FREE Things to Send For...
“It is great to have access to such relevant materials in such a timely manner.”
Tracy Carver
Literacy Volunteers of Bastrop
Assessment for Transitions to Work
Assessment Without Tests. Lengel, Beth (November 2005). West Columbia, SC: Lengel Vocational Services. The author presented these workshop materials in a November 2005 Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development symposium on youth development. While tests have their place, workforce development professionals do not have to be “testing experts” to collect and use important data to help plan job search and training services. Lengel takes a critical look at three tools workforce development professionals can integrate to develop comprehensive information that will help their clients with job search, wage, progression, and career growth. Those tools are self-assessment, observation, and the structured interview.
Career Portfolios. Wonacott, Michael E. (2000). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. Career portfolios provide evidence of individuals’ knowledge and skills in working with data, people, and things. Developing a portfolio can be a valuable career awareness and career planning activity for youth, including those with special needs, and adults; a productive instructional activity involving critical reflection and analytical thinking; and a very useful tool in job search and career change. This ERIC Practice Application Brief describes practices in developing and using portfolios for career-related purposes.
Culturally Sensitive Career Assessment: A Quandary. Austin, James T. (1999). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. In the domains of working and schooling, cultural diversity has become an important concept and a source of leverage for those who dare to surf on turbulent waves that involve new ways of thinking and new ways of doing (Jackson et al. 1992). This ERIC Digest discusses progress in the area of multicultural assessment, and questions such as whether the notions of work and career are viewed similarly across cultures.
Assessment for Adult English Language Learners
Assessment with Adult English Language Learners. NCLE, Center for Applied Linguistics (January 2002). Washington, DC: National Center for ESL Literacy Education. The Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (Title II of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998) requires each state to report educational gains of learners in terms of level descriptors defined by the National Reporting System (NRS) document. This requirement has intensified the debate among practitioners, researchers, and policy makers as to what constitutes success and how to measure it. This NCLE Fact Sheet discusses trends and issues and best practices relating to assessment with adult ESL learners, and suggests resources for further information.
Evaluating Phonological Skills in Adult ESOL Learners. Schwarz, Robin Lovrien (October 2006). College Station, TX: Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy & Learning. Recent studies with adult learners and their process of becoming literate in languages other than English indicate that the correlation of phonological skills with learners’ success or lack of success in learning to speak, understand or read in their native languge is similar to that in children. To increase understanding of the role of phonological skills in the learning of adult learners of English, twenty-nine learners at five sites in Texas were evaluated using a screening tool adapted from commercially available tests of phonological processing skills. Results indicate that, as expected, learners with higher levels of literacy generally have stronger phonological skills in English than those with lower literacy, but low literacy does not in itself predict weak phonological awareness, the skill supporting literacy. Repeating sentences was the most prominent weakness across factors such as levels of literacy, time in the US, time studying English and language background. Theories are suggested for this finding.
Effects of Instructional Hours and Intensity of Instruction on NRS Level Gain in Listening and Speaking. Young, Sarah (December 2007). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. This digest reports on a descriptive study examining two questions related to adult English language learners’ educational level gains in the National Reporting System for Adult Education (NRS), as measured by the standardized oral proficiency assessment BEST Plus: (1) What is the relationship between instructional hours and educational level gain on BEST Plus? and (2) What is the relationship between intensity of instruction and educational level gain on BEST Plus? To provide guidance to users on the number of instructional hours needed for students to show a level gain on BEST Plus, the Center for Applied Linguistics collected pretest and posttest data on more than 6,500 students from two states. Results showed that across NRS educational functioning levels, the greater the number of instructional hours, the higher the percentage of students who made level gain. There was also a general trend toward greater NRS level gain for students with high levels of instructional intensity than for those with low intensity. Intensity of instruction had the greatest impact on students at the Beginning ESL Literacy, Low Intermediate, and Advanced ESL levels.
Learner Assessment in Adult ESL Literacy. Wrigley, Heide Spruck (September 1992). Washington, DC: National Center for ESL Literacy Education. Learner assessment is one of the most troublesome areas of adult English as a Second Language (ESL) literacy. On the one hand, programs face demands for valid and reliable tests that can be used for program comparison; on the other, there are strong calls to keep assessment program-based and learner-centered. Disillusioned with standardized tests and concerned about ongoing demands for accountability and documentation of effectiveness, literacy educators are searching for assessments that are fair to learners, informative to teachers, and acceptable to funders and other outside stakeholders. Implementing or developing sound assessments for ESL literacy has become a big challenge-a task made even more difficult because a framework for assessments that provide useful data for ESL literacy programs has not yet been developed. To help clarify some of the issues, this ERIC Q&A compares standardized tests and alternative assessments and provides some examples of effective alternative assessments used in the field.
Needs Assessment for Adult ESL Learners. Weddel, Kathleen Santopietro and Van Duzer, Carol (May 1997). Washington, DC: National Center for ESL Literacy Education. Assessment of literacy needs from the learner’s perspective is an important part of an instructional program. Learners come to adult English as a second language (ESL) literacy programs for diverse reasons. Although they may say they just want to “learn English”, they frequently have very specific learning goals and needs: for example, to be able to read to their children, to get a job, or to become a citizen. If their needs are not met, they are more likely to drop out than to voice their dissatisfaction (Grant & Shank, 1993). The needs assessment process can be used as the basis for developing curricula and classroom practice that are responsive to these needs. This ERIC Digest focuses on ways to determine what learners want or believe they need to learn. Many of the activities described can also include or lead to assessment of proficiencies, and many of the sources cited include both types of assessment.
Assessment for Adult Basic Education
Indicators of Program Quality Study Circle Guide. Pennsylvania ABLE and Kraus, Sally (2003). Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: Bureau of Adult Basic and Literacy Education. The Indicators of Program Quality provide a comprehensive framework to guide local program improvement efforts. This Study Circle Guide, designed for local administrators and practitioners in Pennsylvania, creates a forum for understanding the meaning of the indicators and discuss their respective use in quality improvement. The guide is based on Pennsylvania’s Indicators of Program Quality, but it could be used to structure a study circle or seminar in using Texas’ IPQs, which include an area on Learner Outcomes covering the following: Academic Development, Real World Applications, Preparation for Transition, Work Force Development, and Personal Development. The Texas IPQs can be found on the Administrators’ page of TCALL’s website in the Adult Education Administrators’ Manual.
It Belongs to Me: A Guide to Portfolio Assessment in Adult Education Programs. Fingeret, Hanna Arlene (1993). Durham, NC: Literacy South. The need for alternative methods of learner assessment has long been recognized by many adult literacy educators. This guide is designed to introduce the concept of portfolio assessment and suggest ways in which portfolios might be integrated into a total assessment plan. This is a valuable tool for those who have decided that standardized tests “do not tell me what I need to know about individual students in order to work with them effectively,” or who have tried “folders” that did not work.
Outcomes of Participation in Adult Basic Education: The Importance of Learners’ Perspectives. Bingman, Mary Beth et al (January 2000). Cambridge, MA: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. The Center for Literacy Studies in Tennessee conducted a longitudinal study examining the outcomes of participation in literacy programs as reported by learners. In this study, adults reported a broad and complex set of outcomes that were affected by the contexts of learners’ lives. This paper examines the implications of these findings for policy makers who are developing measurements of outcomes used to assess performance of adult education programs.
Verizon Life Span Literacy Matrix: Relevant Outcomes, Measures and Research-based Practices and Strategies. Westberg, Laura and McShane, Susan and Smith, Lisa (October 2006). Louisville, KY: National Center for Family Literacy. Developed in collaboration among the National Center for Family Literacy, ProLiteracy Worldwide, the National Coalition for Literacy, the Verizon Foundation, the American Library Association, and Georgetown University, this matrix identifies relevant literacy outcomes, appropriate instruments for measuring the outcomes, and effective research-based practices that allow programs and individuals to increase the development of literacy at all stages of life. This tool is intended to minimize confusion for providers over what works in literacy instruction, and to guide funders in ascertaining what programs are worth funding. Most importantly, it is intended to help providers better serve learners from children’s earliest literacy (ages birth to three years) all the way through adult learners in basic education and literacy programs, including English language learners. A glossary defines terms as they are used in the matrix, and lists of references and standardized measures are provided as well.
Family Literacy
Assessing Adult/Child Storybook Reading Practices. DeBruin-Parecki, Andrea (June 1999). Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. In this paper, DeBruin-Parecki reviews the existing research on joint storybook reading practices, outlining the behaviors essential for success. She then describes and reports on the efficacy of her assessment instrument, the Adult/Child Interactive Reading Inventory (ACIRI), an observational tool for assessing the joint reading behaviors of both adults and children. The ACIRI is intended to encourage good instruction, authentic and friendly assessment, and guidance for teachers working with parents and children as to where to focus their instructional efforts. The ACIRI evaluates 12 literacy behaviors and was piloted by Even Start teachers, who collected data on 29 mothers and their children in September and again in May. The ACIRI instrument, a single-page matrix for documenting observation of adult and child behaviors, is included as an appendix.
Teacher Rating of Oral Language and Literacy (TROLL): A Research-Based Tool. Dickinson, David K. and McCabe, Allyssa and Sprague, Kim (September 2001). Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. Article describes (and includes) the Teacher Rating of Oral Language and Literacy (TROLL), an instrument that measures skills identified as critical in the New Standards for Speaking and Listening (Tucker & Codding, 1998) for children ages three through five. In five to ten minutes and without prior training, teachers can assess an individual child’s current standing with respect to skills that research has identified as critical for literacy acquisition. Skills assessed include language, reading, and writing abilities. TROLL has been used with over 900 low-income children, is reliable, and has strong internal consistency. Its validity has been established in numerous ways; TROLL correlates significantly with scores on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the Early Phonemic Awareness Profile given to the same children by trained researchers.
