Setting Evidence‐Based Language Goals
Senta Goertler (PhD, University of Arizona) is Associate Professor of Second Language Studies and German and Second‐Year German Coordinator at Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Angelika Kraemer (PhD, Michigan State University) is Director of the Center for Language Teaching Advancement (CeLTA) Language School and Executive Associate Director of the CeLTA at Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Theresa Schenker (PhD, Michigan State University) is Senior Lector and Language Program Director of German at Yale University, New Haven, CT.
Abstract
The purpose of this project was to identify target language benchmarks for the German program at Michigan State University (MSU) based on national and international guidelines and previous research, to assess language skills across course levels and class sections in the entire German program, and to adjust the language benchmarks as needed based on the study results and make recommendations for the curriculum. The goal of the study was to identify cost‐ and time‐effective valid and reliable assessment tools for program‐wide language assessment. During the 2012 spring semester, all students enrolled in a German class at MSU (N = 320) participated in this study. At the beginning of the semester, students completed two different language tests both advertised as being aligned with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). The research was guided by the following two research questions: (1) What are the mean and median language levels of students enrolled in German classes at MSU as determined by (a) a language learning software test, and (b) a language test adapted from Goethe‐Institut practice exams? and (2) Is there a correlation between the two tests and/or subsections of the tests? Benchmark levels were initially set as Novice High after the first year of language study, Intermediate Low after the second year, Intermediate High after the third year, and Advanced Low after the fourth year. Students mostly met the benchmark levels, though not equally at each program level and not equally across skills, with the higher scores in productive skills rather than receptive skills. While there was a correlation between the tests and course levels and also between many of the test portions, the tests did not yield the same CEFR ratings, which suggests that at least one of the instruments was not as valid and reliable as hoped. After reviewing the results, the benchmarks were revised to Intermediate Low after the first year, Intermediate Mid after the second year, Intermediate High after the third year, and Advanced Low after the fourth year with the recommendation to put more emphasis on receptive skills in the curriculum.
Number of times cited: 6
- Kristin J. Davin, Amy J. Heineke and Linda Egnatz, The Seal of Biliteracy: Successes and challenges to implementation, Foreign Language Annals, 51, 2, (275-289), (2018).
- Theresa Schenker, Making short‐term study abroad count—Effects on German language skills, Foreign Language Annals, 51, 2, (411-429), (2018).
- Emily Heidrich and Angelika Kraemer, Factors that Influence Proficiency Attainment in a College Language Program: A German Case Study, Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 51, 2, (132-143), (2018).
- Erwin Tschirner, Language Testing: Current Practices and Future Developments, Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 51, 2, (105-120), (2018).
- Senta Goertler and Adam Gacs, Assessment in Online German: Assessment Methods and Results, Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 51, 2, (156-174), (2018).
- Daniel R. Isbell, Paula M. Winke and Susan M. Gass, Using the ACTFL OPIc to assess proficiency and monitor progress in a tertiary foreign languages program, Language Testing, 10.1177/0265532218798139, (026553221879813), (2018).
