 |
|
|
|
|
SBA in the 2007 HKCE English Examination
Domains for assessing learning
The HKEAA has developed four detailed domains for assessing oral language in the classroom: these are:
The domains are the same in both task types-individual presentation and group interaction-but some elements are described differently in the two task types because the kinds of spoken language that are needed in different situations are somewhat different.
Each of the domains has a set of descriptors at each of six levels. This set of levels and descriptors make up the assessment criteria.  Click here to view the assessment criteria.
 |
 To view the explanation of domains provided by Prof Liz Hamp-Lyons.
To view the explanation of the demands of the task types.
To view the explanation of the levels of performance. |
The assessment criteria provide teachers with a common language to describe students' oral language use in ways which are comprehensive, specific and yet constructive. Example 1:
 |
To view the individual presentation in which the student was promoting the film, Amelie. |
Using the assessment criteria as a tool to describe the student's performance allows us to say something like this:
| This is an individual presentation promoting a film called Amelie. The student rather cleverly uses a "poster" about the movie to show to her classmates and to paste her notes onto the back. Her voice projection is fine, and she pronounces common sounds/sound clusters clearly and accurately, though there are some articulation errors and a few words are mispronounced. Her pacing is a little slow and there is some hesitation, so that we feel that she is not yet quite in control of spoken delivery. Her vocabulary is mostly appropriate and she attempts a range of language patterns. Although there are a number of noticeable language errors, none of them seriously impede communication. She shows awareness of errors and some attempts at self-correction. She gives an overview of the film as well as describing the most interesting part of it. She manages to maintain a clear structure without relying too heavily on any notes. She presents her own opinion, although her ideas could be elaborated a bit more. She tries to promote the film by showing her classmates a picture related to the film; although she seems a bit distracted by her own picture and looks at it more than she looks at her audience. |
Example 2:
 |
To view the group interaction from Tsang Shiu Tim Secondary School. |
Using the assessment criteria as a tool to describe the students' performance allows us to say something like this:
| This is an interesting group interaction in which overall, there is quite natural interaction between the group members. The voice projection of everyone in the group is very adequate for all members to hear each clearly. The entire group interaction is notable for the refreshing absence of formulaic language/phrases, and for the lack of reliance on written notes or obviously-rehearsed material.
Keith (boy on far left)
This student has a nice interactive manner although his pronunciation is not great, with a slight 'thickness' that makes some sounds slightly fuzzy, and intonation slightly erratic. His pacing, however, is good. His communication strategies are very strong, his body language both displays and encourages interest, and he uses a full range of turn-taking strategies to initiate and maintain the conversation. His command of vocabulary and language patterns is not as impressive as Henry's, but it is quite varied and accurate. This student has more to contribute and looks stronger from about the middle of the interaction; his ideas are very good and lead to good group interaction. We can predict that this F4 student will develop his mastery of language patterns in real language use, and increase his active vocabulary, during the next year.
Henry (second from left)
This student's pronunciation and delivery is very clear and fluent. His vocabulary and language patterns are very widely varied and accurately used. His pacing is slightly less than natural to begin with but improves during the interaction. He has good communication strategies, but we would really like to see such a strong English user doing more to draw others into the interaction and helping them by extending it. Since this is a F4 student we can confidently expect that by the end of F5 he will have learned how to do those things. In terms of ideas and organisation, he can express his own ideas clearly and fluently, but he is a little bit stilted when attempting to respond to the ideas of others; this too is a skill area that he will be able to improve in the next year (and increasing maturity will also help him feel prepared to be responsive). His 'recap' towards the end of the interaction is impressive in such a young person, and for a second-language user.
Jesi (the only girl)
This student seems like she's not quite 'in' the conversation; her contribution doesn't all fit the flow of interaction as well as the others do. While she generally speaks accurately, her language stays quite simple, and her oral contribution is fairly limited, so we are not quite sure how varied her active vocabulary really is. Her pronunciation is about average for Hong Kong F4 students. Her body language is natural and her participation, while a bit limited, is appropriate. She does contribute an original idea, but it could be better developed or expanded. Overall, Jesi has a solid foundation and we can expect her to make progress in all domains during F5.
Warren (Boy on far right)
This student's pronunciation is clear and standard, with fewer typical Hong Kong pronunciation errors than most F4/5 students, and therefore he is easy to understand. His communication strategies are also quite strong: he appears very involved in the conversation and uses good body language. His vocabulary and language patterns are accurate, though slightly less varied than Henry's and Keith's. He does fairly well on ideas and organisation, making a good suggestion, with good expansion. His contribution to the interaction is solid, and we may find him to be stronger than Jesi, but we would probably prefer to have a fuller performance sample from him in order to be certain of the extent of his ability. |
The assessment criteria have been developed and piloted with the help of teachers from a wide range of Hong Kong schools. Each student is assessed with a scoring sheet, called an assessment record. Click here to view the Assessment Record. This scoring sheet is used to help standardise the assessment process and to record the key features of the assessment activity.
Teachers who use the SBA in their classes are given full training in how to understand and apply these assessment criteria and scoring sheets when assessing students in their classrooms. The assessment criteria should also be discussed with students and actively used by them - in simplified form - as part of self and peer assessment for formative purposes throughout S4 and S5.
Remember:
Only teachers who have been trained in the SBA process, and authorised by the school as assessors, are permitted to conduct SBA assessments.
|
|
