Monday, December 8, 2008

cm's - Butler and OMalley

Butler, F.A. & Stevens, R. (2001). Standardized assessment of the content knowledge of English language learners’ k-12: Current trends and old dilemmas. Language Testing, 18 (4), 409-427. Los Angeles, CA.

Accountability plays a major role in standardized assessment. The complexities of testing outcomes that arise among students whose second language is English are examined in the article. This includes the concept of ‘high stakes’ in relation to decision-making for all students, including students who are limited English speakers. Approaches such as accommodations are discussed. The need for more research on standardized content assessments are also discussed as well as suggestions for alternative approaches.

I thought this article was informative as far as standardized assessment and approaches as well as accommodations for English as second language learners. I found the section on “Opportunity to learn” (OTL) interesting. The fact that our country is vast and each subgroup of students are not the same in many respects makes OTL, rather than language, a barrier to higher achievement. Accountability issues arise on account of these barriers.

I have often wondered how and if such Yup’ik standardized assessment would one day become a reality. Accountability issues as mentioned in the article would probably arise. And who would be the stakeholders? Our state and national leaders would probably oppose such an endeavor on account of expenses.

O’Malley Pierce. (1996) Content assessment. Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. 163-199.

Language and content integration activities are discussed in this chapter. Approaches to authentic assessment in content areas such as mathematics, science, and social studies are presented in different ways. Procedures for self-assessment and peer evaluation are discussed and instructional uses of assessment in content areas described. Suggested rubrics are also given for classroom teachers.

I was somewhat surprised that some states allow exemptions from testing for ELL students on account of possible low test scores. It’s almost frustrating and unfortunate that fear of test scores become like forms of embarrassment and not as tools to help schools build a learning environment conducive for students who come to school.

It makes sense that appropriate content instruction helps immensely in language learning. When they talk about integrated language and content instruction it reminds me of SIOP instruction. It’s great that there are researchers out there who want to help make education worthwhile for second language learners. I wonder how much academic learning we (my high school year peers) would have had. I think it would be interesting to find a comparative result of certain test scores…maybe like ACT, of earlier days to students who were exposed to integrated instruction.

1 comment:

languagemcr said...

Cathy,
Accountability issues are huge. We really need to figure out a better way. Why does accountability need to be given in numbers? I do think schools, districts and teachers should be accountable for students progressing but I don't think static tests with one number taken on one day show that progress.
Your points are so important.
Marilee