Guenter Nold University of Dortmund guenter.nold@udo

1. Central Results of the DESI Study: Competences in German as L1 and L2 in the Context of the German School System Guenter Nold University of Dortmund guenter.nold@udo.edu

2. Outline • DESI: objectives • Test construct and task characteristics • DESI competence scales • Test results • Background variables

3. Objectives of DESI Investigate the causes of the different levels of achievement: cognitive, affective/motivational, social, classroom, home, society Quantitative/qualitative research design Assess Achievement in spoken and written German (L1/L2) and English as FL at grade 9, all types of schools Evaluate English Late Partial Immersion CLIL Implement Changes based on results Objectives of DESI

4. The Test Battery of the German component • reading competence • writing competence • language awareness • orthographic competence • lexical competence/vocabulary • argumentation

5. Moving from a test construct to a proficiency scale Curricula Construct Tasks Task Characteristics Research Difficulty Parameters Proficiency Scale

6. The reading competence test construct The ability • to locate important lexical phrases that are specifically referred to, • to locate and analyse difficult lexical items in the text, • to infer meaning by establishing logical relations, • to trigger prior knowledge(such as concept of metaphor, comic or ironic meaning) in order to connect and compare it with information in the text, • to connect different parts in a text in order to infer meaning (e.g. motives in narratives, lines of argumentation in expository texts) and to develop a mental model of the whole text.

7. Scale of reading competence Level A (first competence level): able to identify meaningful units in a sentence or paragraph as long as they are explicit, Level B (second competence level): able to focus on a specifically important part of a text, to bridge a gap between sentences, or to focus on a semantically or logically difficult part of a text, Level C (third competence level): able to trigger more specific world or text knowledge so as to connect pieces of information, frequently pieces at different parts in a text, and especially pieces that can explain motives or causation, Level D (fourth competence level): able to develop and analyse comprehensive mental models of the whole text that develop while reading, able to make sense of main characters/people and their relationships, of time relations and causality.

8. Result: reading competence overall Overall the students reached the following levels at the end of grade 9/second testing point: 4 percent did not reach level A, 62 percent reached level A, 32 percent reached level B, 4 percent reached level C, 6 percent reached level D.

9. The reading test results in relation to school types

10. Text production • The writing tasks focus on authentic situations: • a formal letter of complaint, • a personal letter to a friend. • The quality of the letters depends on • characteristics of content and formal aspects of a letter (text type characteristics) • -characteristics of lexical and syntactic aspects and also text grammar features.

11. Writing scale: the semantic and pragmatic dimension Level A (first competence level) - mostly informal language, logically flawed in the presentation of ideas, no tribute to the essential text elements of a letter, Level B (second competence level) - written communication between the sender and receiver of a letter is possible without problems. Vocabulary is still rather limited. Yet, able to develop ideas, essential text elements of a letter emerging. Level C (third competence level) - letter writing stylistically appropriate, vivid and adequate in the choice of words, and logical in the presentation of ideas.

12. Writing scale: the language system related dimension Level A (first competence level) Mistakes in orthography, punctuation, and syntax still quite common, the mistakes impact negatively on communication or even make it impossible to pass on goal-related information. Level B (second competence level): Orthography and syntax of the text are mostly adequate. Level C (third competence level): The different aspects of the language system are adequate.

13. Result: writing competence overall The overall text production of the students at the end ofgrade 9/second testing point: The semantic and pragmatic dimension: Almost 30 percent not beyond level A (below the curricular norm), 60 percent at level B, 13 percent at level C. The language system related dimension: About 33 percent at level A or below this level (3 percent), 67 percent of the students at level B or even C.

14. The writing test results in relation to school types:the semantic and pragmatic dimension

15. Language awareness Focus on degrees of grammatical accuracy and stylistic adequacy of the students` language use and their awareness of problem areas. Both, test of explicit knowledge of grammatical categories and test of ability to monitor and correct inappropriate and incorrect language items.

16. Language awareness (2) Three linguistic phenomena highlighted : -grammatical phenomena that are acquired late or are affected by current language change(e.g., the distinction between dative and accusative case, congruence in a complex sentence, genitive case, subjunctive forms), -indirect speech and use of the subjunctive, -stylistic aspects(semantic collocations, aspects of subjunctive /Konjunktiv 1 and 2) The task items involve error correction, applying grammatical terminology, and using language creatively on a small scale.

17. Language awareness scale Level A (first competence level): Simple grammatical awareness Able to identify obvious grammatical mistakes, in some cases also capable of correcting mistakes, Level B (second competence level): Simple stylistic awareness Able to use appropriate style and to produce coherent text if the context and content are simple, Level C (third competence level): Extensive grammatical monitoring Able to identify and to correct grammatical mistakes, even if the grammatical phenomena are difficult. In addition, able to apply simple grammatical terms to examples of language use, Level D (fourth competence level): Extensive stylistic monitoring Able to identify complex stylistic mistakes and to correct them. In addition, able to cope with linguistic ambiguities, Level E (fifth competence level): Active use of declarative language knowledge e.g., able to comment on different types of subjunctive when used in a text.

18. Language awareness results overall at the end of grade 9/second testing point: about 25 percent of the students below level A, about 20 percent at level A, about 22 percent at level B, about 20 percent at level C, about 12 percent at level D, and 1 percent at level E.

19. Language Awareness and school types

20. Three further competences • Orthographic competence • Lexical competence • Argumentation (not dealt with here in detail)

21. The language competences of boys and girlsmean of all the tests of the German component

22. Students with/without a migration background • Students without migration background • 92 % of German L1 speakers • 21 % of bi- or multilingual • 5 % of non-German L1 speakers • Students with one parentborn abroad • 6 % of German L1 speakers • 32 % of bi- or multilingual • 8 % of non-German L1 speakers • Students born in Germany, parents born abroad • 1 % of German L1 speakers • 28 % of bi- or multilingual • 32 % of non-German L1 speakers • Students and parents born abroad • 1 % of German L1 speakers • 19 % of bi- or multilingual • 54 % of non-German L1 speakers

23. Students with a migration background(German L1, bi-multilingual, non-German L1) and school type

24. The overall competences in German and school background The German competences of the non-German L1 student population is particularly problematic in the school types where their share is relatively high, typically in H- and IGS-schools.

25. Socio-economic status and cultural capitalof the family non-German L1students: families with the lowest status/capital (value of 40 on a scale of up to 90 points), German L1 students: families with a relatively high status/capital (value of 50). The bi- and multilingual group is closer to this group (value of 47).

26. The overall competences in German and language background Students with German L1: German competences 92 points higher on the DESI scale than students with non-German L1. The bi- or multilingual group closer to the German L1 group (minus 27 points).

27. The effect of the language background (bi-multilingual, non-German L1) on overall competences in German and English > German > English

28. Socio-economic background, cultural capital, education of parents and competences in maths, German, and English

29. Background variables and language competences Relevant predictors of competence development in the German component of DESI -the cultural capital of the family, -the socio-economic status of the family, -the migration background (a risk in German L1, positive in English L2) -a German speaking family.

30. Thanks! Publications: Beck, B. & Klieme, E. (ed.)(2006). Sprachliche Kompetenzen: Konzepte und Testinstrumente zur Messung der Leistungen im Deutschen und Englischen. Weinheim: Beltz (in press). The DESI Consortium (ed.)(2007). Volume (2) Weinheim:Beltz (in preparation). Further DESI publications (2006) on the internet and in periodicals.