39
POLIA: Standards, Philosophies, and Considerations for Assesssment p. “The essence of second language education is embodied in its attempt to join individuals together so that they might communicate across linguistic and cultural boundaries” (Tedick et al., 1993, p. 44). Never before has the need for such communication been greater. For students in the U.S., the need to function competently in more than one language has become increasingly important in this rapidly shrinking, interdependent world of the 21st century. It has become crucial to prepare students with second language competence—being able to talk about language, to describe its grammar, and to conjugate verbs will simply not suffice. In this new century, students must be able to communicate orally and in writing and to comprehend both oral and written language. They must be able to participate in culturally appropriate ways in face-to-face interaction with members of other cultures, and they must also be able to interpret the concepts, ideas, and opinions expressed by members of these cultures through their media and literatures (National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project, 1996, p. 35). It is indeed an exciting time to be involved in language education. The national standards for Foreign Language Learning, unveiled in early 1996, describe a challenging yet stimulating vision for language education in the 21st century, a vision that recognizes the need for language instruction to facilitate genuine interaction between and among individuals who represent different cultural and linguistic communities (National Standards for Foreign Language Education Project, 1996). This is a vision that the Articulation Project shares, so for this reason, we made the decision to adopt the national standards for the Curriculum Handbook. A synopsis of the standards appears in the Key Materials section. 1 Most states have created state standards for world languages that parallel or incorporate the national standards. The message across the nation is clear. It calls for language education to focus on what students should know and be able to do; the emphasis is on language use and culture is seen as central to acquiring language for real communicative purposes. The national standards represent broad, long-term goals for language instruction. They are intended to be interpreted broadly, and we have done so within the context of the tasks and units in this Handbook. Despite emphasis through the 1980’s and 90’s on proficiency-oriented language instruction for foreign language classrooms and, in the late 90’s the national standards, grammar has maintained its role as the key organizing principle of language instruction in the vast majority of language classrooms. In most language classrooms, language is viewed as “object”—something that is acted upon, an entity to be scrutinized, analyzed, and broken down into its smallest components (Tedick et al., 1993; Tedick & Walker, 1994). This view has emerged in part due to the historical influence that the field of linguistics has had in the field of language education and also in part because of the long road language teachers have had to travel in order to legitimize their place in the arena of U.S. schools. The “content” of language curriculum has been defined as the lexicon, syntax, morphology, and phonology of language, or as the notions and functions. In order to emphasize the communicative nature of language and to acknowledge that language has meaning when it is embedded within a social context, it is necessary to view language as Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment: Standards, Philosophies, and Considerations for Assessment Written by Diane J. Tedick © 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    8

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . �

“Theessenceofsecondlanguageeducationisembodiedinitsattempttojoinindividualstogethersothattheymightcommunicateacrosslinguisticandculturalboundaries”(Tedicketal.,1993,p.44).Neverbeforehastheneedforsuchcommunicationbeengreater.ForstudentsintheU.S.,theneedtofunctioncompetentlyinmorethanonelanguagehasbecomeincreasinglyimportantinthisrapidlyshrinking,interdependentworldofthe21stcentury.Ithasbecomecrucialtopreparestudentswithsecondlanguagecompetence—beingabletotalkaboutlanguage,todescribeitsgrammar,andtoconjugateverbswillsimplynotsuffice.Inthisnewcentury,studentsmustbeabletocommunicateorallyandinwritingandtocomprehendbothoralandwrittenlanguage.Theymustbeabletoparticipateinculturallyappropriatewaysinface-to-faceinteractionwithmembersofothercultures,andtheymustalsobeabletointerprettheconcepts,ideas,andopinionsexpressedbymembersoftheseculturesthroughtheirmediaandliteratures(NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996,p.35). Itisindeedanexcitingtimetobeinvolvedinlanguageeducation.ThenationalstandardsforForeignLanguageLearning,unveiledinearly1996,describeachallengingyetstimulatingvisionforlanguageeducationinthe21stcentury,avisionthatrecognizestheneedforlanguageinstructiontofacilitategenuineinteractionbetweenandamongindividualswhorepresentdifferentculturalandlinguisticcommunities(NationalStandardsforForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996).ThisisavisionthattheArticulationProjectshares,soforthisreason,wemadethedecisiontoadoptthenationalstandardsfortheCurriculumHandbook.AsynopsisofthestandardsappearsintheKeyMaterialssection.1Moststateshavecreatedstatestandardsforworldlanguagesthatparallelorincorporatethenationalstandards.Themessageacrossthenationisclear.Itcallsforlanguageeducationtofocusonwhatstudentsshouldknowandbeabletodo;theemphasisisonlanguageuseandcultureisseenascentraltoacquiringlanguageforrealcommunicativepurposes.Thenationalstandardsrepresentbroad,long-termgoalsforlanguageinstruction.Theyareintendedtobeinterpretedbroadly,andwehavedonesowithinthecontextofthetasksandunitsinthisHandbook. Despiteemphasisthroughthe1980’sand90’sonproficiency-orientedlanguageinstructionforforeignlanguageclassroomsand,inthelate90’sthenationalstandards,grammarhasmaintaineditsroleasthekeyorganizingprincipleoflanguageinstructioninthevastmajorityoflanguageclassrooms.Inmostlanguageclassrooms,languageisviewedas“object”—somethingthatisactedupon,anentitytobescrutinized,analyzed,andbrokendownintoitssmallestcomponents(Tedicketal.,1993;Tedick&Walker,1994).ThisviewhasemergedinpartduetothehistoricalinfluencethatthefieldoflinguisticshashadinthefieldoflanguageeducationandalsoinpartbecauseofthelongroadlanguageteachershavehadtotravelinordertolegitimizetheirplaceinthearenaofU.S.schools.The“content”oflanguagecurriculumhasbeendefinedasthelexicon,syntax,morphology,andphonologyoflanguage,orasthenotionsandfunctions.Inordertoemphasizethecommunicativenatureoflanguageandtoacknowledgethatlanguagehasmeaningwhenitisembeddedwithinasocialcontext,itisnecessarytoviewlanguageas

Proficiency-Oriented LanguageInstruction and Assessment:

Standards, Philosophies, and Considerations for Assessment

Written by Diane J. Tedick

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 2: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .10 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

“subject”(somethingthatacts)(Tedicketal.,1993;Tedick&Walker,1994)andtostriveforabalancebetweenlanguage-as-objectandlanguage-as-subjectincurriculumandinstruction.Balancingthetwoperspectivesmeansthatstudentsareengagedinlearningaboutlanguage—itsvocabulary,itsgrammarandmorphology,itsphonology(thatis,engagingwithlanguageasobject),yetalwayswithinthecontextofusinglanguagetocommunicatemeaning(thatis,engagingwithlanguageassubject).Inotherwords,it’simportantforateachertoteachlanguagerules(e.g.,verbconjugations),butit’salsoimportantalwaystofollowthatinstructionwithapplicationoftherules.Howwellcanstudentsuseconjugateverbscorrectlytowritealetter?Inanutshell,notonlydostudentsneedtoknowhowlanguageworks,theyalsoneedtoknowhowtouselanguageformeaningfulpurposesandtheopportunitiestopracticetheseapplications. Inordertostriveforabalancebetweenlanguage-as-objectandlanguage-as-subjectandtoemphasizelanguageusewithcultureascoreinthelanguageclassroom,arethinkingofcurriculumandinstructionneedstooccur.Traditionally,mostforeignlanguageclassroomshaveconcentratedonhow (grammar)tosay what (vocabulary),buthaveleftthe why, whom, where, andwhen outoftheequation(NationalStandardsforForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996;Tedick&Walker,1994).Whilegrammarandvocabularyremainimportantcomponents,theothers,whichhighlightthesociolinguisticandculturalaspectsoflanguage,areessentialforcommunication.“Inotherwords,grammarandstructurearenotthegoalofinstruction,butratheressentialtoolstowardachievingother,moreimportantgoals—languageuseinsocialcontextsandinterculturalcommunication”(Tedick&Walker,1994,p.306).Onewaytoachievethesemoreimportantgoalsistomakecontentandculturalthemestheorganizingprincipleforlanguagecurriculumandinstruction.Thisrethinkingofthecurriculum,towardcontent-based,task-basedlanguageinstructionandanemphasisonmeaningfullanguageuseisthefocusofthenationalstandardsandeffortsoftheCurriculumTeamoftheArticulationProject. Thefocusonmeaningandlanguageusedoesnotarguethatteachersshouldbeneglectingform.Onthecontrary,what’snecessaryisabalancebetweenmeaningandforminthecontextofcommunication.Inaway,thislanguageinstructionissueissimilartoanissuethathasdominatedthefieldofliteracyinstructionforsometime.Fordecadestherehasbeenadebateaboutliteracyinstructionthathascenteredonwholelanguagevs.phonicsinstruction.Thequestionhastoooftenbeen:Shouldteachersfocusonthewholeortheparts?Theansweris“neither,”becausethequestioniswrong—itissimplynotan“either/or”issue.Goodteachersknowthateffectiveliteracyinstructionprovidesabalancebetweenthewholeandtheparts.Childrenwhoarelearninghowtoreadneedtobesurroundedbyarichliteracyenvironmentthatinvolvesfrequentinteractionwithstimulatingtexts;atthesametime,theyneedtoknowhowlanguage“works.”Inother

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 3: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .11

words,theyneedtounderstandthelanguagesystem—howthepartsworktogethertomakeupthewhole.Themorecontextualizedtheinstructionoftheparts,thebetterstudentsunderstandtheirrelationshiptothewhole.Acompletetreatmentofthewholelanguagevs.phonicsdebateisfarbeyondthescopeofthisintroduction.Weincludetheanalogyheretohelplanguageteachersunderstandthat in order for students to achieve high levels of proficiency in a language, there needs to be a balance between language and language use. Inordertounderstandfurtherhowtostrivetowardsuchabalanceinthelanguageclassroom,itisimportantforteacherstoconsiderthekeyphilosophicalprinciplesthathavedriventhedevelopmentofthe Handbook.

The Philosophical Principles: POLIA and CAPRII

ThephilosophicalprinciplesthatguidedtheArticulationProjectwereestablishedearlyonasworkontheProjectbegan.Astatementdescribingprinciplesofproficiency-orientedlanguageinstructionandassessment(POLIA)wasdevelopedbyAronsetal.(1994)andcontributedtothecurriculumteam’sphilosophicalprinciples(seePOLIAstatementandprinciplesintheKeyMaterialssection). ThephilosophicalprinciplesdescribedinthePOLIAstatementarefurthersupportedbysixkeyconceptsthatwebelieveshouldguidelanguageeducation:(1) Contextualizationoflanguageinstruction,(2)Authenticity oftaskandtext,(3)anemphasison Process,(4)thevalueofReflection forbothlanguagelearnersandlanguageteachers,(5)anemphasison Interaction withinandbeyondtheclassroom,and(6) Integration ofthefourmodalitiesandoflanguageandcontent,beitrelatedtootheracademicdisciplinesorculturalthemes.Whilethesesixconcepts—referredtobytheacronymCAPRII—areandindeedshouldbeunderstoodasinterrelatedandinseparableineffectivelanguageteaching,theycaneachbeconsideredinturn(Tedick,1996;Tedick&Tischer,1996).2Figure1providesabriefsummaryoftheconceptsthatmakeupCAPRII.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 4: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .12 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

F igure 1 : CAPRI IContextualizationinvolvesmeaningfullanguageuseforrealcommunicativepurposes;lessons

thatarepresentedincontextenhancemeaning;contextualizedteachingrecognizesthatmeaning

changesdependinguponthecontextinwhichitoccurs.

AuthenticityofTextandTask—authentictextsandtasksreflecttheintentionofareal

communicativepurposeforarealaudience.

Process—languageacquisition(beitfirst,second,orthird...)isanongoingprocessthatrequires

agreatdealoftime,patience,thought,effort,andencouragement.Recognitionofthenatureof

thisprocessneedstoguideinstructionandassessment.

Reflection—bothteachersandstudentsneedtimefordeliberatethought,orreflection.

Interaction—learnersmustuselanguageinmeaningfulinteractioninordertolearnit.

Integration—anintegrativeapproachtolanguageteachingseestheconnectionoflanguagesand

culturestowhatwedo,howwethink,andwhoweare.

ofthefourmodalities—creatingclassroomactivitiesthatrequirestudentstouselanguagewithintwoormoreofthefourmodalities,withattentiontohowthosemodalitiesworkwithintheframeworkofcommunicativemodes,helpstoreinforcetheconceptsbeingemphasized.

oflanguageandcontent—languagemustbeintegratedwithcontent,beitotheracademicsubjectmattersorculturalthemes.Acontent-basedapproachtolanguageteachingemphasizeslanguageuse;languagestructuresareemphasizedinthecontextofthatuse.LanguageclassroomsmustbecomeplaceswherestudentsandteachersunderstandthemselvesasculturalbeingsandbegintodiscoverthecomplexityoftheconceptofcultureastheyviewculturesbothwithinandoutsideoftheU.S.fromanumberofperspectives.

Contextualization

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 5: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .13

AccordingtoShrumandGlisan(1994):

Languagethatisintroducedandtaughtincontextpresentsrealsituationsthatencompassthephysicalsetting,thepurposeoftheexchange,therolesoftheparticipants,andthesociallyacceptablenormsofinteraction,inadditiontothemedium,topic,tone,andregisteroftheexchange(Hymes,1974).Grammaticalstructuresthatmightotherwisebedevoidofcontextbecomeanintegralpartofthecommunicativeactsthatoccurincontexts(p.23).

Contextualized teaching recognizes that meaning changes depending upon the context in which it occurs.Whenwebegintothinkaboutteachinglanguageforcommunicationratherthanasasystemofgrammaticalforms,weseethatgrammaticalcategoriesdonotnecessarilycorrespondtocommunicativefunctionsandthatgrammaralonecannotdeterminemeaning.Inotherwords,context(thetopicandsituation)playsamajorroleinestablishingmeaning.Forexample,onemightassumethattheimperativemoodasagrammaticalcategoryalwaysindicatestheactofcommanding.Widdowson(1978,inLyster,1990,p.162)providesexamplesillustratinghowcontext,notgrammaticalfunction,determinesmeaning:

“Bakethepieinaslowoven”isaninstruction,notacommand.

“Comefordinnertomorrow”isaninvitation,notacommand.

“Forgiveusourtrespasses”isaprayer,notacommand.

Contextreferstothetopicandsituationofacommunicativeactthatarenecessaryforunderstanding(Walz,1989).Walz(1989)pointsoutthatanumberoflanguagetextbooksprovidecontextualizedgrammarexercises.Theseexercisesprovidethematicallyrelatedsentencesrequiringmechanicalmanipulationofagrammaticalform,butoftendonotforcestudentstounderstand.Therefore,contextualizationofmechanicaldrillsinthissenseiscertainlynotthesamethingascreatingacontext(Walz,1989,p.162).ContextualizationasitisinterpretedinthisHandbookinvolvesmeaningfullanguageuseforrealcommunicativepurposesandhelpsstudentstounderstandhowmeaningisconstructedbylanguageusers(betheywriting,speaking,reading,orlistening)dependinguponcontext.

ManyofthetasksfoundintheHandbook arecontextualizedinthattheyprovideatopicandsituationinwhichstudentsneedtouselanguagewithoneanotherforsomemeaningfulpurpose.Forexample,inthetaskentitled“SenegalbyNumbers,”studentslearnaboutSenegalesedemographicsthroughaninformation-gapactivity.Thetaskgivesstudents

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 6: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .14 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

anopportunitytopracticeunderstandingandcommunicatingcomplexnumbersinthecontextofSenegalesedemographics.Inotherwords,thetopic(Senegalesedemographics) contextualizestheuseofnumbers.

Contextualizinglanguageinstructionmaybestbeaccomplishedbyorganizingthecontentofthelanguagecurriculumaccordingtothemesortopicsthatlendthemselvestore-entrythroughoutthecourseofstudy(assuggestedbywhatisknownasaspiralcurriculum).Ourtheme-basedcurriculumframework(seetheKeyMaterialssection)providesonesuchexampleofcurriculumorganizationthatwouldlenditselftocontextualizinglanguageinstruction.

Authenticity of Text and Task

Relatedtotheconceptofcontextualizationisthenotionofauthenticity.AuthentictextsormaterialshavebeendefinedbyVillegasRogersandMedley(1988)as“...languagesamples—bothoralandwritten—thatreflectanaturalnessofform,andanappropriatenessofculturalandsituationalcontextthatwouldbefoundinthelanguageasusedbynativespeakers”(p.468).Textsthatarepreparedfornativespeakersby nativespeakersreflectthecultureandsocietalvaluesofeverydaylife.“NotextbookculturenoteontheHispanicfamily,forexample,canreplacethestudyofauthenticbirthorchristening,weddinganddeathannouncements,where,undertheobservablelinguisticconventions,lietheritualsofevents,theconnotationsofritesofpassage,themeaningof‘family,’andthedynamicnatureofculture”(Galloway&Labarca,1990,p.139). Forourpurposes,anytextthatis purposeful, meaningful,andhasarealcommunicative intent forarealaudiencecanbeconsideredtobeauthentic.Inotherwords,itisauthenticinthesensethatitwasnotoriginallyproducedforlanguage-teachingpurposesbutratherforthepurposeofcommunicatingmeaning(Brintonetal.,1989,p.17).Thismeansthatane-mailmessagesentviatheInternetbyastudentofGermantoanotherstudentofGermanis“authentic”aslongasthemessageismeaningful(eventhoughthemessagewasnotwrittenbyanativespeakerforanothernativespeaker).Furthermore,authenticityinadeepersensedoesnotresideinthetextitselfbutratherisdeterminedbyhowthattextisused(Hutchinson&Waters,1987),i.e.,theauthenticityofthetask.Forexample,ifateacherusesanarticlefromatargetculturemagazineforthesolepurposeofhavingthestudentsunderlinealloftheinstancesinwhichthesubjunctiveappears,theauthenticityofthetaskdisappears. Let’sexamineataskandconsiderwaysinwhichitcanbeslightlyalteredtobecomemoreauthentic.3ImaginethatstudentsareengagedinaunitonCostaRica(oranyothertargetcountry).Asaculminatingactivityattheendoftheunit,theteacherdecidestohavestudentscreatetravelbrochuresinthetargetlanguagetodemonstratetheirknowledgeofwhattheyhavelearned.Suchataskasksthatthestudentspretendtoactas

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 7: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .15

nativespeakers,whichtheyclearlyarenot.Kramsch(1993)wouldarguethatauthenticityinvolveshavingstudentsbewhotheyare—learnersofthetargetlanguage.Torevisethetasksomewhatwithaneyetowardgreaterauthenticity,theteachercanhavestudentscreatetravelitinerariesforagroupofstudentswhowillbetravelingtoCostaRica,theintentbeingtodemonstratetheirknowledgeofwhattheyhavelearnedbycommunicatingittootherstudents. Anotherexamplewouldinvolvehavingstudentsatthebeginningoftheunitwritelettersinthetargetlanguagetovarioustravelagencies,touristbureaus,and“ChamberofCommerce”equivalentstoindicatethatthey(1)arestudentsofSpanish,(2)arestudyingaboutCostaRica,and(3)areinterestedinreceivingtravelinformationinSpanish.Suchataskhasarealpurposeandarealaudience.Theaddedbenefitisthatitwillalsoleadtoadditionalauthenticmaterialsforclassroomuse!(Thistask,titled“Let’sGotoCostaRica,”isdescribedindetailintheHandbookandappearsinthe“FromPresentationtoCreation”section.) AfinalexampleofanauthentictaskforthisinstructionalsettingistohavestudentswritetoCostaRicanstudentsaboutMinnesota(i.e.,theirhomestate),givenwhattheyhavelearnedaboutCostaRica.Aletterwrittenforthistaskmightinclude,forexample,acomparisonbetweenMinnesota’sBoundaryWatersandCostaRica’sTortugueroNationalParkintermsoftheirenvironmentalrestrictions. SomeofthetasksintheHandbook areauthenticinthattheyareintendedforarealaudience(beyondtheclassroom).Othersarenotauthenticinthissense.Forexample,in“MyFavoriteRecipe,”studentsworkwithpartnerstowriteafavoriterecipeinthesecondlanguage(notfromthetargetculture).Theysharetheserecipesinclass.Whileavaluableactivityforelicitingcommunicationintheclassroom,thetaskcannotbeconsideredauthenticbecauseit’snotdesignedforarealaudienceorpurpose—nativeEnglishspeakersdon’tneedtoreadarecipeformacaroniandcheese,forexample,writteninFrench.However,thetaskcanbeadaptedquiteeasilytoincreaseitsauthenticity.OneclassroomteacherhadstudentscompiletheirrecipesintoabooklettosendhomewithanAmityAidefromtheIvoryCoast,whohadbeenworkingintheirclassroomthatyear.Inthisway,thetasktookonarealpurposeandaudience,andthestudentswereveryexcitedtobeexplaining(inFrench)howtopreparetheirfavoritefoods,knowingtheAmityAidewouldsharetherecipeswithfriendsandfamilyuponherreturntohernativecountry. Thesesuggestionshighlighttheimportanceofcreatingtasksthatinvolvestudentsinusinglanguageforrealcommunicativepurposesandforrealaudiences.Manyofthetasksinthe Handbook areauthenticinthissense.Forexample,thetaskentitled“CreatingChildren’sLiterature”involveshavingstudentswritechildren’sbookstosharewithyoungstudentsinimmersionorFLESprograms.Itisimportanttonote,however,thatitisnotpossibletomakeeverytaskortextauthenticinthelanguage

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 8: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .16 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

classroom.Sometimesstudentsneedtopretendtobenativespeakersforaroleplay;sometimestheyneedtowriteforahypotheticalaudience;sometimestheyneedtoreadatextthathasbeenadaptedfornonnativespeakersofthelanguage.Suchactivitiesarevaluableandcertainlyhaveaplaceinthelanguagecurriculum.Whatisimportant(andpossible!),however,isforteacherstofindagoodbalanceintheircurriculumbetweentasksandtextsthatarelessauthenticandthosethatrepresenttheprinciplesofauthenticityasdescribedabove.Teachersshouldalsomakesurethatsomeofthetextstheyuseinthecurriculumcontainlanguageasusedbynativespeakerssoastoincorporateculturalandlinguisticauthenticity.Anumberofauthentictexts(i.e.,writtenbynativespeakersfornativespeakersofthetargetlanguage)areusedintheHandbookinconjunctionwithtasksandunits.See,forexample,thesamplerecipesin“ReadingRecipes,”themagazinearticlein“DeSolaSolSinDescanso,”andthegradereportintheunitcalled“LeBaccalauréatFrançais.”

ProcessLanguageacquisition(beitfirst,second,orthird...)isanongoing

processthatrequiresagreatdealoftime,patience,thought,effort,andencouragement.Ateacherwhorecognizestheimportanceofprocessinlanguagelearningunderstands,forexample,thatalthoughastudentisintroducedtoagrammaticalstructure(orfunctionortopic)earlyon,s/hewillneedtimetointernalizethatconceptbeforebeingabletoproducelanguageinspontaneousinteractionthatshowsanaccuraterepresentationofthatconcept.Forexample,studentsofFrench,German,andSpanisharetaughttheconceptofgenderandnumberagreementrelativelyearlyoninlanguageclassrooms.Whilethestudentsmaybeabletoproducelanguagewithaccurateagreementonquizzesandtests,theyoftencannotwhenaskedtoproducelanguagespontaneouslyforameaningfulcommunicativepurpose.Theyneedtimetobeabletosee,hear,produce,andexperiencenumberandgenderagreementinmanymeaningfulcontextsforavarietyofpurposesbeforetheydevelopa“feel”fortheconcept—beforeitbecomespartoftheirinternalizedlanguagerepertoire.Thisprocesstakesyears. HeilenmanandKaplan(1985)provideausefuldistinctionamongvariousdegreesofcontroloffunction,topic(orcontext),andformasstudentsdevelopproficiency.Theyarguethatatdifferentlevelsofproficiency,certaingrammaticalstructures,functions,andtopicsorcontextsneedtobetaughtforfull control,othersforpartial control,andstillothersfor conceptual control (authors’emphasis,p.63).Conceptsthataretaughtforpartialorconceptualcontrolatonelevelofproficiencyarerecycledatsubsequentlevelswherefullorpartialcontrolisthegoal(Heilenman&Kaplan,1985).ThesedegreesofcontrolinHeilenmanandKaplan’sframeworkcorrelatewithlevelsofproficiencyasdefinedbytheACTFLguidelines.Inotherwords,ifstudents’proficiencyisinthe

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 9: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .17

Novicerange,theyshouldbeexpectedtodemonstratefullcontrolofcertainfunctions(e.g.,makinglists),topics(e.g.,dates,numbers,etc.),andaccurateproductionofcertainforms(e.g.,questionwords).TheycanbeexpectedtohavepartialcontrolofvariousconceptsthatcorrespondtotheIntermediate-Low/MidrangeandconceptualcontrolofconceptsthatarerepresentativeoftheIntermediate-HighandAdvancedrange.Thepointhereisthatacquisitionofthefunctions,topics,andformsoflanguageisatime-consumingprocessthatrequiresteacherstorecyclethosefunctions,topics,andformssystematicallyandpurposefullythroughouttheircurriculumsothatstudentscanachievehigherdegreesofcontrolastheyadvanceaslanguagelearners.Ourpreliminarymodelforathematiccurriculumframeworkisonewayofenvisioningthiscyclicalviewoflanguageinstruction.Thecurricularthemes(seeKeyMaterialssection)suggestsometopicsthatcanbeconsideredfororganizingthelanguagecurriculum;thecommunicativefunctionsandlanguagestructuresarestipulatedwithinthecontextofthetasksandunitsthatcorrespondtothevariousthemes. Processisalsorelatedtoclassroominstruction.Inthissense,processinvolvesseveralinstructionalphases—e.g.,preparingstudentsforanactivity,carryingouttheactivity,andprovidingafollow-upthatrequiresstudentstoapplywhattheylearned.ThetasksandunitsintheHandbook breaklessonsdownintopre-,during-,andpost-activitystagestoemphasizetheneedforanawarenessofprocessintheclassroom.Inaddition,othertasksorunitsillustrateprocessapproachestoinstruction:“Let’sgotoCostaRica”isataskthatdetailstheprocessapproachtowriting;the“GenderRoles”unittakesstudentsthroughaprocessofcross-culturalexploration.

Anawarenessofprocessinlanguagelearningcanalsobereflectedinassessmentpractices.Toooftenassessmentpracticesfocusontheproduct—thatis,whateverthestudentsproduce,beitapaper,anoralpresentation,avideotape,etc.Butitisequallyimportanttoassessstudents’workintheprocessofworkingtowardthefinalproduct.Forexample,ifstudentsareaskedtoworkinsmallgroupstoco-createaproject(e.g.,askit),theteachermaywanttoassessthestudents’abilitytocollaborateandworkcooperatively.Suchanassessmentgetsatprocess.Ifawritingassignmentrequiresdrafts,feedback,andrevision,theteachermaydecidetoassesshowwellstudentsattendtofeedbackintheirrevisions.Thisassessment,too,getsatprocess.

Theteacherwhorecognizestheimportanceofprocesscreatesaclassroomenvironmentwhereprocessisreflectedininstructionaswellasassessment,whererisk-takingisencouraged,andwheremeaningfulcommunicationisemphasizedoveraccuracyforthesake of accuracy.

Reflection

Closelyrelatedtotheconceptofprocessisreflection.Reflectioninvolves deliberate thought.Inessence,itengagesanindividualina

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 10: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .18 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

“conversation”withasituation,beitproblematic,confusing,orilluminating.Ourviewsofourselvesandourculturesandoftheviewsofothersandtheirculturesareneveruniformorstatic.AsClaireKramsch(1991)explains,“…alargepartofwhatwecallcultureisasocialconstruct,theproductofselfandother[s’]perceptions.”Indeed,languageuse,orcommunication,isembeddedalwayswithinculture,andthereforeislargelydependentuponpeoples’perceptionsofmeaning,whichmayormaynotmatchtheintendedmeaning.Itisthisverysocial,dynamicnatureoflanguageandculturethatmakessecondlanguagesdifferentfromandmorespecialthanotheracademicdisciplines,and,hence,makesreflectionsoimportantforbothstudentsandteachers. Students’reflectionshouldbebothculturallyandlinguisticallybased,aswellasfocusedonself-as-learner,self-as-human-being,andself-in-relationship-with-other.Studentswillnotbeabletoengageinprofoundreflectiononanyofthesetopicsovernight;reflectionrepresentsyetanotherprocessrelatedtolanguagelearningwhichneedstooccurgraduallyandcarefullyinanatmospherewherethestudentscanaskquestionsfreelyandwhererisk-takingisencouraged(Tedick,1992).Someactivitiesthatrepresentattentiontostudentreflectionincludelearningstrategies,self-assessment,peerreview,and“debriefing”exercises.ManyofthetasksintheHandbookinvolveactivitiesthatencouragestudentreflection.Forexample,“StrategicInteraction”includesadebriefingstagewherestudentsareaskedtoreflectbackonthelanguageusedduringtheroleplayandmakesuggestionsforimprovingit.“MyFavoriteRecipe”engageslearnersinapeerassessmentactivity,encouragingthemtoreflecteitheronthepresenter’slanguageuseorthelistener’sabilitytounderstand.Inthe“GenderRoles”unit,studentsareaskedtoreflectontheirownperceptionsofgenderrolesthroughouttheunitastheylearnabouttheperceptionsoftheirGermancounterparts.Reflectionshouldbeencouragedatalllevelsoflanguagelearning—eventhebeginninglevels.Seethe“MagazineScanning”activity,whichwasdesignedforstudentsatNoviceproficiencylevels. Teachersmustalsobeengagedinreflectionastheyplanforandcarryoutinstructionalactivities.Mostteachersdothisnaturally,askingthemselveshowalessoncouldhavebeenimproved,forexample.TheHandbookisdesignedtoencourageteacherstoreflectastheyusethetasksandunitsintheirclassrooms.Materialshavebeendesignedwithlargemarginsforwritingnotesandmakingchanges,andeachlessonisfollowedbyaspacefor“reflections”wheretheteachercanjotdownadditionalnotes,resources,andideasforfuturereference.

Interaction

Learnersmustuselanguageinmeaningfulinteractioninorderto

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 11: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .1�

learnit.Inordertoacquirelanguage,learnerscannotsimplylistentoorread“input;”theymustinteractwithandnegotiatethetypeofinputtheyreceive(Long,1981).Theterm“interaction”impliesface-to-facecommunicationthatinvolvesnegotiationofmeaning,butitalsomeansactiveinvolvementwithalltypesoflanguageuse.Ofgreatvalueinthisdiscussionisthe“FrameworkofCommunicativeModes”usedinthenationalstandardsdocument(Brecht&Walton,1994,inStandardsforForeignLanguageLearning,1996).Inthisframework,therearethreecommunicativemodes—interpersonal,interpretive,andpresentational.Theinterpersonal modeinvolvesactivenegotiationofmeaningbetweenindividualswhoareinpersonalcontact,forexample,directoralcommunicationthatisface-to-faceorviatelephone.Itmayalsoinvolvedirectwrittencommunication,suchastheexchangeofpersonalletters,notes,ore-mailmessages.Therefore,thismodeincludesallfourlanguagemodalities—speaking,listening,reading,andwriting.Theinterpretive mode,whichfocusesonreceptiveabilities(listening,reading,viewing),involvesthecomprehensionorinterpretationoforalorwrittenmessages.Examplesincludereadingatext,listeningtotheradio,orwatchingamovie.Attimesthesereceptiveabilitiesaremistakenaspassiveratherthanactiveactivities.Yetresearchhasshownthatreadersandlistenersmustfunctionasactiveparticipantsintheactofcomprehending.Theymustco-construct meaning astheyworktointerprettheinputprovided.Thisactofco-constructionimpliesinteractionbetweentextandreader/listener/viewereventhoughtheopportunityfornegotiationofmeaningmaynotbepresent.Thepresentational mode,involvingtheproductiveskillsofwritingandspeaking,referstothecreationofspokenorwrittencommunicationforanaudiencewithwhomthereisnoimmediatepersonalcontact.Extendedoralpresentationsandwrittenessaysareexamplesoflanguageuseinthismode.Aswritersorspeakersworktoconstructmeaning,theymustconsidertheirpurposeandimagineinteractionwithanaudience.Thatis,theymustrelyonunderstandingofthepurposeforthecommunicationandknowledgeofaudienceastheychoosethewordsandputtogetherphrasestocommunicatemeaning.Thesethreecommunicativemodescorrespondtothethreenationalcommunicationstandards.Interaction,then,asit’sinterpretedintheHandbookandinCAPRII,involveslanguageusewithinthesethreecommunicativemodes.

Ateacherwhounderstandstheimportanceofinteractionorganizesthelanguageclassroomtominimizeteachertalkandmaximizestudentdiscourse.Thisinvolvesorganizingclassroomactivitiessothatstudentswillhavereasonstorespondtoandinteractwithoneanotheraswellasothersoutsideoftheclassroom.Atthesametime,itisnotenoughtohavestudentsinteractwithoutfeedbackorattentiontoform.Inotherwords,qualityofinteractioniskey.Teachersmustcreateabalancebetweenmeaning(functionandcontent)andaccuracy.Toachievethisbalance,itisimportanttoincorporatedifferentkindsofinteractiveactivitiesfordifferent

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 12: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .20 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

purposes.Attimes,spontaneousinteractionshouldoccur,wherethefocusisentirelyoncommunicatingmeaning,regardlessoftheaccuracy.Othertimes,studentsshouldbeexpectednotonlytocommunicatemeaning,butalsotodosoaccurately.Suchinstanceswillbecharacterizedbytasksthatarereflectiveofthepresentationalmodeofcommunication.Theyinvolvetimeforplanningand,whenappropriate,rehearsal.Mostimportantly,accuracymustalwaysbeaddressedinameaningfulcontext.Drawingstudents’attentiontoaccurateformsandprovidingthemwithconstructivefeedbackthatencouragesthemtoreflectonthelinguisticaccuracyoftheiroutputiscritical,yetneedstooccurinwaysthatencouragelanguageproduction,notinhibitit.Lyster’s(1998)recentworkontypesofcorrectivefeedbackinadvancedimmersionclassroomshasshownthatwhenteachersprovidefeedbackthatrequiresstudentstothinkaboutandrespondtothefeedbackinsomeway,thestudentsaremorelikelytorepairtheirerrorsandimprovetheirlinguisticaccuracy.

It’simportanttorememberthatthehigherthelevelofproficiency,thegreaterone’sexpectationsforlinguisticaccuracyshouldbe.HeilenmanandKaplan(1985)emphasizethatproficiency-orientedcurriculumandinstructionmuststriveforabalanceamongfunction,context(ortopic/content),andaccuracy,“whileatthesametimeallowingfortheimbalancefrequentlyseenattheNoviceorIntermediatelevelswhereonecomponentmaycompensateforanother”(p.60). VirtuallyalloftheclassroomtasksandunitsintheHandbookencourageinteractioninoneormorecommunicativemodes,becausethisHandbookisaboutlanguageuse.Thosetasksthatfocusonface-to-faceinteraction,characteristicoftheinterpersonalmode,arefoundinthe“NegotiatedInteraction”section.Thosethatfocusontheinterpretivemodearefoundinthesecondsectionoftasks,“FromComprehensiontoInterpretation.”Andthosethatemphasizethepresentationalmodecanbefoundinthesectionentitled“FromPresentationtoCreation.”ManyofthetasksthroughouttheHandbookalsosuggestwaysoffocusingonformandintegratingfeedbackinthecontextofinteractiveactivities.

Integration

ThefinalCAPRIIconceptreferstotheintegrationofavarietyoffactors.Itrepresentstheintegrationofcontentandlanguage,includingbothlanguageandcultureandalsolanguagewithotherdisciplines.Italsoreferstotheintegrationofthefourmodalities(reading,listening,writing,speaking). Integrationofthefourmodalitiesisimportant.Creatingclassroomactivitiesthatrequirestudentstouselanguagewithintwoormoreofthefourmodalitieshelpstoreinforcetheconceptsbeingemphasized.Thisapproachalsolendsitselfwelltoavarietyoflearningstyles.Forexample,writinghelpssomestudentsimprovetheirlisteningskills.Ithasalso

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 13: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .21

beenshownthatreadinghelpsstudentsdevelopcompetenceinwriting.Practiceinonemodalityoftenresultsinimprovedcompetenceinothermodalities.Inaddition,byintegratingallmodalitiesincurriculumandinstruction,theteacherconsidershowstudentscanbeusinglanguageforavarietyofpurposes.ManyofthetasksandalloftheunitsintheHandbook integratethefourmodalities.Sometasksemphasizeonemodalityovertheothers,butincludeideasforextendingthetaskstoincorporateadditionalmodalities.Withtheincreasedfocusonthenationalstandards,itisalsoimportantforteacherstobegintounderstandhowthefourmodalitiesworktogetherintheframeworkofthecommunicativemodesdiscussedintheprevioussection. Integratingcontentandlanguagesuggestsfollowingacontent-basedapproachtolanguageteachingwhereinthelinguisticelementsthatmakeuplanguage(i.e.,grammaticalstructures,vocabulary,etc.)emergenaturallyfromthecontentandareunderstoodwithinthecontextofthatcontent.Acontent-basedapproachtolanguageteachingemphasizeslanguageuseandlendsitselfwelltointerdisciplinarycurriculumdesign.Incontent-basedinstruction,thepurposeistoteachorreinforcecontentviathetargetlanguage.Content,notlanguage,istheorganizingprincipleforthetaskorunit.Languageisthevehiclethatallowsaccesstothecontentareasandrelatedtasks.Contentmayberelatedtootheracademicdisciplinesinthecurriculum(science,anthropology)ormayberelatedtoculturalthemes. Languagesneedtobeintegratedwithotherdisciplinesintheschoolcurriculum.Infact,theimportanceofconnectinglanguageandotherdisciplinesishighlightedinthenationalstandards(NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996,seestandard3.1).Itistimeforlanguagestobeunderstoodascentral toawell-definedschoolcurriculumratherthanperipheral.“Learningtodayisnolongerrestrictedtoaspecificdiscipline;ithasbecomeinterdisciplinary”(NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996,p.50).Toapproachlanguageteachingfromacontent-basedorthematicperspectiveallowsonetoseehowavarietyofsubjectmatterareascanbemeaningfullyandpurposefullyintegrated.Forexample,aunitontheMayacaneasilyincorporateattentiontohistory,anthropology,mathematics,science,andart.SeveralofthetasksandunitsintheHandbook attendtotheconnectionbetweenlanguageandotherdisciplines,forexample,“CampaignGraffiti”and“LosMayayElNorte.” Anintegrationoflanguageandcontentalsooccurswhenthecontentisbasedonculturalthemes.Integratinglanguageandcultureiskeyineffectivelanguageteachingandlearning.Iflanguageisseenassocialpractice,thenculturemustbecomethecoreoflanguageteaching(Kramsch,1993).Aswearebecomingasmaller,moreinterdependentglobalcommunitythaneverbefore,culturemusttakecenterstageinthelanguageclassroom.Itcannolongerbelimitedtoasingleperspectiveonsurface

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 14: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .22 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

elementsandcultural“facts”foundinmosttextbooks.Instead,languageclassroomsmustbecomeplaceswherestudentsandteachersunderstandthemselvesasculturalbeingsandbegintodiscoverthecomplexityoftheconceptofcultureastheyviewculturesbothwithinandoutsideoftheU.S.fromanumberofdifferentperspectives(Kramsch,1993;NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996;Tedicketal.,1993).Culturalaspectshavebeenconsideredforallofthetasksandunitsinthe Handbook,andarehighlightedonthefirstpageofeach.Someofthetasksplaceanemphasisonculturalissues,suchas“SoulofSenegal”and“CelebratingtheDayoftheDead.”Others,like“MarketaMovie”and“WeddingCelebration”don’temphasizeculturalissuesbutincorporatesomeattentiontoculturalaspectsnevertheless.

AlloftheunitsandsomeofthetasksintheHandbookprovidegoodexamplesofcontent-basedcurriculumandinstruction.Forexample,“SenegalbyNumbers”iscontent-basedbecauseitfocusesonhavingstudentsunderstandSenegalesedemographicsinrelationshiptoU.S.demographics.Thecontentinthiscasemightbesimilartocontentstudentsmightencounterinanotheracademicdiscipline,suchasgeography,andalsothroughculturalstudyinalanguageclassroom.Throughtheactivities,studentsgaingreaterinsightintothedifferencesbetweentheSenegalandtheU.S.andthereasonsthatunderliethosedifferences.Withinthecontextofthiscontent,studentspracticecomplexnumbers,comparativeconstructions,thepresenttense,andquestionformation.

MostofthetasksintheHandbookarenotcontent-based,however,becausethepurposebehindthedevelopmentofthe Handbook wastoprovideteacherswithprinciplesandarangeofexamplesthatwouldhelpthemtoincreaselanguageuseintheclassroom,keytoincreasingtheirstudents’languageproficiency.Thetasksareexcellentproficiency-orientedactivitiesthatengagestudentsinlanguageuseformeaningfulpurposes,butaren’tnecessarilydrivenbyparticularcontent.Forinstance,“StrategicInteraction”isawonderfulactivitythatcombinesroleplayandcooperativelearning.But“StrategicInteraction”inandofitselfisnotacontent-basedactivityorlesson.The“generic”strategicinteractionactivity(foundintheNegotiatedInteractionsectionoftheHandbook)canbecontrastedwithanapplicationofstrategicinteractionwithinacontent-basedactivity,“LasJóvenesMaquiladoras.”Inthisactivity,thefocusisonhavingstudentsunderstandthevariousperspectivesaroundtheissueofsweatshopsandexploitationofyoungworkerswhilecommunicatinginthetargetlanguagewithpeers.Thesameroleplayactivityisused,butthecontentinthiscaseisthekeyfactor.

Theintegrationoflanguageandcontent(beitrelatedtoacademicsubjectmattersorculturalthemes)willlikelyreceivemuchmoreattentioninthefieldoflanguageeducationinyearstocome,particularlywiththe

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 15: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .23

focusinthenationalstandardsonculturalunderstandingandthecalltoconnectlanguageswithotheracademicdisciplines.Integratinglanguageandcontentexpectsthatteachersattendtobothcontentcurriculumandlanguagecurriculumandfindwaystobalancethetwoininstruction.Anumberofexcellentresourcesareavailabletoassistlanguageteacherswhoareinterestedincontent-basedapproaches4.See,forexample,SnowandBrinton(1997),Genesee(1994),Met(1991),andSnow,Met&Genesee(1989).

Conclusion

Insummary,CAPRIIdescribesanumberofimportantpedagogicalprinciplesthatlanguageteachersshouldimplementintheirteachingpractices.TheseprinciplesarereflectedthroughoutthetasksandunitsinthisHandbook,thoughitisimportanttorememberthatnotalltasksincorporatealloftheprinciplessimultaneously.ItishopedthattheexamplesprovidedthroughouttheHandbookwillhelpteacherstoconsiderhowtheprinciplesofCAPRIIcanenhancetheirownteachingand,ultimately,studentlearning.

Performance Assessment5

Rethinking Assessment: Focus on Language Use

ThenationalstandardsandtheMinnesotaArticulationProjectemphasize what students should know and be able to do.Thetasksprovidedinthis Handbook requirethatstudentsuselanguageforavarietyofcommunicativepurposes.Itfollowsthatassessmentmustfocusonwhatstudentscandowithlanguageinadditiontowhattheyknowaboutlanguage.

Inthefieldoflanguageeducationagradualchangetowardmoreofafocusonperformancemeasureshasindeedbeenobserved.Certainly,large-scalelanguagetestshavemovedtowardmeasuresoflanguageperformancebeginningwiththeproficiencymovementthatcharacterizedthe1980’sintheU.S.(Bachman,1990).TheproficiencytestsdevelopedaspartoftheMinnesotaArticulationProject(forwhichthisHandbook wascreated)certainlyofferexcellentexamplesofcontextualized,performance-basedmeasures.TheCenterforAppliedLinguisticshasbeencompilingdescriptionsofassessmentinstrumentsforK-8foreignlanguagesettings,manyofwhichareperformance-based(Thompson,1997).Recentadditionstothecollectionshowanincreasinguseofalternative,performance-basedmeasures(Thompson,2000-2001).TheForeignLanguageTestDatabase,6containinginformationaboutsecondaryandcollege-levelforeignlanguagetests,showsasimilarpatternofmovement

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 16: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .24 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

towardalternative,performance-basedmeasures.Andanumberofstateshaveledlocalinitiatives(throughgrant-funding)demonstratingtheprevalenceofalternativemeasuresandperformance-basedassessment(e.g.,Assessment, Articulation and Accountability,1999).

Theemphasisonstandardsandlanguageuseinthe90’shasalsoledtomoreofafocusonperformancemeasures.Asafollow-uptothenationalstandards,ACTFL’sperformanceguidelineswerepublishedin1998(ACTFL,1998;Swender&Duncan,1998).Theseguidelinesredefineproficiencyrelatedtothethreecommunicativemodesincorporatedinthestandards(interpersonal,interpretive,andpresentational)anddescribelanguageperformanceatarangeoflevels.ThePerformanceAssessmentUnits(PAUs)beingdevelopedforclassroom-basedassessmentrelatedtothecommunicationstandards(NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject,1996)arealsoperformance-based(“Stepthree,thePAUproject,”2000;Thompson,2000-2001).Atthesametime,what’sunclearisthedegreetowhichteachersareusingsuchassessmentsintheirclassrooms.Ithasbeenourexperiencethatitishappeninglessthanwewouldlike.

Inmanylanguageclassrooms,teachershaveincorporatedcommunicativeactivitiesthatemphasizelanguageuse,yetoftenassessmentremainsfocusedongrammaticalstructuresandvocabulary.Thisleadstoasignificantmismatchbetweeninstructionandassessmentandalsosendsstudentsthemessagethatonlygrammarandvocabularyareimportant.Thereareveryrealreasonswhyassessmenttendstobebasedondiscrete-pointtestsofgrammarandvocabulary—it’srelativelystraightforwardtoassessstudents’knowledgeofgrammarandvocabulary,it’stime-efficient,andteachersandstudents(nottomentionparentsandadministrators)arecomfortablewiththesetypesofassessments.Itishumannaturetobecomfortablewithwhatweknowwellandtobeskepticalofanduncomfortablewiththeneworunknown. Assessinggrammaticalandvocabularyknowledgeisrelativelystraightforward,becausetestitemsusuallyhavejustonerightanswerandthereforecreatetheillusionofbeing“objective.”Inmostschools,studentsaretaughtfromthetimetheyenterkindergartenthatwhat’simportantisknowingtheonerightanswer.Yetintherealworld,fewifanyquestionsorproblemshaveonlyonerightanswer.Andintheworldoflanguagelearning,thesameapplies.There’sneveronerightwaytocommunicatemeaning—languageisbyitsverynaturesubjectiveandcreative.Tocommunicateotherwisetostudentsistodothemadisservice.Moreover,researchonlanguageacquisitioninpastdecadeshasrepeatedlydemonstratedthatknowledge about languagedoesnotreflectone’sability to use languagetocommunicateeffectively.HeilenmanandKaplan(1985)describethedilemmaasfollows:

Learningacertainnumberofadjectivesalongwiththeirmorphologicalchangesdoesnottranslatedirectlyintobeing

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 17: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .25

abletodescribe,justaslearningthevarioususesandformsofthesubjunctiveisnotthesamethingasbeingabletodefendone’sopinionsandstateone’sfeelings.Thisisthegapthatthetraditional,structurallybasedlanguageprogramhasnotbeenabletobridge....Thestatedgoalofsuchprograms,languageuse,[is]notmetbecausetherealgoal,in terms of what students [are] expected to do, pertain[s]primarilytoformratherthantofunctionand[is]moreconcernedwithcompletesentencesthanwithdiscourse-levelcompetence(p.58,emphasisadded).

Nowhereisthisgapmorepronouncedthaninthearenaofclassroomassessment. Discrete-pointtestsofgrammarandvocabularyalsodominateclassroomassessmentbecausetheyaretime-efficient.Intoomanydistricts,teachersareexpectedtogivefinalexamsandtosubmitfinalgradestotheadministrationwithin24hoursaftertheexam.Suchpoliciesforceteachersintorelyingondiscrete-pointmeasures.Withtheadventofstandards-basedcurriculumandinstructionthesepolicieswillneedtochangebecausetheemphasisison what students can do.Forteacherswhoneedtoassesswhatstudentscandowithlanguage,theonlyoptionisamovetowardsperformancemeasures. Thismovetowardsperformanceassessmentisdifficult,becausebothteachersandstudentsarecomfortableandfamiliarwithdiscrete-pointassessmentsofgrammarandvocabulary.Manylanguageteachershadtheseexperiencesaslanguagelearnersyearsago,anditisdifficultforthemtochangewhattheyperceiveworkedforthem.Performancemeasuresthatinvolvequalityjudgmentsofstudents’abilitytouselanguageareadmittedlydifficult,subjective,andtime-consuming.Teachersandstudents(andparentsandadministrators!)needtolearntobecomfortablewiththesubjectivenatureofperformanceassessments.Teachersshouldspeakopenlyaboutthesemeasureswithstudentsandparentsandhelpthemtobecomemoretolerantoftheambiguitythataccompaniesthem.Itmayhelptopointouthowperformancemeasuresarecommonlyusedinourculture.Thesportsworldoffersanumberofexamples.Whileobjectivemeasuresofminutesandsecondsormetersandcentimeterscanbeusedtojudgeperformanceinthe100-meterrace,orthehighjump,subjectivemeasures(usuallyonascaleof1-10)mustbeusedtojudgeperformanceineventslikeice-skatinganddiving.Similarly,intheworkworld,performanceismeasuredsubjectivelyonthebasisofqualityjudgments—consider,forexample,howateacher’sabilitytoteachisassessed!Ifwearecomfortablewiththesetypesofperformanceassessments,sotoomustwelearntobecomfortablewithanemphasisonperformanceassessmentinthelanguageclassroomwherethefocusisonstudents’abilitytouselanguage.Justaswithanysignificant,meaningfulchange,teachersandstudentswill

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 18: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .26 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

needtoproceedgraduallyandtolearntobecomfortabletakingrisksbytryingnewwaysofdemonstratingandassessinglanguageuse. Itisimperativetonotethatanemphasisonlanguageuseandperformanceassessmentisnotintendedtoencourageteacherstoneglectattentiontoformoraccuracy.Instead,itshouldcontextualizeattentiontoformandaccuracy.ThetasksandunitsinthisHandbook haveallbeendesignedtoemphasizelanguageuseandprovidedetaileddescriptionsofhowtoassessstudents’performance,oftenwithaccompanyingchecklistsorrubrics.Attentiontoformandaccuracyisembeddedintherubricsandmustnotbeoverlooked.WehopethatthemanycontextualizedexamplesofperformanceassessmentthroughouttheHandbookwillhelpeasethetransitionforlanguageteacherstoperformance-basedinstructionandassessment.

Moving Towards Performance Assessment:

The Changing Role of the Student in the Process

Intheclassroom,performanceassessment[alsoreferredtoas“authenticassessment”and“alternativeassessment”intheliterature(e.g.,Hart,1994)]ischaracterizedbytasksthatareworthwhile,significant,meaningful,andformpartofthecurriculum.Itprovidesinformationonwhatstudentscanactually dowithlanguageandtheirreflectiononthatprocess.Itiscongruentwithalearner-centered,communicativeapproachtolanguageteaching.Performanceassessmentsarenotonlydesignedandstructureddifferentlyfromtraditionaltests,butarealsogradedorscoreddifferently.Studentperformanceisevaluatedonthebasisofclearlydefinedperformanceindicators,criteria,orstandardsthatemphasizestudents’strengthsinsteadofhighlightingtheirweaknesses. Inadditiontotraditionalmeasuresoflanguagecompetence,performanceassessmentshavebeendevelopedinresponsetocurrentinterestinlearner-centeredpedagogy.Proponentsoflearner-centeredpedagogybelievethatteachersandlearnersshouldsharepowerandthatlearnersshouldhavemorecontrolovertheireducationalprocess(c.f.,Nunan,1988).Inthissense,theprimarygoaloflearner-centeredinstructionistoincreasestudents’participationinthelearningprocessbyassistingtheminestablishinglearningandself-improvementgoals,choosingeffectivelearningmethodsandstrategies,andbecominginvolvedinevaluatingtheirownworkandthatoftheirpeers. Learner-centeredinstructionimpliesthatteachersmustdedicatesomeclasstimetoactivitiesnotnormallyobservedintraditionallanguageclasses,suchasteachinglearnershowtolearnalanguage,howtomakeuseofavailabletoolsandresources,howtouselanguagelearningstrategies,andhowtoreflectontheirownlearning.Languagelearnersassumeresponsibilitiestraditionallytakenonsolelybytheinstructor,includingthe

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 19: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .27

evaluationoftheirownlearning,aswellastheprovisionoffeedbacktotheirclassmates. Assessmentproceduresinanyeducationalprocessshouldbecongruentwithteachingprocedures.Inotherwords,assessmentpracticesshouldalignwithclassroomobjectivesandinstruction.TheassessmentproceduresthatweemphasizeintheHandbook arebasedontheideathatstudentscanlearntoevaluatetheirownlearningand,inturn,learnfromthatprocess.Theyreflectthebeliefthatlearnersshouldbeinvolvedindeterminingcriteriaforsuccessfulcompletionofcommunicativetasksandshouldhavetheopportunitytoassesstheirownperformanceandthatoftheirpeers.Inaddition,justaslearner-centeredpedagogyemphasizesboththelearning processandtheproduct,variousformsofalternativeassessmentgivelearnersopportunitiestoreflectnotonlyontheirlinguisticdevelopment,butalsoontheirlearningprocesses(i.e.,whathelpsthemlearnandwhatmighthelpthemlearnbetter).Assessmentthusbecomesmoreformativeratherthansummative.Learnerscanprovideoneanotherwithfeedbackontheirperformance,forexamplereflectingonhowwelltheyperformedacommunicativetaskthroughgroupprocessing(Johnson,Johnson,&Holubec,1993). Timespentonteachingstudentshowtoevaluatetheirownworkthroughself-reflectionandhowtoevaluatetheworkoftheirpeersisnottimelostforinstruction.Onthecontrary,byunderstandingthetraitsofeffectivewritersandspeakers,studentsinternalizethetraitsandbecomemoreeffectivecommunicators.AsBaron(1991)states:“Whenstudentsinternalizeadefinitionofwhatqualitymeansandcanlearntorecognizeit,theyhavedevelopedaveryvaluablecriticalability.Theycantalkwith[...]theirteacheraboutthequalityoftheirworkandtakestepstoacquiretheknowledgeandskillsrequiredtoimproveit”(p.190).

What are the challenges that come with this process?

Aswithanychangefromanaccustomedapproach,theuseofperformanceassessmentscancreatespecialchallenges.Firstandforemost,teacherswillneedtoreadaboutandpracticeextensivelywithvariousformsoftheseassessmentssothattheybecomecomfortablewiththem.Atthesametime,teacherswillneedtopreparetheirstudentsfortheuseoftheseassessments.Learnerswhoareusedtotraditional,teacher-centeredclassroomsmaybereluctanttoassumenewrolesandresponsibilities.Theymayalsobeskepticalthatpeerscanprovidethemwithfeedbackthatwillenhancetheirlearning.Teachersmustbesuretoexplaintherationaleforperformanceassessmentfullytolearners.Theywillalsoneedtoprovidestudentswithguidanceandinstructiononhowtoreflectontheirperformanceandevaluateitandhowtoevaluatetheirpeers’performance.Concretesuggestionsonhowtogoaboutthisareofferedthroughoutthe Handbook.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 20: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

p .28 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

Itisalsoimportanttoemphasizetheneedtocreateacooperativelearningenvironmentbeforeattemptingtouseperformanceassessments.Studentsmustbeinasupportiveenvironmentiftheyareexpectedtoreflectthoughtfullyontheirlearningprocesses.Theymustalsofeelcomfortablewithoneanothertoprovideconstructiveandhonestfeedbackontheirpeers’work.Otherwise,theywillprovideperfunctorycommentsonotherstudents’worktoavoidhurtfeelings.

Forthesereasons,itisimportanttointroducetheuseofperformanceassessmentsgradually.Notonlydoteachersneedtotaketimetobecomeaccustomedtotheseassessments;learnersalsoneedtounderstandhowtheywillbenefitfromthemandhowtheycanusethemeffectively.Theseassessmentscaneasilybeusedalongsidethemoretraditionalmeansofassessmentcommontoforeignlanguageclassrooms.Acombinationofalternativemeasuresandmoretraditionalformsofassessmentmakesitpossiblefortheteachertocomparetheresultsofthevariousapproaches,leadingtoamorecomprehensivepictureofstudents’languageperformancethaneitheralternativeortraditionalmeasuresalonewouldprovide.Toallowstudentstobecomeaccustomedtothem,theteachershouldbeginusingchecklists,scales,andrubrics(describedinasubsequentsection)toevaluatestudents’performance.Thisenablesstudentstoseetheirusemodeledandbecomeaccustomedtothem.Infact,ateachermaywishtobeginwithjustonerubric(eitherholisticoranalyticsincethesetypeslendthemselvestousewithavarietyoftasks)anduseitconsistentlyforaperiodoftimesothatstudentsbecomecomfortablewithit;otherrubriccanthenbeintroducedgradually.Oncestudentsarefamiliarwiththeuseofchecklists,scales,andrubricsforevaluation,theycanbegintoassesstheirownlearningandprovidefeedbacktotheirpeers.Alternativeassessmentsaregenerallydesignedtobeanintegralpartoranaturalculminationofasequenceoflearningactivities,buttheirusebybothteachersandstudentsrequirescarefulpreparationandshouldbeimplementedgradually.

The benefits that accompany the challenges

Changingthewaywethinkaboutassessmentsimultaneouslychangesthewaywethinkaboutteachingandthewaystudentsthinkaboutlearning(Hart,1994).Thisisperhapsoneofthegreatestbenefitstoimplementingperformanceassessment—itfocusesteachers’andstudents’attentiononlanguageuse.Studentsbecomeactiveparticipantsinassessmentactivitiesthataredesignedtorevealwhattheycandowithlanguageratherthanemphasizingtheirweaknesses.Teachersfindtheseassessmenttechniquesvaluableinhelpingthemtoaligninstructionandassessmentandemphasizingforstudentscommunicationformeaningfulpurposes. AsBaron(1991)states,“manyeducatorsbelievethatperformance-

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 21: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

NOTES

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p .2�

basedassessmentsmorecloselyrepresentthekindsofactivitiesthatwewantourstudentstobeabletoundertakeasmembersofsocietyandthatpracticingfortheassessmentimprovesthesevaluedskillsandunderstandings”(p.187).Certainlythisistrueinthecaseoflanguageclassroomswherestudentsarelearningtocommunicateinsituationssimilartothosetheywillencounterinthe“realworld.”Baron(1991)alsopointsoutthat“thereisagrowingnumberofeducatorsaroundtheworldwhobelievethatthereislittledifferencebetweenaneffectiveperformanceassessmenttaskandaneffectivecurriculumorlearningtask”(p.191).Thismeansthatmanyoftheactivitiesthatstudentsdoinacommunicative,proficiency-orientedclassroomcanbeusedasassessmenttasks,althoughyoushouldmakesuretoincludeawidevarietyoftasktypesthatreflectreallanguageuse.Alloftheactivitiesdescribedinthe Handbooklendthemselvestoperformanceassessmentbecausetheyemphasizewhatstudentscandowiththelanguage.Moreover,thetasksareaccompaniedbyadetaileddescriptionoftheassessmentproceduresandbysamplerubricsorcheckliststhatcanbeusedtoevaluatestudentperformanceonthetasks.

Thedetaileddescriptionsintherubricshelpteachersfirsttoarticulateandsecondlytointernalizeasenseofwhatconstitutesqualityofperformanceandmakesiteasierforteacherstojudgestudents’performanceconsistently.Theyalsohelpto“sell”thenotionofsubjectivityintheassessmentprocess.Themoreexplicitlyagradeorpointisdefined,themorecomfortablestudents(andteachers)willbewiththeuseofperformancetasksandassessmentsinthelanguageclassroom.

Using checklists and rubrics for assessing student performance

on various language tasks

Whereasachecklistsimplyprovidesanindicationofwhetheraspecificcriterion,characteristic,orbehaviorispresent,arubricprovidesameasureofqualityofperformanceonthebasisofestablishedcriteria.Itisimportanttomentionthatstudentsshouldbegivencopiesofthechecklistorrubricthatwillbeusedtoevaluatetheirperformanceonatask prior todoingthetaskorbeginningtheprojectsothatexpectationsaremadeclear.Teachersshouldalsodiscusstherubricswithstudentsand,ifpossible,provideexamplesofstudentworkthatcorrespondstothedifferentpointsorcriteriaonthescale.Itisalwayshelpfulforstudentstoseemodelsofworkthatwouldbe“excellent”vs.“satisfactory”vs.“belowstandard”or“inneedofimprovement.”

Checklists

Checklistsareoftenusedforobservingperformanceorbehaviorinordertokeeptrackofastudent’sprogressorworkovertime.Theycanalso

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 22: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .30 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

beusedtodeterminewhetherstudentshavemetestablishedcriteriaonatask.Belowisanexampleofaspeakingtaskandasamplechecklistthatmightbeusedtocheckwhetherstudentsmeetthecriterianeededtocompletethetasksuccessfully. TaskDescription.ForaunitonLatinosintheU.S.,studentsareexploringissuesrelatedtoLatinosinMinnesota.TheyareinstructedtomakecontactwithanativeSpanishspeakerwhohasimmigratedtoMinnesota(teacherprovidesalistofresourcesformakingcontact).Studentsaretoconductashortinterviewwiththisindividualandreportbacktotheclass.Inanoralpresentation,theyareto(1)brieflydescribetheinterviewee(gender,age,placeofbirth,occupation,etc.),(2)explainwhatbroughthim/hertoMinnesota,(3)describeatleastonechallengetheintervieweehasfacedorfacesinMinnesota,(4)describehowthisindividualmaintainsaconnectiontohis/herheritage,and(5)describeoneitemofinterestthatcameoutoftheinterview.Studentsaretoldthattheywillneedtospeakforaminimumofthreeminutesandthattheyarenottoreadtotheclassandcanonlyrefertominimalnoteswhilepresenting.Theyareadvisedtorehearse,butnottomemorize.Achecklistforassessingstudents’completionofthetaskcomponentsmightlookliketheoneinFigure2.

Notethatachecklistlikethissimplyindicateswhetherthestudentaddressedaspecificportionofthetaskintheirperformance;itdoesnotofferajudgmentofthequalityofperformance. BrownandYule(1983)suggestachecklist-typescoringmatrixforusewithinformation-gapactivities.Theintentionistoassessthespeaker’scommunicativeeffectiveness.Thefirststepistoselectorcreateaninformation-gaptaskinwhichaspeakermustdescribeorprovideinstructionstoalistener,whofollowstheinstructionsorcompletessometaskbasedonthedescription.Forexample,aspeakermustexplaintoalistenerhowtoassembleakitchenutensilhavingfivepartsorcomponents.Thelistenerhasthevariouspartsoftheutensilinfrontofhimandisrequiredtoassemblethepartsonthebasisofthespeaker’sinstructions.Thespeakermustbeseatedinsuchawaysothatshecannotseewhatthelistenerisdoing.Thespeakerbeginsbyidentifyingthefirstpart,thenthesecondpartandexplainstheirrelationshiptooneanother,orhowtheyfittogether.Shecontinuesinthismanneruntilallfivepartsareidentifiedandtheirrelationshipwithoneanotherisdescribed.Whilesuchtasksmaynotbeconsidered“authentic”inthepuresenseoftheterm,theydoelicitthekindsoflinguisticstructuresthatstudentsneedtointernalizeduringtheprocessoflanguageacquisition(Brown&Yule,1983).Achecklistforassessingthespeaker’sabilityto

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 23: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 31

communicateeffectivelyissetupasinFigure3.

Theteacherlistenstospeaker“a’s”instructionsandmarksacheckwheneversheidentifiesacomponentanddescribesitsrelationshiptoanothercomponent.Thesameprocedureisfollowedforspeaker“b,”“c,”etc.InthesamplechecklistinFigure3,speaker“b”wasabletocommunicateallinformationeffectively,whereasspeaker“a’s”performancelackedsomeimportantdetails.Inassessingcommunicativeeffectiveness,theteachermustbecarefultolistentowhatthespeakersaysandnotbeinfluencedbywhatalistenerdoesordoesnotdo.Thatis,alistenermayfigureoutataskandcompleteitwithoutnecessarilyhavingexplicitinstructionsfromthespeaker;conversely,thespeakermaydescribealloftherequiredinformationandthelistenermaynotfollowtheinstructionscorrectly.Figure3mayalsobeadaptedtoassesslisteningcomprehension,inwhichcasetheteacherwillpayattentiontowhatalistenerdoesonthebasisofwhataspeakersays.Checklistssuchastheseforassessingbothspeakers’andlisteners’performanceinaninformationgapactivityappearintheHandbookalongwiththe“MyFavoriteRecipe”task. Checklistscanbeusefulforclassroomassessmentbecausetheyareeasytoconstructanduse,andtheyaligncloselywithtasks.Theycanalsobeusedveryeffectivelyforpeerassessmentoflanguageuse.Atthesametime,theyarelimitedinthattheydonotprovideanassessmentoftherelativequalityofastudent’sperformanceonaparticulartask.

Rubrics

Incontrasttochecklists,rubricsorscalesprovideanindicationof quality ofperformanceonaparticulartask.Rubricshavereceivedmuchattentioninrecentyearsduetotheincreased

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 24: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .32 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

emphasisonperformance-basedassessment.Theyareprimarilyusedforlanguagetasksthatinvolvesomekindofproductiononthepartofthestudent,beitoralorwritten.Rubricsarecreatedonthebasisoffourdifferentscaletypes—holistic,analytic,primarytrait,andmultitrait—eachofwhichwasdevelopedoriginallyforlargescalewritingassessment.Scoringrubricsareoftenusedwithbenchmarksorexemplars—samplesthatactasstandardsagainstwhichothersamplesarejudged(Hart,1994). Holistic rubrics.Whenteachersuseholisticscalesorrubrics,theyarerespondingtolanguageperformance(writingorspeaking)asawhole.Eachscoreonaholisticscalerepresentsanoverallimpression;oneintegratedscoreisassignedtoaperformance.Theemphasisinholisticscoringisonwhatastudentdoeswellratherthanwhatheorshehasnotdonewell(White,1985).Holisticrubricscommonlyhavefourorsixpoints.Figure4showsasamplefour-pointholisticscalecreatedforthepurposesofassessingwritingperformance.

MoreexamplesofholisticrubricscanbefoundintheHandbook—see,forexample,therubricsdevelopedfor“Tic-Tac-ToeStoryGrids”and“FablesthroughComics.”Thosetwoexamplesshowholisticrubricsthathavebeenwrittentoaligncloselywiththetask.However,holisticrubricsareoftenwrittengenericallysothattheycanbeusedoverandoverwithavarietyoftasks.Holisticrubricshavetheadvantageofleadingtoefficientassessmentofstudents’writtenororalperformance,buttheydonotprovidestudentswithspecificfeedbackonaspectsoftheirperformancethatwerestrongorneedimprovement.

Holisticrubricsareoftenusedinlarge-scaleassessmentbecauseoftheirefficiencyandtheirtendencytoleadtogreaterconsistencyamongmultipleraters.Atthesametime,theycanbeusedveryeffectivelywithclassroom-basedperformancetasks. Analytic rubrics. Analyticscalesaredividedintoseparatecategoriesrepresentingdifferent

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 25: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 33

aspectsordimensionsofperformance.Eachdimensionisscoredseparately,thendimensionscoresareaddedtodetermineanoverallscore.Commonaspectsforwritingperformanceincludecontent,organization,vocabulary,grammar,andmechanics.Onascalehavingthesedifferentcategories,anessaywouldbeevaluatedbyapplyingadifferentscoretoeachcategory.Thisallowstheteachertoweighcertainaspectsmoreheavilythanothers.Forexample,contentmayhaveatotalpointrangeof30whereasmechanicsmaybeattributedatotalof10or15points. OneofthebestknownanalyticrubricsusedforwritingassessmentinthefieldofEnglishasasecondlanguage(ESL)wasdevelopedbyHugheyetal.(1983,p.140).Thisrubrichasfivecategories—content,organization,vocabulary,languageuse,andmechanics.DrawingheavilyuponcharacteristicsoftheHugheyetal.scale,TedickandKleedevelopedananalyticrubricforuseinscoringessayswrittenforanimmersionquarterforundergraduatesstudyingSpanish(Klee,Tedick,&Cohen1995).ArevisedversionoftherubricappearsinFigure5. NotethatthescaleinFigure5assignsdifferentweightstodifferentfeatures.Thisallowsateachertogivemoreemphasistocontentthantogrammarormechanics,forexample.Theoptiontoweighcharacteristicsonthescalerepresentsanadvantagetoanalyticscoring.Thedecisiontoweighcertaincriteriaornotrestswiththetask,thepurpose,andthelevelofthestudents.

Analyticrubricsalsohavetheadvantageofprovidingmoreinformationtostudentsaboutthestrengthsandweaknessesofvariousaspectsoftheirlanguageperformance.Oneofthegreatestcriticismsofanalyticscoring,however,isthatthepartsdonotnecessarilyadduptothewhole,or“thewholeisgreaterthanthesumofitsparts.”Inotherwords,providingseparatescoresfordifferentaspectsofastudent’swritingorspeakingperformancemaybeconsideredartificialinthatitdoesnotgivetheteacher

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 26: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .34 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

Figure6providesanexampleofananalyticrubricthatcanbeusedforassessingspeaking.Thisrubricdoesnotemphasizeonefeatureoveranother,butcertainlycanbeadaptedtodoso.Likeholisticrubrics,analyticrubricsareoftendesignedtobeverygenericsothattheycanbeusedwithavarietyoftasks.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 27: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 35

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 28: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .36 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

(orstudent)agoodassessmentofthe“whole”ofaperformance.Inaddition,analyticrubricsarebytheirverynaturemorecumbersomeandtime-consumingtouse.Yet,someteachersfindtheiradvantagestooutweightheirdisadvantagesbecausetheylikebeingabletoprovidestudentswithmoredetailedfeedback. Primary trait rubrics.Theprimarytraitscoringmethod(Lloyd-Jones,1977)involvespredeterminingthemaincriterionforsuccessfulperformanceonatask.The“primarytrait”isdefinedbytheteacherandvariesdependinguponthetask.Thisapproachthusinvolvesnarrowingthecriteriaforjudgingperformanceonatasktoonemaincategoryordimension.Asanexample,considerataskthatrequiresthatastudentwriteapersuasivelettertoaneditoroftheschoolnewspaper.TheprimarytraitrubricmightlooksomethingliketheoneinFigure7.

Aprimarytraitrubrichastheadvantageofallowingteachers(andstudents)tofocusononeaspectordimensionoflanguageperformance.Itisalsoarelativelyquickandeasywaytoscorewritingorspeakingperformance—especiallywhenateacherwantstoemphasizeonespecificaspectofthatperformance.Primarytraitscalesaccompanysomeofthetasksinthe Handbook,forexample“InterpretingtheMessageofaSong.”Theyarebetterrubricsforformativeassessmentratherthansummativeassessment,becausetheyarelimitedintermsoftheinformationtheyprovideaboutthestudent’sperformance. Multitrait rubrics. Amultitraitapproachtoscoringlanguageperformanceissimilartotheprimarytraitapproachbutallowsforratingperformanceonanumberofdimensions(usuallythreeorfour)ratherthanemphasizingjustone.Althoughsimilartoanalyticrubricsinthatseveralaspectsarescoredindividually,multitraitrubricsaredifferentintermsofthenatureofthedimensions,ortraits,thatmakeuptherubric.Asexplainedabove,ananalyticrubriccomprisesmoretraditionaldimensions,suchascontent,organization,andgrammar.Amultitraitrubric,incontrast,involvesdimensionsthataremorecloselyalignedwithfeaturesofthetaskusedtoelicitlanguageperformance.Forexample,inaninformation-gapspeakingtaskwherestudentsareaskedtodescribeapictureinenoughdetailforalistenertochooseitamongasetofsimilarpictures,amultitraitrubricmightbecreatedthatwouldincludedimensionssuchasqualityofdescription,fluency,andlanguagecontrol(seeFigure8).

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 29: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 37

Inthismultitraitexample,themaximumtotalscoreis12.Studentsareassignedascoreof1–4foreachofthethreecategories,andtheseareaddedtocreateatotalscore.Thealignmentofthescalewiththetaskisperhapsthegreateststrengthofthemultitraitrubric;atthesametimethisveryalignmentmakesamultitraitrubriclesstransferableforusewithothertasks.Inotherwords,itislikelythateachtimeadifferenttaskisused,adifferentrubric(oratleastoneortwodimensionsofthatrubric)willhavetobedeveloped.ThemajorityofrubricsintheHandbookareofthemultitraittype,becausetheywerecreatedtoaligncloselywiththetask.See,forexample,therubricsthataccompany“GuessWho,”“StrategicInteraction,”“Newscast,”and“MarketaMovie.”

Creating and Using Rubrics

Whilesomerubricsarecreatedinsuchawayastobegenericinscopeforusewithanynumberofwritingorspeakingtasks,itisbesttoconsiderthetaskfirstandmakesurethattherubricrepresentsagoodfitwiththetaskandyourinstructionalobjectives.Justasavarietyoftask-typesshouldbeusedinlanguageclassrooms,soshouldavarietyofrubricsandchecklistsbeusedforassessingperformanceonthosetasks.Recallthatitisimportanttoincorporatetheuseofrubricsgradually,however,soitisappropriatetobeginwithone(moregeneric)rubricandtoaddothersasthereaderandstudentsbecomemorecomfortablewiththeprocess.Creatinggoodrubricsthatlendthemselveswelltoconsistent,accurateassessmentstakespractice.Itisagoodideaforteacherstobegintocollectsamplesofrubricsthattheycanrefertoandborrowfromtodeveloptheirown.TheHandbook containsmultipleexamplesofrubricsandcheckliststoaccompanythetasksandunits.Thesecanbeadaptedtocreatenewones.

Unliketraditionalformsofassessment,whichofteninvolvemoreobjectivemethodsofscoringandgrading,performanceassessmentsandtheiraccompanyinguseofrubricsinvolvesubjectivejudgments,asexplainedabove.Thissubjectivitymakesitmorechallengingtoestablishreliability,orconsistency,inscoringandgrading.Althoughathoroughdiscussionofthenotionofreliabilityasrelatedtotheuseofrubricsusedforperformanceassessmentisbeyondthescopeofthisportionofthe

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 30: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .38 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

Handbook,afewpiecesofadvicecanbeoffered.Itisrecommendedthattheychecktheirownreliabilityinsomeway.Forexample,asstudents’writtenessaysaregraded,teacherscankeeptrackofthescoresonaseparatesheetofpaper.Afewdayslater,theteacherrandomlyselectsanumber(e.g.,five)oftheessaysandevaluatesthemagain,beingsurenottolookattheoriginalscoresassigned.Thentheteachercomparesthetwosetsofscorestoensurethats/heassignedthesameornearlythesamescoresbothtimes.Ifthetwoscoresarequitedifferent,youwillneedtoexaminetherubriccarefullyandre-evaluatetheessays.Thissameprocedurecanbefollowedforcheckingreliabilityinevaluatingstudents’oralperformanceaslongasaudioorvideorecordingsoftheperformanceareavailable.Alsokeepinmindthatfatiguecanaffectateacher’sabilitytoscorestudents’workconsistently.Itisagoodidea,therefore,tolimitthenumberofwrittenessaysororalperformancestobegradedatonesitting.Themorepracticeteachersgetwiththerubricsandthemorecomfortabletheybecomewiththeprocess,themorereliablethescoringwillbecome.Foradetaileddiscussiononreliabilityinscoring,see,forexample,Cohen(1994).

Encouraging Reflection through Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment

Ithasbeensuggestedthatgoodlanguagelearnersareawareoflanguagelearningprocesses(e.g.,Carrell,1989;Devine,1993;O’Malley&Chamot,1990;Schmidt&Frota,1986).Theyareawareofandabletoreflectontheirownandothers’languagelearningstrategiesandprogressaslanguagelearners.Reflection,asoneoftheconceptscomprisingCAPRII,hasbeendefinedaboveandhasbeenemphasizedasakeycomponentofeffectivelanguageinstruction. Secondlanguagestudentsshouldbeprovidedwithopportunitiestoengageinsystematicreflectiononaregularbasis.Reflectionrequirescommitment,time,andthewilltobeopen,flexible,andsensitive.Peopleneedtobeginwithsituationsthattheyarecomfortablewithandgraduallybuildtowardothermorerisk-takingventures.Onewaytoencouragereflectioninstudentsistoprovideopportunitiesforthemtoassesstheirownlanguageperformanceandthatofothers.

Self-Assessment

Thebenefitsofhavingstudentsassesstheirownprogresshavebeenestablishedinresearchonfirst-languageliteracyacquisitioninyoungchildren(e.g.,Brown,1988;Glazer,1992;Graves,1983;Routman,1991).Itisbelievedthatopportunitiesforself-assessmenthelpstudentstobecomeindependentlearners.Inaddition,anumberofsecondlanguagestudieshavefoundthatself-assessmentleadstoincreasedmotivationinlearners(Blanche&Merino,1989).However,studentsdonotlearntomonitororassesstheirlearningontheirown.Studentsmustbetaughtstrategiesforself-monitoringandself-assessment.Inthecaseofself-assessments,iftimeisnottakentoinstructstudentsintheiruse,theirvalidityisquestionable.BlancheandMerino(1989),inareviewofsixteenstudiesthatemployedmeasuresofself-assessment,foundthatamongthefactorsthatcanthreatenthevalidityofself-assessmentwas“thelackofcommon,validcriteriathatbothlearnersandinstructorscouldusetomakesoundjudgments”(p.325)andlearners’lackoftraininginhowtoperformthetypesofself-assessmentthathadbeenaskedofthem.Techniquesforteachingstudentsstrategiesforself-assessmentareparalleltothoseusedforteachinglearningstrategies.Detaileddescriptionsofsuchtechniquescanbefound,forexample,inO’MalleyandChamot’sbookonlearningstrategies(1990)orChamotetal.’s(1999)handbookonlearningstrategies. Self-assessmenttoolscanbeusedtoencouragestudents’reflectionontopicstheyhavestudied,vocabularytheyhavelearned,theirstudyhabits,andtheirsenseoftheiroverallstrengthsandweaknesses.BlancheandMerino(1989)furthersuggestthatstudentslatersharetheirself-assessmentswithapeerorinasmallgroup,withinstructionsthattheycomparetheir

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 31: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 3�

impressionswithothercriteriasuchastestscores,teacherevaluations,andpeers’opinions.Thiskindofpracticeisvaluableinthatithelpsstudentstobeawareoftheirlearning;inaddition,itnotonlyinformstheteacheraboutstudents’thoughtsontheirlearningandprogress,butalsoprovidestheteacherwithfeedbackaboutcoursecontentandinstruction. Self-assessmentscanalsobeusedtoallowstudentstoevaluatebothlanguageprocessesandproductsthatarespecifictothevariousmodalities.Studentscantakepartinassessmentbyevaluatingtheirownperformance(andthatoftheirpeers)onthebasisofchecklistsandrubricsthataredeveloped.Inordertoratetheirownspeakingperformance,studentswouldneedtoaudio-tapeorvideo-tapetheirperformanceandevaluateitusingarubricorchecklist.Writingcaneasilybeevaluatedwithrubrics.Weofferexamplesofself-assessmentsinthecontextofavarietyoftasksintheHandbook.See,forexample,thefinalevaluationinthe“GenderRoles”unit.

Peer Assessment

Oneofthewaysinwhichstudentsinternalizethecharacteristicsofqualityworkisbyevaluatingtheworkoftheirpeers.However,iftheyaretoofferhelpfulfeedback,studentsmusthaveaclearunderstandingofwhattheyaretolookforintheirpeers’work.Forexample,whentheyreadapeer’sessayorlistentoapresentation,shouldtheyfocusonlyongrammaticalaccuracy?content?organization?orsomethingelse?Theinstructormustexplainexpectationsclearlytothembeforetheybegin.Ifstudentsareaskedtogiveoneanotherfeedbackontheiressays,onewaytomakesuretheyunderstandwhattheyaretoevaluateisbyprovidingstudentswithasamplecompositiononanoverheadand,asagroup,determiningwhatshouldbeassessed(i.e.,howdoesonedefinegoodwriting),carryingouttheassessment,andthendetermininghowtoconveyclearlytothefictitiousstudenthowheorshecouldimprovetheessay. Studentsalsobenefitfromtheuseofrubricsorcheckliststoguidetheirassessments;theserubricscanbeprovidedbytheinstructor,oroncethestudentshavemoreexperience,theycandevelopthemthemselves.Inadditiontopeerassessmentofwriting,studentscanalsoevaluatetheirpeers’oralpresentations,roleplays,skits,ordebates.Again,itisimportantthatstudentsreceiveguidanceonwhattoevaluate.Theuseofrubricsorchecklistshelpsstudentsfocusontheaspectsthattheyshouldassess.Forpeerevaluationtoworkeffectively,thelearningenvironmentintheclassroommustbesupportive.Studentsmustfeelcomfortableandtrustoneanothertoprovidehonestandconstructivefeedback.ThetasksintheHandbookprovideavarietyofopportunitiesandsuggestionsforpeerassessment.Thecheckliststhataccompanythe“MyFavoriteRecipe”taskofferstudentstheopportunitytoassesslisteners’andspeakers’performance.Similarly,peerreviewguidelinessuchasthosethataccompany“GuessWho?”and“Let’sgotoCostaRica”askstudentstogivefeedbackoneachother’swriting. Itisabsolutelycriticaltospendtimewithstudentstopreparethemforself-assessmentandpeer-assessmentactivities.Beforeaskingstudentstoratetheirownortheirpeers’performance,teachersneedtobesurethattheyunderstandthecriteriaandhowtoapplythem.Themoreateachermodelsanddiscussestheprocess,themorestudentswillbenefitfromparticipatingintheevaluationoftheirwork.

Assessing Cultural Understanding

Inadditiontoparticipatingintheassessmentoftheirlanguageperformance,studentsneedtobeinvolvedinassessingtheirculturalunderstandingandknowledge.IntheHandbook,wehaveemphasizedthatcultureneedstobeatthecoreoflanguageinstruction.Itfollowsthatwemustalsodevisewaysofassessingstudents’culturalknowledgeandunderstanding.Wiggins(1989)andothershavearguedquiteconvincinglythatifwevaluesomething,wemustassessit,fortoneglectaconceptinassessmentistocommunicatetostudentsthattheconceptisn’t

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 32: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .40 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

important. Kramsch(1993)hassuggestedthatstudentsneedtolearnaboutthemultiplicityofperspectivesthatdefineculturalconstructs.Shearguesthatinsteadofhavingstudentssimplystatetheirinterpretationofaculturalconstruct,theyshouldbeengagedintasksthatrequirethemtoreflect an understandingofaconstruct.Forexample,studentshavebeenlearningabouttheeducationalsysteminGermany.TheirtaskistocreateavideotapeabouttheeducationalsystemintheU.S.foragroupofGermanstudentswhowillbeonanexchangeintheU.S.thefollowingyear.TheyareinstructedtocreateadescriptionoftheU.S.systemthatreflectstheirunderstandingofwhattheyhavelearnedabouttheGermansystem.Inthisway,teachersareabletotapintodeeperlevelsofcross-culturalunderstanding. Followingisanexampleofaperformancetaskcreatedforcollege-levelstudentsofFrenchthatincludesareflectionofstudents’understandingoftheFrenchconceptof“home.”Thetaskandassessmentsdescribedbelowareintendedtobeinterpretedasbothteacherandstudentassessments.Inotherwords,thetasksaredesignedinsuchawayastoallowforteacherassessmentandstudents’self-assessment.Thisdescriptionincorporatesmanyofthetechniquesandideasdiscusseduptothispoint. SuzanneCook,formerFrenchinstructorattheU.S.AirForceAcademyandPh.D.studentinSecondLanguagesandCulturesEducationattheUniversityofMinnesota,createdthisassessmentforacourseattheUniversitywhileonleavefromherpositionattheAcademy(Cook,1994).Theperformancetaskofthissummativeassessmentisintegrativeinthatitcombinesreadingcomprehension,writing,andculturalunderstanding.BeforereadingatextinFrench,studentsareinstructedtoreflectontheirbackgroundknowledgeof“theFrenchandtheirhomes”byrespondingtothefollowingquestionsinEnglish.Theyareassuredthattherearenorightorwronganswers.

1. DescribetheimageyouhaveofaFrenchhome.Whatistheimagebasedon(TV,magazines,textbooks,visittoFrance—whereinFrance?,etc.)?Inotherwords,reflectonwhatyoubelievehasledyoutoformthisimage.

2. WouldyoucharacterizetheFrenchashospitabletovisitorsintheirhomeornot?Supportyouranswer.

3. HowwouldyoudescribeAmericansintermsoftheirhospitality?Feelfreetouseyourownexperiencehere.Howdoesyourfamilydealwithguestsinyourhome?

Bybeginningtheassessmentinthisway,Cookcommunicatestostudentsthevalueofusingpre-readingstrategiessuchasactivatingpriorknowledge.Shealsogatherscriticalinformationthatmayhelpherunderstandastudent’sperformanceontheassessment.Next,studentsareinstructedtoreadanexcerptfromthebookEvidences Invisibles(Carroll,1987).Theyarepromptedwiththefollowing:

ThefollowingexcerptcomesfromthebookEvidences Invisibles,byRaymondeCarroll,aFrenchanthropologistwhoismarriedtoanAmericananthropologistandwhohaslivedintheU.S.forsome20years.ShestudiedthecommonmisunderstandingsbetweenFrenchandAmericanpeople,misunderstandingsthatareusuallyduetodifferentassumptionsabouthowoneshouldliveandthatarenotexplicitlyconsideredwhenindividualsareinteracting.Thefollowingpassagerevealssomeofthefundamentalassumptions,which,accordingtoCarroll,theFrenchgenerallyhaveaboutthehome.Readthetextcarefullyforunderstandingandwithaneyefordifferencesfromyourownconceptof“home.”

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 33: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 41

Forassessingbasiccomprehension,CookasksstudentstorespondinEnglishtosomeliteral-levelquestionsaboutthetext.Shealsoasksthattheyreflectinwriting“ontheauthorofthistextandtheimplicationthismighthaveontheinformationshepresents,inparticularonhowrepresentativeitmightbeofthewholepopulationofFrance.”Byaskingstudentstoconsiderthisinferentialquestion,Cookattemptstotapstudents’understandingthattheauthor’sinterpretationisdirectlyrelatedtoherindividualviewoftheworld,basedonherstatusandeducationallevelandthattheinformationpresentedmaynotrepresentallFrenchpeople.Sheassessesstudents’responsestothisquestionwithachecklist(seeFigure9).

Thebasiccomprehensionquestionsandcriticalthinking/inferentialquestionarefollowedbythisperformancetask:

ImagineyoujustreceivedthefollowingpostcardfromafriendwhorecentlyarrivedinLyontospendthesummerwithaFrenchfamily.Thisfriendishavingsomedifficultyunderstandingthewaysofhis/herhostfamily.Withwhatyou’velearnedfromthereadingpassage,writearesponsetoyourfriendinFrenchtohelphim/heradjust.Whatshoulds/hedodifferently?Includeinformationfromthetext(atleast3mainideas),inyourownwords,andrelateittoyourfriend’sknowledgeofthewayAmericansdothings.

ThefollowingpostcardtextispresentedinFrench,butitsEnglishtranslationisprovidedinFigure10.

Thewritingportionrepresentsanintegrativetask,wherestudentsareaskedtolinkpriorknowledge(ofAmericanhomesandhowAmericanstreatvisitorsintheirhomes)tonewknowledgegainedfromthereadingpassage.Amultitraitrubric(seeFigure11)havingthreecategoriesisusedtoassessthestudents’writingperformance.Totalscoresmayrangefrom3to12. SeveralofthetasksandunitsintheHandbookincorporateattentiontoculturalissuesintheassessmentprocess.Forexample,therubricthataccompaniesthe“Newscast”taskasksthatstudentsincorporatethetargetcultureperspectiveintheirpresentations.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 34: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .42 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

A Final Word on Performance Assessment

Thisratherlengthydiscussiononperformanceassessmentisnotintendedto

communicatetoteachersthateverysingleclassroomactivityneedstobeevaluatedinasystematicwaywithafullydevelopedrubricorchecklist.Toattempttodosowouldbeexhaustingforteachersandstudentsandwouldlimitopportunitiesforspontaneityintheclassroom.Instead,thisdiscussionisintendedtohelpteachersunderstandthecomplexityofassessinglanguageuseandtoofferthemavarietyofalternatives,somemorecomplicatedandextensivethanothers.Moreover,thetime-consumingnatureofperformanceassessmentscanrendertheminaccessible

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 35: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 43

ifateacherbelievesthats/hemustassesseverystudent’sperformanceoneveryclassroomactivity.Infact,teachersmayfinditusefulattimestoassesstheperformanceofonlyfivestudentsorsoatagiventime—suchanapproachisparticularlyimportantinthecontextoforalassessment.Thepointistodevelopanapproachthatworksforteachersandprovidesconstructivefeedbacktostudents.Theonlystipulationisthattheapproachincorporateassessmentoflanguageuseinadditiontoknowledgeaboutlanguage.WehopethatteachersfindthesamplesintheHandbookhelpfulastheydeveloptheirapproach.

Notes1 Thesynopsisofthenationalstandards(NationalStandardsforForeignLanguageEducation

Project,1996)hasbeenreprintedwithpermissionfromtheAmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguages.WeencouragereaderstopurchaseacopyoftheentireStandardsdocumentfromACTFL.Theexpandedversion,publishedin1999,providesthestandardsastheyhavebeenmodifiedforeightmodernlanguagesaswellastheclassicallanguagesandincludeexcitingexamplesofhowtheycanbeputintopractice.AnorderformisincludedalongwiththeHandbook,orcopiescanbeordereddirectlyfromACTFL(seecontactinformationintheTeachersResourcesSection).

2 PortionsofthesectiononCAPRIIhavebeenadaptedorreprintedfromTedick(1996).

3 TheseexamplesofadaptingatasktomakeitmoreauthenticappearinTedickandKlee(1998)andarereprintedherewithpermissionfromtheCenterforAppliedLinguistics.

4 WehavedrawnmuchfromtheworkoftheMinnesotaArticulationProject’sCurriculumTeamtoformthefoundationofanewprojectatCARLAentitledCoBaLTT—Content-BasedLanguageTeachingthroughTechnology.Inthisprogram,teacherslearntheprinciplesofcontent-basedlanguageinstructionandthetechnologytoolsthatcanenhancecontent-basedinstruction.Therearemanylessons,developedbyCoBaLTTparticipants,availableon-lineinadditiontoanextensiveannotatedbibliographyaboutcontent-basedinstructionandotherresources.Pleasevisitat<http://carla.acad.umn.edu/cobaltt>.

5 SignificantportionsofthesectiononPerformanceAssessmenthavebeenreprintedfromTedickandKlee(1998)withpermissionfromtheCenterforAppliedLinguistics.

6 TheForeignLanguageTestDatabase,maintainedbytheNationalCapitalLanguageResourceCenter<http://www.cal.org/nclrc>,containsmorethan140testsin63languages.Itcanbefoundat<http://www.cal.org/db/flt/flt-dir.htm>.

References

AmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguages.(1986).ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Yonkers,NY:AmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguages.

AmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguages.(1998).ACTFL performance guidelines for K-12 learners. Yonkers,NY:AmericanCouncilontheTeachingofForeignLanguages.

Arons,R.,Eckers,C.,&Jarvis,S.(1994).Characteristics of proficiency-oriented language instruction. Document

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 36: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .44 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

preparedforMinnesota’sArticulationProject,Minneapolis,MN:CenterforAdvancedResearchonLanguageAcquisition,UniversityofMinnesota.(http://acad.carla.umn.edu).

Bachman,L.F.(1990).Fundamental considerations in language testing.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Baron,J.B.(1991).SEA usage of alternative assessment: The Connecticut experience. (ERICDocumentReproductionServiceNo.ED349816)

Blanche,P.,&Merino,B.J.(1989).Self-assessmentofforeignlanguageskills:Implicationsforteachersandresearchers.Language Learning, 39, (3),313-340.

Brecht,R.D.,&Walton,A.R.(1994).Thefutureshapeoflanguagelearninginthenewworldofglobalcommunication:Consequencesforhighereducationandbeyond.InR.Donato&R.M.Terry(Eds.),Foreign language learning: The journey of a lifetime. Lincolnwood,IL:NationalTextbookCo.

Brinton,D.M.,Snow,M.A.,&Wesche,M.B.(1989). Content-based second language instruction. Boston,MA:Heinle&Heinle.

Brown,C.S.(1988).Thinkaloud:Amethodforteachingtheprocessesofcomprehension.The Reading Instruction Journal, 32, (1),13-17.

Brown,G.,&Yule,G.(1983).Teaching the spoken language.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Carrell,P.L.(1989).Metacognitiveawarenessandsecondlanguagereading. Modern Language Journal, 73, 121-133.

Carroll,R.(1987).Evidences invisibles: Américains et Français au quotidien.Paris:Seuil.

Chamot,A.U.,Barnhardt,S.,El-Dinary,P.B.,&Robbins,J,(1999).The learning strategies handbook.WhitePlains,NY:Addison-WesleyLongman.

Cohen,A.D.(1994).Assessing language ability in the classroom(2nded.).Boston,MA:Heinle&Heinle.

Cook,S.(1994,Fall).The concept of home: Assumptions not shared.Unpublishedmanuscript.Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesota.

Devine,J.(1993).Theroleofmetacognitioninsecondlanguagereadingandwriting.InJ.G.Carson&I.Leki(Eds.),Reading in the composition classroom(pp.105-127).Boston,MA:Heinle&Heinle.

Finocchiaro,M.,&Brumfit,C.(1983).The functional-notional approach.NY:OxfordUniversityPress.

Galloway,V.,&Labarca,A.(1990).Fromstudenttolearner:Style,process,andstrategy.InD.W.Birckbichler(Ed.),New perspectives and new directions in foreign language education (pp.111-158).Lincolnwood,IL:NationalTextbookCo.

Genesee,F.(1994).Integrating language and content: Lessons from immersion.EducationalPracticeReportsNo.11.NationalCenterforResearchonCulturalDiversityandSecondLanguageLearning.Washington,DC:CenterforAppliedLinguistics.(http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/ncrcds11/epr11.htm).

Glazer,S.M.(1992).Reading comprehension: Self-monitoring strategies to develop independent readers.NewYork:ScholasticProfessionalBooks.

Graves,D.H.(1983).Writing: Teachers and children at work.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.

Hart,D.(1994).Authentic assessment: A handbook for educators.Reading,MA:Addison-WesleyPublishing

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 37: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 45

Company.

Heilenman,L.K.,&Kaplan,I.M.(1985).Proficiencyinpractice:Theforeignlanguagecurriculum.InC.J.James(Ed.),Foreign language proficiency in the classroom and beyond (pp.55-77).ACTFLForeignLanguageEducationSeries,Vol.16.Lincolnwood,IL:NationalTextbookCo.

Hughey,J.B.,Wormuth,D.R.,Hartfiel,V.F.,&Jacobs,H.L.(1983).Teaching ESL composition: Principles and techniques. Rowley,MA:NewburyHouse.

Hutchinson,T.,&Waters,A.(1987).English for specific purposes: A learning centered approach. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Hymes,D.(1974).Foundation of sociolinguistics.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvania.

Johnson,D.W.,Johnson,R.T.,&Holubec,E.(1993).Cooperation in the classroom.Edina,MN:InteractionBookCompany.

Johnson,K.(1979).Communicativeapproachesandcommunicativeprocesses.InC.J.Brumfit&K.Johnson(Eds.),The communicative approach to language teaching(pp.192-205).NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Klee,C.A.,Tedick,D.J.,&Cohen,A.D.(1995,March).“Content-BasedInstructioninSpanish,French,andGermanattheUniversityofMinnesota:TheDevelopmentandEvaluationofaNewProgram.”PaperpresentedattheAmericanAssociationofAppliedLinguistics,LongBeach,CA.

Kramsch,C.(1991,May).“Towardapedagogyofcross-culturalcompetence.”Paperpresentedatthecolloquium:InterdisciplinaryPerspectivesonCultureLearningintheSecondLanguageCurriculum,UniversityofMinnesota,Minneapolis,MN.

Kramsch,C.(1993).Context and culture in language teaching.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Lloyd-Jones,R.(1977).Primarytraitscoring.InC.R.Cooper&L.Odell(Eds.),Evaluating writing(pp.33-66).Urbana,IL:NCTE.

Long,M.H.(1981).Input,interaction,andsecondlanguageacquisition.InH.Winitz(Ed.),Native language and foreign language acquisition(pp.259-278).AnnalsoftheNewYorkAcademyofSciencesNo.379.NewYork:AcademyofSciences.

Lyster,R.(1990).TheroleofanalyticlanguageteachinginFrenchimmersionprograms.Canadian Modern Language Review, 47, (1),159-176.

Lyster,R.(1998).Negotiationofform,recasts,andexplicitcorrectioninrelationtoerrortypesandlearnerrepairinimmersionclassrooms.Language Learning, 48, (2),183-218.

Met,M.(1991).Learninglanguagethroughcontent:Learningcontentthroughlanguage.Foreign Language Annals, 24, (4),281-295.

NationalStandardsinForeignLanguageEducationProject.(1996). National standards for foreign language learning: Preparing for the 21st century.Lawrence,KS:AllenPress,Inc.

Nunan,D.(1988).The learner-centered curriculum: A study in second language teaching. NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

NorthCarolinaDepartmentofPublicInstruction.(1999).Assessment, articulation, and accountability.Raleigh,NC:DepartmentofPublicInstruction.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 38: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

p .46 POL IA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t

O’Malley,J.M.,&Chamot,A.U.(1990).Learning strategies in second language acquisition. NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Routman,R.(1991).Invitations: Changing as teachers and learners K-12.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.

Schmidt,R.W.,&Frota,S.N.(1986).Developingbasicconversationalabilityinasecondlanguage:AcasestudyofanadultlearnerofPortuguese.InR.R.Day(Ed.),Talking to learn(pp.237-326).Rowley,MA:NewburyHouse.

Shohamy,E.(1985).A practical handbook in language testing for the second language teacher. Israel:ShoshanaGoldberg.

Shrum,J.L.,&Glisan,E.W.(1994).Teacher’s handbook: Contextualized language instruction. Boston,MA:Heinle&Heinle.

Snow,M.A.,&Brinton,D.M.(Eds.).(1997).The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content.WhitePlains,NY:Longman.

Snow,M.A.,Met,M.,&Genesee,F.(1989).Aconceptualframeworkfortheintegrationoflanguageandcontentinsecond/foreignlanguageeducation.TESOL Quarterly, 23, (2),201-217.

Stepthree,thePAUproject:Afterstandardsandguidelines,howdoweassessperformanceintherealworld?(2000).Foreign Language Annals, 33, (2),237,253-254.

Swender,E.,&Duncan,G.(1998).ACTFLperformanceguidelinesforK-12learners. Foreign Language Annals, 31, (4),479-491.

Tedick,D.J.(1992).Reflectionsonreflection.Elsie speaks, 3, (1),4-6.

Tedick,D.J.(1996).ReportfromthecurriculumteamofMinnesota’sArticulationProject:IntroductiontoCAPRIIandinvitationtoparticipate. Minnesota Language Review, 24, (2),28-38.

Tedick,D.J.,&Klee,C.A.(1998).Alternativeassessmentinthelanguageclassroom.InG.S.Burkart(Ed.),Modules for the professional preparation of teaching assistants in foreign languages.Washington,DC:CenterforAppliedLinguistics.

Tedick,D.J.,&Tischer,C.A.(1996).Combiningimmersionexperiencesandpedagogyforlanguageteachers:Lessonslearnedandchangesimplemented.Foreign Language Annals, 29, (3),415-427.

Tedick,D.J.,&Walker,C.L.(1994).Secondlanguageteachereducation:Theproblemsthatplagueus.Modern Language Journal, 78, (3),300-312.

Tedick,D.J.,Walker,C.L.,Lange,D.L.,Paige,M.,&Jorstad,H.L.(1993).Secondlanguageeducationintomorrow’sschools.InG.Gunterman(Ed.),Developing language teachers for a changing world (pp.43-75).ACTFLForeignLanguageEducationSeries.Lincolnwood,IL:NationalTextbookCompany.

Thompson,L.(1997).Foreign language assessment in grades K-8: An annotated bibliography of assessment instruments.McHenry,IL,andWashington,DC:DeltaSystemsandCenterforAppliedLinguistics.

Thompson,L.(2000-2001).Foreignlanguageassessment:30yearsofevolutionandchange.ERIC/CLL Newsbulletin,Winter,3-5.

VillegasRogers,C.,&Medley,Jr.,F.W.(1988).Languagewithapurpose:Usingauthenticmaterialsintheforeignlanguageclassroom.Foreign Language Annals, 21,467-478.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. See final page for full copyright information.

Page 39: Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment

POLIA : S t anda rd s , Ph i l o s oph i e s , and Con s i d e ra t i on s f o r A s s e s s smen t p . 47

White,E.(1985).Teaching and assessing writing.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Widdowson,H.G.(1978).Teaching language as communication.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Wiggins,G.(1989).Atruetest:Towardmoreauthenticandequitableassessment.Phi Delta Kappan, May, 703-704.

© 2006, Regents of the University of Minnesota. Originally published in Tedick, D.J. (Ed.). (2002). Proficiency-oriented language instruction and assessment: A curriculum handbook for teachers. CARLA Working Paper Series. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, The Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition.