Curricular implications عربى 中文 한국어 Português русский 2000 tests administered Arabic Chinese Korean Portuguese Russian Assessment in other languages was added using ID: 783413
Download The PPT/PDF document "Assessing proficiency in languages" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Assessing proficiency in languages
Curricular implications
Slide2Slide3عربى
,
中文
, 한국어, Português,
русский
2,000+ tests administered
Arabic – Chinese – Korean
Portuguese - Russian
Assessment in other languages was added using
internal funding
Slide4Testing plan
Students were tested
at the end of spring and fall semesters
Slide5RECURRING CYCLES
Slide6Data collected
Data includes:
Proficiency test scores: Speaking, Reading and Listening (standardized tests)
R
esponses to background questionnaire, e.g., age, gender, other languages spoken, study abroad experience, language use outside the classroom, etc.Classroom observation data
Slide7Proficiency and learning outcomes
Slide8Median assessment scores
For
C
hinese, French, Russian, and Spanish (by year)
Slide9Median assessment scores by year: Chinese
Year
1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
n=56
n=70
n=45
n=27
Reading
n=49
n=67
n=41
n=12
Listening
n=53
n=64
n=33
n
=12
NL
NM
NH
IL
NL
IH
IM
Chinese
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
NM
NH
IL
IMReadingNLNMILILListeningNLNLILIL
Slide10Median assessment scores by year: French
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
n=243
n
=286
n
=251
n=85
Reading
n=243
n=268
n=222
n
=80
Listening
n=235
n=266
n=217
n
=78
NL
NM
NH
IL
IH
IM
AM
AL
French
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
NHILIMIHReadingNHILAMIH
Listening
NM
IL
IM
IM
Slide11Median assessment scores by year: Russian
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
n
=87
n=101
n
=31
n=4
Reading
n=89
n=105
n
=31
n
=5
Listening
n=86
n=105
n=31
n
=5
NL
NM
NH
IL
IH
IM
Russian
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
NH
ILIMIHReadingNLNHIMIMListeningNL
NH
IL
IL
AL
Slide12Median assessment scores by year: Spanish
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Speaking
n
=353
n
=456
n=524
n=264
Reading
n=346
n
=428
n
=475
n
=169
Listening
n
=344
n=418
n
=467
n
=165
NL
NM
NH
IL
IH
IM
AM
AL
Spanish
Year 1
Year 2Year 3Year 4SpeakingNHILIMIHReadingNHIL
AM
AM
Listening
NM
NH
IM
AM
Slide13Implications
Data show that most students are not attaining the intended proficiency LO by graduation.
Expectations need to be adjusted to reflect what is realistic.
Other LOs may need to be adjusted too.
LOs need to reflect the proficiency profiles of learners of different languages (e.g. reading and listening in French and Spanish vs. Russian and Chinese)
Slide14Implications (cont.)
More emphasis needs to be placed on the development of certain skills.
C
lassroom observation data uncover some potential explanations for proficiency findings.
Slide15Proficiency outcomes and grading:
Walk the walk?
All language programs list proficiency outcomes.
All language courses have explicit or implicit proficiency outcomes.
BUT…Current formative and summative assessments may not accurately reflect (or encourage) development of proficiency.
Do grades in a course reflect proficiency level?
Slide16UofU
Grade-score
correlations
(AY 15-16)
Correlations
Speaking
Reading
Listening
Grade
Pearson Correlation
.
119
*
.
031
.
00
9
N
196
207
207
*. Correlation significant at the 0.05 level
Arabic, Chinese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, all levels
Slide17UofU
Grade-score
correlations
(AY 16-17)
Correlations
Speaking
Reading
Listening
Grade
Pearson Correlation
.229
**
.194
**
.159
**
N
227
227
224
**. Correlation significant at the 0.01 level
Arabic, Chinese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, all levels
Slide18Sustainability?
Slide19Basic Outcomes Student Self Assessment (BOSSA)
How does BOSSA work?
50-minute
lab
session
Lab
session: 6 components