2. 7018-27538-1-CE.pmd EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Journal homepage: http://jurnal.unmer.ac.id/index.php/enjourme/index Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFLConceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFLConceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFLConceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFLConceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceiveteachers conceiveteachers conceiveteachers conceiveteachers conceive 11111Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, 22222Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, 33333Fika Megawati,Fika Megawati,Fika Megawati,Fika Megawati,Fika Megawati, 44444Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputr iVina Virgianata NuralisaputriVina Virgianata NuralisaputriVina Virgianata NuralisaputriVina Virgianata Nuralisaputri 1,2English Department, Faculty of Letters, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia 3,4English Language Education, Fakultas Psikologi dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo, Indonesia Corresponding author: fikamegawati@umsida.ac.id ARTICLE INFO Received 20 December 2021 Accepted 12 May 2022 Available online 15 July 2022 Keywords: authentic assessment, EFL teachers’ conceptions, feedback DOI: 10.26905/enjourme.v7i1.7018 How to cite this article (APA Style): Akbar, A.A.N.M, Sulistyo, G.H., Megawati, F., & Nuralisaputri, V.V. (2022). Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive. EnJourMe (En- glish Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English, 7(1) 20-31, doi:https://doi.org/ 10.26905/enjourme.v7i1.7018 ABSTRACT In Indonesian context, as the 2013 Curriculum (K-13) has been introduced to EFL teachers to be implemented at schools, performance-based assessment starts to be applied at schools too, accompanying the curriculum implementation. This edu- cational reform is meant to improve the quality of the teaching of English as a foreign language. However, little is known in the body of knowledge on EFL teachers’ challenges in implementing the authentic performance-based assessment in K-13 context, one of which, it was argued, is a facet that derives from EFL teachers’ conception on matters pertaining to authentic assessment. To address this, a survey was conducted to find out EFL teachers’ conceptions about authentic assessment, the role of feedback, and use of authentic assessment procedures in the context of such K-13 educational reform. A number of EFL teachers at lower and upper second- ary levels of education in East Java across seniority were involved in the present survey. The findings of the study reveal among other things interesting phenomena where contradictions of conceptions were observed on authentic assessment. These findings have pedagogical implications that are educationally beneficial for the proper and successful implementation of authentic assessment under the 2013 curriculum – K-13. EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No, 1, July 2022, Page 20–31 1. Introduction The implementation of Curriculum 2013 (herein after referred to as K-13) in Indonesia’s edu- cational context announces the new conceptions of language teaching in which language is seen and positioned as a vehicle for verbal communication and interaction (Permendikbud 13, 2015). Unlike the previous educational curricula which tended to promote the learning of language knowledge more, K-13 emphasizes a more functional and ‘communicative view of teaching language’ in which ©2022 The Authors. Published by University of Merdeka Malang This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri English skills as placed as vehicles of verbal communication are what teacher should teach to students in class rather than language components and language knowledge only. This follows than that, teachers’ traditional view of language together with their old perspectives on setting up ideal lan- guage learning environment needs to be reoriented appropriately if successful implementation of K- 13 is expected to take place. In addition, this reorientation also brings about the need for teachers to reorient the way they should assess their students’ learning and the way they interpret their students’ learning output. Authentic assessment as a corridor to measure real-life students’ performance of English in real use is mentioned the K-13 as the evaluation tools to accommodate the current needs and require- ments for assessing students’ learning output in the classroom learning (Permendikbud 104, 2014). Under K-13, authentic assessment is meant to comply with and to meet the demand of the teaching of English to students in which English is regarded as a vehicle to convey ideas through language skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. In such a context, by norms, students’ English learn- ing under K-13 is designed to be assessed comprehensively involving not only aspects pertaining to their cognition on language, but also their affect and language behaviors seen as English skills (Decree of Minister of Education 104 year 2014). In addition, a number of assessment procedures are out- lined as mandated in K-13 as the assessment techniques that assure teachers to have access to reveal students’ cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. These methods are among other performance assess- ment, product, and portfolio, project (Fulcher & Davidson, 2012). Even though authentic assessment has been suggested for years along with the implementation of K-13, in practice, challenges and confusions on its conceptions might still potentially be faced by teachers. A study on the implementation of K-13 during the transition period of KTSP to K-13 implores confusions and anxiety as well as pressure among teachers (Rizqi, 2017). Azis (2015) de- monstrates that assessment practices are conflicting for teachers: they feel that there is no synergy between assessment practices and policies. The policies have set the idealized assessment standards to assess students’ continuous performance meanwhile these teachers are affected by the national exami-nation and ignoring the standards (Azis, 2015). Teachers’ problems are in not only designing assess-ment tools to reveal students’ attitude, but also their difficulties in developing scoring rubrics for skills, implementing the authentic assessment methods, collecting students’ data using a number of measurement strategies, and marking the learning output (Retnawati et al., 2016). Another study conducted by Isnawati and Saukah (2017) also indicates that misconceptions about authentic assess-ment and how it should be truly implemented in classrooms still exist. These studies are informative in terms of concerns on authentic assessment practices. Further studies, however, are needed to reveal more aspects pertaining to implementation of authentic assessment that involve teachers’ current conception with a broader scope. Literature Review Pratt (1992 as cited by Azis, 2015: 130) proposes conceptions as “the lens through which teachers view, interpret, and interact” their teaching knowledge. This means that conception is mental | 21 | EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 20–31 | 22 | naturally. Teacher’s conception happens in teachers’ mind. Indeed, conceptions truly play a crucial role as “theoretical grounds” in teachers’ teaching practices (Nepsor, 1987: 317). This implies that teachers’ conception is linked to teachers’ behavior in the classroom. Consequently, wrong practices and conflicting implementations of authentic assessment in K-13 context certainly indicate that there are some misinterpretations and misconceptions of teachers’ theoretical understanding in authentic performance-based assessment itself. Seniority is embedded as the supporting variable in this study as it is assumed that older teachers with longer experiences of teaching and certainly have stronger concepts that probably can- not be easily changed as demanded by the new reform policy like K-13 and its mandate on employing authentic assessment in classroom practices. It is argued that the longer experiences in matters dealing with teaching and assessment in particular teachers have, the stronger they will hold their conception on the old ideas, and thus they will find it more challenging in adapting to the new reform. Nowadays, language teaching deals with how to make students able to use the language (Harmer, 2009). Students are expected to be able to understand as well as to respond to messages through texts realized as utterances and written language as they are used in particular situations and contexts. The ultimate objectives in language teaching and learning is not only knowing grammatical structure of language, but also acquiring how to perform the language in real communication. Consequently, the ways a teacher monitors and evaluates students’ progress in learning need also to be reformed based on these objectives. According to Brown (2004), there should be a correspondence between language competences and language use. Tests should measure not only students’ knowledge of language, but also their ability to perform the language. Instead of only measuring students’ linguistics knowledge as in dis- crete and integrative components of language, the authentic assessment is designed to accommodate language use and communication in the classroom. Fulcher (2010: 68) illustrates authentic assess- ment in language classroom as a ‘treatment’ in order to facilitate students’ to acquire the language. Different from the classical, discrete, as well as integrative approaches, authentic assessment is de- signed for language learning also known as assessment for learning (O’Malley & Pierce, 1996) rather than for reflecting results of learning or assessment of learning (O’Malley & Pierce, 1996). In addi- tion, it provides contextualized tasks needed to encourage language interactions (Brown, 2004: 13). The most important element of authentic assessment is the authentic task (Brown, 2004: 13). Authenticity is the keyword of the authentic task in authentic assessment which makes it different to other kinds of tasks. In this case, authenticity refers to two things: real life use and real language performance (Bachman, 1990:300). Based on the idea of authenticity itself, authentic task can be defined as a task encouraging students to truly perform the language and involving real life situation in order to provide meaningful task for the students. Carrol proposes that authentic task should accommodate several aspects: integrated skills, performance, normal communication situation, and communicative effect (1937 as cited in Bachman, 1990: 300). In addition to real life situation and real life performance, in designing authentic task, the communication should have particular lan- guage function such as to invite or to congratulate others. In addition, all language skills should be activated as a holistic language production. Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri | 23 | Clearing the Grounds: Basic Principles of Authentic Assessment Authentic task is the key in authentic assessment in English speaking classrooms. In designing tasks for language classroom purposes, there are several principles of authentic assessment that should be considered by teachers. According to Brown (2004: 13), there are at least six principles of authen- tic assessment for teachers to consider in constructing authentic tasks. Those six principles are elabo- rated below. Open-Ended Task. Students’ performance in an authentic task is not assessed by using tradi- tional techniques of assessment that do not involve any language interaction. The authentic tasks ask students to creatively express their idea about certain issues or situations in many alternative forms of assessment. Instead of using objective tests, subjective tests are more preferable for the authentic tasks. The common techniques used in authentic tasks are usually performance-based tasks, project-based task, extended response, and other kinds of test as long as the techniques activate language use and language production (Brown, 2004: 10). Integrated Skills. Each skill is not assessed as unitary language competence, but as holistic experience in communication. In assessing speaking, for instance, which is a productive skill, it is impossible to avoid listening activities as the input for speaking itself. In assessing writing, it is obvi- ously impossible to totally neglect reading activity. Although teacher might only assess one particular skill, the process of achieving an authentic task might require activations of other related skills. Authentic Contextualized Communicative Tasks. As mentioned by Bachman (1990: 303), authentic refers to real life use and real performance. Authentic speaking task, for instance, should not only encourage students to speak, but also cover social functions like what students have in real communication, so the task would be meaningful for them. It is meaningless to suddenly ask students to describe a person without any purpose. There should also authentic context and situation in the task. Teacher should also provide authentic materials which are not intended for learning in order to create real communication atmosphere in the classroom. For example, teacher could give a descrip- tion task containing picture of a missing kid for the students. The picture can be taken from any sources such as newspaper, pamphlet, or others. Process-oriented. Language competences improvement cannot only be assessed at once; they require continuation of assessing students’ performances (O’Malley and Pierce, 1996). Students are assessed during teaching learning activities based on the process of completing projects, portfolio, or other types of authentic task provided by teacher (Sulistyo, 2015:131). Therefore, authentic assess- ment is also well-known as continuous assessment emphasizing students’ learning process rather than students’ result of learning. Diagnostic. Authentic assessment is not aimed to judge students’ success or failure, but it is designed to help students to reflect their own strengths and weaknesses in learning. Later, students could find ways to overcome their weaknesses. Besides helping students to do self-reflection, feedback from teacher and peers also has also important roles in authentic assessment. EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 20–31 Interactive performance. Brown (2004: 11) specifically highlights the presence of interactive tasks in authentic assessment. In a speaking task, there should a stimulus or message that should be delivered and there should be responses to that message. Indeed, the interactions should automati- cally consider particular language context of use and social functions to be communicated. This interactive task will be beneficial to make students experience ‘real-communication’ atmosphere in language learning. This paper then is written to report a result of a study on EFL teachers’ conceptions about authentic assessment, the role of feedback, and use of authentic assessment procedures in the context of K-13 educational reform. The findings of the study have pedagogical implications that will benefit for the proper and successful implementation of the new curriculum – K-13. 2. Method This survey aimed to find out EFL teachers’ conceptions about authentic assessment, the role of feedback, and the use of authentic assessment procedures in Indonesia EFL learning context. The participants of this survey were 282 teachers at lower and upper secondary levels of education across seniority, length of teaching experiences, and certification status. The instrument used in this study was a set of questionnaires which is divided into two sections. The first section consists of ten ques- tions on EFL teachers’ conceptions on feedback and authentic assessment. In addition, the next sec- tion contains sixteen items on types of test techniques used to assess students’ competences in the classroom. The survey involved a number of 282 EFL teachers who were drawn conveniently from sub-populations of districts across East Java: East, west, north, south, and central geographical areas of East Java. Thus, they represent EFL teachers in these areas. The obtained data were analyzed statistically by involving age variables in the analysis. The obtained data was analyzed by using SPSS Ver. 24. For the purpose of the analysis, the subjects of the present study were categorized into three groups: 1) Group 1: 20-35 year-old, labeled as Junior Group; 2) Group 2: 35,1-50 year-old, as Mid Group, and 3) Group 3: more than 50 year-old as Senior Group. The assumption was that the more senior the teachers are, the more experienced they were. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Teachers’ conceptions on authentic assessment To scrutinize teachers’ conceptions on authentic assessment, the questionnaires include items that reflect the six principles of authentic assessment as proposed by Brown (2004), namely: open- ended task, integrated skills, authentic-contextualized communicative task, process oriented, diag- nostic task, and interactive performance. Table 1 presents the summary of teachers’ conceptions in authentic assessment. | 24 | Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri Table 1. Teachers’ Conceptions in Authentic Assessment across Age Groups Conceptions on Authentic Assessment Group 1: Junior Group 2: Mid Group 3: Senior Agree (%) Agree (%) Agree (%) Students’ score is used to diagnose learning strength and weaknesses 89.4% 83.4% 85.7% Peer assessment is useful to help students learn 90.1% 100% 80.9% Teachers’ feedback is also needed to help students realize their problems 96% 91.7% 95.3% Self-assessment is important to help students realize their own problems 84.1% 91.7% 80.9% Continuous assessment provides information on teachers’ teaching quality 78.8% 91.7% 85.8% Continuous assessment makes students aware of their own learning problems 92.7% 100% 95.2% As observed in Table 1, almost all teachers of the three groups conceived the six qualities that should be possessed by an authentic assessment task. As many as 89.4% of the junior, 83.4% of the mid, and 85.7% of the senior agreed that the main purpose of conducting authentic assessment was to diagnose students’ strengths and weaknesses to enhance learning instead of only providing judg- mental scores on students’ ability. Further, authentic assessment is also useful for teachers to reflect their own teaching quality (Brown, 2004). This point was supported by the EFL teachers’ high per- centages on the role of authentic assessment as a continuous task allowing teaching quality improve- ments 78.8% of the junior, 91.7% of the mid, and 85.8% of the senior agreed with the statement. In authentic assessment, feedbacks both from teacher and peer are the important elements to build interactive learning process in performing the language (O’Malley and Pierce, 1996). In Table 1, the majority of teachers in the three groups (96% of the junior, 91.7% of the mid, and 95.3% of the senior) coincided that teachers’ feedbacks were required to help students improve their performance. Most of the EFL teachers of the three groups also agreed with the significance of peer-assessment and self-assessment in authentic assessment to help the students’ realize their learning problems. Further, it was acknowledged by the majority of teachers of the three groups (92.7% of the junior, 100% of the mid, and 95.2% of the senior) that authentic assessment that enhance process-oriented evaluation potentially increased students’ awareness on their own learning problems. 3.2. Contradictions among the statements Although Table 1 seemed to reflect teachers’ comprehension on authentic assessment concep- tions, their responses on some contradictory statements to the six principles of authentic assessment | 25 | EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 20–31 might imply that they did not truly conceive what authentic assessment was and how authentic assessment should be implemented in teaching learning. These contradictions indicated that these EFL teachers basically did not fully comprehend the values of authentic assessment itself. Table 2 presents teachers’ contradictive responses of authentic assessment compared to their responses on the presented aspects in the Table 1. Table 2. Teachers’ Contradictive Conceptions in Authentic Assessment As presented in Table 2, although the EFL teachers had stated that authentic assessment should be diagnostic, many of them (91.4% of the junior, 100% of the mid, and 95.2% of the senior) still considered the scores of authentic assessment as the indicators of students’ achievement, which po- tentially only focused on labeling students’ success in gaining good score instead of identifying their strength and weaknesses to improve their learning. Most of the teachers agreed to use continuous assessment to determine students’ success or failure (92.3% of the junior, 91.7% of the mid, and 95.2% of the senior). Indeed, this concept was contradictory to the principles of authentic assessment which should be more process- oriented rather than product-oriented .The majority of respondents across groups junior, mid, and senior (82.1% ) (75% ), and (80.9%) respectively agree to administer authentic assessment apart from teaching learning activities, while it should be embedded to teaching and learning process. Most of the EFL teachers in three groups (94.7% of the junior, 100% of the mid, and 85.7% of the senior) were also still trapped into traditional perspectives to have formative and summative assessment to conclude students’ competence instead of providing authentic- contextualized language tasks for the students. These findings clearly implied that even though au- thentic assessment should not something new for teachers, their conceptions on what authentic as- sessment is and how to implement the authentic assessment are still overlap. 3.3. Authentic assessment practices in the classroom: Testing techniques In this section, the results of the data analysis on how teachers implement authentic assessment in the classroom are summarized. Their assessment techniques and formats in conducting authentic assessment are highlighted as shown in the tables as presented below. Table 3 presents the percentages of frequencies of testing techniques used by the junior group to assess their students. | 26 | Contradictive Conceptions on Authentic Assessment Group 1: Junior Group 2: Mid Group 3: Senior Agree (%) Agree (%) Agree (%) Students’ scored is merely used to determine students’ achievement 91.4% 100% 95.2% Continuous assessment determines students’ success and failure 92.3% 91.7% 95.2% Teachers combine formative and summative assessment to conclude student’s ultimate competence 94.7% 100% 85.7% Continuous assessment should be conducted apart from teaching activities 82.1% 75% 80.9% Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri | 27 | Table 3. Percentage of Frequencies of Testing Techniques in Authentic Assessment of the Junior Group Test-types Never Rarely Seldom Often Always Multiple-choice types 0 8.6 20.5 52.3 18.5 Short answers 0.7 4.0 19.2 63.6 12.6 True-False 2.6 12.6 31.8 48.3 4.6 Cloze procedures 9.9 27.8 39.7 20.5 2.0 Matching 4.0 14.6 28.5 50.3 2.6 Simulation 12.6 25.8 29.8 24.5 7.3 Role play 4.6 15.2 32.5 35.8 11.9 Interview 9.3 24.5 35.1 20.5 10.6 Checklist 21.9 25.8 33.8 15.2 3.3 Portfolio 24.5 19.2 30.5 21.9 4.0 Project 15.9 20.5 29.1 28.5 6.0 Observation sheet 23.8 25.8 29.1 17.9 3.3 Dialog journals 42.4 24.5 17.2 13.9 2.0 Peer assessment 13.9 21.9 31.1 29.1 4.0 Self-assessment 9.9 25.8 30.5 24.5 9.3 Scoring Rubrics 18.6 10.6 20.5 17.7 21.9 As observed in Table.3, in junior group which consist of 20-35 years old teachers, the multiple- choice (often 52.3%, always 18.5%), short answer (often 63.6%, always 12.6%), true-false (often 48.3%, always 4.6%), and matching (often 50.3%, always 2.6%) were the most popular testing techniques used to assess students’ language performance. It could also be observed that the authentic techniques of testing such as dialog journals (never 42.4%, rarely 24.5%, seldom 17.2%), portfolio (never 24.5%, rarely 19.2%, seldom 30.5%), observation sheet (never 23.8%, rarely 25.8%, 29.1%), project (never 15.9%, rarely 20.5%, seldom 29.1%), and scoring rubric (never 18.6%, rarely 10.6%, seldom 20.5%) were less popular compare to other techniques which were easier to be administered and scored. Table 4 presents the percentages of frequencies of testing techniques used by the middle group to assess their students. Table 4. Percentage of Frequencies of Testing Techniques in Authentic assessment of the Middle Group Test-types Never Rarely Seldom Often Always Multiple-choice types 0 0 14.3 57.1 28.6 Short answers 0 0 7.1 57 35.9 True-False 0 7.1 21.4 64.1 7.3 Cloze procedures 0 7.1 67.1 25.7 0 Matching 0 14.3 24.4 61.2 0 Simulation 7.1 14.3 50.0 14.3 14.3 Role play 0 21.4 28.6 35.7 14.3 Interview 28.6 14.3 50.0 7.1 0 Checklist 11.4 14.3 28.6 21.4 14.3 Portfolio 7.1 35.7 28.6 14.3 14.3 Project 14.3 21.4 35.7 14.3 14.3 Observation sheet 28.6 14.3 35.7 21.4 0 Dialog journals 42.9 7.1 28.6 14.3 7.1 Peer assessment 7.1 28.6 35.7 14.3 14.3 Self-assessment 21.4 21.4 28.6 14.3 14.3 Scoring Rubrics 7.1 14.3 14.3 35.7 28.6 EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 20–31 | 28 | The findings in the middle group as presented in Table 4 were almost identical to the findings of the junior groups. The most popular techniques to assess students’ language performance for EFL teachers in the middle group were the multiple-choice (often 57.1%, always 28.6%), short answer (often 57%, always 35.9%), true-false (often 64.1%, always 7.3%), and matching (often 62.1%). Meanwhile, other techniques of assessment which requiring longer responses and more critical ways of thinking were less popular to be implemented in the classroom by EFL teachers in the middle group. As invented in Table 4, interview (never 28.6%, rarely 14.3%, seldom 50%), observation sheet (never 28.6%, rarely 14.3%, seldom 35.7%), dialog journals (never 42.9%, rarely 7.1%, seldom 28.6%), and self-assessment (never 21.4%, rarely 21.4%, seldom 28.6%) were four least popular testing techniques among EFL teachers in the middle group. Next, Table 5 presents the percentages of frequencies of testing techniques used by the senior group to assess their students. Table 5. Percentage of Frequencies of Testing Techniques in Authentic Assessment of the Senior Group Test-types Never Rarely Seldom Often Always Multiple-choice types 0 0 4.8 85.7 9.5 Short answers 4.8 0 19.0 66.7 9.5 True-False 9.5 14.3 52.4 19.0 4.8 Cloze procedures 0 23.8 42.9 28.6 4.8 Matching 4.8 4.8 42.9 42.9 4.8 Simulation 9.5 19.0 47.6 23.8 0 Role play 0 9.5 38.1 42.9 4.8 Interview 4.8 19.0 47.6 28.6 0 Checklist 9.5 28.6 33.3 23.8 4.8 Portfolio 0 19.0 28.6 52.4 0 Project 4.8 9.5 52.4 28.6 4.8 Observation sheet 14.3 23.8 38.1 23.8 0 Dialog journals 23.8 28.6 42.9 4.8 0 Peer assessment 23.8 19.0 38.1 19.0 0 Self-assessment 4.8 23.8 57.1 14.3 0 Scoring Rubrics 14.3 4.8 14.3 57.1 9.5 The EFL teachers in senior group were assumed to be more experienced compared to the EFL teachers in the junior group and middle group. In fact, due to their age, there was a possibility that these teachers might be quite strict and old-fashioned regarding on current trends of English Lan- guage Teaching and English Language Testing. However, surprisingly, the third group was the most familiar group who used current techniques of assessment to assess their students’ performance com- pared to the other groups of younger EFL teachers. In Table 5, although the two most popular testing techniques in the senior group were still Multiple choice (often 85.7%, always 9.5%) and short answers (often 66.7%, always 9.5%), authentic performance-based assessment in the forms of role play(42.9%), portfolio(52.4%), and scoring rubric(57.1%) were also often administered in their classroom. In conclusion, based on the aforementioned findings, the two most popular testing tech- niques used by EFL teachers in the three groups in order to assess students’ language performances Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri were multiple-choice and short answer. As many as 52.3 % of the junior, 57.1% of the mid, and 85.7% of the senior demonstrated that they were often use multiple choice to test their students’ performances. Short answer was also a popular technique of assessment that often used by the EFL teachers (63.6% of the junior, 57% of the mid, and 66.7% of the senior). In fact, authentic assess- ment tasks seemed to be not really popular among teachers in the junior and the middle groups. Meanwhile, the senior group was more familiar in using authentic assessment techniques to assess their students’ language performances. 4. Discussion 4.1. Teachers’ conceptions on authentic assessment across age levels Authentic assessment is a continuous process in which assessment is administered during the teaching learning process (Brown, 2004). In fact, most of teachers, no matter in what group they belong to, still do not fully have the right conceptions on what authentic assessment is. It can be observed in table 1 and table 2 that their statements about authentic assessment are still overlap one another. Brown (2004) states that there are at least six principles of authentic assessment: open- ended, interactive task, authentic contextualized assessment, process-oriented, diagnostic, and inte- grated skills. To truly implement authentic assessment in the classroom, all those principles should be comprehended by teachers. In such a way, teacher could maximize the use of authentic assessment to facilitate and even to enhance students’ learning process. However, it is found out that the teachers’ conceptions on authentic assessment are not clear yet. Based on the aforementioned findings as discussed in the previous sections, it is found EFL teachers do not really comprehend the six principles of authentic assessment as proposed by Brown (2004). It is indicated by several contradictions of statements that they are selected during the survey. In addition, age seems like not to bring any significant differences on Indonesian EFL teachers’ con- ceptions and understanding on authentic assessment as they tend to demonstrates identical responses during the survey. This is different from Arrafii (2021) mentioning the significant role of age al- though it is not a strong predictor. 4.2. Testing formats used by EFL teachers in authentic assessment O’Malley and Pierce (1996: 12) propose eight models of authentic test types used in authentic assessment: oral interviews, story or text retelling, writing samples, projects, exhibitions, experiments, demonstrations, constructed response items, teacher observations, and portfolio. Other formats of open-ended task types are also provided by Hughes (1993), namely, extended response and perfor- mance. Those kinds of task are design not only to assess but also to facilitate learning teaching activi- ties in the classroom. Brown (2004) mentions this as assessment for learning and assessment as learn- ing. In addition to those authentic tasks, authentic assessment also facilitates students’ reflection on their own learning. Thus, self-assessment, peer-assessment, as well as corrective feedback are obviously needed in implementing authentic assessment. However, based on the result of the survey, the two most common test formats administered by teachers, multiple-choice and short answer, are basically classified the traditional forms of assessment .these forms of tests in traditional assessment only mea- | 29 | EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 20–31 | 30 | sure learners’ knowledge rather than performance and language use (Fulcher & Davidson, 2012). There is no real context of communication in this kind of traditional test forms as required in the implementation of authentic assessment, even though the teachers confess that they assess authenti- cally. From the three groups of teachers, the senior group, which is considered as the most experi- enced group among the other groups, are more familiar to administer forms of authentic assessment test forms compared to other groups. These results automatically rebate common assumption that younger teachers are more innovative and creative as well as more up-to-date with new issues in language teaching and testing. One possibility for this findings are that senior teachers might have more chance to join workshops and other forms of teacher professional development training com- pared to the younger teachers. Thus, they have more experiences to share or guide the novice and mid-teachers (Pramastiwi et al. 2018). The three popular authentic assessment tests administered by the third group are role-play, portfolio, and scoring rubric. These three forms of the test probably also the most common ones known by Indonesian teachers as those three assessment forms are required in Indonesian teaching learning activity based on Decree of minister of education No. 104 year 2014. 4. Conclusion In fact, according to the survey above, the conceptions of authentic assessment are still not clear for teachers indicated by contradictive statements made by teachers regarding to the six prin- ciples of authentic assessments. After years of implementation, the challenges in implementing au- thentic assessment of K-13 in the classroom are still found by teachers. Most EFL teachers creates contradictive statements on authentic assessment indicating that these teachers do not truly have a complete and clear understanding of authentic assessment. As observed from types of testing tech- niques used by teachers in the classroom, the group of senior teachers use more authentic test tech- niques (especially the authentic test required by the decree of minister of education 104 year 2014). However, in the senior group as well as in the junior and middle group, the frequencies of using multiple choice and short answer tests are still higher compared the used of authentic testing tech- niques. In short, the misconceptions exist equally in all group of teachers. To overcome these miscon- ceptions, training on authentic assessment is absolutely needed. In addition, training in developing the authentic tasks are also needed so that teachers can understand the difference between authentic and non-authentic instrument. 5. References Arrafii, M. A. (2021). Indonesian teachers’ conceptions of values and dimensions of assessment prac- tice: The effect of teachers’ characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 103245. Azis, A. (2015). Conceptions and practices of assessment: A case of teachers representing improvement conception. Teflin Journal, 26 (2), 129-154. Conceptions on authentic assessment: What Indonesian EFL teachers conceive Ayu Alif Nur Maharani Akbar, Gunadi Harry Sulistyo, Fika Megawati, Vina Virgianata Nuralisaputri | 31 | Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford university press. Brown, H.D. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practice. San Francisco: Pearson Education Inc. Decree of Ministry of Education Number 13 Year 2015 about National Standard of Education (down- loaded from http://dispendik.surabaya.go.id on September 29th 2016) Decree of Ministry of Education Number 104 Year 2014 about Assessment Standard (downloaded from http://dispendik.surabaya.go.id on September 29th 2016) Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing. London: Hodder Education. Fulcher, G. and Davidson, F. (2012). The routledge handbook of language testing. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Books. Harmer, J. (2009). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Harlow: Longman Hughes, S. (1993). What is alternative/authentic assessment and how does it impact special education?. Educational Horizons, 72(1), 28-35. Isnawati, I, & Saukah, A. (2017). Teachers’ grading decision making. Teflin Journal, 28 (2), 155-169. Nepsor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328. O’Malley, J.M., & Pierce, L.V. (1996). Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. US: Addison-Wesley Publishing. Pramastiwi, P., Lie, A., Widiati, S., & Lie, T. (2018). Challenges and resources in CPD for in-service teachers: Establishing communities of inquiry. Beyond Words, 6(2), 66-87. Rizqi, M.A. (2017). Stress and resilience among EFL teachers: An interview study of an Indonesian junior high school teacher. Teflin Journal, 28 (1), 22-37. Retnawati, H., Hadi, S., & Nugraha, A.C. (2016). Vocational high school teachers’ difficulties in imple- Sulistyo, G. H. (2015). EFL learning: Assessment at school. Malang, Bintang Sejahtera. menting the assessment in curriculum 2013 in Yogyakarta province of Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction 9(1):33-48. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2016.914a