ESOL 4010B/6010B: Applied Linguistics for ESOL

Fall 2009 | WH 306 | 3:30-4:45 PM
ESOL 4010B: CRN 81288  | ESOL 6010B: CRN 81289
3 semester hours

Dr. Lee Campbell
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of English
Valdosta State University
Valdosta, GA 31698-0025

Office: WH 216
Office phone: 229-333-7351
Department phone: 229-333-5946
Fax: 229-259-5529
Email: jlcampbe@valdosta.edu
Website: http://www.valdosta.edu/~jlcampbe
Office hours: W 3:30-5:30, R 12:00-2:00, by appointment, and 24/7 by email

1. COURSE DESCRIPTION: A study of the nature, structure, and diversity of language, emphasizing the phonological, syntactic, and semantic patterns of English in comparison and contrast with features of other selected languages. Prospective teachers will explore the principles of linguistic systems and major theorists and schools of linguistic thought in anticipation of working with communities of non-native English speakers.

2. OUTCOMES: Students who successfully complete ESOL 4010 will

           i.            Demonstrate knowledge of the nature and structure of language, including general principles and terminology of linguistics.

          ii.            Demonstrate understanding of language varieties.

        iii.            Analyze how learners acquire English, both as a first language and as a second language.

        iv.            Apply what they learn to language issues in teaching English to speakers of other languages.

 

Students who successfully complete ESOL 6010 will—in addition to the outcomes above—

 

         v.            Demonstrate an understanding of a line of research on second language acquisition by submitting an annotated bibliography of articles or book chapters relating to some aspect of the linguistic analysis, e.g., acquisition of vocabulary, communicative competence, some aspect of classroom instruction.  Some of these secondary sources will then be referenced in the written project in order to strengthen its analysis.

3. ESOL STANDARDS: ESOL 4010/6010 is one of the three required courses offered by VSU for Georgia's ESOL Endorsement. Applied Linguistics directly addresses the following standards for ESOL programs developed by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission, rule 505-3-.18.

a.       prepare candidates who know, understand and use the major concepts, theories, and research related to the nature and acquisition of language to construct learning environments that support ESOL students' language and literacy development and content area achievement.

b.       prepare candidates who demonstrate understanding of language as a system and demonstrate a high level of competence in helping ESOL students acquire and use English in listening, speaking, reading, and writing for social and academic purposes.

c.        prepare candidates who understand and apply concepts, theories, research, and practice to facilitate the acquisition of a primary and a new language in and out of classroom settings.

d.       prepare candidates who know, understand and use standards-based practices and strategies related to planning, implementing, and managing ESL and content instruction, including classroom organization, teaching strategies for developing and integrating language skills, and choosing and adapting classroom resources.

e.        prepare candidates who demonstrate knowledge of the history of ESL teaching; keep current with new instructional techniques, research results, advances in the ESL field, and public policy issues; such information to reflect upon and improve their instructional practices; and provide support and advocate for ESOL students and their families and work collaboratively to improve the learning environment.

f.        prepare candidates who demonstrate knowledge of history, research, and current practice in the field of ESL teaching and apply this knowledge to improve teaching and learning.

g.        prepare candidates who serve as professional resources, advocate for ESOL students, and build partnerships with students' families.

4. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK STANDARDS: ESOL 4010/ESOL 6010 is taught in accordance with the following College of Education's conceptual framework standards (CFSs):

                     I.            CONTENT AND CURRICULUM:  Teachers demonstrate a strong content knowledge of content area(s) that are appropriate for their certification levels.

                   II.            KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS AND THEIR LEARNING:  Teachers support the intellectual, social, physical, and personal development of all students.

                 III.            LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS: Teachers create learning environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

                IV.            PROFESSIONALISM: Teachers recognize, participate in, and contribute to teaching as a profession.

5. PRINCIPLES: LING 4000/ENGL 6000 is taught in accordance with the following guiding principles of Georgia teacher education programs:

·         Dispositions Principle:  Productive dispositions positively affect learners, professional growth, and the learning environment.

·         Equity Principle:  All learners deserve high expectations and support.

·         Process Principle:  Learning is a lifelong process of development and growth.

·         Ownership Principle:  Professionals are committed to, and assume responsibility for, the future of their disciplines.

·         Support Principle:  Successful engagement in the process of learning requires collaboration among multiple partners.

·         Impact Principle:  Effective practice yields evidence of learning.

·         Technology Principle:  Technology facilitates teaching, learning, community-building, and resource acquisition

·         Standards Principle:  Evidence-based standards systematically guide professional preparation and development.  

 

The study of linguistics--and especially the study of language variation and acquisition--has historically been highly sensitive to the role of teacher disposition in language learning.  Linguistics strongly advocates an objective approach to language free from preconceptions and prejudice.

6. MATERIALS AND REQUISITES: Two textbooks are required:

  • How English Works: A Linguistic Introduction, 2/e, by Anne Curzan and Michael Adams (Pearson Longman, 2009): ISBN 978-0-205-60550-7.  Abbreviated HEW.
  • How Languages Are Learned, 3/e, by Patsy M. Lightbown and Nina Spada (Oxford, 2006). ISBN 0-19-442224-0. Abbreviated HLL.

 

In addition, students will be required to read and understand the English Language Proficiency standards written by the WIDA (World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment) Consortium at < http://www.wida.us/standards/elp.aspx>:

 

·         Understanding the WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards: A Resource Guide, pages RG9-RG33, at <http://www.wida.us/standards/Resource_Guide_web.pdf>.

·         Performance Definitions for WIDA's Levels of English Language Proficiency at < http://www.wida.us/standards/RG_Performance%20Definitions.pdf>

·         English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 5 at < http://www.wida.us/standards/PreK-5%20Standards%20web.pdf>

·         English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Grade 6 through Grade 12 at < http://www.wida.us/standards/6-12%20Standards%20web.pdf>

 

Last, students will need to possess or be able to access the technology enabling them to take quizzes and complete a final exam on BlazeView, VSU’s online instructional medium.  BlazeView will also be used to submit the observation of an ELL and draft portions of the linguistic analysis.

7. LIVETEXT: All students must have access to LiveText, which will be used by the instructor to assess the course's written project, the linguistic analysis. Access to LiveText can be purchased at the VSU bookstore. Linguistic analyses must be uploaded to LiveText in order to be assessed: ESOL candidates who don't post their analyses to LiveText will lose 50 of 100 possible points.

8. ASSIGNMENTS, POINTS, AND GRADING: Class members will be scored on the following assignments:

  • Proposal of linguistic analysis (5 points): outcomes i, ii, iv; standards a, b, c, g; CFSs I, II, IV
  • Draft of discussion of ELL’s context and transcription of learner language, with phonological and suprasegmental notations (2.5 points): outcomes i, iii, iv; standard b; CFSs I, II
  • Draft of discussion of ELL’s phonology (including suprasegmental features), morphology, and syntax (2.5 points): outcomes i, ii, iii, iv; standard b; CFSs I, II
  • Draft of discussion of ELL’s communicative competence, pragmatic and sociolinguistic features, and vocabulary (2.5 points): outcomes i, ii, iii, iv; standards b, d, g; CFSs I, II, III, IV
  • Linguistic analysis of language of aPK-12 ELL (50 points): outcomes i, ii, iii, iv; standards a, b, c, d, e, f, g; CFSs I, II, III, IV
  • 15 quizzes at 1 point each (15 points): outcomes i, ii, iii; standards a, b, c, e, f; CFSs I, II, III
  • Comprehensive final exam (10 points): outcomes i, ii, iii; standards a, b, c, e, f; CFSs I, II, III
  • Observation of PK-12 ELL(s) at a different level than the ELL whose language is analyzed (7.5 points): outcomes i, iii, iv; standard g; CFSs I, II, III, IV

  • Graduate students will complete an annotated bibliography of articles or book chapters on some line of research in second language acquisition.  This bibliography will be submitted as part of the linguistic analysis and will be scored according to its adherence to conventions and the degree to which its sources contribute to the depth of the description and analysis of learner language (see the last two criteria of the scoring rubric below): outcomes i, ii, iii, iv, v; standards a, b, c, d, e, f, g; CFSs I, II, III, IV

 

Final grades for the course will be determined on the following 100-point scale (attendance is worth 5 points—see below):

  • 100=A+
  • 85 =A- (cut-off for As)
  • 80=B
  • 70=B- (cut-off for Bs)
  • 60=C
  • 50=C- (cut-off for Cs)
  • below 50=F

 

In order to receive a C in the course, members need to complete the proposal for the linguistic analysis, the linguistic analysis, and the observation of an ELL. And, again, the linguistic analysis must be uploaded to LiveText in order to be assessed.

 

Assignments will be graded on a 5-increment numerical scale according to which

  • 1 out of 1      or 2.5 out of 2.5     or 5 out of 5     or 7.5 out of 7.5     or 10 out of 10     or 50 out of 50 = A+
  • .8 out of 1     or 2.0 out of 2.5     or 4 out of 5     or 6.0 out of 7.5     or 8 out of 10     or 40 out of 50 = B
  • .6 out of 1     or 1.5 out of 2.5     or 3 out of 5     or 4.5 out of 7.5     or 6 out of 10     or 30 out of 50 = C
  • .4 out of 1     or 1.0 out of 2.5     or 2 out of 5     or 3.0 out of 7.5     or 4 out of 10     or 20 out of 50 = D
  • .2 out of 1     or 0.5 out of 2.5     or 1 out of 5     or 1.5 out of 7.5     or 2 out of 10     or 10 out of 50 = F

 

This is not a percentage system; for example, if you score .6 out of 1 on a quiz, BlazeView will report that you got 60%. That’s a C according to this grading system, not an F.

9. ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: To plagiarize is to "to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own: use (another's production) without crediting the source" (Merriam-Webster).  Students are expected to quote, paraphrase, and cite sources properly in written materials. Plagiarism is plagiarism whether intended or accidental, so members should ask questions if they need to. Students may study together for quizzes and may consult with one another for the analysis, but in the end they must complete their assignments individually and must not pass off another's work as their own.

10. LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AND PROPOSAL: Every member of ESOL 4010/6010 must at least complete a proposal for a linguistic analysis, the analysis itself, and the observation of an ELL in a classroom.

In general, linguistics is the objective study of language, but in practice it's usually the objective study of some relatively small piece of language or relatively small set of pieces of language. The linguistic analysis assignment is basically this: interact with an English language learner (not necessarily in a school setting), transcribe a portion of the learner’s language (in conversation with you), and describe the learner’s language in the objective terms of linguistics.

The ELL must be a PK-12 student at any level (PreK-K, 1-2, 3-5, 6-8, or 9-12). Students simply engage the learner in conversation—as a part of conversation practice for the student or as a part of tutoring the student.  Record a portion of this conversation and transcribe this, about 10-20 minutes of it. Then analyze the salient linguistic features of the transcribed portion, as well as any other features you might have noticed elsewhere. Students might also want to examine written materials produced by the learner or have the learner read an appropriate passage and perform some language function with respect to it. Examine carefully chapters four and five of the HLL text and read the appropriate WIDA standards for the student selected for the analysis.  The conversation in which you engage with the ELL may be more or less academic: you may use it to ascertain the social-conversational proficiency of the ELL, and/or you may wish to investigate an area of academic language use that WIDA describes: language arts, mathematics, social studies, or science.

The specifics of the final written analysis will be presented and discussed in class. Suffice it to say here that students will describe the background of the human subject whose language is to be analyzed and then analyze salient features of the learner’s language: segmental and suprasegmental phonology, morphology, syntax, idiomatic language/communicative competence, and vocabulary. See below the scoring rubric for the analysis of learner language.

It’s important that all students immediately start the process of finding ELLs to work with for their analysis and observation. The proposal for the linguistic analysis--in which students discuss the student whose language they will analyze--is due about a month after classes start. Depending on the specific circumstances of your ELL, you might need to get permission from the ELL’s teacher and guardian(s). A draft of the transcription is then due about a month later. Do give yourself plenty of time to do well on this assignment.

11. OBSERVATION OF ELL(s): Candidates ESOL endorsement must during their three courses obtain field experience at all PK-12 levels. To help fulfill this requirement, students must schedule observational visits to an ESOL classroom or a classroom in which an English language learner is mainstreamed at a PK-12 level different from the one of their subject for the linguistic analysis: PreK-K, 1-2, 3-5, 6-8, or 9-12. Members should complete at least five hours of observation and take notes on the salient linguistic features of the classroom (again, see chapters four and five in the Lightbown and Spada text on ESOL classroom observation, and read the appropriate WIDA standards for the student chosen for observation). Students will edit the notes, add some reflections, and post them to BlazeView late in the term. This document is relatively brief, perhaps three to four pages.

For both the linguistic analysis and the observation, students are responsible for locating ELLs. Often the best way to find ELLs with whom to work is to contact elementary, middle, or high schools directly, explain that you are working on your endorsement, and ask if you can tutor or engage a student in English conversation for practice. Schools are usually happy to give people a chance to help their English language learners. The instructor will provide students with a letter supporting your request.

Notes on the observation of an ELL aren’t due until the end of the course, but the instructor strongly encourages students to complete the observation long before that due date.

12. DRAFTS OF PORTIONS OF LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS: As students draft their linguistic analyses, the instructor will invite students to post drafts of portions to BlazeView. These are optional drafts, but they are strongly encouraged and will be awarded 2.5 points each if they seem to the instructor to be bona fide attempts at the target. The instructor will either make individual or group comments on the drafts. These, then, are formative assessments.

13. QUIZZES: There will be 15 quizzes posted on BlazeView to reinforce key concepts from readings.  These objective quizzes will be worth 1 point each and must be taken by the deadline (there will be no excuses as answers will be provided as soon as the quizzes are scored). Do these quizzes individually: do not collaborate.  Certainly class members may study together, but don’t collaborate on the quizzes. 

14. LECTURES, EXERCISES, AND ATTENDANCE: As the schedule below indicates, the instructor anticipates running the course in a two-part system: the instructor will (almost always on Thursdays) introduce an area of linguistics with a lecture (with questions and discussion as well).  Then Tuesdays will be devoted to in-class exercises and activities designed to bring concepts to life and test students’ understanding of readings.  Because much of the material in an introductory linguistics course strikes students as new and difficult, faithful attendance is crucial, and students will be awarded up to 5 points for it on this scale: 0-2 absences: 5 points; 3 absences: 4 points; 4 absences: 2 points. There are no excused absences.

15. EXTRA CREDIT POINTS: Because the course has much to cover, it will spend only two weeks introducing English and contrastive phonology and the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA).  This isn’t enough time for students to master the IPA, so the class will continue to work on the IPA throughout the term.  The instructor will provide words to transcribe into IPA, and students who wish to continue to practice their transcribing skills will submit their attempts weekly (via BlazeView) for extra credit/make-up points. 

In order to complete International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) exercises on Word and in order to use IPA symbols in their linguistic analyses, students must choose Lucida Sans Unicode for their font. Lucida Sans Unicode provides access to all the consonant and vowel symbols (IPA symbols and alternates) students might need in transcriptions.  Other fonts—the instructor believes—aren’t complete.

16. GRADUATE STUDENTS: As outcome v. above indicates, graduate students (enrolled in ESOL 6010) are required to complete an annotated bibliography of articles or book chapters on a line of research in second language acquisition.  This must be submitted as a part of the linguistic analysis and will be scored with the last two criteria in the scoring rubric (see below). 

Depending on the length of the chapters and articles annotated, the bibliography should include eight to twelve items.  Alphabetize entries according to the last name of the first author, provide the full bibliographic information in either MLA or APA form, and then present a 100- to 200-word summary of the most salient points of the work with respect to this course’s linguistic analysis and/or the observation of the ELL: concentrate on what the chapter or article has to say about PK-12 ELLs.

Some of these sources may be cited in the linguistic analysis and listed in the works cited (MLA) or list or references (APA). 

17. CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION: Students can communicate with the instructor in a number of different ways:

·         Students may meet with the instructor during his office hours or by appointment.  The instructor lives in the Tampa Bay area, so he is usually on campus only T, W, and R.

·         For private communications (private questions, problems, emergencies, and so on), students may use his BlazeNet email account (address at top of this syllabus)--not BlazeView mail.

·         For questions about the course, its requirements, and assignments--questions that other students might be interested in--the instructor will create a discussion area on BlazeView. Please use the discussion area (not the instructor’s BlazeNet email) if you have a question about the course that doesn’t concern a private matter. Other students might benefit from reading the reply.

·         The proposal and drafts will be posted to discussion boards on BlazeView.  The instructor will comment there and students may reply.

·         For extra credit work, the instructor will ask that students submit transcriptions by attachment via BlazeView mail. Use a Word document—not Works—in Lucida Sans Unicode font. The instructor will post answers to BlazeView.

·         The instructor will create a gradebook on BlazeView in which students will be able to check their scores on the various assignments as they are released. Just click on My Grades.

·         Students must upload their linguistic analysis to LiveText at the end of the term in order for it to be assessed according to the scoring rubric below.

18. TENTATIVE SCHEDULE: The following schedule of readings and due dates is tentative; class members are expected to keep up with changes announced in class.  How English Works is abbreviated HEW; How Languages Are Learned is abbreviated HLL.

  • Week 1
    T Aug 18 Introduction to course and applied linguistics
    R Aug 20 Lecture on HEW 1 and 2—“A Language like English” and “Language and Authority”

  • Week 2
    T Aug 25 Exercises and activities on HEW 1 and 2
    Complete quiz 1 by W, August 26
    R Aug 27 Lecture on HEW 3—“English Phonology”

  • Week 3
    T Sep 01 Exercises and activities on HEW 3
    Complete quiz 2 by W, September 2
    R Sep 03 Lecture on HEW 3—“English Phonology”

  • Week 4
    T Sep 08 Exercises and activities on HEW 3
    Complete quiz 3 by W, September 9
    R Sep 10 Lecture on HEW 4—“English Morphology” and Understanding the WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards: A Resource Guide (pages RG9-RG33)

  • Week 5
    T Sep 15 Exercises and activities on HEW 4 and Understanding the WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards: A Resource Guide (pages RG9-RG33)
    Complete quiz 4 by W, September 16
    R Sep 17 Lecture on HEW 5—“English Syntax: the Grammar of Words”; post proposal of linguistic analysis to BlazeView

  • Week 6
    T Sep 22 Exercises and activities on HEW 5
    Complete quiz 5 by W, September 23

    R Sep 24 Lecture on HEW 6—“English Syntax: Phrases, Clauses, and Sentences”

  • Week 7
    T Sep 29 Exercises and activities on HEW 6
    Complete quiz 6 by W, September 30

    R Oct 01 Lecture on HEW 7—“Semantics” and Performance Definitions for WIDA's Levels of English Language Proficiency

  • Week 8
    T Oct 06 Exercises and activities on HEW 7 and Performance Definitions for WIDA's Levels of English Language Proficiency
    Complete quiz 7 by W, October 7
    R Oct 08 Lecture on HEW 8—“Spoken Discourse,” English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 5, and English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Grade 6 through Grade 12

  • Week 9
    T Oct 13 Exercises and activities on HEW 8, English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 5, and English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners in Grade 6 through Grade 12
    Complete quiz 8 by W, October 14
    R Oct 15 Exercises and activities on HEW 8; post draft of contextual background and transcription to BlazeView

  • Week 10
    T Oct 20 No class: fall break
    Complete quiz 9 by W, October 21
    R Oct 22 Lecture on HLL 1—“Language Learning in Early Childhood” and HEW 10—“Language Acquisition”

  • Week 11
    T Oct 27 Exercises and activities on HLL 1 and HEW 10
    Complete quiz 10 by W, October 28

    R Oct 29 Lecture on HLL 2 and 3—“Explaining Second Language Learning” and “Individual Differences in Second Language Learning”

  • Week 12
    T Nov 03 Exercises and activities on HLL 2 and 3”
    Complete quiz 11 by W, November 4
    R Nov 05 Lecture on HLL 4 and 5—“Learner Language” and “Observing Learning and Teaching in the Second Language Classroom; post draft of discussion of phonology, morphology, and syntax to BlazeView

  • Week 13
    T Nov 10 Exercises and activities on HLL 4 and 5
    Complete quiz 12 by W, November 11
    R Nov 12 Lecture on HLL 6 and 7—“Second Language Learning in the Classroom” and “Popular Ideas about Language Learning Revisited”; post draft of communicative competence, pragmatics, and vocabulary to BlazeView

  • Week 14
    T Nov 17 Exercises and activities on HLL 6 and 7;
    Complete quiz 13 by W, November 18
    R Nov 19 Lecture on HEW 11—“Language Variation”

  • Week 15
    T Nov 24 Exercises and activities on HEW 11; post linguistic analysis to LiveText
    R Nov 26 No class: Thanksgiving

  • Week 16
    Complete quiz 14 by M, November 30
    T Dec 01 Lecture on HEW 12—“American Dialects”
    R Dec 03 Exercises and activities on HEW 12; post observation of ELL to BlazeView

  • Week 17
    Complete quiz 15 by M, December 7
    R Dec 10 No in-class final exam: complete comprehensive final exam on BlazeView by 11:59 PM

 

19. SCORING RUBRIC FOR LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS: The following rubric will be used to score the linguistic analysis.  Its criteria are based on the WIDA performance definitions for levels of English language proficiency.

 

 

Target (5 pts)

Acceptable (3 pts)

Unacceptable (1 pt)

Contextual background

Targeted performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s awareness of impact of a full range of contextual factors on language development, e.g., age, language background, educational background, quality of input, and exposure.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s awareness of the impact of at least three contextual factors on language development.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks sufficient detail of contextual information related to language development.

Phonological variation and language control

Targeted performance is evidenced by candidate’s ability to fully understand, describe, and compare English phonology and the phonological system of the language learner’s L1 and to assess learner’s control of English phonology.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s ability to understand, describe, and compare some features of English phonology and the phonological system of the language learner’s L1 and to adequately assess learner’s control of English phonology.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks detail or is partly inaccurate. It is unclear whether or not the candidate understands the features of English phonology or the system of the language learner’s L1 and can assess phonological control. 

Suprasegmental phonology and language control

Targeted performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s ability to understand, describe, and compare several suprasegmental features of English, such as tone, pitch, stress, and loudness, and the features of the learner’s L1 and to assess learner’s control of English suprasegmentals.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s ability to identify language leaner’s use of one or more suprasegmental features of English and to adequately assess learner’s control of English suprasegmentals. 

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks detail and fails to identify suprasegmental features in learner language.

Morphological variation and language control

Targeted performance is evidenced by candidate’s ability to fully understand, describe, and compare English morphology and the morphological system of the learner’s L1 and to assess learner’s control of English morphology.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s ability to understand, compare and describe some features of English morphology and the morphological system of the learner’s L1 and to adequately assess learner’s control of English morphology.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks detail or is partly inaccurate. It is unclear whether or not the candidate understands the morphological features of English and is able to describe systematic errors made by language learners in a given sample.

Syntactic variation, language control, and linguistic complexity

Targeted performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates the candidate’s ability to fully understand, describe, and compare English syntax and the syntactic system of the learner’s L1 and to assess learner’s control of English syntax and learner’s use of structures appropriate to specific genres.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates the candidate’s ability to understand, describe, and compare some aspects of English syntax and the system of the learner’s L1 and to adequately assess learner’s control of English syntax and learner’s use of structures appropriate to specific genres.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks sufficient detail or is partly inaccurate. It is unclear whether or not the candidate understands English syntax or is able to describe syntactical errors made by English language learners.

 

Idiomatic speech and communicative competence

Targeted performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates candidate’s ability to fully describe learner’s comprehension  and use of idiomatic speech and assess degree to which learner achieves communicative competence.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis in which the candidate attempts to describe one or more instances of the learner’s comprehension and use of idiomatic speech. Candidate may fail to link idiomatic speech of the learner to communicative competence.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that omits a discussion of the language learner’s comprehension or use of idiomatic speech, or it is unclear that the candidate understands the concepts of idiomatic speech and communicative competence.

 

Pragmatic and sociolinguistic features of learner speech

Targeted performance is evidenced by an analysis that demonstrates the candidate’s ability to analyze several pragmatic or sociolinguistic features of language learner’s speech and relate these to communicative competence.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis in which the candidate identifies and analyzes at least two pragmatic or sociolinguistic features of speech and discusses their relationship to communicative competence and language proficiency.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks sufficient detail concerning pragmatic and sociolinguistic features, is partly inaccurate, and fails to discuss relationship of features to communicative competence.

 

Vocabulary

Targeted performance is evidenced by a candidate’s ability to fully describe a learner’s vocabulary, both conversational and academic.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis in which the candidate analyzes only one aspect of a learner’s vocabulary, conversational or academic.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis that lacks sufficient detail.  It is unclear whether candidate considered vocabulary or is aware of different types.

 

Depth of description and analysis

Targeted performance is evidenced by candidate’s thorough description and analysis of learner language and a detailed, complete transcription. Candidate uses many examples from the transcript to support conclusions about language proficiency based on the WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards.

Acceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis of learner language that is sufficiently detailed but which could be more thorough. Transcript is complete, though there may be some inaccuracies. Appropriate terminology is sometimes used to describe learner language. Candidate provides some examples from the transcript to support conclusions about the language learner’s proficiency based on the WIDA ELP standards.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by an analysis of learner language that lacks detail and that is too often inaccurate.  Appropriate terminology is seldom use to describe learner language and the candidate provides few examples from the transcript to support conclusions about the learner’s proficiency and fails to base conclusions on WIDA ELP standards.

 

Adherence to conventions

Targeted performance is evidenced by the presentation of a paper that closely follows academic conventions concerning format, citation of sources, style, and mechanics. 

Acceptable performance is evidenced by the presentation of a paper that sometimes deviates from academic conventions but whose deviations are relatively minor.

Unacceptable performance is evidenced by the presentation of a paper that generally does not adhere to academic conventions concerning format, citation of sources, style, and mechanics.

 

 

20. ACCESS: Class members requiring course accommodations or modifications because of a documented disability should discuss this need with the instructor at the beginning of the semester. Class members who require assistance but who are not registered with the Special Services Program should contact the Access Office.