NEW B.Ed COLLEGE NELLIMOODU

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695524

RECORD ON ONLINE ASSIGNMENT

(Semester II)

B.E.D Course 2013-2014

NAME OF THE STUDENT TEACHER : Sindya.J SUBJECT : English CANDIDATE CODE: 165/13 376 021 Certified Record of …………………………………………………………………………………….. Candidate code…………………………………………………………………for the year 2013-2014 Lecturer Principal

2

Online Assignment Proficient and Non proficient learner

Introduction:

In education, the term proficiency is used in a variety of ways. Most commonly in reference to, 1. Proficiency levels, scales and cut off scores on standardized tests and other forms of assessment. 2. Students achieving or failing to achieve proficiency levels determined by tests and assessments. 3. Students demonstrating or failing to demonstrate proficiency in relation to learning standards. 4. Teachers being seemed proficient or non- proficient on job-performance evaluations. To understand how proficiency works in educational contacts , it is important to recognize that all proficiency determinations are based on some forms of standards or measurement system, and that proficiency levels change in direct relation to the scales, standards, tests and calculations methods being used to evaluate and determine proficiency. The objective of the reducing the number of non-proficient students annual measurable objective is to reduce the number of students performing below the proficient level on state reading and math assessments by half within six years. At the school building level, the A.M.O.is established by first determining the percent of students in any tested assessment. Once that percentage is determined, it is divided by two to determine the percent of students who must become proficient within sex years in order to achieve the goal. The major issues related to proficiency determinations in ducation.

1. High standards vs. low standards.

One source of debate is related to the standards upon which a proficiency determination is based and whether the standards are being applied consistently or fairly to produce accurate results. Some may argue, for example

3

that the standards or cut off scores for” proficiency” on a given test are too low , and therefore the test results will only produce “False positives” i.e. they will indicate that students are proficient when they are not.

A test administered in eleventh grade that reflects a level of knowledge and skill students should have acquired in eighth grade would be one general example. Because reported “proficiency” rises and false in direct relation to the standards used to make a proficiency determination, it is possible to manipulate the perception and interperception of test results by elevating or lowering standards.

2. C common systems vs. disparate systems;-

Since proficiency must be determined by some form of measurement system- whether it is a certain percentage of correct answers on a test or a highly sophisticated mathematical algorithm , as with Value-added measures and in teacher evaluation proficiency determinations can be more or less accurate based on the quality of the system being used or they can be comparable or incomparable.

3. Learning vs. reporting:-

As described above, it may be possible for students to learn a lot in schools but still appear to have learned very little due to the systems and standards being applied, or due to the misalignment of teaching and testing. Students may learn important skills in school such as problem solving and researching that are not specifically evaluated by tests or they may ave learned a large body of knowledge, just not the knowledge evaluated by a given test or assessment.

4. Appropriate vs. inappropriate proficiency levels:-

Proficiency determinations are the object of debates related to the appropriateness or in appropriateness of a given proficiency scale, standard or system. Is it appropriate to hold on a non-English speaking student to the same proficiency standards as measured by the same English language tests as a native – English-student? Teacher evaluations are another object of debate and controversy on this issue, particularly when it comes to factoring student achievement in to performance evaluation.

4

In practice proficiency based learning can take a wide variety of forms from state to state or school to school .There is no single model or universally used approach. While schools often create their own proficiency –based systems, they may also use systems, strategies or models created by state education agencies or outside educational organizations. Proficiency based learning is more widely used at the elementary level, although more middle schools and high schools are adopting this approach. Defining proficiency –based learning is complicated by the fact that educators not only use a wide variety and terms for the general approach, but the terms may or may not be used synonymously from place to place, A few of the non common synonyms includes competency based, mastery based, outcome – based, performance –based and standards -based education instruction and learning among others. Recently, the terms competency-based learning or competency-based education have become more and more widely used by 1. Online schools or companies selling online programmes .2.Colleges and universities, particularly those offering online degree programmes. “Competency –based education “to promote programmes of dubious educational value. When investigation or reporting on proficiency based or competency – based education, it is important to determine precisely how the terms are being used in a specific contest. Reform:

Proficiency – based learning is generally seen as an alternative to more traditional approaches in which students may or may not acquire proficiency in a given course credit, get promoted to the next grade level, or graduate . The goal of proficiency – based learning is to ensure that more students learn what they are expected to learn, the approach can also provide information about student learning progress , which can help them more precisely identify academic strengths and weakness as well as the specific concepts and skills students have not yet mastered. When schools transition to a proficiency – based system, it can entail significant changes in how a school operates and teaches students, affecting everything from the school’s educational philosophy and culture to its methods of instruction testing, grading, reporting, promotion and graduation. Schools may use different methods of instruction and assessment to determine whether students have achieved proficiency learning pathways, personal learning, plans, portfolios, rubrics and capstone projects.

5

Debate:

While there is a widespread argument that students should be held to high academic expectation and that the school and teacher should make sure that the students acquire the most important knowledge and skills they need to succeed in adult life. There is often disagreement and debate about the best way to achieve their goals. For this reason, debates about proficiency –based learning tend to be focused on the methods used by schools, rather than the overall objective of the strategy.

Proponents and proficiency - based learning may argue that the approach greatly improves the chances that students will learn the most critically improves the chances that students will train the most critically important knowledge , concepts and skills they will need throughout their lives, and that proficiency – based learning can help to eliminate persistent learning gaps, achievement gaps and opportunity gaps. Critics of proficiency –based learning may argue that the transition will require already overburdened teachers to spend large amount of time and possibly uncompensated time – on extra planning , preparation and training and that proficiency - based learning can be prohibitively difficult to implement particularly at a statewide level. Critics may also take issue with the learning standards that proficiency – based systems utilize or with the specific features of a system used in a particular school. The objective of the reducing the number of non- proficient students AMO is to reduce the number of students performing below the proficient level on state reading and math assessments by half within six years. At the schools that perform at either the approaching standard or the academic warning level on the state assessment. Once that percentage is determined is divided by two to determine the percentage of students who must become proficient within six years in order to achieve the goal, Annual measurable objective or AMO is different than the other three performances based AMOs in the accountability system in that it is calculated not only for the full population of students who take state assessments in the school, but also for each subgroup of students. A student sub group of 30 or more students identified by s specific characteristic related to race/ethnicity, economic status, special needs or English language proficiency.

6

ELL Proficiency levels:

Level 1 – Basic

Students at this level have very limited or no understanding of English. They rarely use English for communication. They can respond nonverbally to commands, statements and questions in simple form. As their oral comprehension measures they begin to use simple words and phrases, and may use English spontaneously.

Level . 2- Low intermediate:-

These students can understand short conversation on simple topics .They rely on familiarity, they use repetition, gestures and non verbal cues to sustain conversation. When reading students at this level can understand basic narrative text and authentic materials, although they will be below grade level. They rely on contextual and visual cuse to aid in comprehension. They can begin to identify the main idea and supporting details of passages. They can write simple notes and make brief journal entries using basic vocabulary and common language structures. Frequent errors are characteristics at this level.

Level-3: High intermediate :

At this level students can understand standard speech delivered in most settings with some repetition and re-wording. They can understand the main idea and some details of extended discourse. They can communicate orally in most setting. Students at this level can comprehend the contents of many texts independently, although they still may not be on grade level, they still require support in understanding accadamic text. They can read many literature selections for pleasure. They can write multiparagraph compositions, journal entries, letters and relative passages. They can present their thoughts in an organized manner but errors may still be present.

7

Level 4 : Proficient:

Students at this level have adequate language skills for day –to-day communication. Occasional, structural and lexical errors still occur. They may still have difficulty with idiomatic expressions and words with multiple meanings. They may still have difficulty with complex structures and abstract academic concepts, but are able to communicate in English in new or unfamiliar settings. Students at this level write for personal and academic purposes. Structures Vocabulary and overall organizations should approximate the writing of native speakers at their level. However it is still possible for errors to occur.

Level-5 : Advanced proficient:

Students at this advanced level have demonstrated English proficiency as

determined by state assessment instruments (ELPA-English- Language-Proficient-

Assessment). They are expected to be able to participate fully with their peers in

graduate level content area classes.

Conclusion:-

Proficiency based learning refers to systems of instruction, assessment,

grading and academic reporting that are based on students demonstrating that

they have learned the knowledge and skills they are expected to learn as they

progress through their education. In public schools proficiency based systems use

state learning standards to determine academic expectations and define proficiency

in a given course, subject area or grade level. The general goal of proficiency

based learning is to ensure that students are acquiring the knowledge and skills that

are deemed to be essential to success in school higher education careers and adult

life.

8

References :

1. www.ksde.org.

2. J. Leon, S,& Mirocha, J. Impact of students’ Language background on content-

based assessment:

3.Education Commission of the states. 2003 No child left Behind rules to aid

schools. http://nclb.ecs.org/nclp/rpt-details.asp?survey=446

4.Menken,k.What are the critical issues in wide-scale assessment of English

language learners? http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/issuebriefs/ib6.htm