Teachers' Understanding of the Use of Malay Language Oral Assessment in Classroom Assessment

Oral assessment always becomes a great challenge for teachers to assess students in the classroom. A qualitative study with a case study design was conducted to investigate teachers’ understanding on the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in classroom evaluation. The research questions in this study focus on, i) what is the definition of oral assessment based on teacher understanding?; and ii) do teachers understand how to conduct oral assessments of Malay language? Six Malay language teachers were involved in this research, with two teachers representing each of the three schools of different categories which are SMK, SABK, and SBP in one of the districts in Negeri Sembilan selected through purposive sampling. The data were collected through the triangulation method which consists of interview method, classroom observation, and analysis of related documents. The findings showed that none of the six study participants could define oral assessment as a process of interaction, which includes four forms that are parallel to DSKP and PPPBD, unable to explain all the characteristics of listening and speaking skills, and cannot properly explain oral assessment objectives. This study can give theoretical implications, allowing MOE to improve the implementation of oral assessment among teachers to more effectively achieve the goals that have been set in the KSSM assessment system.


Introduction
The Ministry of Education (MOE) has improved the educational system, particularly in the transition from public examinations to school-based assessment (PBS), which involves primary and secondary schools across the country. PBS involves all students, which is for both primary (grades one until grade six) and secondary school students (form one to form three). Curriculum and assessment are one of the government's efforts to transform education by implementing an assessment system into the national education system. The PBS education system combines academic and non-academic elements. The academic component consists of Central Assessment (PP) provided by the Malaysian Examinations Council (LPM), but the assessment process is carried out in schools by teachers using LPM developed rubrics. The subject teachers are in charge of classroom-based assessment (PBD) in schools, which includes the planning, implementation, and reporting of the assessment. The process of formal and informal assessment is continuous, for teachers to analyze and determine the actual level of mastery of students. The Malaysia Education Blueprint (PPPM) -2025(KPM, 2013 includes curriculum and assessment that represents a transformation from an examination-oriented education system (achievement tests and examinations) to a more holistic system known as PBD. The system is developed to assess students' potential, readiness to learn, and mastery and achievement.
PBD has been used in education systems for many years in developed countries such as the Netherlands, Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. PBD includes Formative Assessment (FA), which is implemented following established guidelines to allow teachers to plan and implement it with students throughout the year. According to Tombari and Borich (1999), students' knowledge and abilities should be assessed continuously throughout the year rather than being tested by summative assessment.
According to the Assessment Reform Group (2002), FA activities implemented by teachers and students in the classroom play a significant role (Dube-Xaba & Xulu, 2020) because it helps teachers to gather evidence to see the level of understanding of student learning through various activities, such as evidence of oral assessment, through a group discussion between students that encourages them to question and answer, give feedback, and listen carefully during the discussion activity. The results of the assessments conducted during the PBD enable administrators, teachers, parents, and students to plan follow-up actions to improve the development of student learning in the future.
The education curriculum in Malaysia has been replaced changed from the examination-oriented Secondary School Integrated Curriculum (KBSM) to the Standards-Based Curriculum for Secondary School (KSSM) which engages an assessment system to assess students' ability and capability to complete tasks assigned by teachers.
KSSM was implemented for the first time for form one students in 2017. Among the aspects emphasized in this new curriculum recorded in Shift 2 of the Malaysia Education Blueprint (PPPM) 2013-2025 for communication skills, it requires students to master at least three languages to communicate effectively and be able to compete globally. and Performance Standards (SPi) to determine students' mastery levels for each subject so that teaching and learning (T&L) sessions can be implemented effectively.
Nevertheless, teachers have difficulty implementing FA and find it difficult to meet the actual learning needs of the students being assessed (Madsen, 1983). The implementation of oral assessment has great challenges because of external and internal factors that influence teachers to assess the extent of student achievement. This will impact the scoring of students' oral assessments, whether they are transparent or not (Taylor, 2006;Chuang, 2007;Winke et al., 2011). Even students do not understand what the teacher is assessing, the purpose of the assessment, how the assessment results are used, what and how the assessment learning process is assessed, or the assessment goals to achieve learning goals (Al- Amin, 2017). This also happens among Malay language teachers who need to assess reading skills, writing skills, listening and speaking skills. As a result, the purpose of this study is to about the teachers' understanding on the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in PBD.
This study focuses on the research questions as the following: 1) What is the definition of oral assessment based on teacher understanding? 2) Do teachers understand how to conduct oral assessments of the Malay language?

Literature Review Formative Assessment
Formative assessment includes assessment for learning, assessment as learning, and assessment of learning are methods used individually or together, formally and informally to obtain evidence of achievement and improve student learning.
The implementation of Formative Assessment (FA) has been carried out over the past few decades in education policy, for example, assessments and evaluations that are implemented in practice (Birenbaum et al., 2015). FA involves the relationship between teacher and student when teachers respond to student assignment outcomes and provide professional judgment on student learning achievement. Teachers will also provide assessment feedback based on the objectives and standards of assessment to be achieved (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). This continuous or dynamic FA is also known as assessment for learning which is incorporated in T&L and allows teachers to review classroom interactions and, assessment and evaluation procedures (Adebowale et al., 2018). While assessment of learning or summative assessment is conducted at the end of the month, mid-year, and at the end of the year or end of the semester aimed at measuring student learning (Brown, 2004;Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
FA learning activities occur continuously that is practiced daily by students, peers, and teachers aimed at gaining an overview of learning through dialogue, demonstration, and observation (Klenowski, 2009). FA is a process of student self-reflection facilitated by a teacher or a classmate, intending to improve, recognize, and provide feedback on student learning achievement. This method aids students in transitioning from what they already know to what they must do next (Cowie and Bell, 1999;Crooks, 2001;Shepard, 2005).
There are four features of FA. First, the FA implemented to students aims to guide and enhance their learning. Second, is the continuous assessment by teachers to improve learning among students. In addition, it provides an opportunity for teachers to evaluate the progress and development of learning as well as obtain feedback on students' strengths and weaknesses through assessment. Teachers who conduct FA activities indirectly help them improve their experience as well as gain a high understanding of assessment during the teaching process. Third, it can benefit both parties, which is for the teachers and students. Teachers can change and determine the strategies and teaching materials needed in the next T&L session after monitoring the level of progress of students in the learning process. Fourth, FA can provide opportunities for teachers and students and even students with students to actively interact in the carried out activities (Birenbaum et al., 2015;Fletcher and Shaw, 2012).
In Malaysia, assessment is a method of gathering information from students based on what they know, can do and can practice. Through this process, the teacher plays their role to make decisions professionally as a product of an educational program (student performance). FA which takes place throughout the year has a clear goal and is planned by teachers with reference to PPPBD and DSKP to determine the level of mastery of students for each subject so that T&L can be implemented effectively. The concept of FA also applies to lower secondary Malay language subjects. Teachers decide by looking at student performance whether students should be allowed to improve learning or continue to the next level of learning (MOE, 2014). For example, the implementation of assessment and evaluation by English teachers helps them obtain systematic information and can contribute to teachers' understanding of weaknesses and strengths in student learning development (Baranovskaya & Shaforostova, 2017). Information on the development of student learning can improve the teacher's teaching methods in the next T&L session.
Accordingly, FA requires teachers to obtain student evidence as a reference to monitor to what extent students 'knowledge, understanding, and skills can be achieved. In addition, the involvement of teachers, students, and parents can provide a comprehensive view of the evidence obtained from assessment activities. Parents can see student achievement through the evidence obtained during the assessment taking place in the classroom by referring to the scores obtained by the student. In fact, it assists teachers in determining the level of teaching so that appropriate steps can be taken in the next teaching session. Furthermore, these assessment activities are either formally or informally part of the learning process.
As a result, FA, or assessment for learning, will produce high-quality T&L because it allows students to develop ideas, improve understanding, and think more deeply during learning activities. Peer assessment activities, for example, allow students to discuss the important contents of an essay title given by the teacher in the classroom. Teachers play an important role as evaluators, providing feedback on classroom activities to help students learn more effectively. Teachers' feedback can motivate students to improve their learning indirectly.

Standards-Based Curriculum for Secondary School (KSSM)
Following the transformation of national education, a new curriculum has also been formed. The Curriculum and Development Division (BPK) developed the Standards-Based Curriculum for Secondary School (KSSM), which began to be implemented in 2017 for form one students. From 1989 to 2016, KSSM replaced KBSM in our national education system. Cross-curricular elements (CCE) in KSSM include language, science and technology, environmental education, patriotism, values, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, information technology and communications, road safety education, financial education, and global sustainability. There are three aspects of the curriculum in KSSM reform. First, the improvement of curriculum content in line with global trends and international benchmarks. Second, pedagogical aspects lead to an in-depth, contextual and effective approach to learning. Third, the development of student learning is assessed by teachers on an ongoing basis (MOE, 2016).

PBD and Oral Assessment
Oral assessment of Malay language has been done for a long time, particularly during the old curriculum, notably KBSM, between the lower secondary or upper secondary levels. From a sociocultural perspective, the learning and assessment process is a context of social interaction in which students interact with their surroundings (Angela, 2013). Oral skills assessment, in other words, aims to determine a student's level of communication proficiency as it relates to their daily lives. It is not easy for a teacher to determine the exact measurements when evaluating their students' oral assessments because it requires a substantial period of time, effort, and training to ensure that the assessment's reliability and validity are accurate.
Teachers are in charge of conducting PBD in accordance with the LPM's procedures. To achieve more effective and engaging T&L, school assessment entails a teaching and learning process that employs a variety of approaches and strategies. Furthermore, assessment is carried out using a variety of instruments, and teachers use their professional judgement to determine a student's level of mastery during the assessment. After completing the assessment, teachers must keep records of their students' progress and provide a report on their mastery level. This record is intended to inform the student, parents, school administrators, and other stakeholders about the progress of a student's level of mastery.
A study related to the level of teacher literacy on the approach in PBD was conducted by Salleh, Sarkowi, Jaafar, Mohd Arif & Abd Hamid (2019). This quantitative study involved 500 teachers from the state of Kedah. The results of the study obtained through online questionnaires showed that teachers value an approach that aligns with the concept of PBD. A total of 32.5% to 68.3% of teachers implemented the assessment approach for learning and 24.8% to 46.9% adopted assessment as learning. This study demonstrates that teachers have a good understanding of how to conduct PBD.
The implementation of this new educational system is a struggle, and there are some issues that teachers experience as PS implementers in schools. From 2006 to 2014, LPM conducted several studies on PBS, which were published on May 28, 2015, by LPM.
A qualitative study involving 70 teachers from 11 primary schools in Malaysia found that teachers felt burdened with PBS because it took a long time to determine the SPi of students, could not finish the curriculum due to insufficient time, the number of students exceeding 35 in a class, need to fill out a checklist form, manage student files and record scores in the PBS online system. The main issue that teachers and administrators encounter is that the online system is congested, and they must complete the scoring in a short amount of time. Furthermore, teachers have no idea what SPi is or how it is used to assess students' learning abilities. Even the parents did not understand PBS and asked the school to hold exams as usual.
Through educational innovations based on assessment practices in schools, teachers have not yet been able to be a good evaluators because they conducted oral assessment scoring according to their respective understandings. The implication is such practices will affect students' learning performance. Giving different and non -transparent scores (bias) will show significant scoring differences among students (Suseela and Kwan Hoon, 2010) (even the implementation of formative assessment is considered so complex (Vingsle, 2014). Indirectly, teachers are unable to provide parents with accurate and fair assessment results. Such a situation will raise suspicion among parents because the unfair results obtained by their children contradict the briefing on PBS, PT3 & KBAT Improvement to Parents which was attended by 30,402 PIBG representatives of all schools which took place from 24 May to 26 June 2014 (KPM, 2014). This is due to teachers' inability to make accurate and appropriate assessments of the students being assessed due to a lack of understanding of the assessment standards. As a result, this situation raises doubts and distrust among parents and other stakeholders about the reporting of teacher evaluations, and even the quality of the evaluation will be questioned.
Furthermore, the large number of students in one classroom makes individual assessments tough for teachers. A study conducted by Mohamed and Abd Aziz (2018) found that the imbalance in the number of students in the classroom showed that the minimum number of 26 students in one classroom and a number of 45 students in other schools. This causes teachers unable to conduct reassessments as needed to design and build new instruments to enable students to achieve the Level of Mastery set for students who did not master it yet (Abu Naim and Talib, 2014). The next research conducted by LPM in 2012 involved a collaboration between the British Council and Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (UPSI) to identify the English teachers' understanding of PBS in two primary schools in Kuala Lumpur and two secondary schools in Selangor. Findings of the study concluded that English teachers do not understand the concept of PBS, Head Coaches (JU) do not help the teachers to implement PBS, teachers unfamiliar with how to use teaching techniques in formative assessment to improve student performance, teachers still use norm reference test framework instead of criteria reference. Similarly, teachers find that changes in the education system happen too fast and it is difficult for them to adapt the actual methods of assessment, teachers tend to help students by giving good marks which has an impact on the validity and reliability of PBS scores. Therefore, the teachers were asked to conduct additional training on how to conduct PBS.
Based on the study of Suseela and Kwan (2010), They interviewed two English teachers and observed them in the classroom, concluding that the guidelines for teachers to implement oral English assessment form one are unclear, the teachers' basic knowledge of assessment is lacking and that the lack of systematic external monitors is the main obstacle to the implementation of oral assessments.
Teachers requested that the existing assessment format be clearly explained so that oral assessment can be successfully implemented. Teachers also require time management training to implement assessment in the classroom. Teachers clarified that they do not have enough time to conduct assessments as they spend a lot of time on non-academic tasks (Majid, 2011;Nair et al., 2013). Simultaneously, Nair et al (2013) conducted a study on 20 English teachers who were reported having moderate knowledge of how to plan and develop assessment implementation. In addition, the main obstacles to assessment implementation are a lack of teachers, insufficient information, biased student scoring, inadequate time, a lack of teaching materials and methods, and a lack of information technology infrastructure in schools. The implementation of PBS needs to be strengthened and improved (Abdullah et al., 2015).

Research Design
The case study method was used in this qualitative research. The researcher used a qualitative research design to explore more about teachers' understanding on the use of Malay language oral assessments in the classroom. Therefore, the researcher conducted interviews, observations, and document analysis to gather information for explaining the phenomenon. The researcher acts as the main instrument of the study during data collection and analysis (Yin, 2011), allowing the researcher to analyze an event, case, activity, or program individually or in groups (Creswell, 2014).

Sample and Data Collection
In this study, the research participants consisted of six teachers who teach the Malay language for lower secondary, form one and form two in three schools of different categories in a district in Negeri Sembilan, which are Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan (SMK), Sekolah Agama Bantuan Kerajaan (SABK), and Sekolah Berasrama Penuh (SBP). Each school represented two research participants. The selection of research participants was based on purposive samplings, such as meeting the criteria, characteristics, and having the information as specified in the study (Hussin and Darusalam, 2016). Therefore, the selection of research participants can provide the information needed to answer the research questions. Table 1 shows the questions asked by the researchers. Table 1 Questions from the Researcher 1.
Can you explain what is oral assessment? 2.
What is the purpose of the oral assessment being implemented? 3.
Can you explain the oral assessment procedure?

Interview
This study used semi-structured interviews as the main data collection method to understand and explore teachers' understanding on the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in classroom assessment. Interviews conducted by researchers can help obtain more detailed information to understand the experiences and actions taken by research participants on a phenomenon they went through (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The researcher has prepared the interview protocol to align with the research questions to other questions in supporting the questions framed in the interview protocol.

Analyzing Data
In this qualitative study, the researcher as a research instrument needs to understand and explore teachers' understanding of the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in classroom assessment. Accordingly, in this study, the researcher used all three methods of data collection in qualitative design including interviews, observations, and document analysis. The selection of these three methods is a triangulation for researchers to reduce bias when making interpretations about teachers' understanding of the implementation of Malay language oral assessment. The results of the combination, provide space for researchers to get a clear picture in understanding and exploring the studied phenomena.

Observation
Observational methods were also used in this study. Observation is one way for researchers to understand complex phenomena in humans (Jones et al., 2006) by gathering information about the conditions and interactions of phenomena that occur (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015). In the context of this study, observations on teachers were conducted to get what was informed and said during the interviews on teachers' understanding of the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in classroom assessment. The researcher first prepared a checklist based on the research questions. Observations were carried out when the research participants were conducting oral assessments of the Malay language in the classroom.

Document Analysis
In this study, several documents are used as reference material such as the Standards-Based Curriculum for Secondary School (KSSM), Form One Curriculum and Assessment Standard Document (DSKP), Form 2 Curriculum and Assessment Standard Document (DSKP), Guidebook of Classroom-Based Assessment (PPPBD), Form One Malay textbook, Form Two Malay textbooks, daily lesson plans, and student work. Table 2 explains the types of documents used by the research participants to conduct oral assessments of the Malay language. In this regard, the combination of data obtained through interviews, observations, and analysis of related documents helped the researcher to analyze teachers' understanding on the implementation of Malay language oral assessment in classroom assessment.

Findings
The DSKP and PPPBD, which are provided by the MOE, are used by teachers to assess listening and speaking skills in schools. In this connection, three themes were formed, which are the process of interaction, the characteristics of listening and speaking skills, and the goals of oral assessment.

Interaction Process
Based on DSKP and PPPBD, there are four forms of interaction. First, student interaction with the student, the student with teacher, and student with learning materials. Second, through oral recitation and presentation in a variety of situations, students interact and empower learning skills according to their abilities. Third, convey content, facts, and information using grammatical sentences. Fourth, respond verbally in a manner that is correct, accurate, and meaningful. Further details are as shown in Table 3: ✓ ✓ ✓ Total 6/6 1/6 4/6 4/6 Note: 1. Interaction between students, teachers-students, and students-learning materials. 2. Oral recitation and delivery in a variety of situations. 3. Convey content, facts, and information using grammatical sentences. 4. Respond verbally in a manner that is correct, accurate, and meaningful.
i. Interaction between Students, Teachers-Students, and Students-Learning Materials Based on the findings of the researcher's interviews with the six research participants, it showed that none of the respondents could define the interaction process in the oral assessment that includes four components as outlined by DSKP and PPPBD. However, for the four components of the interaction process, all six (6/6) research participants only fulfilled the first component as their statement, which the interaction process refers to talking to others, two-way interaction, the interaction between students and peers, student-teacher interactions, and student-teacher interactions with learning materials. The statement given by them is in line with DSKP and PPPBD.
Based on the interviews, RP01 stated that oral assessment emphasizes a form of communication that involves verbal interaction with other individuals to convey information based on students' knowledge. According to RP01: RP01 : "...it needs to be in the form of words, talking with the other party to see their ability whether they can communicate well or otherwise .. " The statement given by RP01 is supported by RP02 by stating that the process of interaction requires students to interact to convey their ideas. When asked further on what RP02 meant by 'there is interaction', he/she explained that oral assessment is a process of two-way interaction when the teacher acts as a stimulant and the student responds using a grammatical style of language. According to him/her, the process of interaction with the second party can involve peers. Through group discussions, there will be student assessments with students or peers.
RP04 also stressed that the interaction process allows students to interact with peers. This is proved by the statement of RP04: RP04 : What I understand for this new DSKP, what they want is all that we need to do. For example, the students can interact. Students will interact with their friends. The statements given by the research participants indicated that they understood that the process of interaction will occur when there is the interaction of an individual with other individuals or with learning materials during oral assessment in the classroom. ii.

Recitation and Oral Presentation in Various Situations
As a result of the interviews, only one of six (1/6) research participants, that is RP01 understood the interaction process required students to recite, interpret the information heard and conveyed orally. While five of the six (5/6) research participants did not directly said the component of the second interaction process during the interview session. With such a situation, RP01 wants at least students to be able to speak and convey information by making accurate interpretations according to the situation during the interaction. The transcript of the RP01 interview can be observed as follows: RP01 : They understand the aspects that they heard, they narrate for them to interpret in other forms.
The remaining five research participants were unable to provide descriptions of the forms of oral presentation and delivery to show they understood the actual oral assessment. This proves that they understand the definition of verbal assessment in a basic way only and are unable to state it precisely. iii.
Convey Content, Facts, and Information Using Grammatical Sentences Next, the third component of the interaction process is the student's ability to convey content, facts, and information using grammatical sentences. The findings of the study found that only four out of six (4/6) research participants, which are RP02, RP03, RP05, and RP06 understood that the interaction process that occurs requires students to use grammatical language structure when presenting content, facts, and information during the oral assessment. The four participants of this study ensured that students practiced the third component of the interaction process and it shows the parallelism of DSKP and PPPBD guidelines. Research participants realized that this aspect needed to be emphasized in clarifying the definition of the oral assessment itself. The following are statements from RP02 and RP06: RP02 : They can speak if we interact. Like that day, some of the students in the class can speak in a grammatical language.
RP06 : I will look at their fluency, grammar, sentence structure. If there is a mistake we will inform them. So, from there they can learn. iv.
Respond verbally in a manner that is correct, accurate, and meaningful The fourth component of the interaction process is to respond verbally in a manner that is correct, accurate, and meaningful. The findings of the study found that out of six research participants, only four (4/6) research participants could state that students need to respond verbally and this is one of the interaction processes outlined in the DSKP. RP03 thinks that oral assessment is an opportunity for students to explain the information they understand by responding to others. He/She gave the following opinions: PK03 : This oral assessment gives more opportunities to students. Every student needs to communicate well. There may be things that we discuss and we want all of our students to talk or explain what he or she understands.

RP04
In your group, try to discuss ways to deal with environmental pollution such as steps, causes, and effects. Okay, you can discuss it with your friend. I give you 10 minutes to discuss in groups and then outline the results that you get. Documentation Data

RP04
RPH Standard content: 3.9 Comment on things and issues. Learning standards: 1.8.1 Explain something in very competent and critically using correct, accurate, and grammatical sentences.
In conclusion, none of the six research participants could state the definition of verbal assessment as an interactive process, such as it includes four components that are parallel to DSKP and PPPBD. The findings of the study showed that all six study participants did not understand the definition of oral assessment as required in DSKP and PPPBD. Although research participants could explain some components of the oral assessment interaction process, as Malay language teachers they were considered not to fulfill the criteria to fully understand the definition of oral assessment. Therefore, all six study participants need continuous training to strengthen their understanding.

Characteristics of Listening and Speaking Skills
In the characteristics of listening and speaking skills that have been emphasized are divided into two, which are listening skills and speaking skills. In DSKP, listening skills are divided into three, known as (1) the process of observation, and sound recognition; (2) fitness and thinking; and (3) appreciating and understanding orally. While speaking skills are divided into four such as (1) the mental process to produce sound; (2) conversational forms; (3) to convey information; and (4) correct pronunciation, intonation, tone, and etiquette. Table 5 shows the understanding of research participants' listening and speaking skills characteristics while conducting oral assessments.

0/6
Forms of conversation to interact.
To convey creative and critical information, opinions, feelings, ideas.
Pronunciation, intonation, correct tone and be ethical.
Based on Table 5 shows that none of the research participants were able to explain all the characteristics of listening and speaking skills. Only five characteristics of listening and speaking skills were mentioned by the research participants in the interviews conducted. Referring to Table 4 above, it can be seen that none of the research participants stated that the process of sound observation and recognition are among the characteristics of listening skills. The second characteristic of listening skills, i.e. fitness and thinking found only RP01 showed he understood that the pupil's hearing must be active while receiving information and the thinking process will take place to translate what is understood orally. RP01 stated in more detail as the statement below:

RP01
: The verbal assessment that I understand is that we test the students' ability to master something from their verbal aspect, from the aspect of their understanding of the things they know, and their ability to communicate. Aaa ... in this oral, they are also tested related to listening as well so it means they are tested with various senses according to the level of their senses.
Next, the second characteristic of speaking skills is the form of conversation to interact. The findings of the study showed that only five out of six (5/6) of the research participants understood that verbal assessment includes speaking activities formed through interaction with each other. For example, RP02 will always observe students being able to speak during their daily oral assessments. He noted that oral assessment involves question and answer activities between teachers and students or students with peers. This question and answer process encourages students to interact using good sentence structure. At the same time, the teacher acts as a motivator by asking questions to encourage students to continue talking during the discussion session. According to the respondent:

RP02 :
When we asked, they answered. When their friend asked, some of them answered what their friend asks. This verbal assessment needs to speak. This oral assessment is more related to students who give ideas. That student has a good vocabulary. We as mentors correct. The stimuli we gave caused them to speak. The statement given by RP02 is supported by RP03. The findings of the study showed that he wanted all his/her students can speak and give explanations about anything understood in the form of interaction. Below is his/her statement: PK03 : We want all our students to talk or explain what they understand.
Referring to the examples of RP02 and RP03 statements above, the adaptation of speech forms becomes one of the interactions in oral assessment. Research participants always asked questions to stimulate the student's thinking and the student would speak to convey the information. The ability of students to speak proves that all five research participants to understand that students need to meet the characteristics of speaking skills as outlined in the DSKP.
Discussions continued for the third characteristic of speaking skills, which is to convey information, opinions, feelings, creative and critical ideas. Referring to Table 4, a total of five out of six (5/6) research participants stated that the characteristics of speaking skills include giving ideas and opinions given by students. Only one research participant (RP04) did not state anything about the third characteristic of speaking skills. RP01, RP02, RP03, RP05, and RP06 explain that students will present their ideas or opinions through assignments given by research participants for example during discussion activities. Even sharing ideas with peers helps students to diversify the content of the discussion. The following are examples of statements from research participants:

PK02 :
If in terms of verbal, if they can give in terms of ideas, the sentence they speak is still grammatical and the structure is still good.

PK05 :
I asked them to come up with their ideas ... tell them what they thought.

PK06 :
What can people say ... they can voice out with an opinion, an idea ... In addition, the last characteristic of speaking skills based on DSKP is to emphasize the aspects of pronunciation, intonation, correct tone, and etiquette. Analysis of the study findings found that all research participants (6/6) understood and informed that during the oral assessment they will ensure each student can speak using the correct sentence structure that includes pronunciation, intonation, correct tone, and etiquette. For example, the statement given by RP05, stated that "Students will be assessed based on their language skills, explanation clearly or not, and they describe something scientifically. They use terminology and grammar correctly ".
Furthermore, RP03's view on the aspects of pronunciation, intonation, correct tone, and massage etiquette shows a parallel with DSKP. During the oral assessment, he assesses by ensuring that students can pronounce, use accurate sentence structure, and are ethical. The statement of PK03 is also supported by RP04, RP05, and RP06. The following are examples of statements given by them: K03 : When a student performs an oral assessment, I will assess in terms of speech, in terms of language politeness, at the same time I will look in terms of grammar.
PK04 : When we share an issue, the student can answer ... can convey. If they can present ethically with the evidence presented, it is strong. PK06 : ... there is an idea to speak then the intonation we have to identify is good... Based on the above statement, all research participants emphasized the aspects of pronunciation, intonation, correct tone, and etiquette when students interact. In this regard, all six research participants did not take the easy way out of assessing students. This indicates that the research participants understand that the oral assessment performed on students needs to fulfill the characteristics outlined in the DSKP.

Objectives of Oral Assessment
The results of interviews with research participants found that they know and understand that oral assessment aims to produce people who are skilled in communication, increase self-confidence, and are brave to express opinions orally in daily life as stated in DSKP.
✓ TOTAL 3/6 2/6 4/6 Table 6 shows the opinions given by research participants based on the goals of oral assessment. From the researcher's interview data with all six research participants, it proved that none of the research participants could state all three aspects of the oral assessment goals as outlined in the DSKP.

Proficient in Communication
The first aspect, proficiency in communication showed that only three out of six (3/6) research participants, namely RP03, RP04, and RP06 understood that oral assessment implemented as a catalyst for effective communication, improve social relationships with the surrounding community, and student's ability to master language skills can be improved. The statements given by the three research participants related to their communication skills were in line with the DSKP.
RP03 is of the view that oral assessment can provide opportunities for students to develop speaking talents and skills when communicating such as RP03's statement, "We can polish the talents of our students and we can get students who are skilled when they brave to speak correctly.". He/She also argued that when conducting oral assessments in the classroom, students will do their best to speak using precise and correct sentence structure as they are aware of being assessed by the teacher. Communication skills also mean the ability of students to speak more politely as well as the use of correct sentences when interacting. RP04 and RP06 said that: RP04 : In my opinion, if this oral assessment is to train students to speak more politely. RP06 : Speaking skills, using the right sentences, the right language is all about that. Thus, the conclusion that can be made is only research participants know and understand that the implementation of oral assessment in schools can train students to be skilled in the communication of daily life as in the DSKP. Three other research participants did not respond to this statement during the interview session. This means they are still vague about the goals of oral assessments conducted in schools. i.
Have Self Confidence The second goal of oral assessment is to have students' confidence to communicate. The data in Table 5 above shows, only two out of six (2/6) of the research participants stated that oral assessment provides space for students to build high self-confidence while communicating in public. The following statements explained by RP01 and RP05's understanding of the second goal of oral assessment: RP01 : We learn not only to learn to read, to generate ideas, but we also build students' confidence to speak. Indeed, this oral assessment is really good because the student will be more prepared whenever we test them orally. So indirectly this will build their confidence.

RP05 :
Want to practice students' speaking skills confidently in front of the audience. We polish the students' confidence.
ii. Brave to Voice an Opinion Next, the third goal of oral assessment as outlined in the DSKP is to produce students who have courage when expressing opinions. Data showed that out of the six research participants, only four fulfill the third aspect of the verbal assessment goals. This situation shows that they understand that students who are brave to give ideas or opinions orally are a very important element towards the formation of effective verbal interactions. Therefore, RP02, RP03, RP04, and RP05 agreed that oral assessment is a form of interactive training for students to brave in giving ideas and opinions on a topic discussed. Not only that, but students also get exposure to how to speak in front of a crowd without feeling nervous. The study participants 'understanding of students' courage to come up with ideas orally can be seen in their statements as below:

PK03 :
This oral assessment trains students to communicate well. We can polish their talents and can produce students who are brave to speak in public because for me communication is an important thing.
In summary, the overall findings of the study obtained to answer the research questions in this study, prove that all research participants do not understand the definition of oral assessment based on the definition outlined in the DSKP. Based on the three tables above, it can be seen that all six research participants were unable to state the four components of the oral interaction process, the characteristics of listening and speaking skills, and the assessment goals outlined by DSKP and PPPBD. This indicates that all six research participants still do not understand whether the definition of oral assessment and the real purpose of oral assessment is implemented.

Discussion
It can be concluded that none of the six study participants could fulfill the definition of oral assessment based on DSKP and PPPBD. The results showed that the research participants were able to state that oral assessment involves the process of interaction between students with students, students with teachers, and students with learning materials as outlined in the PPPBD. They will monitor students communicating and interacting with other students or with teachers to convey opinions, ideas, information, feelings they experience creatively and critically according to pronunciation, intonation, and tone appropriate to politeness. The oral presentation of these thoughts is according to the student's existing knowledge, readiness, and based on the student's ability. If observed, the PK02 : For example, being fluent in speaking, can give opinions. Can accept other people's opinions.
interaction of students, teachers, students-learning materials. The process of interaction that takes place can be observed whether carried out individually, in pairs, or in groups. The proof is that students are allowed to conduct peer discussion activities in small groups to encourage them to interact in convey information. Consistent with the statement of Abbaspour (2016) and Shohamy (1994) communication occurs according to individuals' real-life situations and their ability to communicate orally using as much vocabulary as possible (Mukhaiyar & Radjab, 2013). Research participants also played their role as mentors by questioning and answering students. The role highlighted by the research participants can motivate and strengthen oral skills among students.
Furthermore, none of the six study participants showed that they understood and were able to fully list the characteristics of listening and oral skills and were unable to explain the goals of oral assessment.
It is suggested that Malay language teachers get a more specific explanation regarding their role and responsibilities as an assessor. The suggestion that can be given in this case is that the BPK is an expert on assessment responsible for improving the quality of teaching and how the implementation of assessment should be done by teachers in schools. Teachers must identify their roles and responsibilities as evaluators not just theoretically given by the ministry or head coaches in the early stages of the introduction of assessment, but also by witnessing the implementation of assessment done by teachers in schools. Furthermore, the KSSM and DSKP curriculum demand teachers master the appropriate approaches, techniques, strategies, and methods for conducting assessments. As a result, teachers must widen their knowledge of assessment methods as much as possible with the help of the BPK from time to time, rather than entrusting assessment to teachers solely as evaluators.

Conclusion
Changes in the education system, such as a new curriculum and the full implementation of assessment in schools, require a thorough understanding of oral assessment by Malay language teachers. To produce a great generation for the country, teachers as evaluators must ensure that their role in conducting assessments in the classroom is transparent and follows proper procedures. Teachers must devote a significant amount of time to self-adaptation and finished mastery of assessment methods. The research's indirect findings can be used by various parties, particularly the Ministry of Education, to take reasonable steps to ensure that assessment among teachers in schools is thorough and reliable. The findings of this study are expected to facilitate all parties, especially in education which is the core of classroom assessment practices.

Recommendations
This research uses a qualitative research design with a case study approach that is limited to the implementation of Malay language oral assessment. For future studies, researchers who are interested to discover more about the field of assessment can focus on the research on reading skills and writing skills among Malay language teachers. In addition, researchers can also use quantitative design by choosing a questionnaire instrument so can involve a larger number of research samples. Since this study only involves one state, it is suggested that future quantitative studies involve sampling from other several states. The study participants selected in this study consisted of Malay language teachers from three schools in different categories, namely SMK, SABK, and SBP. Researchers suggest that future studies focus on rural schools, private schools, cluster schools, or trust schools so that the data obtained will be more robust and convincing. The selection of these proposed schools aims to monitor the challenges of teachers in implementing assessment in their schools.
Next, further studies can also involve students as the respondents. Students should also be allowed to voice out their views on the implementation of assessment in their daily learning process in school. The views and voices of students may become the responsibility of the researcher to unravel what is implicit in their hearts about the assessment system in the school. In this way, it is possible to see the strengths and weaknesses of the effectiveness of the assessment whether any improvements need to be taken in the future.
Finally, the researcher suggested that the policy for the formation of an assessment system involving the MOE, PPD, and JPN that channel resources of the assessment knowledge to teachers as implementers should be used as the sample in the next study. Through this proposal can help all the liquidity of information among teachers related to assessment which is the main practice in schools. Therefore, the objective of the study is to identify the theory and practice of assessment that can be implemented more robustly and effectively.

Limitations
This study only involved six Malay language teachers from three secondary schools in different categories, which are SMK, SABK, and SBP. Each school category is represented by two Malay language teachers that teach lower secondary (Form One and Form Two) for Malay language subject in one of the districts in Negeri Sembilan.