Scaling Up Language Learning Progressions to Support Formative Assessment: Lessons Learned From a Case Study Implementation

• In Event: 35.049 - Teachers' Use of Learning Progressions for Formative Assessment: Implications for Professional Development and Further Research

Abstract

Objective
This paper describes lessons learned from a case study implementation of an empirically derived oral language learning progression for explanation, a productive language practice embedded in college and career ready standards. The lessons learned are informing professional development designed to bring to scale the use of the progression for the purpose of formative assessment with English language learners (ELLs).

Perspectives
Formative assessment involves ongoing assessment of how language use is evolving in order to inform teaching in response to students’ immediate learning needs (Author, 2008; Author, 2013). The language learning progression provides an interpretive framework, supporting teachers’ inferences about students’ current language status so that they can take instructional action to advance language learning. Teachers’ ability to engage in formative assessment is dependent on effective professional development (Wylie, 2008; Author, 2010; Wiliam, 2007). For this reason, there is a need to inform professional learning opportunities for broad dissemination by capturing teacher reports of how they developed skills in using the progression.

Methods & Data Sources
Six K-6 teachers from one elementary school with linguistically diverse students met with researchers over an eight-month period. All meetings were audio- and video-recorded. Verbatim transcripts of the meetings were open-coded to generate organizing themes for teachers’ perspectives on professional learning related to using the progression.

Results
Collaborative Context for Learning. A major theme emerging from the data was the importance of an open and collaborative process for learning. Teachers valued regular meetings, hearing each other’s experiences and the opportunities to discuss with each other potential next steps to support language learning.
Time and Commitment. Teachers increasingly recognized that developing expertise in using the progression required a long-term commitment. Even after eight months of working with the progression, they were ready to continue for another school year to become more skilled in drawing inferences about language use and acting upon them pedagogically.
Teacher Choice. Another theme was the importance of teachers being able to choose which language feature of the progression they focused on. Initially teachers were asked to attend to specific features, which they rejected in favor of deciding what was of most relevance to their own students’ oral language capabilities.
Limit the Focus. Initially, the teachers found it very difficult to observe language while simultaneously teaching content. However, by focusing on one language feature at a time, they gradually developed skills necessary for a dual focus on language and content.
Evidentiary Notes. Teachers struggled for several months with how best to document the evidence of language that they were collecting in situ. Eventually, they each developed a method that best suited their situation.

Significance
Language progressions for explanation have the potential to provide the specificity needed for formative assessment with ELLs. The themes identified from the case study reflect similar themes found in the scalability literature (e.g., Weiss & Pasley, 2006) and can serve as the basis for the development of effective professional learning for using the progression well in the service of language learning in the content areas.

Authors

• Margaret Heritage, WestEd

• Alison L. Bailey, University of California - Los Angeles