Read Text I and answer the fourteen questions that follow it

Text I The “literacy turn” in education: reexamining

what it means to be literate

In response to the phenomena of mass migration and the emergence of digital communications media that defined the last decade of the 20th century, the New London Group (NLG) called for a broader view of literacy and literacy teaching in its 1996 manifesto, A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. The group argued that literacy pedagogy in education must (1) reflect the increasing cultural and linguistic diversity of the contemporary globalized world, and (2) account for the new kinds of texts and textual engagement that have emerged in the wake of new information and multimedia technologies. In order to better capture the plurality of discourses, languages, and media, they proposed the term ‘multiliteracies’.

Within the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies, language and other modes of communication are viewed as dynamic resources for meaning making that undergo constant changes in the dynamics of language use as learners attempt to achieve their own purposes. Within this broader view of literacy and literacy teaching, learners are no longer “users as decoders of language” but rather “designers of meaning.” Meaning is not viewed as something that resides in texts; rather, deriving meaning is considered an active and dynamic process in which learners combine and creatively apply both linguistic and other semiotic resources (e.g., visual, gesture, sound, etc.) with an awareness of “the sets of conventions connected with semiotic activity [...] in a given social space” (NLG, 1996, p. 74).

Grounded within the view that learning develops in social, cultural, and material contexts as a result of collaborative interactions, NLG argued that instantiating literacy-based teaching in classrooms calls on the complex integration and interaction of four pedagogical components that are neither hierarchical nor linear and can at times overlap: situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transformed practice. […]

Although the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies was conceived as a “statement of general principle” (1996, p. 89) for schools, the group’s call for educators to recognize the diversity and social situatedness of literacy has had a lasting impact on foreign language (FL) teaching and learning. The reception of the group’s work along with that of other scholars from critical pedagogy appeared at a time when the field was becoming less solidly anchored in theories of L2 acquisition and more interested in the social practice of FL education itself. In the section that follows, we describe the current state of FL literacy studies as it has developed in recent years, before finally turning to some very recent emerging trends that we are likely to see develop going forward.

(Adapted from: https://www.colorado.edu/center/altec/sites/default/files/ attachedfiles/moving_toward_multiliteracies_in_foreign_language_teaching.pdf)

Read Text I and answer the fourteen questions that follow it

Text I The “literacy turn” in education: reexamining

what it means to be literate

In response to the phenomena of mass migration and the emergence of digital communications media that defined the last decade of the 20th century, the New London Group (NLG) called for a broader view of literacy and literacy teaching in its 1996 manifesto, A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. The group argued that literacy pedagogy in education must (1) reflect the increasing cultural and linguistic diversity of the contemporary globalized world, and (2) account for the new kinds of texts and textual engagement that have emerged in the wake of new information and multimedia technologies. In order to better capture the plurality of discourses, languages, and media, they proposed the term ‘multiliteracies’.

Within the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies, language and other modes of communication are viewed as dynamic resources for meaning making that undergo constant changes in the dynamics of language use as learners attempt to achieve their own purposes. Within this broader view of literacy and literacy teaching, learners are no longer “users as decoders of language” but rather “designers of meaning.” Meaning is not viewed as something that resides in texts; rather, deriving meaning is considered an active and dynamic process in which learners combine and creatively apply both linguistic and other semiotic resources (e.g., visual, gesture, sound, etc.) with an awareness of “the sets of conventions connected with semiotic activity [...] in a given social space” (NLG, 1996, p. 74).

Grounded within the view that learning develops in social, cultural, and material contexts as a result of collaborative interactions, NLG argued that instantiating literacy-based teaching in classrooms calls on the complex integration and interaction of four pedagogical components that are neither hierarchical nor linear and can at times overlap: situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transformed practice. […]

Although the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies was conceived as a “statement of general principle” (1996, p. 89) for schools, the group’s call for educators to recognize the diversity and social situatedness of literacy has had a lasting impact on foreign language (FL) teaching and learning. The reception of the group’s work along with that of other scholars from critical pedagogy appeared at a time when the field was becoming less solidly anchored in theories of L2 acquisition and more interested in the social practice of FL education itself. In the section that follows, we describe the current state of FL literacy studies as it has developed in recent years, before finally turning to some very recent emerging trends that we are likely to see develop going forward.

(Adapted from: https://www.colorado.edu/center/altec/sites/default/files/ attachedfiles/moving_toward_multiliteracies_in_foreign_language_teaching.pdf)

Read Text I and answer the fourteen questions that follow it

Text I The “literacy turn” in education: reexamining

what it means to be literate

In response to the phenomena of mass migration and the emergence of digital communications media that defined the last decade of the 20th century, the New London Group (NLG) called for a broader view of literacy and literacy teaching in its 1996 manifesto, A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. The group argued that literacy pedagogy in education must (1) reflect the increasing cultural and linguistic diversity of the contemporary globalized world, and (2) account for the new kinds of texts and textual engagement that have emerged in the wake of new information and multimedia technologies. In order to better capture the plurality of discourses, languages, and media, they proposed the term ‘multiliteracies’.

Within the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies, language and other modes of communication are viewed as dynamic resources for meaning making that undergo constant changes in the dynamics of language use as learners attempt to achieve their own purposes. Within this broader view of literacy and literacy teaching, learners are no longer “users as decoders of language” but rather “designers of meaning.” Meaning is not viewed as something that resides in texts; rather, deriving meaning is considered an active and dynamic process in which learners combine and creatively apply both linguistic and other semiotic resources (e.g., visual, gesture, sound, etc.) with an awareness of “the sets of conventions connected with semiotic activity [...] in a given social space” (NLG, 1996, p. 74).

Grounded within the view that learning develops in social, cultural, and material contexts as a result of collaborative interactions, NLG argued that instantiating literacy-based teaching in classrooms calls on the complex integration and interaction of four pedagogical components that are neither hierarchical nor linear and can at times overlap: situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transformed practice. […]

Although the NLG’s pedagogy of multiliteracies was conceived as a “statement of general principle” (1996, p. 89) for schools, the group’s call for educators to recognize the diversity and social situatedness of literacy has had a lasting impact on foreign language (FL) teaching and learning. The reception of the group’s work along with that of other scholars from critical pedagogy appeared at a time when the field was becoming less solidly anchored in theories of L2 acquisition and more interested in the social practice of FL education itself. In the section that follows, we describe the current state of FL literacy studies as it has developed in recent years, before finally turning to some very recent emerging trends that we are likely to see develop going forward.

(Adapted from: https://www.colorado.edu/center/altec/sites/default/files/ attachedfiles/moving_toward_multiliteracies_in_foreign_language_teaching.pdf)

What is Validity?
by Evelina Galaczi
July 17th, 2020

The fundamental concept to keep in mind when creating any assessment is validity. Validity refers to whether a test measures what it aims to measure. For example, a valid driving test should include a practical driving component and not just a theoretical test of the rules of driving. A valid language test for university entry, for example, should include tasks that are representative of at least some aspects of what actually happens in university settings, such as listening to lectures, giving presentations, engaging in tutorials, writing essays, and reading texts.

Validity has different elements, which we are now going to look at in turn.

Test Purpose – Why am I testing?

We can never really say that a test is valid or not valid. Instead, we can say that a test is valid for a particular purpose. There are several reasons why you might want to test your students. You could be trying to check their learning at the end of a unit, or trying to understand what they know and don't know. Or, you might want to use a test to place learners into groups based on their ability, or to provide test takers with a certificate of language proficiency. Each of these different reasons for testing represents a different test purpose.

The purpose of the test determines the type of test you're going to produce, which in turn affects the kinds of tasks you're going to choose, the number of test items, the length of the test, and so on. For example, a test certifying that doctors can practise in an English-speaking country would be different from a placement test which aims to place those doctors into language courses.

Test Takers – Who am I testing?

It’s also vital to keep in mind who is taking your test. Is it primary school children or teenagers or adults? Or is it airline pilots or doctors or engineers? This is an important question because the test has to be appropriate for the test takers it is aimed for. If your test takers are primary school children, for instance, you might want to give them more interactive tasks or games to test their language ability. If you are testing listening skills, for example, you might want to use role plays for doctors, but lectures or monologues with university students.

Test Construct – What am I testing?

Another key point is to consider what you want to test. Before designing a test, you need to identify the ability or skill that the test is designed to measure – in technical terms, the ‘test construct’. Some examples of constructs are: intelligence, personality, anxiety, English language ability, pronunciation. To take language assessment as an example, the test construct could be communicative language ability, or speaking ability, or perhaps even a construct as specific as pronunciation. The challenge is to define the construct and find ways to elicit it and measure it; for example, if we are testing the construct of fluency, we might consider features such as rate of speech, number of pauses/ hesitations and the extent to which any pauses/hesitations cause strain for a listener.

Test Tasks – How am I testing?

Once you’ve defined what you want to test, you need to decide how you’re going to test it. The focus here is on selecting the right test tasks for the ability (i.e. construct) you're interested in testing. All task types have advantages and limitations and so it’s important to use a range of tasks in order to minimize their individual limitations and optimize the measurement of the ability you’re interested in. The tasks in a test are like a menu of options that are available to choose from, and you must be sure to choose the right task or the right range of tasks for the ability you're trying to measure.

Test Reliability - How am I scoring?

Next it’s important to consider how to score your test. A test needs to be reliable and to produce accurate scores. So, you’ll need to make sure that the scores from a test reflect a learner's actual ability. In deciding how to score a test, you’ll need to consider whether the answers are going to be scored as correct or incorrect (this might be the case for multiple–choice tasks, for example) or whether you might use a range of marks and give partial credit, as for example, in reading or listening comprehension questions. In speaking and writing, you’ll also have to decide what criteria to use (for example, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, essay, organisation in writing, and so on). You’ll also need to make sure that the teachers involved in speaking or writing assessment have received some training, so that they are marking to (more or less) the same standard.

Test Impact - How will my test help learners?

The final – and in many ways most important – question to ask yourself is how the test is benefitting learners. Good tests engage learners in situations similar to ones that they might face outside the classroom (i.e. authentic tasks), or which provide useful feedback or help their language development by focusing on all four skills (reading, listening, writing, speaking). For example, if a test has a speaking component, this will encourage speaking practice in the classroom. And if that speaking test includes both language production (e.g. describe a picture) and interaction (e.g. discuss a topic with another student), then preparing for the test encourages the use of a wide range of speaking activities in the classroom and enhances learning.

Adapted from: https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/blog/what-is-validity. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.

What is Validity?
by Evelina Galaczi
July 17th, 2020

The fundamental concept to keep in mind when creating any assessment is validity. Validity refers to whether a test measures what it aims to measure. For example, a valid driving test should include a practical driving component and not just a theoretical test of the rules of driving. A valid language test for university entry, for example, should include tasks that are representative of at least some aspects of what actually happens in university settings, such as listening to lectures, giving presentations, engaging in tutorials, writing essays, and reading texts.

Validity has different elements, which we are now going to look at in turn.

Test Purpose – Why am I testing?

We can never really say that a test is valid or not valid. Instead, we can say that a test is valid for a particular purpose. There are several reasons why you might want to test your students. You could be trying to check their learning at the end of a unit, or trying to understand what they know and don't know. Or, you might want to use a test to place learners into groups based on their ability, or to provide test takers with a certificate of language proficiency. Each of these different reasons for testing represents a different test purpose.

The purpose of the test determines the type of test you're going to produce, which in turn affects the kinds of tasks you're going to choose, the number of test items, the length of the test, and so on. For example, a test certifying that doctors can practise in an English-speaking country would be different from a placement test which aims to place those doctors into language courses.

Test Takers – Who am I testing?

It’s also vital to keep in mind who is taking your test. Is it primary school children or teenagers or adults? Or is it airline pilots or doctors or engineers? This is an important question because the test has to be appropriate for the test takers it is aimed for. If your test takers are primary school children, for instance, you might want to give them more interactive tasks or games to test their language ability. If you are testing listening skills, for example, you might want to use role plays for doctors, but lectures or monologues with university students.

Test Construct – What am I testing?

Another key point is to consider what you want to test. Before designing a test, you need to identify the ability or skill that the test is designed to measure – in technical terms, the ‘test construct’. Some examples of constructs are: intelligence, personality, anxiety, English language ability, pronunciation. To take language assessment as an example, the test construct could be communicative language ability, or speaking ability, or perhaps even a construct as specific as pronunciation. The challenge is to define the construct and find ways to elicit it and measure it; for example, if we are testing the construct of fluency, we might consider features such as rate of speech, number of pauses/ hesitations and the extent to which any pauses/hesitations cause strain for a listener.

Test Tasks – How am I testing?

Once you’ve defined what you want to test, you need to decide how you’re going to test it. The focus here is on selecting the right test tasks for the ability (i.e. construct) you're interested in testing. All task types have advantages and limitations and so it’s important to use a range of tasks in order to minimize their individual limitations and optimize the measurement of the ability you’re interested in. The tasks in a test are like a menu of options that are available to choose from, and you must be sure to choose the right task or the right range of tasks for the ability you're trying to measure.

Test Reliability - How am I scoring?

Next it’s important to consider how to score your test. A test needs to be reliable and to produce accurate scores. So, you’ll need to make sure that the scores from a test reflect a learner's actual ability. In deciding how to score a test, you’ll need to consider whether the answers are going to be scored as correct or incorrect (this might be the case for multiple–choice tasks, for example) or whether you might use a range of marks and give partial credit, as for example, in reading or listening comprehension questions. In speaking and writing, you’ll also have to decide what criteria to use (for example, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, essay, organisation in writing, and so on). You’ll also need to make sure that the teachers involved in speaking or writing assessment have received some training, so that they are marking to (more or less) the same standard.

Test Impact - How will my test help learners?

The final – and in many ways most important – question to ask yourself is how the test is benefitting learners. Good tests engage learners in situations similar to ones that they might face outside the classroom (i.e. authentic tasks), or which provide useful feedback or help their language development by focusing on all four skills (reading, listening, writing, speaking). For example, if a test has a speaking component, this will encourage speaking practice in the classroom. And if that speaking test includes both language production (e.g. describe a picture) and interaction (e.g. discuss a topic with another student), then preparing for the test encourages the use of a wide range of speaking activities in the classroom and enhances learning.

Adapted from: https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/blog/what-is-validity. Acesso em: 15 dez. 2023.