Unlock with PatreonThe Problem with CI
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Authentic Assessment – Ben – 17 (formerly Two Cats Out of Two Bags)
Share:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Ben Slavic
Get The Latest Updates
Subscribe to Our Mailing List
No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.
Related Posts
CI and the Research (cont.)
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Research Question
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
We Have the Research
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
33 thoughts on “Authentic Assessment – Ben – 17 (formerly Two Cats Out of Two Bags)”
So what kind of assessment do some of you use, if you are required to give assessment? I am certainly expected to give periodic tests, and I am required to give test grades. That said, I get to make them. What I have come to use is stories, and 8 comprehension questions about the story.
Could I get feedback on this test:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tIpousyBuCMbXGpTtQc_ZScogY5pUWkId4-n-VXyOqo/edit?usp=sharing
1. Is it testing acquisition?
2. Are the questions useful?
Any other comments/suggestions? Please be honest… I use this format of test often, so getting honest feedback would be great.
Thanks!
Tim before the current thread here on authentic assessment I would have like this test. Reading is good. Just see what they know. I did that sort of thing in TPRS for fifteen years. But now I see that test as antiquated and capable of throwing a kid off their emotional center, making them feel judged.
Applying old models of assessment to TPRS classes just won’t fly with me personally anymore. It’s new or it’s out of my assessment system. And what is the new about? Well, it’s about the last two weeks of assessment discussion here. In a word, jGR/ISR and portfolios. No more collection of numbers, scores, quizzes – that is just so old and tired. Really?
One really must read the entire past few weeks of comments and posts here to get a feel for how radical what we are talking about really is. It’s unique and inflammatory. It is a new model that is so extreme that it will put people off. It will be rejected. Few will see what lies beneath its brilliant hues.
It’s a model that resembles nothing we have so far, because it involves assessing the whole child moment to moment in what is really an invitation to be a part of community and not a forced measuring of what they don’t know, making them want to quit.
I know, who has time? But if one were to slowly go over the past two weeks of this discussion on assessment, one would see that most likely 99.9% of people reading it will take offense to what it brings. Easier to ignore it than take the shot to the head that it brings.
That has not stopped me before in supporting new ideas, however. The reason for that is that I defend the rights of children to not be insulted by bullshit.
” an invitation to be a part of community and not a forced measuring of what they don’t know”
Yes! So lovely.
“…But now I see that test as antiquated and capable of throwing a kid off their emotional center, making them feel judged.”
Agreed. I used a similar test for the reading part of the final. However, at my site students have been poorly trained to feel judged at every moment in their classes. Of course, it doesnt justify doing it either. Students may feel judged ANY time there is a right or wrong answer just as Ben had said in a previous conversation.
I love that this test doesn’t quiz them on targets or features of language (vocabulary lists or grammar). It is focused on assessing their comprehension of the story, so this test is just fine.
I think we’re simply declaring war on tests of discrete points of language devoid of any communication: like testing whether or not kids memorized vocabulary lists or grammar. That’s clearly not the case with your test, so this may be a good compromise if you have to give “tests.”
Constructed response (as opposed to multiple choice/true-false) is a step in the right direction. However, there could be a problem with pressure to write on each line, and it’s clear you’re asking for one “right” answer… so that could be stressful for early language learners.
Advanced and intermediate ESL students and Heritage Learners may need questions with a right/wrong answer to give them an opportunity to problem solve (per Krashen & Brown’s problem-solving hypothesis). But that’s only for students who are fluent in social language. To develop Basic Interpersonal Conversational Speech, we have to lighten the cognitive load, so avoiding “wrong” / “right” answers is best. Their little ears are only ready to attune to details that they are ready for–we can’t control and guarantee they know the words they need to know to get the answer 100% right. Last week, Ben’s litmus test for Steven’s PQA was simply: are you sure kids will understand 100%? If not, don’t ask them wrong/right questions.
Getting something “wrong” won’t kill them… but it’s a let-down after the open, accepting classroom TPRS creates, and it might be unnecessary. Why do they need “tests”? They spend the whole class period engaged in listening, responding nonverbally, and then retelling the story at the end. Just honor their participation and capture what they are already doing with a rubric.
Like Ben’s post on “honoring intent,” authentic assessment sends the message (like Ben said to his kids) “You’re being graded right now” throughout the whole class period. All grades with authentic assessments are related as directly as possible to instruction. Kids will know that when their grades are authentic, their participation has to be authentic as well. Show up, participate, and you’ll be graded fairly and your intent and unique voice will matter too. Much more than a multiple choice test, anyways.
Tina, could you just get away with skipping the test and doing a story retell (you were going to do this anyways) with kids independently retelling after your whole-group retell- writing or illustrations? Maybe with an alternate ending or some way to express their weird, creative side? It’s a learning opportunity and an assessment all in one. What about a Listen and Draw? (There is a wrong/right element, but it’s still within the “spirit” of valuing their creative “take” on stories.)
If you can get away from tests, do it. Depending on your administration, this may be a fight worth taking on.
Why?
1. It’s more holistic and requires students have a voice and use higher-order thinking.
2. It’s less time wasted writing tests, less instructional time lost, and less stress for kids.
3. It’s more “authentic” to what actually happened during instruction, which results in a higher construct validity. Asking students to do more independently a version of the storytelling you just did together is bringing the instruction and assessment as close together as possible: so close, they blur. Are we learning or are we assessing-or are we doing both? It shouldn’t even feel like a “test.”
4. It’s much easier to adapt a rubric to make sure the grades are fair.
It’s simply better than a test.
Bonus 5th reason: the possible implications of ending “data” bullying. We can chose not to participate in “tests” (even though yours is fine) to take a stand that “tests” used by traditional teachers to de-value authentic assessments TPRS teachers are already doing.
Crap. I wrote “Tina.” It’s Tina’s fault for being so sweet all the time. I’ve Tina on the brain.
Sorry, Tim.
*I’ve got Tina on the brain.
Did I just make a typo in a typo correction?
Yes, I did. My giant thumb slipped again.
Tim,
When there’s a written story used for assessment I learned that (at this lower level) the follow-up comprehension questions should be IN ENGLISH – to prevent ‘comparing/copying the question and passage text” – which one can do without comprehension; and eliminating confusion from the question itself. If the task is to comprehend the passage, comp questions in L1 get us there quicker/more clearly.
Portfolio assessment is and has been HUGE in Progressive education (I work in a 150 year old Progressive school district), especially at the elem level. But Claire’s application of it here is like peanut butter n jelly – we just need a slew of possible rubric/template ideas for folks to beg/borrow/steal from.
I agree with Alisa on L1 comprehension questions on any type of written assessment like this.
Awesome and useful tip for this newbie.
L1 is less beneficial, however I love what Alisa said:
“we just need a slew of possible rubric/template ideas for folks to beg/borrow/steal from.”
Let’s get them going.
This whole post. I’m giving it a big thumbs up.
That feeling that there is gold waiting to be read and thought upon, like 17 of them, but not being able to sit down and enjoy yet. I’m glad the focus is on assessment right now.
I agree Jim. We have gold here. I don’t think we all know it yet. But the discussion of the past week has been as charged as any I remember here, and we have been through some big things. This may be the biggest. I can’t remember where Claire said something about a week ago how the assessment piece was what was holding TPRS back or something like that, and that genuine reform with assessment in TPRS is necessary to make it realize its full potential in schools. Something like that anyway. Until we stop allowing the data turds to keep driving decisions we make about how we assess, we cannot claim that true reform in WL education has occurred.
It’s gold, but I would point out, it’s not me, it’s just valuing what you guys are already doing. Plus, none of these ideas are my own; I didn’t invent authentic assessment, which is nice because you will find lots of literature to help you along the way. I personally love my grad school textbook “Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners” by O’Malley & Valdez. There are so many Authentic Assessment experts out there and lots of great resources.
All the glory is Ben’s for finding it and recognizing it as gold. It took courage to throw out a radical idea that could have alienated people on this blog. Ben is always looking for what’s authentically good for kids, so of course he would be the first to embrace authentic assessment.
Here’s what I am thinking. We need to make 2016-2017 the Year of Authentic Assessment here on the blog. We can try things, scrap things, bend and mend things, and by the end of 2017 have a workable protocol for assessing kids that MIGHT be acceptable in the eyes of the established order while doing what all assessment must do – be real with the kid.
The complexity is enormous. How many of us are in SBGR systems? Probably not enough. Bottom line is I would like a protocol – a recommended set of assessment instruments – that honors the student and not the datatoids, that makes the kid want to come to class because he’s feeling like he’s going to get a fair deal in our classrooms. We need to be able to have those for whom we work accept that they are not the experts and cannot design assessment instruments like we can. It’s always about power and it’s time for us to take our power back from the turds. We couldn’t before because we didn’t have the teaching strategies but now that we have them we can roll into the assessment piece.
jGR/ISR is the big heavy hitter we can start with. Free writes are fantastic because they do exactly what we want in showing growth through time without judgment. Translation of texts into L1 is a strong candidate for authentic assessment.
So we have a great start. It’s time we turned our 15 year obsession with research and strategies to the third ring in the circus – that assessment gorilla over there who just realized that we are getting ready to turn on him and demand that he quit having our children for lunch.
Ben,
A little aside. I went to a MaFLA workshop (Nov) with a lady who is former MaFLA president and also the director of the FL teacher prep program at Salem State U. She told us that the best way to assess beginner students is by focusing on quantity rather than quality. Timed/Free writes are one example. Like the person who wants to sell or publish your book said, TPRS has had a far-reaching influence.
How about using the dictée? Following Bob Patrick’s lead, dictados could be self-assessed at the end of the year to see whether there has been growth as measured by greater initial (pre-correction) accuracy and greater post-correction accuracy (that is, every body should have a hundred every time at a certain point in the year).
Dictee – kids like it but it eats up big minutes that could be better used for input. Susan Gross was emphatic about only five to ten minutes a week when I first started doing it fifteen years ago but she was just being nice. I could tell that her real message to me was to not bring it into TPRS, that it didn’t have any value for what we do. I always countered that anything that gets me through a class in good mental health, CI or not, was what I considered most important.
I do dictee alot with my French 2 because they simply wont be quiet. There are too many ring leaders. THey have gotten used to running the class from year 1. So I make them listen. I agree that dictee is not that useful.
Just did dictation instead more of a story with the “Advanced” class (juniors who most remind me of a 7th grade class a few years ago…). They will read for the rest of the year (which is only 6 classes before 2 days of exams), and in perhaps less interesting ways than I had originally thought.
I stopped & switched to dictation with them because they were out of control with English, though how I did it wasn’t probably noticeable to them as an alternative because they were out of control.
I feel like it was my very best big-deal confrontation with a student to date as a teacher. I didn’t lose my cool, and the ringleader submitted (to some degree, for some time). His main problem is not his Chinese, which is probably the strongest in the class, but his strong preference to talk at will about whatever he wants in English (sometimes class content, often not). I have learned he isn’t signing up for Chinese next year, and it’s a real relief.
Yeah! The blog, though, Ben. You’re the only person brave enough to take this on and I’m amazed.
Minor Note on: “Translation of texts into L1 is a strong candidate for authentic assessment.”
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but I don’t think L1 is a authentic as the L2 used in class. To help us define how “Authentic Assessment” is more commonly used, it is considered “authentic” when we try to match how instruction is presented to how it is assessed. We teach in L2, so we should assess in L2.
I love Story Retells they should definitely represented on your list, Ben, L1 or L2 (although I have a preference for L2). But I would add that the story is based on what they just co-created, that’s authentic, no matter the language. The text they are translating should be something THEY wrote -and perhaps modified like a RAFT. Can they write or draw a different ending? Change the setting? They may copy language from a model initially, slowly moving toward more independent writing, but they are still making something that’s unique.
Please also consider that illustrations are a more authentic first step towards writing (as opposed to translation). It’s not just my 4 year-old’s drawings of Mommy as a shapeless blob that need a refrigerator to go on: my middle and high schoolers need to show off what THEY create.
But like you say, in a 90 minute block of French, you may need a break from L2 with L1 translation, dictee or choral translation or whatever.
This is probably me splitting hairs, sorry.
Claire said:
…to help us define how “Authentic Assessment” is more commonly used, it is considered “authentic” when we try to match how instruction is presented to how it is assessed. We teach in L2, so we should assess in L2…..
It’s not splitting hairs. I see your point. I will make my list without it. In a department meeting with Linda Li and Zach Al Moreno today I brought this topic up and Zach wanted a definition of authentic assessment. I gave the one above. I was very proud of myself to have remembered to define in terms of what the kids can do in L2. The reason that is important is because the first big step in this transition will be to drum into the minds of all CI teachers that when they assess “what the kids know” they are barking up the wrong tree but when they assess “what the kids can do in the TL that most closely resembles a regular CI class” (reading or a story) then they are barking up the right tree. Does anyone see this of nuclear importance, or is it just me and Claire?
I wonder how many in our group have bailed out on this discussion. Since I am the moderator, I’m just stating here that I will continue to shine the light on this topic very intensely. I really want 2016-2017 to be the year that we here on the PLC rigorously test Authentic Assessment strategies in our CI classrooms. We have a lot of learning and unlearning to do. Might as well start now. How many people even use jGR/ISR?
Then all day today I thought about how nobody even thinks like that. They think – in spite of the research – that we can assess “what a child knows” – a set of words from a list, the ability to fill in a blank, the ability to remember a fact from a story. I’m saying this in a clumsy way, but I think that we must move forward from here with a shared definition of AA and some sample assessments.
What I offer – please correct it – is this:
Authentic Assessment includes these elements (taken from recent comments here):
Assessment is considered “authentic” when we try to match how instruction is presented to how it is assessed. We teach in L2, so we should assess in L2. (Claire)
It’s more “authentic” to what actually happened during instruction, which results in a higher construct validity. Asking students to do – more independently – a version of the storytelling you just did together is bringing the instruction and assessment as close together as possible: so close, they blur. Are we learning or are we assessing-or are we doing both? It shouldn’t even feel like a “test.” (Claire)
Authentic Assessment bears a strong resemblance to the curriculum or to classroom practice. Instruction and assessment and curriculum all look and feel similar, they are all focused on communication. (Claire et al)
Assessments are authentic if they are effective for learning or for guiding instruction…(with) the emphasis on the formative aspect of assessment. (not sure who said this)
Authentic assessments are primarily focused on informing US, the teachers, how we can best guide instruction. What we do when we “teach to the eyes” is a craft, an assessment skill of the highest quality, and we can’t let ourselves be bullied anymore. With this understanding of Authentic Assessment, we have permission to audaciously, unapologetically assess in a way that actually benefits students. (Claire)
And then we can read the entire post #18 to round out our above definition.
I propose that we create something easy to remember – “The Four Pillars of Assessment in a CI Classroom”. I suggest the following percentages but that would be up to each of us do decide individually on these essentially formative instruments:
1. jGR/ISR (50%)
2. Free Writes (bar graph measurements) (20%) (has a summative quality as well, which me likey)
3. illustrations of a wide variety (15%)
4. completing stories with new endings, retelling, rewriting, etc. (15%)
Now I’m still thinking this through, but with a clear commonly held idea here on the blog about what AA really is (see Claire’s #18 articles I just now posted) and with four pillars, that can become any other number at any time – there could be 16 Pillars of AA in CI Instruction, I don’t care I just want some CLARITY OF VISION THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS TOPIC – as we test this over the next year, I feel we are moving from mere ideas to something more practical. Can’t wait to hear from others on this. I know we are in the middle of a tough month (if April didn’t kick your ass, May will) but all the same maybe we can get some thoughts back on this when people have time.
I thank Claire for all her time in patiently explaining things. Come on. Admit it. You never looked at how we assess in CI like this before. I feel as if I just found a new country to explore! IT’S TIME FOR ALL OF US TO STEP A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE DEEP END OF THE POOL.
Here’s more on how Authentic Assessmenr is defined by “experts”. But we can adapt this to TPRS as we are Authentic Assessment experts in our own field.
https://benslavic.com/blog/level-1-targetinglevel-2-non-targeting/comment-page-1/#comment-78951
Ben quoted this but was unsure who said it: “Assessments are authentic if they are effective for learning or for guiding instruction…(with) the emphasis on the formative aspect of assessment. (not sure who said this”
A legit “expert,” Torulf Palm, said this. It’s peer-reviewed. It’s a real “thing” -I promise.
“. The reason that is important is because the first big step in this transition will be to drum into the minds of all CI teachers that when they assess “what the kids know” they are barking up the wrong tree but when they assess “what the kids can do in the TL that most closely resembles a regular CI class” (reading or a story) then they are barking up the right tree. Does anyone see this of nuclear importance, or is it just me and Claire?”
Agreed Ben authenticity ressembles what goes on in class. As for the other members, I think that it is a lot to go through and read plus I am sure there are other things going on management-wise.
There are a LOT of posts to read. Anyway, check out my comment in the last post.
WL teachers are coming to a place where they are shifting away from being mean. They have been so long a part of Mean America, the element in our society that wants to start fights and intimidate. It’s finally over for them. Honoring children is what our work is about.
Gotta pull out my favorite Fred Rogers quote here:
…when I was very young, most of my childhood heroes wore capes, flew through the air, or picked up buildings with one arm. They were spectacular and got a lot of attention. But as I grew, my heroes changed, so that now I can honestly say that anyone who does anything to help a child is a hero to me….
My test was similar but I had students know that 1) Write in a complete sentence — I trained them, they love to read 2) Make your answer comprehensible.
If it was hard to understand I would take off a few points. If it was not written in a complete sentence, I would minus a couple points. Generally they would not affect the overall score.
I would like to go beyond and go more hippy as per Ben’s onslaught on old assessments.
How about recording a story (all in bounds) and playing it on speakers? Have students DRAW one scene from the story with 5 words related to the drawing.
Excellent idea.
The instructional piece has been our primary focus for a decade, and we have done yeoman’s work on it. And I don’t care if it takes another decade to get the assessment piece in place, but TPRS will never be looked upon as anything but an oddity until the assessment piece is fully locked in place and minds fully changed away from trying to gather any kind of numerical data on something as sacred and innocent as a child.
In my view this change in how we assess will happen at the building level, for example as Piazza out there in CA keeps re-educating his bosses and we keep coming up with new statements about assessment using rubrics and portfolios. It will be a slow process, of course, but the spark just happened and we saw it. I felt the heat coming out of my computer a few times! My students hear it every day as well. Since I don’t need a job next year, I am firing from the hip in my own classroom. And they are so with me!
What does real change look like? It looks like the 17 articles just published here. They constitute some of the most brave and radical thinking in education that, for me anyway, I have ever seen. This discussion is the face of true reform, even revolution. We are finally actually putting the kids’ needs to be seen as human first, as we now get ready in the next few years to slap down the data turds for what they are – robots who would be better placed far away from schools, just somewhere else, so that we could just use the L2 in our classroom freely, in the way that aligns with the best research we have, and not the corporate billion dollar model of the past fifty years.