Foreign Language Teaching – Errors, Assessment & Feedback

Definitions & Core Terminology

  • Assessment
    • Ongoing measurement (German: "Leistungsmessung") that supplies information on how teaching/learning processes are progressing and how they can be improved.
    • Diagnostic in nature → informs next instructional steps.
  • Evaluation
    • Decides how well something met a standard → grading / judging ("Leistungsbeurteilung").
    • Summative snapshot of learning results.
  • Testing ("Leistungsüberprüfung")
    • Concrete, often time-bound instruments (exams, quizzes) that generate data for evaluation.
  • Relationship (cf. Finkbeiner 2012)
    • Testing feeds data ➜ Assessment interprets ➜ Evaluation judges.

Achievement as a Social & Pedagogical Parameter

  • Performance Principle (Leistungsprinzip) – societal functions
    • Regulates distribution of rewards, \text{status} \; & \; \text{money}.
    • Encourages productivity, prosperity.
    • Sorts individuals into social / professional positions.
  • Pedagogical Performance Concept (pädagogischer Leistungsbegriff)
    • Student’s right to individual care & holistic support.
    • Focus on learner as person within a community, not a grade-producing entity (Jürgens & Sacher 2008).
    • Tension: societal sorting vs. educational nurturing.

Functions of Assessment / Evaluation

  • Diagnosis – identify strengths/weaknesses, prior knowledge, misconceptions.
  • Information – for students, parents, teachers, system.
  • Differentiation – place learners, group formation, streaming.
  • Education / Motivation – foster metacognition, goal orientation.
  • Reflective prompt in lecture: Recall memorable school tests → which functions dominated? What functions will future tests for you serve?

Reference Norms & Grading Criteria

  • Norm-referenced (group/social referencing)
    • Learner compared to peers ⇒ bell curve.
  • Criterion-referenced (objective/task referencing)
    • Fixed descriptors or standards (rubrics, CEFR can-do statements).
  • Self/Individual-referenced
    • Progress measured against learner’s own previous performance.

Quality Parameters of a Good Test

  • Validity (Gültigkeit) – measures what it claims to measure.
  • Reliability (Zuverlässigkeit) – produces stable & consistent results (e.g., r_{xx'} > 0.8 desirable).
  • Objectivity (Objektivität) – scoring independent of examiner.
  • Feasibility – realistic time, resources.
  • Positive Washback – influence on teaching/learning.

Human / Subjective Factors Affecting Assessment

  • Teacher’s prior knowledge & implicit bias.
  • Student personality & cultural background.
  • Interrelation of instruction & tested material.
  • Test format & situational anxiety.
  • Grading consequences → motivation / demotivation.
  • Extenuating circumstances (illness, socio-emotional events).

Summative vs. Formative Assessment

  • Summative
    • When: end of unit/term.
    • Purpose: certify mastery vs. benchmark.
    • Examples: final exams, research paper.
  • Formative
    • When: continuously, during learning.
    • Purpose: provide feedback to adjust teaching & learning strategies.
    • Examples: concept maps, exit tickets, teacher comments.
  • Complementarity: Both needed; formative assessments feed summative success.

Designing Language Tests – Cycle

  1. Preparation – identify objectives, standards, learner profiles.
  2. Design – choose item types, rubrics, weightings.
  3. Administration – logistics, instructions, security.
  4. Assessment/Scoring – apply criteria, ensure reliability.
  5. Reflection / Follow-up – analyse efficiency, appropriateness, washback; revise.

Aligning With Objectives (WHOOD model)

  • What is to be tested? Skills (listening, speaking…) & competences (intercultural, strategic…).
  • How will results be used? (diagnosis, certification).
  • Objectives: general educational goals (critical thinking, autonomy).
  • Objects: task types, language functions, text genres.
  • Design constraints: time, resources, validity.

Typology of Task Formats

  • Closed Tasks (minimal freedom)
    • MCQs, true/false, matching, simple cloze.
    • Pros: objective scoring; Cons: superficial competence.
  • Semi-Open Tasks
    • Guided gap-fill, guided dialogue, structured summary.
    • Balance of objectivity & productive language.
  • Open Tasks
    • Essays, mediation, role-plays, projects ➜ simulate authentic communication.

Oral Task Bank (Eisenmann & Summer 2012)

  • Presentation, mini-debate, free discussion, improvisation, interview, expert groups, storytelling, picture description, info-gap, interpreting.
  • Variation ↔ fosters fluency, interaction, pragmatic skills.

Self- & Peer-Assessment Instruments

  • Self-Monitoring Sheets
    • Checklists on eye contact, body language, structure, visual aids, time management.
  • Peer Feedback Rubrics (Likert 0–4)
    • Content knowledge, organization, delivery, language accuracy, timing.
  • Can-Do Descriptors (CEFR)
    • Students state: “I can understand familiar words…” (A1) ➜ fosters goal clarity & autonomy.

Feedback – Evidence & Theory (Hattie & Timperley 2007)

  • Meta-analysis effect size d=0.75d = 0.75 → one of the top ten influences on student achievement.
  • Purpose: shrink gap between current & desired performance.
  • Three Questions
    1. Where am I going? (Feed-Up: goals)
    2. How am I going? (Feed-Back: progress)
    3. Where to next? (Feed-Forward: strategies)
  • Four Feedback Levels
    • Task – correctness, completeness.
    • Process – methods, strategies.
    • Self-Regulation – planning, monitoring, evaluating one’s learning.
    • Self – personal praise/affect (least effective alone).
  • Sandwich Technique
    1. Positive comment
    2. Constructive critique (specific)
    3. Closing positive motivator.

Error Treatment in FL Classrooms

  • Categories
    • Slip – performance glitch, easily self-corrected if noticed.
    • Mistake – lapse; learner knows the rule but momentarily fails.
    • Error – competence gap; rule unknown.
  • Timing & Focus
    • Presentation/Practice phase → priority on form & accuracy.
    • Production/Communication phase → priority on meaning & fluency; delayed correction.
  • Oral Correction Techniques
    • Recasts – teacher reformulates correctly.
    • Clarification Requests – “Pardon?” prompts repair.
    • Elicitation – teacher pauses, raises intonation; student supplies form.
    • Postponed Correction – note errors, address after task.
  • Written Correction
    • Use error codes (VT = verb tense, WW = wrong word…).
    • Distinguish gravity (Hughes & Lascaratou 1982) – global vs. local errors.
    • Avoid “bleeding papers to death” ➜ selective, prioritized marking.
  • Risk of No / Poor Correction
    • Fossilization, demotivation, "imprecise unsystematic grading".

Practical Design Considerations (Grade 7 Examples)

  • Closed / Semi-open / Open balance affects validity & learner expression.
  • Compute overall grade transparently: weight content, language, form.
  • Provide rubric-based comments rather than cryptic marks.
  • Consider alternative grades (e.g., analytic rubric Content 40%+Language 40%+Layout 20%\text{Content }40\% + \text{Language }40\% + \text{Layout }20\%) for fairness.

Key Terms to Revisit

  • Assessment, Evaluation, Testing
  • Validity, Reliability, Objectivity
  • Summative vs. Formative
  • Norm-, Criterion-, Self-Referencing
  • Task Typology (closed → open)
  • Feedback (Feed-Up/Back/Forward; levels)
  • Error vs. Mistake vs. Slip

Ethical / Philosophical Implications

  • Balancing meritocratic sorting with pedagogical duty of care.
  • Assessment literacy as teacher responsibility → equitable classrooms.
  • Feedback not merely corrective but transformative ➜ empowers learner autonomy.

Real-World Connections

  • CEFR widely used for workplace language certification.
  • Hattie’s evidence base shapes educational policies worldwide (visible learning).
  • Performance principle echoes debates on standardized testing & social mobility.

Study Checklist

  • Be able to define & differentiate assessment vs. evaluation.
  • Illustrate functions of tests with personal examples.
  • Apply validity / reliability / objectivity to critique a test.
  • Design a balanced test blueprint including open & closed tasks.
  • Draft feedback at task, process, and self-regulation levels.
  • Identify error categories & choose appropriate correction strategies.

Suggested Further Reading

  • Grimm, Meyer, Volkmann (2015) Teaching English – task design cases.
  • Hattie & Timperley (2007) – seminal feedback framework.
  • Peñaflorida (2002) – learner autonomy via nontraditional assessment.