Review
New Ways of Classroom Assessment

Nancy Pendleton, Mary Haynes, Nancy Karam, Lezlie S. Rocka, Kathryn Carpenter, Karyn V.K. Vitali, Joanna C. Piantes, Jayne Bissonnette, Phyllis Lee
ACCCESS Program, Cape Cod, MA

NEW WAYS OF CLASSROOM
ASSESSMENT, J.D. Brown Editor,
Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), 1600 Cameron St., Suite 300, Alexandria, VA 22314

When I first began reading the introduction to this text, I learned its contents would be a series of activities pertaining to assessing a variety of skills and self assessments by the learners. I thought it would be just another book filled with lesson plans. The facilitators of the ABE/ESOL ACCCESS classes have specific questions about assessment. They want to know explicitly what a portfolio is, how it can successfully fit into classroom learning. I was pleasantly surprised when I looked closer that many of my assessment questions were answered in well-detailed activities that clearly demonstrate alternative methods of assessment.

I felt that the best way to review a text of this kind was to put some of the activities into practice in the classroom. I asked some of the ABE/ESOL facilitators in the ACCCESS program to test the assessments. In giving assignments I tried to vary the activities so there would be representation from each of the five parts of the book. The facilitators critiqued their activities in terms of how they worked, whether they eliminated or added anything, and the reaction from their learners. (See individual facilitator notes at the end of this section.)

The assessment activities in this book could be a starting point for ESOL facilitators to develop further any ideas that will enhance the language process ( reading, writing, listening, speaking) in their individual classes. Learners Access to Assessment, p. 60, works well with ESOL learners because it is ongoing and is built into classroom tasks. Learners are willing to participate and the reinforcement of including the entire learning process (listening, speaking, reading and writing) is a good reminder for facilitators that this should be ongoing.

Activities in this text are more challenging and creative than activities found in most ESOL textbooks. Many resources for the ESOL learner do not ask the learner to “stretch” their skills beyond class activities and facilitators are constantly looking to plan activities that assess their students progress/skills. This text presents ideas/methods that accomplish both.

Questions for pre-goal setting, appendix guidelines, and sample self-assessment questions found in the majority of the activities are well defined. Options for portfolio assessments — one in particular — allow learners to write additional reading exercises which could develop into a learner text to be used in a program. GREAT!

In our experience, ESOL learners enjoy assessing their own oral language process by using videos. There is a good procedure for beginners relating to videos and oral language use. Most of the ESOL learners in our program also like their facilitator to share in the assessment process.

The text does need to address the entry/ beginner levels more often. Those listed as such in this text could not be performed comfortably by our learners. Some assessments are too difficult to put into practice because they are developed for more “university level” ESOL. Some are also very time consuming. I found some of the information in the appendix is presented in a negative manner. Some cultures are sensitive to how evaluation/assessment is conducted, whether by a peer or a facilitator (e.g. Appendix, p. 101 — Self Peer/Teacher Assessment of Group Performance, and Appendix, p. 86 — Test Your Talk).

Overall, the volume is good. The editor’s notes at the beginning of each section are well written and informative (especially helpful for the new ESOL practitioner) . He weighed both sides of an assessment issue, the advantages as well as the disadvantages for assessing a particular way.

The following are the comments on specific tools as written by the ACCCESS staff. From looking at teachers’ responses, it appears that most of the assessment activities tested from this book require a high level of student involvement. For some teachers this gave them ideas about how to organize group work and reminded them of the value of doing things in groups and having a balance of self assessment and teacher/facilitator assessment.

We have highlighted a few of the reviews here. Since we are not able to reprint the tools at this time we chose those that relied less on seeing the tool. We looked at a few so the reader could get a flavor of the kinds of activities the book promotes.

Top

Walk-Talk: Oral Tests

I first asked the class to talk about all the things that they learned thus far in our three classes together. Second I had the students make up three questions as if they were giving a quiz or a test based on the materials they learned. I presented several examples and told them that true/false questions could be used. Third, I paired the students up and told them to go outside and ask questions of their partners. For each correct answer a point was awarded.

When I went out to see how things were progressing, I couldn’t help but notice how energized and upbeat students were. Most had earned three points; all were laughing and talking about the activity and their individual responses. I asked for feedback from students as to whether we should do this again. Students were enthusiastic.

In using this assessment tool I was able to see the real value in the students working in pairs, in writing their own questions, in speaking these questions to others, in having a good time while actively learning, and in receiving praise from peers the further developed their confidence in their overall communication skills.
—Phyllis Lee

Top

Mini Talk Shows in Classroom Assessment

In terms of previewing, I followed the four suggested steps with one exception: under number two, I replaced “style of film” with “message or main ideas.” I felt that since the students are not experts on film technique, style would most likely be answered so briefly that there would be little opportunity for extended creative speaking.

View and Post Viewing
Here I had students organize their thoughts in groups rather than as individuals. This provided extra interaction as well as opportunities to clarify (debate, question, compare) their responses.

I also had them prepare questions to ask other groups, with each group responsible for the questions on a specific area, e.g. the “character” group questioned the “message group” etc. I felt that the assignment of tasks and narrowing of focus would facilitate the process. Throughout these discussions, I circulated, listened in and when invited intervened.

Feedback and Scoring
Each group presented on their area. I did not grade the presentations. The rest of the class provided each group with spontaneous feedback on their performance.

Caveats and Opinions
For the film I chose “Dances with Wolves.” That was thematically related to the content of the course “American Folklore,” specifically Native Americans. The 45-minute section of the film I selected concentrated on cross cultural relations and prejudices, the struggle to communicate without a common spoken language, drawing upon other aids (visuals) to enhance communication, and the gradual discovery of a common humanity. These ideas resonated greatly with the students’ lives and experiences.

Overall both the students and I found this to be an effective and enjoyable language activity. They felt the assignment of particular tasks (purposeful watching, group assignments) helped with the retention of material. This was confirmed by effusive and insightful discussions following the movie and tasks.

I allowed 90 minutes for the activity including 45 for viewing time. The only criticism was that this was an insufficient amount of time for their discussion. This was a time-consuming assessment activity, but I believe mini talk shows would be an excellent assessment tool for general skills or for specific targeted grammatical items.
—Karyn V.K. Vitali

Top

Run and Win

I used the Run and Win lesson with a group of 16 entry-level ESOL students. It was our fourth session together. I had begun teaching pronouns previous to the suggested lessons. Also I had demonstrated simple verbs like run, walk, speak, etc. I used the lesson as follows:

Format
I used subject and verb cards to teach subject verb agreement.

Materials
Cards made with the pronouns “I, He, She” made up with simple verbs already taught.

Method
Since my students had very limited English it would be quite tedious to try and explain the game portion of the lesson. Instead I modified it by putting them in groups of 5, 5 and 6 at three tables. I passed out the verb cards which were in blue and white envelopes. I instructed them to open a blue card and one white card and say the words they see. I demonstrated this myself at each table. I moved from table to table allowing them to play with the verbs and continued to point out correct combinations. Later they showed me their combinations.

Conclusion
The students really enjoyed the assessment. It gave them an opportunity to use hands-on activities to make discoveries of their own. They wanted more of this. I made up other words that they knew on a purple card such as “floor, wall, book.” I also made up yellow cards that say “in, on, and at.” Now they can put together whole sentences in this same manner of discovery. I loved the assessment tool. The tool is not only valuable; it is fun and expandable.
—Jayne Bissonette

Top

Tense Excitement Throwing a Die

The directions were clear. But, as typically happens in the classroom, the lesson did not get presented according to the directions. The copier at the school did not work, so I drew the playing board on the chalk board, and students had to copy it. We used someone else’s classroom and they did not leave us much on the chalk board, so I couldn’t fit all the words in columns on the board. This was fine because the words were too hard for all but the intermediate students.

So, we adapted the game to suit us. We did one practice run using the word “laugh.” I wrote it on the board under the heading “today.” I then wrote it again under the heading “yesterday.” This time I added the “-ed” ending. We discussed endings of the past tense words. This was actually an introduction for all the beginning A students. We discussed what sound the “-ed” made in the word “laughed”. We all put the word “laugh” under the “t” option on the playing board because we make a “t” sound when we pronounce this ending.

We then began the game. We did not roll the die because students did not have a column to choose from. I put a word on the board under “today”. The students said the word and then wrote it under “yesterday”. The students tried to say the word. I said it correctly and repeated it several times. With them repeating after me, they then chose the playing board square they thought the ending sound fit ( t/d/ed). I went around and checked everyone’s answer. If they could hear the correct sound. I also demonstrated for them what the word would sound like if it had incorrect endings on it.

We ran out of time, so we only did four words. Most of the students were putting the ending sounds correctly on the playing board by the last two words. All the students seemed to enjoy the challenge of this game. It seemed hard enough to make it fun, but not impossible. It seemed easy for one intermediate A student. Their interest in the game seemed high. They repeated the words over to themselves to listen to endings. They appeared pleased when I came around and told them they had it correct.

I enjoyed using this assessment activity. It was a useful way to introduce and practice past tense ending sounds. I think an idea like this is most useful when any teacher can apply it the way it is needed and most useful in her or his classroom. This lesson withstood this particular test. It was still an informative, learning-filled experience even when it was changed a great deal to fit within the circumstances in which I was applying it. I will use this lesson again for past tense endings and I will use the basic game structure for other sounds that I want to work on with students.
—Lezlie S. Rocka

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.