Learning from Experience
Action Research

Diane Lizotte
New Bedford Adult Education Program

In conducting action research, I intended to demonstrate the limitations
of the standardized testing (English as a Second Language Oral Assessment) used in our program. I approached the research with a preconceived opinion that a variety of more suitable tests would provide valid information about our students and be learner-centered. Based on my own dissatisfaction with this test — a feeling shared by the majority of teachers — I believed I could develop a more appropriate test which would meet the needs of all.

As I continued my research a whole new perspective emerged. The fault in the process was not the test itself; in fact the test was suited for its intended purpose. The use of the ESOLA was primarily a bookkeeping measure, another piece of accountability which staff members “expected” to provide information about the learner in the program.

I reviewed my program and saw how it can be improved. During our future program development time, the teachers and I will review how to develop authentic assessment which can be used in conjunction with standardized testing to provide teachers with information they need to assess the progress of students and the success of the curriculum.

Top

Research question: How is the ESOLA test being used in the New Bedford adult Education Program?

In a decade when educational accountability is expected, many adult education programs have sought to document learners’ progress and ensure future funding through standardized tests. Given this prevailing climate, the New Bedford Adult Education Program incorporated the use of the ESOLA for initial student placement and as a periodic evaluation to document student progress. As stated in the rationale of the test booklet this test could be used to determine:

1. Student entry level
2. Student progress level
3. Student ability to follow directions
4. Student ability to follow English patterns
5. Students ability to use specific basic vocabulary.

What emerged from a periodic administration of this test, however, was teacher dissatisfaction with repeated use of a single test which provided little or no information on learner progress. To address the issue of ESOLA’s effectiveness, it is necessary to examine how the test is used for student placement and to evaluate student progress.

My inquiry began with research in how the ESOL literacy is currently assessed. I looked at three articles “Learner Assessment in Adult ESL Literacy” by Heide Spruck Wrigely, “Adult ESL Learner Assessment Purposes and Tools” by Miriam Burtand and Fran Keenan, and “Assessing Integrated Language” by Deborah Short.

As stated in the research, standardized tests are cost effective, time efficient and meet documentation needs. But by their very nature are one dimensional activities which cannot measure the complexity of language or learning. A detailed review of the ESOLA illustrates that it does meet the criteria of a standardized test. It utilizes basic vocabulary: chair, coat, ear. It increases in difficulty as you progress through four levels. It does address English language patterns and the ability to follow directions. It does deal with basic and advanced language skills and its progression in literacy is logical.
What it lacks, however, is the use of any simulated real life activities, such as social conversation, reading food labels, or writing simple sentences. Nonetheless, it remains, theoretically, a valid instrument based on sound educational research.

I then distributed teacher and student surveys (see Figure A) to determine whether the ESOLA test provides accurate initial information for student placement. These surveys and interviews conducted suggest that the ESOLA has been a reliable initial placement instrument. The test could be expanded to include writing samples for more advanced students, but for placement purposes it is sufficient.

The ESOLA is also used to periodically evaluate student progress; it is administered twice annually. Primarily used to meet program requirements, it is a numerical indicator of student success as listed by increasing test score to insure future funding.

Since assessment is an important part of learning, teachers view assessment as a method of evaluating the success of their curriculum and as a method of meeting the needs of their students. At present, they view the administration of the ESOLA as a monotonous process which yields only a flat number score. What is more, the basic vocabulary and language patterns used in the test are not addressed in the present curriculum. This is an artificial testing situation.

In order to illustrate the test’s shortcomings, I will talk about two learners. One student attended faithfully for a two-year period and made significant oral language gains. Yet her test scores indicate only slight progress. Another, who attended faithfully for a three-year period, used her skills to obtain citizenship and a job promotion. Yet her scores indicate erratic progress and some regression during this time.

Top

In order to clarify this situation, I conducted an individual survey with four teachers and eight students. The following questions were used:

Teacher interview
Do you enjoy administering the ESOLA test?
Do you feel it provides you with useful information?
Do you feel it provides you with accurate information?
Do you feel it reflects what you teach?
Can you use this test to improve teaching techniques?
Does it meet your students’ goals?

Student interview
Do you like the test?
Do you feel it helps you?
Why do you take the test?

The results were hardly surprising. Both teachers and students failed to see the correlation between the testing and the instruction occurring in the classroom.

If periodic assessment is to be useful to the teacher and the student, the ESOLA must be expanded to include much more. An analysis of student writing samples, portfolios, and response journals can be used to supplement the assessment process. Personal goals sheets along with vocabulary lists can also show gains in classroom performance. Teachers might choose to develop their own tests based on the curriculum which will, in turn, lead to better classroom teaching and increased student learning. The entire process of reporting student progress needs to be expanded so that it will not only show minimal gains but actually reflect all the personal achievement made during the academic year.

Despite its limited testing features, the New Bedford Adult Education Program remains highly successful. Students attend 140-155 hours a year. Personal goals are met as students gain valuable life skills and move from level to level. This year 120 students successfully completed three years in the program.

In conclusion, is the ESOLA test an effective instrument in student placement? Generally, yes. Is the ESOLA test as effective instrument in monitoring student progress? No, it is not. It barely meets program requirement and does not provide any additional information on curriculum or student progress. There is a definite need in our program to reexamine the assessment process and to make it more valid. The ESOLA was not designed with The New Bedford Adult Education Program in mind. It is at this point that we, the program, can begin to review the assessment process. This is a definite program need. Teachers need time to address this issue and develop consistent strategies to complete the assessment portion. With this conclusion, I know which areas I need to address for futue program development.

Top

Figure A

Top

Originally published in Adventures in Assessment, Volume 11 (Winter 1998),
SABES/World Education, Boston, MA, Copyright 1998.

Funding support for the publication of this document on the Web provided in part by the Ohio State Literacy Resource Center as part of the LINCS Assessment Special Collection.