Transcript 7 Case Studies in Writing Assessment for Low Level Adult

Seven Case Studies in Writing
Assessment for Low Level Adult
Students
A discussion of computer placement,
on-line diagnostics, and multiple forms
of assessment in developmental college
writing
Background
• Lansing Community College
• Approximately 20,000 students
• (How many developmental writing/reading
students?)
• The Center for Transitional Learning has 3
levels of Developmental Writing
• We define developmental writing as a writing
score below 4 on the Accuplacer computer
placement test
The Pilot
• LCC developed a 6 credit combined
reading/writing/student development course
• The goal was to improve computer placement
scores while teaching students how to
become effective students
• Connect students to important resources such
as advising, tutoring, The Women’s Resource
Center etc.
The Pilot Cont.
• Students in the pilot were required to have at
least a score of 1 on the Accuplacer Placement
Test in either reading or writing
• LCC will not admit students scoring below a 1
• Students testing at a writing level of 6 and a
reading level of 5 are placed into college level
coursework.
• Many students were late enrollees
• Instructor had little or no previous experience
teaching at the lowest acceptable level of
Reading and Writing
Class Size and Demographics
• 7 students completed the pilot course; 9 started
it
• Students were provided with free textbooks,
notebooks, highlighters and pens
• Students elected to take the course
• Two male students over 50 years of age
• Two males in their early twenties
• A 19 year old female
• A 35 year old female
• A 25 year old female
Writing Preview
• Read through the following writing samples.
• Based on the quality of the sample, rank the
each student’s likely overall success in the
course.
• Assign a rank of “1” to the sample you believe
belongs to the strongest overall student in the
class, “2” to the next strongest student and so
on.
• We’ll come back to these rankings later.
Student #1 (RM)
• Writing Level: 2 (did not retest)
• Reading Level: 1 (did not retest)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic Mastery:
– Pronoun Reference and Point of View
– Later earned mastery in Apostrophes
– Few attempts to acquire mastery using
MySkillsLab
Student #2 (MR)
• CPT Reading 1 (retested at a 1)
• CPT Writing 1 (retested at a 2)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic Mastery
– Pronoun Preference and Point of View
– No acquired mastery of any other skills
Student #3 (BL)
• Writing Level: None (retested to a 2)
• Reading Level: 1 (retested at a 1)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic Proficiency: Verb
Tense, Pronoun Reference and Point of View,
Adjectives, Apostrophes, Quotations Marks,
Spelling, Parts of Speech, Phrases and Clauses
Student #3 (continued)
• Acquired Proficiency: Subjects and Verbs,
Fragments, Regular and Irregular Verbs, RunOns and Comma Splices, Pronoun-Antecedent
Agreement, Adverbs, Prepositions,
Capitalization, Commas, Easily Confused
Words
• Failed Proficiency: Subject-Verb Agreement
Student #4 (JB)
• Writing Level: 2 (retested to a 2)
• Reading Level: 1 (retested to a 2)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic: Proficiency in Pronoun
Reference and Point of View, Parts of Speech,
Phrases and Clauses
• Acquired Mastery: None
• Failed Mastery: Subjects and Verbs
Student #5 (BA)
• Writing Level: 2 (retested to a 2)
• Reading Level: 1 (retest to a 1)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic: Proficiency in Pronoun
Reference and Point of View
• Acquired Mastery: None
• Failed Mastery: Subjects and Verbs
Students #6 (JeB)
• Writing Level: 2 (retested to 2)
• Reading Level: 1 (retested 3x’s in one year, no
improvement)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic: Regular and Irregular
Verbs
• Acquired Mastery: Capitalization, Commas
• Failed Mastery: Subjects and Verbs, Fragments
Student #7 (MG)
• Writing Level 4: (retested to a 4)
• Reading Level 2: (retested to a 5)
• MySkillsLab Diagnostic: Proficiency in Regular
and Irregular Verbs, Verb Tense, Run-ons and
Comma Splices, Adverbs, Consistent Verb
Tense and Active Voice, Apostrophes,
Quotation Marks, Spelling
Student #7 cont.
• Acquired Proficiency: Subjects and Verbs, Verb
Tense
What didn’t the tests measure?
• On a sheet of paper, take a few moments to
jot down what the computer-based tests
didn’t tell us about each student.
• Collected results…
• Now, using students’ initials, rank them
according to their computer-based
assessment scores and acquired mastery.
The Question…
• How did the two rankings compare? Did you
find the best writers have the best computerbased testing scores and skill mastery?
Other forms of Writing Assessment
• In-class writing and reflection
• Writing in process which involved multiple drafts
and conferences with formative assessment
• Quizzes on basic grammar and punctuation
• Group exercises
• Individual exercises
• Observed behaviors and tendency in a small
classroom environment
Overall Course Grade for Completed
Work
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Brad
Javon
Jenny
Brandon
Myishia
Martha
Rufus
The Big Questions
• If the goal of ATD is move students more
rapidly into college level classes (Collins,
2008), which of these 7 students are best
equipped to enter college-level courses?
• Which students should continue on the
developmental course path?
• How would you weight the significance of the
three areas of assessment?
Reasoning for the Pilot Course
• LCC seeks to become an Achieving the Dream
School
• The pilot course addressed the ATD
contention that it is “it is the best use of
student and faculty time and state resources
to move the maximum number of students
capable of college level work into college-level
courses (Collins, 2008)”.
The Complexity of the Adult Learner
• ATD suggests lowering cut scores to allow
more students quicker access to college-level
courses (Collins, 2010).
• But, is this putting too much faith in a test?
• What does the test fail to measure that might
be a better or equal indicator of success?
• What might these case studies tell us about
our approach to assessment? Are we doing
enough assessment for each student?
Adult Learners
• There is only one stream for learners for college
students—the mainstream. However, adult learners
have a different and very diverse learning skill set. The
are formed. Doesn’t it make sense that they are
assessed differently?
• Generally instructors are not trained to identify issues
or conditions that may impede upon a students’ ability
to learn.
• Often, gaining a greater understanding of the source of
an student’s struggle requires that instructors learn
more about each student.
• For example….
The Big Reveal
• Jenny: Jenny struggled through high school with an undiagnosed
learning disability. She attended alternative education. She also has
a vision impairment but was not aware of this until it was
discovered during our class.
• Bradford: Bradford suffered a devastating closed-head injury in
2006. He struggles to comprehend and retain information.
• Brandon: Brandon has been completely deaf since birth. While he
was rigorously taught grammar, he had little experience writing.
• Rufus and Bradford have literally no computer skills. At the
beginning of the course, they could not perform basic computer
functions.
• Most of the students had considerable outside distractions.
Conclusions and Solutions
• What does computer-based placement and
diagnostic testing really tell us?
• Are colleges becoming overly reliant on
computer-based assessment for placement in
pre-college courses?
• Should students be allowed to self-select their
courses regardless of test scores?