Summative Assessment Practicum

Summative Assessment Running head: SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT

Practicum Summative Assessment Benjamin Stewart TEC 580 Dr. Robert Campbell April 23, 2007

1

Summative Assessment

2

Practicum Summative Assessment This practicum was a great learning experience. First, I chose to present technology through the use of a webquest for a class I had never taught before. And second, I wanted to observe teachers that I am in charge of in order to see how they use technology in the language-learning classroom and how they differentiate instruction and assessment methods according to the needs and interests of the class. On both accounts, I feel that I made the right choice as an explanation follows.

Strengths I think my greatest strength regarding this project was in the planning/scheduling, and making the most out of my practicum given the opportunities available to me at the time. The first, and most important, part of my practicum was confirming my mentor, Pia White. Pia is a well-respected English language teacher throughout the Republic of Mexico (i.e., she currently is the President of MEXTESOL) (Mextesol, n.d.), so having her as a mentor meant a lot. I asked her to be my mentor at the beginning of the school year – September of 2006 knowing that her schedule would be busy during this time of the year. I have had the personal privilege of working with her in several academic settings and her comments and suggestions, which always maintain the best interests of the learner, are always a continued source of learning as an educator.

Because I am the interim coordinator of the general language department (Fomento de Lenguas Extranjeras) I also wanted to take advantage of observing as many teachers as possible in order to get a better understanding as to how to best assist their development. This also allowed me to be more visible as a coordinator in case they had questions or concerns that needed to be discussed, which turned out to be the case. The

Summative Assessment

3

information that I acquired during my observation will be presented to the teachers in a development course I designed, which is scheduled for the end of the semester. The purpose of sharing my findings is to build a context in order for teachers to share ideas regarding what I observed.

Weaknesses and Lessons Learned After reflecting on my classroom experience using the webquest (Stewart, 2007), which also included individual reflections from the students, I realized how I underestimated the ability and/or willingness of this particular class to work together as a team. Although I felt I spoke at length of the importance of working together and how to best resolve conflict within a group, it simply was not enough. Group members did not participate as much as others, and this created a lot of tension among the group. Some learners said this was the most difficult project they ever had to complete in their four years at the university. If I use this webquest in the future, I will change the headings of the webquest. Instead of simply listing the six facets of understanding design (i.e., explanation, interpretation, application, perspective, empathy, and self-knowledge), I will form alternative headings based on the context of the webquest that scaffolds the learner to address these six facets. Finally, I will remind them more frequently, instead of just at the beginning and end of the project, what the purpose of this project is – to use English as a foreign language using the proper business register and style; to use technology to research, extract, organize, and present information; to obtain a deeper understanding of a publicly traded company; and to work together as a team to achieve a common objective.

I think the greatest lesson I learned during this project resulted from one learner’s reflection on what he thought about this project – I will call him Bob (not his real name).

Summative Assessment

4

Bob is the strongest learner of the class and is considered the leader of the group. Two days before the group was to give their presentation, Bob mentioned that this assignment “simply wasn’t working”. He went on that they needed more time and that other team members were not participating. I spent about 15 minutes reinforcing the importance of working together and that at the end of the day, they had to determine who was going to participate and to what extent. I reminded them that they had had three weeks to work on this project plus several in class periods dedicated to the project. Bob wrote a reflection that included comments about how difficult it was to work as a group, which virtually every learner agreed on. But he went on to mention that this assignment was not relevant to him because he would never be a financial advisor and would never be required to use the skills and knowledge that he obtained in this assignment. He also mentioned that the stress on technology was not stated in the syllabus, and therefore should not have been part of this assignment as well. And that this assignment was too teacher-lead as opposed to student-centered.

Although the rest of the students commented that they learned something from this assignment I realized how varied student interpretations can be when implementing activities and projects for the class. For example, at the end of the presentation, I congratulated them all on what a good job they had done. I concluded by asking them why I assigned this project and they all individually gave reasons for doing this type of assignments (mentioning the same reasons I gave above). Not having read the reflections beforehand, Bob kind of sarcastically said something like, “We did this assignment to practice our language use for unit 2”. I responded in a passive way saying something like, “Right, to complete the unit 2 language test” going right on to other student

Summative Assessment

5

responses (i.e., working as a group, using English as a FL, learning more about a company, etc.). Looking back, Bob’s sarcasm was a sign he still did not see the value in completing this project; he still seemed to be a little irritated about the whole experience even after the presentation was completed. I would not have reached this conclusion had it not been for his reflection. I cannot help but wonder if the entire group had participated as planned, would he still believe this project was a waste of time? What his irritation more of a result of group conflict that at times included shouting at each other in the classroom?

NETS for Students The focus of this assignment was based on NETS for Students four and five, using technology as a communicative and research tool respectively. As mentioned, students had to use critical skills to research, extract, organize, and present information in a logical authentic way. Although technology was used throughout this project, the learners required no assistance from me in using the educational technology required to complete the project.

Technology skills developed I learned how to adapt a webquest to a specific need, in this case, the development of a group project that required English language learners to provide a persuasive presentation utilizing the six facets of understanding when researching a US corporation.

Conclusion I would like to try this webquest again for an English for specific purposes (ESP) class, perhaps paying more attention to monitoring their progress as they complete the project. I still feel that having the learners choose the company, what content is to be

Summative Assessment

6

included in the presentation, and how it is going to be presented is the basis for a studentcentered project. Although the process of getting to the final product was rough, the students did achieve these objectives, and for that reason, I feel the project was a success.

Summative Assessment

7

References Asociaci贸n Mexicana de Maestros de Ingl茅s, Mextesol A.C. (n.d.). Retrieved on April 23, 2007 from http://www.mextesol.org.mx/ Stewart, B. (2007). English Web: Webquest. Retrieved on April 23, 2007 from http://www.geocities.com/bnleez/Webquest_intro.html Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by Design: Expanded 2nd Edition.

New Jersey: Pearson.