Language Assessment in the New Philippine K to 12 Curriculum

Transcription

1 Language Assessment in the New Philippine K to 12 Curriculum Prof. Roderick Motril Aguirre Associate Professor Languages and Literature Department College of Liberal Arts and Communication De La Salle University - Dasmarinas

2 Language Paradigm

3 L1 L2a L2b L2c C1 C2a C2b C2c

4 TRANSITIONING ORACY TO LITERACY aural codes Listening Oracy Speaking 1. Phonological Awareness 2. Alphabet Knowledge 3. Phonemic Awareness 4. Vocabulary M E A N I N G 1. Phonological Awareness 2. Alphabet Knowledge 3. Phonemic Awareness 4. Vocabulary aural print to print aural codes Writing Literacy Reading print codes Giron & Aguirre 2012

5 I N T E R LI N G U A L Authenticating L2b Transactional Aural Print Decoding Phonological Awareness Alphabet Knowledge Print Knowledge Vocabulary Exploratory L1 Phonological Awareness Alphabet Knowledge Print Knowledge Vocabulary ORACY & LITERACY Aural Print Decoding Aural Print Decoding L2a Phonological Awareness Alphabet Knowledge Print Knowledge Vocabulary Personal Giron & Aguirre 2012 Instructional C O N N E C TI O N S U P P O R T S Y S T E M

6 Discipline LANGUAGE Tool for learning

7 Tatlonghari, 2005

8 Vertical Articulation: Language as a Discipline CALP Strategic Competence Sociolinguistic Competence Discourse Competence BICS Grammatical Competence

9 Horizontal Articulation: Language as a Tool to Learn other Disciplines Notional Functional Language Teaching and Learning across curricula Academic Sports Design Technical Vocational

10

11

12 Integrated Language Arts Curriculum Framework

13

14 Language Transitioning

15 Continue L1 L2a and L2b oracy and literacy Continue L1 oracy and literacy Continue L1 oracy and literacy Continue L2b oracy and introduce L2b literacy Continue L1 oracy and literacy Continue L2a oracy & Introduce L2 literacy Introduce L2b oracy Continue L1oracy & Introduce L1 literacy Introduce L2 oracy Build L1 oracy

16 Oracy and Literacy Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing Assessment Oracy Listening and Speaking Assessment

17 KPUP Language Instruction and Assessment

18 K-12 Philippine Basic Education Standards PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PERFORMANCE UNDERSTANDING PROCESS/SKILLS CONTENT STANDARDS KNOWLEDGE K-12 Assessment (KPUP)

19 LEVELS OF INSTRUCTION/ ASSESSMENT BLOOM S TAXONOMY Performance Creating Understanding Judging Process/Skills Analyzing Applying Knowledge Understanding Remembering

20 Levels of Description Assessment Knowledge (15%) Process/Skills (25%) the substantive content of the skills or cognitive operations that the student performs on facts and information for the purpose of curriculum, the facts and information that the student acquires constructing meanings or understandings

21 Levels of Description Assessment Understanding (30%) Performance(s) (30%) enduring big ideas, principles and generalizations inherent to the discipline, which may be assessed using the facets of understanding or other indicators of understanding which may be specific to the discipline real-life application of understandings as evidenced by the student s performance of authentic tasks

22 Performance (Acting ) Understanding (Valuing ) Process (Selecting & Organizing) Knowledge (Attending)

23 Higher Order Thinking Skills Creating Evaluating Analyzing Applying Performance Understanding Process/Skills Enrichment Activity (Transfer) Enrichment Activity (Values) Engagement Activity Lower Order Thinking Skills Understanding Remembering Knowledge Developmental Activity Motivation Activity

24 QA Activity 4: Understanding & QA Performance Activity 3: QA Process QA Activity 2: Knowledge Activity 1: Performance

25 Performance Standard L E V E L S OF A S S E S S M E N T Performance Understanding PRODUCTS/ PERFORMANCES (30%) UNDERSTANDING(S) (30%) PROCESS(SKILLS) (25%) KNOWLEDGE (15%) BEGINNING DEVELOPING APPROACHING PROFICIENCY P R O F I C I E N T A D V A N C E D Content Standard L E V E L S OF P R O F I C I E N C Y

26 How do we assess Knowledge Questions: 1.What do we want students to know? 2.How do we want them to express or provide evidence of what they know?

27 KNOWLEDGE (15%) acquisition of information as evidenced by (8%) Relevance of data/information to the development of understanding (7%) Adequacy of data/information to firm up and deepen understanding

28 Rubric for Assessing Relevance of Knowledge (8%) 8% - Data/information acquired are completely relevant to the development of understanding. 6-7% - Data/information acquired are to a great extent relevant to the development of understanding. 4-5% - Data/information are to some extent relevant to the development of understanding. 2-3% - Data/information are of very little relevance to the development of understanding.

29 Rubric for Assessing Adequacy of Knowledge (7%) 7% - Data/information are completely adequate to firm up and deepen understanding. 5-6% - Data/information are to a great extent adequate to firm up and deepen understanding. 3-4% - Data/information are to some extent adequate to firm up and deepen understanding. 1-2% - Data/information are very inadequate to firm up and deepen understanding.

30 This refers to cognitive operations that the student performs on facts and information for the purpose of constructing meanings and understandings.

31 How do we assess Process/Skills? Questions: 1. What do we want students to do with what they know? 2. How do we want them to provide evidence of what they can do with what they know?

32 This level may be assessed by asking learners to: Outline and organize information Analyze and interpret information Translate and convert information Express information in another form/format Draw analogies Construct graphs, models, flowcharts and mind maps or graphic organizers Transform a textual presentation into a diagram

33 However, there are skills/processes that are unique to specific subjects, which the teacher is in a better position to assess by using the appropriate tool or technology.

34 Example: Listening to a dialogue to get details is a skill that the language teacher may assess by playing a recorded conversation and asking students to process what they have heard by listing down the details.

35 (10%) Understanding of Content (15%) Critical Thinking

36 Rubric for Assessing Understanding of Content (10%) Strong (8-10%) The student understands completely the full content required by the task and can undertake with a great deal of competence all of the processes relative to the content. Developing (5-7%) The student understands the minimum content required by the task and can undertake with some competence of the processes Weak (2-4%) The student struggles to understand the minimum content required by the task and has great difficulty undertaking the required processes.

37 Rubric for Assessing Critical Thinking (15%) Strong (13-15%) -The student demonstrates deep analytical processing of information and can perform with a great deal of competence of the processes. Moderately Strong (10-12%) -The student demonstrates fairly analytical processing of information and can perform with some competence of the processes.

38 Rubric for Assessing Critical Thinking (15%) Developing (7-9%) - The student demonstrates little analytical processing of information and strives to perform the processes. Weak (4-6%) - The student demonstrates very little analytical processing of information and has great difficulty performing the processes. Very Weak (1-3%) -The student can barely demonstrate analytical processing of information and cannot perform the processes.

39 This refers to enduring big ideas, principles and generalizations inherent to the discipline, which may be assessed using the facets of understanding.

40 How do we assess Process/Skills? Questions: 1. What do we want students to understand (value)? 2. How do we want them to provide evidence of their understanding (value)?

41 This level should be able to draw from the students the meaning or meanings they have made or their own understanding, which may be expressed using any of the six Facets of Understanding

42 Breadth of understanding (connection to a wide range of contexts) Depth of understanding (use of insights, reflection)

43 Rubric for Assessing Understanding (30%) Strong (26-30%) -The student demonstrates accurate, very extensive, and very deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are clearly evident.

44 Moderately Strong (21-25%) -The student demonstrates accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self- Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.

45 Developing (16-20%) - The student strives to demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self- Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.

46 Weak (11-15%) - The student can barely demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any three of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self- Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.

47 Very Weak (6-10%) - The student cannot demonstrate accurate, extensive, and deep understanding of the topic/concept through any of the six facets of understanding-- Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-Knowledge-- where connection to a wide range of contexts and use of insights and reflection are evident.

48 This refers to real-life application of understandings as evidenced by the student s performance of authentic tasks.

49 How do we assess performance? Questions: 1. What product or performance do we want students to produce as evidence of their lerning or understanding? 2. How do we want them to provide evidence that they can use or transfer their learning to real-life situations?

50 A good model to assess this level is the use GRASPS Goal Role Audience, Situation Product Standards

51 Products - outputs which are reflective of learner s creative application of understanding; and Performances - skillful exhibition or creative execution of a process, reflective of masterful application of learning or understanding

52 Rubric for Assessing Performance (30%) Strong ( 26-30%) The student (or the team) independently demonstrates the ability to create, add value and transfer his/her/their understanding to life situations in the form of products and performances. This means that the product or performance reflects the following attributes:

53 The entire process from planning to execution was carried out by the student (or the team), with little or no guidance from the teacher. The product or performance is well thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. Potential problems have been identified and appropriate remediation has been put in place should problems arise. There is evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. The product or performance is a demonstration of creative application of enduring understanding in a new or novel context or situation.

54 Rubric for Assessing Performance (30%) Moderately Strong (21-25%) The student (or the team) demonstrates the ability to create, add value and transfer his/her/their understanding to life situations in the form of products and performances, but the product or performance can still stand improvement in a number of areas, namely:

55 The entire process from planning to execution was carried out by the student (or the team), with some guidance/ coaching from the teacher. The product or performance is fairly well thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. There is some evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are attempts at novelty (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). The product or performance is a demonstration of creative application of enduring understanding, but the context or situation in which the understanding is applied is a little ordinary or common.

56 Rubric for Assessing Performance (30%) Developing (16-20%) - The student (or team) strives to use understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances as manifested in the following:

57 The student or the team attempts to do the task entirely on their own, but seeks the teacher s help for the major part of the process. The product or performance has some flaws in the design that the student (or the team) has addressed with some help from the teacher. There is little evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are limited attempts at novelty (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). A little creative application of enduring understanding is shown in the product or performance. The context or situation in which the understanding is applied is ordinary or common.

58 Rubric for Assessing Performance (30%) Weak (11-15%)- The student (or team) shows inadequacy in using understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances. The inadequacy is manifested in the following:

59 The entire process from planning to execution could not have been carried out by the student (or the team), without the teacher s guidance and coaching. The product or performance is poorly thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. There are marked flaws in the design that the student (or the team) is not even aware of. There is almost no evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process or in the use of understanding or learning. Every aspect (e.g., formatting, organization, packaging, presentation ) of the product or performance is just a copy of what has been taught in class.

60 Rubric for Assessing Performance (30%) Very Weak (6-10%) - The student (or the team) shows great difficulty in using understanding or learning creatively in producing products or performances. The difficulty is manifested in the following:

61 The entire process from planning to execution was poorly carried out by the student (or the team), even with the teacher s guidance and coaching. The product or performance is very poorly thought out by the student (or team) from planning to execution. There are many obvious flaws in the design that the student (or the team) has ignored. There is no evidence of value added by the student (or team) in the execution of the process. There are no attempts at novelty (e.g., in formatting, organization, packaging, presentation). The product or performance does not show creative application of enduring understanding. The context or situation in which the understanding is applied is very ordinary or common.

62 Feedback Results of the assessment across levels should be fed back immediately to the students, so that they know what to improve further, and then they can plan strategically how they can address any learning deficiency.

63 LEVELS OF PROFICIENCY

64 (75% - 79%) Levels of Proficiency Developing The student at this level possesses the minimum knowledge and skills and core understandings, but needs help throughout the performance of authentic tasks. (74% & below) Beginning The student at this level struggles with his/her understanding; prerequisite and fundamental knowledge and/or skills have not been acquired or developed adequately to aid understanding.

65 Levels of Proficiency (85% - 89%) Proficiency The student at this level has developed the fundamental knowledge and skills and core understandings, and can transfer them independently through authentic performance tasks. Approaching Proficiency The student at this level has developed the fundamental knowledge and skills and core understandings and, with little guidance from the teacher and/or with some assistance from peers, can transfer these understandings through authentic performance tasks. (80%-84%)

66 (90% - above) Levels of Proficiency Advanced The student at this level exceeds the core requirements in terms of knowledge, skills and understandings, and can transfer them automatically and flexibly through authentic performance tasks.

67 Knowledge, skills, understanding and transfer shall be assessed formatively (daily; weekly; scored and recorded, but not graded) and summatively (scored, recorded and graded) at the end of the unit, quarter, or school year.

68 THANK YOU