Assessment 2: Assessment of content knowledge in TESOL: Grammar Analysis Task
1. A brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (one sentence may be
sufficient)
The grammar analysis task requires candidates to apply content knowledge (language) in
an instructional context. The assignment assesses candidates’ understanding of TESOL
concepts related to aspects of the structure of English, theories of second language
acquisition, language assessment, and planning, implementing and evaluating instruction.
2. A description of how this assessment specifically aligns with the standards it is cited for
in Section III.
Assessment 2 integrates all but two (5b, 5c) of the TESOL standards as a means of
assessing Teacher candidates’ ability to apply their knowledge and understanding of
language and language acquisition (Standards 1a, 1b), culture and group identity
(Standards 2a, 2b), lesson planning, instruction, and standards (Standards 3a, 3b, 3c),
issues of assessment (Standards 4a, 4b, 4c), and ESL history and research (Standard 5a).
Teacher candidates’ identification, analysis, and treatment of learners’ grammar and
lexical errors are evaluated according to the rubric for this project. In identifying
learners’ writing errors on the performance-based assessment (a writing sample) as either
grammar-based or lexical-based, teacher candidates demonstrate their knowledge of the
lexico-grammar system of English and how it has been interpreted by the learner at his or
her current IL stage (Standards 1a, 1b). In analyzing the learners’ errors, teacher
candidates demonstrate their ability to explain in a principled, research-informed way,
not only why they judge a given construction to be an error, but also to assign a possible
inter- or intra-lingual cause for the error (L1 transfer, overgeneralization, etc.) (Standards
4a, 4b). Their analysis should reflect the complexities of how the lexicon and
morphosyntactic system interact with each other to create meaning (Standard 1b).
In developing tasks to address learners’ errors, TC’s must demonstrate a sensitivity to
who the learners are—not only their current ESL level, but also their age, literacy level,
learning style, socio-cultural economic background (Standards 2a, 2b). The tasks
themselves must reflect current standards-based, learner-centered, communicative
approaches to teaching that use an appropriate range of resources and research findings,
and allow for focus on form activities and post-hoc assessment of the efficacy of those
tasks (Standard 3a, 3b, 3c, 4c, 5a).
Finally, in their concluding write-up, Teacher candidates should show insightful
reflection, analysis of the experience, implications of their error identification, analysis
and treatment process on their future classroom practice, and the social justice
implications of moving ESL learners closer along the IL continuum towards TL norms.
3. A brief analysis of the data findings
The data in section 5c show student performance scores for three consecutive semesters.
Overall, there were scores for 51 candidates: 19 in spring 2006, 11 in fall 2006, and 21 in
spring 2007. In spring 2006 and fall 2006, the majority of candidates scored at or above
standard, (84%, n=16, and 82%, n=9, respectively), with 16% (n=3), and 18% (n=2)
scoring below standard, respectively. The results for spring 2007, however, indicate a
decrease in the number of candidates scoring at or above standard (52%, n=11), and an
increase in those scoring below standard (48%, n=10). This shift is most likely a result of a
change in instructor from spring/fall 2006, when the course was taught by full-time Hunter
faculty, to spring 2007 when a new adjunct instructor taught the course. As the adjunct
instructor has a strong background in formal linguistics, he may have been overly emphatic
on the grammar knowledge portion of the task, and less focused on the application of that
knowledge in the classroom.
Additionally, in a longitudinal study of the results from this Assessment, McCormack and
Ediger (2007)* identify specific difficulties candidates have in analyzing and treating
learner errors. These include frequent mismatches between a learner’s error and the
candidate’s proposed treatment of the error such as collocational errors simply treated with
a random array of collocations and idioms, overly simple or complex explanation of a
learner error such as an error involving the future modal leading to an explanation of all
modals, and over-reliance on L1 transfer to explain errors such as “I didn’t learn nothing”
which could be the result of target language input. Candidates also tended to jump to the
first explanation that sprang to mind, as when they recognized a learner error involving the
past tense, but failed to recognize how tense combines with adverbial usage to create the
learner’s intended meaning, or failed to look at a learner’s entire essay for patterns of usage
& evidence of their understanding of English such irregular past tense errors not
necessarily meaning work on past tense in general, just learning the specific irregular
forms.
* McCormack, B. and Ediger, A. (2007) Grammar Knowledge Requirements in ESL Teacher Preparation
as Evidenced through Novice Teachers’ Written Feedback on Lexical and Grammatical Errors.
Presentation at AAAL Conference, April 24, 2007, Costa Mesa, CA.
4. An interpretation of how that data provides evidence for meeting standards
The data shown in section 5c affirms that for spring and fall 2006, 83% (n=25) of
candidates met or exceeded the standards. Despite the most recent semester that we have
data for, spring 2007, reflecting a downturn in performance, the program has confidence in
the ability of our students to meet or exceed the standards and considers spring 2007 to be
an outlier.
5. Attachment of assessment documentation, including1:
(a) the assessment tool or description of the assignment
For this task, you are asked to contact, and request a written essay from, an ESL
student at the age and level that you are likely to teach in the future; then, perform an
analysis of this student's essay for the purpose of diagnosing what and how to teach
him/her; and finally, meet again with the student to give them feedback on it. Your
ultimate task is to write a paper in which you explain the process you followed, how you
performed your analysis (why you chose the errors you chose, and how you analyzed
1
All three components of the assessment – as identified in 5a-c – must be attached, with the following
exceptions: (a) the assessment tool and scoring guide are not required for reporting state licensure data,
and (b) for some assessments, data may not yet be available.
them), how you explained these forms to the student, how they performed on the
exercise(s) or activity/ies which you developed to help this student improve his/her
ability to use this form, and the insights you gained from the entire experience.
Provided with these instructions is a sample of ESL student writing which
contains a number of lexical and grammatical errors. NOTE: Although there are also
other types of errors in this essay (spelling, essay organization, punctuation, etc.), the
focus of your response on this assignment should be on this student's lexical and
grammatical errors only.
Specific Steps to Follow:
1. Identify and contact an ESL student; find out some information about them; obtain a
writing sample from them: Find an ESL student (preferably someone at an age and
level you intend to teach in the future!) and ask if they would permit you to work with
them for a session or two on their writing. Ask them to let you have a sample of an
essay they have written in English. If necessary, give them a topic to write about (see
below for some suggestions) and ask them to write on that topic for 30-60 minutes.
Explain that you would like to analyze the essay, and then you would like to meet
with them again to give them some feedback on its vocabulary and grammar, and to
explain these things and provide some practice in the areas in which they need
additional help. NOTE: Since the focus is on identifying grammar errors in writing,
in eliciting this writing sample, it will be important that you obtain as long a writing
sample as they are able to produce, within reason. Thus, it will be important to find
an ESL student at least proficient enough in English that they can provide you with a
significant writing sample, optimally, about 1 (handwritten) page in length.
Beginning students or very young children (below 2nd grade) would NOT be suitable
candidates for this assignment. Short written answers to a list of individual questions
also is NOT appropriate for this assignment.
2. Analyze the writing sample: Once you receive their writing sample, type up the
essay, taking care to preserve exactly the spelling, word choice, and grammar as the
ESL student originally wrote it. Then analyze it, focusing only on those areas of their
language use that we have studied in our class. NOTE: Although it is likely that they
will have other types of errors in their essays, PLEASE DO NOT FOCUS on errors in
spelling, punctuation, essay organization, articles/determiners, relative clauses,
homophones, prepositions, etc. for this assignment—they are either unrelated to this
course, or we haven’t studied them in this class. Then, analyze their lexical and
grammatical errors as follows:
Part A:
Lexical Errors
Identify 3 lexical errors that you find in this essay. These may include any of the
following:
• Incorrect Word Choice/Understanding of Semantic Features: Choice of words
used in a context where a different word (with a slightly different
meaning) would be more appropriate
• Incorrect Selectional/Syntactic Features: Words used without understanding
what syntactic requirements the use of that word involves or incorrect
accompanying morphological forms
• Incorrect Collocation: Vocabulary used with other words that do not normally
co-occur (and which cannot be explained grammatically)
Part B:
Grammatical Errors
Identify 3 grammatical errors from the essay that you feel are the most serious. The
grammar points you should choose should be structures that we have studied about in
our class by the end of the semester. (Don’t worry about any other ones we haven’t
studied.) You may want to consider error types from among the following:
Subject-verb agreement
Particular verb tenses or aspects (address only one
at a time!)
Basic Phrase Structure
Modals & Phrasal Modals (address only one at a
time!)
Passives
Various Types of Questions Complex/Compound
Sentences
Negative forms
Information structure
Basic sentence
structure
Existential It/There
Part C:
Analyze each of the 3 lexical items and the 3 grammatical errors you have
chosen. Be SURE that the “errors” you have chosen are REALLY errors (to be sure
of this, I recommend talking with others in your class to see if they think the usage in
question is an ERROR). For this analysis, I would suggest that you obtain the
feedback of at least one other person in this class, or anyone else you feel has an
understanding of English grammar and usage (Beware of non-grammarians and their
opinions about English grammar!!!). Identify and plan carefully about HOW you
would recommend these language samples be rephrased, and HOW you would
explain them to the student.
3. Meet with the ESL student again:
Arrange to meet again with the student, and explain to them about how to use these
lexical items and grammatical forms correctly. First, be sure to check with the
student about what they were really trying to say—be careful NOT to try to change
the ideas that the student was trying to convey. Then, provide them with more
appropriate ways of saying what they wanted to say. NOTE: Try to focus on what
they wanted to say, more than on what they actually wrote. Then provide the student
with at least one exercise or activity that you have developed for each type of error
you address, and go through it with them to help them understand better what you
explained to them. Note that the ways in which you will explain lexical errors should
be different from how you explain grammar errors!
4. Write up your analysis and experience:
a. Write up your analysis and describe your experience of analyzing the errors and
working with the student.
1. Briefly describe the student that you worked with—their L1, level, English
learning history, etc.
2. For each error, give the number of the line where it appeared in the original text
(so please number the lines in the version you include with this paper) and then
explain why you chose to focus on each particular one--is it a particularly serious
error? (E.g., did they make the same/similar error several times in this text? Is it a
commonly-used form they are likely to see often in the future? Does it obscure
what they are trying to say?)
3. Explain how you analyzed each error (What was wrong with it? How can you
explain why the student made this particular error? What are some other ways
this idea could be expressed?)
4. Describe how you explained to this student about how this form is/should be used.
5. Describe the exercise or activity that you did with the student to help him/her
learn to avoid this error in the future, and how the exercise worked for the student.
Be sure to include in your paper ALL of the exercises or activities you used with
the student, including information or materials you found on the Internet (as well
as the website/URL). If necessary, copy the actual page(s) you used, include
them, and cite the books or sources in your paper and in your bibliography.
b. Reflect on your entire experience and describe the following:
1. What did you learn from doing the analysis?
2. What did you learn from explaining the errors to the student and doing the
exercise/activity with them? How did the student react? How would you have
felt in their situation?
3. How would this experience influence how you would teach grammar or give
feedback to a student about their errors in the future?
4. What are the social justice implications of how we correct student errors?
c. Provide a bibliography of all outside references used, (including ALL websites and
Internet material!) using APA style in both the citations and the bibliography (see
below).
General rules and formatting of your paper:
1. You may use outside published sources (other books, texts, the Internet, etc.) as long
as you cite them correctly. Remember that Internet material must also be cited, and
included in your bibliography. You are expected not to plagiarize or use ideas of
others without giving proper credit. I strongly suggest you use ESL-oriented
resources rather than native speaker-oriented resources.
2. You must use appropriate in-text (not footnote) citation format, and include a
bibliography at the end, using APA style. See the course website for examples of
APA style, and a sample bibliography that contains some of the books frequently
cited for this course. If you cite our textbook, please remember that it has TWO
authors (please cite it correctly—see our syllabus for a correct citation of this book).
If you quote any outside source verbatim, provide the exact page that the quotation is
from. Paraphrased citations do not need exact pages.
3. Be sure to spell-check (either on a computer or manually with a dictionary) and
proofread (and correct) your paper before you turn it in. If there are spelling and
typographical errors, up to 5 points may be deducted from the grade.
4. You are encouraged to discuss the essay and the errors with others in this class
(orally), but you should write your own analysis in your own words. All papers that
are turned in will be expected to be individual and unique.
5. Papers should be typed double-spaced, with 1" margins on all sides of the page. NO
covers, binders or folders please—simply staple the paper together please. Maximum
length is 15 pages, though the bibliography (only!) may be on the 16th page.
(b) the scoring guide for the assessment
Total Points:
Exemplary
Lexical vs. Grammatical:
Analysis shows a clear
understanding of the distinction;
errors are insightfully identified
as lexical/grammatical
Error analysis shows a
sophisticated understanding of
the nuances of the form,
meaning, and use (including
pragmatics) of the lexical/
grammatical items
Errors are insightfully chosen for
correction based on sound
principles; explanation provides
strong support
Explanations remedying errors
show sophisticated understanding of learners’ needs; are
well-suited for the student
Exercise/presentation includes
more than a helpful remedy for
the student: creativity, good
examples, facilitates
communicative competence
Write-up of the experience
shows insightful reflection,
analysis of the experience, &
social justice implications
Quality of writing is excellent &
flowing; consistently reflecting
accepted conventions of
organization, grammar,
mechanics, and register
Appropriate credit given for
citations; flawless bibliography
& APA format used
Comments:
/48
5-6
pts
Satisfactory
Lexical vs. Grammatical:
Analysis shows basic
understanding of the
distinction; errors are correctly
identified as
lexical/grammatical
Error analysis shows an
understanding of the basic
issues involved in the form,
meaning, and use (including
pragmatics) of the lexical/
grammatical items
Errors are appropriately chosen
for correction based on
reasonable principles, and the
explanation supports it
Explanations for remedying
errors are appropriate for the
student
Exercise/presentation is a
helpful remedy for the student
Write-up of the experience
shows adequate reflection,
analysis of the experience, &
social justice implications
Quality of writing is
appropriate for academic task;
reflects common conventions of
organization, grammar,
mechanics, and register
Generally appropriate credit
given for citations; acceptable
bibliography & APA format
used
3-4
pts
Needs Improvement
Lexical vs. Grammatical:
Analysis shows a lack of
understanding of the distinction
and/or errors are incorrectly
identified as
lexical/grammatical
Error analysis shows a lack of
understanding of the nuances of
the form, meaning, or use
(including pragmatics) of the
lexical/ grammatical items
Errors are inappropriately
chosen for correction; not based
on sound principles; or
explanation does not provide
adequate support
Explanations for remedying
errors show a lack of
understanding of the student’s
needs
Exercise/presentation contains
errors or is inadequate as a
remedy for the student
Write-up of the experience
shows inadequate reflection,
analysis of the experience, or
social justice implications
Quality of writing is not always
appropriate for academic tasks;
does not reflect conventions of
organization, grammar,
mechanics, and register
Appropriate credit not always
given for citations; some errors
in bibliography or APA format
1-2
pts
(c) candidate data derived from the assessment.
Key Assessment 2
Format of
Data
Grammar Analysis Task
Number
Grammar Analysis Task
Grammar Analysis Task
Grammar Analysis Task
Percentage
Number
Percentage
Grammar Analysis Task
Number
Grammar Analysis Task
Percentage
Total
Number
Total
Percentage
Semester
Spring
2006
Spring
2006
Fall 2006
Fall 2006
Spring
2007
Spring
2007
Total
Semesters
Total
Semesters
Candidate Performance Ratings
Below
Standard
(Needs
Improvement)
At Standard
(Satisfactory
Above
Standard
(Exemplary)
3
12
4
19
16%
2
18%
63%
5
45%
21%
4
36%
100%
11
100%
10
7
4
21
48%
33%
19%
100%
15
24
12
51
29%
47%
24%
100%
Grand
Total