“A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment in an In-Class and Online English Phonetics Course "Fuente de estrés" u "Oasis de paz": percepciones de estudiantes de pregrado sobre la evaluación en una clase de fonética inglesa presencial y en línea « Source de stress » ou « Oasis de paix » : perceptions des étudiants sur l'évaluation dans un cours de phonétique anglaise présentiel et en ligne Anna Czura Abstract Post-Doctoral Fellow, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, The sudden need to switch from traditional in-class instruction to online teaching Spain. and assessment due to the covid-19 pandemic has posed considerable challenges anna.czura@uab.cat to teachers, but also to learners. The mixed method study reported in this article https://orcid. compared Polish undergraduate students’ cognitive, affective, and behavioural re- org/0000-0001-5234-6618 sponses to assessment provided in two practical English phonetics courses taught during an in-class fall semester and online spring semester. The quantitative data Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz were collected by means of an online questionnaire, which consisted of three Assistant Professor, University of Wrocław, Wrocław, Poland. categories of semantic differential scales referring to the cognitive, affective, and 623 behavioural responses. The qualitative data consisted of drawings, open-ended malgorzata.baran-lucarz@uwr.edu.pl surveys, and individual interviews with the students. The t-test results showed sig- https://orcid. nificant differences in students’ perceptions in terms of cognitive and behavioural org/0000-0001-5234-6618 aspects. The qualitative data revealed that although the students highly valued formative assessment in the course, the online mode weakened their engagement and interest in receiving feedback. It was also observed that students’ perceptions of in-class and online assessment were shaped largely by their individual dif- This project has received funding from ferences and learning preferences. The study underlies the importance of using the European Union's Horizon 2020 anxiety-lowering techniques in both in-class and online classes, and the need for research and innovation programme un- fostering undergraduate students’ autonomous learning skills. der grant agreement N.° 845783. Keywords: Assessment, English phonetics; students' perceptions; online instruc- tion; ict; covid-19; efl. Resumen La repentina necesidad de pasar de la enseñanza tradicional en las aulas a la docencia y la evaluación en línea, por cuenta de la pandemia de covid-19, no solo ha supuesto retos considerables para los docentes, sino también para los estudiantes. Received: 2021-03-08 / Accepted: 2021-06-21 / Published: 2021-09-11 https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v26n3a09 Special issue on The Role of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning amid the Crisis Generated by the covid-19 Pandemic. Editors: Marta González-Lloret, University of Hawai' i at Mānoa, usa; Laia Canals, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain; Jorge Pineda, Universidad de Antioquia, Colombia. © 2021 Universidad de Antioquia. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License by-nc-sa 4.0 International. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz El estudio de método mixto que se presenta en este artículo comparó las respuestas cognitivas, afectivas y comportamentales de estudiantes universitarios polacos a las evaluaciones impartidas en dos cursos prácticos de fonética inglesa durante un semestre en modalidad presencial y un semestre en modalidad virtual. Los datos cuantitativos se recogieron mediante un cuestionario en línea que consistió en tres categorías de escalas semánticas diferenciales. Los datos cualitativos se obtuvieron mediante dibujos, encuestas de preguntas abiertas y entrevistas individuales con los estudiantes. Los resultados de las pruebas t exhibieron diferencias importantes en las percepciones de los estudiantes en términos de aspectos cognitivos y comportamentales. Los datos cualitativos revelaron que, si bien los estudiantes valoraron muy bien la evaluación formativa en el curso, el modo virtual debilitó su compromiso e interés en la realimentación. También se observó que las percepciones de los estudiantes sobre la evaluación presencial y virtual se vieron determinados ampliamente por sus diferencias individuales y sus preferencias de aprendizaje. El estudio hace hincapié en la importancia de emplear técnicas para mitigar la ansiedad tanto en las clases presenciales como virtuales y la necesidad de promover las destrezas de aprendizaje autónomo en los estudiantes de pregrado. Palabras clave: evaluación, fonética inglesa; percepciones de estudiantes; enseñanza en línea; tic; covid-19; inglés como lengua extranjera. Résumé Le besoin soudain de passer de l’enseignement traditionnel en classe à l’enseignement et à l’évaluation en ligne, en raison de la pandemie de covid-19, 624 a posé des défis considérables non seulement pour les enseignants, mais aussi pour les étudiants. L’étude de méthode mixte présentée dans cet article a comparé les réponses cognitives, affectives et comportementales des étudiants universitaires polonais aux évaluations données dans deux cours pratiques de phonétique anglaise au cours d’un semestre présentiel et d’un semestre en mode virtuel. Les données quantitatives ont été recueillies à l’aide d’un questionnaire en ligne composé de trois catégories d’échelles sémantiques différentielles. Les données qualitatives ont été obtenues via dessins, des enquêtes à questions ouvertes et des entretiens individuels avec les étudiants. Les résultats des tests t ont montré des différences importantes dans les perceptions des étudiants en termes d’aspects cognitifs et comportementaux. Les données qualitatives ont révélé que bien que les étudiants aient apprécié l’évaluation formative dans le cours, le mode virtuel a affaibli leur engagement et leur intérêt pour les commentaires. Il a également été observé que les perceptions des étudiants vis-à-vis de l’évaluation en face-à-face et virtuelle ont été largement déterminées par leurs différences individuelles et leurs préférences d’apprentissage. L’étude met l’accent sur l’importance d’employer des techniques pour atténuer l’anxiété dans les cours en face-à-face et virtuels et sur la nécessité de promouvoir les compétences d’apprentissage autonome chez les étudiants de premier cycle. Mots-clés : évaluation ; phonétique anglaise ; perceptions des étudiants ; enseignement en ligne ; tic ; covid-19 ; anglais langue étrangère. Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online Introduction that investigated learners’ views of English lan- guage assessment and the assessment-related Until recently, research on foreign language emotions collected data through a critical inci- (fl) assessment tended to emphasise the role of dent technique (Czura, 2017), or a combination the teachers – their perceptions (Sahinkarakas, of a draw-a-picture technique, and an interview in 2012), the design of the assessment process, as primary school (Carless & Lam, 2012) and high well as the assessment tools and strategies used school settings (Xiao & Carless, 2013). (Czura, 2013). Nowadays, in light of the learned- centred and person-centred approaches (cf. Jacobs The awareness of learner perceptions of and & Renandya, 2016) to education and educational affective response to assessment is of particu- research, more and more attention is being paid lar importance in times of uncertainty and rapid to the role learners play in the assessment pro- changes. A sudden switch from traditional in- cess. Current approaches to assessment based on class instruction to fully online teaching and cognitive and constructivist theories underscore assessment during the covid-19 pandemic has the importance of learner agency (Andrade & posed considerable challenges not only to teach- Brookhart, 2020) and self-regulation (Zimmerman ers, but also to learners, and may have affected & Schunk, 2011), which is central to the ability their participation, performance, and attain- to derive learning gains from both formative and ment. The different teaching mode necessitated summative assessment. The meaning learners the introduction of new assessment strategies that make of both explicit and implicit presentation of would allow for evaluating learning objectives in teacher expectations, assessment tasks and criteria, an online environment. The study reported in this and the form of feedback provision shapes a unique article sets out to compare Polish undergraduate classroom assessment environment (Brookhart students’ responses to assessment strategies used 625 & DeVoge, 1999; Stiggins & Conklin, 1992), in a practical phonetics course in the 2019/20 aca- which, in turn, affects learners’ willingness to demic year during regular in-person classes in the engage in a task and develop their motivation fall semester and online instruction introduced as to learn (McMillan & Workman, 1998). With an emergency measure in March 2020. The data this in mind, it is necessary to explore learner per- in this mixed-methods research were collected by ceptions of and reactions to the assessment they means of semantic differential scales that encour- are subjected to. “Students’ points of view are aged a comparative analysis in terms of cognitive, windows into their reasoning” (Brooks & Brooks, affective, and behavioural responses; an inter- 1993, p. 60), and consequently, their perspectives view; a draw-a-picture technique, and an online need to be considered in the instructional plan- open-ended survey. ning, and assessment. Theoretical Framework Earlier studies on learners’ perceptions of assess- ment typically adopted a quantitative Dorman This section presents several approaches to assess- and Knightley’s (2006) Perceptions of Assessment ment in online education. In the second part, it Tasks Inventory (pati), or Alkharusi’s (2011) discusses the content, and diagnostic, summative, Perceived Classroom Assessment Environment and formative roles of assessing pronunciation. Scale. Recently, more and more studies explore learner perceptions of assessment by means of qual- Assessment in Online Learning itative research methods. For instance, Huhta et al. (2006) used oral diaries in a longitudinal study Since teacher-student interaction in online that focused on Finnish test-takers’ perceptions of learning is mediated by computer, the teaching a high-stakes language test. The qualitative studies strategies, rather than being transferred directly Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz from a traditional in-class lessons, should be et al., 2008) and assessment that supports learner adjusted to the affordances offered by this mode of autonomy and self-regulation (Booth et al., 2003). communication. The planning process in online Designing assessment in online courses should education entails different modes of communi- also entail listening to students’ voices. In their cation (synchronous, asynchronous), the level of study on student satisfaction in online courses, student engagement (Dennen et al., 2007) and self- Fredericksen et al. (2000) observed that students regulation (Vonderwell et al., 2007, p. 323), lack appreciate assessment forms that value student of visual cues, and the possible occurrence of tech- learning. “The valuing of student performance” nical problems (Reeves, 2000). Consequently, as (Fredericksen et al., 2000, p. 36) can take the form Qing and Akins (2005, p. 52) observe, “face-to- of portfolio assessment or a discussion that is not face pedagogy can and should be used to inform only graded, but also authentic and interactive. online pedagogy. But this in itself cannot be the Student/teacher and student/student interaction driving force to designing online courses; one was also indicated as critical to successful on-line must consider e-pedagogy to create a success- learning (Fredericksen et al., 2000). ful and meaningful course.” The same reasoning should inform the design of the assessment pro- Pronunciation Assessment cess in terms of not only its form, but also the Irrespective of whether pronunciation is inte- choice of objectives, tools, and strategies. grated in a fl general course or taught in a course The implementation of cmc (computer-mediated dedicated exclusively to pronunciation improve- communication) in education has opened new ment, its teaching ought to concern three areas: possibilities of efficient collaborative practice and productive skills, listening/discrimination abili- 626 synchronous and asynchronous communication ties, and phonological competence (Derwing & between peers and teachers. This constructivist turn Munro, 2015; Pennington & Rogerson-Revell, in online education, characterised by its interactive 2019). Taking into account that assessment is a and participatory nature, necessitated a radical crucial element of the didactic process, these three change in course design, teaching, and assessment. areas should be systematically evaluated, taking Assessment in distance education involving cmc the form of diagnostic, formative assessment (fa), emphasises the role of learner-centred, formative and summative assessment (sa) (Celce-Murcia et approaches to assessment, which by offering mean- al., 2010; Derwing & Munro, 2015). In order to ingful feedback, guide students’ learning and help determine teaching priorities, it is generally rec- them select the most efficient learning strategies. ommended that pronunciation teaching begins with diagnosing the level of productive and dis- Beebe et al. (2010) identified the main factors crimination skills, and phonological competence that affected successful transition from in-person of each student and the group. This initial stage to online assessment: (1) efficient time manage- is of utmost importance, since, as several studies ment; (2) student responsibility and initiative show “even experienced L2 learners seem to find in the assessment of learning; (3) structure of it difficult to self-assess correctly their pronuncia- the online medium, which involved information tion skills” (e.g., Dlaska & Klekeler, 2008, p. 506). about course requirements and assessment dead- Furthermore, identification of the priorities sup- lines; (4) complexity of content and (5) informal ports instructors in designing the treatment and assessment, which was tightly linked to student selecting appropriate assessment tools (Celce- initiative in asking for feedback. Given the role Murcia et al., 2010; Derwi ng & Munro, 2015). of learner independence in assessment in online learning, the subject literature also emphasises An analytic/atomistic rather than holistic/ the need for authentic assessment tools (e.g., Kim impressionistic evaluation is recommended Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online (Harding, 2011) as the basis of diagnostic assess- in general fl courses, pronunciation courses or ment of productive skills. It is advisable that it practical phonetics courses, by means of numer- takes the form of recording the students’ perform- ous exercises (see e.g., Celce-Murcia et al., 2010), ing tasks that allow for various degrees of speech many of which can be analogous to those used control, such as reading short passages, sentences, later for formal assessment. As Celce-Murcia et al. words, describing pictures, and free speech (see (2010) sum up, “The best tool we can provide our e.g., Celce-Murcia et al., 2010). Following the students is teaching them how to elicit feedback atomistic approach, the judge (usually the teacher) on their pronunciation from their environment identifies which particular areas of pronunciation and then how to make constructive use of this require improvement. In summative assessment feedback” (p. 359). of productive skills, whether conducted after shorter or longer periods of time, the same types Method of tasks and criteria of assessment are suggested so as to increase the reliability of the observed The study aimed to analyse the cognitive-affec- progress (Celce-Murcia et al., 2010). Since both tive-behavioural pathway of student response to perceptive skills (Derwing & Munro, 2015) and the in-class and online assessment in a course of phonological competence (Wrembel, 2003) sup- practical phonetics. The cognitive aspects referred port the ability to progress in pronunciation, they to students’ positive or negative attitudes to the should also be properly diagnosed and developed assessment process, its quality, perceived level of throughout the course. Both of these abilities can difficulty, fairness, and structure. In the second be easily verified with various types of written element, we focused on affective response, which tasks, such as discrimination, odd-one-out, cloze, included the participants’ motivation, anxiety, and the general sense of contentment that the 627 dictation, in the case of perceptive abilities, and true/false, open questions, multiple-choice ques- two modes of assessment evoked. Finally, we ana- tions, in the case of phonological competence. lysed the expressions of behavioural response to the assessment measures in both semesters, which Formative assessment is used to determine the involved the students’ level of active involvement effectiveness of instruction and provide students and independence. In particular, we addressed with immediate assistance before the difficulties the following research questions: What were the accumulate. It helps learners become aware of students’ attitudes to the in-class and online their strengths and weaknesses, and makes them assessment in the course of practical phonetics? more eager to implement new strategies that What affective response did the students experi- could facilitate their progress (Fernandes, 2011). ence during the in-class and online assessment? Additionally, since it does not involve formal What were the students’ behavioural reactions to grading, it is less anxiety-generating (Cassady & the two modes of assessment? Griedly, 2005), which is particularly important due to the highly emotional nature of pronunci- Participants ation learning (Baran-Łucarz, 2014). Finally, fa can be expected to facilitate students’ progress in Two groups of undergraduate first-year English pronunciation, taking into account that it raises majors (23 students) who had just finished their self-assessment, self-monitoring skills, and pro- two-semester course (an in-class fall semester and motes autonomy (Butler & Jiyoon, 2010). Several online spring semester) of practical phonetics researchers (e.g., Acton, 1984; Ricard, 1986) were invited to take part in the study. Although stress that self-directed pronunciation learning most of them showed interest and declared eager- can significantly boost advancement in pronun- ness to participate in the project, eventually 10 ciation. Consequently, fa should be applied daily students completed the questionnaire, seven Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz of whom provided us with additional qualita- gain competence in the characteristics of English tive data, by either taking part in the interview segments, the articulatory differences between (n=4) or an open-ended survey (n=3). The age of the target language and L1, knowledge on supra- the participants ranged from 19 to 24. Six of the segmentals (particularly word stress and rhythm), participants were females, four were males (inter- basic features of connected speech, and charac- views: two females and two males; open-ended teristics of rp and ga. Moreover, the ability to survey: two females and one male). Except for one receptively and productively use the International female Ukrainian student, the group consisted Phonetic Alphabet (ipa) was systematically of Polish students. All participants but one had developed to increase phonetic competence, dis- never taken part in a practical phonetics or pro- crimination skills, and pronunciation of words. nunciation course before. Finally, in both semesters, the participants’ The Practical Phonetics Course autonomous pronunciation learning skills were gradually developed through different strategies The following sections outlines the aims, content, and specific exercises to practice the articulation teaching techniques, as well as the assessment pro- of particular aspects of pronunciation, percep- cedures applied in the in-class and online course tion, and transcription. The online semester of practical phonetics. additionally aimed at advancing students’ knowl- edge of and ability to recognize and understand Aims, Content and Teaching Approach native English non-standard accents. The most important aim of the first-year practical Each class of 90 minutes had an analogous struc- 628 course of phonetics was to help students acquire ture in both semesters. It would focus on 1-2 English pronunciation at C1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference (cefr), which segments, complemented with basic information is one of the requirements of the undergradu- and practice of selected suprasegmentals or aspects ate study programme. The course attempted to of connected speech. The lesson usually opened help students gain the ability to “articulate virtu- with a game-like warm-up activity, homework ally all of the sounds of the target language with a checking, and reading aloud words and dialogues high degree of control” and to “self-correct if he/ practiced during earlier classes. This stage, though she noticeably mispronounces a sound”, control- rarely involved formal grading, allowed the ling at the same time stress rhythm and intonation teacher to monitor how much students worked (Council of Europe, 2018, p. 136). Standard individually after class. Then articulatory features models of pronunciation, i.e. modern Received of a new sound would be introduced, followed Pronunciation (rp) or General American (ga), by simple gymnastics of articulators, and prac- constitute the points of reference, which com- tice in transcribing selected vocabulary items plies with the expectations and needs of most of or phrases. Finally, repetition of words and sen- our students (Baran-Łucarz, 2013). The detailed tences, and practicing reading dialogues filled course syllabus and course objectives were pre- with the new sound took place. The class would sented at the very beginning of each semester. usually end with a communicative task or relax- It is recommended that three main aspects are ing game-like activity and assigning homework. developed in a pronunciation course – phonetic Authentic materials, such as short film excerpts and phonological knowledge/awareness, percep- and songs, were also systematically implemented. tive/discriminative capacities, and articulatory Additionally, in the online semester, volunteers skills (Derwing & Munro, 2015). In regard to the were invited to prepare a short PowerPoint® pre- first domain, the participants were expected to sentation on a non-standard English accent. Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online In the fall semester (October-February), the Assessment in the In-Class course was conducted in the classroom. Most and Online Semesters of the spring semester (March-June) was taught online: first via Zoom and since April via Following the cefr, assessment in this course is Microsoft Teams. Neither the teacher nor the understood as any formal and informal measures students had any earlier experience of distance that aim to respond to students’ performance and education. learning process. The in-class course opened in the fall semester with a diagnosis of the students’ Concerning the online classes, several difficulties pronunciation level and difficulties, and a survey were encountered, particularly at the beginning of about their needs and targets. During individual the course. Despite the teacher’s repeated requests, meetings they carried out a few tasks, i.e. passage only approximately 30 %–40 % of the students and word reading, picture description and free would have their cameras switched on. Since the speech. The learners’ performance was recorded lack of vision, unlike in a traditional class, made and then supplemented with the teachers’ feed- it difficult for the teacher to observe students’ on- back. At the end of the in-class semester, a similar spot reactions that could indicate their attitudes, procedure was carried out to allow for compari- involvement and motivation, they were encour- son, and then graded. In another graded task, the aged to share their opinions at the end of each participants were asked to prepare and imitate a class about the exercises, materials used, and any fragment of their favourite movie. As before, the difficulties they encountered. Only occasionally learners received recordings of their performance would students share their perceptions and if so, and detailed feedback. they were usually positive. Additionally, some stu- During the in-class semester, the students took 629 dents were not always audible enough, which they three written tests verifying their abilities to use blamed on their microphones or poor Internet ipa (a transcribing task) and phonological com- connection. Finally, the pace of the online lesson petence (true/false statements and cloze tasks). seemed a bit slower, due to, among other reasons, The teacher set some calm, quiet classical music waiting longer for students’ answers, technical in the background, whose successful applica- problems, or time spent on changing the materials tion for stress reduction was emphasized in shown on the screen. Suggestopedia (Lozanov, 1982), and observed in While most of the in-class written exercises were the phonetics teacher’s earlier teaching experi- conducted in pairs and then checked in unison, ence (Baran-Łucarz, 2013). The students could the online tasks were usually completed individ- also volunteer to prepare extra credit exercises for ually within a given time limit or done on-spot in their classmates. The results of the oral and writ- lockstep to save time. Chorus repetition of words ten tests constituted each 50 % of the final grade. and sentences, one of the basic activities used in Formal assessment during the online semester the classroom, was replaced in online teaching was conducted using analogous tasks and assess- by students practicing quiet echo reading while ment criteria, and was explained to the students listening together to recordings played by the as soon as the transition to the online mode was teacher. This activity was used to practice proper confirmed. Among the graded tasks, which aimed positioning and movement of articulators. To at motivating all the students to work individually improve ongoing teacher/student communi- at home, was identifying selected consonants and cation, the students were also reminded about vowels in a text of their choice. To minimize cheat- the possibility of seeing the teacher individually ing, the written transcription tests and tests on online or sending a message via the chat panel. standard/non-standard English accents consisted Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz of multiple-choice questions with a set time limit. entries devoted to potential progress, effectiveness The test was taken simultaneously by all the stu- of various strategies, and feelings accompanying dents and the items were presented in a different their pronunciation practice. Although students order. The students could not return to the previ- could get additional credits for diary reflections, ous questions. Before the first test, the format was none of them followed the teacher’s sugges- piloted and as a result a few more seconds were tion. Finally, at the end of the online semester, allotted to each task. The scores for both the sam- to encourage reflective practice and to help the ple and proper tests were normally distributed teacher grade the students fairly, each student and ranged from very high to very low, with the filled out a self-assessment sheet, which focused average scores being the most frequent. on the quality of individual work, actual involve- ment in the online course and classes, level of and In the final online oral test, the same types of tasks progress in ipa use, and accuracy in pronuncia- (passage reading, word reading, free speech), crite- tion. Students’ evaluations had to be justified, and ria of assessment (accuracy in segment production, any further comments were invited. word stress and rhythm, consistency in using rp or ga) and benchmarks were used as in the in-class Data Collection and Analysis semester. As before, the outcomes were thor- oughly discussed with each student and scans of The data in this mixed-methods research were the feedback were sent back to students. This time, collected by means of an online questionnaire, however, the oral performance constituted 60 % of which consisted of 18 sets of semantic differential the final score, while written performance 40 %. scales that encouraged a comparative analysis in terms of students’ cognitive, affective, and behav- 630 Some differences between the two semesters can ioural responses to assessment in two distinctive be identified in terms of formative assessment. modes of teaching. Each of these scales repre- A mainstay during traditional classes – practic- sented a dimension with bipolar adjective pairs (cf. ing reading dialogues aloud in pairs/small groups, Osgood, 1952) and seven points in between, e.g., during which the teacher would approach each pair and offer feedback – was replaced by students Challenging ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ Easy reading aloud in unison. Since the teacher consid- ered this stressful for the learners, initially the task Commonly used to assess “the 3-dimensional was performed by a few volunteers and only after structure of objects, events, and situations” some time would other students be nominated to (Bradley & Lang, 1994, p. 50), two identical sets read aloud. The feedback was given on the class of semantic differential scales were applied in this forum and was not a basis for formal assessment. study to explore students’ attitudes to assessment Although transcription exercises were also set, not used in a traditional in-class and an online course all the students were eager to share their screens of practical phonetics. The instrument addressed or write their answers in the chat. As before, the three dimensions of students’ responses: cogni- learners were encouraged to perform optional tive (seven adjective pairs), affective (eight adjective tasks – written and oral – to receive detailed writ- pairs) and behavioural (three adjective pairs). Seven ten feedback or help during online office hours. adjective pairs were framed negatively and were Whereas in the in-class semester many students reverse coded prior to the analysis. For each pair eagerly sought additional feedback, here only three of adjectives, the participants were asked to indi- students from among 23 took this opportunity. cate the point between the adjective pair that best reflected their attitude to the assessment process To promote autonomous learning, the students in a given semester. The questionnaire was distrib- were encouraged to write weekly diaries with uted in the form of an online Qualtrics tool after Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online the end of the spring semester in June 2020. We use the pictures they produced for the purpose calculated the statistical significance of results by of research analysis and in scholarly publications. means of the paired sample t-test in spss. The interviews were then transcribed, anony- mized, and pooled together with the survey data. In the next step, we supplemented the quanti- The qualitative data, including the pictures drawn tative data with individual interviews involving by students, were content analysed on the basis a draw-a-picture technique (cf. Kalaja, & Melo- of the three dimensions that informed the struc- Pfeifer, 2019; Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2018) ture of the quantitative questionnaire: cognitive, or an online open-ended survey. The use of affective, and behavioural responses. These three graphic and visual imagery in social sciences categories, together with the constituent adjec- dates back to Bronisław Malinowski’s use of pho- tive pairs, were used as a framework for deductive tographs and illustrations in his anthropological qualitative data analysis. First, we coded the data work (cf. Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2018). In individually, adding any emerging codes when studies on fl education, hand-drawn illustrations necessary. In the next step, we compared the find- have been successfully implemented to explore lin- ings and agreed on the final coding of the data. guistic landscapes (Kalaa & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019), multilingual practices (Pitkänen-Huhta & Results Rothoni, 2018), and teacher and learner beliefs and perceptions (Chik, 2018). The presentation of the results starts with the quantitative analysis of the data derived from Shortly before the interview, the participants the online questionnaires. In the second step, we were requested to draw two pictures and formu- attend to the data collected by means of the inter- late corresponding captions on the basis of their view and draw-a-picture technique in reference 631 thoughts, experiences, understandings of, and to the three types of student response: cognitive, attitudes towards assessment in each semester. affective, and behavioural. When participants’ attitudes to assessment in the two semesters did not differ, one picture was suffi- Quantitative Data cient. We then asked the participants to elaborate on the pictures at the beginning of the interviews, Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics illustrat- which lasted approximately 30 minutes each and ing the comparison of students’ perceptions of the were carried out by means of a video-conference in-class and online assessment. On the whole the tool. The remaining interview questions touched perceptions of the assessment process in both in- upon the participants’ perceptions of the strong class and online semesters are positive. Except for and the weak points of the assessment process in the ‘lenient-strict’, ‘happy-angry’ and ‘independent both semesters, and their investment in complet- – imposed’ pairs, the responses in reference to the ing the obligatory and optional assignments. The second semester tended to lean more towards the open-ended survey contained the same questions negatively phrased adjectives. as the interview, except for the draw-a-picture technique, and was introduced as an emergency Starting from the cognitive dimension, the stu- measure given the small number of interview dents rather unanimously described the in-class participants. They could decide whether they assessment process as clear, fair, and worthwhile. preferred to be interviewed by their practical pho- The evaluations of these categories deteriorated netics teacher (the second author) or an exterior in the online semester, whereas the values of researcher (the first author). Prior to the data col- standard deviation (sd) increased. In the affec- lection, the participants granted their informed tive dimension, except for the ‘happy-angry’ pair, consent, which included explicit permission to which remained on the same level, the evaluations Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz Table 1 Students’ Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioural Reactions to In-Class and Online Assessment In-Class Online N.° Adjective Pair Assessment Assessment Mean sd Mean sd COGNITIVE RESPONSE 1 clear—confusing 1.7 0.67 2.6 1.58 2 easy—challenging 3.3 0.97 3.5 0.97 3 worthwhile—useless 1.8 0.92 2.4 1.35 4 fair—unfair 1.6 0.97 2.1 1.2 5 lenient—strict 3.3 0.92 3 0.94 6 detailed—general 2.3 0.95 2.7 1.16 7 diverse—monotonous 2.3 1.25 3.1 1.1 TOTAL 2.34 0.54 2.74 0.82 AFFECTIVE RESPONSE motivating— 1.8 0.79 2.8 1.55 8 demotivating 9 happy—angry 2.5 1.27 2.5 1.27 10 confident—shy 2.4 1.58 3.8 2.1 11 calm—stressed 2.1 1.37 2.9 1.97 12 pleasant—unpleasant 1.8 1.03 2.2 1.23 632 13 secure—insecure 2.4 1.26 2.9 1.85 14 cheerful—frustrated 2.7 1.49 3.4 2.07 15 exciting—boring 2.6 1.17 3 1.15 TOTAL 2.84 0.9 3.24 1.13 BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSE 16 active—passive 1.6 0.84 2.6 1.43 17 organised—chaotic 2.4 1.35 3.3 1.7 18 independent—imposed 3.3 1.34 2.4 0.84 TOTAL 2.13 0.71 2.77 0.97 of the online assessment were more negative in be less unanimous in their reactions to the online comparison with the first semester, especially assessment than the one conducted in-class. with regard to the level of stress and self-confi- dence. Additionally, the relatively high sd values Since the assumption of normal distribution was in the evaluations of the online assessment sug- met, paired t-tests were calculated for the whole gest great variability in students’ responses, which scale, the constituent subscales, and the individ- is particularly visible in the ‘confident—shy’ ual items to determine whether the students’ and ‘cheerful—frustrated’ pairs. In the behav- attitudes to the two modes of assessment were sta- ioural dimension, although students indicated that tistically different. With the alpha level set at 0.05, online assessment entailed more independence, a significant difference was established between they described it as more passive. The analysis of the participants’ overall attitudes to in-class vs. online sd values indicates that the students tended to assessment (df=9; t=-3.13; p=0.012), as well as in Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online terms of the cognitive (df=9; t=3.07; p=0.13) and behavioural response (df=9; t= -2.492; p=0.034). Similar analyses for individual questionnaire items revealed statistical significance in the following adjective pairs: ‘demotivating—motivating’ (t= -.246, p=.015), ‘active—passive’ (t=-2.34, p=.023) and ‘confident—shy’ (t=3.28, p=.01). Qualitative Data The qualitative data analysis was structured around three main categories of students’ responses: cog- nitive, affective, and behavioural. For the sake of brevity, only selected, most representative pictures drawn by participants will be presented. Fall Semester —In-Class Course Figure 2 “Fairness”—A Drawing Illustrating In-Class Assessment [P4]. In terms of the cognitive dimension, Participant 1 [P1] entitled his/her drawing as “The work- ing mechanism” (Figure 1) and explained that “a grade reflected my learning efforts because I received rope has a beginning and an end. (…) so the whole quite a high grade which, in my opinion, fully corre- rope for me was the first semester which was, well, sponds to the progress I made.” In the statement “in this course I got the real feedback”, P2 underlined 633 essentially how it was supposed to be.” that, unlike in some other courses, feedback in the phonetics course was detailed and offered in-depth comments that helped students improve their com- petences and track progress. One student drew an open door to illustrate that the assessment process would “open [his] eyes to new perspectives and new horizons,” and new possibilities of developing pro- nunciation skills. On the other hand, P7 perceived the content of assessment as excessively challenging as he/she would rather focus on the basics. Figure 1 “The Working Mechanism”—A Drawing Il- lustrating In-Class Assessment [P1] Regarding the affective aspects, the participants expressed predominantly positive feelings towards the subject, the teacher, and the assessment. In their evaluations of the assessment process, They underlined that they felt calm and peace- most of the participants highlighted that the ful throughout the process. In the participants’ assessment was fair, which was strengthened by opinions, the tension was minimised by ongoing, the fact that two out of four illustrations were enti- continuous assessment based on clear rules and tled “Fairness” (one presented in Figure 2). It was criteria, individual or group feedback sessions, emphasised that the assessment was clear, transpar- and such anxiety-reducing techniques as playing ent, and involved no ambiguity. All the participants music during tests. As P2 explained, “I had this believed that the grades reflected their engage- feeling and later I discussed it with my colleagues ment and/or skills. As P5 pointed out, “my final [that] we went into the assessment and before we Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz knew it, it was already over.” In contrast, for one person, who considered assessment challenging (see above), it was the source of embarrassment, whereas two persons voiced critical opinions about the written phonetic transcription test which P2 described as “less important, (…) inferior to the oral part, which in my mind was like the real part.” A few students completed some additional assign- ments as they were encouraged by the positive Figure 3 “The Impaired Mechanism”—A Drawing Il- atmosphere, an interesting and creative task, the lustrating Online Assessment [P1] perceived usefulness of feedback, and the clarity of assessment. P5 noted that such tasks served as a driving force “in a time of my laziness.” However, We will start with the cognitive evaluations of other students admitted that it was the grade that assessment, which at the same time lead to several motivated them to engage in extra activities or emotional and behavioural reactions. Regarding do homework: “an extra grade is always welcome the clarity of online assessment, most of the par- [laughter] in a positive way” [P3]. Even though P1 ticipants claimed it was well-organised and clear. was aware of the value of the additional activities, As P2 put it, it “was very clear, very well-explained, she/he failed to do them: ‘[it was] an encourage- (…), nothing surprising,” which contributed to ment to try some tasks or try some exercises at their sense of security. This is reflected in the pic- home, which would improve one’s pronunciation ture of P2 (see Figure 4), who drew an oasis and 634 and I didn’t do those.” Such optional tasks were commented: “the phonetics assessment was sort juxtaposed with the obligatory homework exercises, of an oasis (…). It was like a safe haven that I knew which P1 did “because when we [the class] meet on I could, sort of, rely on.” The student explained weekly basis, you’re constantly, you have more invig- ilation.” She/he further explained: “In class you’re naked. You can’t really hide anything, so you know everything will be checked, so therefore, well, at least I did motivate myself to do more things.” Spring Semester —Online Course Most of the participants summed up the assess- ment positively, saying e.g., “I don’t have any major complaints when it comes to assessment. I didn’t see much difference in assessment” [P3]. It seems, however, that many shared the opinion of P1, who used the term “impaired mechanism” in reference to online assessment. As in the case of the in-class semester, the participant drew again a rope (see Figure 3), and explained: it’s also a rope. It also has a beginning and end, but we can see that it’s being torn apart. We can see that the rope is very tense. It’s likely to be damaged. So there Figure 4 “Oasis” —A Drawing Illustrating Online As- were some difficulties on the way. sessment [P2] Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online the feeling of security by referring again to the lack reality too well, […] but rather assessed the ability of ambiguity in assessment. As he put it, “I knew to shoot.” Finally, students’ doubts about the reli- that this assessment would be according to some ability of the online test were also strengthened standard (…), it was familiar to me. I knew from by their anxiety related to encountering techni- the previous semester what to work on, the form cal problems while writing. Student P1 explained was quite similar, so it was all known and sort of as follows: “…it was much more tense for me safe. It was a peaceful place amongst the chaos.” because I was worried not only about my skills in transcription, but also about the condition of P4 had a different impression, stating as follows: my Internet. […] So it was like extra baggage on “the second semester, as much as I really enjoyed the the test.”However, further analyses of students’ class, was a bit of (…) an unknown when it came to responses revealed that the feeling of security dur- the final grade.” It was further illustrated in a draw- ing online classes, which some considered even ing representing a question mark and entitled “A higher than during in-class meetings, was due to stressful unknown.” All the participants claimed yet another factor. As P1 explained, he/she did the final grade they received at the end of the online not do the homework as “it’s easier to hide behind semester was fair (e.g. “Yeah, I think I received the computer (...), hide things we didn’t do.” She/ a grade that reflected my stage of pronunciation he added that it is different in class, where “you skills” [P1]). Some students, however, had the feel- feel ashamed in a way for not doing them [home- ing it was more their effort that determined the final work assignments] and you feel responsible in a grade rather than their skills (“In fact I think the way because that’s your fault.” Participant P2 also final mark reflected the amount of work and effort confessed that she/he rarely did homework assign- I put this semester” [P3]). Others, e.g., P2, believed ments not only because she/he did not have time, 635 that “perhaps the grade was more reflective of the studying in two faculties, but also because they skills and less reflective of the actual (…) effort.” were not graded. Similarly, the assurance of being secure, of the teacher not punishing the students The problem of fairness was also indicated by most with fail grades for not having done the home- of the students in reference to the online writ- work, allowed P4 to remain more passive and ten tests. Many of them complained that the time not to do some homework or optional tasks: for providing the responses was too short, which, “We didn’t have to send them (…). We just had as they thought, did not allow them to show to have them with us. I sometimes didn’t do them their actual knowledge (“I was feeling a bit unfair just because I would forget, or I wouldn’t have the because I knew I was prepared and still I wouldn’t motivation to do them, have the stress or fear receive max points because of just the time” [P1]) that if I don’t do them, it’s going to be something and made them stressed. According to some stu- bad.” Since many of the homework assignments dents, the fairness of the written transcription tests were voluntary, it was up to the students whether was also negatively affected by their preference for they would receive qualitative feedback from the pen and paper rather than online tests, and open- teacher. Although P1 considered him/herself an ended rather than multiple choice tests: “seeing autonomous learner, it is clear that he/she failed it [transcriptions] on the computer is a bit differ- to understand that seeking feedback on one’s own ent than transcribing by me. It’s easier for me with performance (cf. Cotterall, 2000) is an important the ipa to write it down with my hand,” said P4. element of learner autonomy: On the other hand, P3 commented on the general some people will ask for the feedback and some peo- weaknesses of multiple-choice tests, claiming as ple will not and I think I belong rather to the second follows: “I think this could not have been avoided, group of the people that I [sic] like to work autono- but the grades for this part did not represent the mously and I’m kind of scared of remarks sometimes. Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz So when someone’s not giving me remarks directly, I’m not willing pretty [sic] to ask for them, so I prob- ably did receive less feedback. [P1] Some students, however, especially those who were more grade-oriented (e.g., P3), were still active and motivated to do most of the optional tasks. Moreover, it turned out that this was not only due to extrinsic motivation, but also because certain exercises were considered particularly worthwhile for them. Among these exercises were the presen- tations on various accents or writing dialogues filled with particular sounds, which “was simply a good, creative, challenging task” that allowed the students to “further develop” (P3). As regards other emotional reactions, participant P4 expressed feeling weird and unnatural during online assessment: “it wasn’t as natural and easy- going as it was in the first semester, because not everyone had the chance to speak up and be heard properly.” Although she/he regarded her/himself 636 to be the most active student, she/he still had the feeling of not having practised enough: “I knew I was speaking the most out of the class because I try to be active, but it was one minute per week Figure 5 “Student Contribution” —A Drawing Illus- or even less. It was a bit weird and stressful.” On trating Online Assessment [P2] the other hand, she/he enjoyed taking assessment at home “I think the assessment online, the final speaking exam was less stressful. You can sit in your own chair, wear anything you want and still enjoyed working individually, since they could be comfortable. […]. But I just think if it wasn’t “talk a lot to themselves” [P7] and freely organize for the pandemic, I would love to get back to the their time and work [P1, P2, P3], some found it institute.” Student P5 shared another affective and difficult to motivate themselves to “do anything due behavioural response to online on-spot forma- to not being able to communicate in real life with tive assessment, stressing that “feedback of tasks others and spending almost all the time at home” couldn’t be as fast as in the case of normal classes” [P5] or finding individual oral practice particularly and that she/he favoured formative assessment strange and unnatural (“it’s a bit weird practicing by provided to her/him individually: “it was com- myself in my room during the night” [P4]). Finally, plicated for me to speak and discuss my mistakes one of the participants strongly stressed the value of because I felt that everyone has to hear it and spend self-assessment (see Figure 5), which, according to their time on it instead of doing something more her/him, was a new worthwhile experience, placing useful.” On the other hand, P7 acknowledged the learner in the centre, and encouraging reflec- being happy about not having “direct contact with tion on how much progress was made and what still other students” for it made her/him less stress- needs to be worked on to more successfully direct ful. Although a few more students claimed they future work. Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online Discussion (Kharbat & Abu Daabes, 2021). This question becomes even more pertinent in grade-oriented The quantitative data indicate that the participants contexts, in which students tend to express posi- held predominately positive perceptions of assess- tive attitudes to cheating (Chudzicka-Czupała et ment in the in-class and online teaching modes; al., 2013). It also seems that learners need adequate however, in most cases their evaluations of being training in how to effectively manage online assess- assessed online leaned towards the negative side of ment and the emotions it evokes. the spectrum. This was confirmed by the statistical calculation, which revealed a significant difference It appears that participants were very much in terms of the students’ overall perceptions of the aware that the attitudes they had to assessment in-class and online assessment, as well as in terms were shaped by their individual differences and of cognitive and behavioural responses. learning preferences. As student P1 put it, “It’s really about individuals.” Indeed, it appears that sev- The general attitudes towards the assessment pro- eral learner-based factors – their self-perceived and cess in both semesters expressed during interviews actual levels of pronunciation, initial level of anxiety, were also largely positive. The students viewed it preferences towards different strategies of learn- as well-organised, fair, clear, adjusted to the level ing, and probably also personality – affected their of the students, and detailed. It is undoubtful that perceptions of assessment. These individual dif- in their evaluations of the assessment process the ferences could also explain the lack of confidence students underlined the value of ongoing, contin- experienced by some participants during forma- uous feedback, and formative forms of assessment. tive assessment of oral performance provided during online lessons. What supports such a claim However, a deeper analysis of the pictures and is the statistically significant difference in the con- 637 responses indicated that some aspects of online fident-shy subcategory of the affective responses, assessment were not perceived as sufficiently fair. with the shyness being higher in the online mode. From the perspective of the participants, the fair- The highly diversified preferences of learners call ness of the written tests was distorted by the very for the need to offer a variety of approaches to form of the test (multiple-choice test), the anxi- presentation, practice, and assessment in the two ety generated by the short time limit to provide modes of learning. responses, and by the anticipation of techni- cal problems while test taking. Such perceptions The analysis of the quantitative data suggests that were revealed by the students despite the fact that students’ affective reaction to different modes of the test was piloted, which gave them a chance to assessment did not change. This may be attrib- familiarise themselves with and voice their opinion uted to a wide range of teaching techniques the about the test type. Moreover, the test results had teacher consciously introduced to create a posi- normal distributions, which suggests they included tive atmosphere and reduce the anxiety level such as individualised feedback, music during tests, and a balanced amount of good, bad, and average scores. voluntary activities. On the other hand, a more This poses the question of how to collect evidence detailed analysis of this subscale implies significant of learning certain content (here phonetic tran- differences in the item referring to students’ per- scription and phonological competence), which ceived motivation and self-confidence. Therefore, a is normally verified in the form of a written test in more in-depth exploration of the affective domain a fair and stress-free way, in an online form. This in the online environment is needed. may appear difficult, if we want to avoid resorting to proctoring, which raises a number of privacy- Both the quantitative and qualitative data cor- related, environmental, and psychological concerns roborate certain changes in students’ behavioural Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz response. Some participants, particularly those into account both the affordances, and constraints who were grade-oriented, used the possibil- of learning and teaching in online environments. ity of “hiding” behind the screen during online classes as an excuse not to do regular homework The students’ propensity to hide behind a com- assignments. At the same time, despite considering puter screen and remain inactive was also themselves autonomous and valuing detailed forma- reflected in their unresponsiveness to invitations tive assessment, they did not take advantage of the to the present study. Despite the initial decla- possibility of receiving systematic feedback from rations the students made during one-on-one the teacher, which, as stressed by Celce-Murcia et al. online sessions with teachers, in the end only (2010), they could have made constructive use of. a fraction of students decided to participate in the project. The poor responsiveness of the These findings confirm those of numerous stud- students in this online study was somehow sur- ies which indicate that student engagement, prising, given our positive experiences of data understood here as students’ willingness to inter- collection in the same institution in the past. act with the teacher, peers and the course content This observation indicates a more general prob- is central to student learning, which is even more lem of conducting online research, and a further pronounced in distance education, which entails search for effective and efficient ways of gathering the feeling of isolation and disconnection from the data online is necessary. Consequently, although group (Dennen, Darabi, & Smith, 2007; Robinson the study enriches our understanding of how & Hullinger, 2008). Following the assertion made learners view in-class and online assessment, cau- by Vonderwell et al. (2007, p. 323) that “assessment tion is needed in drawing clear-cut conclusions. as a process requires that online learning activities Additionally, we are aware that the comparison 638 facilitate self-assessment, peer-assessment, self-reg- of students’ perceptions of two different modes of ulatory mechanisms, and learner autonomy,” the assessment would have been more accurate if the assessment tasks in the phonetics course encour- data concerning the in-class assessment had been aged self-reflection and participatory practice. collected directly after the end of the semester. Nevertheless, not all students were interested in However, it must be taken into account that the engaging in such activities. The emergency, unex- research design and data collection took place in pected, and rather abrupt introduction of distance a time of unprecedented uncertainty and excep- learning during the covid-19 pandemic was tionally heavy workload that the transition from caused by the external situation and was not the in-class to online learning entailed on the part of mode of learning the students had signed up for; the researchers and participants. however, it revealed an urgent need to foster learner autonomy and self-regulation in students at the Considering the methodological choices in the undergraduate level. Given that student engage- present study, we believe that the three instruments ment and participation had a direct impact on the complemented each other and enabled both quan- effectiveness of the teaching and assessment pro- titative and qualitative data analysis and discussion cesses, further studies and training opportunities centred around the three types of student response. that focus on student motivation and teacher moti- Of note is that we found the participants’ commen- vational strategies in online classes are called for. tary on the illustrations during interviews essential to The study findings also confirm earlier assertions fully understand the essence of the visual conceptu- (e.g., Qing & Akins, 2005) that although in-class alisations and the metaphors they used. Finally, the pedagogy, especially the successful one, should draw-a-picture technique seemed interesting for the inform the instructional planning and implemen- interview participants, who eagerly submitted their tation of online education, it is necessary to take illustrations and elaborated on the content. Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online Conclusions ment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 27(4), 350–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/096959 The present study indicates that despite univer- 4X.2019.1571992 sity students’ predominantly positive affective Baran-Łucarz, M. (2013). Phonetics learning anxi- response to the transition from a traditional in- ety —results of a preliminary study. Research in Language, 11(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/ class to online assessment in a practical phonetics v10015-012-0005-9 course, there was a marked contrast in their cogni- tive and behavioural response, which was mainly Baran-Łucarz, M. (2014). The link between pronunciation anxiety and willingness to communicate in the for- shaped by the level of learner autonomy, agency, eign language classroom: The Polish efl context. motivation, and individual learning styles, and to Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue a lesser extent, anxiety and technological limita- canadienne des langues vivantes, 70(4), 445–473. tions. Whereas the time management, content, https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2666 and structure of assessment, except for an online Beebe, R, Vonderwell, S., & Boboc, M. (2010). Emerging test with strict time limits, did not raise the par- patterns in transferring assessment practices from F2f to online environments. Electronic Journal of e- ticipants’ concerns, it appears that students did Learning, 8(1), 1–12. not fully benefit from the informal and formative forms of assessment offered by the instructor. In light Booth, R., Clayton, B., Hartcher, R., Hungar, S., Hyde, P., & Wilson, P. (2003). The development of quality of students’ rather passive participation in the online online assessment in vocational education and train- classes and tasks, there is a need to implement ing: Vol. 1. Australian National Training Authority. a wider systemic approach to fostering learner Bradley, M. M, & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: autonomy at the undergraduate level, as well as to The self-assessment manikin and the semantic introduce more interim measures of eliciting stu- differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Ex- 639 dent work in online classes. perimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59. https://doi. org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 Acknowledgements Brookhart, S. M., & DeVoge, J. G. (1999). Testing a theory about the role of classroom assessment in student We wish to express our deepest gratitude to all motivation and achievement. Applied Measure- the participants who took part in the study. We ment in Education, 12(4), 409–425. https://doi. org/10.1207/S15324818AME1204_5 are most grateful to them for sacrificing their free time, spending it again in front of the screens, to Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: provide us with all the necessary information. It The case for constructivist classrooms. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. is only thanks to their involvement that we have been able to shed more light on the matters pre- Butler Y., & Jiyoon, L. (2010). The effects of self- assessment among young learners of sented in this paper. Many thanks! English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5–31. https://doi. org/10.1177/0265532209346370 References Carless, D. & Lam, R. (2012). The examined life: perspec- Acton, W. (1984). Changing fossilized pronunciation. tives of lower primary school students in Hong tesol Quarterly, 18(1), 71–85. https://doi. Kong. Education, 42(3), 313–329. https://doi.org/ org/10.2307/3586336 10.1080/03004279.2012.689988 Alkharusi, H. (2011). Development and datametric proper- Cassady J. C., & Griedly, B. E. (2005). The effects of online ties of a scale measuring students’ perceptions of the formative and summative assessment on text anxi- classroom assessment environment. International ety and performance. The Journal of Technology, Journal of Instruction, 4(1), 105–120. https://doi. Learning and Assessment, 4(1). https://ejournals. org/10.1037/t03442-000 bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1648 Andrade, H. L., & Brookhart, S. M. (2020). Classroom Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. assessment as the co-regulation of learning. Assess- (2010). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala Anna Czura and Małgorzata Baran-Łucarz teachers of English to speakers of other languages (2nd ricos e práticos, (pp. 81–107). Centro de Investigação Ed.). Cambridge University Press. em Educação e Psicologia da Universidade de Évora. Chik, A. (2018). Beliefs and practices of foreign lan- Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, guage learning: A visual analysis. Applied Linguisics K. (2000). Student satisfaction and perceived Review, 9(2-3), 307–331. https://doi.org/10.1515/ learning with online courses: Principles and ex- applirev-2016-1068 amples from the suny learning network, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 7–41. Chudzicka-Czupała, A., Lupina-Wegener, A., Borter, S., & https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v4i2.1899 Hapon, N. (2013) Students’ attitude toward cheat- ing in Switzerland, Ukraine and Poland. The New Garrison, D. R. (1997). Computer conferenc- Educational Review, 32, 66–76. ing: the post-industrial age of distance education. Open Learning, 12(2), 3–11. https:// Cotterall, S. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy through doi.org/10.1080/0268051970120202 the curriculum: principles for designing language courses. elt Journal, 54(2), 109–117. https://doi. Harding, L. (2011). Accent and listening assessment: A vali- org/10.1093/elt/54.2.109 dation study of the use of speakers with L2 accents on an academic English listening test. Peter Lang. Council of Europe. (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, as- Huhta, A., Kalaja, P., & Pitkanen-Huhta, A. (2006). The dis- sessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. cursive construction of a high-stakes test: The many https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with- faces of a test-taker. Language Testing, 23(3), 326– new-descriptors-2018/1680787989 350. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532206lt331oa Czura, A. (2013). The role of peer-assessment in develop- Jacobs G. M., & Renandya W. A. (2016). Student-centred ing adolescent learners’ autonomy. Baltic Journal of learning in elt. In W. A. Renandya & H. Widodo English Language, Culture and Literature 3, 20–32. (Eds.), English language teaching today: Linking the- Czura, A. (2017). Adolescent learner perceptions of ory and practice (pp. 13–24). Springer. https://doi. 640 foreign language assessment: Critical incident org/10.1007/978-3-319-38834-2_2 analysis. Glottodidactica, 44(2), 25–39. https://doi. Kalaja, P. & Melo-Pfeifer, S. (Eds.) (2019). Visualising multi- org/10.14746/gl.2017.44.2.02 lingual lives. More than words. Multilingual Matters. Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). In- https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922616 structor-learner interaction in online courses: The Kalaja, P., & Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (2018). alr special issue: relative perceived importance of particular in- Visual methods in applied language studies. Applied structor actions on performance and satisfaction. Linguistics Review, 9(2-3), 157–176. https://doi. Distance Education, 28(1), 65–79. https://doi. org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0005 org/10.1080/01587910701305319 Kharbat, F. F., & Abu Daabes, A. S. (2021). E-proctored Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2015). Pronunciation exams during the covid-19 pandemic: A close un- fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 derstanding. Educ Inf Technol. (2021). https://doi. teaching and research. John Benjamins. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10639-021-10458-7 org/10.1075/lllt.42 Kim, N., Smith, M. J., & Maeng, K. (2008). Assessment in Dlaska, A., & Klekeler, C. (2008). Self-assessment of pro- online distance education: A comparison of three nunciation. System, 36(4), 506–516. https://doi. online programs at a university. Online Journal of org/10.1016/j.system.2008.03.003 Distance Learning Administration, 11(1). https:// Dorman, J. P., & Knightley, W. M. (2006). Initial use of the www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring111/ Perceptions of Assessment Tasks Inventory (pati) kim111.html in English secondary schools. Alberta Journal of Lino, A., & Thomson, R. I. (2018). Effects of web-based Educational Research, 52(3), 196–199. https://doi. hvpt on efl learners’ recognition and produc- org/10.1037/t68629-000 tion of L2 sounds. In P. Taalas, J. Jalkanen, L. Fernandes, D. (2011). Avaliar para melhorar as aprendizagens: Bradley and S. Thouësny (Eds.), Future-proof Análise e discussão de algumas questões essenciais. call: Language Learning as Exploration and En- [Evaluate to improve learning: Analysis and discus- counters – Short Papers from eurocall 2018 (pp. sion of some key issues]. In I. Fialho & H. Salgueiro 106–111). Research-publishing.net. https://doi. (Eds.), Turma mais e sucesso escolar: Contributos teó- org/10.14705/ rpnet.2018.26.821 Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala Íkala “A Stressful Unknown” or “an Oasis”?: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Assessment In-Class and Online Lozanov, G. (1982). Suggestology and suggestopedia. In adult learners. tesl Canada Journal, Special Is- R. W. Blair (Ed.), Innovative approaches to language sue, 1, 243–253. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl. teaching (pp. 146–159). Newbury House Publishers. v3i0.1009 McLoughlin, C., & Luca, J. (2002). A learner-centered Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New bench- approach to developing team skills through web- marks in higher education: Student engagement based learning and assessment. British Journal of in online learning. Journal of Education for Busi- Educational Technology, 33(5), 571–582. https:// ness, 84(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.3200/ doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00292 JOEB.84.2.101-109 McMillan, J. H., & Workman, D. J. (1998). Classroom Sahinkarakas, S. (2012). The role of teaching expe- assessment and grading practices: A review of the rience on teachers’ perceptions of language literature. Metropolitan Educational Research Con- assessment. Procedia —Social and Behavioral Sci- sortium. (eric Document Reproduction Service ences, 47, 1787–1792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. No. ED453263) sbspro.2012.06.901 Osgood, C. (1952). The nature and measurement of mean- Stiggins, R. J., & Conklin, N. F. (1992). In teachers’ hands: ing. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 172–237. https:// Investigating the practices of classroom assessment. doi.org/10.1037/h0055737 suny Press. Pennington, M. & Rogerson-Revell, P. (2019). English Vonderwell, S., Liang, X., & Alderman, K. (2007). Asyn- pronunciation teaching and research: Contempo- chronous discussions and assessment in online rary perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi. learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Edu- org/10.1057/978-1-137-47677-7 cation, 39(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Pitkänen-Huhta, A., & Rothoni, A. (2018). Visual accounts 15391523.2007.10782485 of Finnish and Greek teenagers’ perceptions of their Wrembel. M. (2003). An empirical study on the role of multilingual language and literacy practices. Applied metacompetence in the acquisition of foreign lan- Linguistics Review, 9(2-3), 333–364. https://doi. org/10.1515/applirev-2016-1065 guage phonology. In M.-J. Solé, D. Recasens, & 641 J. Romero (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Interna- Qing, L., & Akins, M. (2005). Sixteen myths about online tional Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS) (pp. teaching and learning: Don’t believe everything 985–988). Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona; you hear. TechTrends, 49(4), 51–60. https://doi. International Phonetic Association. org/10.1007/BF02824111 Xiao, Y., & Carless, D. R. (2013). Illustrating students’ Reeves, R. (2000). Alternative approaches for online learning perceptions of English language assessment: Voices environments in higher education. Journal of Educa- from China. relc Journal, 44(3), 319–340. https:// tional Computing Research, 23(1), 101–111. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0033688213500595 doi.org/10.2190/GYMQ-78FA-WMTX-J06C Zimmerman, B., & Schunk, D. (Eds.). (2011). Hand- Ricard, E. (1986). Beyond fossilization: A course on strate- book of self-regulation of learning and performances. gies and techniques in pronunciation for advanced Routledge. How to cite this article: Czura, A., & Baran-Łucarz, M. (2021). “A stressful unknown” or “an oasis”?: Undergraduate students’ perceptions of assessment in an in-class and online English phonetics course. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 26(3), 623-641. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v26n3a09 Medellín, Colombia, Vol. 26 Issue 3 (September-December, 2021), pp. 623-641, ISSN 0123-3432 www.udea.edu.co/ikala