Learning Opportunities Through a Student-generated assessment tool
The development of learning autonomy and the acquisition of professional discourse in a second language are current priorities of higher education content and language integrated learning (ICL-HE). Research regarding assessment of these objectives is lacking. This action research study explores the use of formative and self and peer assessment in the teaching of professional discourse in an ICL-HE context. It examines how student generation and application of an instrument to assess written professional discourse creates a knowledge building environment (KBE) and opportunities for learning and tracks the learning behaviour trajectory of one student. Interaction analysis is applied to audio and video data collected during a professional discourse writing activity. Classroom data provides evidence for the creation of KBE and opportunities for learning. Longitudinal data collected from one student reveals increasing orientation toward the learning object. The student generation of assessment instruments is a viable formative assessment technique in ICL-HE contexts.
KeywordsHigher education, ICL-HE, Assessment, Professional discourse, Learning Behavior Tracking
Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). A Disciplinary Discourse Perspective on University Science Learning: Achieving Fluency in a Critical Constellation of Modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27–49.
Brouwer, C. E., & Wagner, J. (2007). Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 1(1), 29-47
De Pietro, J. F., Matthey, M., & Py, B. (1989). Acquisition et contrat didactique: les séquences potentiellement acquisitionnelles dans la conversation exolingue. In Actes du troisième colloque régional de linguistique (pp. 99-124).
Doehler, S. P. (2010). Conceptual changes and methodological challenges: on language and learning from a conversation analytic perspective on SLA. P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, Ch. Jenks (eds) Conceptualising Learning in Applied Linguistics, 105-127.
Fortanet-Gomez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education: Towards a Multilingual Language Policy.Bristol, Multilingual Matters
Hoadley, C. (2012). 12 What is a Community of Practice and How Can We Support It? Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments Routledge.
Lantolf, J.P. & Poehner, M.E.(2008) “Dynamic Assessment”. Hornberger, N.H. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Education, New York: Springer.
Leung, C. (2007) “Dynamic assessment: Assessment for and as teaching?” Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 3, 257-78.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997) Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake:Negotiation of form in Communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
Markee, N. (2007). Toward a Learning Behavior Tracking Methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 404–427.
Martinez Ciprés, H. (2011). Improving Written Production Through Self-Assessment in CLIL Science Classroom. Unpublished Master Thesis, Universidad Autonoma Barcelona.
Marzano, R. J. (2010) Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Moore, E. (2014). Constructing content and language knowledge in plurilingual student teamwork: situated and longitudinal perspectives. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17(5), 586–609.
Popham , W.J (2008) Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Ribas, T. (2010) La evaluación en el área lingüística. Textos de Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura, 53, 10-21
Sauro, S.(2009). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 Grammar.Language Learning and Technology.Vol 13.96-120.
Copyright (c) 2015 Joan Ploettner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.