Assessment

Did you know that WestEd and the Understanding Language initiative at Stanford University collaborated to develop a new set of English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)? The standards correspond to the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards, and address language progressions of ELs, with five ELP levels. For each of the ELP standards that the authors developed, they address the question, “What might an ELL's language use look like at each ELP level as he or she progresses toward independent participation in grade-appropriate activities?” Have a look at the document here.

Resource

Council of Chief State School Officers. (2014, April.) English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards with Correspondences to K–12 Practices and Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/Final%204_30%20ELPA21%20Standards(1).pdf

Related to the implementation of the new Standards such as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) or the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), states will now also revisit the need for ELP standards and assessments.

Recently, 11 states formed the English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21^st Century (ELPA21) consortium to develop better systems of assessment to measure students’ English proficiency (reading, writing, listening and speaking) in relation to ELP standards and the framework of the CCSS and NGSS.

ELPA21 is developing innovative new screening tests and a summative assessment, both of which are implemented via computer assessment, in order to better identify the specific ability of each EL student and to better measure each student’s abilities against the ELP standards and the content-area standards of the CCSS and NGSS.

To check out some of the new innovations coming out of the ELPA21 watch this shot 5-minute video clip.  

Or for further information about the new proposed testing and assessment measures of the ELPA21 check out their website. 

Resource

Valdés, G., Kibler, A.,  Walqui, A. (2014). Changes in the expertise of ESL professionals: Knowledge and action in an era of new standards. TESOL Journal. Accessed on http://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/papers-and-briefs/professional-paper-26-march-2014.pdf?sfvrsn=2 

Have you heard of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium?

The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium is one of two main multistate summative assessment consortia developing next-generation assessments that measure student progress towards college and career readiness aligned with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium is made up of 23 U.S. States/Territories (CA, CT, DE, HI, ID, IA, ME, MI, MO, MT, NV, NH, NC, ND, OR, PA, SD, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY, and the U.S. Virgin Islands). The assessments currently under development will be administered to all students, including English learners, as well as students with disabilities, starting this spring. 

One new characteristic of the Smarter Balanced Assessment System is that they will be including computer adaptive tests. This means that the difficulty level of the questions a student receives will shift based on the student’s responses, which is intended to result in a more well-rounded snapshot of the student’s levels of knowledge, skills, and abilities. For English learners and students with disabilities, the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium has also developed “a common accommodation system to reduce or eliminate variations across States”.

 For more information on the creation of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and what the tests will look like, check out this edu@scholastic interview with Jaqueline King, Ph.D., the Director of Higher Education Collaboration at the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.

Resources

Abedi, J. & Ewers, N. (2013, February). Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium: Accommodations for English Language Learners and Students with Disabilities: A Research-Based Decision Algorithm. 

Did you know that 31 states across the U.S. currently have laws or amendments on the books that establish English as their official language in some form?  While some states such as Alaska and Hawaii have it as one of several official languages, other states, such as Arizona, Tennessee, Massachusetts, and Arkansas, have taken more forceful stances on the use of language in public life, including prohibiting the use of other languages in public education or banning bilingual education (California recently repealed its law prohibiting bilingual education).

While many states take varying stances on English as an official language or the role of English in the classroom, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) charges states to develop native language assessments for EL students.

While some states are diving deep to identify and implement new and existing supports, other states have taken few, if any, steps to do so.

Resources

For more information on English-only education policy and some of the approaches states have taken toward native language assessment, check out this article from New America.

As the school year winds down, the months of March through May are often filled with end-of-year exams, standardized testing, and final classroom-based assessments. While the end of the school year can be exciting for students, it may also bring stress and anxiety as students face assessments and final coursework. These end-of-year assessments can be especially nerve-wracking for EL students, who may face additional challenges with assessment language, and whose command of language might impact their results.  Fortunately, there are several ways for classroom instructors to help students—especially English learners—to manage stress during the end-of-year assessment season.

For a look at 6 “brain-compatible” strategies to help students address their concerns about testing, check out this article from Edutopia.

While you may be very familiar with assessment formats such as the closed-question or essay, another helpful approach to formative assessment is graphic organizers.

Using visual frameworks and graphic organizers in your classroom can be powerful assessment tools (Ewy, 2002; Hyerle, 1996). These kinds of visual formats can be especially useful in the assessment of EL students because they allow students to show their content knowledge in a less intimidating format than an essay or short answer, which may require more mastery in English language skills.

It is important however, as with any assessments, that students be familiar with the concept, design, and function of a graphic organizer. In other words, teachers should model for students how to use graphic organizers and the process for completing them.

Whether it is Venn diagrams, T-charts, Cycles, cause and effect outlining, semantic webs, or another type of visual or graphic tool, remember that these can be a great resource for assessing what students know!

Need some ideas on how to get started? Check out this article about how graphic organizers can be used as assessment tools in the classroom!

Also, here is a sample lesson in which reading comprehension is assessed using graphic organizers!

Resources: 

Ewy, C.A. (2002). Teaching with visual frameworks: Focused learning and achievement through instructional graphics co-created by students and teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. 

Hyerle, D. (1996). Visual tools for constructing knowledge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 

Over the past several weeks we have focused on assessments for English learners, and in particular, the role of informal assessments for tracking students’ progress, differentiating students’ instructional needs, and improving teachers’ understanding of lesson clarity.

When thinking about assessments for EL students, it is important to remember that they may have difficulty conveying content knowledge and comprehension in English—especially when assessments require students to read and respond to items that use specific and unique forms of questions, texts, and vocabulary.

Content assessments for EL students are most successful when they integrate a variety of ways for students to demonstrate their understanding of classroom content (Herrell & Jordan, 2012, p. 7) without heavy reliance on the target language. Assessments should be measurable and easily documented.   

A great resource for your classroom planning is this article from Colorín Colorado, which highlights three informal assessment strategies (performance-based, portfolio, and content area assessment) and also includes some great ideas for differentiation and tools for making assessments more accessible for ELs.  

In the context of today’s schools’ heavy reliance on mainstream, summative assessments, attention to formative assessment may be challenging or overlooked by new and experienced teachers alike! But formative assessment doesn’t need to be scary—in fact, there are many ways to make formative assessments enjoyable for both teachers and their students! Interactive, ongoing, classroom-based assessments also provide EL students with opportunities to review material, learn from classmates, and ask questions follow-up questions.

 One fun formative assessment activity is the Stock Market Game (Echevarría, Vogt, & Short, 2010a, 2010b, 2013 p. 223). The Stock Market Game could be used either at the beginning or end of a lesson as a preview or check for comprehension.

Try the Stock Market Game as a formative assessment integrated into your next lesson!

 Stock Market Game 

Materials: Play money in several denominations (e.g. $10, $20, $50, $100… etc. For this you can use monopoly money or you can create money specific to your classroom)

1)  Before beginning the game, the teacher should develop content questions (be sure to integrate questions that will also be included on the final test or quiz) to also preview the summative assessment. Teachers should prepare enough content-based questions so that the majority of the game is related to the unit (roughly 10-15 questions).

2)   Teachers should also develop several other “common knowledge” or trivia questions to serve as fillers for the game that help with maintaining students’ engagement. These might be questions about pop culture, local/state facts, school trivia, etc. Make sure, however, to choose grade-level appropriate trivia and offer a variety of topics as additional questions so students are not disadvantaged by lack of knowledge of topic areas (i.e. ELs are not disadvantaged by lack of knowledge of American pop culture).  

3)  Place students into heterogeneous groups of 3-5, mixing skill levels, language proficiency levels, language backgrounds, etc.

4)   Each group should receive a two-column answer sheet.  One column will be used to write down students’ “wager” or “investment” and the other column will be used to write down their response to the question.

5)   Each group should receive a starting monetary amount (e.g. $25 dollars, but it depends on how much each question is worth).

6)   As the game starts, a student representing each group writes down an investment in the first column before each question is asked. Echevarría, Vogt and Short (2010a, 2010b) suggest not allowing students to risk more than 50% of what they have in their “bank” to avoid any groups going broke and being unable to continue with the game.

7)    Once each group’s representative has written down an investment on its worksheet, the teacher should read a question (either content-related or trivia) out loud to the class. To make the game and its language more accessible for all learners, also project the question and pictures that correspond to its content for the whole class.

8)    Once the question has been asked, allow students a few moments to write down each group’s response. Once all groups have written down their answers in column two of the worksheet, the teacher should circulate the class to identify right and wrong answers. If groups have answered correctly the teacher, or the “bank,” pays the group the amount they wagered. If the group’s response is incorrect, the bank takes the investment amount.

9)   Throughout the game, teachers should continue this process alternating between content-related and trivia questions. Students should not know questions’ categories prior to the teacher’s asking them. If answers to content-related questions are frequently incorrect, teachers will know that lesson review is necessary.

10) Try to keep everyone in the game—remember that the goal is for the teacher to identify comprehension levels and determine levels of preparation for the summative assessment. If groups are falling behind, teachers might switch to a few easier questions everyone should be able to answer correctly, or if a group falls too far behind, slip it some money as a loan or a bonus.

 11) The last question in the game should be content-related and set up similarly to a final Jeopardy question. For this last question, the 50% wager rule is lifted so groups can invest all or some of their total earnings in the question. In the end, the group with the most money becomes the winner for that day’s stock market.

12) Be sure to collect groups’ response sheets for later use in developing review materials and to inform your knowledge of students’ comprehension levels.

Try it out in your classroom! Not only is this a great tool for formative assessment, students will also find it fun! 

According to Noyce and Hickey formative assessment is “the process of monitoring student knowledge and understanding during instruction in order to give useful feedback and make timely changes in instruction to ensure maximal student growth.” Formative assessment is an important approach for continuously monitoring students’ progress and adapting curriculum and instruction to ensure that it corresponds appropriately with students’ knowledge and skills.

Formative assessment with EL students is particularly important when implementing lessons and units modified for English learners. English learners enter the classroom with a wide range of language skills, content and background knowledge, and prior experiences, which will impact their learning and comprehension of new language and content. Integrating formative assessment in your lessons will help to identify the needs of your students in order to make informed and meaningful adjustments to lessons, whether through inclusion of additional language supports, opportunities to enrich students’ background knowledge, or providing further explanations of activities that cater to different learning styles.

A resource for both teachers and administrators is the IDEAL Formative Assessment Rating Tool (page 5 of pdf) developed by the WIDAconsortium.  This resource provides teachers and administrators with a survey to assess how formative assessments are being used within a classroom or school, how they are being used to respond to standards, and how they are being used to respond to student learning. 

The IDEAL Tool is a great place to start thinking about the role and the use of formative assessment in your classroom and school!

Similar to oral language development, EL literacy development is often viewed within the context of a developmental continuum where students pass through a number of established stages as they work towards language proficiency. However not all EL students will start or pass through these stages at the same time, EL literacy development is highly influenced by their oral language and vocabulary development, native language experiences, and their past experience with literacy instruction.

Formative assessment is critical to monitoring the progression of students’ literacy development from one stage to another. Formative assessment (both formal and informal) allows instructors the opportunity to meet students along their pathway towards proficiency and provide the structure and scaffolding tools necessary to assist with skill development.

Formative assessment measures can come in a variety of forms. One recent article form the International Literacy Association suggested that instructors should approach literacy instruction as a miner, someone who is working to uncover where students are at individually, how they read, and their individual reading processes and skills. For a closer look at how becoming a miner can help you empower your students check out this great article!

 Resources

Gottleib, M. (2006). Assessing English Language Learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 

Within the field of formative assessment research, several studies have started focusing on how using formative assessment instructional strategies in the classroom might not only help the instructor monitor, gauge, and support learning and teaching, but also help students reinforce and develop the skills necessary for self-regulated learning. In these contexts, self-regulated learners are defined as students who actively work to construct and “set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition”. Since formative assessment relies upon both internal and external feedback, the questions and demands of formative assessment strategies can help students reinforce critical learning processes and strategies to navigate presented content. Finally, studies have demonstrated that formative assessment strategies enhance student motivation and achievement, because students must engage with the material through complex meta-cognitive processes but within an approach that is designed to encourage responsive instruction and a supportive learning environment.

Resources

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.

Bose, J., & Rengel, Z. (2009). A model formative assessment strategy to promote student-centered self-regulated learning in higher education. US-China Education Review, 6(12), 29–35.

Cauley, M. C., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). FA techniques to support student motivation and achievement. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(1), 1–6.

Clark, I. (2011). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), p205-249. 

Irving, K. (2007). Teaching science in the 21st century: Formative assessment improves student learning. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/publications/news/story.aspx?id=53559

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

Pintrich, P. R., & Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 250–284). San Diego: Academic Press.

Research suggests that in order for assessment systems to be fair for all students, multiple forms of questions should be integrated, therefore providing multiple opportunities for students from a range of backgrounds to demonstrate knowledge and comprehension.

This kind of approach is especially important for particular sub-groups of students, including English learners. In a recent publication from Young, Pitoniak, King & Ayad and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortia, the authors suggest several ways to develop tests that are more accessible for EL students. They offer a variety of suggestions on how different types and forms of questions might benefit or hinder comprehension for English learners.  

For another look at what guidelines and supports the new Smarter Balanced Assessment has in place for ELs check out this blog post from Colorín Colorado.

Next week we will turn to look at the other multi-state assessment consortium, PARCC, including how it developed and its implications for EL and non-EL students alike.    

Resources

Kopriva, R. (2010, September). Building on student strengths or how to test ELs against challenging math (and science) standards when they don’t have the English yet. Common Core State Standards Implementation Conference.  

Another multi-state consortium developing assessments that measure students’ academic progress aligned with the Common Core is the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC).

PARCC includes Arkansas, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, and Rhode Island. Pennsylvania has also participated in the development of the PARCC assessment system, but has not yet committed to its adoption.

The PARCC test system contains fully fixed-form, computer-based assessments comprised of both performance-based, as well as end-of-year assessments, and also includes optional diagnostic and mid-year assessments.

The PARCC test development team has also identified tools and accommodations to improve its accessibility for EL students, including, for example: English/Native Language Dictionaries, scribe or speech-to-text options, and increased time for test completion. For an overview of the accessibility features and accommodations associated with PARCC, check out this guide.

For some sample questions and readings from the PARCC assessments and ideas on how to best prepare EL students for the exams, take a look at this blog from Colorín Colorado.  

Formative assessment has been described as the process of “monitoring student knowledge and understanding instruction in order to give useful feedback and make timely changes in instruction to ensure maximal student growth”. In studies such as Alvarez, et al., researchers have suggested that formative assessment may be even more valuable to promoted English learners’ language and academic development. Formative assessment itself involves a continual processes of gauging learning and adjusting instruction—activities that are themselves forms of differentiation, adaptation, and modification—as we would also see in sheltered instruction.

With regard to summative assessments, recent research has suggested that using systematically selected accommodations for EL students can significantly improve performance on those assessments.   

For a more in-depth look at what formative assessment is and a more detailed look at the discussion and research behind the development and implementation of formative assessment for ELs in the context of the Common Core State Standards check out this article by Alvarez et al..

Resources

Kopriva, R.J., Emick, J.E., Hipolito-Delgado, C.P., & Cameron, C.A. (2007). Do proper accommodation assignments make a difference? Examining the impact of improved decision making on scores for English language learners. Educational Measurement Issues and Practice, 26(3), 11-20.

Noyce, P.E., & Hickey, D.T. (Eds.). (2011). New frontiers in formative assessment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. 

When considering the use of assessments, especially with regard to EL students, it is important to acknowledge the difference between academic language proficiency and academic achievement (Gottlieb, 2006). Academic language proficiency focuses on the ability of the student to use the four language domains in English to convey and understand messages and ideas. Gottlieb (2006) suggests that academic language proficiency can be broken down further into three criteria:

1)   Comprehension of material, and the use of technical aspects of the content lesson, such as specialized vocabulary, language or grammatical patterns, or elevated structure associated with the presented content material.

2)   Linguistic complexity, or command of register, sentence length and complexity, structure and organization of the thought, response or idea, and level of ability to fluidly transition between different domains for interaction (e.g. writing and oral).

3)   Competence of the phonology, syntax and semantics of the used language.

Academic achievement, on the other hand, focuses on the content knowledge and skill sets students are required to know. For example, while academic language proficiency would require students to be able to structure or model correct language for asking questions and making statements in the target language (e.g. “The French Revolution was… The French Revolution began in… etc.”), academic achievement would involve students’ correct content-based answers to the questions.

It is important for teachers to carefully consider the distinction between academic achievement and academic language proficiency because doing so will further promote the development of lessons aligned to language objectives that directly address the needs of the students and the language skills required to be successful in a lesson.

Resource: 

Gottlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

What policies, practices, and procedures does your state, district, or school have in place for accurately assessing the progress of EL students, especially in the mainstream classroom?

Despite the diversity of EL students (in terms of culture, socioeconomic status, linguistic background, etc.), many schools, districts, and states still expect that their tools and practices for assessing native English-speaking students can also accurately and adequately assess EL student learning. Traditional ways of assessing students draw heavily on an understanding of the American educational system, using tools that are generally only available in English and that do not allow for alternative modes of response (e.g., drawing, mapping, oral response, and so on). It is essential to recognize EL students’ backgrounds and make responsive adjustments, in order to develop a classroom, school, district, and statewide system that accurately assesses the learning of all students.

Resource

For a closer look at assessing ELs in mainstream classrooms, take a look at this short article.