oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Understanding the Knowledge Requirements for English 6 -Four Teachers’ Interpretations of the Terms "Relatively Varied" and "Well-grounded and Balanced" in Students’ Written Production
Örebro University, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences.
2019 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

This paper presents a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews investigating 1) How teachers in the course English 6 interpret the terms "relatively varied" and "well-grounded and balanced", and how their interpretations differed, 2) How do the teachers interpret the terms in relations to the National Agency for Education’s commentary material?, and 3) What kind of resources do the teachers use to understand those terms? The reason for conducting this research is to gain a greater understanding of how teachers in the course English 6 in upper secondary school interpret the terms in the requirements. The terms in our requirements leave a lot of room for interpretations, and I want to find out how teachers with experiences of teaching interpret the terms in order to better understand how they can be interpret.

My finding revealed that three out of four of the interviewed teachers did not mention the terms in their description of them, they brought in other aspects from the requirements, and did not address neither of the terms clearly. This applied to all the teachers, except for T4. The teacher that did address the terms was the only one who read the National Agency’s commentary material, therefore T4’s interpretations of the term aligned closest to the description in the commentary material.

From the answers the teachers provided me with, they seemed to interpret the requirements in their own way and this is a validity and reliability issue when assessing the students’ texts. The teachers answers are also discussed from a norm-referenced perspective.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. , p. 38
Keywords [en]
English as a second language (ESL), "Teachers perception" AND assessment, L2 AND assessment
National Category
Learning
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-75548OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-75548DiVA, id: diva2:1340175
Subject / course
English; English
Supervisors
Available from: 2019-08-02 Created: 2019-08-02 Last updated: 2019-09-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(275 kB)0 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 275 kBChecksum SHA-512
0fa65c380c955d25e171bd5efae4c78f9c78d69285ef8cff9d904ea0ef694c81a9ce3dc2a831eda98c94a37389901d6a6e60b29db4735096d2ccfcb74f7adb1a
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences
Learning

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf