RUNNING HEAD: Preparing Standardized Test Through Moodle ...repository.udistrital.edu.co/bitstream/11349/15163... · national standardized test Saber 11, in the dimension of English

RUNNING HEAD: Preparing Standardized Test Through Moodle Platform.

1

Preparing Secondary Learners For Standardized Tests, Supported By Moodle

Lorena Plazas Irreño

Presented to:

Astrid Ramírez Valencia

Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas

Facultad de Ciencias y Educación

Licenciatura en Educación Básica con Énfasis en Inglés

Bogotá

2019

Preparing Standardized Test Through Moodle Platform. 2

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………4

Introduction……..…………………………………………………………...…… 6

Justification.……………………………………………………………………….8

Objectives…………………………………………..……………………………..9

Chapter 2………………………………………...……………………………….10

Theoretical framework………………..………………………………………….10

Secondary Learners…………………..…………………………………..10

Standardized test…………………………………..……………………...12

Teaching strategies………………………………..………………………15

Moodle……………..……………………………………………………..23

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)…………………...27

Chapter 3…………….……………………………………………………………30

Methodology……………………………………………………………………...30

Chapter 4………………………………………………………………………….33

Workplan………………………………………………………………………….33

Description of the material……………..…………………………………34

Description of lessons……………………….……………………………34

Learner´s Role…………………………………………………………….41

Teacher´s Role…………………………………………………………….42

Assessment………………………………………………………………..43

Population……………………………………………………………..…………..44


Chronogram……………………………………………………………………...45

Chapter 5…………………………..……………………………………………..47

Results……………………………………………………………………………47

Diagnostic test……………………………………………………………………47

Workshops………………………………………………………………………..49

Chapter 6…………..……………………………………………………………..57

Conclusions………………………………………………………………………57

Limitations…………………………………………..…………………...58

Personal Reflections Towards Project………………..………………….59

References…………………………………………………………..……………62

Annexes…………………………………………….…………………………….65

Annex 1: Consent Form………………………………………………….65

Annex 2: Guidance Guide of the Standardized Test………………….….67

Annex 3: Diagnostic Test…………………………….…………………..68

Annex 4 and 5: Workshops of statements……………….……………….72

Annex 6 y 7: Workshops of Reading Comprehension………..………….75

Annex 8: Quizlet page about of vocabulary and lexicon…………………75


Resumen

En el presente trabajo, se muestra el proceso aplicado para implementar material de

aprendizaje, como talleres, cuestionarios, foros, videos y demás, a la plataforma virtual

Moodle, apuntando a la preparación de estudiantes de grado Once, de un colegio en

Bogotá, para la prueba estandarizada Saber 11, en el área de la lengua extranjera, inglés.

Esta iniciativa surge como respuesta a la necesidad de involucrar las TICs como

herramienta en los procesos de enseñanza – aprendizaje, las cuales facilitan a los alumnos

una retroalimentación de los conocimientos previos aprendidos, por medio de tareas a

desarrollar dentro de la plataforma. Esta metodología muestra grandes beneficios al

momento de evaluar, que van desde un ahorro en tiempo para calificar y analizar datos,

hasta una diversidad de técnicas para la retroalimentación de los conocimientos y por lo

tanto, la aplicación de ellos.

Palabras clave: Aprendizaje del inglés; Plataformas virtuales; Tecnologías de la

Información y la Comunicación.


Abstract

This project presents a process of implementation of didactic material such as

workshops, questionnaires, forums, videos and others, into the virtual platform Moodle,

aiming to a training process for Eleventh-grade students from a school in Bogotá, for the

national standardized test Saber 11, in the dimension of English as a foreign language. This

proposal emerged as a response for the need of including ICT’s as tools in the learning –

teaching processes, which ease the learners have a retention and feedback about their

previous knowledge, by the application of tasks inside the platform. This methodology

illustrates great benefits regarding evaluation, represented by a decrease of the time for

assessing and analyzing data, as well as a diversity of techniques to provide and apply

feedback to the pupils.

Keywords: English language learning; ICT’s; Virtual platforms.


Introduction

The 21st century is an age which has been framed by the presence of technology; it

is in all the dimensions and practices as communities: economics, agriculture, social

studies, and obviously, education. In these times, technology has become a core instrument

to improve our teaching practices; even, it has been a need to fulfill when we develop a

session with a group of students. Additionally, technology facilitates our teaching practices,

leaving aside the thought that learning only occurs inside the classroom. Currently, we, as

teachers, are able to assign homework to the learners, trough platforms, or using

multimedia such as videos or audios to diverse our classes.

This pedagogical project addresses the use of virtual platforms to enhance the

students’ learning processes, making an emphasis on English as a Foreign Language. All

this, aiming to strengthen their knowledge to face an important standardized test in

Colombia: Saber 11. This knowledge was displayed in a platform called Moodle, and the

activities included in it consisted on reading comprehension exercises, the only component

students need to understand and complete the Saber 11 test appropriately.

This paper contains six sections. The first addresses the reasons and importance of

having developed this research topic, and the objectives of this study. The second section

illustrates the main theoretical concepts that frame this project. The third section presents

the methodology included in this study. The fourth section frames the pedagogical design

of this project, including information regarding lesson planning, population and the

chronogram. The fifth chapter shows the results of the application of English Workshops


through Moodle, and the last section presents the conclusions, limitations, pedagogical

reflections and concerns for future projects.


Chapter 1

Justification

According to Icfes, the educational dimension in which students acquire the lowest

scores in the Saber 11 test is English; for this reason, it is necessary to intervene in the

learners’ training process for standardized tests, in order to improve their skills in this area.

An important way to develop this process is through the application of virtual platforms

(Moodle, for this project) because it has many tools which facilitate students to easily

access this platform and develop activities such as videos, workshops, forums, etc,

As mentioned above, the implementation of the Moodle platform is sought as a

learning medium for the preparation of students for standardized tests. And, based on this,

teachers have the need of nourishing platforms with materials which help pupils improve

their skills (specially, reading comprehension) to face these evaluations. This process

should be carried out, considering the educational needs of students in the learning of the

English language, and the regulations established by the Ministry of Education of the

country, in terms of required knowledge and knowledge parameters within the standardized

tests in the English area.

For this reason, Moodle is a platform of great importance, due to the great variety

and versatility of resources that it offers, since these are quite flexible and manageable to

accommodate any type of teaching that is offered. It is useful as a teaching tool, allowing

from hanging the most diverse multimedia contents (notes, videos, images,), being able to

evaluate the different tasks of our students or, to carry out exams online. It is essential to


create “learning objects” or “didactic units” and to promote self-learning and cooperative

learning in the apprentices.

Therefore, it seeks to find primarily whether the use of the aforementioned online

lessons will be useful for students to prepare for standardized testing and, likewise, find

those specific aspects to be considered when implementing this type of lessons. To this end,

different tests will be designed and applied in order to measure the level of satisfaction of

the user and, thus, to determine those key elements that can affect the own use of the

mentioned lessons.

Based on the information above, this pedagogical project aims to achieve the

following objectives:

General Objective

The strengthen students’ skills in English language for standardized tests, by the

creation and implementation of a virtual class through the platform Moodle.

Specific Objectives

1. Design didactic units which contribute with the students’ learning process in English

language, to face standardized tests.

2. Detect the improvement the students acquired through the development of the

proposed activities in the platform, by using their scores in the Saber 11 test.


Chapter 2

Theoretical Framework

Designing and implementing activities and materials for an online platform is a

process in which circumstances such as the students’ English proficiency, their educational

level, the teaching and learning methodologies, the characteristics of the platform and the

students’ knowledge of it; among many others, may positively or negatively affect the

student’s meaningful learning process. This chapter will illustrate a compilation of

conceptions on the constructs that lead this study.

Secondary Learners

According to the Colombian Ministry of Education (n.d.), learners can be classified

among the following educational levels: early childhood, preschool, primary school (first to

fifth grades), basic education (sixth to ninth grades) and high – school education (tenth and

eleventh grades), considering the last as secondary learning. These apprentices have

acquired learning characteristics in different areas; in the cognitive area, they are able to

reason to solve problems and complete tasks, they have improved their decision making

skills, they have a clearer communication and are able to understand, interpret and make

opinions about literary works. And, regarding social dimension, secondary learners are able

to talk about topics such as religion, politics and sexuality, leaving aside shame and taboo.

According to Pennington (2009), in this cognitive development, most secondary learners

have achieved the formal operational stage. These students can think abstractly and need

fewer concrete examples to understand complex thought patterns. Generally, most of

secondary students share the following characteristics:


• They need to understand the purpose and relevance of instructional activities.

• They are both internally and externally motivated.

• They have self-imposed cognitive barriers, due to years of academic failure and lack

of self-confidence.

• They may have “shut down” in certain cognitive areas, and will need to learn how

to overcome these barriers to learning

• They want to establish immediate and long-term personal goals

• They want to assume individual responsibility for learning and progress toward

goals

To create a test for secondary learners, the teacher must take into account the

student’s age, the grade in which they are, their previous English knowledge, their skills,

their strengths and weaknesses. The teacher must take into account the entity that performs

the exam that, in this case, is the ICFES, it means, what to evaluate, and what its

components are. SABER 11° standardized test contains specific components; it evaluates

the communicative competence in English language, considering the guidelines provided

by the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), through reading, grammar

and lexical tasks. This is achieved through different types of questions, organized in seven

parts which consist of 45 questions. Also, the CEFR requires a series of reading

competences which are presented by this standardized test:


• Identifying keywords within the text that allow us to understand its general

meaning.

• Identifying the author’s point of view.

• Assuming a critical position in front of the author’s point of view.

• Identifying the values by other cultures, allowing to construct their interpretation of

their identity.

• Reading as a means to acquire information from different disciplines that expand

their knowledge.

• Using a variety of comprehension reading strategies, appropriated to the purpose

and type of text.

• Analyzing descriptive, narrative and argumentative texts, in order to understand the

main and specific ideas.

• Making inferences from the information in a text.

• Identifying the elements that allow to appreciate the values of the English-speaking

culture.

• Understanding a variety of informational texts from different sources.

Standardized Test

Standardized tests are used as evaluation methods that measure the particular

strengths or weaknesses of the students and a specific educational system, detect population

with educational needs, identify factors that impact the students’ learning and academic

performance, and observe changes or progress in the educational level.


Classification.

There are several types of standardized tests such as traditional tests, which allow

evaluating the level of knowledge, and the ability to achieve in a performance area;

psychometrical test, which evaluate the psyche of an individual, and capture the results

through numerical values; knowledge or skill test, which are frequently applied in the

educational or professional area, and are responsible for measuring teaching systems, based

on an individual’s capabilities. These evaluation instruments can be applied to a part of the

population (samplers) or to a whole population (census), allowing statistically analyze

contextual factors such as geographical areas, ages, gender or the socioeconomic conditions

of the participants, as well as their academic performance.

Components.

This type of tests is composed of reagents that are usually presented in a printed

booklet or digital media. All of them are based on general and specific objectives to be

achieved, and questions that measure knowledge, skills, competences, attitudes, among

others.

Objectives.

The objective of these tests is to evaluate and obtain an overview of the level and

quality of the educational systems or the participants, in such a way that the areas for

improvement and the challenges presented to the school communities point out to the

academic development in the students. Identifying the challenges, weaknesses and low

levels of knowledge in our students, teachers can reorient our pedagogical strategies, in

order that students acquire satisfactory levels of learning.


Standardized tests that are carried out around the world are managed by national,

regional and international organizations. The main ones at international level are: The

Program for the International Assessment of Students (PISA), the Study of Trends in

Mathematics and Science (TIMMS), the Adult Competencies Assessment (PIAAC), and

the Third Regional Comparative and Explanatory Study (TERCE). At the national level, we

have the National Plan for the Evaluation of Apprenticeships (PLANEA) tests in Mexico or

SABER in Colombia.

In conclusion, standardized tests attempt to identify the educational level in both

the students as individuals and the institution, aiming to design and implement strategies

which give solution and improvement in these contexts.

Teaching strategies.

According to Burges and Head. (2005), “preparing students for an examination is a

special responsibility. This is because the exam results can have a significant effect on

people’s lives and careers; exams provide access to higher levels of education and open doors

to certain professions. It is important to build variety and fun into an exam course; it is also

important to nurture the individual abilities of learners and attend their needs and concerns”.

In addition, an exam can reveal the skills and prior knowledge of a person and, at the

same time, strengthen that knowledge which serves to acquire higher levels of education.


On the other hand, Burger and Head. (2005) “teachers need to know about the exam,

once teachers know, we will be teaching an exam class; our first responsibility is to find out

as much as possible about the format and content of the exam” The aspects we need to check

are:

• How long is the exam?

• What skills are tested in the exam?

• What sorts of questions or tasks are used to test each skill?

• How many different parts are there to the exam?

• How much time is allowed for each part?

• What are the assessment criteria for each question or task?

• How is the exam marked?

• How are the results presented?

According to the aforementioned, teachers must consider the kind of exam, the skills

which are evaluated in the exam, the structure of the exam, the type of questions used there,

the level of your students, and the type of population that will take the exam. Considering

these things, this allows students to be properly evaluated, in coherence with their skills and

knowledge.

Moreover, Burger and Head (2005) state that “to become familiar with the format of

an exam, it is a good idea to work through at least one complete sample paper. The teacher

should feel comfortable with the format of the exam”.


In other words, teachers need to know the date when the exam will take place, and

(eventually) the time, location and procedural regulations; these can help the teacher to keep

track of what he / she can do, how to prepare them and be clear about the time.

As well as finding out about the exam itself, teachers need to find out as much as we

can about the students in the class and our reasons for taking the exam.

In successful exams, the teacher is likely to be someone who:

• Thinks that exam is useful and important.

• Enjoys the discipline of teaching towards an exam, and manages their own and their

students’ time effectively.

• Knows and understands the exam that he / she is teaching.

• Listens to student’s concerns and anxieties.

• Gives feedback on student performance.

Building up an exam may be long or short, depending on the type of exam and the

time available. The teacher should know how much class time is available, it is a good idea

to prepare an outline plan for the course on a one-page grid, showing the number of weeks

and skills, topics, tasks, exam components, etc., which will be the focus of each weekly work.

This allows a complete overview and makes it easier to ensure that the course structure

includes everything that has to be covered. In planning, we will want to check that the time

allowed for practicing the different language skills is fairly balanced, and that there is some

scope for recycling and reviewing previously learned skills and knowledge, as the course

progresses.


For this reason, it is appropriate to test students when this should be focused on

teaching. The kind of teaching that is required will depend on the abilities of the learners,

and the extent of the gap between their current level and the level of the exam. Finding an

appropriate balance between teaching and testing in a given class, will depend on whether it

would be described as “weak”, “average to good” or “strong”, in respect of the likelihood of

its students, reaching the level required to pass the exam that they are enrolled for.

Testing time.

Burger and Head (2005) explain that all students in exam sessions need to be tested,

at different stages of their preparation of the exam.

Pre-testing.

Pre-testing takes place either before the preparation of the test, and it commonly

happens in the first week of a term. It is a way of determining the students’ proficiency before

taking the exam.

Revision testing.

Its purpose is to check that learners can put in practice their knowledge and skills to

develop the tasks that will appear on the exam. Revision tests help familiarizing students with

the variety of tasks, as well as indicating how well they are doing.

Mock exams.

The main reason for giving a mock exam is to reduce anxiety about procedural

issues, such as how to complete a written exam in the time available (in this case, the


standardized test). It provides an experience of exam-taking which can be reviewed later,

with the students, and which allows them to identify and discuss things that might be

worrying them about the exam day.

In other words, it is important to identify the students’ level of knowledge before

the exam, as well as their abilities and difficulties towards the topics in the evaluation, in

order to strengthen the abilities and solve the difficulties.

Factors to consider when planning.

Burger and Head (2005) explain that, isolated from the exam itself, there are key

factors to consider about the students, the time available, and the access to resources such

as computers, the internet and audiovisual equipment. The following checklist may help

when thinking about who the students are, where and why they are training for the exam:

• How many students will there be in class?

• How old are the students?

• Do they share the same language and cultural background?

• Why are they preparing for the exam?

Once we have identified the students, we need to consider how much time is

available, both inside and outside class, between the beginning of the course and the exam.

The following questions may prove useful:


• How many months will the preparation of test last?

• How many hours a week will I be teaching these students?

• How much time will they have for independent study or homework?

It means, when planning the work to be done with the students, it is important to

consider the necessary time for the development of the exam.

Finally, the availability of resources, materials, and support -both for the teacher

and for the students- needs checking, as follows:

• Will students have access to computers and relevant software at school and /or at

home?

• Will they have access to internet at school and / or at home?

Currently, the development of exam training processes work in physical locations,

following a face-to-face learning and teaching methodology, but there are other alternatives

which work through virtual platforms (the topic of this research), a consideration that

implies the use of electronic devices such as computers, tablets or smartphones, as well as a

constant and solid access to internet. Making a focus on the last aspect, it is necessary to

identify if the students who take the exam preparation have the possibility to use internet at

home or only in the school and vice versa, if the school counts with a strong connection to

internet that helps the learners develop their activities without problems. Finally, when

identifying these situations, the teacher should know how to work with the students; what


methodologies to apply and how to interact with the learners, in order that they get

comfortable and motivated of training for the exam.

How to choose materials for a particular course which trains for an exam.

Burger and Head mention that an important part of course planning is the selection of

appropriate materials. Teachers have an ample variety of materials, going around the ones

we can make or print, to the ones we can find on internet.

• Multimedia materials: We can obtain resources from virtual sites. For instance, there

are significant materials from Wikis, Blogs and webpages which are oriented to

education. Additionally, videos result an important source we can use for making our

classes more didactic, considering students get attentive to an educational video,

specially, if they belong to primary school. Regarding standardized tests, teachers

have the possibility to use videos with the instructions of the test, and the content the

pupils need to pay attention to, in order to complete the questions accurately.

• Printed materials: Teachers can use guidelines or books that help apprentices

enhance their skills and understanding the structural language, such as lexical and

grammatical components. Focusing on standardized tests, teachers can use

handbooks which are specialized on the development of this type of exams, such as

the guides or booklets that facilitates the Ministry of Education (MEN) for the

preparation for the standardized test.


The Colombian Ministry of Education (2017) published the list of standardized tests

for the certification of linguistic proficiency level, and dictated other provisions, in which the

KET book has the approval for the preparation of this type of standardized exams.

Standardized Test Saber Pro 11°

According to ICFES, the standardized test SABER 11° contains specific

components; it evaluates the communicative competence in English language, taking into

account what is mentioned in the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR),

through reading, grammar and lexical tasks. This is achieved by the application of different

types of questions, organized in seven parts, which are composed by 45 questions; they

must be answered in one hour, and the learner will find on them, news, vocabulary, short

conversations, fill-in-the-gaps activities and reading comprehension exercises. Based on the

results the students get in the test, they can be located in one of the levels expressed by the

CEFR, A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2, considering A1 as the beginner level and the C2 as a

closed level to the native proficiency.

The type of questions presented in the standardized test are similar to the question’s

students find in the KET preparatory handbook. It means, in both documents, learners can

detect exercises which regard filling in the gaps, reading comprehension, multiple choice

questions, among others. However, according to MEN (2017), the questions in the Saber 11

test are designed, according to a series of parameters which involve the level of difficulty

on analysis of the text and an understanding of the answer options. Regarding the

questions, they are divided by:


1. Syntactic questions: These are focused only on pieces of language (e.g. a noun, a

verb, a connector, among others), and the learner need to identify the meaning of

that word into a section of the text.

2. Semantic questions: They look for an analysis of the text by the reader, in order to

identify the meaning of it, to answer correctly the question.

3. Pragmatic questions: This type of questions go further the only meaning of the text.

Here, the reader needs to identify complex aspects such as the author’s feelings and

other reader’s reactions. Pragmatic questions tend to be the most difficult in the

Saber 11 test. Nevertheless, the difficulty level is not only considered in the

questions, but also in the answer options. In the standardized test, answer options

are divided by four, and they depend on the complexity in the question; they are

type A, B, C and D.

• Type-A Answer: This is the easiest answer option, and test designers assign

this type of answers for short questions which do not need enough effort by

the reader.

• Type-B Answer: This kind of answers tend to be longer than the Type-A, and

they can include more difficult words, characteristic which makes more

complex for the reader to understand and identify the correct answer.

Despite of this, Type-B answers are in a pre-intermediate difficulty level.

• Type-C Answer: This type of answers is generally (but not only) presented in

semantic questions; they tend to have a medium length and use complex

words. Type-C answer requires a higher level of analysis by the reader to

identify the correct answer.


• Type-D Answers: This is the most difficult answer; Type-D answers are

presented in pragmatic and semantic questions, and they need the participant

goes beyond the personal meaning in the text. This type of answer tends to

be longer, and include specialized words, which become it into the most

“professional” answers for the learners.

It is necessary to highlight that the point of creating questions, following the

guidelines presented above, is to create complete questions at the same level. In other

words, a syntactic question has to include Type-A answers, and all of them must be at the

same level. And, for instance, pragmatic questions include Type-D answers, not a mixture

of Type-D and Type-A answers. It means, all the options must be difficult to understand.

Additionally, this type of questions is used in the Moodle platform, with some

adaptations for virtual environments. Rodriguez (2017) mentions that we find a series of

tools such as the question bank, which are used to create questionnaires or exercises with

questions such as multiple choice, false and true, short answer among others.

Moodle

When designing activities and online material for test preparation, instructors tend

to apply the task-based learning methodology. At the end of the design process, they should

be accessible to students from a computer or electronic device with the possibility to get an

internet connection. Generally, institutions have virtual classrooms (not only for English

language) which are created under the Moodle platform.


To understand more in depth how this platform works and relates to the main

objective of this project, it is necessary to study its characteristics. These are then

mentioned and analyzed below.

According to MoodleDocs (2017), this platform is a system characterized by being

integrated, unique and strong. This platform was designed with the purpose of providing

teachers and learners with a personalized learning system, based on the pedagogy of social

constructivism and cooperative learning.

The word Moodle is an acronym for Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning

Environment, which is fundamentally useful for developers and education theorists (Baños,

2007). Etxebarria et al. (2012) mentions that the Moodle platform appeared in 2002, and its

development was based on constructivist learning theories and the well-known cooperative

learning. Being a dynamic learning environment, it offers an endless number of tools for

teachers and students, who can cooperatively use them for educational purposes, in this

case, English Language Learning (ELL). The flexibility and the large number of tools

offered by the platform allow the design of English language teaching programs, with a

huge variety of activities that the learners can complete without the need of being face-to-

face with the instructor.

Questionnaires.

In data collection, an important resource for this project is the questionnaire; this

tool is useful when creating questions, in order to assess the students’ previous knowledge,

as well as the student’s proficiency level, aligned with the CEFR. In order to provide a

good kind of teaching, questionnaires become a very useful tool, because they allow to


measure the student’s knowledge, where they should start or how far they have advanced.

The different types of questions to be included, the formats to be used and the structure of

each group of questions should be understood.

“Questionnaire is considered as a written and basic means between the interviewers

and respondent; it facilitates translating the objectives and variables of the research through

a series of particular questions previously prepared, susceptible to analyze, in relation to the

problem studied” (Balestrini, 2002, p.138). This tool offers a great variety of characteristics

which allow the creation of groups of questions, and the implementation of exams for

students in test training process. These questionnaires have the option of including different

types of questions in different types of formats, as well as providing coherent results which

will be of great use for teachers who carry out action plans.

Due to its wide range of options, there is a great variety of uses which are adjusted

to the tool offered by the platform. Baños (2007) proposes the use of questionnaires for the

following functions:

They can be used in initial assessments (to have an initial idea of the degree

of knowledge and skills on the part of the students), in tests type test (with the

advantage that the questionnaire can be generated randomly and that its correction is

immediate), in Tests of curricular competence, in all possibilities of self-evaluation,

in order to facilitate to the students the monitoring of its own performance, as

instrument of reinforcement and review, etc. (Baños, 2007, p.6).

Both, self-assessments and test type tests, are evidenced in the Moodle platform

designed for the institution. Self-assessments are implemented at the end of each cycle, so


that students are aware of their own abilities. Test type tests are used to classify students at

the appropriate level, to determine if the student can continue to the next level, or to certify

the level of proficiency in E9nglish language. These questionnaires are previously

stipulated and, thanks to the adaptation allowed by the platform, they are included in

courses and used as assessments of the different levels offered.

The definition of questionnaire is limited to a tool; “it is a series of questions

relating to a subject, to obtain information” (Hurtado, 2000, p. 469). Questionnaires have

specific characteristics that allow to further improve the learning experience. Their

characteristics are presented below.

• The variety of question types

• The use of question bank

• The general configuration of questionnaires, considering their time limit, attempts

and type of data collection evaluation.

Types of questions.

These characteristics allow the creation of questionnaires with different purposes.

Concerning the types of questions, it is necessary to explain that there are Open and Closed

questions. On the first hand, open questions look for undetermined information, it means,

the answer to be obtained through open questions is varied, according to the person who

completes the questionnaire. On the other hand, closed questions aim to affirm or deny

statements, in other words, the objective of this kind of questions is to determine if the

participant agrees or disagrees about something or that person has done or has not done


something, consequently, the expected answers for this kind of questions are only YES or

NO.

Both open and closed questions, establish response categories which are divided

into:

• Spontaneous response: The interviewer does not have an expected answer by the

respondent.

• Suggested answer: The interviewer reads the questions to the respondent.

• Evaluative: The interviewer reads a scale of increasing or decreasing intensity of

response categories, which are classified by levels.

Similarly, it is quite useful to customize questionnaires, in which you can modify

the number of attempts, the time limit and the type of data collection; these aspects will

allow to vary the uses of these questionnaires, either to classify and / or evaluate according

to the modifications made.

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)

To develop this pedagogical project with the platform Moodle, it is necessary to

consider a set of requirements and demands established in the Common European

Framework of Reference (CEFR).

According to the Colombian Ministry of Education (MEN in Spanish), in the

current times, characterized by globalization, Colombia needs to develop the citizen’s

ability to manage, at least, one foreign language. In this context, the MEN formulate the

National Bilingualism Program 2004 – 2019, which includes new standards of


communicative competence in English. The CEFR was the reference to state the levels of

proficiency that students must achieve.

According to a study called “Key Data on Teaching Languages at Schools in

Europe”, carried out by the European Academic Information Network (2005), in the

educational systems of the 25 countries which compose the European Union, students

dedicate eight years, approximately, in learning a foreign language, with an hourly intensity

between five and nine hours per week, taking into consideration that they start learning at

the age of eight years. In Colombia, the students dedicate six years, approximately, in

learning a foreign language, since they are in sixth grade until the eleventh grade, starting at

the age of eleven years, three hours per week. 720 hours for studying English, along basic

and secondary education, is enough for the students reach the required competence in

English.

Importance.

The European Council (2014) lists a number of reasons that the CEFR is necessary.

These reasons are summarized as follows: it fosters and facilitates cooperation between

educational institutions in different countries; it provides a solid basis for the mutual

recognition of language certificates; and it helps students, teachers, course designers, in

examining institutions and educational administrators to situate and coordinate their efforts.

At the institutional level, the integration of curricular contents based on the CEFR is strictly

necessary, and that these contents ensure a proper learning of the language, and certify the

institution within the certification guidelines by high-quality language centers.


As CEFR becomes a vital tool for language institutions; for students, this tool plays

a very important role due to the contents it proposes. These contents will allow them to

communicate internationally, considering the cultural aspects of the language in which they

will be immersed and the everyday context in which they are.


Chapter 3

Methodology

This chapter discusses the methodology that will give development to this

pedagogical project, in order to obtain results. This section will mention the strategies and

the way in which the results will be obtained, the steps to follow and the schedule of

activities to carry out.

According to Blázquez (1994), didactic media is any resource which the teacher

plans to use in the design and development of the curriculum… to approximate or ease the

contents, mediate in the learning experiences, develop cognitive skills, give a support for

the methodological strategies and enrich the evaluation process.

According to what was previously explained, this proposal is divided in six phases:

Phase I: Problem Statement.

The ICFES recognizes that the results in the standardized test for secondary learners

were very low, and in the area with the lowest score obtained in English, the area in which it

was best for the students of the schools of calendar A, this year, was in Critical Reading with

an average score of 54.29, while English, with an average of 50.75, was the area in which

they obtained lower scores and, despite being this a country which, in 2004, a national

program of bilingualism was integrated, “in order to have citizens able to communicate in

English, in such a way that they can insert the country in the processes of universal

communication, in the global economy and in cultural openness, with internationally


comparable standards” (MEN, 2006, p.6). But the results in the ICFES test show the opposite.

As mentioned by the magazine Dinero, (25/ may/2017) Colombia is lagging behind in

bilingualism and remains within the countries with the worst scores in this area, at least, the

latest English Language Proficiency Index, produced by Education First (EF), shows that, in

2016, 72 countries were evaluated. Colombia obtained the 57th. This country obtained 48.41

points out of 100, so it remains in the group of States with insufficient performance and

management of this language.

Phase II: Documenting.

E-Learning has become a mainstream in TEFL, due to the interactive practice,

diversity, techniques and nature. The apprentices are able to access in the web, follow

sequences of instructions, in order to complete pedagogical activities and achieve learning

goals (Ally, 2002, 2004; Ritchie & Hoffman, 1997). That is why the documenting phase is

essential in the search of information related to this type of learning to, then, develop the

corresponding activities through Moodle as a diagnostic test, workshops of each of the

parties which includes the standardized test such as statements, finding news, vocabulary,

short conversations, fill-in-gaps activities, and reading comprehension exercises.

Phase III: Intervention.

It is important to nurture the platform so that secondary learners improve their level

of performance in the English area, since, in recent years there has been a low level of

punctuation in the English area and, for that reason, it is necessary to make an intervention

which allows to follow a specific program or a group of steps to help a student to improve

in an area that they need, these interventions have some important elements:


• These have an intention, that is, these are aimed to a particular deficiency.

• These are specific and formal. An intervention lasts a certain number of weeks or

months and is reviewed periodically.

• These are set up in this way so that you and the school can monitor the progress of

the student with an intervention and, the interventions are formal but can also be

flexible.

Phase IV: Monitoring the Intervention.

In the phase IV, it is necessary to make observations to the activities within the

platform and be able to analyze the effect on the students, if when nourishing the platform

there is an improvement in the student’s knowledge and the activities are relevant or not.

All this is evidenced through questionnaires, workshops, tests and other materials.

Phase V: Observation and Evaluation.

In this phase, I will evaluate the results of the activities, in order to develop any

modification, through the provision of feedback.

Phase VI: Results

In this phase, I will report the findings of the intervention. With this information, it

is possible to redesign the activities planned in the platform.


Chapter 4

Work plan

Intervention

This section will explain the work plan for training secondary learners for the

standardized tests; this, in order to obtain good results, demonstrate their knowledge and

skills evaluated by the Icfes, institution which mentioned that the results in the standardized

test for secondary learners were very low, considering English as the lowest one. For this

reason, it was necessary an intervention which contributed to strengthen their competences

for this test.

Consequently, for the proper development of the students’ preparation, it was

necessary to consider relevant aspects of the test; as the material that was evaluated, that

would be useful for the students, the research that was done about this test, its structure; the

parts which are divided, the type of questions they use and the way of answering. This project

also considered the CEFR, which gives the guidelines that evaluate the level of proficiency

in English. It was also possible to create and search for material with the same type of tasks

as reading, grammar and lexicon, and to develop the lessons given to the students.

For instance, one of the sections the standardized test contains, regards interpreting

information from signals; this part aims to inquiry about the pragmatic knowledge of the

learners, as well as allows to recognize the communicative purpose of a notice and the

place where it may appear. To do this, the student finds five signals and must decide where

he / she may read it. In each question, there are three options, A, B or C, in which the pupil

has to decide on only one of them, and mark it on the answer sheet. As previously

mentioned, students will find other kind of activities, such as reading comprehension and


fill-in-the-gaps exercises, and all these contribute that the learner’s practice and enhance

their communicative skills (reading, vocabulary, grammar).

Description of the Materials.

According to Tomlinson, materials allow the student to strengthen and develop

their skills; He defines “materials” as “everything that teachers and students use to facilitate

the learning of a language” (Tomlinson, 2012, p. 183). They can be videos, emails,

dictionaries, grammar books, readings, exercise books, etc. In other words, materials can

refer to any element that is used to increase the knowledge and experiences of the language.

Tomlinson (2011), also stated that “it is the teacher who, according to learning objectives,

proposes or elaborates the appropriate material to reach the expected goal” (p. 2011).

The Colombian National Ministry of Education (MEN in Spanish) presented the

Resolution 12730, 2017; this publishes the list of standardized tests the government

approves for measuring the students’ linguistic proficiency level, and the Key Elementary

Test (KET) has the approval for training on standardized tests. According to this statement,

this study considered using the material of this international exam, as well as other

independent sources which worked as exercises for the learners.

Description of the Lessons

The pedagogical intervention was composed by several activities which aimed to

enhance the participants’ communicative skills, and their knowledge on how to complete

standardized tests. Table 1 displays the list of activities included in the intervention, the

moment they were developed and the objective to be achieved with each one of them.


Week Main Activity Terminal objective Data to be

collected

1

Presentation –

Standardized test

To understand the procedures,

components, and evaluation

criteria of the Saber 11 test.

Summary about

Standardized tests.

2

Diagnostic test To detect the learners’

previous knowledge on

communicative skills in L2

and solving procedures of the

standardized test.

Information about

the pupils’

previous

knowledge

through an answer

sheet.

3

Workshop 1:

Statements

To prepare and strengthen

students in this type of tasks

found in the standardized test

Answers from the

statement

workshop

4

Workshop 2:

Statements

To prepare students in this

type of tasks found in the test.

Answers from the

statement

workshop

5

Reading

comprehension

Workshop 1

To improve reading

comprehension

Errors identified in

the answers of

reading

comprehension.

6

Reading

comprehension

Workshop 2

To improve reading

comprehension

Errors identified in

the answers of

reading

comprehension.

7

Forum To identify the proficiency

level of the learners through

making opinions about a

specific topic.

Students’ opinions

about a specific

topic.

8

Quizlet Workshop To detect the knowledge the

apprentices have acquired on

vocabulary and language

structure.

The scores the

Quizlet webpage

assess each

student.

Table 1: Description of the activities along the intervention.

Source: Own.


Considering the participants are minors, it was necessary to hand in a consent

form for the students’ parents, in order to receive their authorization to interact with the

learners, as well as manage and publish their products in this project (See Annex 1).

The first activity focused on providing the learners with information about the

Saber 11 test; its components, type of exercises, answer procedures, competencies to be

considered and evaluation criteria, in order that the apprentices understand how to face this

exam and, by this way, try to obtain a satisfactory score. To achieve this objective, it was

necessary to use a guidebook by MEN, which contained important and accessible data

about the Saber 11 test (See Annex 2).

The second activity consisted on a diagnostic test with questions which are similar

to the ones presented in the Saber 11 exam. This, in order to identify and analyze the

learners’ proficiency before the pedagogical intervention. This diagnostic exam was

composed by exercises regarding filling in the gaps, analyzing vocabulary and

understanding texts.

The third and fourth sessions consisted on workshops in which the learners

analyzed a series of sentences (announcements, headings or signals), to identify their

meaning. It is necessary to highlight that this is one of the components the standardized test

contains (specifically, the first part) (See Annex 4).

The next two sessions were devoted to reading. In these lessons, the learners had to

answer questions, according to a text; this can be a newspaper article, a conversation, an

opinion section or even, a cartoon. (See Annex 5).

The seventh activity took place in an online forum, in which the learners made

entries, commenting what they have learned along the intervention; their proficiency


regarding reading comprehension and development of standardized tests, as well as their

reactions towards this intervention.

The final action addressed the use of a webpage called Quizlet, which helped

reinforcing vocabulary and lexicon. In this page, the participants of the study found

exercises with basic vocabulary used by them throughout their academic lives (See Annex

8). This session aimed to identify the knowledge the apprentices have acquired in this

project.

This work plan considered two parameters, both regarding time. On the first hand,

it was necessary to take into account the time to upload the material in the platform; it must

not exceed one week, in order the students had enough time to explore the materials. And

on the other hand, the time to develop the exercises; the learners had a due date to develop

and upload the exercises with their answers. If the time for an activity was out, the link in

the platform was closed and the learners did not have the possibility to present their

progress.

It is important to explain that most of the activities, such as the diagnostic test and

some reading comprehension workshops, were developed through Moodle platform.

Nonetheless, the students had several face-to-face class sessions with the researcher, in

order to provide feedback about the exercises or check the presentation of the activities.

• The time of connection, in this time during the whole week was to connect and see

the activities of the students that were going up during the course of the week,

normally it was two hours a day and also a time of feedback of the activities that

agreed to each activity a connection time was used to rate the activities and another

time to make feedback to the students.


• Report presentation time: which was face-to-face, the report was presented at the

school and with the teacher’s approval of the activities and the development of

these, she signed the activity development control chart weekly

• Awareness time, during this time awareness was given to the students and the head

teacher of the pertinent ones of their participation and according to the activities this

was done monthly.

• Meeting time with the students: to clarify doubts and others, it was agreed with the

students in a virtual or digital way, which means we used WhatsApp and e-mail

where they could write their concerns, questions and others related to the

development of the proposed activities for the preparation of the standardized test

and uploads to Moodle.

In addition, for the development of this due intervention, an objective, a

designated task, the role of the teacher and the student’s role to fully comply with the

proposed academic purposes which prepare the students for the standardized test were

proposed for each activity. Then, for each activity, I will outline the aspects for the

development of each of these.


1. In the first orientation guidance activity.

Objectives: To contextualize the students and prepare them for the test, they should

know the guidelines and all the structure of the test to generate confidence

Designated tasks. The students had to elaborate a summary of how the ICFES was

composed, that it evaluated and others that contributed to them to understand the

exam at the time of doing it.

2. In the second activity diagnostic test

Objectives: To analyze the level of proficiency this stipulated in the performance

levels according to the score evaluated from 0 to 10 by the schools in which the

students were, thus analyzing their previous knowledge and skills.

Designated tasks: the students had to upload the answer sheet of the diagnostic test

to the enabled link in the Moodle platform.

3. In the third activity workshop of statements

Objectives: to prepare students in this type of tasks so that they are able to infer

from an image or text.


Designated task: the students will have to develop the workshop of statements to be

able to analyze how they infer from this type of tasks.

4. Fourth activity workshop of statements

Objectives: To reinforce the students in how to infer better in this type of tasks.

Designated task: students should develop more exercises related to statements.

5. The following activities are reading comprehension workshops

Objectives: to strengthen in students this series of skills and competences that help

them to understand and infer texts better.

Designated task: read the texts and readings found in the workshops and solve the

questions according to the readings.

6. Forum

Objectives: to analyze and share how to infer better and if these activities improve

reading comprehension.

Designated task: the students will have to develop the workshop of statements to be

able to analyze how they infer from this type of tasks.


7. Finally, Quizlet, vocabulary and lexicon.

Objectives: to strengthen your previous knowledge in terms of vocabulary and

lexicon, as it will help them in reading comprehension.

Designated task: perform the activities found within the quizlet page and perform the

test which reports a vocabulary acquisition score.

For the development of these activities was important the participation of

students, and the role they had during the preparation of the standardized test in

Moodle, in addition to the role of the teacher in charge of carrying out this

intervention for the proper preparation of their students for the standardized test.

Learner’s role.

The students had to be participants in each activity presented, as in the Moodle

platform as in the face-to-face sessions. They also needed to be receptors of feedback, it

means, they received corrections on the errors they made in the exercises, and what was

expected was that the apprentices retained those corrections, in order not to commit the same

errors, achieving by this way, an enhancement of their communicative skills.


Teacher’s role.

According to Serrano and Pons (2011), the construction of meaning, and the

attribution of meaning is a process that depends on the interactions between the teacher, the

students, the contents and the proposed learning objectives. For this reason, it is necessary

for the teacher to be a mediator who guides and guides the student’s learning activity,

which will allow him / her to understand the meanings of the contents and to achieve the

proposed learning goals.

In my study, I performed three functions. In the first place, I followed the

students’ progress in terms of the development of the activities that prepared them for the

standardized test. Secondly, I design sequences of lessons and activities, considering the

English level of the students and their needs. Finally, I gave advice to the students,

With respect to the procedure of the activities, make feedback to each of your interventions

in the process.

Assessment

In the intervention, the students in each activity were evaluated to analyze their

level of performance, in terms of knowledge and skills in different competences presented

in the standardized test. In each session, I provided comments on the development of this

activity which required a specific task. After that, the students had to apply those comments

in the next workshop, trying not to make the same mistakes and really demonstrate a better

performance. In addition, the learners can keep the corrections made in each composition,

to strengthen their previous knowledge, skills and competences. Each student was informed

about the evaluation system by the standardized test, which was applied in the diagnostic

test and the reading comprehension workshops. It is necessary to point out that the other


activities such as the participation in the forums and the development of reports represented

additional points. The students received their qualification score at the end of each activity,

with their respective feedback, so that they could continue with the next activity.

In terms of scoring, I considered the rating scale determined by ICFES to evaluate

the students’ artifacts. This scale is based on the description of proficiency levels by the

Common European Framework of Reference, presented in Image 1.

Image 1: Description of proficiency levels.

Source: Icfes (2014)


It is important to highlight that, to obtain 100 points in the activities presented in

this study, it was necessary to give equivalent scoring to each question. For instance, taking

into account the maximum score ICFES provides in its standardized exam, and the

diagnostic test was composed by 25 questions, I assigned a score of 4 points per each

correct answer. At the end of the intervention, all the grades that each student obtained,

were calculated to obtain an average level of performance. Finally, the students were

evaluated, following the criteria that appear below:

Prior knowledge: for this intervention should have considered the prior knowledge,

skills and competencies that students had to be able to evaluate and find the level of

performance and design activities which would strengthen their knowledge and

other skills that prepare them for the test standardized.

Knowledge of how to be: the students must develop the activities to know their

performance and their punctuation in the level of performance for this test to raise

awareness of their weaknesses and that they should strengthen in terms of

competencies in the exercises found in the standardized test, the work that the

students develop within the platform doing the activities is the way in which they

are evaluated.

Population

The target population consisted of 35 eleventh graders (20 boys and 15 girls) who

studied at a school located in Bogotá. Their ages ranged from fifteen to eighteen years old,

and these participants studied English at school two hours per week, in which the teacher


tried to implement activities in English for the development of the four communicative

skills, using all the resources that the school had. In addition to this information, the teacher

provided class time to create extra activities to train the apprentices for the standardized

test. Although I developed this intervention with all these students, only 12 of them were

selected for data collection and analysis. I made the selection of the participants after the

pedagogical intervention. I received work from very few students and some did not

participate.

Table 2 presents a chronogram of the sessions developed along the internship. The

dates and hours proposed were modified, depending on how the internship took place, and if

there were any sporadic situation. This table illustrates the time invested in the development

of the pedagogical intervention, including materials design, assessment processes, and

interaction with the students; and the time invested in the creation of this document.

DATE

DESCRIPTION HOURS

SPEND TEACHER´S ROLE STUDENTS’

ROLE PEDAGOGICAL RESEARCHER

Week

1

Observer

Design of observation´s

rubric

Usual roles as

students in the

classroom.

12

Week

2

Identification of

students’ roles in the

participant group.

12

Week

3

Data analysis 12

Week

4

Identification and

comparison between the

topics presented by the

teacher and the contents

ICFES evaluates.

12

Week

5 Activities Designer

Design, development

and presentation of the

platform.

Participants in

the presentation

of the platform.

25


Week

6

Design and creation of

spaces for developing

the activities in Moodle

and another space of

interaction.

Create a profile

and login in their

specific group

inside the web

space and create

the group of chat

to clarify ideas.

25

Week

7

Materials design Exploration of

new materials 25

Week

8

Diagnostic test Analyse the results of

the diagnostic test

Development of

the diagnostic

test

25

Week

9

Review and 1st topic

workshop about

previous knowledge

Analysis of data

collected

Development of

the 1st topic

workshop about

previous

knowledge

13

Week

10 2nd topic workshop

Analyse of 2nd topic

workshop

Develop 2nd

topic workshop 13

Week

11 3rd topic workshop

Analyse of 3rd topic

workshop

Develop 3rd

topic workshop 13

Week

12

1st Reinforcement

workshop about

evaluation topics

1st evaluation analysis of

results and feedback.

1st evaluation

about previous

workshops

13

Week

13 4th topic workshop

Analysis of 4th topic

workshop

Develop 4th

topic workshop 13

Week

14 5th topic workshop

Analysis of 5th topic

workshop

Analyse of 5th

topic workshop 13

Week

15

2nd evaluation design

about previous

workshops

2nd evaluation analysis

of results and feedback.

2nd evaluation

development

about previous

workshops

13

Week

16

2nd Reinforcement

workshop about

evaluation topics

2nd Reinforce Analysis

of results and feedback.

2nd

Reinforcement

workshop

development

12

Week

17

Application of final

evaluation Final data collection

Development of

final evaluation 12

TOTAL PRACTICE HOURS 263

*HOURS SPENT IN WRITING WORK: 121

TOTAL OF HOURS 384


Chapter 5

Data Analysis and Results.

This chapter is devoted to presenting the analysis and results of this pedagogical

intervention, whose objective was to strengthen students’ knowledge on communicative

skills and development of Saber 11 standardized test.

Results

It is necessary to remember that it was not possible to collect data from all the

participants, as explained above, and it was necessary to select only twelve students, because

they developed and uploaded the whole set of activities in the Moodle platform,

demonstrating commitment and responsibility with this study.

The main sources of information to analyze were three: The diagnostic test, in which

it was possible to identify the students’ previous knowledge; the activities, in which the

apprentices developed exercises regarding each type of questions presented in the Saber 11

test; and the official scores obtained in this standardized test. With the last data source, it was

possible to conclude the effectiveness of the development of communication workshops

through Moodle platform in pupils’ knowledge.

Diagnostic test.

The diagnostic test was composed by 25 questions regarding reading

comprehension and vocabulary. Excerpts 1 and 2 illustrate some of the answers these two

students selected, as well as their respective scores, considering the first as the lowest, and

the second the highest.


Excerpt 1: The lowest score in the diagnostic test.

Source: Learner

Excerpt 2: The highest score in the diagnostic test.

Source: Learner.

Table 3 presents the whole list of scores obtained by the twelve participants in the

diagnostic test, and Graphic 1 shows a comparison of each student’s score with the average

score of the group.

Student 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Score 68 56 32 48 60 70 64 70 68 70 44 45

Table 3: Students’ scores in the diagnostic test.

Source: Own.


Graphic 1: Comparison between students’ scores and their average score.

Source: Own.

As illustrated above, we can identify that 3 students can be placed in the A- level, 2

students in A1 level, 3 in A2 and 4 in B1. It means that, at the beginning of the intervention,

67% of the participants obtained a basic level of proficiency in English language, and 33%

is in the intermediate level of proficiency. Additionally, considering the average score of

these students is 57, we can say that 59% of the participants is over the local average.

Workshops

It is necessary to remember that this intervention included the development of

four workshops which involved similar activities to the presented in the standardized test,

and they were assessed with the same scores than ICFES does with the official exam, it

means, a score scale from 0 to 100, considering 0 as the lowest and 100 as the highest

score.

N° De estudiantes Notas

1 68

2 56

3 32

4 48

5 60

6 70

7 64

8 70

9 68

10 70

11 44

12 45 promedio

de los estudiantes 57,91

68

56

32

48

60

7064

70 68 70

44 45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

PU

NT

AJE

NIV

EL D

E D

ES

EM

PE

ÑO

N° DE ESTUDIANTES

Notas

Notas

Promedio de Notas


The first statements workshop showed that all the students obtained a score range

between 10 and 70 points, demonstrating a basic-intermediate proficiency level by the

apprentices. Excerpts 3 and 4 present two students’ evaluations and their scores.

Excerpt 3: Statement Workshop and Feedback.

Source: Student.

Excerpt 4: Statement Workshop with Answers.

Source: Student

In the first reading comprehension, the learners obtained a range score between 40

and 50 points, still demonstrating a basic reading comprehension proficiency. Excerpts 5


and 6 illustrate two samples of this workshop, with their answers provided by these pupils,

as well as their scores.

.

Excerpts 5 and 6: Samples of the reading comprehension workshop.

Source: Student.

In the second reading comprehension workshop, the students obtained a score

range between 50 to 73, showing a basic-intermediate proficiency level and, in comparison

with the previous test, the students seemed to get higher scores. Excerpts 7 and 8 show

samples of this test, with their respective scores.

Excerpt 7: Samples of the reading comprehension tests.

Source: Students.


Excerpt 7: The highest score in the reading comprehension workshop #2.

Source: Student.

Standardized test.

To conclude as previously mentioned, a diagnostic test was performed to analyze

the students' prior knowledge and weaknesses, of which a score of 57 was shown at an A1

level in order to prepare them and obtain better results. At the end of the project the results

of the standardized tests were obtained of which of the 12 students more than 70% obtained

scores higher than 70 from a range of 0 to 100 of this range of students was taken into

account as shown in the following abstract sent by the students of the results the

standardized test, showing thus improving their scores with 70 and 75 from the diagnostic

test to the standardized test.


Excerpt 8; score obtained in the standardized test in the English area.

Source: Student

Excerpt 9; score obtained in the standardized test in the English area.

Source: student.

Table 4 presents the complete list of scores obtained by the twelve participants in the

standardized test, and Graphic 2 shows a comparison of each student's score with the

group's average score.


Graphic 2. Comparison between students’ scores and their average score.

The final graph shows a comparison between the first average of scores obtained in the

diagnostic test of which was 57 and the final average of the standardized test that was 74

from a range of 0 to 100 of which evaluates the Icfes showing that they obtained better

results. results increasing 17 points in the standardized test.

75

70

76

70

76

73

70

82

78

73

70

76

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

PU

NTA

JE N

IVEL

DE

DES

EMP

EÑO

N° DE ESTUDIANTES

Notas

Nota


Promedio antes promedio después

Graphic 3. Average obtained from the scores of the diagnostic test to the standardized

test.

Finally, to conclude we can analyze with each activity carried out they were improving

their results and thus strengthening their skills and solving better the tasks found within this

test required to obtain good results.

General results

Although the results in the test presented recently and which in this project was

prepared for the students was good and during the development of the activities in Moodle

they were improving their skills and abilities with each activity, this could not be done with

all students, everyone’s participation was expected, since both parents and managers

expressed their agreement with this intervention and saw it as a benefit for all, especially

for the students because the results of this test helps them access to higher education but

some students do not see this as a goal. Also, they did not participate, since in a number of

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

average scores from diagnostic test to standardized test


times a meeting was held with the head teacher and students to seek their participation, to

achieve this, they wanted to motivate them with an appreciative note in the area of English,

they also agreed in two days to work. They did not do another meeting to implement

another method which they agreed to leave free activities for a maximum of two weeks so

that at any time available activities, which only worked so that 12 students who always

participated in all the proposed activities the desire to prepare for the test and be able to

enter higher education, they were aware of the importance and therefore decided to

participate.

.


Chapter 6

Conclusions, Limitations, Implications and Pedagogical Reflections

The purpose of this intervention was to prepare the students for the standardized test

by improving and strengthening their previous skills and making use of their prior

knowledge, through the Moodle platform. This project represented contributions in the

students that are evidenced in their linguistic competences, which allow them to have a

better performance in all the abilities of the second language, qualifying them in a good

level of performance.

Throughout the pedagogical intervention, which consisted of eight activities, tasks

based on lessons, trainees could improve their skills and competences through the

development of a variety of activities and the provision of feedback. Also, during this

process, we find a series of implications.

The results and conclusions presented above provide an important involvement, in

what refers to the current teacher. It is necessary to be aware that, as teachers, we will

always find obstacles in our work, and we must be very recursive, since many times any

method or intervention that we wish to perform some unexpected problems arise, as in this

case of this intervention, there was a very low participation and, in spite of the meetings

held with the students, they did not fulfill any of their agreements and, when citing the

parents there has been no response. I have learned that if there is no interest on the part of

the students or parents, it is difficult to participate and achieve the objectives proposed in

this intervention, and the teacher’s work is not valued. because students see this as more


work to their academic work, and think that this intervention does not affect them either in

their academic curriculum or in some kind of assessment. Unfortunately, the students are

conditioned to work for a kind of retribution. In some cases, I had to hear someone who

asked questions such as “and is there any extra grade?” or “Do we have any additional

point?” but I did not listen to anyone who asked “What are we going to learn?” or

something like this. Current students only want to have the least work as possible at the

school; they do not want to have homework or develop several workshops in one session,

and when there is an isolated person from the school, learners do not consider him/her as

someone important, as well as his/her activities. “The practitioner’s activities are optional”,

“It is not necessary to make them” or “Ok, free time” are the expressions some students

said when developing this intervention. In terms of professional level, the preparation of

material helped me to strengthen my skills and prior knowledge, to be more analytical,

reflective, and creative, and always in the search to find the best tools or methods when

necessary to obtain a good development within of the class or any proposed activity.

Limitations

Although this intervention provided positive results, I must confess that some

obstacles. It did not allow me to execute this project in freedom.

The first limitation was referring with the implementation time. In the first place,

the students proposed connection times which were possible, then this time was not

possible, so the schedule had to be changed, extending it to a week or two for the

realization of each activity, taking more time for connection and revision of tasks since

there was no fixed shipping time. However, I had the possibility to collect the data and

develop certain activities with some students.


The second limitation was related to the participation of the students and with the

development of activities proposed in the platform, of the 35 only 12 participated.

Personal reflections towards project

As a future teacher - researcher, I must say that, in the first place, this process was

wonderful for me because it helped me to analyze that faced with different obstacles, we

must be recursive and always look for the best teaching for our students and what we offer

them is with a good preparation with objectives that help the students to strengthen all their

skills that we learn from each other and seek the welfare of them as in this case that the

activities will help them prepare for this test that is so important to them for their future and

can to enter higher education something that all teachers want that our students continue to

be educated and that they are people who will contribute to society.

Second, this research was useful to analyze and learn from this in many personal,

professional and pedagogical aspects which lead us to the reflection of our work as teachers

always looking to improve and to obtain good achievements in our students and their well-

being. that everything is useful to them as in this case of the project they looked for their

best preparation so that they would obtain good results in such an important test.

Finally, It is necessary to be aware that, as teachers, we will always find obstacles in our

work, and we must be very recursive, since some unexpected problems may arise with any

method or intervention that we wish to perform, as in the case of this intervention there was

a very low participation and in spite of the meetings held with the students, they did not

fulfill any of their agreements and when citing the parents there was no response. I have


learned that if there is no interest on the part of the students or parents, it is difficult to

participate and achieve the objectives proposed for the intervention.

For this reason, communication is a very important and necessary resource to overcome all

the obstacles analyzed and mentioned previously. Using it, many aspects can be approached

to solve the presented problems. For this endeavor, it is important the participation of the

entire educational community, as it involves students and make them aware of the

objectives and the development of the intervention. It is also necessary to take into account

their opinions to have a good development of the pedagogic intervention, the support of the

directors and the parents, and their approval. They are of great help to guide students during

the development of the work. Finally, it is important to mention the role of the tutor who,

with his experience, is of great help for avoiding mistakes and for providing solutions to

problems presented during the development of the work with the students.

On the other hand, it is important to take into account if all students have the necessary

resources to the full development of the proposed activities, such as a computer for the

access and development of the proposed activities within the platform; this implies taking

into account other factors for the development of a pedagogic intervention such as the time

of the students in order to agree on consistent times of full development of activities and the

use of appropriate materials to achieve the goals planned for the intervention.

To conclude, we think that Moodle is a great tool and strategy for teaching and

therefore it is useful not only for the preparation of standardized tests but also for any sort

of English teaching, either to teach writing, reading, speaking or listening, we also analyzed

that, through the work done in the Moodle platform, it could be used to strengthen


teamwork, since many obstacles were presented in terms of entry and implementation of

activities on the platform. This situation served to analyze the importance of strengthening

teamwork, since this leads to a good development of the proposed activities and there is a

knowledge built by all students and a clear designation of the roles of each participant.

In addition, during the development of the intervention, one of the obstacles was the

development of activities and entry to the platform, one of the explanations given by the

students about they not entering to the platform to develop the activities is that the entrance

to the Moodle platform seemed very complex, and not very dynamic unlike other programs

such as Duolingo or Kahoot. It is necessary to use the tools offered by Moodle to make it

more dynamic and be recursive and develop material that is didactic to build a more

dynamic platform with games and other tools that are attractive to students. The proposal

would be to modify the Moodle program in such a way that there is more dynamism in the

activities to generate greater interest and motivation in students about English learning.


References

Burgess, Sally and Head, katie (2005). How to teach for exams. Pearson education limited.

England.

Baños, J. (2007). La Plataforma Educativa MOODLE: Creación de aulas Virtuales. Madrid:

IESSatafi (Getafe).

Bartolomé, A. (2001). Universidades en la Red. ¿Universidad presencial o virtual? En

Crítica, LII (896) pp. 34-38. Retrieved from:

http://www.lmi.ub.es/personal/bartolome/articuloshtml/bartolomeSPcritica02.pdf

Dinero.com (2017) Colombia esta rezagada en el bilinguismo [newspaper article]. Retrieved

from https://www.dinero.com/edicion-impresa/caratula/articulo/nivel-de-ingles-de-

los-colombianos-en-promedio/245716

European Council (2014). Common European Framework of reference for Languages:

Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Etxebarria, A; Garay, U. & Romero, A. (2012). Implementation of social Strategies in

Language Learning by Means of Moodle. Journal of Language Teaching and

Research. 3 (2). Pp 273-282.

García, J. (2001). Surgimiento De La Sociedad De La Información. Biblioteca Universitaria

Nueva Época. 4 (2), Pp. 77-86

Entornos Educativos. (2016). ¿Qué es Moodle?. Retrieved from

http://www.entornos.com.ar/moodle


López, C. (2011). Uso de las TIC para el Aprendizaje del Inglés en la Universidad Autónoma

de Aguascalientes. Apertura. 3 (2). Mexico: Universidad de Guadalajara. Retrieved

from http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/688/68822737007.pdf

Marsh, G.; McFadden, A. & Price, B. (2003) Blended Instruction: Adapting Conventional

Instruction for Large Classes Online. Journal of Distance Learning Administration,

(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter64/marsh64.htm

Martinez, C. & Fernandez, M. (2008). El Uso De Moodle Como Entorno Virtual De Apoyo

A La Enseñanza Presencial. La Práctica Educativa En La Sociedad De La

Información: Innovación A Través De La Investigación. Pp. 291 – 300. Retrieved

from http://www.edutic.ua.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/La-practica-

educativa_291_300-CAP25.pdf

Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2005). Al Tablero. Retrieved from

http://www.mineducacion.gov.co/1621/propertyvalue-32266.html

Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2010). Pruebas Saber. Retrieved from

http://www.mineducacion.gov.co/1759/w3-article-244735.html

Morchio, M. (2014). El Rol de las TIC en el Aula de Inglés. Congreso Iberoamericano de

Ciencia, Tecnología, Innovación y Educación. Argentina. Retrieved from

www.oei.es/historico/congreso2014/memoriactei/753.pdf

MoodleDocs. (2017). Acerca de Moodle. Retrieved from

https://docs.moodle.org/all/es/Acerca_de_Moodle

Salinas, J. (1999). ¿Qué Se Entiende Por Una Institución De Educación Superior Flexible?.

Congreso Edutec 99. En La Formación Flexible Y A Distancia. Sevilla. Retrieved

from http://tecnologiaedu.us.es/bibliovir/pdf/gte35.pdf


Tomei, A. (2003). Challenges of Teaching with Technology Across the Curriculum: Issues

and Solutions. London: Information Science Publishing.


Annexes

Annex 1: Consent Form

Colegio Heladia Mejia I.E.D

Dios, ciencia, juventud

Bogotá, marzo de 2016.

Respetado (a) padres de familia o acudiente.

Reciba un cordial saludo.

La presente es para informarle por parte de las directivas del colegio Heladia Mejia que se

realizara el siguiente proyecto con los estudiantes de grado 11 de la mañana para la

preparación de la prueba estandarizada saber 11 , el cual será realizado y guiado por la

estudiante Lorena Plazas Irreño, estudiante de noveno semestre de Licenciatura en Educación

Básica con Énfasis en Inglés de la Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas y quien

actualmente se encuentra desarrollando su proyecto de grado en modalidad pasantía con el

proyecto anteriormente mencionado dentro del cual se encuentra su hijo (a). Como él (ella)

es menor de edad, me remito a usted para solicitarle autorización para recopilar material

fílmico, auditivo y escrito, por parte de su hijo (a).


Este material será analizado y presentado ante el profesorado de la carrera y universidad

anteriormente mencionadas. Cabe aclarar que este material no será publicado en ninguna red

social ni en canales de videos por internet; el material recopilado tiene fines estrictamente

académicos.

__________________________ __________________________

Nombre del (la) estudiante Firma padre, madre de familia o acudiente.

Agradezco su atención y colaboración prestadas al desarrollo de este proyecto.

Cordialmente,

RECTORIA ACADEMICA

Firma rectora


Annex 2: Guidance Guide Of The Standardized Test.


Annex 3: Sample of the Diagnostic Test





Annex 4: Sample of Workshop: Statements

Name: last name:

EXAM SKILLS

Which notice (A-H) is according to (1-9)

1. Pay less than usual at this restaurant.

2. You can get a meal here at any time.

3. You do not need to cook these.

4. You must pay for your meal in cash.

5. You can get a job here.


Annex 5: Sample of the Reading Comprehension Workshop.

1. There is enough space in the castle for the whole family.

A Right B Wrong C Doesn´t say.

2. It´s possible to get lost in the castle.

A Right B Wrong C Doesn´t say

3. There is no heating in the castle.


4. Gabriel enjoys being outside in the garden.


5. Gabriel takes a bus to school


6. There isn´t a TV at the castle.



Reading

Complete the five conversations.

Choose A, B OR C for questions 1-5.

Example:

1. Can you book a tennis court for next

Wednesday?

A. Which day shall we play?

B. What time do you want to play?

C. What sports can you play?

2. Why not play football with us this evening?

A. You´ve got enough strikers!

B. The stadium opens at 7.00.

C. I usually win all my races.

3. I really hate going fishing!

A. I didn´t catch anything.

B. I agree. It´s so boring.

C. I feel like doing that as well.

4. Snowboarding´s more fun that skiing.

A. How are your new skis?

B. Where is it?

C. Why do you say that?

5. Who´s playing in goal today?

A. Their new Norwegian Keeper?

B. There are three at the back.

C. They are a very good idea.


Annex 6: Sample Of The Quizlet Page About Vocabulary And Lexicon.

Documents

RUNNING HEAD: Preparing Standardized Test Through Moodle ...repository.udistrital.edu.co/bitstream/11349/15163... · national standardized test Saber 11, in the dimension of English