Project language assessment meeting 9-10
BEYOND TEST: ALTERNATIVES IN ASSESSMENT
to speak of alter'native assessments is counterproductive because the term implies something new and different that may be "exempt from the requirements ofresponsible test construction" (p. 657). So they proposed to refer to "alternatives" in assessment instead. Their term is a perfect fit within a model that considers tests as a subset of assessJllent. Throughout this book, you have been reminded· that all tests are assessments but, more important, that not all assessments are tests.
THE DILEMMA OF MAXIMIZING BOTH PRACTICALITY AND WASHBACK
The principal purpose of this chapter is to examine-some of the alternatives in assessment that are markedly different from formal tests. Tests, especially large-scale standardized tests, tend to be one-shot performances that are timed, multiple-chOice, decontextualized, norm-referenced, and that foster extrinsic motivation. On the other hand, tasks like portfolios, journals, and self-assessment are
• open-ended in their time orientation and format,
• contextualized to a curriculum,
• referenced to the criteria (objectives) of that curriculum, and
• likely to build intrinsic motivation.
PERFORMANCE-BASED ASSESSMENT
Performance-based assessment implies productive, observable skills, such as speaking and writing, of content-valid tasks. Such performance usually, but not always, brings with it an air of authenticity-real-world tasks that students have had time to develop. It often implies an integration of language skills, perhaps all four skills in the case of project work. Because the tasks that students perform are consistent with course goals and curriculum, students and teachers are likely to be more motivated to perform them, as opposed to a set of multiple-choice questions about facts and figures regarding the solar system. O'Malley and Valdez Pierce (1996) considered performance-based assessment to be a subset of authentic assessment. In other words, not all authentic assessment is performance-based. One could infer that reading, listenillg, and thinking have many authentic manifestations, but since they are not directly observable in and of themselves, they are not performance-based. According to O'Malley· and Valdez Pierce (p. 5), the following are characteristics of performance assessment:
1. Students make a constructed response.
2. They engage in bigber-order tbinking, with open-ended tasks.
3. Tasks are meaningfu~ engaging, and autbentic.
4. Tasks call for the integration oflanguage skills.
S. Both process and product are assessed.
6. Depth of a student's mastery is emphasized over breadth.
PORTFOLIOS
One of the most popular alternatives in assessment, especially within a framework of communicative language teaching, is portfolio development. According to Genesee and Upshur (1996), a portfolio is "a purposeful collection ofstudents' work that demonstrates their efforts, progress, and achievements in given areas" (p. 99). Portfolios iBclude materials such as
• essays and compositions in draft and fmal forms;
• reports, project outlines;
• poetry and creative prose;
• artwork, photos, newspaper or magazine clippings;
• audio and/or video recordings of presentations, demonstrations, etc.;
• journals, diaries, and other personal reflections; .
• tests, test scores, and written hom~wor~ exercises;
• notes on lectures; and
• self· and peer-assessments comments, evaluations, and checklists
JOURNALS
Fifty years ago, journals had no place in the second language classroom. When language production was believed to be best taught under controlled conditions, the concept of "free" writing. was confmed alnlost exclusively to producing essays on assigned topics Today, journals occupy a prominent role in a pedagogical model that stresse.s the importance of self-reflection in the process of students taking control of their own destiny.
A journal is a log (or "account") of one's thoughts, feelings, reactions, assessments, ideas, or progress toward goals, usually written with little attention to structure, form, or correctness. Learners can articulate their thoughts without the threat of those thoughts being judged later (usually by the teacher). Sometimes journals are rambling sets of verbiage that represent a stream of consciousness with no particular point, purpose, or audience. Fortunately, models of journal use in educational practice have sought to tighten up this style of journal in· order to give them some focus (Staton et al., 1987). The result is the emergence of a number of overlapping categories or purposes in journal writing, such as the following:
• language-learning logs
• grammar journals
• responses to readings
• strategies-based learning logs
• self-assessment reflections
• diaries of attitudes, feelings, and other affective factors
• acculturation logs
CONFERENCES AND INTERVIEWS
For a number of years, conferences have been a routine part of language classrooms, especially of courses in writing. In Chapter 9, reference was made to conferencing as a standard part of the process approach to teaching writing, in which the teacher, in a conversation about a draft, facilitates the improvement of the written work. Such interaction has the advantage of one-on-one interaction between teacher and student, and the teacher's being able to direct feedback toward a student's specific needs. Conferences are not limited to drafts of written work. Including portfolios and journals discussed above, the list of possible functions and subject matter for con ferencing is substantial:
• commenting on drafts of essays and reports
• reviewing portfolios
• responding to journals
• advising on a student's plan for an oral presentation
• assessing a proposal for a project
• giving feedback on the results of performance on a test
• clarifying understanding of a reading
• Exploring strategies-based options for enhancement or compensation
• focusing on aspects of oral production
• checking a student's self-assessment of a performance
• setting personal goals for the near future
• assessing general progress in a course
SELF- AND PEER ASSESSMENTS
Self-assessment derives its theoretical justification from a number of wellestablished principles of second language acquisition. The principle of autonomy staridsqut as one of the primary foundation stones of successful learning. The ability to set one's own goals both within and beyond the structure of a classroom curriculum, to pursue them without the presence of an external prod, and to independently monitor that pursuit are all keys to success. Developing intrinsic motivation that comes from a self-propelled desire to excel is at the top of the list of successful acquisition of any set of skills.
Types of Self- and Peer-Assessment
It is important to distinguish among several different types ofself- and peer-assessment and to apply them accordingly. I have borrowed from widely accepted classifications of strategic options to create five categories of self- and peer-assessment:
(1) direct assessment of performance,
(2) indirect assessment of performance,
(3) metacognitive assessment,
(4) assessment of socioaffective factors, and (5) student self-generated tests.
1. Assessment offa specific} performance. In this category, a student typically monitors him- or herself-in either oral or written production-and renders some kind of evaluation of performance. The evaluation takes place immediately or very soon after the performance. Thus, having made an oral presentation, the student (or a peer) fills out a checklist that rates performance on a defined scale. Or perhaps the student views a video-recorded lecture and completes a self-corrected ·comprehension quiz. A journal mayserve as a tool for such"self-assessment. Peer editing is an excellent example of direct assessment of a specific performance.
2. Indirect assessment of[general) competence. Indirect self- or peer-assessment targets larger slices of time with a view to rendering an evaluatioIl'of general ability, as opposed to one specific, relatively time-cortstrained performance. The distinction between direct and indirect assessments is the classic competence-performance distinction.
3. Metacognitive assessment [for setting goals}. Some kinds of evaluation are more strategic in nature, with the purpose not just of viewing past performance or competence but of setting goals and maintaining an eye on the process oftheir pursuit. Personal goalsetting has the advantage offostering intrinsic motivation and of providing learners with that extra special impetus from having set and accomplished one's own goals. Strategic planning and self-monitoring can take the form of journal entries, choices from a list of possibilities, questionnaires, or cooperative (oral) pair or group planning.
4. Socioajjective assessment. Yet another type of self- and peer-assessment
comes in the form of methods of examining affective factors in learning. Such assessment is quite different from looking at and planning linguistic aspects of acquisition. It requires looking at oneself through a psychological lens and may not differ greatly from self-assessment across a number of subject-matter areas or for any set of personal skills
Reference
Brown, J.D. (Ed.) (1998). New ways of classroom assessment. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
O'Malley, J. Michael, and Valdez Pierce, Lorraine. (1996.) Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. White Plains, NY: Addison-Wesley.
TESOL Journal 5 (Autumn, 1995). Special Issue onAlternative Assessment.
to speak of alter'native assessments is counterproductive because the term implies something new and different that may be "exempt from the requirements ofresponsible test construction" (p. 657). So they proposed to refer to "alternatives" in assessment instead. Their term is a perfect fit within a model that considers tests as a subset of assessJllent. Throughout this book, you have been reminded· that all tests are assessments but, more important, that not all assessments are tests.
THE DILEMMA OF MAXIMIZING BOTH PRACTICALITY AND WASHBACK
The principal purpose of this chapter is to examine-some of the alternatives in assessment that are markedly different from formal tests. Tests, especially large-scale standardized tests, tend to be one-shot performances that are timed, multiple-chOice, decontextualized, norm-referenced, and that foster extrinsic motivation. On the other hand, tasks like portfolios, journals, and self-assessment are
• open-ended in their time orientation and format,
• contextualized to a curriculum,
• referenced to the criteria (objectives) of that curriculum, and
• likely to build intrinsic motivation.
PERFORMANCE-BASED ASSESSMENT
Performance-based assessment implies productive, observable skills, such as speaking and writing, of content-valid tasks. Such performance usually, but not always, brings with it an air of authenticity-real-world tasks that students have had time to develop. It often implies an integration of language skills, perhaps all four skills in the case of project work. Because the tasks that students perform are consistent with course goals and curriculum, students and teachers are likely to be more motivated to perform them, as opposed to a set of multiple-choice questions about facts and figures regarding the solar system. O'Malley and Valdez Pierce (1996) considered performance-based assessment to be a subset of authentic assessment. In other words, not all authentic assessment is performance-based. One could infer that reading, listenillg, and thinking have many authentic manifestations, but since they are not directly observable in and of themselves, they are not performance-based. According to O'Malley· and Valdez Pierce (p. 5), the following are characteristics of performance assessment:
1. Students make a constructed response.
2. They engage in bigber-order tbinking, with open-ended tasks.
3. Tasks are meaningfu~ engaging, and autbentic.
4. Tasks call for the integration oflanguage skills.
S. Both process and product are assessed.
6. Depth of a student's mastery is emphasized over breadth.
PORTFOLIOS
One of the most popular alternatives in assessment, especially within a framework of communicative language teaching, is portfolio development. According to Genesee and Upshur (1996), a portfolio is "a purposeful collection ofstudents' work that demonstrates their efforts, progress, and achievements in given areas" (p. 99). Portfolios iBclude materials such as
• essays and compositions in draft and fmal forms;
• reports, project outlines;
• poetry and creative prose;
• artwork, photos, newspaper or magazine clippings;
• audio and/or video recordings of presentations, demonstrations, etc.;
• journals, diaries, and other personal reflections; .
• tests, test scores, and written hom~wor~ exercises;
• notes on lectures; and
• self· and peer-assessments comments, evaluations, and checklists
JOURNALS
Fifty years ago, journals had no place in the second language classroom. When language production was believed to be best taught under controlled conditions, the concept of "free" writing. was confmed alnlost exclusively to producing essays on assigned topics Today, journals occupy a prominent role in a pedagogical model that stresse.s the importance of self-reflection in the process of students taking control of their own destiny.
A journal is a log (or "account") of one's thoughts, feelings, reactions, assessments, ideas, or progress toward goals, usually written with little attention to structure, form, or correctness. Learners can articulate their thoughts without the threat of those thoughts being judged later (usually by the teacher). Sometimes journals are rambling sets of verbiage that represent a stream of consciousness with no particular point, purpose, or audience. Fortunately, models of journal use in educational practice have sought to tighten up this style of journal in· order to give them some focus (Staton et al., 1987). The result is the emergence of a number of overlapping categories or purposes in journal writing, such as the following:
• language-learning logs
• grammar journals
• responses to readings
• strategies-based learning logs
• self-assessment reflections
• diaries of attitudes, feelings, and other affective factors
• acculturation logs
CONFERENCES AND INTERVIEWS
For a number of years, conferences have been a routine part of language classrooms, especially of courses in writing. In Chapter 9, reference was made to conferencing as a standard part of the process approach to teaching writing, in which the teacher, in a conversation about a draft, facilitates the improvement of the written work. Such interaction has the advantage of one-on-one interaction between teacher and student, and the teacher's being able to direct feedback toward a student's specific needs. Conferences are not limited to drafts of written work. Including portfolios and journals discussed above, the list of possible functions and subject matter for con ferencing is substantial:
• commenting on drafts of essays and reports
• reviewing portfolios
• responding to journals
• advising on a student's plan for an oral presentation
• assessing a proposal for a project
• giving feedback on the results of performance on a test
• clarifying understanding of a reading
• Exploring strategies-based options for enhancement or compensation
• focusing on aspects of oral production
• checking a student's self-assessment of a performance
• setting personal goals for the near future
• assessing general progress in a course
SELF- AND PEER ASSESSMENTS
Self-assessment derives its theoretical justification from a number of wellestablished principles of second language acquisition. The principle of autonomy staridsqut as one of the primary foundation stones of successful learning. The ability to set one's own goals both within and beyond the structure of a classroom curriculum, to pursue them without the presence of an external prod, and to independently monitor that pursuit are all keys to success. Developing intrinsic motivation that comes from a self-propelled desire to excel is at the top of the list of successful acquisition of any set of skills.
Types of Self- and Peer-Assessment
It is important to distinguish among several different types ofself- and peer-assessment and to apply them accordingly. I have borrowed from widely accepted classifications of strategic options to create five categories of self- and peer-assessment:
(1) direct assessment of performance,
(2) indirect assessment of performance,
(3) metacognitive assessment,
(4) assessment of socioaffective factors, and (5) student self-generated tests.
1. Assessment offa specific} performance. In this category, a student typically monitors him- or herself-in either oral or written production-and renders some kind of evaluation of performance. The evaluation takes place immediately or very soon after the performance. Thus, having made an oral presentation, the student (or a peer) fills out a checklist that rates performance on a defined scale. Or perhaps the student views a video-recorded lecture and completes a self-corrected ·comprehension quiz. A journal mayserve as a tool for such"self-assessment. Peer editing is an excellent example of direct assessment of a specific performance.
2. Indirect assessment of[general) competence. Indirect self- or peer-assessment targets larger slices of time with a view to rendering an evaluatioIl'of general ability, as opposed to one specific, relatively time-cortstrained performance. The distinction between direct and indirect assessments is the classic competence-performance distinction.
3. Metacognitive assessment [for setting goals}. Some kinds of evaluation are more strategic in nature, with the purpose not just of viewing past performance or competence but of setting goals and maintaining an eye on the process oftheir pursuit. Personal goalsetting has the advantage offostering intrinsic motivation and of providing learners with that extra special impetus from having set and accomplished one's own goals. Strategic planning and self-monitoring can take the form of journal entries, choices from a list of possibilities, questionnaires, or cooperative (oral) pair or group planning.
4. Socioajjective assessment. Yet another type of self- and peer-assessment
comes in the form of methods of examining affective factors in learning. Such assessment is quite different from looking at and planning linguistic aspects of acquisition. It requires looking at oneself through a psychological lens and may not differ greatly from self-assessment across a number of subject-matter areas or for any set of personal skills
Reference
Brown, J.D. (Ed.) (1998). New ways of classroom assessment. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
O'Malley, J. Michael, and Valdez Pierce, Lorraine. (1996.) Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. White Plains, NY: Addison-Wesley.
TESOL Journal 5 (Autumn, 1995). Special Issue onAlternative Assessment.
Komentar
Posting Komentar