Secondary school EFL teachers' awareness for formative assessment for effective learning

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the extent to which English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers in secondary schools were aware of formative assessment for effective learning, and whether this awareness level differed based on their teaching experience. The study used a survey design, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data from 167 participants, and analyzed the data using various statistical and analytical techniques. The results of the study indicated that EFL teachers had limited knowledge of formative assessment and that their practical understanding of the topic had not been addressed in teacher education curriculums or training programs. The study recommends that educational authorities, such as the Ministry of Education (MOE), teacher education institutions, and universities, take steps to promote the practicality of formative assessment in teacher education programs and on-the-job learning initiatives. The findings of this study can also serve as a reference point for further research and interventions to improve the effectiveness of EFL teacher education in different contexts.

1. Introduction

There are two types of assessment in education: summative and formative. Summative assessment is a traditional method carried out solely by the teacher, where test scores evaluate and promote the result and achievement. On the other hand, formative assessment is an instructional practice where teachers and students work together. This collaborative process happens continuously before, during, and after instruction to enhance instructional practices and promote student learning. Teachers’ awareness is a crucial factor in formative assessment practice. Therefore, surveys have been conducted to assess awareness across different contexts, including EFL education [1].

Black and Wiliams explored teachers' awareness of formative assessment as important to improve instructional practices and enhance students’ learning. Hence, it is crucial to survey teachers' awareness for several convincing reasons. Firstly, it is fundamental for teachers to develop themselves academically and professionally. This helps to understand what and how they are aware of the underlying theories that support students' learning and achievement through principled guidance [2]. In other words, the teachers' awareness of formative assessment promotes students' learning capabilities and creates a better academic and sociocultural environment. Secondly, surveying the teachers' awareness of formative assessment builds stronger bonds between teachers and their staff, which leads to increased professional staff performance. This also helps educational policymakers prepare appropriate models of formative assessment for proficient language instruction and active learning. Moreover, the survey on the teachers' awareness may add to the existing knowledge related to formative assessment. The current study, therefore, focuses on assessing the awareness of secondary school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers. The current study hence focuses on underlying theories, principles, practices, and demographic variables [3].

Awareness of formative assessment is required to examine the application of language knowledge and students' learning by investigating the teachers' level of awareness of formative assessment [8]. This study has indicated the significant differences among teachers in their level of awareness of the underlying theories of formative assessment related to English language instruction and student learning [9]. In light of this study, EFL teacher's awareness of formative assessment is influenced by the lack of understanding of underlying theories associated with secondary school teachers [8].

Awareness of formative assessment is also comprehension of the principles of a broad range of assessment methods that can be used for instructional objectives and assessment activities that directly demonstrate the teachers' understanding and success [[1], [2], [3], [4]]. Teachers' awareness of the principles of formative assessment involves an understanding of assessment terminologies, the development and implementation of assessment strategies and techniques, familiarity with standards of quality in assessment, and knowledge of alternatives to traditional measurements of learning [[5], [6], [7], [8]]. Additionally, awareness of formative assessment encompasses teacher insight into classroom instruction, the purposes and principles of assessment, its practice, and how to assess using appropriate assessment strategies [9,10].

Vygotsky's theory of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) and scaffolding claims classroom instruction and learning occur when teachers are aware of the guided principles of formative assessment [10]. In addition, principles of the language learning theories are among the most important that EFL teachers are required to be aware of so that they can effectively put formative assessment into practice in English language instruction.Moreover, the Assessment Reform Group [11] emphasizes principles of formative assessment are used as a guideline in foreign language instruction. These principles are believed to inform EFL teachers about sharing responsibility with students in their learning and assessment. EFL teachers therefore, are required to develop awareness of these principles through teacher education programs. According to the Assessment Reform Group [11:2] assessment for learning.

• ➢is part of effective planning;
• ➢focuses on how students learn;
• ➢is central to classroom;
• ➢is a key professional skill;
• ➢is sensitive and constructive;
• ➢fosters motivation;
• ➢promotes understanding of goals and criteria;
• ➢helps learners know how to improve;
• ➢develops the capacity for self-assessment;
• ➢recognises all educational achievement.

Awareness of the practice of formative assessment in language instruction is the other crucial part of formative assessment, which EFL teachers are required to develop throughout their professional careers. Formative assessment practice occurs at different stages of instruction: pre-instruction, during instruction, and post-instruction stages. At pre-instruction stage EFL teachers in collaboration with their students are expected to assess and identify the students' learning gaps of the intended lessons in relation to the desired learning outcomes. Then, based on the evidence gained from formative assessment practice of this stage the teachers need to plan instructions and alternative strategies relevant to address all students’ learning needs [[1], [2], [3],7].

Formative assessment practice during instruction include EFL teachers' provision of appropriate guidance and support to students and active involvement of the students. Hence, at the beginning of this stage teachers are required to clarify the objectives of the intended lessons to the students and share criteria of success among them. As a result, they clearly understand their concern, assess their peers’ work, provide constructive feedback and learn from each other.

Moreover, creating frequent interaction between them and their students, helping them use alternative strategies including peer assessment, self-assessment and questioning, teachers' making of follow-up on whether the learning progress is in line with the objectives of the lesson and adjusting the instruction accordingly, motivating them to actively participate in the assessment process, providing constructive feedback to their learning are parts of the teachers’ concern as explained by Vygotsky as “scaffolding” [3,12]. Therefore, taking into account the advantage that formative assessment has in enhancing teachers' awareness and principle based pedagogical practices, curriculum designers need to accommodate adequate courses related to the underlying theories, principles, and practice of formative assessment in the curriculum of teacher education to equip them with the desired level of its awareness [13].

Teaching experience affects the development of language teachers’ awareness and pedagogical practice. Although the nature of expertise in language teaching is an underexplored research area of applied linguistics, some of the differences between less and more experienced language teachers seem to lie in the different ways in which they relate to their contexts of work, hence their conceptions and understanding of teaching in these contexts. More experienced teachers, thus, exhibit differences in the way they perceive and understand what they do, their ability to integrate and use different kinds of knowledge, desire to investigate and solve a wide range of teaching problems, high level of awareness of instructional objectives to support teaching, better understanding and use of language learning strategies, greater awareness of the learning context and greater efficiency and effectiveness in lesson planning are some of the differences [14,15].

Although teaching experience is believed to have considerable positive effects on EFL teachers' awareness and pedagogical practices, the inadequacy of curriculum of teacher education in accommodating formative assessment courses can potentialy negatively affect their awareness in this regard [5,[16], [17], [18]]. In connection with this, research indicated that there are problems related to the quality of language instruction in Ethiopia. This happened because EFL teachers' teaching practice was influenced by traditional teaching methods and poor teacher training, which neither promoted the learners' language learning nor developed their communicative competence in general [[19], [20], [21], [22], [23]]. Due to this, EFL teachers often confuse formative assessment with summative assessment in their actual practices, which emanate from their traditional trends in language instruction [24]. As a result, teachers' awareness and teaching experiences may not reach the standard level necessary to enhance their teaching and the students' learning [25]. Studies have shown that secondary school EFL teachers in Ethiopia hardly use formative assessment to adjust classroom instruction and enhance students' learning [[26], [27], [28], [29]]. However, there has been no empirical research conducted in this regard. Therefore, it is essential to survey the effect of EFL teachers’ teaching experience on their awareness level of formative assessment in Ethiopia.

The aim of this study was twofold. Firstly, it aimed to investigate EFL teachers’ awareness level of formative assessment based on the three sub-scales identified as the underlying theories, principles, and practices of formative assessment. Secondly, the study aimed to identify whether there are significant differences among the EFL teachers' level of awareness of formative assessment (underlying theories, principles, and classroom practice) in relation to teaching experience based on the level of awareness obtained from the first objective.

1.1. Objectives

1.1.1. General objective of the study

The general objective of the study was to investigate secondary school EFL teachers’ awareness of formative assessment in Gamo and Gofa zones, SNNPR, Ethiopia.

1.1.2. Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the study were designed to.

• 1.Assess secondary school EFL teachers' awareness level of the underlying theories, principles and practice of formative assessment;
• 2.Investigate whether teaching experience significantly affects the teachers' awareness level of the underlying theories, principles and practice of formative assessment.

1.2. Significance of the study

The study will provide stakeholders with valuable information on the awareness gap the participant EFL teachers may have about the underlying theories, principles, and classroom practice of formative assessment and then facilitate relevant on-the-job training for the population of the study. It will also be helpful as a stepping stone for those who are interested in conducting studies on related research topics.

1.3. Scope of the study

There are different forms of assessments in education which have their own distinctive naturesre and which are carried out for different purposes. These can include summative and formative types of assessment. The current study however, is limited to formative assessment and examined secondary school EFL teachers' awareness level of the underlying theories, principles and practices in general and on the basis of their teaching experiences in the Ethiopian context.

2. Methodology

A survey design was used followed by a concurrent-convergent mixed approach. This design was used to derive a holistic understanding of the problem and important to investigate the problems in triangulating the quantitative with qualitative approach. It was used to integrate the results obtained from both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. This helped to systematically converge the results in discussion and conclusion sections. This increases the validity of research findings and contributes to the body of knowledge [[30], [31], [32], [33]]. The following picture briefly describes the above statements here under.

2.1. Research setting and population

The population of this study was 304 EFL teachers who were teaching in 68 public secondary schools located in 16 administrative zones, in southern Ethiopia. The researchers decided to focus on this population due to the vicinity of the researchers as a good opportunity to collect ample data. The schools were selected as they were in the catchment areas of Arba Minch University which raised funds for a financial case for this study.

2.2. Sampling techniques, sample size determination and samples

This study used multi-stage sampling techniques to select the representatives from such a large population in a single study. Accordingly, first, the researchers selected 204 participants from the 304 population of EFL teachers using a simple random sampling technique, assuming that they are homogeneous in that each teacher has an equal chance of being included in the sample group. The sample size was then determined based on the submission of the formula: s 1-P, d2/(N-1)-P. Regarding the use of this formula, (s) refers to the required sample size, followed by (X2), which refers to the table value representing 1 degree of freedom at the desired confidence level (3.841) and refers to the degrees of freedom exceeding the constant population count. Then (N) refers to the population size (P) refers to the proportion of the population (e.g., 0.50 or 50 %), used to determine the maximum sample size, and (d) refers to the accuracy level of 0.05. Based on this formula, 204 participants were selected for the first objective designed to investigate the participants’ awareness level of formative assessment.

Subsequently, a stratified simple random sampling technique was employed to select samples from 204 participants categorized under three teaching experience groups, adapting nine categories defined in the guideline, “A Guidline for Teachers' Promotion. Ministry of Education” [34] used for determining the teachers’ professional career development in line with their teaching experiences shown in the following table.

As it is seen in the above Table 1, there is difference among the groups of beginner teachers and higher-leading teachers III, which shows a 24-year difference between the groups. Then, the sample of 204 participants was divided into three groups. Henceforth, the nine categories were grouped into three groups with intervals of 8 years of teaching experience between the groups. Group I comprised 64 teachers who have teaching experiences ranging from 0 to 8 years; Group II included 67 teachers who have teaching experiences ranging from 9 to 17 years, and Group III included 73 teachers whith teaching experience of 18 years and above. Subsequently, simple formulas were used to determine the sample size and confidence level table [35]. Accordingly, 52, 56, and 59 participants were selected from each group: group I, group II, and Group III, and the sample size of the study therefore, comprised of 167 participants for the second objective designed to investigate the effect of EFL teachers’ teaching experience on their awareness level of formative assessmrnt.

Table 1.

EFL teachers’ categories based their teaching experiences.

Model	Professional level	Teaching experiences in years
1	Beginner teacher	Below 2 years
2	Junior teacher	2 years
3	Teacher	5 years
4	Senior teacher	8 years
5	Associate teacher	11 years
6	Leading teacher	14 years
7	Higher leading teacher I	17 years
8	Higher leading teacher II	21 years
9	Higher leading teacher III	25 years & above

Adapted from the Framework for Teachers' Professional Development (MOE, 2017).

2.3. Instruments of data collection

2.3.1. Questionnaire

A questionnaire consisting of two main parts was developed to collect data from the aggregated sample. The first part was designed to obtain the participants' background information. The second part, on the other hand, contained 48 items with five alternative Likert scales (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree). 7, 10, and 31 items were included under three sub-scales of awareness of formative assessment and used to investigate the participants’ level of awareness of underlying theory, principles, and practice of formative assessment respectively. This instrument was designed depending on the theoretical frame work and objectives of the study.

2.3.2. Interview

The interview was used to collect in-depth qualitative data to triangulate the result with that of quantitative data analysis. Hence, leading questions in line with the items of the questionnaire were prepared by the researchers. For this reason, 3 participants were selected proportionally to represent the three groups previously formulated based on their teaching experiences. This instrument was developed based on the context and objectives of the study.

2.4. Validity and reliability of the instruments

As it is indicated on Table 2 below, Validity and reliability were checked using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. First, the validity of the items was tested by two university professors and research experts. Then, the reliability of the 48 items designed to assess the teachers' awareness of the three sub-scales of formative assessment was tested using Cronbach's alpha coefficient and all the items were used. According to these statistics, the required levels of reliability of the items were found to be at the accepted status, as shown below.

Table 2.

Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient Statistics for Reliability level of items.

Scales	Reliability	Items	Status
Awareness of the underlying theories	0.735	7	Good
Awareness of the principles	0.870	10	Very high
Awareness of practice	0.910	31	Very high
All items of the three scales	0.930	31	Very high

2.5. Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval was considered before the data collection had begun. First, the approval letter in line with project ID as Gov/AMU/TH23/CSSH/DELL/10/12 which was signed by Dr. Endalkachew Hailu Guluma, chief of the ethical approval committee. All the participants were asked for their willingness to participate in the study. Besides, the participants were informed about the anonymity of all collected data from them. Accordingly, the data were confidentially managed, analyzed, and reported from these points of view.

2.6. Methods of data analysis

The researchers used a statistical software package (SPSS) version 20 to analyze the collected data. Descriptive statistics, such as average means and standard deviation, were used to determine the level of awareness of EFL teachers' formative assessment. Then, the interpretation of the results was traced based on this classification of mean scores and standard deviation following the thumb rule. This classification categorized awareness levels based on thumb nail rule as very low, low, high, and very high [36]. The researchers used the summed means to measure the participants' scores and the summed average means. Finally, the interpretation was done using rules of thumb reasonably adopted by the study. The benchmark to interpret the participants' awareness level of formative assessment was based on mean scores ranging from 1.0 to 2.4, 2.5–3.44, 3.5–4.0, and 4.0–5.0, which were classified as very low, low, high, and very high, respectively.

The researchers used a statistical tool called ANOVA to find out if there were any significant differences in the level of awareness of formative assessment among three groups of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers. They set the significance level at a value of p < 0.05. Along with this, they also conducted a qualitative analysis to gain a deeper understanding of the participants' viewpoints. The qualitative analysis was based on three themes derived from the quantitative analysis. The aim was to triangulate the results obtained from both types of analysis. Finally, the researchers combined the results and presented, discussed, concluded, recommended, and reported them for further action.

3. Results

3.1. EFL teachers’ awareness level of the theories, principles and practice of formative assessment

Furthermore, the interviews were conducted with a few participants from three groups. The interview data analysis then showed that the participants had a low awareness of the formative assessment. Participant 1 reflected on this during the interview;

I understand that the theory of language learning and formative assessment are different issues. I think the theory of language learning is concerned with how students learn the four language skills effectively, whereas formative assessment is linked to measuring students' achievement level of the lesson they are provided through multiple testing rather than administering tests once or twice at certain points of time in a semester.

In the same manner, participant 2 responded that she couldn't exactly talk about the role of theories, principles, and practice of formative assessment that underlie classroom instruction as follows; I can't exactly tell you about the theoretical foundations of formative assessment right now, but to my understanding, planning and administering objective tests consisting of different items, including multiple choices, matching, true or false, and subjective tests that require students to write pieces of text, are parts of formative assessment. I think preparing and administering such types of formative assessment repeatedly in a particular semester supports students' achievement and promotion.

Participant 3 on the other hand, explained that he had no idea about the theory of language learning under discussion as he had attended his pre-service teacher education a long time ago. He explained his response in the following ways;

A long time has passed since I completed my pre-service teacher education. Therefore, I can’t remember about learning theory at this point, but I want to learn about language learning theory and formative assessment if your university provides training on the issue.

Awareness of the principles of formative assessment is assumed to be the other vital part of awareness of formative assessment that EFL teachers are required to develop in their teacher education programs, through teaching experience, and through on-the-job short-term training. Accordingly, participants in the three groups were asked what principles of formative assessment they thought guide EFL teachers in applying formative assessment. As presented below, participant 1 explained that he had no clear understanding of the principles of formative assessment;

I have no clear understanding of the principles of formative assessment. However, I understand that the teacher needs to know the knowledge and skills that the students are required to grasp from the lessons they are provided and needs to identify assessment types, including oral and written tests, particularly to evaluate the students' achievements in four language skills.

This participant percieved principles of formative assessment in connection to oral and written tests, particularly those that teachers use to evaluate the students' achievements during language instruction. Moreover, participant 2 reflected that he hadn't received courses about the principles of formative assessment but that he tried his level best to incorporate formative assessment into English language instruction without having awareness of the issue;

I can’t tell you right now what principles of assessment guide EFL teachers to practice formative assessment, for I was not provided courses about the principles of formative assessment that EFL teachers need to follow in practicing formative assessment. However, I try my level best to put formative assessment into practice in English language instruction.

Similar to the participant 2 above, participant 3 viewed the principles of formative assessment in connection with clarifying to the students how they are evaluated and assigned test scores in the course of a semester;

I can’t tell you exactly about the principles of formative assessment. However, to my understanding, the principles of formative assessment first suggest EFL teachers' requirement of clarifying their students about the objectives of the lesson they are provided, then explaining to them how they are evaluated, about the types and number of tests to be administered in a semester, and about how the tests are scored. I think these are the major principles of formative assessment.

Awareness of practice of formative assessment is also assumed to be critical to EFL teachers so that they put it into place collaboratively with their students at different stages of English language instruction. Based on this, the participants of the three groups reflected their views about practices of formative assessment for students’ effective learning purpose and achievement.

The result of interview data indicated that participants in the three groups viewed strategies of formative assessment in English language instruction as instructional practices that teachers use to remind their students about the previous lesson and to direct them towards the new lesson. This showed that the teachers assume strategy of formative assessment as a kind of instructional task that EFL teachers put into practice before presenting the new lesson to check the students’ understanding of the previous lesson through questioning.

Moreover, in relation to the issue under discussion, participant 1 reflected her idea as follows;

EFL teachers first need to activate students' memory by reminding them what they learned during the previous lesson before they present the new one. At this stage, he or she can ask the students about what they understood during the previous lesson. This can be regarded as a strategy of formative assessment. During instruction, the teacher is required to assess the students by giving them class work and by guiding them in how they perform the task. Then, he or she needs to provide feedback and corrections to the student's work. This can also be regarded as a strategy of formative assessment. Finally, for example, in reading instruction, the teacher is expected to assess how well the students understand the contents of the reading texts through questioning.

In the same manner, participant 2 considered strategies of formative assessment as instructional tasks that EFL teachers use to assess and provide corrective feedback on the students’ work. These are what the respondents consider strategies of formative assessment that EFL teachers are required to apply in English language instruction. Strategies of formative assessment in English language instruction, however, include strategies such as informal discussion, peer assessment, and self-assessment. In relation to this, participant 2 responded as follows;

I have no clear understanding of the strategies that EFL teachers are required to use to put formative assessment into practice. EFL teachers need to apply formative assessment strategies mostly during the pre- and post-instruction stages. During the pre-instruction stage, the teachers have to assess the students' understanding of the previous lesson. Moreover, during post-instruction, they are expected to assess their understanding of the new lesson.

Nevertheless, the result obtained from participant 3 showed that EFL teachers viewed strategies of formative assessment as mere tasks that are performed only by EFL teachers, ignoring the students’ roles in assessment practice. In this sense, participant 3 mentioned as follows;

Formative assessment strategies have their own designing systems, and EFL teachers need to decide the types of questions such as true/false, matching, and other types of questions in preparing exams and implement these strategies of formative assessment more often at the post-instruction stage.

Generally, all the participants selected from the three groups commonly viewed formative assessment in language instruction as a form of assessment that teachers devise to measure students' achievement levels in the lessons they are exposed to through the provision of multiple tests, which is the purpose of summative assessment. This indicated the participants' lack of clear and sufficient awareness of theory, principles and practices that underlie formative assessment for language instruction and students’ learning. The result of supported the result of quantitative data analysis, which revealed no significant difference between the participants of the three groups in terms of awareness of the practice of formative assessment. Furthermore, it is strongly believed that EFL teachers need to apply these strategies of formative assessment in English language instruction in collaboration with their students.

3.2. The impact of teaching experience on secondary school EFL teachers’ awareness levels of formative assessment

Table 4 presented above indicates whether teaching experience has significant impact on awareness level of formative assessment. One-way ANOVA in this regard was conducted with respect to the three-subscales of formative assessment: awareness of underlining theory, awareness of principles and awareness of practice. Accordingly, the result of ANOVA test indicated the p-value was. 22 for the teachers' awareness level of the underlying theories; the p-value was.24 the level of awareness of the principles and the p-value was 0.47 for the level of awareness of the practice of formative assessment. To this effect, the result showed no significant differences between the three teaching experience groups, interms of awareness level of the three sub-scales; as all the p valus are >05. Finally, this result is indicating that the observed differences in awareness could be not due to chance rather than teaching experience and this needs further study.

Table: 4.

One way ANOVA test for significant differences of the teachers’ level of awareness in terms of teaching experience.

Model		Sum of Square	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Between Groups	2.483	2	1.235	3.580	0.22
	Within Groups	13.862	165	0.377
	Total	6.345	167
2	Between Groups	2.045	2	0.894	2.420	0.24
	Within Groups	15.516	165	0.419
	Total	17.561	167
3	Between Groups	1.062	2	0.487	1.160	0.47
	Within Groups	15.488	165	0.418
	Total	16.550	167

4. Discussion

This study aimed to assess how much secondary school teachers knew about the theory, principles, and practices related to formative assessment. The results revealed that English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers had a low level of awareness about the underlying theory, principles, and practice of formative assessment. The study found that teachers' awareness was the most influential factor affecting formative assessment; however, its level was low. Previous research suggests that understanding the theory, principles, and practice of formative assessment is essential for a teacher's development, which affects student learning [1,3]. Therefore, the study recommended that EFL teachers have a moderate level of knowledge about English language teaching and learning procedures associated with formative assessment [[35], [36], [37], [38]].

In addition, qualitative analysis was done with interview data and the results confirmed the results of quantitative data analysis. Most of the teachers who participated in the interview were aware of the professional theories about formative assessment and they believe that it affects their learning somehow. Teachers’ practices to be better teachers are what teachers want generally according to the results. However, the interview data also further revealed that there was a low level of formative assessment among the participants regarding the theoretical foundations, principles, and practice of formative assessment. Participants from all three groups could not articulate the language learning theories that underlie formative assessment, nor the principles guiding its practice in language instruction. They primarily associated formative assessment with the summative assessment and evaluating students' achievements. Both data sources indicate that the participants lacked awareness of the theoretical foundations, principles, and strategies of formative assessment.

Formative assessment is accepted as an integral part of language instruction in the field of language teaching. It can meaningfully foster students' achievement and advance teachers' quality. The American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education indicates a vision for the 21st century for teacher education programs that proposes knowledge and skills for all students. In this regard, EFL teachers are required to be aware of theories, principles, and practices of formative assessment to address diverse students' learning needs and to create environments that support differentiated instruction. Hence, a well-organized teacher education program should accommodate formative assessment courses and be required to include evaluation and assessment standards that aid in making judgments on its candidates’ knowledge and efficacy of the application of formative assessment on completion of their education to certify them as professional EFL teachers [2,3,35,39].

Social constructivists assume learning primarily occurs as a result of interaction between learners. Vygotsky's theory of ZPD and scaffolding, which emanates from this broader assumption that emphasizes learning best occurs in a social context with a teacher's proper guidance and the student's active involvement in the formative assessment process. The principles and practice of formative assessment, therefore, align with this language learning theory and are believed to be embedded in it [3] [10,11]; Nevertheless, the qualitative data obtained through face-to-face interviews further supports the findings of the quantitative study, which revealed no significant difference between the three groups in terms of awareness of language learning theories that underlie formative assessment.

There are 10 principles of formative assessment that guide EFL teachers in formative assessment practice [11]. Awareness of the planning of teaching and learning, and awareness of formative assessment as central to classroom practice in English language instruction are among the other principles, however, the responses of the interview participants in the three groups indicated that the participants considered principles of formative assessment as instructional practices that EFL teachers use to evaluate students' achievements. This shows the participants’ misconception of equating formative assessment with summative assessment and the wide awareness gap of the issue under discussion. Moreover, the result of qualitative data analysis supported the result of quantitative data analysis, which revealed no significant difference between the three groups in terms of awareness of the principles of formative assessment.

The second objective of this study was to identify whether teaching experiences significantly impacted EFL teachers’ level of awareness of underlying theories, principles, and practices of formative assessment. The quantitative data did not support the finding that teaching experience significantly impacts EFL teachers' level of awareness of formative assessment concerning the three subscales.

However, teaching experience is believed to have an impact on language teachers’ awareness of formative assessment. Teachers with more teaching experience in this regard are assumed to have a better understanding of formative assessment compared to those with less teaching experience [13,14]. Nevertheless, the quantitative result revealed no significant difference between the three groups due to their teaching experiences. The results of qualitative data analysis also supported the results obtained through quantitative data analysis. This can happen due to the inadequacy of the EFL curriculum of the secondary school teacher education program to integrate formative assessment courses relevant to equipping the teachers with awareness of the theories, principles, and practices of formative assessment.

In general, the above discussion of results revealed that secondary school EFL teachers lack an adequate awareness level of formative assessment in the context of this study. Besides, the teaching experiences could not impact the level of awareness of formative assessment in the context of EFL teachers in the study. This implies that EFL teachers might not have been practicing formative assessment in the actual classroom during instruction due to the awareness gap identified. However, these results mainly accounted for the single research setting and population and only focused on some variables of formative assessment with a few factors related to the teachers' awareness. This may limit the results and findings of the study. To this end, it would be better if some additional variables were considered in this study [[40], [41], [42]].

5. Conclusion and recommendation

This study assessed Secondary school EFL teachers' awareness level of the underlying theory, principles, and practice of formative assessment. For this reason, it used a descriptive survey design along with a mixed methods approach incorporating a questionnaire and interview followed by both concurrent-convergent data analysis methods. Accordingly, the finding of the study revealed that secondary school EFL teachers’ awareness level of formative assessment was low. The findings also indicated that there is no significant differences between EFL teachers of different teaching experience on their awareness level of formative assessment. Therefore, the following recommendations were suggested based on the findings.

The insights gained from this study are worthwhile to a body of knowledge required for secondary school EFL teacher education/professional development programs as well as for the teachers’ self-directed learning from experiences.

The findings of the study are also believed to enhance EFL teachers' awareness of formative assessment for improving classroom teaching and students’ learning to produce competent citizens capable of 21st-century knowledge.

It also potentially helps policymakers and practitioners to address all teacher knowledge domains of formative assessment by incorporating them in the curriculum of secondary school EFL teacher education to develop the teachers’ awareness.

In addition, the findings further guide the Minstiry of Education of Ethiopia to design and implement on-job learning/training programs to revitalize/equip the teachers with underlying theories, principles, and practice of formative assessment to scaffold the teachers' level of awareness based on their teaching experiences vis-a-vis experiential learning theory and social constructivists’ paradigm.

The findings can serve as a benchmark for empirical interventions undertaken by different stakeholders including universities and researchers to effectively address the gap associated with EFL teachers' awareness of formative assessment by conducting further research in diverse contexts. This would contribute to filling the gap identified by the current study and bear a comprehensive understanding of the problem.

Data Availability statement

The data is available in the Elsivier data base so as to make the article more valid and further use of the data.Sharing research data helps prospective researchers evaluate our findings, build on our work and to increase trust in our article. For this reason, we (authors) allow the organization to make as much of the data publicly available as reasonably possible.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Abebe Mebrate Demekash: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Software, Resources, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Hailu Wubshet Degefu: Supervision, Project administration, Data curation, Conceptualization. Tesfaye Alemu woldeab: Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Conceptualization.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Table 3 stated above indicates the results obtained from the descriptive statistics about the EFL teachers' level of awareness of formative assessment. The results demonstrated that the participants level of awareness of formative assessment is low. These results suggest that secondary school EFL teachers need to improve their awareness of the underlying theories, principles, and practices of formative assessment.

Table 3.

Descriptive statistics for the EFL teachers’ level of awareness of the underlying theories, principles, and practice of formative assessment.

Sub-scales	N	mean	SD
Awareness of theoretical foundation of formative assessment	204	2.61	0.644
Awareness of the principles of formative assessment	204	2.81	0.665
Awareness of practice of formative assessment	204	2.69	0.641
Overall average means & SDs	204	2.70	0.65