Consequences and Validity of Performance Assessment for English Language Learners: Conceptualizing & Developing Teachers' Expertise in Academic Language. CSE Technical Report 700.

Zenaida Aguirre‐Muñoz, Jae Eun Parks, A. Benner, A. Amabisca, C. Boscardin
{"title":"Consequences and Validity of Performance Assessment for English Language Learners: Conceptualizing & Developing Teachers' Expertise in Academic Language. CSE Technical Report 700.","authors":"Zenaida Aguirre‐Muñoz, Jae Eun Parks, A. Benner, A. Amabisca, C. Boscardin","doi":"10.1037/e644092011-001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this report is to provide the theoretical rationale for the approach to academic language that was adopted to meet the research goals of the second phase of this project as well as to report on the results from the pilot training program that was developed to create the conditions under which varying levels of direct instruction in academic language occurs. The challenge was to find an approach for the instruction of academic language that would serve a dual purpose. The first purpose was aimed at building teachers’ understanding of the key components of academic language to improve their instructional decision-making. The second goal was to provide teachers with tools for providing ELLs with direct instruction on academic language and thereby support their English language development. After careful review of the literature, we found that the functional linguistic approach to language development best met these goals. We developed training modules on writing instruction based on the functional linguistic approach, as it has the strongest potential in providing explicit instruction to support ELL student writing development. Overall, teachers responded positively to the functional linguistic approach and were optimistic about its potential for improving ELL writing development. Responses to the pre-and post institute survey revealed that teachers felt better prepared in evaluating student writing from a functional linguistic perspective as well as in developing instructional plans that targeted specific learning needs.","PeriodicalId":19116,"journal":{"name":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e644092011-001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to provide the theoretical rationale for the approach to academic language that was adopted to meet the research goals of the second phase of this project as well as to report on the results from the pilot training program that was developed to create the conditions under which varying levels of direct instruction in academic language occurs. The challenge was to find an approach for the instruction of academic language that would serve a dual purpose. The first purpose was aimed at building teachers’ understanding of the key components of academic language to improve their instructional decision-making. The second goal was to provide teachers with tools for providing ELLs with direct instruction on academic language and thereby support their English language development. After careful review of the literature, we found that the functional linguistic approach to language development best met these goals. We developed training modules on writing instruction based on the functional linguistic approach, as it has the strongest potential in providing explicit instruction to support ELL student writing development. Overall, teachers responded positively to the functional linguistic approach and were optimistic about its potential for improving ELL writing development. Responses to the pre-and post institute survey revealed that teachers felt better prepared in evaluating student writing from a functional linguistic perspective as well as in developing instructional plans that targeted specific learning needs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英语学习者绩效评估的结果与有效性:学术语言教师专业知识的概念与发展。CSE技术报告700。
本报告的目的是为学术语言的方法提供理论依据,该方法是为了满足该项目第二阶段的研究目标而采用的,并报告试点培训计划的结果,该计划旨在为学术语言的不同水平的直接教学创造条件。我们面临的挑战是找到一种教学学术语言的方法,这种方法可以达到双重目的。第一个目的是建立教师对学术语言的关键组成部分的理解,以提高他们的教学决策。第二个目标是为教师提供工具,为ELLs提供直接的学术语言指导,从而支持他们的英语语言发展。经过对文献的仔细回顾,我们发现语言发展的功能语言学方法最能满足这些目标。我们开发了基于功能语言学方法的写作教学培训模块,因为它在提供明确的指导以支持ELL学生写作发展方面具有最大的潜力。总体而言,教师对功能语言学方法的反应是积极的,并对其提高英语写作发展的潜力持乐观态度。对学院前和学院后调查的回应显示,教师在从功能语言学的角度评估学生写作以及制定针对特定学习需求的教学计划方面做了更好的准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Aligning Instruction and Assessment with Game and Simulation Design. CRESST Report 780. Evaluation of Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading: Effective Tools for Developing Literacy through Science in the Early Grades-Light Energy Unit. CRESST Report 781. Accessible Reading Assessments for Students with Disabilities: The Role of Cognitive, Grammatical, Lexical, and Textual/Visual Features. CRESST Report 785. Preparing Students for the 21st Century: Exploring the Effect of Afterschool Participation on Students' Collaboration Skills, Oral Communication Skills, and Self-Efficacy. CRESST Report 777. What Works? Common Practices in High Functioning Afterschool Programs across the Nation in Math, Reading, Science, Arts, Technology, and Homework--A Study by the National Partnership. The Afterschool Program Assessment Guide. CRESST Report 768.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1