Assessment and Feedback
Assessment and evaluation practices reflect our educational culture and our cultural beliefs about teaching and learning. Many international students come from a classroom in which assessment and evaluation is summative, often in the form of a final exam worth 100% of the course grade. They are unfamiliar with the concept of formative assessment, which assesses learning in progress and contributes to the learning process, and therefore do not understand the importance placed on attendance, participation in classroom activities as a means of monitoring and assessing student progress.
Language can be a particular issue in relation to assessment, as instructors may have trouble interpreting responses due to grammatical or linguistic errors and may not recognize that a student has demonstrated understanding of course content. Similarly, a question that is unclear or vague may be misinterpreted by students and lead to responses that do not demonstrate what the student actually has learned. It is equally important to distinguish between language and content and to assess for content as it is to word assessments as simply and clearly as possible so that students know what kind of response the instructor is looking for.
Providing students with rubrics and clear assessment criteria greatly helps to clarify instructor expectations as does providing models of well executed assignments and giving students a chance to compare them to poorly executed examples using the rubrics is often very helpful. Instructors at Thompson Rivers University noted that employing assessment tools other than oral presentations and written assignments can help international students demonstrate what they have learned. They commented that incorporating “well planned multiple choice or true/false components can level the playing field and give a clearer indication of comprehension” (TRU instructor handbook “Assessment,” pg. 52).
The website for the Writing Center at the University of North Caroline, Chapel Hill points out that multilingual learners need more time for assessment. According to the website
Research summarized by Grabe (2009) has demonstrated that even fluent non-native speakers read 50-70% slower in their foreign language than in their native language. Writing in a foreign language is similarly slow because of the extra layer of cognitive processing required to produce well-developed, coherent texts in a foreign language.
They conclude that
In the interest of gaining a more reliable measure of student learning, providing extended time for assessment to ESL students has been recognized as a reasonable practice by several universities and professional credentialing boards. Reasonable accommodation is determined locally, but ranges between 25% and 50% extended time.
Retrieved from https://writingcenter.unc.edu/teaching-multilingual-students/
A similar point is made in the videos from Oregon State University that can be found on this part of the website. We need to ensure that our assessment practices measure what our students have learned in a way that is fair to all learners and provides an accurate way to know whether our students have met the learning objectives for the course.
Questions for reflection/ discussion before viewing the video clip
- What kind of assessment practices do you employ in your teaching? Why do you prefer these types of assessment?
- Which of these assessment types is most difficult for multilingual learners? Which is easiest? Why?
v Multiple choice questions
v Short answer questions
v Essay exams
After viewing the video clip
- What constitutes a “thoughtful” response? Is this an important aspect of your assessment practices?
- Did you agree with the instructor’s comment that providing “immediate and thoughtful” response is more challenging for multilingual learners?
- Would you consider any of the accommodations suggested in the video? Do you think they would work with the assessment tasks you give in your classroom? Why or why not?
- Do you feel that it is fair to all learners to provide accommodations like these to everyone? Would it be better to offer the exam separately to multilingual learners and provide them with specific accommodations? Why or why not?
Action - Oriented Feedback
Action - Oriented Feedback
Shapiro, S., Farrelly, R. & Tomas, Z. (2014 ). Fostering International Student Success in Higher Education. Alexandria, VA: TESOL International Association Press.
UFV Library Catalogue
Subjects: Students, Foreign -- English-speaking countries
Location Call No. Status
ABBOTSFORD LB 2375 S43 2014 STACKS
Chapter 4: Assignments and Assessment
Distinguishes between formative assessment, which assesses learning in progress and contributes to the learning process, and summative assessment, which evaluates learning at the end of a course or unit. Some pros and cons of different forms of summative assessment are given in the box on p. 53.
Backward design is discussed on pp 54-55 and front-loading is discussed on pp. 55-56.
One issue regarding assessment is lack of clarity in the assignment description or instructions. Some guidelines are included on pp. 56-57, and explicit rubrics are discussed on pp. 57-59. Some helpful guidelines are included in the box on p. 58.
The section on grading and evaluation on pp. 65-71 includes many helpful strategies to help instructors “navigate” the issue of assessment and make decisions about how they will decide on and deliver assignments in their courses.
The discussion of “accents” on p. 68-69 is related to the discussion of “accents” in the video “Writing across Borders.”
Some suggestions for possible “accommodations” are offered on pp. 67-71. The section “Toward Equity and Empowerment” reminds us that the purpose of assessment and evaluation is to allow students to “show what they have learned in class” (p. 71). Rather than lowering the standards, any accommodations or assessment practices should enable us to “create conditions whereby all students can be successful in meeting the high standards we set for them—not to change our expectations for those who are struggling” (p. 71).