assessment for learning: investigating … for learning: investigating assessment used to ... decide...
Post on 01-May-2018
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
Assessment for learning: Investigating assessment used to serve learning in an L2 classroom
ACLA/CAAL 2009 ConferenceCarleton University
Ottawa
Christian Colby-KellyMcGill University
MontrealCanada
christian.colby@mail.mcgill.ca
2
Colby-Kelly and Turner’s (2007) Definition of formative assessment
Formative assessment is defined as the process of seeking and interpreting evidence for making substantively grounded decisions or judgments about the product of a learning task in order to decide where the learners are in their learning, where they need to go and how best to get there. (p. 11)
3
Black and Wiliam (1998a) reviewed 250 studies, summarized in 8:
1. Fontana and Ferenandes (1994) 2. Whiting, Van Burgh and Tender (1995) 3. Martinez and Martinez (1992) 4. Bergan, Sladeczek, Schwarz and Smith (1991) 5. Butler (1988) 6. Schunk (1996) 7. Frederiksen and White (1997) 8. Fuchs and Fuchs (1986)
There is a body of firm evidence that formative assessment is an essential component of classroom work and that its development can raise standards of achievement. We know of no other way of raising standards for which such a strong prima facie case can be made.
Black & Wiliam (1998b p. 10).
AFL Studies in
Year General Education L2 Education
1998 Black and Wiliam (1998a, 1998b)BroadfootBrown and Hudson James and Gipps Torrance and Pryor
1999 Weeden and Winter
2000 JamesTriggs, Weeden, Winter and Broadfoot
Rea-Dickins and Gardner
2001 BlackBrookhart
Spence-BrownRea-Dickins
2002 Ross, Hogaboam-Gray and Rolheis
AFL Studies in
Year General Education L2 Education
2003 Black and WiliamBrookhart and BronowiczMcDonald and Boud
2004 Broadfoot and BlackHarlen and WinterWiliam, Lee, Harrison and Black
Cheng, Rogers, and HuLeungLeung and MohanRea-Dickins
2005 Black JamesBlack and Wiliam Jones and MorelandHarlen YoungHodgen and Marshall
BroadfootLeung
2006 Black (2006a, 2006b) Hodgen and WiliamBlack and Jones Weeden & LambertBlack et al
Rea-Dickins (2006a, 2006b)Leung and Lewkowicz
2007 BlackLeitch et al
Colby-Kelly & Turner
2008 Fautley 2008 Language Testing Research Colloquium:Carless (2008)Cheng, Yu and Andrews (2008)Davies (2008)Taveres and Hamp-Lyons (2008)
10
AFL asks learners to -
be actively involved in their own learning
appropriate the goals of assessment
carry out self and peer assessments
…and
11
AFL asks teachers to - encourage learner involvement in assessment
guide learners to understand assessment goals
provide feedback useful in learner development
adapt lesson planning in consequence of assessment outcomes
(Black & Wiliam, 1998a; 1998b; 2005; 2006)
12
Downloaded Sept. 23, 2007 from http://www.qca.org.uk/libraryAssets/media/4031_afl_principles.pdf
13
The AFL 10 principles
1. AFL should be part of effective planning of teaching and learning.
2. AFL should focus on how students learn.
3. AFL should be recognized as central to classroom practice.
4. AFL should be regarded as a key professional skill for teachers.
5. AFL should be sensitive and constructive because any assessment has an emotional impact.
6. AFL should take account of the importance of learner motivation.
7. AFL should promote commitment to learning goals and a shared understanding
of the criteria by which they are assessed.
8. Learners should receive constructive guidance about how to improve.
9. AFL develops learners’ capacity for self-assessment so that they can become
1414
AFL components Self-, peer- and teacher-assessments Scaffolding of knowledge Guided questioning techniques Teachers asking learners questions like, “What
do you think I want you to learn from this lesson?”
Learners taking much more responsibility for their learning
Diagnostic assessment component –determining where learners are, then where they are and how to go beyond in their learning
Primary research question
Do Assessment for Learning practices in classroom settings enhance the learning of specific language features?
Secondary research questionsa) Do Assessment for Learning practices enhance the learning
of a modal form in a second language classroom?
b) Does a computer assisted learning activity incorporating self-assessment enhance the learning of a modal form in a second language classroom?
c) Does a group reflective, peer-assessment knowledge construction activity enhance the learning of a modal form in a second language classroom?
d) Does a teacher-guided questioning and scaffolding formative assessment component enhance the learning of a modal form in a second language classroom?
e) Is there evidence of the Assessment Bridge when Assessment for Learning practices are employed in a second language classroom?
InstrumentsQUALITATIVE:
Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) Individual student online CM production Group concept map (CM) production (paper
and pencil) Teacher-class CM production (using acetates
and an OHP) After each step, teacher and student surveys on
their experience perceptions
Quantitative:• Pre-, post- and delayed post-
• Fill-in-the blanks tests• Essay tests• Student and teacher questionnaires
surveying their agreement with the 10 principles of AFL
MethodologyTreatment
CALL• Module including guided questioning, self-assessment• Interactive quiz with learning hints• Individual online student CM production
Group work CM • Group discussion, cooperative learning, including
peer-assessment• Co-constructed group CM production
Teacher-class CM production • Class discussion, guided questioning, knowledge
scaffolding• Co-constructed teacher-class CM production
21
PRE-TREATMENT
Teacher training session
Teacher questionnaire on AFL 10 principles
Student questionnaires on AFL 10 principles
Essay test
Fill-in-the-blanks test
22
DURING TREATMENT
English Mystery Module + survey questions on ‘usefulness’
Eng. Mystery Module access frequency data
Individual concept maps + survey questions on ‘usefulness’
Group concept maps (3 groups)
Group concept mapping observation field notes
Group concept mapping audio transcription
Class concept map
Class concept mapping observation field notes
Class concept mapping audio transcription
23
POST-TREATMENT
Student survey on treatment & learning
Teacher survey on treatment & learning
Student questionnaires on AFL 10 principles
Essay test
Fill-in-the-blanks
Piloted fill-in-the-blanks test results:Mean: 7.5/10 Mode: 8.0/10 SD: 1.45
10.009.008.007.006.005.00
VAR00001
5
4
3
2
1
0
Freq
uenc
yVAR00001
Piloted essay test results: Table 1
Frequency of obligatory contexts and correct modals in written essays Obligatory Correct Scores Scores contexts forms in ratios in percentages 2 0 0/2 0 3 0 0/03 0 4 1 1/4 25 4 0 0/4 0 5 0 0/5 0 6 0 0/6 0 7 0 0/7 0 7 5 5/7 71 9 1 1/9 11 9 9 9/9 100 10 0 0/10 0 10 0 0/10 0
© Colby-Kelly 2009 30
A Quizzical Mystery
Gap-fill exercise
Fill in all the gaps, then press”Check” to check your answers. Use the “Hint”
button to get a free letter if an answer is giving you trouble. You can also click on the “[?]” button to get a clue.
Joe [“?”] like to see that car in his parking space.
36
A Learner’s Viewpoint
This way change the way I think about how to learn. I think this way, I don’t need to spend to much time to remember how to use would and will because I had deep impress in my mind.
37
AcknowledgementsMy thanks for the help and support of Dr. Carolyn Turner, Dr. Janna Fox, Dr. Joanna White, Dr. Lise Winer and PhD Candidates Heike Neumann, Talia Isaacs, Pamela Gunning, May Tan, Beverly Baker, and Candace Ferris. Thanks also go to the administrative and technical support staff, teachers and student participants of the school involved in the study.
ReferencesAssessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning: Research-based principles of
assessment for learning to guide classroom practice. [Brochure, online]. Available : http://arg.educ.cam.ac.uk/news.html (May, 2005).
Bachman, L. (2005). Building and supporting a case for test use. Language Assessment Quarterly, (2), 1, 1-34.
Bachman, L. & Palmer, A. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, (1), 7-73.
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-144.
Brookhart, S. (2005). Research on formative classroom assessment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
Chaloub-Deville, M. (2003). Second language interaction: current perspectives and future trends. Language Testing, 20 (4), 369-383.
Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481. Genesee, F. & Upshur, J. (1996). Classroom-based evaluation in second language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cheng, L., Rogers, T. & Hu, H. (2004). ESL/EFL instructors’ classroom assessment practices: Purpose, methods, and procedures. Language Testing, 21 (3), 360- 389.
Colby-Kelly, C. & Turner, C. (June, 2006). At your service! Assessment at the service of learners and teachers. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguists and Association canadienne de linguistique appliqué/Canadian Association of Applied Linguists, Montreal, QC.
Colby-Kelly, C. & Turner, C. (2007). AFL research in the L2 classroom and evidence of usefulness: Taking formative assessment to the next level. Canadian Modern Language Review.
Cresswell, J. & Plano-Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.
Crow, C. (1974). A semantic field approach to passive vocabulary acquisition for reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, (19), 3, 497-513.
Daley, B. (2004). Using concept maps with adult students in higher education. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Concept Mapping, Pamplona, Spain.
Harlen, W. & Winter (2004). The development of assessment for learning: Learning from the case of science and mathematics. Language Testing, 21 (3), 390-408.
Hatch, E. & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual, design and statistics for applied linguistics. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Hodgen, J. & Marshall, B. (2005). Assessment for learning in English and mathematics: a comparison. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 153-176.
Johnassen, D. Howland, J. Marra, R. & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology. New Jersey: Pearson.
Leung, C. (2004). Developing formative teacher assessment: Knowledge, practice, and change. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1 (1), 19-41.
Leung, C. & Mohan, B. (2004). Teacher formative assessment and talk in classroom contexts: Assessment as discourse and assessment of discourse. Language Testing, 21 (3), 336-359.
Lynch, B. (2001). Rethinking assessment from a critical perspective. Language Testing, 18 (4), 351-371.
National Research Council, Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. (2001). Knowing what Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
McNamara, T. (2001a). Editorial: Rethinking alternative assessment. Language Testing, 18 (4), 329-332.
Poehner, M. & Lantolf, J. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9 (3), 233-265.
Rea-Dickins, P. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall: Identifying processes of classroom assessment. Language Testing, 18 (4), 429-462.
Rea-Dickins, P. (2004). Editorial: Understanding teachers as agents of assessment. Language Testing, 21(3), 249-258.
Rea-Dickins, P. & Gardener, S. (2000). Snares and silver bullets: Disentangling the construct of formative assessment. Language Testing, 17 (2), 215-243.
Triggs, P. (2000). The LEARN project: Phase 2: Developing assessment in the primary school project report. (University of Bristol Graduate School of Education CLIO Centre for Assessment Studies). Report for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. Available at: http://qca.uk/ages3-14/afl/292.html(September 2005).
top related