Home / Special Issue / / J

 

J

J

Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, Volume J, Issue J, January J

Keywords: J

Published on: J

J

  • Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New directions for Teaching and Learning, 1998(74), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.7401

  • Ashraf, H., & Zolfaghari, S. (2018). EFL teachers’ assessment literacy and their reflective teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 425-436. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11129a.

  • Azman, H. (2016). Implementation and challenges of English Language Education Reform in Malaysian primary schools. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2016-2203-05

  • Bourque, L., & Fielder, E. P. (2003). How to conduct self-administered and mail surveys. SAGE Publications Inc.

  • Box, C., Skoog, G., & Dabbs, J. M. (2015). A case study of teacher personal practice assessment theories and complexities of implementing formative assessment. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 956-983. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215587754.

  • Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practice. Longman.

  • Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (Vol. 10). Pearson Education.

  • Chapman, D. W., & Snyder Jr, C. W. (2000). Can high stakes national testing improve instruction: Re-examining conventional wisdom. International Journal of Educational Development, 20(6), 457-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(00)00020-1

  • Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 301–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240304

  • Cizek, G. (2010). An introduction to formative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 3-17). Routledge.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Policy frameworks for new assessments. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 301-339). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_6

  • Darmi, R., Saad, N. S. M., Abdullah, N., Behak, F. P., Zakaria, Z. A., & Adnan, J. N. I. (2017). Teachers’ views on students’ performance in English language proficiency courses via CEFR descriptors. IJAEDU-International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 3(8), 363-370. https://doi.org/10.18768/ijaedu.336688

  • Domingo, J., Martinez, H., Gomariz, S., & Gamiz, J. (2014). Some limits in peer assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4, 12-24. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.90

  • Don, Z. M. (2015). English language proficiency, graduate employability and the role of CEFR. ASEAN Seminar 2015 on “Best Practices in English Teaching in ASEAN Universities”. UM repository. http://repository.um.edu.my/98438/1/Asean%20Seminar%202015%20English%20language.pdf

  • Grob, R., Holmeier, M., & Labudde, P. (2017). Formative assessments to support students’ competences in inquiry-based science education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1673

  • Hancock, C. R., & Brooks-Brown, S. (1994). Teaching, testing, and assessing: Making the connection. National Textbook Company.

  • Knight, P. T. (2002). Being a teacher in higher education. SRHE/OU Press.

  • Kruger, D., & Stones, C. R. (1981). An introduction to phenomenological psychology. Duquesne University Press.

  • Li, L. (2017). The role of anonymity in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 645-656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1174766

  • Little, D. (2013, October 29-30). The Common European Framework of References for Languages: Purpose, origin, ethos and implications [Paper presentation]. CEFR Conference: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia. Putrajaya, Malaysia.

  • Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 275-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.823540

  • Lo, Y. Y. (2018). English teachers’ concern on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): An application of CBAM. Jurnal Kurikulum dan Pengajaran Asia Pasifik, 6(1), 46-58.

  • Malakolunthua, S., & Hoon, S. K. (2010). Teacher perspectives of school-based assessment in a secondary school in Kuala Lumpur. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1170-1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.302

  • Matsuno, S. (2017) Adoptability of peer assessment in ESL classroom. Creative Education, 8, 1292-1301. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.88091.

  • Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Ministry of Education. (2017). English Language Curriculum Standard for Secondary School. Standard Document Curriculum and Assessment Form 3. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Mohtar, M. (2010). The use of alternative assessment to sustain teaching and learning. Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

  • Mousavi, S. A. (2009). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing (4th ed.). Rahnama Publication.

  • Omar, H. M., & Sinnasamy, P. (2017). Between the ideal and reality - Based oral English assessment. The English Teacher, 38, 13-30.

  • Pantiwati, Yuni, & Husamah, H. (2017) Self and peer assessments in active learning model to increase metacognitive awareness and cognitive abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10411a

  • Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.

  • Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120052396

  • Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 83-97).Sage Publications.

  • Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., & Chi, L. J. (2018). CEFR-aligned school-based assessment in the Malaysian primary ESL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 452-463. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal. v8i2.13311.

  • Singh, C. K. S., & Samad, A. A. (2013). Portfolio as an assessment tool and its implementation in Malaysian ESL classrooms: A study in two secondary schools. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 21(4), 1255-1273.

  • Singh, C. K. S., Lebar, O., Kepol, N., Rhaman, R. A., & Mukhtar, K. A. M. (2017). An observation of classroom assessment practices among lecturers in selected Malaysian higher learning institutions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 23-61. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2017.14.1.2

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2005). Student involved assessment for learning. Merrill Prentice Hall.

  • Stillman, G. (2001). The impact of school-based assessment on the implementation of a modelling/applications-based curriculum: An Australian example. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 20(3), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/20.3.101

  • Toledo-Pereyra, L. H. (2012). Research design. Journal of Investigative Surgery, 25(5), 279-280. https://doi.org/10.3109/08941939.2012.723954

  • Torrance, H. (1995). Teacher involvement in new approaches top assessment. In H. Torrance (Ed.), Evaluating authentic assessment (pp. 44-56). Open University Press.

  • Uri, N. F. M., & Aziz, M. S. A. (2020). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the Challenges. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183 http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13

  • Weiss, D. M., & Belland, B. R. (2016). Transforming schools using project-based learning, performance assessment, and common core standards. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1663

  • Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New directions for Teaching and Learning, 1998(74), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.7401

  • Ashraf, H., & Zolfaghari, S. (2018). EFL teachers’ assessment literacy and their reflective teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 425-436. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11129a.

  • Azman, H. (2016). Implementation and challenges of English Language Education Reform in Malaysian primary schools. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2016-2203-05

  • Bourque, L., & Fielder, E. P. (2003). How to conduct self-administered and mail surveys. SAGE Publications Inc.

  • Box, C., Skoog, G., & Dabbs, J. M. (2015). A case study of teacher personal practice assessment theories and complexities of implementing formative assessment. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 956-983. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215587754.

  • Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practice. Longman.

  • Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (Vol. 10). Pearson Education.

  • Chapman, D. W., & Snyder Jr, C. W. (2000). Can high stakes national testing improve instruction: Re-examining conventional wisdom. International Journal of Educational Development, 20(6), 457-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(00)00020-1

  • Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 301–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240304

  • Cizek, G. (2010). An introduction to formative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 3-17). Routledge.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Policy frameworks for new assessments. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 301-339). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_6

  • Darmi, R., Saad, N. S. M., Abdullah, N., Behak, F. P., Zakaria, Z. A., & Adnan, J. N. I. (2017). Teachers’ views on students’ performance in English language proficiency courses via CEFR descriptors. IJAEDU-International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 3(8), 363-370. https://doi.org/10.18768/ijaedu.336688

  • Domingo, J., Martinez, H., Gomariz, S., & Gamiz, J. (2014). Some limits in peer assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4, 12-24. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.90

  • Don, Z. M. (2015). English language proficiency, graduate employability and the role of CEFR. ASEAN Seminar 2015 on “Best Practices in English Teaching in ASEAN Universities”. UM repository. http://repository.um.edu.my/98438/1/Asean%20Seminar%202015%20English%20language.pdf

  • Grob, R., Holmeier, M., & Labudde, P. (2017). Formative assessments to support students’ competences in inquiry-based science education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1673

  • Hancock, C. R., & Brooks-Brown, S. (1994). Teaching, testing, and assessing: Making the connection. National Textbook Company.

  • Knight, P. T. (2002). Being a teacher in higher education. SRHE/OU Press.

  • Kruger, D., & Stones, C. R. (1981). An introduction to phenomenological psychology. Duquesne University Press.

  • Li, L. (2017). The role of anonymity in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 645-656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1174766

  • Little, D. (2013, October 29-30). The Common European Framework of References for Languages: Purpose, origin, ethos and implications [Paper presentation]. CEFR Conference: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia. Putrajaya, Malaysia.

  • Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 275-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.823540

  • Lo, Y. Y. (2018). English teachers’ concern on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): An application of CBAM. Jurnal Kurikulum dan Pengajaran Asia Pasifik, 6(1), 46-58.

  • Malakolunthua, S., & Hoon, S. K. (2010). Teacher perspectives of school-based assessment in a secondary school in Kuala Lumpur. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1170-1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.302

  • Matsuno, S. (2017) Adoptability of peer assessment in ESL classroom. Creative Education, 8, 1292-1301. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.88091.

  • Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Ministry of Education. (2017). English Language Curriculum Standard for Secondary School. Standard Document Curriculum and Assessment Form 3. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Mohtar, M. (2010). The use of alternative assessment to sustain teaching and learning. Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

  • Mousavi, S. A. (2009). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing (4th ed.). Rahnama Publication.

  • Omar, H. M., & Sinnasamy, P. (2017). Between the ideal and reality - Based oral English assessment. The English Teacher, 38, 13-30.

  • Pantiwati, Yuni, & Husamah, H. (2017) Self and peer assessments in active learning model to increase metacognitive awareness and cognitive abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10411a

  • Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.

  • Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120052396

  • Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 83-97).Sage Publications.

  • Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., & Chi, L. J. (2018). CEFR-aligned school-based assessment in the Malaysian primary ESL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 452-463. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal. v8i2.13311.

  • Singh, C. K. S., & Samad, A. A. (2013). Portfolio as an assessment tool and its implementation in Malaysian ESL classrooms: A study in two secondary schools. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 21(4), 1255-1273.

  • Singh, C. K. S., Lebar, O., Kepol, N., Rhaman, R. A., & Mukhtar, K. A. M. (2017). An observation of classroom assessment practices among lecturers in selected Malaysian higher learning institutions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 23-61. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2017.14.1.2

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2005). Student involved assessment for learning. Merrill Prentice Hall.

  • Stillman, G. (2001). The impact of school-based assessment on the implementation of a modelling/applications-based curriculum: An Australian example. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 20(3), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/20.3.101

  • Toledo-Pereyra, L. H. (2012). Research design. Journal of Investigative Surgery, 25(5), 279-280. https://doi.org/10.3109/08941939.2012.723954

  • Torrance, H. (1995). Teacher involvement in new approaches top assessment. In H. Torrance (Ed.), Evaluating authentic assessment (pp. 44-56). Open University Press.

  • Uri, N. F. M., & Aziz, M. S. A. (2020). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the Challenges. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183 http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13

  • Weiss, D. M., & Belland, B. R. (2016). Transforming schools using project-based learning, performance assessment, and common core standards. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1663

  • Anderson, R. S. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New directions for Teaching and Learning, 1998(74), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.7401

  • Ashraf, H., & Zolfaghari, S. (2018). EFL teachers’ assessment literacy and their reflective teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 425-436. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11129a.

  • Azman, H. (2016). Implementation and challenges of English Language Education Reform in Malaysian primary schools. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2016-2203-05

  • Bourque, L., & Fielder, E. P. (2003). How to conduct self-administered and mail surveys. SAGE Publications Inc.

  • Box, C., Skoog, G., & Dabbs, J. M. (2015). A case study of teacher personal practice assessment theories and complexities of implementing formative assessment. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 956-983. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215587754.

  • Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practice. Longman.

  • Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (Vol. 10). Pearson Education.

  • Chapman, D. W., & Snyder Jr, C. W. (2000). Can high stakes national testing improve instruction: Re-examining conventional wisdom. International Journal of Educational Development, 20(6), 457-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(00)00020-1

  • Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 301–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240304

  • Cizek, G. (2010). An introduction to formative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 3-17). Routledge.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Policy frameworks for new assessments. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 301-339). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_6

  • Darmi, R., Saad, N. S. M., Abdullah, N., Behak, F. P., Zakaria, Z. A., & Adnan, J. N. I. (2017). Teachers’ views on students’ performance in English language proficiency courses via CEFR descriptors. IJAEDU-International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 3(8), 363-370. https://doi.org/10.18768/ijaedu.336688

  • Domingo, J., Martinez, H., Gomariz, S., & Gamiz, J. (2014). Some limits in peer assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4, 12-24. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.90

  • Don, Z. M. (2015). English language proficiency, graduate employability and the role of CEFR. ASEAN Seminar 2015 on “Best Practices in English Teaching in ASEAN Universities”. UM repository. http://repository.um.edu.my/98438/1/Asean%20Seminar%202015%20English%20language.pdf

  • Grob, R., Holmeier, M., & Labudde, P. (2017). Formative assessments to support students’ competences in inquiry-based science education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1673

  • Hancock, C. R., & Brooks-Brown, S. (1994). Teaching, testing, and assessing: Making the connection. National Textbook Company.

  • Knight, P. T. (2002). Being a teacher in higher education. SRHE/OU Press.

  • Kruger, D., & Stones, C. R. (1981). An introduction to phenomenological psychology. Duquesne University Press.

  • Li, L. (2017). The role of anonymity in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 645-656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1174766

  • Little, D. (2013, October 29-30). The Common European Framework of References for Languages: Purpose, origin, ethos and implications [Paper presentation]. CEFR Conference: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia. Putrajaya, Malaysia.

  • Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 275-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.823540

  • Lo, Y. Y. (2018). English teachers’ concern on Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): An application of CBAM. Jurnal Kurikulum dan Pengajaran Asia Pasifik, 6(1), 46-58.

  • Malakolunthua, S., & Hoon, S. K. (2010). Teacher perspectives of school-based assessment in a secondary school in Kuala Lumpur. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1170-1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.302

  • Matsuno, S. (2017) Adoptability of peer assessment in ESL classroom. Creative Education, 8, 1292-1301. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.88091.

  • Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Ministry of Education. (2017). English Language Curriculum Standard for Secondary School. Standard Document Curriculum and Assessment Form 3. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

  • Mohtar, M. (2010). The use of alternative assessment to sustain teaching and learning. Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

  • Mousavi, S. A. (2009). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing (4th ed.). Rahnama Publication.

  • Omar, H. M., & Sinnasamy, P. (2017). Between the ideal and reality - Based oral English assessment. The English Teacher, 38, 13-30.

  • Pantiwati, Yuni, & Husamah, H. (2017) Self and peer assessments in active learning model to increase metacognitive awareness and cognitive abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10411a

  • Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60-63.

  • Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120052396

  • Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 83-97).Sage Publications.

  • Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., & Chi, L. J. (2018). CEFR-aligned school-based assessment in the Malaysian primary ESL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 452-463. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal. v8i2.13311.

  • Singh, C. K. S., & Samad, A. A. (2013). Portfolio as an assessment tool and its implementation in Malaysian ESL classrooms: A study in two secondary schools. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 21(4), 1255-1273.

  • Singh, C. K. S., Lebar, O., Kepol, N., Rhaman, R. A., & Mukhtar, K. A. M. (2017). An observation of classroom assessment practices among lecturers in selected Malaysian higher learning institutions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 23-61. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2017.14.1.2

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2005). Student involved assessment for learning. Merrill Prentice Hall.

  • Stillman, G. (2001). The impact of school-based assessment on the implementation of a modelling/applications-based curriculum: An Australian example. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 20(3), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/20.3.101

  • Toledo-Pereyra, L. H. (2012). Research design. Journal of Investigative Surgery, 25(5), 279-280. https://doi.org/10.3109/08941939.2012.723954

  • Torrance, H. (1995). Teacher involvement in new approaches top assessment. In H. Torrance (Ed.), Evaluating authentic assessment (pp. 44-56). Open University Press.

  • Uri, N. F. M., & Aziz, M. S. A. (2020). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the Challenges. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183 http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13

  • Weiss, D. M., & Belland, B. R. (2016). Transforming schools using project-based learning, performance assessment, and common core standards. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1663

ISSN 0128-7702

e-ISSN 2231-8534

Article ID

J

Download Full Article PDF

Share this article

Related Articles