A Post-Positivist and Interpretive Approach to Researching Teachers’ Language Assessment Literacy

Abstract

The language assessment literacy of English language teachers has been one of the topics of discussion in the language testing field. In this article, I focus on the need to expand research constructs and methodologies to understand, in depth, the language assessment literacy for these key players in language assessment. I first explain the need to focus on language teachers and examine current challenges in researching language assessment literacy. Then, I reflect on how post-positivist, interpretive research constructs and methodologies can expand and why they should. If this happens, research might yield more valid, useful data to unveil the complexities of language assessment literacy for language teachers. That data can provide valuable feedback to advance teachers’ professional development through language assessment literacy.

Language Assessment Literacy and Teachers’ Professional Development: A Review of the Literature

“…It is important to note that, although lal's three overarching components have been constant in the literature, they are still going through refinement (Giraldo, 2020;Inbar-Lourie, 2013a). In the case of language teachers, the lal construct is intricate and still gaining research attention (for examples, see Coombe et al, 2020;Vogt et al, 2020).…”

A Reflection on Initiatives for Teachers’ Professional Development Through Language Assessment Literacy

“…Undoubtedly, the task of doing language assessment is part of teachers' practices. Thus, furthering their professional development must also involve close attention to how and why teachers do language assessment (Giraldo, 2020;Hill, 2017;Scarino, 2013). In fact, principles such as delivering professional development programs based on teachers' needs and providing sustained support are echoed in lal discussions (Brindley, 2001;Inbar-Lourie, 2008).…”

“…This decision makes sense and is consonant with principles for professional development in general; that is, professional development in language education is receptive of teachers' needs and contexts. For example, Fulcher's (2010) textbook for language testing, Tsagari et al's (2018) tale, Arias et al's (2012) professional development program, and Giraldo andMurcia's (2018, 2019) course are all based on thick descriptions of teachers' needs. This means some of the sources for lal presented in Figure 1 are informed by teachers' life-worlds (Scarino, 2013).…”

Language Assessment Literacy: Insights for Educating English Language Teachers through Assessment

“…The main argument in my 2020 paper (Giraldo, 2020a) is that we need to expand research methodologies for LAL, both from procedural and conceptual lenses. Fulcher (2012) rightly pointed out the limitations of using a questionnaire to be analyzed statistically.…”

“…The recommendations below come from the conceptual and empirical research I have conducted in LAL, which is fully described in Giraldo (2018), Giraldo and Murcia (2018;2019), Giraldo (2019a), Giraldo (2020a), andGiraldo (2021). Furthermore, these recommendations come from my experience as a language teacher educator teaching language assessment to pre-and in-service teachers in the Colombian context.…”