Evolving Program Benchmarks for Higher Levels of Proficiency

By Jean Rueckert

hen I heard these questions during an ACTFL presentation about focusing on proficiency for program consistency

(Sandrock & Clementi, 2020), I reflected on experiences working alongside other language specialists and leaders in three different school contexts. I made connec-tions related to facilitating continuous improvement toward an articulated K–12 proficiency-based program.

One insight narrowed my focus on the following question that can challenge any learning community: How can we arrive at a shared understanding of program outcomes and collectively evolve the K–12 program toward higher levels of proficiency for all learners?

With the understanding that no two school contexts are alike, the same processes apply to developing effective language programs. These are captured

here by language specialist, Greg Duncan (Curtain & Dahlberg, 2016):1 . Establishing overarching proficiency

targets (in all four skills) for each year of instruction.

2 . Designing instructional pathways that will lead students to reach the proficiency targets.

3 . Assessing both internally and externally to determine if the targets are being achieved.

W

“Without a textbook, how do we organize a program curriculum and move our learners forward?”

“What does ‘forward’ mean?”

Program Improvement: Part 2 – Setting Benchmarks and Assessing Proficiency

The Language Educator n Spring 2021 27

Different Contexts, Common ElementsAs an international educator, I have been fortunate to have opportunities to contribute at schools around the globe. These schools have been invested in the development of multilingual, multiliterate graduates, beginning in the early years of their education. The three most recent are international schools with the following in common: They deliver a standards-based curriculum, follow cycles of continuous improvement, and have protected time built into their schedules for professional learning and collaboration.

Similar to their counterparts in the U.S., all three schools have adopted the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages (2015) and NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements (2017) to frame their language programs and, as such, their curricula. These schools are located in Singapore, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates respectively—three very different contexts.

However, the evolution of their lan-guage programs reveals another common element: The desire to develop high levels of proficiency for all learners (i.e., moving them “forward”). Examples from two schools will highlight some of the steps in the processes that build effective language programs.

In Spring 2018, during my final semester at the Singapore American School (SAS), I sent an email to another interna-tional language educator in Japan sharing insights into the work that was successfully taking place at SAS. These were highlights

from our journey toward a K–12 standards-based language program for Spanish and Chinese aligned to proficiency outcomes.

In that email I explained, “the clearer our assessment criteria are, the more effec-tive we can be at determining appropriate performance standards for a course, devel-oping assessments aligned to these and, more importantly, guiding our students in understanding their own steps in their language learning (i.e., Are we assessing what matters most? How effectively are we measuring our students’ progress?).”

Three years and two schools later, I have found that these ideas remain key to me. Developing a deeper under standing of how to lead these conversations with teachers of diverse backgrounds in new and different contexts, I recognize that the community must first “speak the same language” about developing proficiency within its program and in the day-to-day work involved in the processes as defined earlier. Once this has been accomplished, setting clear benchmarks and expectations go hand-in-hand with improving assess-ment practices.

Developing Common UnderstandingIn late 2018, the K–12 world language team at the International Community School (ICS) of Addis Ababa began the pro-cess of evolving their collaboration toward a school-wide language program framed by proficiency. The professional learning for the team of teachers of French, Spanish, and Amharic began during K–12 vertical

meetings where a shared understanding of proficiency within the framework of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines (2012) and aligned to the World-Readiness Standards was developed.

Since several teachers were less familiar with this framework for teaching for profi-ciency, I facilitated professional dialogue around what it means to develop a stan-dards-based program aligned to proficiency.

During the following months we unpacked the language of the standards, examining those related to the goals for Communication and Culture. We recognized early on that trying to arrive at a common understanding of all three modes of com-munication was too much too soon.

Instead, we slowed down the process and focused on what all teachers had in common with their age groups: They first develop interpersonal communication. Later, we would apply this lesson to the presentational and interpretive modes. In this way we were able to start with more manageable chunks of professional learning as a K–12 instructional team.

Then we interacted with the language of the performance indicators for Interper-sonal Communication at the Novice and Intermediate sublevels in the NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements. This performance range best represents the continuum of proficien-cy for learners in Grades 1–10 leading up to the International Baccalaureate diploma program in Grades 11 and 12.

Following structured protocols, the teaching team examined the nuances that

K–12 world language teachers from ICS Addis Ababa engaged in ongoing learning during an on-site ACTFL workshop, 2020. left to right: Goliad Tamerou (left) and Roser Noguera (right), Goliad Tamerou, Michael Ali (left) and Suzanne Youveup (right)

The Language Educator n Spring 202128

distinguish one sublevel from the next. This led us to the development of a set of targeted instructional strategies that would support students in moving forward across the proficiency continuum.

At the end of that school year and into the next, we developed a proficiency framework guided by consultants which led us to consider the amount of instructional time in our program. This supported the development of overarching targets for the sequence of year-long courses, and we were able to analyze the instructional time in the middle school and make the appro-priate adjustments. We could then consider new pathways from Grades 6-10 based on proficiency exit targets for all skills and apply these to the design of common sum-mative assessments.

In early 2020, we were ready to raise the level of our assessment literacy. We collaborated with ACTFL to have an on-site two-day workshop: “Bringing Proficiency into our ICS Language Programs,” which preceded a regional institute for language educators interested in ensuring language learner proficiency.

The first day’s sessions were organized for the full K–12 team. The following day we split into smaller teams with shared experiences at the elementary or second-ary levels. As a K–12 team we purposefully engaged in a session to listen to spoken samples from the Novice, Intermediate, and Advanced levels.

We began by first determining individual-ly if each sample was or was not “at level.” Then we determined if minimal or strong evidence of that level existed to bring in the layer of the proficiency sub-levels, “low” and “high.” Once we shared our individual results in small groups, we gained a clearer understanding of the proficiency targets for speaking in our program. Teachers were ready to create quality summative assess-ments aligned to course benchmarks.

Evolving Possibilities for Our LearnersPrograms that guide their language learn-ers to high levels of proficiency commit

to focus ing on what students can do with what they know in real-world situations and creating structures to open up pathways to high-level outcomes. Once they answer the important question, “What will our learners be able to do with what they know?” they follow up with “How well?” at each step of the program’s sequence.

At the American Community School (ACS) of Abu Dhabi, we are pursuing a new strategic plan to ensure that we deliver on four priorities. One of these is to “inspire global citizens” through the enhancement of our world language program, includ-ing building a leading program in Arabic. The other two languages taught in our program are Spanish and French in Grades 6–12. Aside from our non-native students of the three languages, heritage learners of Arabic, the host country language, are in all three divisions. About a third of the elementary students are heritage learners of Arabic.

When I arrived in August 2020, research-based proficiency frameworks with overarching proficiency targets were already informing some of the course re design in the middle and high schools. These frameworks guided the initial transition of the world language courses in Grades 6–12 to proficiency-named courses reflecting the proficiency outcomes for each. The development of multi-year courses beyond Novice, aligned to proficiency exit targets, was also in progress for the secondary pro-gram. Course-alike teaching teams continue to design and implement these common courses across the three languages at the Novice and Intermediate levels.

In high school this takes place for the Intermediate High and Advanced courses. A new “Novice High” course was also added to our middle school offerings this year for non-native learners of Arabic to provide more time to reach the targeted level of proficiency of Novice High in interpersonal speaking. There is still a need to determine how best to balance the development of the different modes/skills for Arabic. That said, each course-alike team is developing targeted assessment tools for speaking and writing so that students are able to prog-ress along the proficiency continuum with confidence and consistency over time.

The pathway for Romance languages has been clearer than for Arabic due to the level of difficulty and time needed to learn the latter. Categorized as a Group 4 lan-guage by the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (Wong, 2004), such languages take longer to develop Novice, Intermediate, or Advanced level proficiency compared with the Romance languages in Group 1, even for highly motivated, non-native speakers.

Another factor receiving our attention is the potential mix of non-native and heritage learners beyond the Novice level of proficiency. Currently, solutions for dif-ferentiation arise during our course-alike collaboration on unit design to ensure that there is sufficient challenge for all learners along the continuum.

Program Improvement: Part 2 – Setting Benchmarks and Assessing Proficiency

An early language learner with Suha Naffa, ES Arabic teacher at ACS Abu Dhabi.Photograph courtesy of the ACS Communications Office

INSPIREGLOBAL CITIZENS

n Strengthen school-wide service learning program to nurture global citizenship

n Provide social-emotional wellness programs to promote wellbeing and build confidence

n Enhance world languages model, including a leading Arabic program, for greater cultural understanding

The Language Educator n Spring 2021 29

As teachers of Arabic, Spanish, and French engage in dialogue, the common learning objectives guide the expecta-tions for their similar proficiency-focused environments. They are able to discuss what is at the heart of developing profi-ciency for their groups of learners.

My role is often that of facilitator and coach, helping groups determine the appro priate performance range as we pre-view new units and focus on the targeted Can-Do Statements for each communica-tive mode. Further unpacking leads us to identify the supporting language functions and text type that build and respond to the question, “How well?” As we continue building common rubrics, we are able to hone in on the steps that will help our learners demonstrate growth.

With the Grade 6–12 pathways taking shape for the proficiency-named courses, attention is now on the K–8 pathways for Arabic. With increased instructional time for language classes in the elementary and middle schools, we are now better posi-tioned to consider our proficiency bench-marks for the K–8 Arabic pathways. To support this, I am evaluating documented

research from previous consultants and

tables, such as the table in Figure 1. These

provide informed guidance toward setting

overarching targets aligned to the amount

of time needed for different language

group categories in an individual school

program. While increased class minutes are

important, so are meaningful and purpose-

ful practices within that allotted time.

Focus on Assessment: Measuring Student Progress“Assessment is the engine that drives most

of what we do,” according to assessment

specialist Tom Schimmer (2021). Our K–12

world language theme during the second

semester for vertical meetings is: “Focus

on Assessment: How will (do) we know if

our students are learning?”

Whether learning about how others check

for learning, or collaborating on the varia-

tions for summative assessments in online

environments, we must ensure that all of us

are focusing on our students and on what will

make the greatest difference for their growth

in proficiency. Before we can do that, how-

ever, we must know what we are looking for.

Onboarding teachers new to a proficiency-based program creates the need for sessions on foundational elements of pro-ficiency as framed by the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. Rated samples for writing and speaking on the ACTFL website are very useful for such sessions.

For example, during a recent vertical meeting, our secondary Arabic teachers reviewed writing samples for Novice High to Intermediate High without having seen the ratings ahead of time. They engaged in discussion about the observed differences, strengths in vocabulary and text type, and patterns of errors that distinguish the texts. Later they reviewed the ratings and, from there, began forming a shared understanding and common language for what the different benchmarks look like in this framework. Once teachers have clarity, their assessment and feedback practices can lead to student clarity on performance and growth.

Step by step, these facilitated meet-ings create opportunities to build bridges among faculty and support expanded verti-cal conversations about how well our stu-dents are performing. This semester, 6–12 teachers in language-alike groups began

Program Improvement: Part 2 – Setting Benchmarks and Assessing Proficiency

Middle School/High School Proficiency Targets for Modern World Languages(Non-Roman Alphabet: Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian)

MODE AND SKILL LEVEL I135-150 HOURS

LEVEL II270-300 HOURS

LEVEL III405-450 HOURS

LEVEL IV540-600 HOURS

LEVEL V675-500 HOURS

INTERPERSONALSpeaking

Novice-Mid Novice-High Novice-High Intermediate-Low Intermediate-Low

INTERPRETIVEListening

Novice-Mid Novice-High Novice-High Intermediate-Low Intermediate-Low

INTERPRETIVEReading

Novice-Mid Novice-High Novice-High Novice-High Intermediate-Low

PRESENTATIONALSpeaking

Novice-Mid Novice-High Novice-HighNovice-High Novice-High

Intermediate-Low Intermediate-Low

PRESENTATIONALWriting

Novice-Mid Novice-High Novice-HighNovice-High Novice-High

Intermediate-Low Intermediate-Low

* Proficiency targets are set, based on significant research, to provide informed guidance to local language programs and in no way should be interpreted as a state mandate.

Figure 1. From Implementing the Foreign Language Standards of Learning in Virginia Classrooms: A Guide for Teachers, ©2015 by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education. All rights reserved. Reproduced by permission.

The Language Educator n Spring 202130

calibrating student samples in vertical teams to highlight indicators of success at different proficiency levels in speaking and writing. This allowed us to begin build-ing a collection of “Evidence of Success” student learning data at the Novice High to Intermediate Mid levels, which will be expanded over time for use with teach-ers and students. We knew that a robust collection of student learning data would be important later in the semester, partic-ularly at the transition points between divisions prior to course recommendations for the next level of school.

This is the reason our summative assess-ments are taking on a new importance. Such assessments may help determine the placement of incoming students, as well. Until circumstances allow us to resume the use of external assessment data, we continue to build our internal assessment literacy. In our collaborative groups, we focus on quality assessment design with these guiding questions:n Are the scenarios authentic and rele-

vant to our learners (are they likely to happen in the world beyond school)?

n Do the assessment tasks guide our learners to demonstrate what they can do with the language that they are learning?

n Are the assessments aligned to our targeted performance indicators? Do they include clear criteria? For example, for a Novice High interpersonal speak-ing assess ment, does the task expect the use of simple sentences and invite students to participate in conversations by asking questions related to the unit

topic? Does the rubric target Novice High as “demonstrating proficiency”?

For elementary Arabic, our next steps include revisiting how we organize our learners through the lens of proficiency, looking for ways to integrate the modes of communication into each lesson, as well as the adaptation and introduction of an early learner rubric to mirror what is being applied in our proficiency-named courses at the secondary level.

ConclusionTo design common assessments aligned to proficiency targets and review and discuss samples of student work, a teaching team needs time for collaboration. Professional dialogue often leads to improvements in assessment practices. The benefits of such work also include reaching a shared understanding of the program’s proficiency-focused language, identifying and adjusting proficiency benchmarks along a K–12 contin-uum and, ultimately, determining evidence of success for each benchmark leading up to a graduate’s exit from the program.

Are teachers and students clear on what each benchmark looks or sounds like? When a school develops a culture of vertical colla-boration and a vision for what high levels of proficiency are possible in its unique context, the teachers and leaders can col-lectively shape pathways to develop higher levels of proficiency for every learner.

The ending of my 2018 email to the lan-guage educator in Japan serves as an impor-tant reminder for those making these shifts in program improvement: “Knowing that any program-level curricular transformation is a

journey, within your own school’s context and towards your school-wide and divisional goals, pacing yourselves is important.”

However, I am assured that the invest-ment in the journey is worth it, for educa-tors and most importantly, for our learners.

Jean Rueckert is the Director of World Languages

at the American Community School of Abu Dhabi

in the United Arab Emirates.

References

ACTFL (2012). ACTFL proficiency guidelines 2012. Retrieved from https://www.actfl.org/resources/actfl-proficiency-guidelines-2012

Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education (2015). Implementing the foreign language standards of learning in Virginia classrooms: A guide for teachers. Richmond, VA.

Curtain, H. I., & Dahlberg, C. A. A. (2015). Languages and learners: Making the match: World language instruction in K–8 classrooms and beyond. London: Pearson.

National Council of State Supervisors for Language (NCSSFL) and ACTFL (2017). NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-do statements for communication and intercultural competence. Alexandria, VA: ACTFL.

National Standards Collaborative Board. (2015). World-readiness standards for learning languages, 4th ed. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Sandrock, P. and Clementi, D. (2020, November 20-22). Focus on proficiency for program consistency [Conference session]. ACTFL 2020 Convention. Virtual.

Schimmer, T. (2021, January 12). Assessment & grading in a virtual context [NESA webinar].

Wong, C. H. (2004). An analysis of factors predicting graduation of students at Defence Language Institute Foreign Language Center [Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School]. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA429897.pdf

Program Improvement: Part 2 – Setting Benchmarks and Assessing Proficiency

To design common assessments aligned to proficiency targets and review and discuss samples of student work, a teaching team

needs time for collaboration.

The Language Educator n Spring 2021 31