Eclectic approach: A search for more effective assessment ways to meet EFL assessment principles

Nur Sehang Thamrin, Suwarsih Madya, Nur Hidayanto Pancoro Setyo Putro, Siti Salina Mustakim, Aminuddin Hassan, Heri Retnawati


The current EFL curriculum for high schools in Indonesia demands integrating cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains in assessment. Therefore, teachers must consider these domains in designing assessment instruments and use them, including in a full-online class. In this type of class, they must choose effective methods with principled eclecticism that meet the assessment principles. This study examines the teachers’ assessment process, from constructing the assessment devices to implementing the test in virtual classrooms. The qualitative research approach was used to explore the online-based assessments involving 16 English teachers recruited through convenience sampling techniques. Accordingly, the data were collected using virtual semi-structured interviews through a WhatsApp call. The data were analysed descriptively through a thematic analysis integrated with an interactive technique to locate and identify common patterns of meaning in a data set. The findings show that teachers used several methods to design their tests in the planning stage, considering several aspects based on the eclectic approach principles for effective assessment practices. However, teachers need more assessment literacy regarding their knowledge of test quality. This research employed qualitative data from a small number of teachers, so future studies that include more teachers from different locations and consider different viewpoints, including those of students, families, and policymakers, on how to evaluate student achievement virtually are recommended.


Covid-19; language assessment; online assessment; principled eclecticism; virtual

Full Text:



Abduh, M. Y. M. (2021). Full-time online assessment during COVID-19 lockdown: EFL teachers’ perceptions. Asian EFL Journal, 28(11), 26–46.

Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 863-875.

Adnan, A., Suwandi, S., Nurkamto, J., & Setiawan, B. (2019). Teacher competence in authentic and integrative assessment in Indonesian language learning. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 701–716.

Al-Khasawneh, F. (2022). A systematic review of the eclectic approach application in language teaching. Saudi Journal of Language Studies, 2(1), 17–27.

Asoodar, M., Atai, M. R., Vaezi, S., & Marandi, S. S. (2014). Examining effectiveness of communities of practice in online English for academic purposes (EAP) assessment in virtual classes. Computers and Education, 70, 291–300.

Autti-Rämö, I., & Mäkelä, M. (2007). Ethical evaluation in health technology assessment reports: An eclectic approach. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 23(1), 1–8.

Baird, J., Andrich, D., Hopfenbeck, T. N., & Stobart, G. (2017). Assessment and learning: Fields apart? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practices, 24(3), 317–350.

Banta, T. W., & Palomba, C. A. (2015). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, and improving (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Brindley, G. (2001). Outcomes-based assessment in practice: Some examples and emerging insights. Language Testing, 18(4), 393–407.

Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2018). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (3rd ed.). Pearson.

Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th ed.). Pearson.

Burton, K. (2011). A framework for determining the authenticity of assessment tasks: Applied to an example in law. Journal of Learning Design, 4(2), 20–28.

Carr, N. T. (2011). Designing and analysing language tests. Oxford University Press.

Chen, J., & Neo, P. (2019). Texting the waters: An assessment of focus groups conducted via the WhatsApp smartphone messaging application. Methodological Innovations, 12(3).

Cheng, L., & Fox, J. (2017). Assessment in the language classroom. Macmillan.

Cleland, J., McKimm, J., Fuller, R., Taylor, D., Janczukowicz, J., & Gibbs, T. (2020). Adapting to the impact of COVID-19: Sharing stories, sharing practice. Medical Teacher, 42(7), 772–775.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis.

Coombe, C., Vafadar, H., & Mohebbi, H. (2020). Language assessment literacy: What do we need to learn, unlearn, and relearn? Language Testing in Asia, 10(3).

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

Dunn, L., Morgan, C., O’Reilly, M., & Parry, S. (2003). The student assessment handbook: New directions in traditional and online assessment (1st ed.). Routledge.

Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth.

Fulcher, G. (2012). Assessment literacy for the language classroom. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(2), 113–132.

Galaczi, E. (2018, June 26). English language assessment: Benefits of testing the four skills (reading, listening, writing, and speaking). Cambridge English.

Giordano, V., Koch, H. A., Mendes, C. H., Bergamin, A., de Souza, F. S., do Amaral, N., & Pecegueiro. (2015). WhatsApp messenger is useful and reproducible in the assessment of tibial plateau fractures: Inter- and intra-observer agreement study. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 84(2), 141–148.

Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and authentic learning. Corwin Press.

Guangul, F. M., Suhail, A. H., Khalit, M. I., & Khidhir, B. A. (2020). Challenges of remote assessment in higher education in the context of Covid-19: A case study of Middle East college. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 32(4), 519–535.

Hanafi, R. E. K., & Zulfa, P. F. (2017). Principled eclecticism: Theory and application in the teaching English for specific purposes. In S. Wachidah, D. Rochsantiningsih, R. Hartono, & M. Anugerahwati (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th ELTLT International Conference (pp. 462–466). Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Ihuoma, C. P. (2019). An eclectic approach to the reduction of test anxiety among fresh students of the National Open University of Nigeria. A-F FUNAI Journal of Education, 1(1), 179–191.

Irons, A., & Elkington, S. (2022). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback: Key guides for effective teaching in higher education (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Juanjuan, G., & Mohd Yusoff, N. (2022). The shared features of effective improvement programmes for teachers’ assessment literacy. Pedagogies: An International Journal.

Koh, K. H. (2011). Improving teachers assessment literacy through professional development. Teaching Education, 22(3), 255-276.

Kumar, C. P. (2013). The eclectic method-theory and its application to the learning of English. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(6), 1–4.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Madya, S., Retnawati, H., Purnawan, A., Putro, N. H. P. S., & Apino, E. (2019). The equivalence of TOEP forms. TEFLIN Journal, 30(1), 88-104.

Madya, S., Retnawati, H., Purnawan, A., Putro, N. H. P. S., & Kartianom. (2020). The range of TOEFL scores predicted by TOEP. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 491–501.

McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford University Press.

Mellow, J. D. (2002). Toward principled eclecticism in language teaching: The two-dimensional model and the centring principle. TESL-EJ, 5(4), Article A-1.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Ministry of National Education of Republic of Indonesia. (2011). Pedoman pelaksanaan pendidikan karakter [Guidlines for the implementation of character educations]. Pusat Kurikulum Perbukuan.

Mpungose, C. B. (2020). Is Moodle or WhatsApp the preferred e-learning platform at a South African university? First-year students’ experiences. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 927–941.

Orlov, G., McKee, D., Berry, J., Boyle, A., DiCiccio, T., Ransom, T., Rees-Jones, A., & Stoye, J. (2021). Learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: It is not who you teach, but how you teach. Economics Letters, 202, 109812.

Parupalli, R. S. (2018). Eclectic approach in English language teaching: A comprehensive study. Academicia: An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 8(10), 40-50.

Perwitasari, F., Astuti, N. B., & Atmojo, S. (2021). Online learning and assessment: Challenges and opportunities during pandemic COVID-19. In B. H. Prakoso, Safari, Asrijanty, & Rahmawati (Eds.), Proceedings of the Educational Assessment and Policy (ICEAP) International Conference, (pp. 133–137). Center for Assessment and Learning, Indonesia,

Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory and Practice, 48(1), 4-11.

Retnawati, H. (2016). Hambatan guru Matematika sekolah menengah pertama dalam menerapkan kurikulum baru [Obstacles for first high school mathematics teachers in implementing the new curriculum]. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 3(3), 390-403.

Retnawati, H., Hadi, S., & Nugraha, A. C. (2016). Vocational high school teachers’ difficulties in implementing the assessment in curriculum 2013 in Yogyakarta Province of Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 33-48.

Richards, J. C. (2017, June 6). Principles of the eclectic approach. The Official Website of Educator Jack C. Richards.

Russell, J., Elton, L., Swinglehurst, D., & Greenhalgh, T. (2006). Using the online environment in assessment for learning: A case-study of a web-based course in primary care. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 465-478.

Sarifa, N. (2020). Enhancing EFL learners’ English proficiency and intelligence by implementing the eclectic method of language teaching. Arab World English Journal, 11(1), 103–113.

Tian, W., Louw, S., & Khan, M. K. (2021). Covid-19 as a critical incident: Reflection on language assessment literacy and the need for radical changes. System, 103, Article 102682.

Timmis, S., Broadfoot, P., Sutherland, R., & Oldfield, A. (2015). Rethinking assessment in a digital age: Opportunities, challenges and risks. British Educational Research Journal, 42(3), 454–476.

Triastuti, A., Madya, S., & Chappell, P. (2021). Designing English: Text-based instruction with principled electictism. UNY Press.

UNICEF. (2021). Indonesia case study: Situation analysis of the effects of and responses to covid-19 on the education sector in Asia. UNESCO.

Wahid, R., Farooq, O., & Aziz, A. (2021). The new normal: Online classes and assessments during the Covid-19 outbreak. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 17(2), 85–96.

Wali, N. H. (2009). Eclecticism and language learning. Al-Fatih Journal, 5(39), 289-298.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.

Xie, Q. (2013). Does test preparation work? Implications for score validity. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(2), 196–218.

Yang, Y. F. (2011). Engaging students in an online situated language learning environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(2), 181–198.

Zhang, C., Yan, X., & Wang, J. (2021). EFL teachers’ online assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: Changes and mediating factors. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30, 499–507.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View Journal Stats