Fremdsprachenkompetenz – Der Schlüssel zur Tür nach Europa Kloster Banz 26. Oktober 2006...
-
Upload
oliver-norris -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Fremdsprachenkompetenz – Der Schlüssel zur Tür nach Europa Kloster Banz 26. Oktober 2006...
Fremdsprachenkompetenz – Der Schlüssel zur Tür nach Europa
Kloster Banz26. Oktober 2006
Language Testingand Teacher Training
—A Swedish Example
Gudrun EricksonGöteborg University, Sweden
Dept. of Education; Language and Literature Unit
The Swedish School System
• 9-year compulsory school — Gesamtschule
• 98% continue to three-year upper secondary education (c. 75 % graduate) — Core subjects
• National curricula and syllabuses for subjects• Grading from year 8 — to be year 6…• Goal/criterion referenced grading system; four
grade levels — to be more…• Teachers responsible for grading• Grades used for selection for higher education• Extensive national testing programme
”Levels” in national test development process
Government
The Ministry of Education
The Swedish National Agency for Education
Different universities in the country
Göteborg University: Foreign languages
www.ped.gu.se/sol
Aims of national assessment—
[Strong] Advisory function
• Enhance educational achievement• Clarify goals; indicate strengths and
weaknesses in individual learner profiles• Concretize goals and grading criteria• Enhance equity and fairness in
assessment and grading• Provide statistics for local and national
analyses of educational achievement
Formative and summative materials
Foreign Languages in Swedish Schools
• English compulsory from primary level
• [Optional] Second FL in compulsory school; approx. 80 % start, 62 % complete their studies – German, Spanish, French
• English compulsory in upper secondary education — a core subject
• Second FL compulsory in more academically oriented programs in upper sec. (Fr, Ger, Sp + e.g. Italian, Russian, Chinese…)
National Test Materials of FL
English• Subject test for grade 5 (11-year-olds)• Diagnostic material for grades 6-9 (12-15-year-olds)
• Subject test for grade 9 (16-year-olds) / end of compulsory school
• Summative tests for two courses in upper sec. ed. (A + B)• Self-assessment material for course A• Illustrative materials for [advanced] productive skills (C)
French, German, Spanish• Summative materials for two courses in upper sec. ed.• Illustrative materials for productive skills• Under development: formative (diagnostic) + summative
materials for compulsory school
Focal areas in the national syllabuses of FL
Receptive competence
Productive competence
Interactive competence
Intercultural communicative competence
Reflective competence
7 stages of proficiency
The Swedish syllabus for FL and the CEFR:A tentative [textual] comparison
Stage Level (entrance levels)
1 A1 – A2
2 A2
3 A2 –B1
4 B1
5 B1 – B2
6 B2
7 B2 – C1
The typical national FL test Four subtests — Target language only (instructions, questions, answers)
• Oral production and interaction (paired or group oral)
• Reception: Listening comprehension
• Reception : Reading comprehension
• Written production (and interaction)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
• Culture in a wide sense, an integrated aspect of test content and design• Reflection, e.g. self assessment, focused upon in several materials • Results / Sub-scores presented in profiles• Model provided for aggregation into total score
Extensive guidelines for teachers. Benchmarked examples of oral and written production and interaction, incl. reasoning and comments based on goals, grading criteria and pre-defined analytic factors.
Basic principles for national test development
• Pedagogical considerations – Assessment of and for learning
• Enhancing validity and reliability, avoiding bias• Broad coverage of the construct – multi-faceted,
varied, monolingual tests• Giving students the opportunity to show what they
can do with their language, rather than focusing on what they cannot do
• Making what is most important assessable, not prioritizing what is easily measurable
Basic principles for test development (cont’d)
• Presenting individual results in profiles
• Focusing first on strengths, then on weaknesses
• Distinguishing between errors that [may] disturb,
and errors that destroy communication
**********• A collaborative approach to test development• Large-scale pretesting of all materials
• An eclectic approach to method (“Q +Q”)
Development Process
• Analyses of relevant literature and research• Continuous cooperation with ’broad’ expert groups• Small-scale piloting > Adjustments• Large-scale pretesting in randomly selected
groups of students in the country (n ≈ 400 per task)
• Analyses of results AND of students’ and teachers’ views and suggestions (“the q + q approach”)
• Compilation of tests• Standard setting and benchmarking in broad
groups of experts
Reactions to national tests• Students generally positive to varied, authentic
tasks – not too easy, not too difficult
• > 95 % of teachers positive to the national testsfunction, content, level of difficulty, guidelines, profiles, layout
• [Teacher] discussions aboutworkload; practical aspects of oral testing; standards; linguistic requirements
• [Political] discussions aboutrole of national tests (correlation with final grades); confidentiality; costs
National assessment in Sweden: Challenges
• Coping with multiple aims• Balancing implementation and prescription• Bridging the gap between formative and summative
assessment• Further developing methods of collaboration with different
stakeholders, e.g. students• Emphasizing further the pedagogical potential of
assessment for efficient and positive learning• Increasing assessment competence and confidence
among teachers• Analyzing further the relationship between the Swedish
syllabuses and the CEFR
Language (Subject) Teacher Educationin Sweden:Two models
I. Language studies, didactics and teaching practice integrated (4.5 – 5.5 years)
II. Language studies —
Didactics and teaching practice as a separate programme (1.5 years)
(often older students with work experience)
Subject teachers normally teach two subjects
Testing and Assessment in Teacher Training
Considerable variation between different universities
Strong criticism from the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education of too little emphasis on assessment and grading in teacher training programmes
Growing interest in assessment issues, in pre- and in-service training
Considerable increase of budget from the new government for teacher pre- and in-service training, including assessment and grading
Example of structurePre- and inservice training
• General lecture(s) on assessment and testing(construct/rubric; validity/reliability; formative/summative; “the joint
venture”; assessment of/for learning; washback; rating/grading, …)
• Literature seminars and workshops(Designing tasks for different constructs and different purposes; rating tasks — focusing on inter- and intra- rater reliability; national tests;
benchmarks/ standards; CEFR / ELP, …)
• Assignments during teaching practice / in practice
• Follow-up seminars based on practical examples
EALTA* Guidelines for Good Practice in Language Testing and Assessment
Three categories/“audiences”:
• Teacher pre- and in-service training• Classroom assessment
• Test development in national or institutionaltesting units or centres
Basic principles the same for all categories:Respect for students/examinees, responsibility, fairness, reliability, validity, collaboration among the parties involved
* European Association for Language Testing and Assessmentwww.ealta.eu.org
EALTA GuidelinesConsiderations for teacher pre-service and in-
service training in language testing and assessmentExamples
• How aware are trainees made of the range of assessment procedures appropriate to their present or future needs?
• What is the balance between theory and practice in the training?
• How far are the trainees involved in developing, trialling and evaluating assessment procedures?
• How far do assessment procedures used to evaluate the trainees follow the principles they have been taught?
EALTA GuidelinesConsiderations for classroom testing and
assessment Examples
ASSESSMENT PURPOSE(S) AND SPECIFICATION• What is the purpose of the assessment?• How does the assessment purpose relate to the curriculum?
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES• Who designs the assessment procedures?• What account is taken of students’ views on the assessment
procedures?
CONSEQUENCES• What use is made of the results?
• What are the consequences of the results of the assessment for learners?
EALTA GuidelinesConsiderations for test development in national or
institutional testing units or centres Examples
• TEST PURPOSE AND SPECIFICATION
• TEST DESIGN and ITEM WRITING
• QUALITY CONTROL and TEST ANALYSES
• TEST ADMINISTRATION
• REVIEW
• WASHBACK
• LINKAGE TO THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK
European student 2005:
“I think that a good language test/ assessment should get students chance to show what they know and devolope their skills. It should contain of listening and reading comprehations, as well as writing and grammar part. But the most important thing is to speak in that language, so I think there should be also oral exams. Speaking is the most important, because without it, we wouldn’t communicate. Because of that students should also learn pronunciation.”
Matters to discuss
• Formative and summative assessment / classroom assessment and exams: similarities and differences?
• Influence from tests and testing on learning and teaching: positive, negative — inevitable…?
• Effective ways of supporting teachers in their different assessment activities and practices
• The role of students in testing and assessment
• “Making what is most important assessable, not prioritizing what is easily measurable” – effects and implications?
• The EALTA Guidelines for Good Practice in Language Testing and Assessment