|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Unless otherwise noted, links open in a new window. |
||||||||||||
|
√ = topic / activity that was adequately dealt with during the class |
||||||||||||
|
The first class meeting was hindered greatly by technical problems. But we accomplished the following: √ (15') made some personal observations and told some anecdotes about tests, language or otherwise; √ (15') listened to two "ordinary" language students complain about what they considered to be inappropriate language teaching and grading; use this link to hear the audio clip, or go to my language-related media page to sample the larger collection of such; √ (90') talked about the basic concept of "scoring guides", especially in comparison to A-F grading (performance vs. seat-time as determining the pace of instruction; proficiency vs. bell-curve as principle of scoring); also experimented with making scoring guides; √ (15') touched several times on ACTFL and oral testing, but only briefly; √ (15') talked, again only briefly, about language teacher training; √ (5') agreed that dinner during the class was to be by individual "foraging" (but groups are free to forage together; please limit foraging trips to 15 minutes and then return to eat during class, so that I can show videos or do some other presentation while you eat. √ (5') had first discussion about a later major assignment: conducting, recording and evaluating an OPI-style speaking assessment; start now to line up interview subjects and check your technical skills with recording equipment √ (30') got acquainted during dinner Assignments: 1) reflective writing about Oregonian article reporting changes in the TOEFL test - scoring guide (pdf, 68K); 2) use ACTFL Guidelines to rate your own proficiency. Here are the detailed procedures and specifications (pdf, 75K), and here is the scoring guide (pdf, 12K) |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for meeting #2 (3 October): ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines for Speaking and Writing; Fischer article about Introducing Oral Testing in First-Year Language Course; introductory chapter of Weber book. √ more about scoring guides (language performance, other student assessment, this course) - a little √ ACTFL Guidelines (Speaking) and
√ view JMP video; audit other oral tests - brief attention to an excerpt of a Spanish interview
• Assignments (as tweaked during this meeting): postpone the WebCAPE piece; start self-evaluation with ACTFL Guidelines, due next meeting; start planning your quasi-OPI (recruit interviewees, learn technology) |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: √ (experiment): Should we start each meeting with a down-to-earth discussion that involves assessment, in order to get practical benefits; example for this week: Should grades be affected by attendance (especially: what does it mean / accomplish to penalize students for poor attendance)? √ introduction to the profession (by request): organizations, journals, issues in language pedagogy √ OPI technique (major activity); set up auditing activities; recording techniques
√ Discuss: delivery of the reading materials doesn't seem to be working - what to do? Switched to downloading from site or photocopies distributed in class • Assignment (needs tweaking before it's active): |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: FLA (Foreign Language Annals) articles about testing in other modalities; ACTFL Reading and Listening Guidelines - but still haven't discussed these √ Down-to-earth opening topic: Introducing oral testing (assuming college first-year course) - how early, and how? √ I'll report on an MA thesis and its defense in Applied Linguistics; related topic: publishing in language pedagogy, and the article that begets the book √ Discuss Scoring Guide for the TOEFL reflection - see link above in Meeting 1 area
√ Rating an oral test sample: parameters & scoring guide - discussed parameters in detail, with example of a flawed assignment; scoring guide can be understood without discussion √ discussion of group projects to be showcased during finals week; examples: 1) How to implement portfolio assessment in a language program; 2) assessing (and, where necessary, changing) student preconceptions about language instruction and learning; 3) student pre/mis-conceptions about grammar - Two groups emerged, with 2-3 other people wanting to do individual final projects. One group is interested in topic 1, the other in heritage language learners and assessment.
• Assignment (needs tweaking before it's active): |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: articles on testing reading & listening, left over from before; OUS Second-Langauge Standards; Portland Public Schools Standards √ Guest presentation about PSU FLL Heritage Language Institute and HL research, by Dr. Linda Godson √ Down-to-earth topic - delayed until after 6pm: In a proficiency-based course, what percent of the grade should be assigned to each language skill? What about the student who wants something for "extra credit"? √ The "G-word" issue: the Relative Contribution Model; groups map a grammar feature onto ACTFL Guidelines; need to finish at next meeting √ time for group project discussions / discussion with me about individual projects; need more time at every meeting
• Assignment: provide a writing sample for someone else to rate, and - assignment made at a later meeting - in turn rate a sample - outline will be provided in class |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: articles on testing reading & listening, left over from before; OUS Second-Langauge Standards; Portland Public Schools Standards; Barnett article about responding to student writing (to be distributed in class) • Down-to-earth topic - ways to record and process grades efficiently • Finish the "G-word" discussion; grammar features and text type (past tenses; object pronouns) • ACTFL Guidelines (Writing); "snapshot" assessment vs. interactive-adaptive assessment • Group project discussion • Background of OUS standards, including other subject areas; food for thought: What DO young learners need to learn in their math and social studies classes? What differences are there between simply specifying knowledge, justifying it with "because," and justifying it with "so that"? Concrete examples: math - multiplication tables (10? 12?), Pythagorean Theorem, quadratic equation, logarithms, formula for compound interest, calculating probabilities; social studies: capitals of the 50 states; counties of Oregon (with their county seats); Preamble to the Constitution; Sacco-Vanzetti Case; label US map with names of states; Bill of Rights; Gettysburg Address. -- As a way of getting into the same discussion, ask yourself what various reasons non-professionals (rather than ourselves) give to justify second-language instruction • We need to discuss and develop two individual assignments for the rest of the quarter: one should concern testing in writing, listening, and/or reading; the other should call upon your reading in curriculum and program assessment. Both topics lend themselves to reflective writing, but both could also involve creating assessment materials. We'll see. • The Oregon Common Assessment of speaking prochievement (probably won't get to this) • Assignment (will need tweaking): rate a writing sample (your own or someone else's), using ACTFL Guidelines and the PSU FLL scoring guide |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: Dale Shalock on history of American educational system as a background for educational reform in Oregon • activity/topic |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: Dale Shalock on history of American educational system as a background for educational reform in Oregon • activity/topic |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: Dale Shalock on history of American educational system as a background for educational reform in Oregon • activity/topic |
||||||||||||
|
Reading for this meeting: Dale Shalock on history of American educational system as a background for educational reform in Oregon • activity/topic |
||||||||||||
|
Final Meeting & Projects Presentation (•• November) Reading for this meeting: Dale Shalock on history of American educational system as a background for educational reform in Oregon • activity/topic |
||||||||||||
| Holding pen / planning area
••Assignments (needs tweaking during the meeting): Take WebCAPE and reflect in writing (focuses: how a low-level language student - specify what kind - would react to it; how it resembles, if it does, other language tests you have encountered; how it might claim to measure or at least predict proficiency). ••??Organize this as part of a journal for this course.assessing learner behaviors assessing cultural competence Assessing teaching - FLA 38.2 Rehaviors and Attitudes of Effective FL Teachers; Assessing curriculum, program, department, institution The PSU Pew Grant project: mass testing; language acquistion research The PSU FLL "Vitality Grant" Assessment Project The CEPR-FIPSE Project Technology-assisted assessment Reaching for PASS: where are you in the development of your assessment skills? My other assessment activities |