Fair Assessments

     I found Casanave’s discussion of the fairness of assessment particularly interesting.  As a K-12 educator, discussions of assessment inevitably lead me to think about the consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act and its heavy emphasis on high-stakes testing. The stakes are high for all students and teachers, but English language learners have been especially affected by policies that are essentially unfair. ELL’s are required to take English proficiency exams yearly, are often required to take tests of content knowledge in English, and are not always provided with the appropriate accommodations for testing. For example, Wright & Choi (2006) examined the effects of  high-stakes testing  on 3^rd grade English language learners in 59 schools across Arizona. They interviewed teachers who reported observing a number of disturbing behaviors during test taking including leaving entire sections of the test blank, crying, and vomiting.  The teachers also reported that ESL instruction was largely replaced with test prep curriculum beyond the students’ linguistic proficiencies.

     Such findings are upsetting and make me wonder what teachers can do to change policy.  Casanave stated that teachers often have little control over assessment decisions that are made outside of their classroom. That is certainly true, but I think that teachers have a responsibility to work towards change in unfair assessment practices and to carefully examine the ethical dilemmas of assessment. I wish that I had a better idea of how to go about doing that. It is a difficult challenge especially in an educational policy environment that largely ignores the voice and expertise of teachers and researchers. One thing that made sense to me was the idea of local contexts which Casanave discussed on pg. 123. Right now assessments for K-12 students are most often designed at the state level, and we’re moving towards more of a nationalized system. What can we do in order to return some control to local schools so that they can design assessments appropriate for the specific needs of their students? I also wonder about diversity. Are the groups who design and score state’s writing assessments diverse to ensure that the interests of all students are served?

     Even if teachers can find effective ways to improve assessment practices, changes won’t be made over night. In the meantime, they can find ways to reduce stress and anxiety in their own classrooms. There were many excellent suggestions in this week’s readings for providing “better conditions for success” (Ferris, 2008, p. 98). I like the ideas of projects and portfolio assessments. I think that providing meaningful contexts and looking at growth over time are powerful strategies for promoting fluency and accuracy as well as confidence. Additionally, I have found it helpful in my work with L1 writers to allow frequent opportunities for self assessment and student goal-setting. Students should have ownership in their writing and that might include opportunities for them to examine and question assessments in the classroom and other contexts.

Wright, W., & Choi, D. (2006). The Impact of Language and High-Stakes Testing Policies on Elementary School English Language Learners in Arizona. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(13), 1-75

    

Thoughts on Post-process

As a public school teacher, I implemented a process approach to writing instruction. I used and loved writing workshop methods in my 2^nd grade classroom and helped other teachers implement the practice. Process writing allowed students to work at their own level and pace. It gave students an opportunity to express themselves in their own voice about topics that were meaningful to them. It gave me the freedom to meet the individual needs of students. Rather than teaching the same discrete skills to the whole class at the same time, I could pull up a chair beside a student and help them discover their goals as writers.  Most of my students embraced writing, and many of them even chose to take their writing journals to recess. It was one of my favorite times of day because I felt that students truly connected to their writing and to each other as a result of writing workshop.

Despite my successful experiences with writing workshop, I completely agree with a couple of points about the limitations of process writing. First, I think that it has often been oversimplified in practice. Matsuda mentioned Donald Graves’ “shock and dismay” at overhearing two teachers discuss “the three-step and the four-step Graves writing process.”  This incident seems familiar to me. I have seen entirely too many writing process posters hanging on classroom walls. It is also common for basal reading series to have a writing lesson plan that lists out a step in the writing process for each day of the week. (i.e. Day one: prewrite; Day two: draft; Day three: revise; Day four: edit; Day five: Publish). These oversimplifications sterilize the writing process and do not resemble authentic writing processes.

I also agree that it is important to acknowledge the sociopolitical aspects of writing and writing instruction. This point makes me think about the discussions that I have had with my undergraduate students in the education department about codeswitching. I take issue with the argument that teachers can teach kids to codeswitch by explaining to them when and where it is appropriate to use their home language as opposed to standard English.  I think that it is disrespectful and counterproductive to tell students that their language is inappropriate in school or anywhere else without also discussing why it is considered inappropriate. When we explore the reasons for conceptions of appropriateness and inappropriateness, we infuse the conversation with issues of power. These discussions can help students choose how they want to communicate. 

Literacy Biography

     I’ll begin by discussing my development as an L1 writer before discussing my limited experience as an L2 writer. Writing did not play a prominent role in my K-12 education. My earliest writing experiences involved short, formulaic exercises that focused more on penmanship and grammar than communication or expression. In middle school and high school, I completed the standard assignments such as five paragraph essays and research papers with ease but with little attention to my personal writing style or my growth as a writer. I responded more positively to creative writing assignments, and I experimented with short fiction and poetry on my own. Through creative writing, I began to see myself as a writer and to be metacognative about my writing processes.

     In undergraduate school, most of my core classes required essay writing. I rarely received specific feedback, so I continued to write without much thought to my processes. I rarely revised or consulted references. I simply wrote down my thoughts and turned them in. The courses that I took as an elementary education major rarely included writing exercises except for lesson plans or the occasional essay about educational philosophy, so I did not consider writing to be a primary part of my professionalism. When I entered the Masters in Reading program at ISU, I was unpleasantly surprised by the amount of writing required. As an undergraduate, the papers I wrote were almost always short, and I struggled to write papers that met the page requirements required for masters classes. I still received little feedback about my writing, so I continued to write without much revision. When I submitted my first article for publication, I was asked to revise it. This was the first experience in which I received useful criticism about my writing in a way which would allow me to improve as a writer, and it was the first time that I saw writing as a crucial part of my career.

     As a doctoral student, I have become more aware of my writing, and it has become more of a source of anxiety. I feel more affected at this level of study by my working class background. I am the first person in my family to attend college, and I sometimes worry that I do not have sufficient vocabulary. In order to improve my academic vocabulary and writing, I pay careful attention to the word choices, sentence structure, and organization in scholarly writing.

     I also have some experience as an L2 writer. I began studying Spanish in high school in order to fulfill the foreign language requirement for admission to college. I had no interest at the time in foreign language, but I quickly fell in love with the idea of understanding the world in a new way. After I graduated from high school, I spent the summer volunteering in a predominantly Latino community in Houston, Texas. I worked with preschoolers who spoke Spanish. I loved the experience and continued similar work when I returned home to Oklahoma City. I wanted to be able to communicate better with the children, so I completed a minor in Spanish.

     My minor included classes in Spanish Literature which required me to read, write, and speak only in Spanish. It was much easier for me to read and write than to speak and listen. I enjoyed reading in Spanish, but I found L2 writing difficult. I could write reasonably well and communicate basic ideas, but the final product always felt stilted and incomplete to me because I did not have sufficient vocabulary and grammar skills to fully express my thoughts. I felt emotionally disconnected from the writing. I did most of my writing by thinking in English and then translating to Spanish. I used English/Spanish dictionaries when necessary, but I preferred to just find another way to say something if I didn’t know the exact translation. Overall, I felt like my Spanish classes were useful but disconnected from the sorts of authentic experiences that might have allowed me to become more fully bilingual. I never became comfortable speaking in Spanish, and eventually abandoned my study of the language. My experience with Spanish taught me that second language acquisition can be a challenging endeavor. Consequently, I have a great respect for those who have achieved multilingualism and a compassion for students who may be struggling with the acquisition of English.