Stanford Language Center Elizabeth Bernhardt, Joan Molitoris, Alice Miano, Sara Gelmetti, Kenric Tsethlikai, Ken Romeo Stanford University Language Center

Stanford Language CenterElizabeth Bernhardt, Joan Molitoris, Alice Miano,

Sara Gelmetti, Kenric Tsethlikai, Ken Romeo

Stanford University Language Center

Objectives

• Outline assessment program• Provide organizational details• Highlight speaking & writing• Relevant across all languages• Refer to both first & second-year


The ‘Why’

• Improve student performance• Enhance credibility (w/ public)• Programmatic consistency


Results

• More highly trained staff• Professional conversation• 20% first-year/24% second-year increase• Highly positive student reaction• Increased interest in proficiency

notation


Organization

• Placement testing (Bernhardt)• Oral assessments

– SOPIs (Molitoris)– Presentational speech (Miano)– ODAs (Gelmetti)

• Writing assessments– WDAs (Gelmetti)– Presentational Writing (Tsethlikai)


Placement Testing

• Approaching Stanford

• Online during the summer

• Preliminary placement based on score

• Oral assessment on campus

Stanford University Language CenterPlacement Testing – Elizabeth Bernhardt

SOPI definitionSHORT FORM

20 minutes

Warm-upPicture-based tasks

TopicsWind-down

Task levels: Intermediate, Advanced

LONG FORM45 minutes

Warm-upPicture-based tasks

TopicsSituations

Wind-down

Task levels: Intermediate, Advanced, Superior

Stanford University Language CenterSOPIs – Joan Molitoris

Stanford Uses of SOPIs

• Placement Testing• 3rd Quarter Exit Testing• Overseas Studies Testing• Occasional/External Testing• Proficiency Notation Guidance


SOPI Development

• Objective: develop multiple prompts leading to unique tests

• SOPI “Task Force”: task and prompt creation

• Logistics: artwork, test booklet, recording of instructions and prompts

• Load into course management system


SOPI Delivery

• Digital Language Lab scheduling

• Upload/download• Variable class purpose• Results assessed over

the summer by internal OPI testers

• Results published in Annual Report


Future Directions

• Develop SOPIs for languages with increasing enrollments

• Compile unique tests for specific purposes

• Create “item bank” to allow for randomized delivery of questions within test format


Oral Presentational Language

• Stanford Objectives for Spanish and Portuguese (1997) based on National Standards

• Tri-modal nature of communication• Emphasis on interpersonal

communication in first-year courses• Emphasis on presentational

communication in second-year courses

Stanford University Language CenterPresentational Speech – Alice Miano

Emphases in Communicative Modes through the two-year program


First Year | Second Year Second Year

Modes of Communication Presentational Mode

Interpersonal

Interpretive

Presentational

Use of notes

Length

Sophistication / Extemporaneousness

How to evaluate oral presentational language?

• Organization/Structure• Critical Thinking: Content Analysis and Use

of Evidence• Fluency: Length, Level of Rehearsal or

Reading vs. Spontaneity/Extemporaneousness

• Vocabulary: Use of Academic, Presentational Language

• Accuracy


Without Assessment Tool

• Assessments varied widely amongst instructors

• Student performances tended to fall below expectations


Initial Findings Using Assessment Tool

• Students and instructors more cognizant of expectations

• Student performances improved and objectives more frequently met

• Greatly increased inter-rater reliability• Instructors excited and motivated to

continue the project, collaborate further


OnDAsOnline Diagnostic Assignments

• Computer-assisted diagnostic assignments

• Based upon the ACTFL proficiency guidelines

• 2 types: Oral (ODA) and Written (WDA)

• Oral (ODAs): 4 times / quarter, 1st and 2nd year

• Written (WDAs): pilot project

• Communication mode: Interpersonal

• Limited-time assignments

Stanford University Language CenterOnDAs – Sara Gelmetti

Structure of the OnDAs

• Prompts are tailored according to the proficiency level that is being assessed

• First part: warm-up and level check• Second part: probes more challenging

functions spirals up the assignment• Last part: “wind-down” question

returns the student to a comfort level


Example 1: LA STANZA DELLO STUDENTEODA ITALIAN 1 - 1st YEAR, 1st quarter• Prompt: audio

• Visual input: static

• TARGET: Novice Mid > High

• FUNCTIONS: communicate minimally with lists and formulaic utterances

• CONTEXT / CONTENT: common informal setting / autobiographical information, personal experience

• TEXT TYPE: individual words and phrases, some discrete sentences in the present


Example 2: FLORENCE HOSTING FAMILYWDA ITALIAN 2 - 1st year, 2nd quarter• Prompt: written

• TARGET: Novice High > Intermediate Low

• TASKS: simple description on a familiar topic, requests for information, formulate basic questions

• FUNCTIONS: communicate simple facts and ideas; begin to create with the language

• CONTEXT / CONTENT: common informal setting / autobiographical information, personal experience

• TEXT TYPE: discrete sentences in the present


Example 3: DAL DOTTOREODA ITALIAN 3 - 1st year, 3rd quarter• Prompt: audio

• Visual input: static

• TARGET: Intermediate Low > Mid

• FUNCTIONS: create with the language, initiate & maintain a simple conversation, ask and answer simple questions, begin to narrate in the past

• CONTEXT / CONTENT: informal settings / familiar topics related to daily and/or personal activities

• TEXT TYPE: discrete sentences


Example 4: WINTER HOLIDAY CELEBRATIONWDA ITALIAN 21 – 2nd year, 1st quarter

• Prompt: written

• TARGET: Intermediate Mid > High

• TASK: paragraph length narration of factual nature using appropriate time frame

• FUNCTIONS: uncomplicated communication, description with elaboration, narration in the past

• CONTEXT / CONTENT: informal settings / topics of general and personal interest

• TEXT TYPE: paragraphs with some connectors

Stanford University Language CenterODnAs – Sara Gelmetti

How to Evaluate OnDAs

• on a credit/no credit basis

• individual feedback after every OnDA

• rated according to how the task is performed or, instead, how severely the communication is impeded

• assessment criteria: a series of questions, based upon the ACTFL guidelines for speaking and writing


Preliminary findings

• OnDAs can be taken at home individually Class time can be maximized and optimized for useful

practice

Pressure is reduced and affective filter is lowered

• Both students and instructors need to be familiar and comfortable on how to use new technologies


Presentational Writing in Second-Year Programs

• Entrance Level of Students

• Preparation for major/minor, WIM courses, courses in other academic disciplines

• Exit Objectives– Written communication for increasingly formal

settings

– Make Connections to areas of academic interest

Stanford University Language CenterPresentational Writing – Kenric Tsethlikai

Targets for Presentational Writing

• Level

• Models

• Characteristics


Interpretive to PresentationalTargets for Interpretive Skills in Second-Year Language Instruction

Practice and gain greater control over interpretive tasks of previous quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter

+ Summarize the main and supporting ideas in expository prose, such as: informal correspondence, literary excerpts, short stories, book and film reviews, newspaper and magazine articles and editorials

+ Synthesize ideas in formal correspondence, essays and critical articles; develop a more complete understanding, beyond main ideas

+ Analyze ideas in essays and critical articles, short stories and novels, in addition to texts similar to the previous quarter + Justify personal interpretations of texts by citing textual evidence

▼Targets for Presentational Writing in Second-Year Language Instruction

Practice and gain greater control over advanced-level presentational writing tasks + Write expository prose with good control of high frequency structures and appropriate vocabulary in critical summaries, descriptions and narrations (3-5 page essays)

+ Demonstrate increasing control of advanced-level writing with increasing accuracy and breadth in descriptions, narrations and syntheses of readings (5-6 page essays)

+ Write on a researched topic (with cited sources) that demonstrates strong control of high frequency structures with clear evidence of tone, register and stance (8-10 page essay)

+ Express personal reactions to literary excerpts, short stories, book and film reviews, newspaper and magazine articles and editorials, by citing and describing main and supporting ideas in texts

+ Demonstrate critical thinking and analysis in argumentative /persuasive essay with clear structure (e.g. thesis/anti-thesis/synthesis/hypothesis)

+ Demonstrate critical thinking and analysis with use of cohesive devices and greater lexical sophistication in literary analyses as well as abstract topics such as globalization, immigration and community service

+ State position and opinions + Support opinions and positions through citations and examplesDevelop tone and stance in appropriate register

+ Support opinions through hypothetical outcomes about abstract issues

+ Actively incorporate new structures and appropriate vocabulary

+ Use more accurate and structures and idiomatic expressions

+ Use more specialized vocabulary and idiomatic expressions

+ Continue writing functional-based messages for likely situations in a study abroad program

+ Engage in correspondence for formal contexts (i.e. requesting information about an internship in a francophone country)

+ Continue writing formal correspondence for requests and inquiries


Learning Goals: Writing-as-Process

• Cultivate attention to register, style and cohesion

• Develop socio-cultural awareness and appropriateness

• Highlight conventions for appropriate citations and bibliography

• Prepare Students for Academic and Professional Writing Needs


Future Directions

• Assessment Rubric for Presentational Writing


Thank You!

• Philosophy• An invitation

– Please email us

– Please visit us

• Open for questions


Documents

Stanford Language Center Elizabeth Bernhardt, Joan Molitoris, Alice Miano, Sara Gelmetti, Kenric Tsethlikai, Ken Romeo Stanford University Language Center