Running Head: ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 1

Jose G Montalvo

Module 2 Application — Assessment of ESL and Bilingual Students

San Pancho, Mexico – La Escuela Secondario Junior High School – English Language Instructor

September 2nd, 2018

ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 2

Assessment Appropriateness

Closing the achievement gap between English Language Learners (ELLs) and native-

speaking students requires fair and equitable educational assessments to measure an ELL’s

language proficiency level and provide them the opportunity to eventually compete on the same

scale as their native-speaking counterparts. When administered correctly, assessments offer data

to analyze where a learner’s current levels are and what standards they have mastered. For

assessments to help learners gain appropriate skills required by state academic standards they

must be reliable, valid, and impartial. A standards guide provides an instructor an educational

foundation to build upon by using key pieces of information that are helpful in unpacking

learning standards. Assessments set the standard of what a learner should know and what a

learner can do in a given academic year. Common Core Standards and State-adopted Standards

are held accountable under the No Child Left Behind mandates, which are the foundations in

American public schools. Standardized tests of academic content and English language

proficiency reveal indications of learner progress or challenges that need acknowledging.

Whether it be through diagnostic, formative, or summative, assessments provide information for

all stakeholders—teachers, students, parents, federal, state, and local administrations—to

determine a learner’s achievement gaps and the means to enhance academic performance.

Diagnostic Assessments

Diagnostic assessments or pre-assessments determine where the learner’s skills,

knowledge, and what they can do at the beginning of a course, grade level, or lesson. Testing on

what students already know can indicate what adjustments the teacher can apply to accommodate

varying proficiency levels and learner needs. Diagnostic assessments influence instructor

applications that build on a learner’s prior knowledge and strengths, eliminate any

misapprehensions of learner ability, serve as a starting point in modifying curriculum, and

ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 3

creates a foundation for learning new content and concepts. Diagnostic assessments are also

helpful for the student to understand what their strengths and weaknesses are and their role in

taking charge of their learning (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015).

Tests are not the only forms of diagnostic assessments nor should they be. Pre-exams can

be seen as a threat by the learner of their competence level. Moreover, teachers often do not like

to construct tests, are not altogether satisfied with the results when they do, and are also

suspicious of the standardized, professionally designed tests because they are not always sure

what these tests are actually timing to measure (Cohen, 2001, p. 515). There are a variety of

diagnostics assessments (see Figure 1) that can be done other than pre-tests to determine a

learner’s skill set and abilities prior to moving forward working with new learning targets.

Figure 1. Examples of diagnostic assessments.

(EducationCloset, 2017)

Providing a variety of assessments gives the learners a sense of ownership over their

academia and reduces stress factors that most test-takers experience. Some learners are just not

good test-takers but they can make effective observers, work well through certain mediums like

discussion boards, or do well in interviews. Assessments give an instructor the tools to decipher

where the talents in their learners lay. An adept instructor constructs a variety of assessments
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 4

rather than adhering solely to examinations. There may be too much bias in national and state

examinations where learners cannot relate to scenarios presented in some of the questions on

these exams. Learners must not only be able to relate to content in the classroom, culturally

relevant materials, and learning targets, but they must also be to relate to the assessments they

are given. This will ensure success for learners and not leave them in a defeatist cycle that

passing a test means proficiency.

Performance-based Assessments

Using a learner-centered approach to assess transfer of skills and integration of content

while promoting student creativity, performance-based assessments give the instructors a clear

synopsis of student ability and also provide an avenue for student self-assessment and reflection.

Performance-based assessments also exhibit safe, learning environments where learners can

demonstrate their strengths and inadvertently provide instructors the necessary information to

make proper accommodations for future lesson targets. Such assessments can include group

presentations, take-home projects, peer to peer interviews, group observations, and so on.

Hurley and Blake (2001) best summarize diagnostic and performance-based assessments in the

first and second principle of the seven Guiding Principles of Assessment where “assessment

activities should help teachers make instructional decisions and assessment strategies should help

teachers find out what students know and can do, not what they cannot do” (p. 91).

Pros and cons for performance-based assessments. Validity is one of the most

important components when constructing any type of assessment. For ELLs, as well as for all

populations, it is critical to consider the degree to which interpretations of their test scores are

valid reflections of the skill or proficiency that an assessment is intended measure (Pitoniak, et

al., 2009) and instructors must take caution when using instruments that lack reliability and

validity to assess student learning profiles and caution against labeling a student as a certain kind
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 5

of learner (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015). Since all students learn in different ways,

performance-based assessments are usually the most valid way of assessing skill development

for the instructor is more of a guide who directly observes rather than a corrector of examinations

who has no hands-on experience with how the student learns. However, performance-based

assessments can be time-consuming for the instructor to design, and without a carefully

constructed rubric, assessment can lend itself more to subjectivity rather than objectivity.

Because students vary widely in how they apply skills of independence, it’s important for

teachers to differentiate such skills based on student proficiency, just as they differentiate

instruction in other skills (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015, p. 8).

Pre-Assessment Exams / Placement Tests

Instructors should never feel the need to refrain from using diagnostic exams or quizzes

so long as the examinations contain no bias, the complexity of the language is reduced, and they

accurately measure objectives. As a formal diagnostic assessment, pre-assessment exam factors

must include the extent of the sampling of the objective, the degree of ambiguity of the items and

restrictions on freedom of response (e.g., being given more specific and thus constraining topics

for compositions), the clarity and explicitness of the instructions, the quality of the layout, the

familiarity that the respondents have with the format, and the length of the total test (Cohen,

2001, p. 525). Reliability and validity are extremely crucial when creating pre-assessments

examinations for not only should pre-assessments provide meaningful and appropriate

information about a learner’s ability and generate information that is without bias (McKay,

2006), but they also should assess academic content areas that are relevant to the construct—the

skills or proficiency—being measured (Pitoniak, et al., 2009). While diagnostic assessments

measure what a learner already knows, formative assessment is an assessment for learning.
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 6

Formative Assessments

Any form of assessment that encourages students to keep asking, “How am I doing?” is

likely to change how they look at themselves and at what they’re learning, usually for the worse

(Kohn, 2006). A teacher may provide more feedback to some students and less to some others,

or the instructor may prioritize his/her perspective in assessing a performance, ignoring the fact

that other voices and aspects should be considered accordingly (Mussawy, 2009). Determining

specific formative assessments (see Figure 2), whether it be through portfolios, curriculum

assessment, rubrics, checklists, and so on, are excellent tools for learning. Formative

assessments ensure that weak students can grasp the material. Cooperative environments along

with classroom-based assessment have the distinction of immediately informing teachers and

students, as well as parents, of student performance on an ongoing basis (Janisch, Liu, & Akrof,

2007). Therefore, formative assessment is checking for understanding during the lesson rather

than waiting to see if the learner has grasped the material through summative assessments.

Without clear and powerful learning targets, assessments become a guessing game

(Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015). Teachers need to organize a framework in which to guide

thinking and practice in equitable assessment (Lyon, 2013). Assessment of academic growth

over periods of time is much better than summative assessments of fluency. Instructors must

know where their students are, give clear and concise explanations of the learning targets, help

students develop a more realistic understanding of their own strengths and areas for growth, and

have strong support systems available to them to help them master course objectives (Jackson,

2009). For bilinguals to achieve academic success, frequent assessment must be the norm.

Constant and effective communication provides a solid foundation for overall learning success.

According to Hattie (2012), “visible teaching and learning occurs when there are clear learning

targets, deliberate practice aimed at attaining the mastery of a goals, where there is feedback
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 7

given and sought, and when there are passionate stakeholders (teachers, students, peers) who

participate in the act of learning” (p. 14). If the learners do not where they are in their skill level

and with no proper assessment being implemented periodically, then the instructor cannot expect

their students to take ownership of their academia and progress further up the learning ladder.

Figure 2. Examples of formative assessments.

(EducationCloset, 2017)

The Pros of Formative Assessments

Formative assessments support understanding and learning throughout the lesson. Any

number of formative assessments can help instructors see if learners are grasping new concepts

and content through cooperative environments and discussion, graphic organizers, reflection

journals/portfolios, informal presentations, and so on. Feedback strategies are instructional in

nature – they help teachers and students engage with each other to know where students are and

where they need to improve (Pilcher, 2012, p. 91). Moreover, formative assessments show the

instructor if learners are ready to move on to the next phase or learning target. This support
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 8

provides learners the confidence needed to master other learning targets and be prepared to take

on any summative assessments aligned with targets already learned.

Guiding Principles in relation to formative assessments. Learners have two main

components they face when learning a new language: The arena of social engagement and the

academic rigor of cognitive development. Learning another language increases the learner’s

cognitive awareness through well-organized lesson planning, usage of the learners’ L1 and

prerequisite knowledge, clear explicit and implicit instruction, varieties of assessments and

feedback, a curriculum rich in content, and appropriate paced instruction. An adept teacher

teaches the learner rather than the content, and does so through learning targets, scaffolding,

positive reinforcement, challenging student expectations, practice through cooperative learning

environments, and creative formative assessment approaches. Through Holistic Context for

Learning Hurley and Blake (2001) explain that students engage in learning when they can

personally relate to materials and activities that pertain to learning targets, understand realistic,

achievable goals, and are given the best opportunities to take ownership of their academia.

Culturally relevant pedagogy allows for learning opportunities in which the knowledge and

perspectives of students are not only considered, but also valued and validated as a means to

personal empowerment and academic success (Chenowith, 2014, p. 37).

Learning tasks and formative assessments are always interconnecting and for a student to

engage in learning, these tasks must represent real-world scenarios and maintain authenticity as

much as possible. Hurley and Blake (2001) note that “assessment activities should grow out of

authentic learning activities and where assessment strategies involve the daily collecting of

evidence of student learning as they perform real-world application tasks” (p. 91). As long as the

sequencing of learning tasks align with learning targets, learners will develop the confidence to

find solutions to problems that may incur in future learning targets. However, assessments of
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 9

student learning are longitudinal and take place over time which may cause frustration in the

learner and instructor if both are not patient enough and communication is not a constant (Hurley

& Blake, 2001).

The Cons of Formative Assessments

A never-ending argument teachers present when trying to meet curriculum objectives,

state standardized testing scores, and adhering to specific learner needs is time. Programs that

institute unrealistic expectations or inundate curriculum with learning materials too high above

the learner’s cognitive level results in poor performance on summative assessments and

standardized tests, leaving instructors and learners to suffer together in reaching a language

acquisition agenda that is completely unrealistic, stagnate, and dated. However, it is imperative

that the instructor stay within the cognitive boundary of the learner and not move forward until

mastery of the learning target has been accomplished. An adept instructor knows how to

correctly implement formative assessments throughout the learning process without sacrificing

too much time and most certainly does not move forward until the learner has the confidence to

do so. This is why formative assessment is known as is feeding forward where much of what the

teacher does through guided instruction is intended to feed forward to modify future instruction

(Fisher & Frey, 2010, p. 20). Each assessment activity should have a specific objective-linked

purpose (Hurley & Blake, 2001). If learners are rushed through lesson targets and cannot relate

to the material being taught, then any type of formative assessment is eventually not going to be

taken seriously by the learner and summative assessments or examinations will replace learning

for test results rather than what the whole academic experience represents: A learning process

that lasts for a lifetime.

ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 10

Summative Assessments

Summative assessments are designed to measure student outcomes as a unit of study ends

or at other key points in a unit or year of study (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010, p. 21). Though

summative assessments do not necessarily take the form of examinations, especially in the

classroom, they are often recognized as an assessment of learning when it comes to standardized

testing and how a learner is gauge against state standards. They represent an accountability

measure that is part of the grading process which can occur at the end of a unit, the middle and

end of a semester, the end of a school year, or as part of a mandatory state-wide examination.

Summative assessments do not only hold the learner accountable for learning acquisition but also

the instructor teaching methodologies as well as the validity of the institutions educational

programs and curriculum. Previously, summative assessments only took the form of standard

tests, but there are various ways summative assessments can be implemented (see Figure 3).

There are arguments for and against summative assessments with the cons weighing more

heavily than the pros, but until stakeholders realize that proficiency does not mean passing the

test, summative assessments will continue to be the norm for school and state standards.

Figure 3. Examples of summative assessment.

(EducationCloset, 2017)
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 11

The Arguments for Summative Assessments

It can be argued that summative assessments are necessary for evaluating effective

instruction and hold teachers accountable for how learners are taught. Supporters also claim that

summative assessments can be seen as a time-efficient, cost-effective, direct assessment of skills

and proficiency. Multiple choice examinations and high-stakes tests which require precise

answers leave no room for subjectivity, which is possibly why standardized testing is still seen as

an effective academic measuring requirement at the federal, state, and district levels.

Furthermore, summative assessments have high-point value and can assess whether or not the

learner has met overall required, standardized goals. While summative examinations have

historically been the norm, assessment outcomes of this type create an inequitable implications

for ELLs.

The Cons of Summative Assessments

Summative assessments are supposed to accurately measure learner knowledge and skill-

level set, but validity and reliability are called into question especially for ELLs where

assessments should allow students ample opportunities to demonstrate their knowledge,

understanding, and skills (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015). Most summative standardized

examinations do not have the appropriate language, cultural relevance, proper alignment of

English language proficiency standards with academic content and achievement standards, or

accurately reflect the individual’s ability level in the content area being assessed (Pitoniak, et al.,

2009). For ELLs to compete with native speakers at the school, state, and national level,

assessments of this nature must be modified until the learner has made the necessary academic

strides in English language proficiency. Only then will the ELL be able to be on an equal level

of what constitutes academic proficiency.

ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 12

The instructor and summative assessments. There is an exorbitant amount of pressure

on the instructor to achieve school academic expectations. This pressure often results in

instructors teaching to the test where there will be an emphasis on teaching certain skills while

overlooking others. Summative assessments can divert the flow of natural learning and leave the

instructor and learner in panic-mode, especially when learner scores are seen as a reflection and

judgement of a teacher’s effectiveness. Evaluating teacher performance through summative

examinations creates a negative and imbalanced atmosphere starting in the classroom that

eventually works its way up to the school, state, and federal levels. ELLs may be a part of the

reason for the No Child Left Behind Act, but little has been done to support alternative and more

effective assessments to ensure that school, state, and federal standards are met.

Alternative Summative Assessments

Alternative summative assessments can provide an avenue of learning that becomes more

meaningful and authentic for the learner. Graphic organizers compiled into cumulative

portfolios, essays, or projects are just a few of the many ways alternative assessments can be

done to ensure the learner has understood overall learning targets and goals. Designing a

summative assessment according to specific criteria differentiated by readiness, interest, or

learning profiles will lower affective filters so long as the assessment is reliable and valid with

no error and bias (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015). Performance assessments can include

essays, extended projects or products, portfolios, and authentic assessments and grading criteria

can be the same regardless of the products being produced (Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015).

These types of alternatives will provide ELLs a path towards taking ownership over their

academia and the confidence to reach goals set forth by school, state, and federal standardized

examinations.
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 13

Conclusion

The overwhelming task of the teacher to give the greatest opportunity for the learner to

gain second language acquisition success is how to combine differing assessment options to

ensure the learner obtains confidence when subject to various forms of assessments whether it be

diagnostic, formative, or summative. Creative projects such as graphic organizers, poster boards,

acting out storylines, or debates are some of the ways teachers can lower affective filters and

create an environment conducive for academic success. Not all students learn the same way, and

an instructor must provide a multitude of avenues for the learner to reach target goals and push

beyond their cognitive abilities. Hopefully, stakeholders at the school, state, and federal levels

will eventually come to understand that implementing alternative and authentic assessments,

accommodations, and equitable opportunities for ELLs will garner an outcome that truly leaves

no child behind.
ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 14

References

Chenowith, N. H. (2014). Culturally responsive pedagogy and cultural scaffolding in literacy

education. The Ohio Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 35-40.

Cohen, A. D. (2001). Second language assessment. In M. Celce-Murcia, Teaching English as a

Second or Foreign Language (3rd ed., pp. 515-534). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

EducationCloset. (2017). Assessment selection tool. Retrieved from

https://educationcloset.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Arts-Integrated-Assessment-

Types.pdf

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010). Guided instruction: How to develop confident and successful

learners. Alexandria: ASCD.

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York:

Routledge.

Hurley, S. R., & Blake, S. (2001). Assessment in the content areas for students acquiring

English. In S. R. Hurley, & J. V. Tinajero, Literacy assessment of second language

learners (pp. 84-103). New York: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. Retrieved from

http://joseamayasr.yolasite.com/resources/Literacy_Assessment_Chapter05.pdf

Jackson, R. R. (2009). Never work harder than your students and other principles of great

teaching. Alexandria: ASCD.

Janisch, C., Liu, X., & Akrof, A. (2007). Implementing alternative assessment: Opportunities

and obstacles. The Educational Forum, 71, 221-230.

Kohn, A. (2006, March). The trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4), 12-15.

Lyon, E. G. (2013). Learning to assess science in linguistically diverse classrooms: Tracking

growth in secondary science preservice teachers’ assessment expertise. Science

Education, 97(3), 442–467.

ASSESSMENT APPROPRIATENESS 15

McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mussawy, S. A. (2009). Assessment practices: Student’s and teacher's perceptions of classroom

assessment. University of Massachusetts, Center for International Education. Amherst:

Master's Capstone Projects.

Pilcher, J. K. (2012). Who’s engaged? Climb the learning ladder to see (2nd ed.). Pensacola:

Studer Education.

Pitoniak, M. J., Young, J. W., Martiniello, M., King, T. C., Buteux, A., & Ginsburgh, M. (2009).

Guidelines for the assessment of English language learners. Princeton: Educational

Testing Service (ETD).

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom.

Alexandria: ASCD.

Tomlinson, C. A., Moon, T., & Imbeau, M. B. (2015). Assessment and student success in a

differentiated classroom. Virginia: ASCD.