop support for teachers' pedagogic practices (e.g., tailoring a specific professional development). Additionally, while published evidence on teachers' experience with AfL are predominantly situated in Western contexts (Arnold, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref15">3</reflink>]), there is underrepresentation of insight from non-western educational environments, especially Global South areas like Indonesia. Drawing on these gaps, this paper seeks to answer a research question: What types and qualities of AfL strategies have been incorporated into the classroom assessment practices of Indonesian EFL secondary school teachers?</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-3">Literature Review</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183284110-4">Assessment for Learning Strategies</hd> <p>Black and Wiliam's ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref16">7</reflink>]) seminal review has been the most cited formative assessment text since it was published in 1998. One of its major findings was that a substantial learning improvement was gained when formative assessment was applied. This study convinced some policymakers to take formative assessment forward as an important aspect of curriculum reform (Berry and Adamson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref17">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the early development of AfL theory, five strategies were identified, including sharing criteria of success with learners, strategic classroom questioning, comment-only marking, peer and self-assessment, and using the results of summative tests formatively (Black et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref18">9</reflink>]). Wiliam and Leahy ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref19">28</reflink>]) developed an integrated model of implementation. They integrated classroom activities into three processes of instruction that deal with establishing a) the current status of student learning, b) learning goals to achieve, and c) how to achieve these goals. They proposed five key AfL strategies in which three learning agents (teacher, student, and peer) participate.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Clarifying learning intentions and sharing criteria for success</item> <p></p> <item> Engineering classroom discussions, questions and tasks that elicit evidence of learning</item> <p></p> <item> Providing feedback that moves learning forward</item> <p></p> <item> Activating students as instructional resources for one another</item> <p></p> <item> Activating students as the owners of their own learning</item> </ulist> <p>Each strategy emphasizes the importance of classroom interaction among learning agents to cultivate a 'moment of contingency' to understand students' learning better, and help students act as an active regulator of learning. Sharing learning expectations and defining the criteria of success are the initial stages of the classroom dialogue. These strategies can be enriched through asking students to personalize learning targets and create criteria of good or poor performance (Marshall and Drummond, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref20">19</reflink>]). After the learning objectives have been set and understood by the students, teachers can utilize strategic questioning and feedback to collect evidence of students' understanding, seek learning challenges and misconceptions, and help close gaps toward the learning goals. However, feedback is only meaningful when it is specific, triggers learners to reflect on and guide learning, and promote the notions of learner agency (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref21">8</reflink>]). To ensure collaborative work, AfL requires teachers to help learners develop confidence, autonomy, and responsibility for their learning. Then, teachers can ask students to act as a learning resource for one another (Homayouni, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref22">13</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-5">Feedback Types and Mechanisms</hd> <p>Feedback is crucial in shaping student learning and outcomes. Tunstall and Gipps ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref23">27</reflink>]) described feedback to fall into a continuum of evaluative-descriptive practices that are different in styles, processes, and purposes. Evaluative feedback assesses learner's overall performance against specific standards or criteria. This feedback can be positive (e.g., praises and rewards) or negative, such as criticism or even punishment. While praise and rewards can boost motivation, they have low to moderate effects on average learning achievement (Wisniewski et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref24">29</reflink>]). In contrast, descriptive feedback refers to providing specific, targeted and precise information on learner performance, describing particular areas where improvement is needed, what was incorrect and how to address it, leading to the acquisition of new skills and improve task and overall performance (Hattie and Timperley, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref25">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>Peer feedback is other valuable form of feedback that is recognized as an effective AfL strategy that promotes substantive engagement and provides learners with deep insights into their learning and the learning of others (Nelson and Schunn, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref26">20</reflink>]). This reciprocal learning activity can foster a deeper understanding of language rules and ability to give critiques constructively that induces creativity and critical thinking skills (Shen et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref27">25</reflink>]). Additionally, peer feedback can positively influence writing performance (Nelson and Schunn, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref28">20</reflink>]).</p> <p>Another form of feedback is formative feedback, appeared during the learning process to monitor progress, provide ongoing guidance or assistance, and support learning and development. Formative feedback aims at helping learners understand where they are now in relation to their learning goals and how they can improve learning process and achieve the desired goals (Wiliam and Leahy, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref29">28</reflink>]). Formative feedback focuses on the long-term progression and development of learners in their learning. It paves a clear pathway through which learners achieve their goals.</p> <p>While students receive various forms of feedback during learning episodes, not all feedback has positive influence on learning, nor is it effective in moving learning forward. Ruiz-Primo and Li ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref30">22</reflink>]) found that despite numerous forms of feedback are provided, they are more likely to be of confirmatory or evaluative, delivered mostly in the forms of grade, number, or symbols, than descriptive. Only those that provide clues about where students are in their learning, where they need to go, and how to get there are potential to bring learning forward. Positive effect of feedback on student learning and development may rely on teachers' understanding of feedback and expertise in feedback delivery (Koloi-Keaikitse, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref31">16</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-6">Effective Questioning and Classroom Dialogue</hd> <p>Another important feature of AfL is the process of collecting evidence about the current state of student understanding. Questioning and classroom dialogue, either on a one-to-one basis, or through a group-based, or classroom discussion, are crucial strategies to collect such evidence. However, what is more important is the nature of questions being asked (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref32">8</reflink>]). Teachers should ask open-ended questions to elicit more participation and provoke the use of higher-order thinking and reasoning skills (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref33">8</reflink>]). Nevertheless, despite teachers reporting questioning being an essential part of their pedagogy (e.g., Black et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref34">9</reflink>]), questioning research provide evidence of convergent, procedural, less thoughtful questioning practices (Jiang, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref35">15</reflink>]). Ateh ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref36">5</reflink>]) reported on low quality of teachers' elicitation practices which failed to reveal students' reasoning or include opportunities for divergent thinking development. Likewise, report on teachers' questioning and elicitation practices in Indonesia provides evidence of low-level, textbook-based questioning approaches, despite some minor quantity of referential questioning emerge as well (Rido, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref37">21</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-7">Methods</hd> <p>This study adopted a multiple case study approach, differentiated from a single-case study by the number of cases being examined (Yin, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref38">31</reflink>]). Specifically, this study treated junior, senior, and vocational secondary schools as a separate case, focusing on AfL strategies as the primary unit of analysis. By choosing three different types of schools, the study aimed to illustrate how teachers in distinct educational settings implement AfL strategies in their classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-8">Data Collection Methods</hd> <p>Classroom observations were the primary method of data collection, chosen to understand the educational culture, setting, or phenomena from the participants' behaviors within their natural environments. Observations were video recorded to capture multiple types of data (e.g., visual, audio, and contextual elements). Additionally, videoed observations can be later re-viewed by multiple observers to mitigate bias of a single observer and to triangulate interpretation. Observers adopted the role of 'complete observers' (Savin-Baden and Major, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref39">24</reflink>]) to minimize disruption. A camera was strategically placed in the classroom to capture a comprehensive view of the interactions, supplemented by field notes on any student–teacher interactions not visible on camera. Before observations began, approvals were obtained from the Ministry of Education (MoE) and school principals. Consent forms were distributed and signed by teachers and students' parents.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-9">Instrument</hd> <p>Various measurement instruments have been developed to observe teachers' AfL practices. The Assessment for Learning Measurement instrument (AfLMi) (Lysaght et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref40">18</reflink>]) was initially considered. Despite its marvelous measurement properties, this tool relies on scale items which is not compatible with the observation approach of data collection in this study. Additionally, the Malaysian Teachers' Assessment Practices Instrument (MTAPI) (Sathasivam and Rahim, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref41">23</reflink>]) was reviewed but not adopted because it is merely a coding scheme for analyzing observation data. Thus, an observation protocol was developed for this study, guided by Wiliam and Leahy's framework ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref42">28</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-10">Participants</hd> <p>Three teachers working in public secondary schools were recruited purposively based on, first of all, the school types and accreditation grades, that is, all participants must teach at the state schools with an 'outstanding' grade' because they are considered to have better teaching resource compared to those in the lower grades. Thus, their pedagogic practices can be used as a benchmark of the quality of instruction. Research has indicated that the levels of accreditation have been associated with improvement in education quality, effectiveness, productivity, and performance (Lagrosen, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref43">17</reflink>]). Afterward, participant selection was continued and based on their occupational status (i.e., all teachers must be public teachers) because they are considered to have more access on learning resource (e.g., access to professional development) and might have had better conceptual and practical understanding of AfL, compared to the private, or contract teacher counterparts. Finally, participants were recruited on a voluntarily basis through self-nomination, endorsed by school principal.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-11">Ali and the Observed Lessons</hd> <p>Classroom observations were conducted in Ali's 7th grader classroom, junior secondary school. Ali is a male senior teacher with over 25 years of experience. All students were beginners in English. The observed lessons were on the topic of 'What Time Is It?' chapter 3 of the textbook. The lesson plan, eight planned sessions, aimed at enabling students to demonstrate knowledge and skills related to asking and providing information about days, months, and numbers pertaining to time and dates. Four observations were conducted and video recorded, except the first attendance not part of the chapter 3, for familiarization purpose. So, the first three of eight lessons were video recorded. Ali's weekly teaching load included 38 teaching 'hours' per class, with each 'hour' being 40 min long as prescribed by the curriculum. Ali taught multiple parallel classes of year 7 and year 8.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-12">Baiq and the Observed Lessons</hd> <p>Baiq is a female senior teacher at a senior high school with 27 years of teaching experience. Three observations were held with one of her year 10 classrooms (30 students). Three observations, conducted after mid-term test (i.e., a test after 8 to 10 weeks), taken place a week earlier before observation, focused on grammatical items. The sessions aimed at providing feedback on the results of the test to enhance students' grasp of grammatical concepts. Due to the nature of these post-test review activities, Baiq did not prepare a specific lesson plan for these meetings. In this setting, a teaching 'hour' is defined as 45 min, each lesson extending to 90 min. The actual observed teaching hours, however, ranged between 50 and 80 min across three lessons.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-13">Candra and the Observed Lessons</hd> <p>Candra, a male teacher with nine years of experience, taught English at a vocational school. Observations were conducted in a class of 38 year 10 students, on the topic of 'Describing People.' This topic covered three sessions spreading across three weeks. A lesson plan for these meetings was requested, but none was provided until the last observation, suggesting that Candra might not have prepared one and instead relied heavily on the textbook that prescribes the learning sequences. A teaching 'hour' at the vocational school is 45 min, with each lesson should last for 90 min but actual observed lessons ranged 75 to 85 min.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-14">Data Analysis Method</hd> <p>Data analysis was grounded on inductive content analysis (Savin-Baden and Major, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref44">24</reflink>]), involving recursive sweeps through transcripts and videotapes. Rigorous analytical process was guided by AfL strategies outlined by Wiliam and Leahy ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref45">28</reflink>]). Given the voluminous data, a twenty-minute section from the first lesson of each teacher was initially transcribed, resulting in a total of 180 min—comprising a 20-min presentation at the beginning of the first lesson, a 20-min section from the middle of the second lesson, and a 20-min segment from the end of the third lesson (see Table 1). The three fragments were initially considered sufficient to uncover variety of evidence of AfL strategies during pre-, while, and post-learning episodes. All activities in the first 20-min segments can be associated with the pre-learning phase where some AfL strategies, such as setting learning target, were evident. On the second segment where students engaged on task execution, feedback were provided and dialogues were developed. This segment was considered the best episode to collect evidence of feedback and questioning practices. The 20-min part of last lesson can capture teachers' end of meeting feedback and evidence regarding planned adjustment of teaching for the next teaching episode.</p> <p>Table 1 Minutes Videotaped and Transcribed Per Lesson for Each Teacher</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Teacher</p></th><th align="left"><p>Lessons</p></th><th align="left"><p>Prescribed Length of the Lesson (Minutes)</p></th><th align="left"><p>Videotaped (Minutes)</p></th><th align="left"><p>Parts of Tape Transcribed</p></th><th align="left"><p>Transcribed (Minutes per Lesson)</p></th><th align="left"><p>Total (Minutes per Teacher)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" rowspan="3"><p>Ali</p></td><td align="left"><p>Lesson 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>80</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>70</p></td><td align="left"><p>Beginning</p></td><td align="left"><p>20 + 50</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>70</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>80</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>72</p></td><td align="left"><p>Middle</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td><td char="." align="char" rowspan="2"><p>40</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>80</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>70</p></td><td align="left"><p>End</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="3"><p>Baiq</p></td><td align="left"><p>Lesson 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>80</p></td><td align="left"><p>Beginning</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td><td char="." align="char" rowspan="3"><p>60</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>50</p></td><td align="left"><p>Middle</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>50</p></td><td align="left"><p>End</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" rowspan="3"><p>Candra</p></td><td align="left"><p>Lesson 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>85</p></td><td align="left"><p>Beginning</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td><td char="." align="char" rowspan="3"><p>60</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>75</p></td><td align="left"><p>Middle</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lesson 3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>90</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>80</p></td><td align="left"><p>End</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Total</p></td><td align="left"><p>9 lessons</p></td><td char="." align="char" /><td char="." align="char"><p>632</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>180</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>230</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>All verbal utterances, gestures, and movements of teachers and students, as well as contextual information, were transcribed. However, the analysis focused on the propositions or learning events related to AfL strategies (Wiliam and Leahy, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref46">28</reflink>]). Numerous numbers of initial codes were identified, examined for content, and then grouped into categories by comparing and contrasting one code with another to maintain the consistency of the coding system. Subsequently, each code was thematically classified into four final categories (see Table 2).</p> <p>Table 2 Numbers of Code and Categories of Assessment Practices from Transcribed Fragments of Lessons</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2"><p>No</p></th><th align="left" rowspan="2"><p>Categories</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Ali's Lessons (110 min)</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Baiq's Lessons (60 min)</p></th><th align="left" colspan="3"><p>Candra's Lessons (60 min)</p></th><th align="left"><p>Total</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left" /></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td align="left" colspan="11"><p>Learning checks</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>a. Checking knowledge</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>140</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>8</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>69</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>65</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>26</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>314</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>b. Checking understanding</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>70</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>14</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>13</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>26</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>14</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>141</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>c. Monitoring learning</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>23</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>44</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>d. Eliciting knowledge</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>8</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>5</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>13</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>Feedback</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>79</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>24</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>40</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>14</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>22</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>12</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>27</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>8</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>232</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td align="left"><p>Marking tasks</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td align="left" colspan="11"><p>Learner Agency</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>a. Peer assessment</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>16</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>24</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>b. Self-assessment</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>6</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>c. Eliciting learning objectives</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>0</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>5</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>Total</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>317</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>66</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>84</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>84</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>92</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>38</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>39</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>47</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>18</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>785</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>However, as formative assessment is part of a continuum of pedagogic practices (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref47">8</reflink>]), analyzing only fragments of classroom activities might be challenged on grounds of reliability. Therefore, the entire first lesson of Ali was fully transcribed because his lessons included a more diverse classroom activities compared to those of other teachers. This scrutinizing process, however, yielded no additional code. A total of 230 min of transcription—including the 20-min detailed transcription of all participants and one whole lesson—was thus deemed sufficient to address concerns associated with the limitation of analyzing a fragment of social interaction, which is part of a broader set of activities.</p> <p>Finally, the codes emerging from the 230 min of transcripts guided the screening of the entire eight lessons to discover potential additional codes through repeated viewing of the whole videos and note-taking (without transcribing). Nevertheless, no new code was revealed from such video-viewing attempts indicating a saturation of the data.</p> <p>To ensure the reliability of data analysis, both intra-coder and inter-coder strategies were employed. The corresponding author first undertook an iterative review and analysis of the transcribed lessons at specific intervals of time, returning to the transcripts later to verify the consistency of the coding. The work was peer-reviewed and intensive discussions were held on all codes and categories until consensus was reached.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-15">Findings</hd> <p>Table 2 summarizes AfL practice categories that fall into 1) the learning checks, 2) feedback, 3) marking task, and 4) learner agency practices. The last category, however, is excluded because it was reported elsewhere (Burhanuddin and Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref48">10</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-16">Learning Check</hd> <p>Learning checks involve teachers questioning, eliciting responses, and monitoring task completion to assess and support learning. In three observed classrooms, learning checks accounted for 65.22% of assessment practices, surpassing feedback (29.55%), marking tasks (0.76%), and learner agency (4.46%). This indicates a significant effort by teachers to understand and aid students' learning to meet objectives.</p> <p>The learning checks category is based on teachers' practices in verifying students' existing knowledge, <emph>checking knowledge,</emph> which typically involved asking the students—either individually or as a class—about their prior knowledge using pre-defined, closed-ended questions that elicit short, single-word, or yes/no answer, primarily at the beginning of lesson. Teachers primarily sought evidence of factual and classroom context knowledge related to vocabulary items, grammatical rules, spelling, pronunciation, and previous lesson objectives.</p> <p>Teachers also performed assessment practices associated with <emph>eliciting knowledge</emph>, asking students (individual and whole class elicitation) open-ended questions, eliciting nuanced, expanded, more than one response in terms of factual knowledge, for example, 'what else' or 'any other answer' question. Analysis on the <emph>eliciting knowledge</emph> propositions shows that teachers' activities in regard to checking and eliciting knowledge focused on display questioning and often involved asking for answers already known by the teachers, prompting of simple responses, inauthentic dialogue, and lesson-related knowledge sharing.</p> <p>In addition, teachers ensured that the students had a correct understanding about the lessons and instruction through questioning and written task assignments. This practice termed as <emph>checking understanding</emph>, defined as seeking evidence of learners' understanding about what had been taught or what teachers believed to be new knowledge (e.g., understanding of grammatical concepts, content of the lesson, or instructions for the task). Extract below illustrates the <emph>checking understanding</emph> activity in which, after explaining the concept of 'time,' Ali asked a student (Akbar—pseudonym) to draw a clock showing 6 o'clock:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> T:[The teacher looked at the attendance list to find a name] Ok, Akbar, maju ... coba maju tunjukkan saya jam 6! <emph>(Ok Akbar, come forward, show me six o'clock!)</emph></item> <p></p> <item> S1[Akbar came forward, picked up the board marker from the teacher]</item> <p></p> <item> T:[The teacher repeated his instruction] Coba di mana jarum panjangnya, jarum pendeknya <emph>(Where should the long and the short hands be)</emph> ... Ya <emph>(yes)</emph>, six o'clock? Persis <emph>(on the dot/exactly)</emph> six o'clock.</item> <p></p> <item> S1:[Akbar seems confused, standing in front of the board]</item> <p></p> <item> SS:Saya pak, saya pak <emph>(me Sir, me Sir)</emph> [While Akbar was about to write the answer on the board, some students put their hands up, an intimidating pressure for Akbar]</item> <p></p> <item> T:[The teacher made his instruction more explicit] Di mana dia, jarum panjangnya kalau menunjukkan six o'clock? ... ke mana arahnya? <emph>(Where exactly the long hand should be if the clock shows six o'clock? Where does it aim (of what has been taught) at?</emph> ... [Akbar drew the long hand aiming at 12]</item> <p></p> <item> T:Ya bagus <emph>(Yes, good)</emph>, six o'clock.</item> <p></p> <item> T:Satu lagi, di mana jarum pendeknya sekarang? <emph>(One more thing, where should the short hand be now?)</emph></item> <p></p> <item> T:Short hand. Apa artinya short hand? <emph>(What is the meaning of 'short hand'?)</emph> [to the class]</item> <p></p> <item> SS:Jarum pendek <emph>(short hand)</emph> [class yelled]</item> <p></p> <item> S1:[Akbar is thinking]</item> <p></p> <item> T:Six o'clock [the teacher reminded Akbar the task]</item> <p></p> <item> T:[To all students in the classroom] Yang lain coba fikirkan yang nomer berikutnya <emph>(Please think and do the next tasks)</emph></item> <p></p> <item> S2:Saya <emph>(me)</emph> [a student put his hand up]</item> <p></p> <item> S1:[Akbar drew a line toward six]</item> <p></p> <item> T:Ya good <emph>(yes, good)</emph></item> </ulist> <p>Note: T = teacher; S = a student (singular); SS = students (plural); ... = pause; () = translation; [] = description of teacher/student activities and movement; and // = simultaneous responses.</p> <p>Another aspect of learning check was the monitoring of students' progress in completing tasks. <emph>Monitoring learning</emph> refers to teachers walking around the classroom to check students' completion of the tasks and responding accordingly to students' queries. Monitoring learning ideally gives opportunities for teachers to provide feedback to individual students, develop an engaging dialogue and discussion with learners to explore and gain insights, misconceptions, and misunderstanding students have about the learning. Nevertheless, the opportunities were used mainly for checking the accuracy of students' responses to the tasks (e.g., correct or incorrect). The general patterns of discourse were dominated by the teacher questioning and feedback in the form of display questions that limited students' exposure to the target language.</p> <p>Detailed and iterative viewings of transcripts and whole lessons suggested that although teachers attempted to initiate classroom dialogue and discussion, little reference was made to using open or referential questioning that stimulates and explores students' deep thinking and reasoning skills (e.g., a lack of evidence regarding teachers' questioning to elicit the answer that the teacher wanted to know, to promote authentic and natural communication, and to encourage students to provide lengthy and complex responses and language output).</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-17">Feedback</hd> <p>The second key category of practice is feedback, which constitutes a significant portion of the assessment practices, making up 29.55% of interactions. However, the nature of feedback was predominantly confirmatory, manifesting in forms, such as praise (e.g., "good," "very good"), direct corrections (e.g., "okay," "yes," "right," "wrong"), and rhetorical questions by which teachers provided the answer immediately without awaiting student responses. Other forms of feedback included refining or completing students' responses, recasting students' answers, verifying or providing alternative answers, and asking students to repeat an answer. The feedback predominantly aimed to ascertain correct answers rather than to foster extensive dialogue or reflection.</p> <p>Teachers often overlooked incorrect or inappropriate responses from students. Rather than exploring the misconceptions students might have regarding the tasks, they simply redirected the question to another student to obtain the correct answer. Additionally, teachers critiqued students' work and behaviors [Baiq] and offered detailed oral commentary feedback to individual students, as exemplified by Candra in the verbatim form of transcription provided below.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> T:What about you? [the teacher asks a student to read her description of her best friend]</item> <p></p> <item> S:I have a friend, Maimuni, beautiful, kindly, pretty, sweet, also short soft white skin. He is fifteen years old ... He hobbies is play and watching ... He is also short hair ... He is very good ...</item> <p></p> <item> T:Look at the personal pronoun. Is it <emph>she</emph> or <emph>he</emph>? Be consistent. Use 'she' for a girl and 'he' for a boy. Is your friend a girl?</item> <p></p> </ulist> <p>• S:Yes</p> <p></p> <p>• T:She?</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> S:She [nodding]</item> <p></p> <item> T:Then, if your friend is a girl, the pronoun must be 'she' and that 'she' needs 'to be' to describe the characteristics and the 'to be' used is 'is', she is beautiful. For possessive pronoun, we cannot use she or he, he hobbies is, we use <emph>her</emph> instead, her hobbies, his hobbies. To be 'is' could not be used if the hobby is more than one hobbies because 'is' is used for singular pronoun</item> </ulist> <p>It is evident that the teacher focused predominantly on the correct use of grammar (language form) while seemingly neglecting the communicative aspect of language use. This could be a result of the emphasis placed on grammatical items in final examinations. Given the context of senior vocational school and the focus of feedback on personal pronouns, which is a very rudimentary concept of language, the dialogue might indicate poor competency of the students in English. Alternatively, it can be interpreted that the student might have understood the concept but when applied in the spoken context, she lapsed into error. Despite this, there was no opportunity for students to internalize and utilize the feedback to enhance their learning, nor were there indications in the subsequent lessons that the teacher took further steps to ensure these errors were corrected in future lessons. Likewise, after delivering their descriptions, students did not seem to take initiative to refine their work. Since this performance was graded, the teacher's evaluation was strictly summative, with no subsequent actions to rectify the observed errors.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-18">Marking Task</hd> <p>Assessment practice was also manifested through marking tasks. This practice involved teachers assigning grades to student work and responses during questioning, which were then recorded in a grading booklet. Marking also entailed ticking off or writing names of students in a register to note that a student had responded or reached a certain competency level, as observed by the teachers.</p> <p>These assessments heavily relied on the teacher's subjective judgment, as the criteria for evaluating students' responses were not disclosed. Even comprehensive review of the full video recordings did not reveal any standardized criteria for assigning scores, except in Candra's lesson. Candra clarified performance criteria and grading procedures to students but did not involve students in an engaging or in-depth discussion about the assessment formats or criteria to better prepare them for the tasks. Students, in turn, seemed to accept these assessment processes as solely the teacher's responsibility, implying a perception of assessment as being exclusively the teacher's domain.</p> <p>While other teachers, Ali and Baiq, did not disclose the results of their evaluation of learning to the students, Candra orally shared his grading marks, specifying students' performance levels and highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. Candra intended this feedback to foster comparison and therefore enhance student learning and motivation. Nevertheless, there was no recorded evidence of students actively working on this constructive feedback, thus the potential of this feedback to advance learning remained unfulfilled.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-19">Discussion</hd> <p>This study indicates that teachers' pedagogic and assessment practices centered around learning process assessment and grounded upon securing students' understanding, scaffolding learning and how this might be enhanced, mirroring intentions of formative assessment. However, teachers' AfL practice reflects the notion of convergent, mechanistic approaches to assessment. For example, practices of learning checks were prominent but primarily sought factual knowledge and lacked substantive interactivity. Research indicates that a significant portion of teacher questioning practices comprise low-level inquiries that primarily require students to recall facts rather than stimulate capacity for developing higher-order thinking (Işır and Uyar, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref49">14</reflink>]). The prevalence of short-answer, fact-based questions may root from a desire to cover the content of subject curriculum quickly or a lack of capacity in effective questioning techniques (Jiang, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref50">15</reflink>]). Other ineffective practices, such as proposing questions predominantly to a few strong students or providing a brief wait time for responses, can also contribute to the lack of thoughtful questioning in classrooms (Ateh, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref51">5</reflink>]).</p> <p>Time constraints and large class sizes can be significant factors that lead teachers to provide less thoughtful questioning to students. Research has shown that in environments where there are pressures to cover a large amount of curriculum content within limited time frames, teachers may feel compelled to prioritize content delivery over engaging in more thoughtful questioning strategies (Almulla, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref52">1</reflink>]). Furthermore, a lack of resource and pressure to manage student behavior and performance in large classes can create barriers for teachers to engage in more interactive practices (Gül and Kasten, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref53">11</reflink>]). These constraints can lead to a situation where teachers resort to more traditional methods of instruction.</p> <p>AfL theory emphasizes that classroom interaction is considered formative when an exchange of response influences and changes cognition (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref54">8</reflink>]), when it expands opportunities to engage more participation, and when it stimulates higher-order, critical thinking and reasoning skills (Black et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref55">9</reflink>]). The key indicator of the high quality of classroom dialogue is "the use by pupils of such terms as 'think,' 'because,' 'would,' and 'should'" (Black and Wiliam, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref56">8</reflink>]). Such responses can only be facilitated if teachers have adequate competence and expertise in generating thoughtful questioning (Jiang, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref57">15</reflink>]) and are not being hovered by strict obligation to cover all curriculum content (Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref58">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>The convergent practices of assessment were also evident in the teachers' feedback. The observed feedback practices were mostly generic, evaluative, and presented excessively in the forms of praise, grades, numbers, or symbols, concurring with previous studies (e.g., Ruiz-Primo and Li, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref59">22</reflink>]). These kinds of feedback may give an indication about the current state of students' learning, but they lack the power to bring learning forward and move it closer to the intended learning goals because it was too generic to provide explicit clues to students about where they are in their learning, where they need to go, and how they can get there (Wiliam and Leahy, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref60">28</reflink>]). In order to promote learning improvement, teachers need to develop a greater specificity in their approach to giving feedback; moving beyond superficial praise and generic comments to adopt more nuanced and tailored feedback strategies that consider the individual learning contexts and needs of their students.</p> <p>Given such evidence, the paper argues that AfL practices, in particular those associated with promoting an engaging classroom interaction through thoughtful dialogue and deep feedback, are not adequately achieved by three observed teachers. The findings indicate that observed teachers may lack conceptual and practical understanding of effective feedback and questioning strategies due to various individual and contextual constraints (Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref61">4</reflink>]). One key factor is the insufficient training on specific AfL topics (e.g., AfL strategies) leading to inadequate knowledge among teachers in providing developmental feedback and questioning (Işır and Uyar, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref62">14</reflink>]). Many teachers express dissatisfaction with the level of training they receive (Koloi-Keaikitse, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref63">16</reflink>]). Studies have highlighted that teachers often receive peripheral training in assessment components during training programs, which does not adequately equip them with a sound theoretical knowledge and practical skills needed for a deep AfL implementation (Işık, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref64">14</reflink>]). This lack of preparation extends the language assessment literacy issues, encountered by education system globally. Numerous studies demonstrated that teachers in various countries have limited understanding of assessment concepts and receive inadequate training in AfL practices (Szarka et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref65">26</reflink>]). Lack of training not only affects teachers' ability to conduct assessments but also impacts their interpretation of assessment results for instructional improvement.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-20">Conclusion and Limitations</hd> <p>The findings of this study suggest that while three teachers incorporated AfL strategies into their teaching, the quality issues persist. This finding indicates a possible gap in the teachers' practical expertise in AfL, which implicates the urgent need to provide a specific and sustainable AfL training for teachers. However, while many training programs focus on theoretical knowledge without sufficient emphasis on practical application (Işık, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref66">14</reflink>]), there is a need for more hands-on training that allows teachers to practice designing, implementing, and analyzing assessments in real classroom settings. Assessment training aimed at improving teachers' feedback and questioning practices should receive a bold priority. Additionally, a follow-up support and coaching after training, often lacking in the current professional development programs (Arrafii, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref67">4</reflink>]), needs to be intensified to achieve sustainability of practice. Insufficient follow-up support can hinder the dissemination of training gains to actual assessment practice.</p> <p>Findings reported here are not without limitations. Although multiple case study design allows for in-depth exploration, the depth comes at the expense of understanding how widespread these experiences are across a larger population. Future studies would benefit to include a larger number of teachers and schools. Other concern relates to diversity in perspectives. With a small sample size, there might be limitations in the diversity of evidence represented in the study. There might be a risk for not capturing a full range of experiences related to the research topic, which may impact the depth of the analysis. Additionally, the opportunity for triangulation is limited. These issues can affect the robustness of the conclusions. It is crucial for future research to consider the use of stratified sampling techniques that can help ensure a more representative sample. Larger samples allow for more robust cross-validation of data, increasing the credibility and trustworthiness of the findings.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-21">Data availability</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [MA], upon reasonable request.</p> <hd id="AN0183284110-22">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0183284110-23"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref11" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Almulla M. An investigation of teachers' perceptions of the effects of class size on teaching. International Education Studies. 2015; 8; 12: 33-42. 10.5539/ies.v8n12p33</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref7" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Arfon, E. (2022). Supporting progression in language learning: assessment in the Curriculum for Wales. Cardiff: Welsh Government, GSR report number 29/2022. Retrieved from: https://gov.wales/review-assessment-language-learning</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref6" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Arnold, J. (2022). Prioritising students in Assessment for Learning: A scoping review of research on students' classroom experience, Review of Education. 10, e3366. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3366</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref9" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Arrafii MA. Assessment reform in Indonesia: Contextual barriers and opportunities for implementation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Education. 2023; 43; 1: 79-94. 10.1080/02188791.2021.1898931</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref36" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Ateh CM. Science teachers' elicitation practices: Insights for formative assessment. Educational Assessment. 2015; 20; 2: 112-131. 10.1080/10627197.2015.1028619</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref1" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Berry R, Adamson B. Assessment reform in education policy and practice. Springer. 2011. 10.1007/978-94-007-0729-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref2" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Black P, Wiliam D. Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. 1998; 5; 1: 7-74. 10.1080/0969595980050102</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref21" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Black P, Wiliam D. Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. 2018; 25; 6: 551-575. 10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref18" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Black P, Harrison C, Lee C, Marshal B, Wiliam D. Assessment for Learning; Putting it into practice. 2003; Open University Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burhanuddin Burhanuddin, Arrafii Mohammad Arsyad. Unfolding the typology and quality of the learner agency practices in the teachers' implementation of the 2013 curriculum in Indonesia: the normalisation process theory perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review. 2023; 24; 4: 545-561. 10.1007/s12564-022-09806-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gül A, Kasten WC. Supporting teacher change in an English as a foreign language environment: A peer-coaching study in Turkey. American Journal of Qualitative Research. 2021; 5; 2: 130-155. 10.29333/ajqr/11151</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hattie J, Timperley H. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. 2007; 77; 1: 81-112. 10.3102/003465430298487</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Homayouni M. Peer assessment in group-oriented classroom contexts: On the effectiveness of peer assessment coupled with scaffolding and group work on speaking skills and vocabulary learning. Language Testing in Asia. 2022; 12: 61. 10.1186/s40468-022-00211-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Işır E, Uyar Y. Investigating reading comprehension questions and student-generated questions in language lessons in terms of level. Education Quarterly Reviews. 2022. 10.31014/aior.1993.05.04.676</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jiang Y. Teacher classroom questioning practice and assessment literacy: case studies of four English language teachers in Chinese Universities. Frontiers in Education. 2020. 10.3389/feduc.2020.00023</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koloi-Keaikitse S. Assessment training: A precondition for teachers' competencies and use of classroom assessment practices. International Journal of Training and Development. 2016; 20; 2: 107-123. 10.1111/ijtd.12072</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lagrosen S. Quality through accreditation. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2017; 9; 3/4: 469-483. 10.1108/ijqss-02-2017-0010</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lysaght Z, O'leary M, Ludlow L. Measuring teachers' assessment for learning (AfL) classroom practices in elementary schools. International Journal of Educational Methodology. 2017; 3; 2: 103-115. 10.12973/ijem.3.2.103</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marshall B, Drummond MJ. How teachers engage with assessment for learning: Lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education. 2006; 21; 2: 133-149. 10.1080/02671520600615638</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nelson M, Schunn C. The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science. 2008; 37; 4: 375-401. 10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rido A. What do you see here from this picture? Questioning strategies of master teachers in Indonesian vocational English classrooms. TEFLIN Journal. 2017; 28; 2: 193-210. 10.15639/teflinjournal.v28i2/193-211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruiz-Primo MA, Li M. Analyzing teachers' feedback practices in response to students' work in science classrooms. Applied Measurement in Education. 2013; 26; 3: 163-175. 10.1080/08957347.2013.793188</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sathasivam RV, Rahim SSA. I do it better: how social and emotional learning environment enhances assessment for learning strategies in science classrooms. Journal of International and Comparative Education. 2021. 10.14425/jice.2021.10.2.0913</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Savin-Baden M, Major CH. Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. 2020; Routledge</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shen S, Wang S, Qi Y, Wang Y, Yan X. Teacher suggestion feedback facilitates creativity of students in steam education. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12: 1-6. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.723171</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Szarka K, Szőköl I, Vargová A. Assessment literate teachers in Slovakia: The requirements for assessment literacy of teachers. Online Journal for Research and Education. 2022. 10.53349/resource.2022.is24.a1110</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tunstall P, Gipps C. Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal. 1996; 22; 4: 389-404. 10.1080/0141192960220402</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wiliam, D. & Leahy, S. (2015). Embedding Formative Assessment: Practical Techniques for K-12 Classrooms. Florida: Learning Sciences International.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wisniewski B, Zierer K, Hattie J. The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 10; 3087: 1-14. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wu X, Zhang LJ, Liu Q. Using assessment for learning: Multi-case studies of three Chinese University English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers engaging students in learning and assessment. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12: 725132. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.725132</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 20184; SAGE Publications Inc</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Burhanuddin; Moh. Arsyad Arrafii and Mahsun</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref65"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1461558
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies in Indonesian EFL Secondary Schools
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burhanuddin%22">Burhanuddin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Moh%2E+Arsyad+Arrafii%22">Moh. Arsyad Arrafii</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4441-243X">0000-0003-4441-243X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mahsun%22">Mahsun</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Asia-Pacific+Education+Researcher%22"><i>Asia-Pacific Education Researcher</i></searchLink>. 2025 34(2):803-812.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 10
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+%28Second+Language%29%22">English (Second Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Second+Language+Learning%22">Second Language Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Second+Language+Instruction%22">Second Language Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Teachers%22">Language Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Formative+Evaluation%22">Formative Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Feedback+%28Response%29%22">Feedback (Response)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Quality%22">Educational Quality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Practices%22">Educational Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classroom+Observation+Techniques%22">Classroom Observation Techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Development%22">Faculty Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questioning+Techniques%22">Questioning Techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pedagogical+Content+Knowledge%22">Pedagogical Content Knowledge</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Effectiveness%22">Teacher Effectiveness</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indonesia%22">Indonesia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s40299-024-00897-4
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0119-5646<br />2243-7908
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This paper reports on a multiple case study classroom observation investigating the types and qualities of teachers' AfL strategies among three English teachers across three distinct types of secondary schools in Indonesia. The study found that while teachers are integrating several AfL strategies, the quality issues persist. The study highlights a significant reliance on superficial questioning and frequent confirmatory rather than formative feedback practices. These findings may reflect a lack of the teachers' understanding of formative assessment that hinders its substantive application in the class. There is an immediate need to provide teachers with professional development in questioning and feedback practice delivery to support teachers in integrating these assessment techniques tailored to the needs of students, foster an engaging learning environment, and maximize the potential of AfL to improve educational outcomes.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1461558
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1461558
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s40299-024-00897-4
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 803
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: English (Second Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Second Language Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Second Language Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Formative Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Feedback (Response)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Quality
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Classroom Observation Techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Faculty Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Questioning Techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pedagogical Content Knowledge
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Indonesia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Exploring Types and Qualities of Teachers' Implementation of AfL Strategies in Indonesian EFL Secondary Schools
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burhanuddin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Moh. Arsyad Arrafii
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mahsun
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0119-5646
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2243-7908
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 34
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Asia-Pacific Education Researcher
              Type: main
ResultId 1