Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Feb 9 Question #2: Proficiency levels
We are all aware that our learners differ across proficiency levels. But let's think about what this means. To what does "proficiency" refer? If we are teaching, for instance, an "Intermediate English" class, can we expect all of our students to be at that level? Can we expect each student to be at that level in all different skills? How is proficiency leveling potentially problematic? How does proficiency play into how different levels of classes are taught? Choose any two different proficiency levels (assume age level is identical) and discuss the differences and similarities between them in terms of teaching and learning. Imagine that you wanted to teach the same functional concept to these two different levels - how would the lessons differ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Korean high English class is not divided by students’ level of proficiency. In a class there are students who belong to different levels of proficiency in reading and writing, and listening and speaking. The education department of Korea emphasizes the proficiency level-adjusted English education in school, and the introduction of the proficiency level-adjusted class formation is applied in the tenth graders and after school English classes. However I am against the idea of forming a high school English class according to the students’ proficiency levels.
ReplyDeleteThe advanced level class students are frustrated if he/she cannot be the top of the class. They tend to be openly competitive in a class, and this over competitiveness negatively affects the classroom atmosphere. If they are asked to do a group activity, the only thing they care for is to get the highest score not the fun or objective of the activity. They do not even try to share the information they have with others. On the other hand, the students who are assigned to the low level class get the idea that they are losers and they do not want to do anything in the class. They think that they are worthless because they are the losers. They think there is no chance they will move up to a higher level class.
When I think of Korean high school English class, proficiency level-adjusted class formation is not appropriate. However, proficiency level matters in teaching English. For example an intermediate level targeted reading material can be introduced to attract students’ interest. Then different leveled comprehension check hand outs can be distributed according to their proficiency levels. For a group activity a teacher can form a group that has different proficiency level students and recommend group work as a cooperation project to help each other. They will learn something from each other through working together as a group, and sometimes it is a low level student who leads the group with his/her original ideas. It will boost the low proficiency level students’ motivation and the high proficiency level students will make their knowledge of their own by teaching their peers.
There are as many proficiency levels as the number of students! Although every student is categorized into one of the three typical levels (beginning, intermediate, and advanced), it cannot explain much of the student’s proficiency. One might be a fluent speaker but poor writer and another student might know a lot of grammar but lack in conversational skill. There should be different prescriptions for them, but however, there’s a chance that they are in the same class under the name of “intermediate.” Therefore, unless it’s a private one to one lesson, a teacher should try to figure out the weakness of each student and help him or her to get it over.
ReplyDeleteTeaching in the class of beginning level, teachers should speak a little bit slower. As students’ words and expressions are limited, the class is likely to be teacher-centered. We should not make them feel embarrassed when they make errors, so need to be very patient. It’s better to avoid too much grammatical explanations as it could overwhelm beginners.
On the other hand, in an intermediate class, a teacher would try more to involve students. For example, students are encouraged to ask questions and make comments. Teacher can give little doses of grammar when necessary, but guide students not to focus too much on it. In addition, intermediate students are to practice dealing with unrehearsed situation.
In case I teach some expressions of shopping in the beginners’ class, I would give them a simple dialogue of a customer and a clerk. After explaining those expressions, they’ll first repeat after me to speak out the dialogue and then, exercise with their partners. In the intermediate class, students’ are going to learn a more complex dialogue. Possible class activities include role playing, sharing their own shopping experience with classmates, talking about their favorite shopping spot in town, and so on.
Proficiency levels are a way to catergorize ideal characteristics of knowledge. Unfortunately, not everyone has the ideal characteristics, so an Intermediate class can have a wide range of proficiency among the students. We expect them to be at a certain level if they are in a specified-level class, such as Beginning ESL or Intermediate ESL, but that is not always the case.
ReplyDeleteTeaching a beginning level class requires more work on the instructor, as the students look to teacher as the source of knowledge. The instructor must speak slower so that students can understand.They may have little to no experience with English.
In an intermediate class, the students should have more knowledge of the language and can work more in pairs and groups. Teacher-student interaction is easier than in the beginner class.
In comparing how I would teach a beginner versus intermediate lesson, I would make the beginner lesson more simple, such as short questions and answers and simple vocabulary for a practice dialogue which they can do in pairs. For the intermediate lesson, the students could come up with their own dialogue and role play.
I agree with Heilena that proficiency grouping can have negative outcomes. This applies not only to language but to every subject in school. There are articles that actually explain that grouping can be negative because it doesn't give the low level students a chance to be exposed to the high level stuff and thus leaves them in that "stuck" feeling. The thing about learning is that depending on the material we will all have our ups and downs in terms of how quickly we catch on to the material. So while a student may be low at the moment, at any time a light bulb can go off and then he/she may speed ahead to the higher levels. Unfortunately if such a student were a a low level class then he/she would never have the opportunity to speed ahead when that light bulb goes off because the class would be paced at a slower rate for "low" kids.
ReplyDeleteI like Heilena's idea of teaching to all and then giving homework that is appropriate to that child's proficiency level. I find this especially appropriate since there are 4 different areas in which one could have varying levels of proficiency: reading, writing, listening, and speaking! Most classes will maybe split those into 2, reading/writing and listening/speaking. But as we have already discussed in class just because you are a good reader does not necessarily make you a good writer and the same goes for listening and speaking. So if a classes were not separated by such leveling systems then theoretically when a student was handed homework that fit his/her level, that same student may have a different level for each of the 4 categories and that would be okay. I also like the idea of having group work within the same class where in each group you would find varying levels of proficiency because peer learning is supposed to be one of the best ways for a child to retain material and teaching is one of best ways to find out how well you know the material, so a high kid teaches and a low kid remembers it because it came from a peer. I love it!
I can see the value of assessing the proficiency level of students who are studying a second language. I still remember yearly tests when I was a child as to my proficiency in reading, math, and other subjects. We got numbers of "you're reading at grade level," or one grade (or more) above or below grade level and so on.
ReplyDeleteIn a situation where you are teaching ESL to high schoolers and there are enough students for several classes, you would, I think, want to assess the students and form beginner-, intermediate-, and advanced-level classes. The ages could actually differ within each class (9th through 12th graders in each, based on achievement). This becomes complicated as one assesses the four skills (speaking, listening, reading, writing) and has to, based on a composite, place a student in beginning, intermediate,or advanced class.
If the classes are then structured to teach to each proficiency level, and if students could be made aware that mastery or significant progress in a particular level could get them to move to a higher level as the course progresses, I think motivation to work to achieve in one's class could be generated.
Comparing an intermediate class with an advanced class, I think the teacher can expect to spend less time in "teacher at front of class" mode in the advanced class. Group and/or pair work would play a more significant role in the advanced class. Peer feedback is important at both levels, but perhaps the advanced students would have more practice at giving good feedback.
I think structural/grammatical concepts could form a greater part of the syllabus at the advanced level than at the intermediate level. At both levels, however, I think review of topics previously covered can be quite valuable.
And yes, I like the ideas that others propose to get, within a particular level, kids of different proficiency in a particular skill to work with each other. Say, a student who speaks (pronounces) well to help a student with a less native accent, but maybe the less proficient speaker could help the other student with spelling or vocabulary or some other skill.
In teaching a concept to the two levels, I think I might still present the concept to the intermediate class (as I might have to the beginners) and then solicit input from the students; in an advanced class, however, the same concept might be presented in writing to the students and then I would solicit that we discuss the concept based on their reading.
At all levels of proficiency, depending on the setup and materials available at the school, I would want all students at all levels to have access to whatever "cool" tools or technologies we have at our disposal (labs, recordings, videos, and so on).
William Mastropieri
ReplyDeleteNo, I would not expect all of my students to be at the same level of "proficiency".
Some would have forgotten the material after they took the "proficiency test".
I would like to see the test.
I always hated the mindless competition in
language classes.
Naturally, a less proficient class would mandate a teacher to teach slowly. The teacher must make it interesting. On this level, a teacher must be patient. The teacher should never show his impatience. Heilena has really shown alot of
compassion when she noticed that some students
felt like "losers". We, as teachers must not go only with the remarkable. We all learn at our own pace. All of my stuedents will be winners!
The concept of proficiency is hard to translate into three level classrooms (beginner, intermediate, advanced). The concept of proficiency is a relatively abstract notion; ask any student, teacher, or parent to define or categorize proficiency levels. The answers would all be different. The next problem that comes up, which many have mentioned, is that students may be more advanced in one aspect more than another (reading vs. writing). This goes back to the abstract concept of proficiency. Any attempt to categorize it leaves some students behind or to far ahead.
ReplyDeleteProficiency is also closely tied to the ideas of success or failure (not necessarily grade wise). Which when emphasized can be very detrimental to a learning environment. “Success” in a Language class can mean many different things this is why we must look at learning in a different light one not categorized into different groups of “success” or “failure.”
The ideal way would be to separate the classes into new students to the language and ones that have been there longer (the time stipulation would be decided by the organization or school). Within these two groups the first one would be merely prep for the second course. The second course contains students of different proficiencies with the same general concept taught. The difference would be (in an ideal class) the teacher/teachers could work with students individually or in small groups. This would include helping the students that are not as proficient understand the concepts as well as expanding the concept for the more advanced students. Also leaving room for the students to then intermingle within their proficiency groups to help each other learn and further the concept that was taught.
In reality there is no right answer but one thing that we do need to do is to clearly define what proficiency means within your classroom. This way the students and you have an idea of what the goals are.
I think that, no matter what level the class is described as being at, the students will never be at the exact same comprehension level. Each person will have their own strengths and weaknesses.
ReplyDeleteSome people may have wonderful oral comprehension but be challenged in the area of producing language in discussion. Some might be grammar that struggle to keep up with listening to the lecture.
There's a number of issues that can arise from this. For example, if you are giving instructions for an assignment orally, if a student misses what you say they might be completely unable to finish the assignment as you would have hoped. Even missing one word could hinder their ability to fully understand what it is you're asking them for.
Ideally, you would need to use a combination of written and oral instructions and always be open for them to ask questions and discuss the assignment with classmates.
The problem with different proficiency levels is very common in the ESL classroom. That can be very challenging for a teacher, as if the teacher decides to teach the ones on the lower level, those who already know the material will get bored; if the teacher chooses to go with the higher level, the lower level students may get frustrated. In such cases, I think, the teacher needs to go with the level somewhere in the middle and use many individual approaches.
ReplyDeleteI remember in my high school Physics class during the class work as well as during the tests, there were three levels of problems. Some of us, like me, did not even go beyond the 1st or 2nd level, because I was "on the first level", and that was all I needed at that point. I could still get good grades if I did the assignments right. However, there were some students, who wanted to go to college and major in physics, so they would really get bored with just the first level problems, they wanted to do the third level ones. So, they would choose to do those. It was set up the way that no one felt dumb, and no one really knew or cared about what levels other people were choosing to do.
I think as one of the ways to adjust the assignments to different levels I would use the same approach: I would have different assignments for the students to choose from. I would give them the freedom to choose, but if I see that someone who is doing level 1, for example, is getting everything correct, I would encourage them to move on to the next level.
Well, I understand, that this approach would probably work well with the work-sheets or written assignments. Whenever it's a speaking or listening class, it would be more difficult to make such adjustments not making that so obvious. But, like I said, the teacher will have to go with the level in between and then make certain tasks individual or split the students in smaller groups according to their levels.
This individualistic approach will definitely take twice as much time for the teacher to prepare for the lesson, but the results should be worth it.