1 / 26

Constructing Learner-Centered Assessment: Designs, Systems, and Outcomes

Constructing Learner-Centered Assessment: Designs, Systems, and Outcomes. Steven J. Ross SPS-KGU Kobe-Sanda, Japan. Preliminaries. Proficiency: absolute (criterion-referenced) or relative (norm-referenced) abilities in language domain irrespective of context.

celine
Download Presentation

Constructing Learner-Centered Assessment: Designs, Systems, and Outcomes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Constructing Learner-Centered Assessment: Designs, Systems, and Outcomes Steven J. Ross SPS-KGU Kobe-Sanda, Japan

  2. Preliminaries • Proficiency: absolute (criterion-referenced) or relative (norm-referenced) abilities in language domain irrespective of context. • Achievement: absolute (criterion-referenced) or dynamic (growth-referenced) learning based on a syllabus • Self-and-Peer Assessments here refer to school-based achievement assessment.

  3. Rationale for SBA • Not all learners are extrinsically motivated • Instrumental motivation is the norm • Motivational void is often large in foreign/second language learning • Locus of control is mostly external • Learner empowerment for self-and-peer assessment may shift motivation

  4. Passivity • Most language learners are socialized into taking a passive role • Assessment is done to them, rather than what they can do for themselves. • The goal is to gradually shift from passive to active participation in assessment

  5. Achievement Components • Teachers’ on-going record of individual student performance on achievement tasks. • Learner self-assessment of absolute mastery and dynamic change • Peer-assessment of cooperative learning contribution and performances on achievement tasks

  6. Adjusting Self-Assessment • Achievement is more validly assessed than proficiency • Achievement is experiential with episodic memory for reference • Proficiency events may be too abstract and not directly experienced • Over-estimation (low) and under-estimation (high) prevalent in neophytes

  7. Factors in Peer-Assessment • Benchmarking is advisable in early dry run simulations • Quality standards need to be established early on • PA can be misinterpreted as popularity • Learners often need assessment training

  8. Triangulation • Teacher, Self, and Peer Assessments should correlate with each other • Early and frequent data collection can facilitate calibration of the assessment system • Learners need to be aware of importance of assessment validity • Self and Peer assessment has to count towards record of achievement.

  9. The Research Fair as Goal • Semester or Annual Event • Language curriculum can be designed around the RF: e.g., seminars and presentation courses. • One year (presentation course) or two year (seminar) preparation time frame • Groups nominate research theme • Cooperative learning (research, analysis, rehearsal, in-class and RF presentation)

  10. Assessment Content • Cooperative learning projects are ideal • In and out of class group preparation for presentations • Group presentation can be globally and locally peer- assessed • Individual presentations can be globally and locally peer-assessed

  11. Assessment Contexts

  12. Research Fair Project Assessment

  13. In-Class Project Assessment

  14. Individual Global Peer-Assessment

  15. Global Peer-Assessment Criteria • Clarity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Voice 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Eye Contact 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Organization 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Balance of Roles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Originality 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  16. In-Group Peer Assessment Criteria • Cooperation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Contribution 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Initiative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Effort 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Attitude 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Expertise 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  17. Reflective Self-Assessment • Contribution 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Effort 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Revision 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Growth 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Cooperation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 • Motivation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  18. Potential Long-Term Benefits • Most learners join the work force after graduation • Presentation skills are developed • Group cooperation skills are developed • Technical skills (computers, Power Point, etc) are developed • Confidence may be enhanced • Language proficiency increases

  19. Organisational Troubleshooting • Organizational workload issues • Delegation of task management • Assessment monitors in Research Fair • Using technology for frequent peer-assessment • Archiving continuous assessment

  20. Toward Formative Assessment • Self-and-Peer Assessments can be either summative or formative: usually summative before formative. • Early-mid-final assessments can capture dynamic changes. • Achievement assessment can credit both absolute performance and growth over time.

  21. A Systems Analysis Approach to Assessment Design • Engineered Cooperative Learning Events • Self-and-Peer Assessment training • Inclusion of dynamic improvement criteria • Efficient data collection • Efficient data storage and retrieval • Efficient data analysis • Triangulation and validation

  22. Empirical Research Evidence • Longitudinal Sequential Cohort Design • S1 S2 S3 S4 F1 F2 F3 F4 • Each cohort contains about 250 students • S1 to S4 employed mostly summative assessments • F1 to F4 employed increasingly more formative assessments

  23. Assessment Practice Shift

  24. Preliminary Outcomes: Listening Proficiency (TOEFL)

  25. Preliminary Outcomes Reading Proficiency (TOEFL)

  26. Research Agenda • Longitudinal comparative impact analyses of formative vs summative assessment • Peer-assessment training impacts • Analysis of self-assessment residuals (differences between predicted and observed self-assessments) • Motivational change over time as a consequence of formative assessment

More Related