Procedimientos de subasta

In Saudi Arabia, the higher education sector in the Ministry of Education was established in 1975. It is responsible for developing, implementing and supervising various undergraduate and postgraduate programmes that fulfil the KSA’s need for national cadres who are

scientifically and professionally qualified to serve the national development objectives.

Over the past 40 years, higher education in the KSA has fostered over 60 educational establishments, including government and private universities and educational institutions. High-educational facilities in KSA are gender-segregated, which means that men and women study at separate campuses and do not meet, except those targeting medical specialities. In addition, all these educational facilities are linked to the Ministry of Education (higher education) but exercise a great deal of administrative and academic autonomy.

That being said, these higher-educational contexts devise their own teaching and assessment methods, which are imposed by the respective academic faculties (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, lecturers and teaching assistants), including recently quality assurance units, as they see fit. For 30 years, almost all higher-educational facilities have favoured a teacher-centred approach10 in their teaching practices and employed formal

traditional assessments (written exams) even in low-stakes mini-assessments termed 'quizzes'. These were commonly carried out by the teaching members, as the expertise of the

experienced members was passed on to novices through classroom observation and imitation. Also, these practices were not dictated specifically by the administration facilities but were rather mentally internalised by the members of these academic facilities.

However, in the past ten years, higher-educational facilities have become familiar with and aware of the importance of academic accreditation11. Many universities have strived to achieve institutional and programme accreditations both nationally and internationally, through the enhancement of quality and excellence in academic evaluation (NCAAA; https://www.ncaaa.org.sa/Pages/default.aspx).

Accordingly, there has been a great increase in the bundles of documents assembled, and forms filled in, to be submitted regarding the programmes offered by universities or institutions and the courses taught within each programme in the KSA. Two kinds of

documents have acquired great value in relation to teaching and assessment practices: course descriptions and course specifications. The former intends to inform a particular audience – teachers, students external and internal examiners of the accreditation sector – about the subject matter, approach, breadth, and applicability of a course. The latter states the expected outcomes (objectives and topics week by week) of enrolling in a higher-education course and the means by which these outcomes are achieved and demonstrated through assessment or coursework of all students successfully completing the given course.

Everything therefore has become documented, with the aim of being transparent about what goes on, and faculty members have become required to comply with what entities such as the Quality Assurance Unit think should be written in these documents with regard to the

methods of teaching and means of assessment. All these documents, namely the course specifications and course descriptions, are now managed by the Quality Assurance Unit of each faculty in the educational facilities.

11 _{Academic or educational accreditation is a type of quality assurance process under which the services and}

operations of educational institutions or programmes are evaluated and verified by an external body to determine if the applicable and recognized standards are met. (Lenn, 1992)

Overall, then, there has been increased action in recent years towards educational accreditation, which resulted in, most notably, the following: 1) supervision and

documentation of the educational process, and 2) the syllabus and assessment activities becoming more specified and uniform.

4.3.1.1 Departments/programmes of English language: The status of grammar teaching and assessment.

In KSA, higher-educational facilities provide a wide range of English language programmes. These programmes offer a study plan for students who wish to obtain bachelor’s or post- secondary diploma degrees in the English language. There are seven universities in Riyadh that offer pathways to English language bachelor’s degrees (BA) in linguistics, literature, or translation. Table 1 outlines these institutions and the English language programmes they offer. For ethical purposes the institutions are anonymized, and letters (e.g., A, B… etc.) were used to refer to each different institution.

Table 2.

Higher-educational facilities with English language programmes

Institutions Type College/ Faculty Programme(s)

Institution A Public College of Arts English Language

and Literature College of Languages and Translation English Language and Translation

Institution B Public College of

Languages

Applied Linguistics, English Translation, English Literature

Institutions Type College/ Faculty Programme(s)

Institution C Public College of

Languages and Translation

English Language and Translation

Institution D Public Foundation course English language

Institution E Private College of Human

Sciences

English Translation, Linguistics

Institution F Private Faculty of Language

Studies

English Language and Literature

Institution G Private College of Science

and Theoretical Studies

English Language and Translation

The syllabus of most of these programmes includes courses in the core areas of English. Lower-level courses in most plans are designed to enhance students’ own listening, reading, speaking and writing skills, in addition to grammar and vocabulary courses. Upper-level specialised courses provide students with a practical understanding of theoretical and applied linguistics and polish their skills of interpreting, translating, analysing, and critically

engaging with spoken and/or written English in various genres.

Grammar courses are essential to English language programmes. Being assigned as an independent course, grammar is taught and assessed explicitly. Grammar courses in English language programmes focus mainly on basic grammatical rules and linguistic terminologies which are devised from the assigned textbooks and detailed in the course specifications and

descriptions. Grammar courses are assessed in a summative framework through classroom- based assessments such as midterms, quizzes and final exams. The following section discusses the grammar courses within the English departments chosen in this study.

4.3.1.2 The current context.

The present study was conducted in fall 2018 in four high educational contexts in Riyadh: Institutions A, B, C and D. These facilities were chosen for two reasons: first, it was convenient for me to conduct the study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, as it is my hometown and because I work in one of these facilities. Second, all these institutions allowed me to visit their campuses and contact the teaching faculty of the English language programmes.

Institution A:

As shown in Table 1, English as a major subject is provided by two faculties, the College of Languages and Translation (COLT) and the College of Arts. Grammar courses within these programmes are almost similar. In the Department of English Language & Translation (DELT), there are two grammar courses: Grammar 1 (ENGT 113) and Grammar 2 (ENGT 213). The former course aims to increase students’ knowledge of the target language and its structures. Students are trained to make use of grammar and produce simple sentences and also use tenses, nouns, modals and verbs. The latter focuses more on the parts of speech, the clauses and the sentence structures: simple, compound, complex and compound complex, in active and passive voices. In the Department of English Language and Literature (DELL), there are two grammar courses: Grammar 1 (ENG 106) and Grammar 2 (ENG 211). The aims of each grammar course in DELL corresponds with the courses in DELT. All the courses use the same textbook12, and involve summative classroom-based assessment, namely in-terms,

quizzes and final exams. The in-term exams and the quizzes or any other classwork (e.g. participation or assignments) constitute 60% of the overall grade of students (100). The final exam makes up the remaining 40%, such that the total of marks adds up to 100. Moreover, a course teacher(s) is responsible for constructing, administrating and correcting these

assessment tasks. The results of the in-terms should be announced and discussed with the students within two weeks, while the final results are to be reported within three days (Regulations of Study and Examination for undergraduate, the approved executive rules; https://council.ksu.edu.sa/sites/council.ksu.edu.sa/files/attach/_ldrs_wlkhtbrt_tdyl_shhr_jmd_ lakhr_1433h.pdf).

Institution B:

There are three departments of English: English Translation, English Literature and Applied Linguistics. All these pathways share one grammar course (Grammar LIGT 131) that is offered by the Department of Applied Linguistics, and the faculty members from this department are the only ones who teach this course in all the departments in the College of Languages at institution B. This grammar course is usually taught by one teacher, which was the case in my study, to students in level 2 (year 1). It aims to build students’ knowledge of various grammatical aspects, namely tenses, clauses, passive and active voices etc. Grammar is assessed in a summative framework, through classroom-based assessments based on the given course textbook13. According to the regulations of study and examination for

undergraduates at B, assessment procedures should include at least two exams during a semester and one final examination. Just like in A, the course teacher(s) is responsible for constructing, executing and marking these exams

(http://www.pnu.edu.sa/ar/Faculties/Science/Documents/تارابتخلااو_ةساردلا_ةحئلا.pdf).

Institution C:

The College of Languages and Translation (COLT) offers one pathway in English major via the Department of English Language and Literature (DELL). There are three different grammar courses: ENG 118 (year 1, level 1), ENG 119 (year 1, level 2) and ENG 220 (year 2, level 3). The names of the textbooks used are ‘Grammar Sense 1’, ‘Grammar Sense 2’ and ‘Grammar Sense 3’, consecutively. The aim of these courses is to gradually build students’ knowledge of English grammatical rules and help them progress from a basic level (first grammar course, ENG 118) to intermediate (ENG 119) and then advanced (the last grammar course, ENG 220). These courses are assessed summatively through classroom-based

assessment and are based on the topics covered in the assigned textbook14. Classwork should include at least two in-terms and, if desired, other assessment means. The total classwork should not exceed 40% of the total mark, 100. The final examination must be out of 60 marks, which completes the classwork and adds up to a total of 100 marks (Regulation of Study and Examination for undergraduate;

https://units.imamu.edu.sa/colleges/sharia/FilesLibrary/Documents/dras.pdf). The course teacher(s) constructs her/his own exams and quizzes during the semester, in addition to marking and reporting them. The final exam, however, is created by the course convenor15 and handed out to all the course teachers who administer the exam and correct and report the results within three days. This practice exists only at institution C and not in the other

facilities mentioned in this study.

14 _{Grammar Sense 1, & 2 by Cheryl Pavlik / Grammar Sense 3 by Susan Bland} 15 _{A course teacher probably with the most experience and highest degree}

Institution D:

This institution functions under the umbrella of the higher-education sector. It offers a diploma degree to post-secondary students in various fields of public administration. This facility does not provide an English major pathway but hosts an English Language Centre (ELC) that offers a one-year language programme to preparatory students. The programme, which is mandatory, improves the candidates’ English skills and leads them to advance the same beyond an intermediate level (however, students who score 5.5 in IELTS or 65 in TOEFL iBT can be exempted). It comprises four levels, with each level covering the subjects of reading, writing, listening, communication and grammar. Accordingly, institution D is suitable for my study context for two reasons: first, it is a public higher-educational facility; second, the grammar courses are taught and assessed independently. These courses are assessed summatively, through midterms and final exams based on the topics covered in the textbooks provided16_{. The course teacher(s) has to carry out the tasks of assessment}

(Executive Rules for training and studying at https://www.ipa.edu.sa/ar-

sa/Admission/Documents/ExecutiveRoles.pdf). Table 2 summarizes the research context with regard to grammar assessment.

Table 3.

Grammar Courses and Assessment Means in Current Research Context Institution A

College Department Course No. & code Credit hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment

Arts DELL ENG 106 3 Year 1

Level 2

Two in-terms (40 %) Quizzes (10%) Assignments (10 %)

ENG 211 3 Year 2

Institution A College Department Course No.

& code Credit hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment Level 3 Final (40%)

COLT DELT ENGT 113 3 Year 1

Level 2 Two in-terms (50%) Quizzes (10%) Final (40 %) ENGT 213 3 Year 2 Level 3 Institution B

Colleges Departments Course No. & Code Credit hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment College of Languages Applied Linguistics LING 131T 3 Level 2 Year 1 2 In-terms (40%) Quizzes, participations (20%) Final exam (40%) English Translation English Literature Institution C College Department Course No.

& Code Credit hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment

COLT DELL ENG 118 3 Level 1

Year 1 In-terms (40 %) Final Exam (60%) ENG 119 3 Level 2 Year 1 ENG 220 2 Level 3

Institution A College Department Course No.

& code Credit hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment Year 2 Institution D Facility Programme Course No. Credit

hrs. Level of students Means of Assessment ELC English Language Grammar 1 5 Level 1 Year1 Two In-terms (40 %) Attendance and code of

conduct (20%) Final Exam (40%) Grammar 2 5 Level 2 Year 1 Grammar 3 5 Level 3 Year 1 Grammar 4 5 Level 4 Year 1

As seen from the table above, there is a homogenous perspective among the four facilities with regard to grammar assessment, which, as mentioned, is conducted with a summative angle through classroom-based assessments (in-terms, quizzes and final exams).

4.3.1.3 Regulation of study and examination: Article No. 39 of the executive rules.

Shared by all higher-educational facilities, Article No. 39 is important to the present study as it constitutes students’ rights to contest their exam results. If a student is not satisfied by the

outcome of the course results, she/he can make an official appeal to an internal council, which will be placed in charge of resolving disputes over exam results.

Students who wish to challenge their exam results must do so within a certain period of time after the final exam, during which the teachers must submit their exam papers to be reviewed by a designated authority, an examination board. Teachers should be able to provide evidence and justify the students’ results if required.

The need of concrete evidence to justify students’ overall results grounds teachers’ practices within written exams since they are tangible and provide a sense of security to the teachers once their results are requested for review.