Hello all
Rachel says that “The overriding problem [with her ESOL tests] is that the learners who progressed from Entry 3 to Level 1 have very poor success rates, whereas those who were assessed as working towards Level 1 or 2 at initial assessment achieve much better.” I would say that the overriding problem is bigger than this: i.e. the way tests themselves, and the qualificatiions framework they are part of, have come to dominate ESOL students’ learning and lives.
It’s worth keeping an eye on the reasons ESOL tests have become so dominant in recent years. Sure – students like to gain qualifications, but many many tests are taken either to fulfill institutional and funding requirements that students “progress up a level” annually, or to sastisfy a language requirement for citizenship. Would ESOL teachers spend as much time as they currently do on ‘exam practice’ if they weren’t ordered to by their institutions, for funding purposes? No, I didn’t think so. Talk about ‘washback’: it seems that at this time of year, ESOL practice suffers a tidal wave in an attempt to meet institutional funding demands and to toe the line with the Government’s social cohesion agenda. Are these really adequate reasons for testing to choke practice as it does? It doesn’t help, of course, that many of the tests that ESOL students take are inadequate in their design and inappropriate (viz the national literacy test as a test of reading for ESOL students.), and (especially at Entry levels) have very little currency outside the Skills for Life arena. They are, of course, rather a good money-spinner for Cambridge ESOL, Trinity, et al.
None of this, of course, is the fault of teachers. And Rachel’s concern – that the ‘steps’ between levels do not seem to be of the same size – is a valid one. But I think it’s important not to lose sight of the bigger picture. In a paper I wrote with Melanie Cooke, just out in the latest Language Issues, we outlined some strategies for resistance to agendas which threaten to undermine what we know to be effective practice, including the hugely inappropriate nature of some of these tests. The reference is: Cooke, M. and J. Simpson (2009) ‘Challenging agendas in ESOL: Skills, employability and social cohesion.’ Language Issues 20/1, 19-30. This is a very good issue of Language Issues, by the way. As I’ve said before, every staff room should have a copy.
Cheers
James
________________________________________
From: ESOL-Research discussion forum and message board [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rachel Thake [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15 May 2009 17:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Entry 3 and Level 1 results
A more accurate title....
We have just had the Cambridge ESOL Reading results back.
As usual, there is a high pass rate at the Entry levels and much lower
achievement at Levels 1 and 2.
The overriding problem is that the learners who progressed from Entry 3
to Level 1 have very poor success rates, whereas those who were assessed
as working towards Level 1 or 2 at initial assessment achieve much
better.
The jump from Entry 3 to Level 1 seems to be too challenging for most
students to achieve in one year - even for those on full-time courses.
Achievement is particularly low for those educated outside the European
setting.
Any thoughts, suggestions, strategies?
Rachel Thake
ESOL Programme Leader
TVU
Crescent Road
Reading
RG1 5RQ
tel: 0118 967 5551
***********************************
ESOL-Research is a forum for researchers and practitioners with an interest in research into teaching and learning ESOL. ESOL-Research is managed by James Simpson at the Centre for Language Education Research, School of Education, University of Leeds.
To join or leave ESOL-Research, visit
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ESOL-RESEARCH.html
A quick guide to using Jiscmail lists can be found at:
http://jiscmail.ac.uk/help/using/quickuser.htm
To contact the list owner, send an email to
[log in to unmask]
|