Category: Student Assessments

The follow entry outlines a pre-assessment strategy I would like to use as an EAL teacher team-teaching in a 10th grade biology class.  For this lesson, the biology teacher has decided she wants to give her students a better perspective of the impact humans have on planet Earth by having them read an article about the topic.

Here is the article to be read.

My role is to assess the English Language Learners’ readiness for this lesson, differentiate lessons for them, and track their progress.  I will do the same for students with special needs as well.

The Pre-Assessment Strategy

The main concern of the biology teacher is that the ELLs will not have an adequate enough understanding of the article’s vocabulary to fully appreciate it.  However, we should not assume that simply because these students do not speak English as a first language that this is the case, so the first step is to administer a quiz to the whole class with ten key vocabulary words from the article in it.

Click here to view the quiz.

As the quiz was taken in a Google Form, I have immediate data  which I can now use to divide the class into three levels of academic readiness to eventually read the article.

For this particular activity let us assume that the breakdown is as follows:

Group 1: Five students who got eight to ten correct

Group 2: Twelve students who got five to eight correct

Group 3: Five students who got zero to five correct. Three of these are the ELL students and two have special needs to be addressed

Differentiation and Tracking Progress

Now that we have our pre-assessment data recorded and the class divided into groups based on their readiness to read the article, I can focus my attention on the ELLs and those with special needs.  However, as I am teaching very closely with the biology teacher so as to not alienate the ELLs, we both will have a responsibility and role in differentiating instruction so that everyone gets the most out of the article to be read.

For group 1 who already has a fairly strong knowledge of the vocabulary, I will assign them to a work station with the intent of expanding their knowledge rather than reiterating what they already know.  To accomplish this I will provide them with a list of ten synonyms for the vocabulary they already ready know and ask them to attempt to match them with the originals by searching on the web with iPads.  Finally, to assess their progress I will ask each student to come up to my desk and give me the synonyms.

Group 2 represents the majority of the class with average knowledge of the necessary vocabulary who ideally need to be at group 1 capability before reading the article.  To achieve this I believe these students need to use the vocabulary in contextual situations so I will have them write sentences.  First these twelve students will be provided with the definitions of the sentences and then they will be tasked with writing a single sentence to demonstrate understanding.  To track their progress I will walk around their desks and ask them to read some sentences to me.  If they are accurate I can consider this exercise to be successful in preparing them for the article.

Finally group 3, which consists of ELLs and those with special needs, are the group which I consider to need instruction in the vocabulary from scratch and not simply extra support like the others.  For the ELLs, I do not see the value in explaining the meanings of the terms to them and it will be much more effective if they learn through self-discovery.  Therefore, I will task them with finding the meanings in their first languages with iPads.  After they have done this I will ask them to retake the original quiz and compare their scores.  If they have significantly improved, and if time allows, I will assign them the same task as group 2 students, then assess their progress by reading their sentences.

With regard to the two students with special needs (e.g., dyslexia and ADHD) in group 3, I do not believe separating or pulling them from the classroom is necessary, so I will ask the special education teacher to join this lesson and work with them.  The linguistic task I will assign to them is to find examples of the vocabulary with iPads.  For example, they will search for images of the term ‘destruction’ and present it to me as proof of understanding.  If the student is able to, I will ask them to give me a verbal example of term in a sentence to demonstrate understanding.  Finally, I will ask them to take the original quiz again to measure learning.

Conclusion

The benefit of the pre-assessment is that I as a teacher can see where my students are at before throwing them into a complex task.  When differentiating instruction I believe the goal should be to bring the whole class to the same point, but different paths will have to be taken.  For those with a strong understanding already, they will be challenged most by expanding their knowledge.  For the middle zone, these students will need reinforcement by means of contextualized tasks, such as writing sentences.  And for the student who need more assistance, the key is to not alienate and pull them out of the classroom, but to utilize their strengths (e.g., first languages, research skills) so that they can be on par with the rest of the class by the time we begin the main lesson.

Here is a flowchart outlining the thought process for reference:

 

The following entry describes a projected based activity I will use in a 10th grade ESL classroom.  Included are the project description, evaluation rubric, and my plan for monitoring and giving feedback to the students as they work towards completion each day.

Project Description

This project asks 10th grade ESL students to consider the theme of communication between individuals in society.  In order to do so, they will be tasked with the cross-curricular task of designing a traditional board game together in groups.

The major goals include learning how to give and listen to instructions in English, engaging in collaborative and cooperative planning, and the fostering creative thinking.  In order to accomplish these goals, the objectives include proper usage of language targets, giving and listening to logical instructions, and using appropriate board game terminology.  Respectively, this means using sequencers (e.g., first, then, finally), correct phrases (e.g., You have to / You cannot) for directions, and vocabulary such as ‘shuffle’, ‘dice’, or ‘drafting cards’ appropriately.

In addition to linguistic targets, this project requires the cultivation and demonstration of important skills related to information and communication, thinking and reasoning, and those required for success in both personal life and the workplace.  When necessary, evidence of the these is required to be presented in a Google Docs file to demonstrate technological competence and accountability for on’e’ own work.

At minimum, students will have completed a rudimentary board game complete with a theme, working mechanics, and written instructions for playing. The physical game itself may be printed on paper and the instructions must be written in Google Docs.

Evaluation Rubric

The following is the evaluation rubric for this project created here:

http://www.quickrubric.com/r#/qr/chrisbell/making-a-board-game5

Monitoring and Feedback Plan

This project is scheduled to take seven days in total with the students completing a designated schedule each day. The purpose of this is to accomplish micro-tasks and to avoid being overwhelmed by all the requirements of the project.  In order to monitor and provide feedback, I will engage in a series of formative assessments each day to help keep the students on track and maintain an accurate image of where they are in terms of progress.

One the first day, in addition to the rubric in a Google Doc, I will also share with the students a seven-day plan with the objectives they need to accomplish each day.  It will look like this:

Major Group Products

Day 1: Students will demonstrate knowledge of how to use Google Docs (e.g., opening a file, creating content, and commenting) and Canva. Additionally, students will present some potential themes for their game Day 2: Students will delegate roles including designer, rule maker, and mechanics expert. This will require skills from art, English, and math (e.g., basic counting, arithmetic, probability). Additionally, a theme will be decided upon Day 3: Students will present a draft of ideas in Google Docs including the type of game is. Additionally, they will present the basic parts of their game after researching on the Web appropriate vocabulary Day 4: Students will present a rough sketch of their game design either on paper or via an app of their choice if they do not like Canva. Additionally, they will present the basic order the game is played using sequencers Day 5: Students will finalize their instructions on how to play the game including what is necessary and not necessary for game play along with the appropriate sequencers.  Additionally, students can present some basic game mechanics (e.g., how to win, how to lose at minimum) Day 6: Students will spend their time finalizing their project. This time is best served compromising and negotiating on the finer points of the design, mechanics and rules for playing Day 7: Students will have completed a rudimentary board game complete with a theme, working mechanics, and written instructions for playing. The physical game itself will be printed paper and the instructions in Google Docs

Major Individual Products

Day 7: Each student will have the opportunity to explain and share their game with various groups. Students must use sequencers, clear instructions, and appropriate board game vocabulary

Each day I will make a point to have short conferences with each group to gauge where they are.  For example, on the first day I will meet with each group and ask them to demonstrate basic use of Google Docs as well as some potential themes they have up with so far.  Near the end of the project work time, an assigned recorder (which will change each day) will comment in the Google Doc about what we have discussed to serve as a record of their progress that particular day.  This process will be repeated each day and if the groups can both verbally explain and write the comments I will give them a single participation point which counts towards their overall course goal, but not the board game project’s final goal.

Additionally, I will comment in Google Docs about what they are doing well on and where they need to improve by referencing the rubric that they already have.  For example, if a particular day’s language targets, cooperative communications, and interpersonal skills were excellent I would write a comment about how they are on track but need demonstrate better thinking and reasoning skills the following day.  The purpose of this is to complement the seven-day plan with a broad overview of where they are overall in terms of successfully meeting the requirements.

Another assessment method I will use is to directly ask each group at the end of the day to informally give themselves a current grade by adding up the points while looking at the rubric.  However, they will not only be required to give a grade, but must also walk me through their thinking process and explain why they gave themselves that grade.  The purposes of this exercise are to 1) drive home the concept that this is their project and whether they do well or not is solely their responsibility and 2) provide a way for students to measure their daily formative assessments with the ones I leave each day in Google Docs.  In other words, to provide a clear image of the standards of the teacher.

One the last day I will have a representative from each group join another group and explain and play their newly created game.  Each player (aside from the student explaining) will assess that representative with a copy of the rubric printed out in front of them by circling or coloring the appropriate region.  The purpose of this peer review is to aid me as the teacher in my final grading.  That is, if the students’ peers largely felt that the representative was able to hit grammatical targets, gave clear instructions, and used appropriate vocabulary, then my final assessment should reflect this as the students we able to effectively communicate.

With regard to the overall goals, if the students have successfully collaborated (i.e., can demonstrate their negotiations and how they problem solved) to create a board game and can explain how to play it using the proper English grammar and vocabulary, this project will be considered a success.

The following entry considers three components which provide a cohesive strategy for using and modifying formative assessments in the classroom.

Asking the Right Questions

Generally speaking, directly asking students whether they understand a concept does not yield accurate results.  One reason may be that a student may simply not know how to evaluate their knowledge.  As an alternative, it is much more effective to apply the concept presented that day and ask for evidence of learning.

One way to do this might be to use the Google Forms application as an exit ticket at the end of class and have students input one thing they have learned, one thing they feel a little uneasy about still, and one question they have.  This data is then automatically collated in a spreadsheet which the students and teachers can view to compare and contrast their knowledge gains.

Example:

Takeaway: Modify assessment if questions do not evaluate knowledge.

Analyzing Data and Work Properly

Collecting data in a spreadsheet is an accurate and convenient way for students and teachers to assess knowledge, but alone is not enough.  More important, I believe, is having a method to understand what the data mean so that review can take place which is not a waste of time.  One example would be to use a rubric which clearly states quality standards and serves to measure improvement in an objective way.

Consider the case where students have to write a topic sentence for a paragraph as their exit ticket in their 10th grade ESL class.  One way to measure this would be to send them to the students with comments on how to improve, but there is no assurance that the students will understand the teacher’s feedback.  A better way, however, would be to have the students self-evaluate at the top of the next class with a rubric that clearly states what makes a proper topic sentence when writing paragraphs.

Demonstration in a math class:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csN2NJtO18Y

Takeaway: Modify assessment if students cannot measure where they are at.

Appropriate Follow-up

If the students have received unambiguous tasks for demonstrating knowledge and that knowledge is able to be accurately evaluated in an objective manner, the third component of an effective strategy for assessments is to know what to do with the results.   Let us turn to the results of the aforementioned Google Forms exit ticket to illuminate this point.

Consider, for example, that a student wrote that they understood the purpose of topic sentences very well, they still feel uneasy about transitions between paragraphs, and they had a question about the best way to write a conclusion.  Additionally, consider the situation where the majority of the class expressed some confusion about transitions between paragraphs.  As a result, the teacher would know exactly what the students want to learn about and can now dedicate review to the various uses of transition terms.

In short, this method would demonstrate that classroom review is data-driven and not randomly chosen by the teacher.  Additionally, planning for classroom review also prevents a teacher from singling out a student who needs help by overloading them with excessive homework.

Takeaway: Modify assessment if it does not provide a clear picture of what needs to be reviewed more.