Carolina Jimenez

Language 9

Stephen Tippet

May 9^th, 2010

My class, my test

In San Juan Evangelista School, teachers were assigned to prepare tests for the entire level. The problem was that sometimes “test developers” did not know what the other teachers had taught or their methodology; therefore, the entire assessment process was not valid. Teachers should be able to develop their own tests for their own students because of three main reasons: first, teachers are aware of the content taught in the class, second teachers know with which methodology they have taught the content, and lastly teachers must use tests as part of the learning process. In this essay, I will argue why teachers should be allowed to develop their own tests.

The only way teachers can create a test is by knowing what contents students have reviewed and learned. When other teachers develop tests, these may include content which students have not been taught. In technical terms this is known as content validity. This means that teachers should assess what you have taught with a representative sample of the content domain. For example: if a teacher is assessing his/her students reading comprehension with open-ended questions, he/she should not assess grammar or spelling in the answers since that is not part of the reading comprehension domain.

A test, in order to be valid, needs to consider the methodology in which students have learned the contents. Instructional validity is the technical term for explaining how a test needs to consider the way in which students have been taught the contents. For example: if students have studied the meanings of certain words and how they collocate with others in a written manner, teachers cannot assess use of words in an oral manner because that is not the method in which they taught the words. In our country, PSU is the selection test for students to enter the university. This test format is multiple choice/objective tests. Therefore, students should practice their tests with a similar format. Format is also what instructional validity seeks for.

When teachers develop their own tests it is even more feasible to promote learning with the tests. However, assessment is closely connected to learning; the latter will not come automatically. When teachers develop their own tests, they are aware of the entire process of assessment and with that awareness they will be able to promote learning by deeply analyzing tests results and evaluating their methodology and teaching styles. Feedback is also essential in order to promote learning through assessments. When we provide students with detailed and meaningful results, we will be promoting autonomy and learning because they will be able to see their strengths and weaknesses.

As a conclusion, we can state that these three arguments are key in order to discuss the issue of test development. The assessment process needs to have a high level of validity which can be provided by knowing the context of each class. Teachers are the ones that best know their context, and they should be able to develop their own tests for their own classes. When teachers are given standard tests, they are not able to use tests as a learning tool; therefore, they are not able to take 100% advantage. I guess that most of the times, the best things are tailor-made.

One learning process that I consider as done by apprenticeship is the teaching profession. Through lots of observation I have been able to learn certain methods with which I can teach a lesson or keep order and behaviour inside the classroom. I have been able to participate in ELAB at the university which gave me vast experience on different approaches to teaching the English language. I have also had the opportunity of working as an assistant at the university which has also given me a lot of chances to practice my teaching skills with university students. After a process of observing others I now have a clearer idea of what teaching is and how I can do it.

Carolina Jiménez

Stephen Tippett

Language 9

Being under Pressure

            It is known that sometimes people under pressure perform actions which do not want to. The main character of the story “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell is pressured to shoot the elephant even though he did not want to. In this essay, I will try to prove this thesis with three different assertions presented in the story.

            The first assertion is: “As soon as I saw the elephant I knew with perfect certainty that I ought not to shoot him.” The character is from the beginning desiring not to perform the action of killing the elephant. The second fact is that the character explains that when he was facing the elephant a huge crowd of “natives” were behind him so “And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all. The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward.” It is clear that this man felt the pressure and immediately understood that he would have to do something he did not want to. The last piece of evidence is that since he was a “sahib”, a European man, he had to act like one, being very resolute and do definite things. “For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life trying to impress the “natives,” and so in every crisis he has got to do what the “natives” expect of him.” So, the character finds out that in the end all sahibs need to do what others want them to do.

            In order to conclude, I can say that with the evidence provided I was able to prove the fact that the main character had to shoot the elephant because of the pressure natives imposed on him. Throughout human history, many situations have occurred because of the pressure people feel, for example wars. Many of the actions we performed are modelled by what the society expects of us. Sometimes, people should try to act correctly, doing good to others, instead of acting according to what others expect of them.

As it is stated in the text “Cognitive Apprenticeship” by Allan Collins, students can carry out the process of apprenticeship with their cognitive skills. If we take the linguistic domain as an example, we can demonstrate how students can start building their own knowledge through apprenticeship. In the process of observation, if we talk to students with more sophisticated language and more complex structures, probably they will observe the way we speak. Later on, if we encourage our students to use the same advanced language they are hearing from us by guiding them into more complex language, they will be incorporating that language until at one point they will not need our guidance anymore.  Finally, students will practice the new structures and include the new sophisticated vocabulary into their daily classroom language. Teachers can definitely accomplish this process with specific features of the language. For example, this process can be carried out with a specific vocabulary preparation for a class presentation.

Based on my experience, I am one of the people who learn by doing. Therefore, most of my language learning has been a process of experimentation where I would imitate and use words my teachers used, and with their guidance and feedback I could become a more independent user of the language.

Apprenticeship must be one of our aims in teaching since we know that by constructing ones’ learning and knowledge students will get extremely involved in the process. This method may lead us to creating more meaningful lessons for our students which will become into developing better learning processes and results.

The code to see it is: txh2k9zw62141

Honestly I could not determine what kind of theory they use because I could not see behaviourism nor Grammar translation.

If anything the web page does not show any type of reinforcement so it is definitely not behaviourism.

There is no translation nor grammar explanation whatsoever, so that is not the theory behind it.

After reading “Karaoke for Social and Cultural Change” I realized how ignorant I am with regards to other countries’ educational systems. The fact that India had so much illiteracy was indeed shocking. However, what was even more surprising was the method they are currently using to overcome illiteracy in the population. Same Language Subtitling (SLS) is a remarkable idea which has so many advantages such as being of great extension and low cost. The uses of subtitles in the same language in order to enhance reading experiences is a phenomenon which has been extended over the past 10 years to a majority in India.  Results have been startling because India has achieved literacy subliminally.

Although Chile does not have the same levels of illiteracy among its population I consider the SLS an excellent measure to be applied in Chile as a means of enhancing better reading experiences. We are a society that does watch television which can make SLS easier and an amazing opportunity for young children to be exposed to reading since a very early age.