Research in the areas of second language instruction in the Middle Eastern context has mainly focused on student or teacher perspectives on different aspects of language and pedagogy (see, for example, Alghazo, 2015; Zidan et al., 2018; Clymer et al., 2020; Alghazo et al., 2021). However, the study of classroom-based assessment (CBA) has not been given due attention in that context. Indeed, CBA has traditionally been a means of evaluating students’ learning and documenting their achievements. In the literature, assessment has been divided into two categories: summative assessment, which is conducted at the end of the learning process (i.e., end of instructional unit or end of a course), and formative assessment, which is implemented throughout the learning process (Brown and Abeywickrama, 2018). In recent years, there has been a greater emphasis on formative assessment (Irons and Elkington, 2021) which is intended to inform teachers’ decisions about how to proceed in order to achieve student learning goals (Black and Wiliam, 2009) and support students’ self-awareness, autonomy, and goal setting (Fox, 2014; Yan and Carless, 2022). This shift is in line with a global trend toward a more balanced approach to assessment that includes both summative and formative assessment (Cheng, 2011). This has led to a change in the role of teachers, from evaluators of students’ learning achievements to facilitators of learning (Black and Wiliam, 2009; Cheng and Fox, 2017).

In the literature, the available research on English as a Second Language (ESL) or English as a Foreign Language (EFL) assessment practices is considerably less extensive than the vast collection of studies on language testing practices (Cheng et al., 2008). In several ESL/EFL contexts, investigations looked into teachers’ assessment practices (e.g., Cheng et al., 2008; Troudi et al., 2009; Saefurrohman and Balinas, 2016; Wang, 2017). Nevertheless, this has not reached to numerous ESL/EFL contexts. For example, in the context of Jordan, there were only a few studies about EFL teachers’ classroom assessment practices—the types of questions used in designing English language tests (Omari, 2018), and implementation of some assessment types such as self-assessment (Baniabdelrahman, 2010) and portfolio-based assessment (Obeiah and Bataineh, 2016).

In the context of public secondary schools in Jordan, to the best of our knowledge, it appears that no study has yet explored EFL teachers’ assessment practices. Thus, this study aims to investigate EFL teachers’ classroom assessment practices, including the purposes and methods of CBA in the context of public secondary schools in Jordan. It also aims to identify the factors that influence teachers’ choices with regards to assessing students in the four language skills, building on the previous work of Swaie (2019). The questions driving this research were as follows:

The study adopted a two-stage mixed methods design (Creswell and Creswell, 2018) that includes questionnaires and interviews in order to investigate the research questions. First, a closed-ended online questionnaire was utilized to collect data on participants’ assessment practices. The results from this stage were then employed to develop the interview questions for the subsequent stage in order to gain a deeper understanding of the results.

The questionnaire and the follow-up interviews served as the foundation for the following study results. While the questionnaire data gives a broad picture of the participants’ thoughts, the in-depth interviews offer specific insights into the participants’ experiences and ideas.

The results based on the questionnaire and interviews data demonstrated that most Jordanian EFL teachers use assessment in their classes in order to accomplish several purposes, both formative (e.g., planning instruction) and summative (e.g., determining final grades). This suggests that teachers seem to be aware of the various purposes that can be used for assessing language in the classroom. This awareness may be attributed to their teaching experience and knowledge of assessment methods as more than half of teachers have at least 11 years of teaching experience and have attended courses or workshops on assessment. This supports previous research in the literature that found experienced and well-informed teachers on assessment tend to employ more assessment purposes than less experienced or less assessment-knowledgeable teachers (Cheng et al., 2004).

The study also found that teachers primarily use assessment for student-centered purposes, such as determining final grades, obtaining information on students’ progress, and motivating students to learn and work harder. While some of these purposes can support effective teaching (e.g., Obtain information on students’ progress), most teachers reported utilizing assessment to support student learning (e.g., Motivate students to learn). This indicates that many teachers perceive that assessment should be used primarily to evaluate students’ learning. Moreover, the data of questionnaire revealed a high percentage of positive responses to instructional-related purposes, indicating a trend in teachers’ responses. However, it was unforeseen to find some teachers responding “Rarely” or “Never” to these purposes, which may suggest an absence of formative assessment in their classroom practice especially that those are core formative purposes. In relation to employing assessment to get students ready for the Tawjihi exam, this was predictable because in contexts where students are required to take high-stakes tests, teachers often tend to focus their instruction to prepare their students for the test (Shohamy, 2006; Cheng, 2008).

Turning to the methods, the results showed that teachers primarily employed Teacher-made assessment methods to evaluate their students in reading, writing, listening and speaking. This was more common than using Student-conducted methods or Standardized tests, particularly in reading (e.g., short answer and multiple-choice items) and writing (e.g., editing a paragraph). This trend may be attributed to the effect of the Tawjihi exam and the necessary to get students ready for this high-stakes examination since these types of questions are frequently found in the Tawjihi format, as informed by the interviewees. This emphasize on the format of high-stakes examinations has also been observed in other EFL contexts (e.g., Andrews et al., 2002; Qi, 2004). This can also be attributed to the fact that students in Jordan seem to be exam-oriented (Alhabahba et al., 2016) which makes them more concerned about passing the exam than learning to acquire knowledge and develop their English skills. Another reason for utilizing tests more often than methods that require students’ participation in assessment (e.g., self and peer assessment) could be the low proficiency level of students which lead teachers to choose methods that suit their students’ limited proficiency. This may explain the frequent use of editing a sentence/paragraph and multiple-choice items to assess writing compared to other methods such as short and long essays. This is in line with the findings of Cheng et al. (2008) who noted that due to the low English competence of students, EFL teachers in China often used translation tasks in assessment.

With respect to listening and speaking assessment, the study’s results revealed a discrepancy between what participants responded in the questionnaire and what they reported in the interviews. The questionnaire data showed that teachers frequently used methods such as oral/reading dictation and oral interviews to assess students in listening and speaking. However, in the interviews, all participants stated that they hardly focus on listening and speaking in their instruction or assessment because these two skills are not evaluated in the Tawjihi exam. Whatever the case, it appears that what the teachers proposed in the interviews are more accurate than what they stated on the questionnaire because this practice of teaching-to-the-test has been noted in previous research on the impact of large-scale and high-stakes examination in ESL/EFL contexts, where teachers incline to focus only on teaching the skills and exam-relevant material. (Manjarrés, 2005; Azadi and Gholami, 2013). The discrepancy could be explained by the fact that many of questionnaire respondents probably teach classes other than Grades 11 and 12, so it is reasonable to assume that many of the inconsistent responses were made by confused respondents who teach classes other than Grades 11 and 12.

The study also revealed that peer assessment or self-assessment were among the methods that were less frequently used by teachers to assess students’ four skills (i.e., reading, writing, listening & speaking). This probably attributes that EFL teachers in Jordanian secondary schools are not fully aware of the importance of such assessment methods because of the lack of assessment knowledge and training. It is also possible that students are not willing to participate in assessing their selves or peers because they only care about their teachers ‘assessment or they may be unfamiliar of this type of assessment as teachers stated in the interviews. This suggests that Jordanian students appeared to be less involved in assessment process to the extent that enable them to take responsibility over their learning. In the literature, students’ involvement in self and peer assessment is key principles in assessment for learning or formative assessment which believed to have potential to enhance and better support students’ learning (Black and Wiliam, 1998; Stiggins, 2002).

Regarding the factors that influence teachers’ choices of assessment, the interview results showed that teachers tend to follow the format of the Tawjihi in their tests, indicating the strong influence of this high-stakes exam on their assessment practices. This is consistent with previous research on the impact of high-stakes tests, which found that teachers are more likely to align their tests with external assessment formats (Cheng, 2004; Qi, 2004). In addition, this influence extends to instruction as teachers focus more on material and skills tested in the exam and neglect other skills such as listening and speaking. This may be due to the pressure on teachers to adhere to external testing material and format, and a lack of concern from students for what is not included in the exam. This may reflect a testing culture among students, who prioritize good grades in the language course over actual language learning (Abdo and Breen, 2010).

In addition, the proficiency level of students in English and their individual learning needs can significantly impact the design of assessment tools used by teachers in the classroom. Because of students’ poor proficiency level, teachers admitted that they frequently select assessment methods that seem to be easier for students and avoid other methods. In the literature, it was found that students’ language proficiency appeared to take priority when teachers choose how to evaluate their students (Wang et al., 2020). This is probably related to the assumption of some teachers that assessment should be used in a manner that does not elicit negative emotions in students. This perspective was also noted in Chang (2005) which found that many teachers hold the belief that assessments should be implemented in a manner that promotes and supports students’ learning while avoiding the creation of negative emotions.

The study suggests that assessment knowledge and training can influence how teachers conduct assessment in their language classrooms. Most teachers, in this study, seemed to have insufficient assessment knowledge especially with regards to formative assessment’s purposes and methods. This probably signifies a shortage of assessment training in teacher education and professional development programs. This concurs with earlier research in EFL settings that discovered that teacher programs may not equip teachers with adequate knowledge and instruction to skillfully carry out assessments in their classrooms, as the majority of the teachers’ training programs tend to focus on curriculum and teaching strategies in general (Inbar-Lourie, 2008; Coombe et al., 2012).

This study explored the assessment practices of EFL teachers in secondary schools of Jordan. Results showed that teachers use range of methods for different purposes and at different frequencies in their classrooms. Factors such as the National Exam (Tawjihi) and students’ proficiency levels significantly influenced teachers’ choice of assessment methods. The study also found that the most used method was teacher-made tests that resembled the Tawjihi exam format, particularly in reading and writing. However, these tests may not accurately assess students’ language abilities because they do not evaluate all language skills, such as listening and speaking.

The findings of this study may contribute to increasing awareness among ESL/EFL teachers and other stakeholders, including educational policymakers, regarding the significant role of assessment in the language classroom. Moreover, this study highlights the lack of teacher education programs that adequately address the need for training and development in assessing students’ language skills. It emphasizes the necessity of professional development programs for both pre-service and in-service teachers to equip them with the necessary knowledge and skills to conduct assessments effectively.

On the other hand, the findings of the study were based on self-reported data in which what teachers report about themselves might not correspond with what they actually do in the classroom. Therefore, further research using classroom observation is recommended in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of teachers’ assessment practices in the context of secondary schools in Jordan.

The datasets presented in this study can be found online via the following link: https://curve.carleton.ca/e61926cb-de7e-44a0-956b-6fd4729a41b5.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by The Carleton University Research Ethics Board-A (CUREB-A). The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

SM designed the study, collected and analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript. MA contributed to the study design, provided feedback on the data analysis, and revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.