[Assessment 1162] {Dangerous Content?} assessments

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

Gail Burnett gburnett at sanford.org
Thu Feb 7 19:07:48 EST 2008


Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed
Warning: (not named).
Warning: Please read the "AttachmentWarning.txt" attachment(s) for more information.

All the discussion on this list (the first I've ever joined) has been fascinating. I have a question I haven't seen addressed. Someone said that the BEST-Plus is the only valid kind of test for ESL learners. What does anyone think of the CASAS? That's what we use with our adult students, both ELLs and native speakers. I know it wasn't designed for ESL use but it does use real-life material (road maps, pay stubs, store signs, etc.) and I think that's good. What has always bothered me is that it's taken silently. That doesn't seem right for our lower level students, who rarely make many gains. I wonder if it's considered valid for them or not. I know that other ESL programs do use it.

Thanks.


-----Original Message-----
From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of assessment-request at nifl.gov
Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 5:57 PM
To: assessment at nifl.gov
Subject: Assessment Digest, Vol 29, Issue 28

Send Assessment mailing list submissions to
assessment at nifl.gov

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
assessment-request at nifl.gov

You can reach the person managing the list at
assessment-owner at nifl.gov

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Assessment digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. [Assessment 1160] Re: {Dangerous Content?} RE: No Questions
or Comments?! (Jodi Crandall)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:22:49 -0500
From: Jodi Crandall <crandall at umbc.edu>
Subject: [Assessment 1160] Re: {Dangerous Content?} RE: No Questions
or Comments?!
To: "Forrest Chisman" <forrest at crosslink.net>
Cc: 'The Assessment Discussion List' <assessment at nifl.gov>
Message-ID: <076B1938-8827-49B0-9890-3DA0BC4C3641 at umbc.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Forrest,

I'm not sure yet that I know the question, but here goes ...

I don't know of community college programs now that continue to
separate out literacy level students after the actual literacy
class. Does anyone else>

When I mentioned higher levels of prior education, in this context, I
didn't mean college-educated students, but those with closer to a
high school education n their own countries. These are the students
that we used to believe were the main students that we served, not
the literacy level students who are increasingly being enrolled in
our classes.

For highly educated individuals, those with college degrees in their
own countries, most of the programs that I know seek to transition
these students into more academic ESL programs at the intermediate
levels. In fact, some community colleges, like the English for
Academic Purposes College of Lake County, that we studied, created a
seamless transition from noncredit to credit academic ESL courses by
working backwards from the credit expectations and then aligning the
intermediate level noncredit ESL to them.

City College, as you know, provides accelerated ESL classes (two
terms in one) for more educated students, since they are likely to be
able to make faster progress.


Jodi

On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Forrest Chisman wrote:


> Jodi,

>

> I think you misunderstood me (as usual) :-). My question wasn't about

> separating out literacy level students. I agree most programs do

> that. My

> question was about the other practice from the 1980's you mention --

> separate classes for students with higher levels of prior education

> ABOVE

> the literacy level.

>

> Forrest

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-

> bounces at nifl.gov] On

> Behalf Of JoAnn (Jodi) Crandall

> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 3:10 PM

> To: The Assessment Discussion List

> Subject: [Assessment 1139] Re: {Dangerous Content?} RE: No

> Questions or

> Comments?!

>

> Jackie and Forrest,

>

> I think most large programs separate literacy level students from

> others

> who are at a beginning level. I know that back in the 1980s when

> there

> were large refugee ESL programs, several community colleges created

> parallel ESL classes for the beginning levels and even into

> intermediate

> levels, with one set of classes for students with limited literacy or

> prior schooling and another for more educated students. The reason

> was

> that the students with less education made slower progress. Some

> of this

> is undoubtedly due to the way in which we teach English (requiring

> literacy), but it is also because students need to become

> accustomed to

> attending classes, learning to hold and use a pen or pencil, and a

> wide

> range of basic skills that come with being a student in a class.

>

> Those of you who have separate classes for those who need

> literacy: Can

> you tell us what kind of classes or program you provide?

>

> Those who teach both literacy and more educated learners in the same

> class: Can you let us know how you manage? What are some ways in

> which

> you accommodate both sets of needs?

>

> Jodi

>> Forrest,

>> I like the idea of separate classes for those with a literacy

>> background

>> and those without. These two groups have such different needs.

>> Having both

>> in the class make it difficult for a teacher to meet the needs of

>> either

>> group well and I find that often the stronger students dominate

>> the class,

>> and their drive push the teacher forward. If the instructor does

>> not keep

>> up

>> with the students who are learning at a faster rate, they often

>> become

>> frustrated and leave or mentally check out. However, if the

>> instructor

>> keeps

>> up with those students, the others are unable to keep up and they get

>> frustrated.

>> I think that literacy could perhaps be separated out. And

>> regardless of

>> how you do it, well-trained instructors are essential.

>> Jackie

>>

>>

>> On 2/5/08, Forrest Chisman <forrest at crosslink.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> To all of you who commented on level of prior education as a

>>> factor in

>>> student performance:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Everyone with whom Jodi Crandall and I talked believes that more

>>> highly

>>> educated students do better in terms of persistence, learning

>>> gains,

>>> and

>>> transitions. And learning theory would lead us to expect this.

>>> Regrettably

>>> we found very little hard data about how much difference prior

>>> education

>>> makes, because too few programs track the level of prior

>>> education of

>>> their

>>> students and correlate it with outcomes. DO any of you do this?

>>> That is,

>>> do

>>> you have any data on HOW MUCH difference level of prior education

>>> makes?

>>> Or

>>> any strong impressions? And are there "cut points" in prior

>>> education

>>> that

>>> seem to make a difference -- e.g. students who are completely

>>> illiterate,

>>> students who at least reached high school, high school graduates,

>>> college

>>> graduates, etc. -- or is level of prior education pretty much of a

>>> continuum?

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> More importantly, what can programs DO to narrow the gap between

>>> highly

>>> educated students and those with less prior education? Presumably

>>> students

>>> with very low levels of education are more likely end up in the

>>> lower

>>> level

>>> ESL courses (Literacy or Low-Beginning levels) why are (almost by

>>> definition) in the business of teaching basic literacy and

>>> sometimes

>>> math.

>>> Why isn't this enough? In your experience, does the "gap" exist

>>> at these

>>> levels too, or mainly at higher levels? At any levels, would it be

>>> desirable

>>> to place less highly educated students in separate classes from

>>> those

>>> with

>>> more education and adjust the curriculum/support systems for them

>>> accordingly? Some programs have tried "native language literacy"

>>> or the

>>> Spanish GED. What has been the experience of any of you with these

>>> approaches? Any other ideas? IS there an adult ESL equivalent of

>>> "bi-lingual

>>> education" that should be tried?

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> It seems to me that we need to come up with better ideas. Because

>>> the

>>> people who study immigration tell us that the level of education of

>>> immigrants has been falling. And if Immigration Reform mandates

>>> large

>>> numbers of undocumented people to "learn English" (whatever that

>>> means),

>>> ESL

>>> programs may be swamped with students who have very little

>>> education in

>>> their native countries and too little money to serve them. So

>>> anyone

>>> who

>>> has any ideas about how to bridge this "education gap" could help

>>> us a

>>> lot

>>> by posting ideas about how to close it on this discussion list.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Forrest Chisman

>>>

>>> Vice President

>>>

>>> CAAL

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> *From:* assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-

>>> bounces at nifl.gov]

>>> *On

>>> Behalf Of *Tina_Luffman at yc.edu

>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 05, 2008 1:32 PM

>>> *To:* The Assessment Discussion List

>>> *Subject:* [Assessment 1109] Re: {Dangerous Content?} RE: No

>>> Questions

>>> or

>>> Comments?!

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Hi Jackie,

>>>

>>> Thank you for this information. I believe this research must be

>>> what my

>>> former Spanish teacher was basing her argument on for bilingual

>>> education in

>>> the K-12 school system.

>>>

>>> Tina

>>>

>>> Tina Luffman

>>> Coordinator, Developmental Education

>>> Verde Valley Campus

>>> 928-634-6544

>>> tina_luffman at yc.edu

>>>

>>> *"Jackie Coelho" <jackie.coelho at gmail.com>*

>>> Sent by: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov

>>>

>>> 02/05/2008 11:13 AM

>>>

>>> Please respond to

>>> The Assessment Discussion List <assessment at nifl.gov>

>>>

>>> To

>>>

>>> "The Assessment Discussion List" <assessment at nifl.gov>

>>>

>>> cc

>>>

>>> Subject

>>>

>>> [Assessment 1108] Re: {Dangerous Content?} RE: No Questions or

>>> Comments?!

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Hi Tina,

>>>

>>> This has been researched already and is the basis for the

>>> arguement in

>>> favor of bilingual education, a good idea that was not

>>> implemented in

>>> the best way. For many years people have known that a good

>>> foundation

>>> in literacy in the first language will facilitate learning in a

>>> second

>>> or third language.

>>>

>>> Another interesting twist is the existence of languages that are not

>>> written.

>>>

>>> Jackie

>>>

>>>

>>> On 2/5/08, Tina_Luffman at yc.edu <Tina_Luffman at yc.edu> wrote:

>>>> Hi list members,

>>>>

>>>> My experience teaching ELAA students in the GED class is similar to

>>> that

>>> of

>>>> Gail. If the student has a solid educational background in the

>>>> country

>>> they

>>>> came from in their native language, they tend to advance rather

>>> quickly

>>> and

>>>> get their GED. Those coming with 6th grade educations from their

>>> country

>>> or

>>>> lower tend to stay in the GED class for years and do not make much

>>>> advancement.

>>>>

>>>> This experience relates well to research done among Native American

>>> tribes

>>>> teaching them English. Those Native Americans who were first taught

>>> literacy

>>>> skills in their own tongue learned English much quicker than

>>>> those who

>>> tried

>>>> to learn literacy skills in English without that background in

>>>> their

>>> own

>>>> tongue. I also found similar problems when I was learning

>>>> Spanish. The

>>>> concepts I could mentally translate from English to Spanish were

>>>> much

>>> easier

>>>> to grasp and learn than those I didn't know in English. Perhaps

>>>> this

>>> is

>>>> something deserving more research.

>>>>

>>>> Tina

>>>> Tina Luffman

>>>> Coordinator, Developmental Education

>>>> Verde Valley Campus

>>>> 928-634-6544

>>>> tina_luffman at yc.edu

>>>>

>>>> -----assessment-bounces at nifl.gov wrote: -----

>>>>

>>>> To: "The Assessment Discussion List" <assessment at nifl.gov>

>>>> From: "Gail Burnett" <gburnett at sanford.org>

>>>> Sent by: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov

>>>> Date: 02/04/2008 06:34PM

>>>> Subject: [Assessment 1104] {Dangerous Content?} RE: No Questions or

>>>> Comments?!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed

>>>> Warning: (not named).

>>>> Warning: Please read the "AttachmentWarning.txt" attachment(s) for

>>> more

>>>> information.

>>>>

>>>> In our small adult education program, my experience (just about

>>>> three

>>> years)

>>>> is that students with solid educational backgrounds advance,

>>> particularly if

>>>> they're not working too many hours. Those who advance the

>>>> slowest, if

>>> at

>>>> all, are immigrants who are barely literate in their first

>>>> language. I

>>> would

>>>> say that lack of education is a bigger factor than lack of time; a

>>> student

>>>> who works full-time and is exhausted often will still succeed

>>>> because

>>> he/she

>>>> is familiar with academic work, and is goal-oriented. What we do is

>>> try

>>> to

>>>> get our low-level students to come up with goals, but that's a hard

>>> concept

>>>> in a second language.

>>>>

>>>> This does not mean that the factors mentioned in the research don't

>>> play

>>> a

>>>> part, though. I'm one of those barely-trained teachers

>>>> (transitioned

>>> from

>>>> another career, got trained mainly through workshops rather than

>>> classes).

>>>> My skill level very well may contribute to students' slow

>>>> advancement.

>>> It's

>>>> hard for small adult education programs to get highly skilled ESL

>>> teachers.

>>>> The pay is low and there are no benefits. But my program is

>>> encouraging

>>> me

>>>> to get extra training and has me on a plan of improvement. I think

>>> we're

>>>> making some progress.

>>>>

>>>> Does this address any of the issues? And am I submitting it right?

>>>>

>>>> ________________________________

>>>>

>>>> From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of Marie Cora

>>>> Sent: Mon 2/4/2008 6:50 PM

>>>> To: Assessment at nifl.gov

>>>> Subject: [Assessment 1103] No Questions or Comments?!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Hello everyone,

>>>>

>>>> I'm so surprised! No one has anything to comment on regarding your

>>>> program's effectiveness at helping ESL students advance?? I was

>>>> very

>>>> curious to know if subscribers experience the same types of issues

>>> that

>>> Dr.

>>>> Chisman and Dr. Crandall found in their research: a lack of

>>>> intensity

>>> of

>>>> instruction/few protocols for transitioning students/few

>>>> opportunities

>>> for

>>>> professional development.

>>>>

>>>> What are the issues in your program that you feel inhibit the ESL

>>> student

>>>> from advancing? What do you try to do about that?

>>>>

>>>> Please post your questions and comments now.

>>>>

>>>> Thanks!

>>>>

>>>> Marie Cora

>>>> Assessment Discussion List Moderator

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Marie Cora

>>>> marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com

>>>> <mailto:marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com>

>>>> NIFL Assessment Discussion List Moderator

>>>> <marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com>

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and

>>> intended

>>>> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are

>>> addressed.

>>>> If you have received this email in error please notify the system

>>> manager.

>>>> This message contains confidential information and is intended only

>>> for

>>> the

>>>> individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not

>>>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

>>>> -------------------------------

>>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>>> Assessment mailing list

>>>> Assessment at nifl.gov

>>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>>> <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment>

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>>>> Email delivered to tina_luffman at yc.edu

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> -------------------------------

>>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>>> Assessment mailing list

>>>> Assessment at nifl.gov

>>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>>> <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment>

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>>>> Email delivered to jackie.coelho at gmail.com

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>> -------------------------------

>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>> Assessment mailing list

>>> Assessment at nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>> <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment>

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>>> Email delivered to tina_luffman at yc.edu

>>> <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment>

>>>

>>> -------------------------------

>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>> Assessment mailing list

>>> Assessment at nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>>> Email delivered to jackie.coelho at gmail.com

>>>

>>>

>> -------------------------------

>> National Institute for Literacy

>> Assessment mailing list

>> Assessment at nifl.gov

>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>> Email delivered to crandall at umbc.edu

>>

>

>

> --

> JoAnn (Jodi) Crandall

> Professor, Education Department

> Director, Ph.D. Program in Language, Literacy & Culture

> Coordinator, Peace Corps Master's International Program in ESOL/

> Bilingual

> Education

> University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)

> 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250

> ph: 410-455-2313/2376 fax: 410-455-8947/1880

> email: crandall at umbc.edu

> www.umbc.edu/llc/

> www.umbc.edu/esol/

> www.umbc.edu/esol/peacecorps.html

>

>

>

> -------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Assessment mailing list

> Assessment at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

> Email delivered to forrest at crosslink.net

>

>


JoAnn (Jodi) Crandall
Professor and Director
Language, Literacy and Culture Ph.D. Program
Director, Peace Corps Master's Intl Program in ESOL/Bilingual Education
University of Maryland Baltimore County
1000 Hilltop Circle
Baltimore, MD 21250
tel: 410-455-2313
fax: 410-455-8947
eml: crandall at umbc.edu




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20080207/f7f52137/attachment.html

------------------------------

-------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Assessment mailing list
Assessment at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment


End of Assessment Digest, Vol 29, Issue 28
******************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
-------------- next part --------------
This is a message from the MailScanner E-Mail Virus Protection Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The original e-mail attachment "winmail.dat"
was believed to be infected by a virus and has been replaced by this warning
message.

At Thu Feb 7 19:12:39 2008 the virus scanner said:
Could not parse Outlook Rich Text attachment

--
Postmaster
University of Maine System Information Technology Services
www.maine.edu/system/unet/