Cathy's McNamara Abedi

McNamara, Chapter 2 “Communication and the design of language tests”

This chapter describes the activities of designing tests and making meaning of test scores particularly in language and language use. It goes on to talk about discrete point testing or individual points of knowledge and the evolvement of psychometrics that have to do with the measurement of cognitive abilities leading up to reliability. Test writers of the earlier days, l960’s, influenced today’s test writers. Integration of knowledge refers to the relevant systematic features of language. Integrative tests soon became important features of language testing such as in oral interviews. Later a new view emerged under the guidance of John Oller, in the l970’s, proposed the Unitary Competence Hypothesis, also known as pragmatic test. However, cloze tests proved to be similar to discrete point testing. Hyme’s theory of communicative competence, especially in the social structure, showed there was more to knowing a language. Cultural aspects play an important role during the process. Out of Hyme’s theory came performance tests in language and close attention to social roles in real settings. Test materials soon came to reflect communication in settings such as hospital or government run meetings.

This particular reading assignment helped me to see how testing of language and language use has evolved over time. At the same time I’m thinking about our Yup’ik community and how children learn a language. I remember how my mother-in-law, as I was learning Nelson Island dialect, would sometimes do a recast where she would rephrase what I was trying to say. Her nature of delivery and tone of voice was such that I never felt threatened. I knew that she understood what I meant and I would replay the conversation in my mind over and make a mental distinction between the word or phrase and how it’s said where I grew up. Other times, I make sure I remember the phrase so I don’t make the same mistake.


Abedi – “The No Child Left Behind Act and English Learners: Assessment and Accountability Issues”

This article describes issues that concern No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act and how limited English proficiency (LEP) are affected. It describes six LEP assessment issues in relation to AYP reporting. The issues include 1) Inconsistency in LEP classification across and within states, 2) Sparse LEP population, 3) Lack of LEP subgroup stability, 4) Measurement quality of AYP instruments for LEP students, 5) LEP baseline scores, and 6) LEP cutoff points. The chapter goes on to discuss the disaggregated progress reports by subgroup and NCLB requirements as well consequences for schools enrolling LEP students. Its stated “LEP students exhibit substantially lower performance than non-LEP students in subject areas high in language demand.” (Abedi, p. 10-11) Suggestions as to and effective education system for LEP students are given. The three interactive components are 1) classification, 2) instruction, and 3) assessment. The three have in common the language factors or barriers. Interactive model is explained and described in the chapter.

It never occurred to me how complex LEP really was until I read this article. There are so many issues related in and around LEP, NCLB, and AYP. I thought it was interesting to know that LEP, across the country, can have a broad definition. And there are factors, both common and uncommon, that affect the LEP students all over. It’s not surprising, though, especially in knowing the diversity of our regions, our cultures, and our languages. I also found it interesting to know that “…academic achievement tests that are constructed and normed for native English speakers have lower reliability and validity for LEP populations (Abedi, Leon, & Mirocha, 2003).” (Abedi, 2003) If I understand this statement correctly, it means that the academic achievement tests do not align with LEP students. That brings a lot of questions to mind. One of them being, then why are the LEP students tested using the same forms?

I had a question about baseline scores. What do they mean?

Cathy's McNamara Ch. 1

McNamara, T. (2008). Language Testing. Oxford University Press.

Chapter1: Testing, testing…What is a language test?

This chapter talks about language testing, it’s terms and definitions. Types of tests are described such as performance tests, achievement tests, and criterion-referenced tests. Testing has proved to become a gateway to many careers and/or fields of interest. Language testing has changed over the years. It’s no longer a single performance test but may include a developing a portfolio of written or tape/video recorded oral assessment. Another may include observation in normal settings where language has to be used. Other forms of assessment are also mentioned in the chapter.

This chapter got me thinking about my own research which is currently in its’ planning stages. In regard to oral language assessment, I’m now wondering how I’m going to do that. I know observation is one way I could do it and video recording. As an observer, how am I to evaluate an oral language? What am I looking for? Am I looking for complete sentences? Am I looking for fluency only? I would probably have to come up with a checklist that I as an observer see as important. Are age and amount of time taken into consideration?

I thought it was interesting to read that “[w]hereas achievement tests relate to the past in that they measure what language the students have learned as a result of teaching, proficiency tests look to the future situation of language use without necessarily any reference to the previous process of teaching.” (McNamara, 2008, p. 7) It makes more sense to me to think of tests that are meaningful, meant for real life, and have a real purpose. A purpose that is not necessarily negative but positive in it’s outcome. Unless I misunderstood something as I was reading, this is what I came up with.

Chapter 1 of O'Malley & Valdez

O’Malley/Vadez on Chapter 1: Moving Toward Authentic Assessment

This chapter describes the types of testing that have evolved over the past decade. Authentic assessments align with classroom goals, curricula, and instruction. These types of tests are a move away from multiple-choice tests that have been criticized to lack content validity. In other words what the students knows are not exactly represented in the multiple-choice type assessments. The chapter goes on to talk about English Language Learning (ELL) students and the purpose for given tests. Standardized test are also discussed. Both types of tests, however, do not cover the full range of assessment needs for these students.
Authentic Assessment has to do with many forms of assessment that reflect student learning, achievement, motivation, and attitudes on relevant classroom activities. Performance assessments, portfolios, and student self-evaluation are examples of authentic assessment. I was especially interested in the portfolio type of assessment and wondered how a Yup’ik third grade level portfolio might look like. I could see the benefits of having a portfolio. In the process, I’m sure the students would see their own progress and how much they’ve learned. These portfolios would be useful in parent/teacher/student conferences. The chapter mentions that authentic assessment means changes in instruction as well as teaching philosophy. I would be most interested in finding ways that make portfolios easy to manage and organize around my teaching schedule.

Pierce on Assessment

This article by Pierce describes the impact of assessment on English language learners from national tests such as the NCLB. Statements published by Education Week editorial especially intrigued me. For example, “NCLB is wreaking havoc because it fails to reflect what we know about standardized testing and how children learn.” (p. 311) Our country is comprised of multicultural children and not all are alike or similar. We have basic human needs that are similar and yet we are different. The funds of knowledge in each culture is different and it highly influences our ways of doing, knowing, and being. Maybe a question to ask, although arbitrary (if that’s the word), is if there’s standardized tests out there, is there a “standardized” American?

NCLB has affected our schools as well as our communities in many negative ways. One of them affects our Yup’ik language. I know of some parents and community members who, at one time or other, said leaning in English will help our Yup’ik students to succeed in school. And that English learning will help them pass the required tests in order to graduate. To make it short, I’ve heard that not one test fits all groups of students across the nation. There’s always going to be problems and I think this article points out many of those problems.

AP on Teacher Suspended...

Teacher Suspended for Refusing to Give State Test

This article is an associated press release on a suspension of a Seattle middle school teacher being suspended for two weeks for refusing to give the Washington Assessment of Student Learning in classroom. I thought the teacher ability to stand up for his beliefs in a powerful way was quite interesting. At the same time it made me think about our state required testing on standards for grades 3, 8, and up. Our Yugtun students who were never formally taught in English were required to take an English test. I used to cringe inside and have that silent roar building up inside me as I watched my students take the test over a time period of three days. One student had his head down on his desk the whole hour. I felt his pain just observing and thought how unright this whole thing was. Thank goodness we no longer allow this group of students I teach in Yup’ik to not have to take the test. (If my husband made enough money for us to survive, maybe…just maybe…after reading a similar article… I, too would have stepped out of school during the time period of state standards testing. The other part of me now asks: would I have done that?)

Lesley on Maori Approaches to Assessment

Rameka, L. (2007). Maori Approaches to Assessment, Canadian Journal of Native Education, 30 (1), 126-141..


In this article the author describes the Kaupapa Maori theory in depth. Two interrelated projects are discussed: the New Zealand Ministry of Education funded Kaupapa Maori Learning and Assessment Exemplar Project and the works of the author on the progress of Maori centers on the development of Maori early childhood assessment approaches. Kaupapa Maori is a philosophy and practice for raising Maori that encompasses Maori consciousness, supporting resistance, and transformation actions as described by the Maori. There are proverbs, which I thought were interesting, added to the article. The whole community, including students, parents, and family are involved in the assessment process. The Maori communities took it upon themselves to make the assessments work for them as they saw fit.

In reading this article I thought most of the Maori beliefs were similar to Yup’ik beliefs, although I did not quite understand some terms. The part that I believe we as Yup’iks (this is only my opinion) have lost that idea of building confidence as Yup’ik people. I think having confidence has a lot to do with many things. One of them being able to express yourself as Yup’ik, while at the same time having pride in yourself as Yup’ik. (I hope this makes sense.)