Teaching and learning MFL
Assessment
Papers & recommended reading | Editorial reviews | Tasks for traineesFormative assessment and the learning
and teaching of MFL: sharing the language learning road map with the learners
(pdf dcoument)
Black, P., and Jones, J., (2006) Language Learning Journal, 34,
pp 4–9
The seminal work of Black and Wiliam (1998) posited the argument that assessment can, and should, be a sophisticated and continuously employed instrument for the advancement of learning, rather than a crude and unreliable final judgment on it. With the furthering of this research project into discrete subject areas, the MFL teaching community has the opportunity to see what the application of formative principles looks like in the languages classroom and in the teaching and learning programme. This assessment for learning research programme is far from complete; this interim paper underlines the refreshing eagerness of the MFL AfL research team to share valuable findings with colleagues as soon as they emerge from strategies and practice piloted in our classrooms. The ITT MFL project team would strongly recommend that practitioner inquiry and experimentation result, and be communicated to the Kings College team.
The paper first delivers a summary reminder of the relationship between sound assessment and effective learning established by the ‘Black Box’ research project, and moves to consider its relevance to, and application in, programmes of languages study. It is argued that teachers are better able to apply the fundamental AfL principle of pupils plotting, mapping and negotiating their own progress because “an increasingly coherent learning trajectory in MFL that is structured, progressive and differentiated” is now in place in the form of the KS2 and KS3 frameworks’ precise objectives, which are in turn underpinned by the global aims of the National Curriculum’s Programme of Study. Reference to ITT MFL’s Current Theory and Research area Policy and Reform may provide rather less optimistic points of view on this assertion.
The article’s next port of call is the issue of enhancing questioning and dialogue in languages classrooms. There is strong and helpful exemplification of how to set challenging activities, ask ‘rich’ questions, encourage participation by all learners, promote open discussion, make constructive and actionable comment, and introduce self- and peer-assessment. The formative use of summative–style tests and collaborative learning are also proposed in this array of fundamental AfL strategies, but are not as yet supported by practical examples.
The concluding remarks declare that methods associated with developing AfL in languages, whilst fitting well with “the current culture of language learning as dialogic and interactive”, often appear “risky” and imply “a journey into new territories of teaching and learning”. The article has previously touched upon the business of setting aside scheduled time within languages lessons and for teacher collaboration outside contact time to put AfL principles into practice effectively; its integration into MFL schemes of work may thus yet prove challenging as it vies with time required by established summative procedures and the introduction or growth of other cross-curricular initiatives.
Given that this is an interim report, writing this review offers the exciting prospect of posing questions for the continuation process to consider. There seem to be two areas raising questions, both arguably located within the larger sphere of time management. The first is raised explicitly in the report, with regard to teacher motivation: to what extent is the MFL teacher cohort prepared to find the time for, and to adopt, a “risky” though ultimately rewarding approach? The second one is raised implicitly and involves the place and role of the target language: can the “ talking about language” activity base implied in the 7-14 key stage frameworks, and the “talking about learning” enshrined in the AfL principles forge an easy combination with the need to provide “rich input”? We await the next chapters with interest!
First steps towards
electronic marking of language assignments (pdf document)
Bishop G. (2004) Language Learning Journal, 29, pp 42-46
This article looks into the possibilities offered by electronic marking of word processed work.
How can we best assess written work? Is our aim to provide a summative mark or formative feedback? Is our feedback adequate? Will our students use it? Teacher’s feedback and the chance for students to put things right are very valuable and necessary to support progress in the language.
The article explains how to differentiate between different types of errors and how to give feedback within a word processed document sent by e-mail through the insertion of codes and comments.
This way of marking electronically allows the tracking of different versions of the work while keeping the original copy clean, to provide statistical evidence about the recurrence of certain mistakes, errors or “slips”, to turn marking around more quickly leading to an increase in motivation by the students to learn from the mistakes made.
Effective assessment in MFL
Barnes, A. and Hunt, M. (2003) CILT, the National Centre for Languages
Assessment is an area in which teachers often feel least confident, yet properly used it can be a powerful tool for moving pupils forward in their learning. This book takes a comprehensive look at the different aspects of assessment which can occuply so much of a language teacher's time and provides advice to ensure that the time spent is useful and productive.
The author's provide tasks, exemplar material and suggested activites throughout to support the development of effective assessment practices. These include ideas from assessing learning constructively, from tips for homework and vocabulary-testing to more strategic functions such as marking and feedback to pupils, record-keeping and report-writing. Selected materials are included on an associated website to enable readers to tailor them to their own specific needs. The principles are applicable to all language-learning situations; examples refer specifically to Key Stages 3 and 4.
(Above text taken from the published summary of the book)
Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for learning in the classroom
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2002) King's College London School of Education
Editorial review coming soon.
Inside
the Black Box – Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) King's College London School of Education
In this paper the authors set themselves the task of answering the three
following questions:
1) Is there evidence that improving formative assessment raises standards?
2) Is there evidence that there is room for improvement?
3) Is there evidence about how to improve formative assessment?
In the past decade or so the government has been very keen to improve the standards of learning through school education and there have been many efforts to change ways education standards are assessed though more frequent inspections or National Curriculum testing for example.
The authors believe that there is strong evidence that formative assessment is an ‘essential feature of classroom work and development of it can raise standards’ and hope that national policy makers will take this into consideration in their future work.
What
is wrong with our educational assessments and what can be done about it
(pdf dcoument)
Wiliam, D. (2001) Education Review 15 (1), Autumn 2001
In recent years schools have been pressurised to improve their pupils’ attainment in tests and examinations.
In this article the author explains that this has lead to a narrowing of the curriculum and to a situation where assessment has lost its power to say anything useful about students’ achievements.
The author believes that current assessments are not only ineffective but also counter-productive in providing high quality education for all pupils and he argues that the contribution assessment can make to learning needs to be reviewed.
Note: This paper was presented at the The Association for Achievement and Improvement through Assessment's (AAIA) Annual Conference in 2001. The same authorpresented the following papers which are also available to download:
The meanings and consequences of educational assessments, Wiliam, D. Critical Quarterly, 42(1), pp105-127 (2000)
Reliability, validity, and all that jazz, Wiliam, D. Education 3-13 29(3) 9-13 (2000)
Level
best? Levels of attainment in national curriculum assessment, Wiliam,
D.
