Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Fremdsprachenkompetenz – Der Schlüssel zur Tür nach Europa Kloster Banz 26. Oktober 2006 Language Testing and Teacher Training — A Swedish Example. Gudrun Erickson Göteborg University, Sweden Dept. of Education; Language and Literature Unit email@example.com. The Swedish School System.
Fremdsprachenkompetenz – Der Schlüssel zur Tür nach EuropaKloster Banz26. Oktober 2006Language Testingand Teacher Training—A Swedish Example
Göteborg University, Sweden
Dept. of Education; Language and Literature Unit
• National curricula and syllabuses for subjects
The Ministry of Education
The Swedish National Agency for Education
Different universities in the country
Göteborg University: Foreign languages
Formative and summative materials
• [Optional] Second FL in compulsory school; approx. 80 % start, 62 % complete their studies – German, Spanish, French
• English compulsory in upper secondary education — a core subject
• Second FL compulsory in more academically oriented programs in upper sec. (Fr, Ger, Sp + e.g. Italian, Russian, Chinese…)
French, German, Spanish
• Summative materials for two courses in upper sec. ed.
• Illustrative materials for productive skills
• Under development: formative (diagnostic) + summative materials for compulsory school
Intercultural communicative competence
7 stages of proficiency
1 A1 – A2
3 A2 –B1
5 B1 – B2
7 B2 – C1
Four subtests — Target language only (instructions, questions, answers)
• Reception : Reading comprehension
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
• Culture in a wide sense, an integrated aspectof test content and design
• Reflection, e.g. self assessment, focused upon in several materials
• Results / Sub-scores presented in profiles
• Model provided for aggregation into total score
Extensive guidelines for teachers. Benchmarked examples of oral and written production and interaction, incl. reasoning and comments based on goals, grading criteria and pre-defined analytic factors.
• A collaborative approach to test development
• Large-scale pretesting of all materials
• An eclectic approach to method (“Q +Q”)
function, content, level of difficulty, guidelines, profiles, layout
• [Teacher] discussions about
workload; practical aspects of oral testing; standards; linguistic requirements
• [Political] discussions about
role of national tests (correlation with final grades); confidentiality; costs
I. Language studies, didactics and teaching practice integrated (4.5 – 5.5 years)
II. Language studies —
Didactics and teaching practice as a separate programme (1.5 years)
(often older students with work experience)
Subject teachers normally teach two subjects
Considerable variation between different universities
Strong criticism from the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education of too little emphasis on assessment and grading in teacher training programmes
Growing interest in assessment issues, in pre- and in-service training
Considerable increase of budget from the new government for teacher pre- and in-service training, including assessment and grading
• General lecture(s) on assessment and testing
(construct/rubric; validity/reliability; formative/summative; “the joint venture”; assessment of/for learning; washback; rating/grading, …)
• Literature seminars and workshops
(Designing tasks for different constructs and different purposes; rating tasks — focusing on inter- and intra- rater reliability; national tests; benchmarks/ standards; CEFR / ELP, …)
• Assignments during teaching practice / in practice
• Follow-up seminars based on practical examples
• Teacher pre- and in-service training
• Classroom assessment
• Test development in national or institutionaltesting units or centres
Basic principles the same for all categories:
Respect for students/examinees, responsibility, fairness, reliability, validity, collaboration among the parties involved
* European Association for Language Testing and Assessment
• How aware are trainees made of the range of assessment procedures appropriate to their present or future needs?
• What is the balance between theory and practice in the training?
• How far are the trainees involved in developing, trialling and evaluating assessment procedures?
• How far do assessment procedures used to evaluate the trainees follow the principles they have been taught?
ASSESSMENT PURPOSE(S) AND SPECIFICATION
• What is the purpose of the assessment?
• How does the assessment purpose relate to the curriculum?
• Who designs the assessment procedures?
• What account is taken of students’ views on the assessment procedures?
• What use is made of the results?
• What are the consequences of the results of the assessment for learners?
• TEST PURPOSE AND SPECIFICATION
• TEST DESIGN and ITEM WRITING
• QUALITY CONTROL and TEST ANALYSES
• TEST ADMINISTRATION
• LINKAGE TO THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK
“I think that a good language test/ assessment should get students chance to show what they know and devolope their skills. It should contain of listening and reading comprehations, as well as writing and grammar part. But the most important thing is to speak in that language, so I think there should be also oral exams. Speaking is the most important, because without it, we wouldn’t communicate. Because of that students should also learn pronunciation.”
• Formative and summative assessment / classroom assessment and exams: similarities and differences?
• Influence from tests and testing on learning and teaching: positive, negative — inevitable…?
• Effective ways of supporting teachers in their different assessment activities and practices
• The role of students in testing and assessment
• “Making what is most important assessable, notprioritizing what is easily measurable” – effects and implications?
• TheEALTAGuidelines for Good Practice in Language Testing and Assessment