Art Un ticle I.1 ited Sta In the ates News - Woodring College of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Framework for Math - Western Washington University$

1. I had been nicer with the beggar womans. I had think of it before. But why was I mean. Poorwomans I hope somebody saves me. So I can help beggar womas. Specialy the old one. Now amgoing to help peeple. But first some one help me.2. She was thinking that she was greedy to the poor people and mean and she was going to helpthe poor pleople and she was sorry.3. I was very selfish I had never given those dry skins I should given meet, corn and tortillas tothe old women, I should given food the poor peple ho came for food. I’m sorry, I’m sorry, sorry,sorry, sorry, I’m sorry!4. Oh I should have never rejected beggars I-I-I wish I could live again and fixed my errors. Andnever give poor people only a slice of old onion. I wish I could just stay poor put have givenpoor people food before getting poor.Author’s point of viewIn another item, students are asked to step out of the story and imagine the author’s point of viewand purpose in response to the question, “Write why you think the author made this happen tothe Rich Señora.” The analysis of responses to this item revealed that 93% of the students had asense of the author’s purpose and were able to imagine the author’s point of view,71% atprimarily a literal level, and 22% at a more inferential level. Two general types of responseswere identified. In the first type of response students demonstrated a “basic understanding ofstory elements” (score of 2–3 on the rubric) and assumed that the author was telling a tale ofretribution for misdeeds as shown in the following examples:1. Because when the beggar woman came to the rich woman’s house the rich woman threw acloth over her plate and she didn’t wanted to give food to the people because she didn’t want towasted food for a beggar.2. I think the author made this happend to her because she was berry stingy and mean and shewas berry rich she had enouhgf food to give to poor and for her.These examples illustrate some of the differences in students’ responses and suggest differentlevels of text processing. Although both are essentially restatements of obvious information inthe text—literal interpretations—in the first example, the student used details from the story todescribe the character’s behavior. In the second example the student generalized from thebehavior to character traits—“she was very stingy and mean.” Both are examples of building onearlier test items where students are asked to describe the character and give examples of actionsthat prove the character was as the student described.The next level of response illustrates the students’ ability to go beyond a simple text theme ofretribution and restatement of the text to imagine the author’s interaction with the reader,suggesting that the author wanted to convey a moral or lesson.Type 2 examples:1. I think the author made this happen to the rich señora because it was a lesson to everybody toknow that there are people less fortunate then you so don’t be so gretty because you never knowwhat will happen next.2. I think that the author made this happen is for the people to see that if you want to recibesomething you also have to share. I also think that happen for people to see that been selffish isnot good.Contrasting characters’ points of viewIn the comparison portion of the assessment, the students are asked to construct a dialoguebetween the main characters of the fiction and nonfiction pieces. The task requires students totake the point of view of both characters alternately and sustain a dialogue that reflects each of© 2008 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved174
their imagined points of view. There were three general types of responses to this item. The firsttype of response demonstrated minimal text comprehension or inappropriate departure from thetext. The second and third types of responses were of an inferential nature, giving “evidence thatthe reader is beginning to interpret text by making connections between details and largermeanings” (score 4)or “make plausible interpretations or generalizations” (score 5). Eighty-fourpercent of the responses to this item were at an inferential level. The examples below illustratethese two higher levels of text processing.Type 1 and 2 examples:Example 1Trevor: Do you know how much te people need that food? You are rich, yo’u should at least givea little meat the people are staving. Please give them something.Rich Señora: Yeah Yeah I’m not going to waste my food let them work so they could buy whatthey need and I’m not giving nothing to anybody.Trevor: You have plenty of food they dont have nothing dont you have any sipithy for them.Rich Señora: Ok, ok, I’ll just give some little of meat thats all.Example 2Trevor: Wy did you youst gave that poor woman a skines onion. Whyare you so neine to people.be more nise to them.Rich Señora: but I just hate when thet women comes beggin for things. the should feall sheshould be shy for that.Trevor: but dirint you now if that lady had a famaly thats why you should help.Rich Señora: No I can’t I keape my richnes and my good to myselfok.In both examples the students used textual information to create a dialogue that was plausible forthe characters. They went beyond restating the text to extend the characters in appropriate ways.For example, Trevor’s question, “Why?” asks the Rich Señora to reflect on her actions. Sheresponds that she thinks the beggar should be ashamed of herself for begging and Trevorsuggests she may have a family and needs help.There are a number of possible explanations why this item drew high level responses from somany students. According to the TPBA work group, the alternative assessment was constructedso that the items built on each other throughout the text, providing a kind of internal scaffolding.From the workgroup’s point of view, the students actually learned from, as well as performed, onthe test and as they went through the items. This scaffolding allowed them to see connectionsbetween plot and character that were then reflected in this item. The task was also an engagingone in which students had more interpretive freedom. According to the teachers, the task alsoresembled those used in instruction as students worked toward the standards in their languageArts classes. They were familiar with projecting character traits through dialogue and using“thought bubbles” to indicate the character’s exact words. Although the item came at the end ofthe assessment when performance could have been affected by fatigue, the opposite appeared tooccur. The text processing patterns suggested by the students’ answers indicate that students canmake inferences and apply them to elaborate context even though their ability to expressthemselves clearly is still developing.Finding 4: Implications for InstructionUnlike the district PBA where transitional students’ performances revealed global difficulties,the transitional performance-based assessment provided more specific information about thestudents’ strengths and difficulties. The phonological, syntactic and semantic patternsdemonstrated in the students’ work reflected the influence of their first language, Spanish.© 2008 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved175
Page 2 and 3:
"Those who arrive by age 12 or 13 m
Page 5:
Article I.2 Are Signed Languages "R
Page 8 and 9:
Biological analyses of the status o
Page 10 and 11:
and beyond, speaking and signing ch
Page 12 and 13:
Conclusion: Are Signed Languages Re
Page 14 and 15:
Article I.3 The Interpreter: Has a
Page 16 and 17:
A few weeks earlier, I had called F
Page 18 and 19:
“We struggled even getting to the
Page 20 and 21:
herself by strapping a cassette rec
Page 22 and 23:
In 1998, after nine years as the ch
Page 24 and 25:
momentary burst of excitement that
Page 26 and 27:
can shape core grammar. Because the
Page 28 and 29:
The authors compared animal and hum
Page 30 and 31:
monkey moved. He followed it with h
Page 32 and 33:
delight, fear, laughter, and surpri
Page 34 and 35:
Piipaío in a hut: Pirahã huts typ
Page 36 and 37:
LEP students, and equitable organiz
Page 38 and 39:
4. Second language development crea
Page 41 and 42:
curriculum or "teaching to the test
Page 43 and 44:
portfolio work was scanned and stor
Page 45 and 46:
experiences of many groups of stude
Page 47 and 48:
While not disagreeing that interpre
Page 49 and 50:
sound educational practice, however
Page 51 and 52:
arises from the efforts to abstract
Page 53 and 54:
Article II.2 Cross-Cultural Communi
Page 55 and 56:
males who can serve as positive rol
Page 57 and 58:
Understanding another culture is a
Page 59 and 60:
Pets and AnimalsWhich animals are v
Page 61 and 62:
to teach standard English is reflec
Page 63 and 64:
Asking personal questions of a pers
Page 65 and 66:
Using Cross Cultural Communication
Page 67 and 68:
Why Do Nonstandard English-Speaking
Page 69 and 70:
Before beginning to teach standard
Page 71 and 72:
• Negative attitudes toward low p
Page 73 and 74:
New standardized tests and assessme
Page 75 and 76:
Each of the behaviors listed above
Page 77 and 78:
Article II.3 Hard Work Hypothesis:
Page 79 and 80:
each point higher in SES, students
Page 81 and 82:
This case does not provide strong s
Page 83 and 84:
Article II.4 Language Acquisition a
Page 85 and 86:
1992, p. XI). These researchers, wh
Page 87 and 88:
comprehend a word within a specific
Page 89 and 90:
more to the truthfulness of the chi
Page 91 and 92:
This idea of “semilingualism” c
Page 93 and 94:
Article III.1 A Brief Description o
Page 95 and 96:
take different lengths of time to c
Page 97 and 98:
example, should involve the same co
Page 99 and 100:
As with all stages of BICS acquisit
Page 101 and 102:
Assessment techniques at stage 3 ca
Page 103 and 104:
different. Therefore, the social di
Page 105:
integrative motivation. Basically,
Page 109 and 110:
(Ellis, 1985; Hakuta, 1986). Howeve
Page 111 and 112:
that sociocultural processes have o
Page 113 and 114:
Article III.3 How Children Acquire
Page 115 and 116:
phonetic units (unique to signed la
Page 117 and 118:
Article III.4 Toward a Sociocultura
Page 119 and 120:
emember is that the fundamental goa
Page 121 and 122:
The best practices models can be th
Page 123 and 124: By focusing on the dialectic betwee
Page 125 and 126: intergenerational wisdom shared by
Page 127 and 128: Daily Realities RecappedThe above v
Page 129 and 130: traditions. At a time in our histor
Page 131 and 132: We will now look at two examples of
Page 133 and 134: Speakers communicate fluently, main
Page 135 and 136: question the effects of such attitu
Page 137 and 138: Article IV.3 Culture Change: Effect
Page 139 and 140: and psychological characteristics o
Page 141 and 142: Contraryto what wewere expecting, t
Page 143 and 144: Article V.1 Assessment in ESL & Bil
Page 145 and 146: vocabulary does the student lack?Is
Page 147 and 148: whether they are LEP and to provide
Page 149 and 150: Fourth, ESL and bilingual program s
Page 151 and 152: competent reader/writer. All versio
Page 153 and 154: Table 1Comparison of Recent Accultu
Page 155 and 156: unilinear model, which measures the
Page 157 and 158: an English-only instructional progr
Page 159 and 160: Article V.3 Assessment of English L
Page 161 and 162: 8. Change answers only for a very g
Page 163 and 164: Riles, 1979; Jose P. v Ambac, 1983)
Page 165 and 166: proficiency is often underestimated
Page 167 and 168: Finally, when second language reade
Page 169 and 170: for their decisions, noting issues
Page 171 and 172: As mentioned above, when the transi
Page 173: ather than generic adjectives and t
Page 177 and 178: English texts and demonstrate progr
Page 179: using inter-district teams). In the
show all

Art Un ticle I.1 ited Sta In the ates News - Woodring College of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?