Introduction

Oral communication skills, encompassing both speaking and listening abilities, play a pivotal role in learners’ exploration, comprehension, and expression of feelings and ideas. The development of these oral communication skills is paramount for successful language acquisition. Language assessment processes inherently involve evaluating not only reading and writing but also the proficiency in oral skills to monitor learners’ progress in language learning. However, assessing oral skills, being a multifaceted task, has posed challenges for educators and remained a subject of contention among researchers. Within the context of Algerian higher education, considerable attention has been devoted to the pedagogy of teaching oral expression. However, there has been a notable dearth of comprehensive exploration into the assessment practices, particularly in the realm of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms. Despite the explicit emphasis by the Algerian Ministry of Higher Education on the importance of effective oral expression teaching and assessment, educators continue to grapple with the complexities associated with its evaluation. The existing challenges underscore the need for a more in-depth investigation into the assessment practices employed by EFL teachers in the Algerian context.

1. EFL Teachers’ Oral Assessment Practices: A Comprehensive Examination

1.1. Oral Assessment Practices

Assessment practices encompass diverse procedures employed to gather information on students’ performance, integral to evaluating their knowledge acquisition (Saefurrohman, 2018; Brindley, 2003). This critical aspect, as articulated by Heaton (1975), underscores the interconnectedness of teaching and testing (p. 5). In EFL contexts, oral assessment holds paramount importance, involving evaluations conducted primarily through spoken language (Joughin, 2010, p. 3).

The multifaceted objectives of oral assessment include assessing course objectives, measuring language proficiency, gauging teaching efficacy, diagnosing students’ strengths and weaknesses, and placing learners within appropriate programs (Hughes, 2002). Joughin (2010) further delineates objectives as assessing specific learning outcomes, gauging the depth of knowledge, enhancing learning quality, and ensuring authenticity of student work.

A plethora of techniques can be employed for oral assessment, ranging from oral presentations to standardized speaking tests (Sheahan, 2012; Alharbi and Surur, 2019). The choice of assessment criteria is a complex task, dependent on the objectives of the oral task (Luoma, 2004). Harmer (2007) emphasizes the need for a tailored approach to oral production, considering factors such as the lesson stage, activity, type of mistake, and the individual student (p. 123).

Scoring procedures are integral to oral testing and can be approached analytically, holistically, or objectively (Fulcher, cited in Alharbi and Surur, 2019, p. 3). Analytical methods involve separate evaluation of criteria, holistic approaches offer an overall impression, and objective methods provide binary feedback without assigning grades. Various aids, such as verbal feedback, scoring sheets, checklists, and rubrics, support these approaches.

1.2 Previous Studies about EFL Teachers’ Practices of Oral Assessment

The existing body of literature on EFL teachers’ oral assessment practices is limited (Frisch, 2015; Elsaraa and Maiwan, 2018; Saefurrohman, 2018; Alharbi and Surur, 2019; Smit, 2020; Hussain et al, 2021), yet it reveals valuable insights into the dynamics of oral assessment

• Frisch (2015): Frisch’s investigation delved into teachers’ perceptions and performance standards of oral proficiency. The study uncovered a diverse focus on content, language, and interaction criteria. This suggests that teachers recognize the multifaceted nature of oral proficiency, considering not only linguistic aspects but also the interactive dimension of effective communication.

• Elsara and Maiwen (2018): Elsara and Maiwen’s exploration of authentic assessment practices shed light on the challenges faced by teachers. The study revealed issues related to time constraints and the design of rubrics. This implies that despite the benefits of authentic assessment, practical challenges hinder its seamless implementation, highlighting areas for improvement in assessment procedures.

• Saefurrohman (2018): Saefurrohman’s study on Indonesian high school teachers provided insights into prevalent assessment practices. The findings indicated a widespread use of standardized tests and a limited incorporation of peer and self-assessment. This suggests a potential gap in the adoption of more diverse and formative assessment methods, impacting the richness of feedback and student involvement in the evaluation process.

• Alharbi and Surur (2019): Alharbi and Surur’s research delved into the beliefs of both teachers and students regarding oral assessment effectiveness. The study highlighted challenges such as unfair grading and large class sizes. This indicates the existence of systemic issues that can influence the perceived fairness and effectiveness of oral assessment, necessitating attention to equity and classroom management strategies.

• Smit (2020): Smit’s exploration of teachers’ perceptions and challenges in assessing oral proficiency in the Swedish EFL classroom emphasized difficulties related to students’ communication abilities. This suggests that challenges extend beyond the assessment process itself and encompass broader issues concerning students’ communicative competence and engagement.

• Hussain et al. (2021): Hussain et al.’s study on EFL teachers’ perceptions and challenges in assessing speaking skills at the tertiary level in Pakistan revealed a focus on oral presentations, debates, and role plays. Challenges identified included time constraints, introverted students, and issues related to instructions. This implies that despite a focus on varied assessment tasks, practical impediments persist, necessitating attention to instructional clarity and support for diverse student needs.

Collectively, these studies highlight the complexity of oral assessment in EFL contexts, showcasing both the diverse strategies employed by teachers and the persistent challenges faced in implementing effective evaluation practices. The synthesis of these findings contributes to a nuanced understanding of the current landscape, providing a foundation for further research and improvement in EFL oral assessment methodologies.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The educational landscape in Algeria has undergone a pedagogical shift, guided by the Ministry of Higher Education, towards embracing the communicative approach, particularly in EFL classrooms, with a specific emphasis on oral expression courses. This transition underscores a broader recognition of the crucial role of effective communication skills in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning process.

However, despite concerted efforts to integrate a communicative approach, Algerian EFL teachers consistently face challenges in both teaching and assessing oral skills. The complexities of imparting and evaluating spoken language abilities pose significant hurdles, influenced by factors such as large class sizes, limited resources, and potential disparities in teacher training programs.

In addition, despite the importance of oral assessment, research about teachers’ practices of oral assessment is limited (Frisch, 2014; Elsaraa and Maiwan, 2018; Alharbi and Surur, 2019; Smit, 2020; Hussain et al, 2021; Senouci, 2022); and in the Algerian Higher Education context, little research is devoted to reveal the practices of oral assessment, especially in the EFL classroom. Therefore, this study comes to bridge the gap by exploring the status of implementing oral assessment practices by the Algerian EFL teachers of oral expression

1.4 Purpose of the Study

This study aims to conduct a thorough investigation into the assessment practices employed by EFL teachers in the oral expression course at Mohammed Lamine Debaghine University-Setif2. The primary focus is to gain comprehensive insights into the objectives, tasks, criteria, and scoring procedures utilized in the assessment of oral proficiency within the EFL classroom as follows:

1. Discerning Overarching Goals : Identify the broader goals that EFL teachers aim to achieve through oral assessment in the specified academic context. This involves understanding the broader intentions behind evaluating students’ oral proficiency, such as gauging language acquisition and fostering effective communication skills.

2. Identifying Specific Tasks : Explore the specific tasks employed by EFL teachers when assessing oral expression. This includes a detailed examination of various activities and assignments designed to evaluate students’ spoken language abilities, ranging from traditional presentations and debates to innovative approaches like role-plays and group discussions.

3. Uncovering Assessment Criteria : Understand the criteria against which oral assessments are conducted. This involves delving into nuanced aspects such as grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary usage, content comprehension, fluency, accuracy, time management, intonation, and overall communication skills.

4. Examining Scoring Procedures : Elucidate the diverse scoring procedures employed by EFL teachers in the oral assessment process. This includes investigating whether teachers adopt analytical approaches, breaking down assessments into individual criteria, or holistic approaches providing an overall evaluation. Additionally, explore the use of objective methods where feedback is binary and devoid of grading.

1.5. Significance of the Study

The significance of this study lies in its potential to significantly contribute to understanding current practices in the assessment of oral proficiency within the EFL classroom at Mohammed Lamine Debaghine University-Setif2. By unraveling the objectives, tasks, criteria, and scoring procedures employed by teachers, the research aims to inform educational stakeholders, policymakers, and educators about the efficacy and potential areas of improvement in current oral assessment strategies, aligning with the broader goals of the Ministry of Higher Education’s communicative approach.

Moreover, the findings of this study may serve as a foundation for enhancing teacher training programs, curriculum development, and educational policies related to EFL teaching and assessment. Ultimately, the study aspires to facilitate positive changes in oral assessment practices, ensuring they align with educational goals and contribute to the holistic development of students’ language proficiency and communication skills

2. Methodology : EFL Teachers’ Oral Assessment Investigation

This section elucidates the meticulous research design, encompassing research questions, participant selection, data collection instruments, and analytical procedures.

1. Research Questions : This study endeavors to address the following research inquiries with precision :

What oral assessment practices are employed by EFL teachers ?

• What objectives underpin oral assessment ?

• What tasks are utilized for oral assessment ?

• Which criteria are considered in oral assessment ?

• Which scoring procedures govern the oral assessment process?

1. Participants : Conducted at Mohammed Lamine Debaghine University, Setif2, Algeria, this research engages 12 proficient EFL oral expression educators. The participants, aged 25 to 45, comprise 11 females and 1 male, boasting 1 to 10 years of teaching experience. With academic qualifications ranging from Master to PhD, teachers were judiciously selected through purposive convenience sampling, ensuring a deliberate selection based on availability and willingness to participate.

2. Instrument : Data collection relies on a meticulously crafted semi-structured questionnaire, comprised of five principal sections. The initial section captures participants’ background information, encompassing age, gender, academic qualifications, and oral expression teaching experience. Subsequent sections assess teachers’ objectives, tasks, criteria, and scoring procedures for oral assessment, incorporating both closed-ended Likert-scale items and open-ended questions to capture nuanced insights.

• Section II : Teachers’ Objectives of Oral Assessment

• Section III : Tasks Employed for Oral Assessment

• Section IV : Assessment Criteria for Oral Evaluation

• Section V : Scoring Procedures in Oral Assessment

1. Procedures : The questionnaire, administered through a Google form, was disseminated to 26 EFL oral expression teachers, with 12 respondents completing the comprehensive survey. For meticulous data analysis, responses to closed-ended questions underwent quantitative scrutiny using SPSS 22, leveraging means, percentages, and ranks. Concurrently, data from open-ended questions underwent qualitative exploration through thematic analysis, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of participants’ nuanced perspectives.

By employing this rigorous scientific methodology, this research aims to furnish a detailed and nuanced comprehension of EFL teachers’ oral assessment practices at Mohammed Lamine Debaghine University, Setif2, thereby contributing substantively to the academic discourse on language education and assessment practices.

3. Results & Discussion : Analyzing EFL Teachers’ Oral Assessment

The examination of findings is delineated under four sub-headings corresponding to the sub-research questions, encompassing the objectives of oral assessment, tasks of oral assessment, criteria considered for oral assessment, and scoring procedures in oral assessment.

3.1. The Objectives of Oral Assessment 

The exploration into the first research sub-question unveils nuanced insights, meticulously presented in Table 1 : The Objectives of Oral Assessment.

Table 1 : The Objectives of Oral Assessment

Items	Mean		Response Level	Rank
To assess your students’ learning	3.66	73.2	Agree	2
To assign grades to your students	4.15	83	Strongly Agree	1
To test the efficiency of your teaching	3.48	69.6	Agree	3
To train students to be confident speakers/presenters	1.19	23.8	Disagree	4
To improve oral communication at the department	1.12	22.4	Disagree	5
Total	2.72	54.4	Neutral

Table 1 presents a comprehensive overview of EFL teachers’ perspectives on the objectives of oral assessment. Notably, 83 % of teachers strongly agree that the primary purpose of oral assessment is to assign grades to students (mean value : 4.15). Furthermore, teachers use oral assessment to evaluate students’ learning (mean value : 3.66) and test the efficiency of their teaching (mean value : 3.48). Conversely, there is a divergence of opinion on whether oral assessment is utilized to train students to be confident speakers or enhance oral communication within the department, with mean values of 1.19 and 1.12, respectively, indicating disagreement.

This finding diverges from the results reported by Hussain et al (2021), where testing teaching proficiency and enhancing student learning were identified as the primary objectives for oral assessment. The emphasis on assigning grades in the present study may be attributed to time constraints and administrative pressures necessitating timely submission of grades.

In response to the open-ended question, one teacher highlighted stimulating students to work hard as an additional objective for her oral assessment practices, adding a nuanced layer to the identified objectives.

3.2 The Tasks of Oral Assessment

The second research sub-question delves into the tasks employed for oral assessment, intricately analyzed and presented in Table 2 : The Tasks of Oral Assessment.

Table 2 : The Tasks of Oral Assessment

Items	Mean		Response Level	Rank
Oral presentations	4.48	89.6	Very Frequently	1
Oral debates	4.23	84.6	Very Frequently	3
Project work	1.55	31	Rarely	11
Role plays	3.18	63.6	Frequently	5
Oral Reports	1.9	38	Rarely	9
Oral interviews and dialogues	4.12	82.4	Very Frequently	4
Oral reading/dictation	1.72	34.4	Rarely	10
Retelling a story after listening to a passage	2	40	Rarely	8
Answering a paper-pen test after listening to a passage	4.3	86	Very Frequently	2
Preparing a summary of what is heard.	1.22	24.5	Rarely	12
Peer-assessment	2.14	42.8	Occasionally	7
Self-assessment	2.4	48	Occasionally	6
Standardized speaking test	0.11	2.2	Never	16
Standardized listening test	0.14	2.8	Never	15
Picture description	0.81	16.2	Never	13
Audio-recording	0.44	8.8	Never	14
Total	2.17	43.4	Occasionally

Table 2 provides a comprehensive breakdown of the frequency of various oral assessment tasks employed by teachers. Notably, oral presentations, paper-pen tests, oral debates, and oral interviews/dialogues emerge as the most frequently utilized tasks, garnering mean values of 4.48, 4.3, 4.23, and 4.12, respectively. Conversely, tasks such as oral reports, retelling a story, project work, oral reading, and preparing a summary are reported to be rarely used by teachers. Certain tasks, including picture description, audio recording, standardized listening test, and standardized speaking test, are identified as never employed for oral assessment.

This outcome contrasts with findings from Alharbi and Surur (2019), where a greater variety of oral assessment tasks were reported to be used more frequently. However, aligning with Hussain et al (2021) and Elsara and Maiwen (2018), oral presentations emerge as a predominant assessment method for oral skills. Similarly, the current results align with Alharbi and Surur (2019) and Saefurrohman (2018), highlighting the frequent use of oral debates and interviews/dialogues in oral assessment practices.

In response to the open-ended question, teachers underscored translation to the mother tongue and gap filling as additional tasks employed in oral expression assessment, enriching the understanding of the diverse methods applied by educators.

These results present a nuanced panorama of EFL teachers’ preferences and practices in oral assessment tasks, underscoring the need for a tailored approach that aligns with both educational objectives and the specific context of Mohammed Lamine Debaghine University, Setif2, Algeria. The meticulous representation through tables enhances the clarity and accessibility of the findings, contributing to the robustness of the scientific inquiry.

3.3 The Criteria of Oral Assessment

This section meticulously delves into the third research sub-question, scrutinizing the criteria employed in oral assessment. The intricacies of these criteria are presented in Table 3 : The Criteria of Oral Assessment.

Table 3 : The Criteria of Oral Assessment

Items	Mean		Response Level	Rank
Pronunciation	4.15	83	Very Frequently	4
Vocabulary	4.77	95.4	Very Frequently	2
Confidence	1.17	23.4	Rarely	12
Intonation	3.54	70.8	Frequently	5
Grammar	4.8	96	Very Frequently	1
Content	3.29	65.8	Frequently	7
Fluency	4.61	92.2	Very Frequently	3
Accuracy	2.4	48	Occasionally	8
Body language	2.4	48	Occasionally	8
Time management	1.92	38.4	Rarely	10
Comprehension	1.46	29.2	Rarely	11
Correct answers in paper-pen tests	3.43	68.6	Frequently	6
Total	3.16	63.23	Frequently

Table 3 intricately unfolds the frequency of criteria considered in oral assessment by EFL teachers. The analysis reveals that teachers frequently employ a variety of assessment criteria, garnering a total mean value of 3.16. Predominantly, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and pronunciation emerge as the most frequently considered criteria, with mean values of 4.8, 4.77, 4.61, and 4.15, respectively. Intonation, correct answers in written tests, and content also secure frequent usage, each with specific mean values. Conversely, accuracy, body language, time management, comprehension, and confidence are reported to be occasionally or rarely considered by teachers in oral assessment.

These results align with previous studies (Elsara and Maiwen, 2018 ; Alharbi and Surur, 2019 ; Smit, 2020 ; Hussain et al, 2021), emphasizing the significant role of grammar, pronunciation, and fluency as primary criteria in oral assessment. However, the current study diverges from Frisch (2015), where content and body language were highlighted as major assessment criteria. In response to the open-ended question about additional criteria, teachers elucidated that speech rate, the ability to respond back to questions and comments, and the general impression of the student’s performance, including the creativity of ideas, are also considered. This enriches the understanding of the diverse aspects encompassed in the assessment criteria for oral expression.

3.4. The Scoring Procedures of Oral Assessment

The exploration of the fourth research sub-question dissects the scoring procedures employed in oral assessment, meticulously outlined in Table 4 : The Scoring Procedures of Oral Assessment.

Table 4 : The Scoring Procedures of Oral Assessment

Items	Mean		Response Level	Rank
Using verbal feedback	4.18	83.6	Very Frequently	2
Using Scoring sheets	3.18	63.6	Frequently	4
Holistic scoring	4.33	86.6	Very Frequently	1
Analytical scoring	2.44	48.8	Occasionally	5
Checklists	1.15	23	Rarely	6
Rubrics	1.09	21.8	Rarely	7
Key answer for written tests	4.18	83.6	Very Frequently	2
Total	2.93	58.6	Occasionally

Table 4 scrutinizes the scoring procedures employed by EFL teachers in oral assessment. The results highlight the frequent utilization of holistic scoring, verbal feedback, and key answers in written tests, each with respective mean values of 4.33, 4.18, and 4.18. Additionally, scoring sheets are frequently employed (3.18), while analytical scoring is reported to be used occasionally (2.44). Conversely, checklists and rubrics emerge as rarely employed scoring procedures, each with mean values of 1.15 and 1.09.

This outcome resonates with Hussain et al (2021), indicating that verbal feedback and scoring sheets are majorly utilized scoring procedures for oral assessment. However, it deviates from Alharbi and Surur (2019), where teachers predominantly employed analytic scoring. The rarity of using checklists and rubrics contradicts the findings of Smit (2020) and Frisch (2015), where these scoring methods were reported to be more prevalent.

Conclusion : A Comprehensive Synthesis of Findings

In conclusion, the study unfurls a comprehensive panorama of EFL teachers’ oral assessment practices. The findings indicate that oral assessment practices are not well implemented by EFL teachers. They mainly use oral assessment to assign grades to students, which is contradicting the tenets of teaching and assessing oral expression skills. In addition, teachers do not frequently implement the various assessment tasks. They rely largely on oral presentations, written tests with never using standardized speaking and listening tests. For assessment criteria, teachers are implementing a variety of oral skills aspects with much focus on grammar, vocabulary fluency and pronunciation and less focus on comprehension and confidence. Finally, teachers seem to favor the holistic scoring procedures and key answers of written tests with a total neglect of analytical rubrics, which are highly recommended for oral assessment. Briefly, EFL teachers are reported to use online assessment mainly for assigning exam grades to students relying on oral presentations as the major assessment task, with much focus on grammar and vocabulary for assessment criteria using a holistic scoring procedure.

Based on the results of this study, the following pedagogical implications are offered. First, teachers should implement oral assessment with the objective to enhance students learning and ameliorate their oral teaching. In this regard, the administration should provide more time for oral teaching and assessment practices in order to reduce the pressure on teachers for submitting grades in due deadline. Second, teachers should vary the used assessment tasks and avoid the paper pen examinations for oral skills. To this end, policy makers should provide official standardized tests for oral skills (speaking and listening) at university level to help teachers cope with assessing these challenging skills in the most feasible way. Third, Administrators should organize resourceful professional trainings for EFL oral expression teachers to familiarize them with different assessment criteria and instruct them on how to design, implement, and score a good oral test. Fourth, teachers are invited to use various scoring procedure with more focus on analytical scoring and rubrics. Accordingly, policy makers are requested to provide standardized rubrics for oral assessment or assign experts at English departments to design appropriate rubrics for appropriate oral assessment. Finally, teachers should familiarize students with the different oral assessment criteria for better functioning of the oral evaluation system.

Further research may replicate the current study to cover a large sample of EFL oral expression teachers at different Algerian universities. In addition, future researchers may replicate the current study to explore both teachers’ and students’ perceptions, attitudes and encountered challenges with oral assessment practices. Furthermore, experimental research might be conducted to investigate the effect of the assessment tasks on students’ oral performance. Moreover, research may be conducted to investigate different topics related to online oral assessment. Finally, online oral assessment might be compared face-to-face oral assessment in relation to students’ achievements and grades.

Senouci, M. (2022). Continuous Assessment in Higher Education: EFL Teachers’ Practices & Challenges, Aleph. Langues, médias et sociétés, 9 (3), 359-377