A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT LITERACY AMONG EFL TEACHERS IN INDONESIA AND NIGERIA

Abstract

In this comparative study, we examined the Language Assessment Literacy (LAL) of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers in Indonesia and Nigeria, focusing on their contextual factors such as policy frameworks in education systems, LAL-related professional development, and digital infrastructure. The study employed a mixed-method research design by utilizing a comparative cross-sectional survey design and semi-structured interviews. A total of 210 teachers participated in the survey, complemented by 36 semi-structured interview participants across both countries. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent samples t-tests to examine cross-country differences in teachers’ assessment knowledge, beliefs, practices, and digital assessment literacy, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically. The quantitative data suggested that Indonesian teachers excelled in understanding and implementing alternative and formative assessments, which was attributed to the positive and reforming the newest curriculum and a consecutive professional development cycle. In contrast, Nigerian teachers appear more dependent on standardized assessments due to both a lack of pertinent pedagogical training and the influence of examination-oriented educational systems on their teaching practices. In addition, due to the availability of technology and unencumbered institutional backing, Indonesian teachers’ understanding of digital assessment was more pronounced. Qualitative data corroborated this systemic phenomenon in Nigeria, where inadequate infrastructure and a lack of professional development are systemic barriers that limit teachers to primitive assessment strategies and practices. Ultimately, the study found that assessment literacy is primarily a sociopolitical construct that contextualizes individual assessments. However, this study is limited by its cross-sectional design and reliance on self-reported data, which may introduce response bias and limit causal interpretations. Despite these limitations, the study offers important implications for policymakers and educators seeking to enhance LAL through context-sensitive reforms and targeted capacity-building initiatives.