Abedi article

Abedi article; The no child left behind act and English language learners: assessment and accountability issues.

The issue that I came away understanding in reading this article was that there is an issue of classification into subgroups for limited English proficient (LEP) population on when to exit and deem LEP students proficient or not. It explained all the issues that are inconsistent and unfair to the LEP student population when it comes to attaining adequate yearly progress (AYP). It explained the 6 LEP assessment issues in length; inconsistency in LEP classification across and within states, sparse LEP population, lack of LEP subgroup stability, measurement quality of AYP instruments for LEP students, LEP baseline scores, and LEP cutoff points. It was heartbreaking to read about how the NCLB and its AYP is actually putting undue hardship on those schools and districts with a high number of LEP students. The authors reported and mentioned alternatives of some of the issues. The biggest issue that the LEP students are having in the assessments is that in reading. Not that the student is unable to do it, it’s the complexity of the language that is used in the test. The way the test is written, vocabulary, length of sentence, and the unfamiliarity of the language used that sometimes is hard for the LEP student to understand. The authors said that there is research that suggests that when the choice of language used is reworded without changing the meaning can affect the ability of the student to score better on assessments without changing the end result. The article made mention that the standardized content based type of standardized assessments in English seemed to make these tests like an English proficiency test (p. 7). In discussing possible solutions in making NCLB work for the LEP student the authors mentioned that the factors of; classification, assessment, and instruction need to work together not in isolation. In working with these factors, those that work with LEP students need to constantly explore and make changes within these factors so that the achievement of the LEP can keep up with the changes that occur in education and assessment issues.

McNamara chapter 2 reaction

McNamara chapter 2 reaction: communication and the design of language tests

In reading this chapter, I realized that in all these years I’ve been teaching, I have never questioned or thought about the test itself and why and how they were put together. I am glad that the chapter starts out in explaining how the design of language tests have evolved from Lado’s (1961) mastery of features (discreet point testing) to Canale & Swain’s (1980’s) communicative competencies; grammatical, sociolinguistic, strategic, and discourse. I observed in reading this chapter, language tests went from individual sections of language learning to trying to include all areas of language learning – cognitive to social influences/settings. I learned that depending on the test and the criterion, the results are always interpreted differently, depending on the test designers and I got to thinking, the location of where the test design was being developed had or has to make a difference.

chapter 1-Authentic assessment for ELL

Authentic assessment chapter 1, O’Malley & Pierce

Authentic assessment is an alternative form of assessment that focuses on the student and their abilities; learning, achievement, motivation, and attitude. These are unlike the assessment’s that are given only in English and are usually multiple choice type. This chapter 1 reading was all about authentic assessment and the English language learner (ELL). It explained the types of authentic assessments there are; self-assessment, portfolio assessment, and performance assessments.

I can’t wait to learn more about this type of assessment. I do a type of authentic assessment that I call portfolio type assessment on top of the other assessments we are required to give to our students. What I do is collect and make copies of student work, take anecdotal notes (language), take notes on actions and activities of students, and photographs. I share this portfolio with the parents and students at parent teacher conferences and give the portfolio to the parents at the end of the school year. It is always exciting to see the growth at the end of the school year by looking at the work and photographs.

McNamara chapter 1

Reaction to chapter 1-Language testing, McNamara

It occurred to me while reading this chapter that I have never thought about differences between types of tests. The explanation on page 4 was very helpful for my understanding of language testing: a. language tests have a major role in people’s lives b. using results of tests to determine placement for students c. used in research as a measure of language, etc.

In reading the chapter, I realize how important it is to understand testing and assessment. Learning about the method and purpose, knowing the difference between achievement and performance, knowing the importance of validity and so on! So much to think about. Learning to question and not being afraid to do that is going to take practice and determination for me.

Pierce reaction

Reaction to Pierce article

The article started out explaining the No Child Left Behind act (NCLB) law and why it was enacted into law. Then it goes on to explain how teachers of English language learners (ELL) can help their students get prepared for tests they have to take which are mostly standardized and all in English. Other points that they explained in the article were how some states and parent groups and opponents of NCLB and their actions against it, other point covered were how states were coping with effects of NCLB to their states and districts.
It’s amazing that those who put this NCLB act seemed to think that every student will reach this “proficiency” score! No thought of those students whose first language is other than English, language minority, and English language learners. It was good to see the point of the authors to mention that there has been research that says that language fluency takes a while to master, anywhere from 4 to 7/8 years! Here they had made mention that immigrants and language minority students can wait 3 years to get “caught” up before they have to take the test.

Reaction to newspaper article

Reaction to article: Teacher suspended for refusing to give state test

It is too bad that Mr. Chew didn’t go into details about the many reasons of why he refused to give the test. I was disappointed when I read the only reason listed was that the students struggle through the test and that he see’s few positive results.
I would have said that the only positive result that I see with my immersion students is that they are becoming really good bubble fillers! This past week my students have been testing for English Language Proficiency (ELP). In another week they’re going to be taking AIMSWEB testing. This test is going to test to see if they know the English language alphabet and phonetics also basic math skills-number recognition and the student’s ability to count to whatever in English. Here I am teaching the Yupik language and culture and my students need to take these tests in English! I happened to be passing one child who was being tested for ELP. The tester was asking an immersion student in English, “Tell me what this picture means?” – it was a picture of a traffic light turning red, it was a picture of a child waiting to cross at a crosswalk! How is an immersion child who has never been to the city be able to tell the tester what they see!
Seriously! This is what our students have to be subjected to with these state and federally mandated testing!

reaction to Maori assessment

Reaction & Entry of Rameka article: Maori approaches to assessment

In reading this article, I thought how amazing it would be to have this kind of support from my own government. I understand that it just didn’t happen this way. They probably had to work and fight for this type of support, like we are doing in Hooper Bay.

In reading this article I saw many similarities between my culture and the Maori culture, especially on the view of children. In the Yup’ik ways, we value and treasure each child, as do the Maori. We both understand that each one is special and bring with them a world of wealth and contribution. Another important similarity I saw was the relatedness and connectedness of everything and everyone. The child is viewed as an individual who is in the process of becoming. The child is bringing into the classroom already having some knowledge about their world. My job then in my class is to use that knowledge and expand and teach them to “read, write, and do math” in the Yup’ik language.

As for assessment, I have to give these assessments that are state and nationally mandated to “show” they are learning and progressing. These assessments are given to each and every child in the school and district. I like how the Maori plan uses the community and individual child and make authentic assessments. They are sensitive to the fact that each community is different, the article mentioned that the community and school need to work together to make their own authentic assessment that is relevant to their environment and is based on their local beliefs and culture. The beliefs and values are diverse in each community, though they might be similar, they are practiced in a different ways, so the article advised for the community and school to work together to make their assessment authentic to their “place”.