International Education Washington

World Language Standards -- Review 8/31/2005

This web page includes preparation notes for our meeting with Dr. Mimi Met from the National Foreign Language Center, who offered us a national perspective to inform our process.

August 31, 2005 1:30-4:00 pm
University of Washington
Language Learning Center - Denny 108
 

To get to UW, take 45th St exit off of I-5. Head east toward University District. Enter the 17th Ave NE entrance off of 45th St. (They can give you a map.)

Here are notes in preparation for that meeting.

Key questions to consider:

What do we mean by "standards"?

The word "standard" can be confusing because it has several meanings. This ACTFL paper by Paul Sandrock does an excellent job of explaining the concept in simple terms. (We will bring copies of the paper to the meeting on August 25.)

State Standards: Connecting a National Vision to Local Implementation (PDF) by Paul Sandrock, ACTFL

From Sandrock's paper (p. 8):

  • What? Content Standards explain what students should know and be able to do. These general goals focus teaching and learning.  ...
  • How? Performance Standards describe how students will show that they are achieving the content standards. Performance standards are written with active verbs to help students, teachers, and parents envision the ways that students will demonstrate what is described in the content standards. ...
  • How well? Proficiency Standards provide the criteria and/or scale for judging the degree of progress on the performance standards. ...
  • When? Where? Who? Program Standards offer descriptions of important components of a school or district program, addressing the availability of foreign language instruction for all students, explaining how the instruction is offered each day and each year, and sharing the program configuration and location (e.g., will the program be a part of the regular elementary school day, or will it be offered after regular school hours?). ...

As we envision it, the scope of our current work entails developing (adapting) Content Standards and Performance Standards. (At a later point we might work on Proficiency Standards and Program Standards.)

Within the various state standards, the terminology is not consistent, especially with regard to Performance and Proficiency Standards. The National Standards refer to "Progress Indicators." Our Washington State Standards (Essential Academic Learning Requirements) refer to "Benchmarks."

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Does Mimi have any suggestions for reconciling this terminology?
     
  2. If we include Progress Indicators (or Benchmarks or whatever we call them), should we refer to them by grade (e.g., 4, 8, 12, 16) like the National Standard do, or by "level" (e.g., Beginning, Developing, Expanding) like the Nebraska Standards do?

 

back to top

Who is the audience for the standards?

We identified two distinct audiences with different needs (in terms of deliverables from this effort):

Audience Need
Administrators
  • To understand "what's in it for them" -- that is, how learning languages will help students do well on state tests, like the WASL (Washington Assessment of Student Learning)
  • To see the relationship of the World Language Standards to the state's Essential Academic Learning Requirements
Classroom Teachers
  • To get practical information to help them teach their classes
  • To have tools and strategies to help them assess their students to see how well they're learning
  • To feel they're not working "alone," but are part of a larger language learning community
  • To feel that World Languages is a part of our state's education reform effort, not an afterthought

With this in mind, we would envision designing the World Language Standards document to include:

For Administrators:

  • Why Learn Another Language? (high-level overview of the benefits of learning languages for increasing student achievement)
  • Mapping of World Language Standards to our state Learning Goals and Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALRs)

For Classroom Teachers:

  • Online Lesson Plans (practical applications of the standards to give teachers ideas for standards-based classroom lessons -- these could be an ongoing library that we build on the web)
  • Assessment Tools & Strategies (relevant information that teachers can begin to incorporate into their classrooms to improve the quality of assessment data for language learning over time and provide valuable feedback to teachers, students, parents, and education leaders)

Based on our meeting on 8/25/2005, we are postponing working on the Online Lesson Plans and Assessment Tools & Strategies.

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Is this a wise choice or should we do more sooner to meet the needs of teachers? Have other states found the Learning Scenarios in the Standards helpful?
     
  2. Michele just presented many of the Assessment tools from the NJ Standards at a workshop for immersion teachers. They seemed to be well-received. Should we focus on sharing these tools (sample rubrics, etc.), but not on developing new things within our state at this time?

back to top

What has already been done in Washington state?

In 1999, WAFLT and OSPI prepared a "White Paper" on World Languages. Parts of that paper were presented to the State Board of Education GRAD (Graduation and Requirements Committee). We are working on reconstructing an electronic copy so it can be made available on the web for historical perspective. In addition, parts of it could be incorporated into the Voluntary World Language Standards document.

A number of high school and college world language teachers were involved in developing Competency Based Admission Standards in 1999 for the Higher Education Coordinating Board Admission Standards Action Committee. These documents may also be of interest, but they were never widely reviewed or adopted other than with pilot schools working on performance-based admission standards. They are not formulated in alignment with the National Standards for Foreign Language, nor are they Standards for a full K-12 sequence of language learning (the focus is on college admissions = 2 years of high school language). See:

back to top

Where should we start?

Given the extensive work by ACTFL (American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages) and the AAT's (American Association for the Teaching of Language X's for Spanish, German, French, Chinese, Russian, etc.) that has gone into developing the National Standards for Foreign Language Education, we agreed that it makes sense to start with the National Standards first, then see how to build on or tailor them for Washington state.

Standards for Foreign Language Learning

Communication: Communicate in Languages Other Than English

Standard 1.1: Students engage in conversations, provide and obtain information, express feelings and emotions, and exchange opinions.

Standard 1.2: Students understand and interpret written and spoken language on a variety of topics.

Standard 1.3: Students present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners or readers on a variety of topics.

Cultures: Gain Knowledge and Understanding of Other Cultures

Standard 2.1: Students demonstrate an understanding of the relationship between the practices and perspectives of the culture studied.

Standard 2.2: Students demonstrate an understanding of the relationship between the products and perspectives of the culture studied.

Connections: Connect with Other Disciplines and Acquire Information

Standard 3.1: Students reinforce and further their knowledge of other disciplines through the foreign language.

Standard 3.2: Students acquire information and recognize the distinctive viewpoints that are only available through the foreign language and its cultures.

Comparisons: Develop Insight into the Nature of Language and Culture

Standard 4.1: Students demonstrate understanding of the nature of language through comparisons of the language studied and their own.

Standard 4.2: Students demonstrate understanding of the concept of culture through comparisons of the cultures studied and their own.

Communities: Participate in Multilingual Communities at Home & Around the World

Standard 5.1: Students use the language both within and beyond the school setting.

Standard 5.2: Students show evidence of becoming life-long learners by using the language for personal enjoyment and enrichment.

Several states have developed extensive Foreign (or World) Language Frameworks, aligned with the National Standards. Two we would recommend examining further are:

These can be downloaded for free. The Nebraska Frameworks book can also be ordered (as a binder).

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Do you agree that these are a good place to start?
     
  2. Are there other state standards or frameworks we should look at?
     
  3. In reality, how much are these frameworks being used by teachers (or curriculum developers)?

back to top

How do we implement standards?

There are many resources available to help teachers implement standards. Our committee needs to review some of these and think about what to use and when to use them and how to introduce them to language teachers. See, for example:

 

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Do you have any other thoughts for how we should begin implementing standards? What do teachers need to know?
     
  2. How can standards be included in teacher professional development (both pre-service and in-service)?
     

back to top

What about Assessment?

Assessment is a large topic and we can probably only begin to touch on it at the August 25 meeting. In a sense, the challenge of assessment is one of the main motivators behind standards. Once the Content Standards define What is important to learn, we can use Performance Standards to determine How students will demonstrate what they know and are able to do, and Proficiency Standards to determine How well they know it.

One very helpful assessment framework to look at is the framework designed for the National Assessment of Educational Progress for Foreign Language (NAEP-FL), developed in 2000. Although the actual NAEP-FL has not been implemented yet (it was originally scheduled for 2003), the framework represents the thinking of dozens of top academicians and teachers in the language learning field and is grounded in the National Standards.

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Do you think this is a useful framework for thinking about assessment?
     
  2. Do you know of other states (or schools/districts) that are making use of it?
     

One idea is to see if we can identify a teacher, school, and district which would like to pilot using this Assessment Framework.

Other resources we should review:

back to top

 

Should we try to correlate WL Standards to our other State Standards (EALRS)?

We have begun correlating the National Standards for Foreign Language with the Washington State Standards (learning goals, components, and essential academic learning requirements).

  • First draft correlation: WL Standards & EALRs (Word)
  • Correlation in format of GLEs (Grade-Level Expectations)
    link coming soon...

We are thinking that it would be helpful to show teachers and administrators that work in WL classrooms does support students learning the other essential academic learning requirements in Reading, Writing, Communication, Social Studies, and other areas.

Questions for Mimi:
  1. Does this seem worthwhile?
     
  2. Are we on the right track?
     
  3. Any other suggestions for us?

 

back to top
Site Map | ©2003 Washington State Coalition for International Education
For questions regarding this website, please contact: webmaster@internationaledwa.org.