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.

Peregoy

Peregoy, Chapter 10 Reading Assessment and Instruction.

This article describes reading assessment in terms of inventory of informal reading and information on consideration of oral language, reading and writing to aide in instructional strategies. It talks about theoretical approach to literacy assessment where the teacher’s values placed on reading play an important role. The article goes on to describing proficiency in language where speaking and reading or writing determines the oral and written communication skill levels of language learners.

I thought this article did a good job of explaining what goes on in the reading process of English learners. It was interesting also when the author described decoding skills in relation to meaning. Expressions such as “barking at print” caught my attention because it’s what some of my students do when they read word by word without really catching on to the meaning of the phrase or sentence. I also thought the article did a great job of explaining the role of prior knowledge and how it affects the meaning brought on by the reader. As teachers we really need to take that into consideration, especially when we deal with a diverse group of students.

Chapter 6 O'Malley Pierce

O’Malley, Pierce. Authentic Assessment For English Language Learners. Chapter 6.

Authentic assessment on writing assessment brings out two important aspects: self-assessment and peer assessment. This chapter describes nearly everything about writing, from the role of the writer to the nature of writing task and includes samples of scoring rubrics.

I found this chapter to be well worth reading. It brought on new perspectives for my own classroom and it also brought questions for me as a teacher. Writing has never really been strong area for nearly most of my students, especially boys. I wonder if there’s research out there about young boys and writing. It seems there’s always at least two or three boys who, no matter what tasks you bring out, never like to write. Some times I’d have to sit next to the student and encourage/prod and praise with ideas.

The area that I think we lack in our writing lies in self-assessment and peer assessment. As I read on I wondered to myself, again about those who don’t really like to write, how they would fair in writing a self-reflection or peer evaluation. All the ideas sound great, but in reality, some times we run into problematic areas, but at the end, the challenge lies in the teacher finding writing tasks that are interesting and fun.

cm's Rhodes Ochoa

Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz in “Assessing Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students”

This article examines the assessment and placement process of ethnic minority students and other diverse special education school children. As early as l960’s it was found that there were mislabeled students due mostly to the misunderstanding of culturally and linguistically diverse children in school programs. Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of l975, requires that students be assessed in their native language and in a nondiscriminatory manner. This article also discusses the studies of the last twenty years of trends, the methodological and conceptual issues to be considered, the potential factors to explain why the problem exists, and suggested solutions along with policy recommendations.

I think the problem of disproportionate representation still exists in our states and local school districts where linguistically and culturally diverse students are. Although public laws are passed, I think there will always be cases arising because of the magnitude of students and their diversity. Also, assessment practices take time in evaluation, in updating, and in translating. It’s unfortunate that our school sites don’t have appropriate assessment procedures to meet the needs of our students who speak in their first language. In our site, this need for certified Yup’ik Special Education teachers as well as the need for evaluation procedures to be done in Yup’ik are almost always lacking. We often complain about how long it takes for referrals and Special Ed procedures before Yup’ik students are properly served. I know it takes a lot of paperwork in the referral process, but it’s the students who need the most help that everything boils down to.

cm's O'Malley Pierce ch 5

O’Malley/Pierce on Chapter 5: Reading Assessment

This chapter identifies and describes practical approaches to authentic reading assessment. It discusses the disposition of reading in the first language and reading in the second language and how these two relate to the other. New ideas are introduced with reading assessment in mind. Procedures for assessing reading are also discussed for use with English language learners. Some of these include identifying the purpose of reading assessments, involving students in self-evaluation and peer-evaluation, developing scoring rubric, and setting standards. Samples of reading assessment formats are given throughout the chapter. Suggestions are then given for recording teacher observations, developing reading/writing portfolios, and using assessment results for planning and teaching.

In reading this chapter I had, in the back of my head, my current students who read in their first language, Yup’ik. Whenever we had district wide discussions on reading, I often wondered how reading in Yup’ik compared to being able to read in English. I often hear that what the students learn to do in Yup’ik literacy, they should be able to transfer to English reading. One example is discussion about and finding the story problem and/or solution of a story. If students are able to that in Yup’ik they should be able to transfer that ability to English reading. Literacy at one time was thought to be mainly oral language and decoding. It’s a lot more than that now. For example, prior knowledge and/or personal experiences play a part in understanding (comprehension) of reading. Teachers of reading now need to be aware of the funds of knowledge that students hold in order for them to tap into their prior knowledge so that connections can be made and meaningful activities implemented in relation to the story. The story or reading becomes “alive” and makes sense when students can understand the content of the story. Unfamiliar vocabulary words are introduced through the process of scaffolding. One way of introducing vocabulary, that I find works well with my students is doing Total Physical Response (TPR.) I believe that involving students to come up with motions using their bodies for new words is beneficial. Through practice and repetition of words, using motion, the students soon learn to identify the new words and what they mean.

I think one of the things I’ve never really done in my classroom is assessment of reading that includes student attitudes and feelings toward reading or writing. (I also like the idea of holding students accountable for how they use time in class for reading or writing.) It would be well worthwhile to try the above ideas as part of authentic reading assessment.

cm's O'Malley ch 3

O’Malley/Vadez on Chapter 3: Portfolio Assessment

This chapter describes the use of portfolio assessments with English language learners. Basic features are described as well as student self-assessment and goal setting. Suggestions for getting started with portfolios are also given along with managing portfolios and using them in instruction. Whole language approach as an instructional content supports the use of portfolios. Both the teacher and student are involved in the input of learning and activities. As far as portfolio assessment, the learner has the main input and role in assessing his or her own progress. Instructional goals need to be defined before students make entries in their portfolios. In addition criteria for evaluation would have to be generated along with the students’ help before entries are made in the portfolio. Portfolios assess student growth as well as achievement.

I think having portfolio assessments for language learners is a positive tool. It has many benefits especially for the learner. Overall, the responsibility of learning and self-assessing becomes part of the language learner that it allows for high engagement. This reminds me of metacognition. I think this process, metacognition, is very important because it affirms your knowledge and helps build confidence in yourself as a language learner. The benefits of portfolio assessments are as real as water is useful for human beings. I think taking the time, finding the time, and being systematic would have to evolve and happen before these types of assessments become real. I would think that some students would have to see models of portfolio assessment before they make it a part of their own. I would think that for third graders we’d have to simplify parts of the portfolio so they don’t become overwhelmed. Things like using sad and happy faces, as part of the self-evaluation would have to do, as some students need more time and assistance. (At the same time, here I go again, in thinking about our Yup’ik values, I think self-assessment might be a hurdle to cross for some learners. In Yup’ik we are advised NOT to brag about ourselves. I remember how my older brother, once he learned to go out hunting on his own, was advised by my mother on being careful in talking about his catch to others. I guess we would have to talk about this, too, as we come across self-assessment and that it’s OK to talk about how well we did.)

cm's Nelson-Barber

Sharon Nelson-Barber and Elise Trumbull on “Making Assessment Practices Valid for Indigenous American Students”

This article describes the reasons why educational assessments do not typically reflect the important content knowledge and understanding of indigenous or native students. The author draws on experiences of native educators and communities to talk about their ways of knowing, of learning, and problem solving. And how these can be used in the validity of assessments in the school. Suggestions are given as to how researchers and test makers can identify strategies regarding school improvement for native students. Educators and/or research findings such as Dennis Demmert describe the key means to improving education for native students. One key means is using local knowledge and culture to help student improve in assessment. The authors of this article go on to explain the term cultural validity as introduced by Solano-Flores and Nelson-Barber. Cultural validity can be viewed as a core component in assessment development and testing practices. Local assessment development is one way of addressing cultural validity according to Solano-Flores, Trumbull, & Nelson-Barber (2002).

I am thrilled to know that there are researchers and educators out there who are talking about learning how indigenous and/or native students learn and their ways of knowing and being. In addition finding ways to make assessment valid and meaningful for them. I really liked the way the Navajo teachers and non-native teachers collaborated to make assessment relevant and meaningful for the students. I think we need more awareness of educators who work with indigenous or native students. The highest benefit would go, undoubtedly, to the learner. However, as I was reading, as I almost always do, I wondered about those students who are in between. These are students who are not yet fully immersed in their own culture and/or language. I’m not sure if there’s a term for such learners. We have a few students who neither are full speakers of Yup’ik nor are they fluent speakers of English. Some times we talk about how we as educators might deal them but find no real answers on account of varied factors.

Poehnern Lantolf

Poehner and Lantolf in “Dynamic assessment in the language classroom” (2005)

This article describes using dynamic assessment (DA) and instruction as resultant from Vygotsky’s theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The work of Reuven Feuerstein in dynamic assessment is discussed as well as comparison of DA to formative assessment. Suggestions are given as to how formative assessment may be thought of in relation to DA principles. Formative is intended as a feedback into the teaching and learning process while summative assessment has to do with the outcome of learning. Dynamic assessment requires the help of a capable person so the learner can benefit in completing a task, but also in transferring the mediated performance to other similar tasks or tests. Although Vygotsky did not use the term dynamic assessment, his ideas concerning ZPD were similar to DA.

The interesting part about the article that got me thinking had to do with the concept of future in developmental psychology. One idea is the concept of past-to-present. This idea “…acknowledges ‘the role of the past life history of the organism in leading to its present state of functioning’ (Valsiner, 2001:86 in Poehner & Lantolf, 2005). Another idea has to do with when the future has already become present. I think this way of thinking is intriguing because we’re always in the process of changing. Our thoughts and things we’ve learned never really come to a standstill. That’s the beauty of life itself. I’ve heard it said that learning never ends. Maybe that’s why some assessments don’t really matter to some people. I’ve heard some people say that the grade they received for a certain class doesn’t really bother them because the grade is only a letter and it doesn’t mean much. The important thing is that they learned something in some way that is not reflected in the grade. I believe that dynamic assessment happens in all walks of life.

cm on Solano-Flores

Solano-Flores on “Who Is Given Tests in What Language by Whom, When, and Where? The Need for Probabilistic Views of Language in the Testing of English Language Learners.”

This article describes the limitations of current ELL testing practices and their effectiveness or ineffective as well. Solano-Flores based his reasons on categorical, deterministic views of language and erroneous assumptions of assessment systems in ELL students. He also describes the need for probabilistic approaches based on generalizability theory in order to address valid measures of academic achievements for ELL students. In addition the process of ELL testing is affected by factors that are unpredictable and beyond the control of test makers and all those involved in the test. It is stated that probabilistic views of language in ELL testing helps to see a clearer picture between assessment system effectiveness and score dependability.

I guess the idea that “one test fits all” is hardly true. There are so many factors involved that makes validity of tests ineffective. One of the factors mentioned in the article has to do with dialects. Some where in the back of my mind, I’ve always wondered how educators or others come up with “standardized” languages or other. The article on this subject really spoke to me when it said that there really isn’t a standard language or dialect. And that standardized dialects actually come from those who have more power or voice in all the sites put together. In our site, we often hear about standardized Yup’ik and I some times wonder what that really means. I think I know what the author is talking about now. There really isn’t a standardized Yup’ik or standardized Yup’ik writing system, is there.

cm chapter 5 Validity

Language Testing by Tim McNamara
Chapter 5 Validity: testing the test

This chapter describes the validity of testing. It begins by drawing parallels with the court system on the basis of evidence. The chapter then goes on to describe the process of test validation and what it entails. The defensibility and fairness of tests based on performance are the main issues here. If the procedures used are found faulty then the test or assessment itself is questioned and becomes a matter of concern to the recipients involved. Proficiency tests, as opposed to achievement tests, look to the future. Validation should continue as long as the test is given to language users. Questions arise as new and various cases bring new challenges. The development of new assessments validation takes on a new form as the stakeholders have to consider the general public for its’ acceptability. This is where face validity comes into play. Consequential validity is explained toward the end of the chapter. Consequential validity, in terms of ability, in the end, is reflected by the “haves” and “have nots.”


This chapter reminds me of our Yup’ik Proficiency Test that we have to give every year to our students in LKSD. I had never really thought about stakeholders as those who are most concerned about the validity of the test. It seems, out of a need for immediate proficiency test in language, that this test was translated from an English version. Any two languages are not the same. The ways of thinking, of being, and ways of knowing are different and these connect to the culture. Just last week we had a discussion about the test itself and many concerns came up. For example, the possible ways of answering some questions with only word endings like in –llru. Perhaps as more and more concerned people give voice the validity of the test will one day make more sense.

Cathy's Shohamy O'Malley

Shohamy on “The Language Assessment Process: A ‘Multiplism’ Perspective”


This article describes in detail the language assessment process and the idea of multiplism. Guiding questions are given in designing the testing instrument. Language assessment tools are also explained and described. The important idea being that not one single testing procedure is not adequate, therefore multiple procedures for collecting data are explained. Also, the fact that classroom assessments that are on-going take into account the process and the product parts of language use. The article goes on to explain portfolios as part of the language assessment.

I gained a better “picture” of what language assessment may look like as far as reliability and a better idea of what the learner’s capabilities may be through the use of portfolios. While at the same time, I’m thinking about how a teacher with fifteen or more students may be able to manage the use of portfolios. I would imagine that young students would need practice and training into creating useful portfolios. The portfolios would definitely be useful during parent conferences. I remember how I use to keep things like my writings as part of my assignments in my earlier school years and how, in reflection, I used to be able to see how much I’ve changed and how much I now knew. The portfolio would have to contain artifacts that mean something to the individual students in order for them to see progress.

The article also brought into mind, the fact that we as teachers sometimes need to inter-rate some students for consistency and to get a better picture. However, in reality, and with the amount of everyday things to do, finding the time can get in the way.


O’Malley – Pierce on Chapter 2, Designing Authentic Assessment

This chapter describes, in detail, the types of authentic assessment, designing as well as developing them. It also talks about teaching and learning models that are the basis of authentic assessment. Scoring rubrics and scoring performance assessments are also described. Other issues such as reliability, validity, and purpose of assessments as well as fairness and grading practices are given. The important thing to remember about authentic assessments in language is the fact that students are challenged to use their language to communicate their understandings and what they’ve learned.

I was happy to see that one type of authentic assessment is retelling of a story. I see retelling as an important aspect of our Yup’ik culture and language because it’s in stories that most of our values are described and played out for the purpose of understanding the theme or lesson as well as other ideas like enjoyment and passing down of important Yup’ik stories. It’s through stories that we learn to make connections to the character or events and we come to understand what our own lives bring to the scene. It’s also interesting to some times learn how much of the story events made an impression on us. I thought the chapter had pretty good charts or figures that capture the important ideas of authentic assessment such as the inventory sheet for goal setting, checklist for designing authentic assessment, and how to identify student reactions.

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.)

Cathy's-Meskill and Dodge

Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching English language learners with computers. Language Learning and Technology, 46-59.

Computer-supported communication discourse through triadic scaffolding- teacher, student, and computer- is examined in this article written by Carla Meskill. The teacher recounts her experiences in language acquisition, particularly in forms and functions, with early learners of English.

This article makes me wonder about our Yup’ik students who use computers at our school under the instruction of our ELD or English Language Development teacher. I’m pretty sure that similar accounts of language discourse occur but to what extent or whether an awareness of intrinsic language learning occurs during the process. At the same time, the article gives me ideas about using computers to focus on form with my students. I’m sure, as the article mentioned, that students would learn to notice those forms of language we sometimes have trouble with. (Consciousness raising).




Dodge, B. (2008). Some thought about webquests. Website: http://webquest.sdsu.edu/about webquests.html.

This website page was written in l995 by Bernie Dodge about WebQuests. Definitions and critical attributes for activities as well as examples and design steps are given on the site.

As stated by the author, this website is preserved for the sake of earliest thoughts and ideas about WebQuests. As I was reading the page some thoughts that came into my mind were: This writing has words that denote opinions about what should go into WebQuests. (And I’m thinking…I’m sure there’s now other ways as new technology develop.) And in just a short time, I’m sure new technology brings new ways of doing and thinking in terms of how teachers, students, and others use technology to make meaning suitable to their own ways. (I hope this makes sense.)

Cathy's blog

Bloch, J. (2007). Abdullah’s blogging: a generation 1.5 student enters the blogosphere.
Learner language & technology. pp. 128- 141.

This article describes the use of blogs in an L2 writing course that focuses on pros and cons of plagiarism. The author talks about a student who, although his background in education and use of English is not well-grounded, used blogging as a tool to not only show the kinds of rhetorical strategies for evaluation, but to participate in a discussion amongst learners who were better able to express themselves.

I thought this article was very interesting. It made me think of our own people who hold little or no academic education and yet have abilities to express themselves well as well as to analyze, to synthesize, and make sense of the world around them. I was also interested about the generation 1.5 as mentioned in the article. Had it not been for blogging, I’m sure Abdullah’s ideas, insight, and connection to those in the same class would have been minimal. Blogging seems to help in many ways.

Cathy's New technologies assignment

Thorne, S. (2006). New technologies and additional language
learning. CALPER Working Paper Series, 1-26.

This review essay talks about some contexts and uses of technologies in relation to how they are used in second and foreign language education settings. The use of synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC), internet-mediated intercultural L2 education, and other language learning avenues using the Internet system are the main focus of this review. Other technologies that are recent are also mentioned along with some challenges.
It’s amazing how fast the varied use of technology has gone in what seems just a short period of time. It’s even more intriguing to learn that two people from two different languages can learn to communicate through the Internet at minimal cost. At the same time, it frightens me to think about the possible negative effects of modern technology for our youth in small communities such Toksook Bay where there are no roads for easy access to the outside world. There’s so much involved here. The amount of time spent on the computer may bring challenges that affect the interrelationships so important for healthy families. Nevertheless, I can see positive aspects of using technology in school for language learners. The use of games in technology is exciting for both teachers and students. The challenge is to come up with effective games and ones that will enhance language acquisition.
This review brings out the following questions for me.
1. How will technologies, as culture, affect the cultural lifestyles of indigenous cultures that are still alive?
2. If language is always changing over time, how will our Yup’ik language be affected where there’s contact with other languages? Will our young people’s vocabulary bank include more tech terms?