english language assessment guide 2017 2018 - … · assessment guide: english 2017/2018 4 1.1 the...

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT GUIDE

2017-2018

Assessment Guide: English 2017/2018 2

Contents 1 Overview and Rationale 1.1 The two modes of assessment 1.2 Key principles of assessment 2 Materials available to support the assessment process 3 Alignment to the CEFR 4 Summative Assessment 4.1 Group A and Group B subjects 4.2 SIS 4.3 Continuous Assessment 5 End-of-Term Exams – Listening: Exam Day Procedures 5.1 Before the exam 5.2 Role of invigilators 5.3 Conducting the exam 5.4 Exam incidents 5.5 Marking the exam 6 End-of-Term Exams – Speaking 6.1 Speaking exam logistics 6.2 Speaking test procedure – conduct of the exam 6.3 Speaking test marking – using the rubrics 7 End-of-Term Reading-Writing Exams 7.1 Exam responsibility 7.2 Before examination day 7.3 On-day examination procedures 7.4 Classroom arrangements 7.5 Role of invigilators 7.6 Examination incidents 7.7 Online examinations 7.8 Marking the reading exam 7.9 Writing marking processes and procedures 7.10 Marking the writing exam – using the rubrics 8 SMME 8.1 Rationale behind SMME 8.2 Speaking standardisation 8.2.1 Internal standardisation sessions 8.2.2 Internal moderation 8.2.3 ADU SMME report 8.3 Writing SMME 8.3.1 Standardisation 8.3.2 Internal moderation 8.3.3 ADU SMME report 8.4 SMME: Continuous Assessment – Assessed Projects 8.4.1 Pop Quizzes 8.5 External moderation – ADU audits 9 Student Absence Policy 10 SEN Policy 11 EmSAT English 12 Formative Assessment 12.1 Defining formative assessment 12.2 Formative – Assessment ‘as’ Learning 12.2.1 Working with rubrics formatively 12.2.2 Using can-do statements 12.2.3 Setting targets 12.3 Formative – Assessment ‘for’ Learning 13 M&E (Monitoring & Evaluation) 14 ADU Contacts

3 4 5 7 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 15 16 18 23 23 23 23 24 24 26 27 27 27 28 32 32 33 33 34 34 35 35 36 37 37 38 39 39 40 41 42 42 42 42 44 45 45 46 46


1 Overview and Rationale The assessment framework has been designed to work in conjunction with the new curriculum being introduced across all grades. The primary objective of the assessment framework is to improve the standard of English teaching, learning and achievement in UAE schools. The means by which it aims to do this are:

setting standards and expectations for English achievement in line with the

standards expected in both other countries and in the modern, globalised

knowledge economy.

motivating students to achieve the learning outcomes of the curriculum in

order to pass exams which meet international standards.

pushing a culture of assessment-led teaching which is balanced between

standard end-of-learning exams, project-based performance tasks and in-

class continual formative assessment of individual students.

utilising assessment as a feedback tool – giving honest feedback to

students/parents as to their current level, progress, strengths and

weaknesses as well as giving feedback on the effectiveness of teachers and

schools in achieving the required standard.

allowing for positive washback into the lessons such that the nature of

upcoming assessments and the focus on working towards them is compatible

with pedagogically-proven methodologies of student-centred, communicative

and collaborative teaching as well as the teaching of effective learning

strategies.

providing effective, reliable and informative rubrics for marking which not only

allow assessors to provide accurate assessments of students’ English skills

but can also be utilised as a tool for formative assessment to let students

know which areas they need to improve.

balancing the focus of assessments so that both assessment and teaching

can focus on effective communicative and language skills, and not just

knowledge of the language.

providing continual support in training, monitoring, moderating and post-exam

analysis so that all MOE staff are knowledgeable of, supportive of and

supported by the new assessment framework and can be part of the

discussions around its effectiveness and future progression.


1.1 The two modes of assessment Assessment in any system can generally be divided into two main categories – summative and formative. Summative assessment is what we might traditionally think of as ‘tests’ or ‘exams,’ and will typically involve either a paper-based exam or a performance task which results in a mark and/or a grade. They test the product of learning over a specified course of time and so, for this reason, are usually placed at the end of the term (though this framework also includes continuous assessment tasks through the term). Summative assessment is an important tool to assess the degree to which learning has taken place, progress on the part of individual students, and which aspects of learning need extra attention. In this framework, summative assessment is achieved through two branches, which are seen as two separate columns in the Student Information System (SIS): Continuous Assessment – these are tests or tasks which are graded and assessed by the teacher throughout the term; for example pop quizzes, projects, portfolio work, etc. Exam – these are taken on centrally mandated days and times. In line with most international English assessments, the exams will cover the four skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing. These four skills will be equally weighted towards students’ final grade, despite any differences in numbers of marks available. Formative assessment, on the other hand, is the constant assessment and analysis of a student’s strengths, struggles and progress that should occur in every lesson throughout the entire course of learning. As such, formative assessment is not given in the form of tests or by giving scores but largely revolves around the management of feedback to the student so as to best foster success in future learning and evaluation (for which previous summative assessments will be a useful tool in giving such feedback). Whereas summative assessment evaluates the product of learning (what have you learnt?), formative assessment focuses on the process of learning (how are you learning?). Aspects that come under formative assessment may include not just performance in classroom tasks and declaration of knowledge (i.e. answering questions correctly, using taught language in group tasks) but also general classroom participation and attitude to learning, as well as more cognitive aspects such as use of learning strategies and techniques. In addition, since learning is a cumulative process, formative assessment should include evaluation of how much a student reapplies language taught previously in the class to current classroom tasks (rather than solely focusing on the objective for the current lesson). This framework will provide a range of tools, suggestions and strategies for achieving effective formative assessment, largely under the ‘Assessment for Learning’ philosophy.


1.2 Key principles of assessment There are four key elements to assessment which should inform any design of both summative assessment programmes and a complementary formative assessment programme. These are:

Reliability A good way to sum up reliability in a test is ‘if two or more markers mark the same exam, their scores will be the same or, at least, very similar.’ In other words, it is about trying to remove subjective feeling in marking as much as possible from assessment and using objective criteria. In the case of assessing receptive skills, this could be in the form of questions which only have one right answer. In the case of productive skills, there should be very clear criteria for marking; with objective quantification and exemplification, so that groups of markers can agree upon a score. In other words, teachers should not be judging or using marking rubrics subjectively since there should be clear enough descriptors in the rubric that they can be factually matched with the student’s performance. Subjective variance in how markers and marking schemes treat different students creates institutional unfairness when applied on a national scale. This is also important because we aim for our assessments to have external reliability, whereby the scores we give the students on their exams – when matched against their expected CEFR level – are a reliable indicator of that level and how they will perform in external exams. For example, if students are taking, say, a Grade 12 exam pitched at a B2.1 level, then those students who pass that test (all of them and only them) also would obtain e.g. a 5.5 in IELTS or a 1250 in EmSAT. Without reliability in both pitching of assessment and marking, this cross-comparison judgement is not possible.

Validity

This is the concept that assessments should truly be assessing the authentic, real-world language skills that students will need; and that exams should be assessing what they purport to assess (i.e. a speaking exam should not involve the students having to write something). Assessment needs to be matched to learning outcomes which reflect true 21st century language needs and goals; and the most effective assessment tools need to be chosen to truly ascertain whether students can demonstrate those skills and outcomes (without unknowably crossing over into other learning outcomes).

Practicality

As assessment designers work to create highly valid and reliable assessments, they must also think through the practical implications and how realistic they are to achieve for schools and institutions in terms of ability to mark the papers, number of students, time constraints on marking, etc. – and thus adjust or offer training as necessary and viable.


Backwash/ Washback

Whatever the nature of the assessment framework, it is also essential to think what impact it will have on the classroom teaching both preceding and following it. An assessment framework should motivate students to participate well in class, self-evaluate, and push for best performance. Conversely, a poorly designed and unrealistic assessment framework can have devastating effects on student motivation and confidence and thus erode the whole purpose of learning. In addition, it should be considered whether practising and training for the tests still allows classroom practice which focuses on good pedagogical principles, such as collaborative and communicative learning and the practising of authentic language skills. Finally, the assessment framework is also designed to take into consideration critical thinking and 21st century skills which the Ministry are extremely keen to promote in order to help develop students into independent, critical citizens prepared to take on the challenges of the 21st century knowledge economy. Thus, with progress up the grades and through the year, students will be asked to demonstrate a range of such skills in assessment – including aspects such as the ability to take the lead in discussions, to discuss ideas from different perspectives, to infer ideas or implied meaning from the context, and to collaborate on producing and presenting original ideas and designs.


2 Materials available to support the assessment process As assessment is an extremely high-stakes aspect of the educational model, with huge amounts riding on its smooth implementation and integrity, it is essential that teachers feel fully supported with information and materials. To this end, the ADU will provide the field with the following supporting materials. Please note that all of the below will be available on Sharepoint (under English > Assessment). If you have any issues accessing Sharepoint, please contact the Service Desk at [email protected]. Once fully updated, the following will be available:

this assessment guide which provides a complete overview of all aspects of

the new assessment system; both summative and formative

test specifications for all tests, to indicate the type of questions, topics and

tasks covered to help prepare for exams

timetables and timings for all scheduled exams

rubrics to be used in marking writing and speaking sections of exams

guides, lesson plans, rubrics and materials for the assessed projects

sample exams, including tips and strategies to help student training

various resources to be used in enrichment, intervention, Saturday and

masterclass sessions to help prepare students for the EmSAT exam

training for Lead Teachers on how to support schools in implementing all

aspects of the new assessment system

SMME materials and training for all schools – training teachers on the

standardisation in using rubrics, marking procedures and in the role of the

ADU in moderating exams

guidance and supporting training/materials on the formative assessment

strategy for schools which will be a core focus this year

official documentation and forms for you to keep appropriate records of

assessment

In addition, the ADU team will be conducting regular school visits – both announced and unannounced – to moderate exams, provide support and guidance for schools, observe examples of formative assessment in action and conduct general monitoring and evaluation of the assessment framework in the field.

mailto:[email protected]


3 Alignment to the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference) The curriculum and assessment frameworks have been devised in alignment with the CEFR [Common European Framework of Reference]. The CEFR is a framework against which to benchmark language proficiency.

General description EmSAT score IELTS bands

Alignment of CEFR to MOE’s intended Grade attainment

C2 Highly proficient – can use English very fluently, precisely and sensitively in most contexts

>2000 8.5-9.0

C1 Able to use English fluently and flexibly in a wide range of contexts

1625-1975 7.0-8.0

B2 Can use English effectively, with some fluency, in a range of contexts

1250-1600 5.5-6.5

B1 Can communicate essential points and ideas in familiar contexts

875-1225 4.0-5.0

A2 Can communicate in English within a limited range of contexts

500-850 3.0-3.5

A1 Can communicate in basic English with help from the listener

125-475 2.0-2.5

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

B2.2

B2.1

B1.2

B1.1

A2.2

A2.1

A1.2

A1.1

Pre-A1.2

Pre-A1.1

Grade Target level


4 Summative Assessment

4.1 Group A and Group B Subjects Subjects in the UAE’s national curriculum are divided into Group A and Group B subjects. Group A subjects are core subjects which students need to pass to move onto the next Grade (except for in Grades 1-3 when students automatically move on). Group A subjects have a pass rate of 50% (for the year mark) for Grades 4-9 and 60% for Grades 10-12. Students are given an opportunity to take resit exams at the end of the year for Group A subjects that they have failed. The Group A subjects which fall under the EMI department’s responsibility for assessment are:

English (Grades 1-12)

ASP Maths (Grades 6-9)

ASP Science (Grades 6-8)

ASP Physics/Chemistry/Biology (Grade 9)

Health Science (Girls) (Grades 10-12) Group B subjects are subjects which have no minimum pass mark (i.e. you can be awarded an ‘F’ grade but you do not need to take a resit exam nor does your score prevent you moving on to the next Grade); though these subjects do count towards a student’s grade point average. The Group B subjects which fall under the EMI department’s responsibility for assessment are:

Physical and Health Education (Grades 1-12)

Design and Technology (Grades 4-9)

Creative Design and Innovation (Grades 10-12)

Computer Sciences (Grades 10-12)

Business Management (Grades 10-12)

Life Skills (Boys) (Grades 10-11) As a Group A subject, the weighting of continuous assessment and the exams for English in terms of the overall year’s grade are:

Grades 1-3: 70% Continuous Assessment, 30% Exams

Grades 4-12: 30% Continuous Assessment, 70% Exams

Across the three terms this works out as: English

Grades 1-3

Term 1

Term 2

Term 3

20% Cont. 10% Exam

25% Cont. 10% Exam

25% Cont. 10% Exam

Grades 4-12

Term 1

Term 2

Term 3

10% Cont. 35% Exam

10% Cont.

10% Cont. 35% Exam


4.2 SIS (Student Information System) This is the student gradebook where you will enter the grades for your students. The gradebook has been programmed in line with the assessment weightings for each grade’s subjects. Each class has its own room, in which you will see the students and columns in which to enter their scores. These columns will fall under the two main parent categories of ‘Continuous Assessment’ and ‘Exam’. Underneath these parent categories you will see columns for their assessment tools – e.g. ‘project’, ‘pop quizzes’, etc. under Continuous Assessment; ‘Listening’, ‘Speaking’, ‘Reading’ and ‘Writing’ under Exam. Typically, teachers will be responsible for entering the marks into the Continuous Assessment category. This will need to be completed at least two working days before the start of the end-of-term exam period. This is because the Continuous Assessment sections for all subjects need to be filled and subsequently approved/closed by school administration before the exam columns can be opened for mark entry. The columns under the Exam category are typically filled in by school administration. It is the responsibility of Lead Teachers to ensure that all marks which are entered and approved into the SIS are an accurate reflection of the marks awarded by teachers for assessment. If any errors have been made in entering marks, teachers should liaise with the assessment directorate to request a score change. If lead teachers have any concerns that marks are being systematically entered incorrectly, they should immediately contact an ADU member to report it.

4.3 Continuous Assessment The tools which are used to award the marks for Continuous Assessment are under constant monitoring and evaluation and, as so, are subject to change each term. Towards the end of each term you will be contacted by the RDU (Research Development Unit) so that you can give feedback on the Continuous Assessment tools and strategies; and at the start of each term you will receive guidance and supporting materials for that term’s Continuous Assessment through Sharepoint. Another aspect of Continuous Assessment that teachers should be aware of is pop quizzes. These are to be delivered using an online system and will be twice weekly for English language. Initially, the score which will be entered into SIS will be reflective of pop quizzes completed, rather than correct answers obtained – in order to motivate participation and since these pop quizzes should be used more formatively rather than summatively. The online learning system will produce a report with this information. Where paper pop quizzes are used, please keep a record of absent or non-participating students. See also section 8.4 for procedures around marking and moderating continuous assessment.


5 End-of-Term Exams – Listening Exam Day Procedures As part of each end-of-term exam, students from each grade will take part in a listening exam. This may be done in a separate sitting to the final reading-writing exam or it may be done in the same setting. If the listening exams are being conducted during a different period to the final exams, then you will receive a timetable with dates and timings – it is an obligation to conduct listening exams to this timetable. 5.1 Before the exam Ensure the classrooms are ready with all resources required, this includes the audio system, whiteboard pens and spare pens for the students. Please note, it is the responsibility of all schools to ensure that the room(s) used for listening exams are:

a. equipped with suitable audio equipment (e.g. laptop, speakers, software to play MP3s such as Windows Media Player) to play the audio files

b. invigilated by personnel who are prepared, willing and capable to facilitate proper playing of the audio files

The seating arrangements should be set up in a way that will help prevent students from cheating and copying. This is something that will depend on the differing facilities within schools but requires attention and imagination and can be done in collaboration between principals and English coordinators. You may wish to try staggering the chairs or turning them outwards in ways that students cannot directly see each others’ papers. On the morning of the exam, the listening exam paper and the audio for the relevant Grades will be released via the SIS. Those responsible for the exams should:

print off sufficient exam papers for the students (in colour for Grades 1-6).

download all the audio files

use a USB memory stick to transfer the relevant audio files to computers in any rooms where the exam is being conducted

test the files and speakers quickly and discretely to check they are working and clear for those sitting at the back


5.2 Role of invigilators The role of the exam invigilators is an extremely important one. There are many things that an exam invigilator is responsible for which are detailed below.

Invigilators must report to the class they are invigilating in 5 minutes before the exam time.

Ensure all belongings are placed away from the students, this includes mobile phones which should be switched off and put in the students’ bags or whichever system individual schools use for mobile phones during exams. Check that students have no sheets of notes on or near their person.

Ensure exams are in the room in a sealed envelope with the register of students [filled or blank] and 3-4 copies of the exam incident report.

Complete the register at the start of the exam.

Ensure students use blue pen and not pencil to complete the exam. 5.3 Conducting the exam:

Once all students are seated and quiet, the invigilator distributes the exam papers to the students.

Invigilators monitor that students are filling in the following information correctly: name in English, student ID number, and class.

When students are ready to start, press play on the file. There is no need to give students time to look at the questions, or to play the recording twice, as both of these aspects are included within the audio.

The audio file will end with “This is the end of the listening test”. After you hear this, you may give the class two extra minutes to check their answers.

No one is allowed to enter or leave the class – even for bathroom breaks – once the file is playing.

The invigilators are not allowed to give the students any assistance whatsoever other than ensuring they write their names, section and ID number correctly.

Once the listening exam is over, the invigilators should ensure that all exam materials from the students have been collected and put back in the exam envelope. Laptops with audio on should be removed from the room and stored securely.


5.4 Exam incidents

Complete the Exam Incident Form (available in the ‘School Documentation Pack’ on the Sharepoint) for any incidents during the exam. Each incident should have a separate form.

Students who you suspect of cheating should be allowed to finish the exam, with a note made on the top of the paper. Students suspected of cheating should remain in the room, with the exception of serious misconduct such as consistent talking or giving answers to other students. In this case students should be moved to a separate pre-arranged room to complete the exam away from the other students.

In a case where a student falls ill during the exam the invigilators should remove the student from the room as discretely as possible and be escorted by the hall monitor to a place where the student can receive help.

In a case where a student is disrupting the exam audio by making noise, they should be removed from the exam room and complete the exam away from other students.

5.5 Marking the exam

Listening can be marked using the answer key which will be provided at a specified time after the exam has finished, through SIS.

All questions are worth one mark. In cases of matching, true-false or multiple choice questions, the response must be the same as the answer key to be marked correctly. Please notify the relevant Grade member in the ADU immediately if you believe you have found an error in the answer key.

In the case of gap-fills or short-answer questions, the answer must match that given in the answer key precisely to be awarded the mark (e.g. it should not contain three words where only one has been asked for). However, marks should still be awarded in the case of spelling mistakes where the answer can clearly be interpreted as the correct one.

Exams should not be marked by the teacher of that class, and preferably teachers of other grades. Schools should arrange to swap exam envelopes between teachers in order to facilitate this.

Once exams have been marked, the raw score should be entered into the ‘Listening’ column in the SIS. However, ensure you always create a spreadsheet record of scores as a backup in case of difficulties.


6 End-of-Term Exams – Speaking Rather than have specific grades scheduled for specific days and times, for speaking exams schools will instead be instructed of a centrally mandated period in which they must complete their speaking exams. The Speaking exam consists of 2 parts, which are summarised below:

Setup

Part 1 Part 2

Grade 1 1:1 Asking questions about a picture

Asking personal questions

Grade 2 1:1 Asking questions about a picture

Asking personal questions

Grade 3 1:1 Asking personal questions

Asking questions about a picture


Asking questions about a picture

Grade 5 Students in pairs Asking personal questions

Student-student interaction (using picture prompts)








Student-student interaction (using oral prompts)






Student-examiner interaction (based on examiner prompt)

The topics of the speaking exams will cover a range of topics within the coverage of that term’s exam. The timing of the exam is summarised below. Note that the maximum time is greater to accommodate students entering-leaving, instructions and the recording of scores. Please keep a stopwatch handy during the exam to ensure these maximum timings are kept to. At the same time, do not reduce the timing of the exams as you are disadvantaging students by doing so. In cases where students do not seem willing to say anything, give them at least 1 minute at each part before moving onto the next part or closing the exam. Having a smooth transition of students in and out of the speaking tests, while sticking to these timings, will ease the logistics of conducting speaking exams.


Speaking – maximum per part (from first question)

Speaking – maximum time overall

Total time needed for each class for speaking exams [based on maximum of 35 students]

Grade 1 1 Minutes 3 Minutes 2 Hours




Grade 5 1.5 Minutes 4.5 Minutes 1 hour 30 minutes * in pairs

Grade 6 1.5 Minutes 4.5 Minutes 1 hour 30 minutes * in pairs

Grade 7 2 Minutes 5.5 Minutes 2 Hours * in pairs

Grade 8 2 Minutes 5.5 Minutes 2 Hours * in pairs

Grade 9 2.5 Minutes 7 Minutes 2 Hours 30 Minutes * in pairs



Grade 12 2.5 Minutes 7 Minutes 4 Hours 30 Minutes

6.1 Speaking exam logistics

Schools must assign timings to students for their speaking exams. If students miss their exam time, they should be given reminders and the school should keep a record of the number of reminders given. Students who do not take their speaking exam during the specified period will not get an opportunity to resit.

The LT should implement a system in the school that ensures that students

are forewarned of the dates of all speaking examinations. Some possible

ideas for such a system could include:

o Requiring students in each class to sign a form/letter that notifies them

of the dates and timings for speaking examinations.

o A student and parent accessible English Department academic

planner.

o Posters in classrooms displaying dates and times for speaking

examinations.

Schools should ensure that a quiet space to conduct the speaking exams is provided. The students should wait in groups in a designated waiting room – a spare nearby classroom for smaller groups or an auditorium for larger groups. Ideally, a monitor should be available to escort students. As one student / student-pair goes in for their exam, the next student / student-pair should be brought from the waiting room and asked to wait quietly outside the examining room. Once the current candidate(s) have finished their exam, the next candidate(s) can enter the room as soon as the examiner is ready to receive them. Finally, the monitor should then ensure that students who have finished their exam leave the area where the exams are conducted, not communicating with any students who are yet to complete the exam.


6.2 Speaking test procedure – conduct of the exam

For all exams, best practice would be to have two members of staff conducting the exams: an interlocutor who asks the exam questions (this could be the class’s usual teacher, to allow familiarity) and an assessor who sits silently and uses the speaking rubric to grade the students (this should not be the class’s usual teacher). If staffing the exams makes this unfeasible, experienced speaking examiners who have shown reliable marking through moderated exams in the previous term may sit as interlocutor and assessor (so long as they are not examining their own class).

To start the test, the examiners should greet the student and help them feel at ease, ensure their full name is captured on the recording, then use the introductory prompt above the Part 1 questions. Interlocutors should remain friendly and patient throughout to help put students at ease.

For Part 1 of the exam (Part 2 for Grades 1 and 2), interlocutors should pick questions at random (trying to cover all available questions across a whole class; and ensuring to rotate questions so consecutive students are not asked the same ones) from the table provided. The initial question should be asked first. For Grades 1-4 a back-up question is also provided in case students need more support. For Grades 5-12, the back-up question is provided in brackets underneath the initial question and, again, is only to be used if students need support. For these grades, a follow-up question is included to be asked after each initial question.

When students are in pairs, interlocutors should alternate the initial questions between them. In addition, after each follow-up question they should turn to the other student and ask “And you? / What do you think?”

In Part 1 of the exam for Grades 1-2 and Part 2 for Grades 3-4, you are given a picture to show to the student and questions to ask them about it. For Grades 5-8, Part 2 consists of a picture prompt. These picture prompts are single pieces of paper with a set of pictures on them – which should be printed in full colour. For Grades 9-11, Part 2 consists of a series of brief oral instructions given by the examiner.

For all Grade 5-11 students, the aim of Part 2 is that they interact with each other, asking each other and answering questions. If students begin interacting with you as interlocutor, gently interrupt and ask them to speak with their partner. If necessary, continue to use prompts provided or – if necessary – your own brief prompts to keep students interacting with each other until the maximum time. In rare cases where one partner is not contributing at all to the conversation, you may ask the other student to give an extended description to their partner.………………………………….

For Grade 12 candidates, they are given a short prompt from the examiner and then it is their responsibility to keep the conversation going through asking questions and making suggestions. Please limit your responses to these questions to roughly 10 words. Interlocutors will have to use some


imagination and spontaneity here, improvising answers as they go along. Be careful not to give out much information with each response, continually leave space for the student to elicit more information. If the maximum time is approaching and they have only asked questions, prompt them to give some suggestions.

For most parts of the exam, unless suggested above, the examiner should ask each question as it is written in the speaking pack, not varying the wording given. The only exceptions are that you can give brief definitions of words on request, or, if a student’s intonation and body language suggests that they are giving a rote-memorised response, interrupt them to ask a question about what they have just said.

If the student does not immediately answer/understand the question, mentally count to 5 before using the back-up question provided in brackets underneath the initial question. It is imperative that you maximise opportunities for students to speak; do not interrupt candidates (unless interrupting a pre-memorised response) and allow them a few seconds of silence (if needed) to gather thoughts before speaking. ……………………………………………….

To ensure consistent testing, it is important to stick to maximum timings and leave questions if it means it will take you over. This may particularly be the case with strong, fluent candidates who give extended responses. In cases where candidates are giving such extended answers that it is likely to impact on exam conduct (e.g. very few questions being asked or, if in a pair, the other candidate getting little opportunity to speak) then interlocutors may gently interrupt the candidate to ask the next question. In addition, from Grade 5 up, please note that additional prompts in part 2 may not be necessary if the candidates are capable of freely and equally keeping the conversation going amongst themselves for the maximum time.

It is vital that interlocutors give no feedback to students within the exam in order to ensure fairness in assessment. This includes not responding to student answers with phrases like “very good”, “great”, “well done”, etc. nor should interlocutors suggest in any way – verbally or not – that a candidate’s response was weak or unclear. “Thank you” is a useful stock response to student’s contributions.

Some exam prompts may contain gaps e.g. “What do you like about _____?”; the idea is that these gaps are filled by referring to what the student has just said. In addition, some prompts give a choice of gender e.g. your brother/sister. In these cases, use the gender which matches with the candidate i.e. ask boys about ‘brothers’.

When students are required to respond to a picture prompt, the interlocutor

should ensure that the picture prompt is clearly presented to the student at the

appropriate time.


Ensure you are using the speaking rubric accurately and fairly to award students a mark – you must familiarise yourself with the rubrics and undergo speaking standardisation before the exam (for more details on standardisation and moderation of speaking exams please see the SMME section below).

After the candidate leaves, and before the next student comes in, please take a minute of the designated exam time to copy the marks across using the relevant paperwork, available as the ‘Speaking Exam Record’ in the ‘School Documentation’ pack. These records must be kept secure after the exam for moderation purposes.

All speaking exams must be recorded, with the student’s full name in the file name and legible in the recording. These recordings are to be used for the purpose of internal moderation by Lead Teachers and for external moderation during ADU audit visits. During both internal moderation and external moderation, a sample of high-scoring, mid-scoring and low-scoring students will be listened to in order to check the reliability and accuracy of the use of speaking rubrics. In addition, recording of exams is essential in the case of disputes over marks awarded. The LT will dictate how speaking examinations should be recorded and stored during the speaking examination period. All recording should be digitally stored in .mp3 format.

Once the exam period is over, teachers will be specified a deadline before which to enter the speaking marks into SIS. A ‘Speaking’ column is provided in SIS to put the score into.

6.3 Speaking test marking – using the rubrics As stated earlier, it is essential for an effective assessment system to be reliable – for different markers to give the same or very close marks for the same exam performance. This means that, when it comes to assessing speaking, teachers cannot just give – say – a mark out of 10 based on how they feel about a student’s performance or their own criteria. The solution to making open speaking assessment more reliable is to have specific marking rubrics and criteria which all assessors use. In addition, the rubrics need to be sufficiently clear and quantifiable so that exam performance can be clearly matched against them. Finally, rubrics can also be used formatively (see section 12.2.1 below) so that students know what they need to work towards and improve on. The rubrics are divided into four categories for speaking. These are designed to match with common criteria which external exams use. The rubrics are specifically weighted towards those aspects of procedural knowledge which are more likely to cause communicative success or miscommunication in speaking, rather than those which reflect more declarative knowledge. The four criteria are listed below; alongside the kind of questions which markers should be asking themselves internally as they listen to the candidate:


Communicative success

> Does the candidate confidently and appropriately answer the questions that the examiner is answering? > Does the candidate answer questions promptly or does the examiner have to wait for answers? > Does the examiner have to give support? (where support is defined as: having to repeat or rephrase questions, or make suggestions as to possible answers e.g. ‘what colour is this? … … is it red?’). > When there is misunderstanding, can the candidate use questions to help this? (e.g. “could you say again please?”) (from Grade 5 up) > Do they expand on their answers? Do they give reasons, examples or more details? Or do they only give the most basic short answers and need to be asked e.g. ‘why?’ ? > When working with a partner, can they create and equal and shared interaction? Do they ask questions and give relevant responses? Or, if their partner is a lower candidate, do they attempt to support them? Do they avoid dominating the conversation? (n.b. please take care only to assess candidates on their performance. If their partner is unhelpful or unresponsive, be prepared to award higher marks if clearly attempting to create an effective interaction. However, do NOT consider any support given to their partner in Arabic). (for Grade 10-12) > In long answers (‘talk for one to two minutes’), is it clearly organised with e.g. signposting words and concluding statements? > Do Grade 12 candidates attempt to interact with the examiner and involve them in the discussion?

Range and accuracy of language

(for Cycle 1) > Do they only answer in single words or attempt to use phrases (e.g. “Ahmed” or “My name is Ahmed”)? > Does the vocabulary used mean the answer to the question is correct? > In Grades 3 and 4, when using sentences do they use any different tenses and/or modal verbs if appropriate? (for Cycle 2 up) > Are they using accurate simple and compound sentences?


> Are they using accurate verb forms such as tenses or modals? > Are they using subordinate clauses to form complex sentences, such as conditionals and relative clauses? > How accurate is the grammar? Are there frequent grammatical mistakes? If there are mistakes, are they with basic grammar (e.g. subject-verb agreement) or with more complex grammar (e.g. use of tenses in hypothetical conditionals)? > Do they use a range of vocabulary? Do they use topic-specific vocabulary, that has been studied in the coursebook? Or do they rely on repeating vocabulary through their speech?

Pronunciation > Are the phonemes (e.g. the vowel and consonant sounds) pronounced correctly? Or, do they mix up e.g. /k/ and /g/, /p/ and /b/ or /i/ and /e/? > Do they use word stress correctly? e.g. say ‘APPle’ rather than ‘appLE’ or ‘inforMAtion’ rather than ‘inFORmation’? > Is there general rhythm and stress pattern natural and accurate across sentences? Do they use appropriate weak forms? Considerations here include: * stressing content words e.g. ‘I’d LIKE to GO’ rather than ‘I WOULD like TO go’ * using contracted forms e.g. ‘I’m EIGHT’ rather than ‘I AM EIGHT’ * chunking words together in a natural way e.g. ‘we-went to-the-beach’ rather than ‘then-we went-to the-beach’ > Do they use intonation to help carry their meaning e.g. going up to check understanding (‘how do you mean?’), showing surprise or enthusiasm (‘really? brilliant!’), or at higher levels carrying implied meaning (‘we could do that’ with implied doubt)? > Where there are errors in pronunciation, what effect do they have? Can you still understand the candidate easily? Or do you have to strain and focus more to follow?

Fluency > How confident do they appear when speaking English? Do they seem generally at ease when communicating? Or do they clearly demonstrate nerves, uncertainty, unease while communicating in English? What effect would their level of confidence speaking have on the person they are communicating with?


> While speaking, is there communication continually interrupted or slowed down by hesitations ‘ummmm… eeeerr….’ or repetitions “I like to, like to, to,to,..’? > Is the general pace and speed of their speech sufficiently natural? Or do they use slow speech to be able to continue talking while formulating thoughts? Alternatively, is the pace too fast? Would their pace of speaking require patience from the listener?

We recognise that this may be daunting at first for teachers/markers. In order to be reliable and to avoid ambiguity, the rubrics need to be quite detailed. However, ever-increasing practice and familiarity will make it quicker and easier to use these rubrics for marking. Here are some strategies and procedures for helping you use these: As you first start engaging in talk with a student, you will probably get a general holistic sense of their level compared to the level of their grade. This can help ‘orient’ yourself to the relevant part of the rubric. For example, a clearly strong student may mean you just need to compare bands 3 and 4 when choosing marks. To help, the bands have been designed with the idea that: > 4 = above the expected level of the Grade > 3 = clearly at the expected level of the Grade > 2 = nearly at / at the lower end of the expected level of the Grade > 1 = below the expected level of the Grade (where the expected level of the Grade can be seen in the matching CEFR level in section 3) Start the exam with some warmer questions to help not only put the candidate at ease but also, again, orient yourself to which bands of the rubric you are more likely to be choosing between. Try and listen to all aspects of their speech – picking out positive uses and inaccuracies – but you may also find it useful to move your focus at times so that you are particularly concentrating on e.g. their pronunciation, their grammar, etc. As hard and unnatural as it might seem, try and focus more on the delivery of what they are saying rather than the content of their speech itself. You may wish to make notes during the exam but if you wish to write down band scores, use coded symbols rather than numbers. Balancing exam delivery and assessment takes time and is difficult at first, which is why we recommend having a second teacher in the room who simply listens and notes down their assessment, if possible. One important point to consider is not to ‘double fault’ students. In other words, when choosing marks from the rubric, be careful not to penalise the candidate for the same error under two different columns. For instance, if there are frequent disfluent (in the sense of speech delivered very slowly), then they will likely get a lower mark for the ‘’fluency’ criteria; however, do not take this factor into consideration when considering ‘pronunciation’ but rather consider phoneme use, word stress, intonation, etc. instead. However, memorised speech is an exception (see below)

If the answers given in speaking are off-topic, then the first thing examiners should do is re-ask and/or rephrase the question (if necessary, interrupting the candidate


where a long off-topic answer is being given). This should then be considered ‘support’ and affect the mark for ‘Communicative Success’ criteria as such. The mark for ‘Range & Accuracy of Language’ should be considered normally but taking into consideration that the vocabulary is likely to be ‘insufficient for the task’. If the off-topic responses seem spontaneous then the marks for pronunciation and fluency should be considered normally. However, if the candidate’s delivery/body language suggests that the answers are memorised then – as before – examiners should interrupt the candidate either: a) if the answers are off-topic, to re-ask or rephrase the questions, or b) if the answers are on-topic to the questions asked, to ask more about what the candidate has just said. In the case of marking candidates who produce some memorised answers, it is better practice to consider only the spontaneous speech when comparing to the rubric. If speech which sounds memorised makes up most answers, though, then this will mark the student down for Communicative Success (unlikely to “Answer[…]the questions adequately”), Pronunciation (unlikely to have “Appropriate sentence stress”) and Fluency (unlikely to have “natural pace”, as memorised speech will likely have “slow pace”). Since the score given will be out of 16 (adding the four columns up), and the SIS will not accept half-marks, you cannot give half marks for any of the criteria. In other words, you need to decide whether a candidate’s e.g. speaking fluency is band 3 or 4, you cannot give 3.5 because you feel it is a bit of both. Some pointers to help you here:

ensure that the candidate has achieved all the positive descriptions in the

grade. Where there are two bullet-pointed descriptors and one is achieved

but not the other; then the lower band should be awarded. Where there

are more than two bullet-point descriptors in a band, achieving the majority

of the descriptors (i.e. 2 out of 3; or 3 out of 4) should be considered

sufficient to award that band.

pilot feedback suggested that wishing to give half marks may be especially

the case with the ‘accuracy and range of language’ criteria in the speaking

rubric as it incorporates both grammar and vocabulary. Experience tells us

that is quite rare that a student would have very strong grammar but a

poor grasp of vocabulary or vice versa. However, if there is clearly a

band’s difference between their grammar skills and their vocabulary skills,

consider the difference that the weaker aspect makes to communicating

meaning. If it sometimes means that the meaning is unclear, then score

them the lower band according to the weaker aspect as they cannot be

said to have an excellent accuracy and range of language. If unsure,

following the principles above should give the right mark still.


7 End-of-Term Reading-Writing Exams

The final reading-writing exams will be held during the end-of-term exam period. The ADU will provide schools with an exam timetable.

7.1 Exam responsibility

All of the following information as relating to exam day procedures is the responsibility of school principals and administration to facilitate. The principal will establish an exam committee within the school to manage the invigilation and running of exams. In addition, each school will have an all-subject meeting prior to the exam period to disseminate the following information and go through each staff member’s roles and responsibilities during exams. The following is simply provided for your information and so that you can check procedures are being followed as instructed.

7.2 Before examination day Prior to the examination period the following items should be in place to ensure the smooth running of all examinations:

1. Student/Parent awareness: Please ensure that students and parents are aware of the date, time and venue of relevant examinations to ensure attendance.

2. Invigilation schedule: Ensure that all invigilators are aware of the date, time and venue of relevant examinations. Invigilators must also be briefed on examination day procedures. This briefing should include knowledge of the relevant documents provided by the ADU that must be completed for each examination. Any queries regarding documentation should be directed to the ADU. Contact details are provided at the end of this document.

3. Classroom availability: The school timetable should ensure that classrooms

which are required on examination days are available.

4. Exam related resources: ADU School Documentation Pack needs to be printed and accessible.

5. Extra rooms: Pre-designate a room for any students who have been caught cheating (this is only in cases of gross misconduct).

7.3 On-day examination procedures Reading and Writing exams will be conducted as one paper on the day specified in the timetable. You will be notified of which examinations will be partially conducted through the SwiftAssess system. Where this is required, the reading section will be administered through the SwiftAssess system and the writing section will be completed by paper examination.


All classrooms/examination rooms must be prepared with all required resources, this includes whiteboard pens/erasers and spare blue ink pens for the students. SwiftAssess examinations require that students bring their own fully charged laptops. There are two methods of distribution for exams – they are either to be downloaded from SIS or are delivered by courier from the publishing company (MASAR). Each school is responsible for ensuring that they download and print off exams, or else pick up their examination papers, in a timely manner on the day of an examination. In the case of courier delivered exams, ensure you know the location of the distribution centre prior to the examination period. If you are unsure where the distribution centre is located, please contact your Cluster Manager. Once the papers have been collected and arrive at your school, the Principal and Lead Teacher should check, in a secure location (examination storage room), that the papers have arrived on time and there are a sufficient number of papers for all examinees. Examination paper integrity is paramount and students should have no access to the examination papers or designated operational rooms where examination papers are held.

7.4 Classroom arrangements The seating arrangements should be set up in a way that will help prevent students from cheating. This is something that will be dependent on the differing facilities within schools but requires attention and imagination and can be done in collaboration between principals and Lead Teachers / English Coordinators. Ideas for this include, but are not limited to, turning tables outwards towards the wall so that students are not facing each other or mixing different grades in one room and alternating the columns (so that no two students of the same grade are sat next to each other). Ideally, large halls or auditoriums should be used in which multiple invigilators should be present.

7.5 Role of invigilators The role of examination invigilators is an extremely important one. Examination invigilators are responsible for the following:

1. Invigilators must report to the examination room that they are invigilating in 5 minutes before the exam time.

2. Students’ belongings must be placed away from the students. Mobile phones must be switched off and put in the students’ bags or held securely by the invigilator according to school policy. Check that students are not using ‘cheat sheets’ and are bringing no further communication devices or other items commonly associated with cheating, such as dictionaries, non-transparent pencil cases etc., to their desks. Also, please ensure that no students are wearing Apple watches or other watch devices which can connect to the internet.


3. Ensure examination papers are collected in a sealed envelope with a register of students expected to be in attendance. 3-4 copies of the ADU Exam Incident Report Form should also be supplied to invigilators.

4. A register of students expected to be in attendance must be completed before

an examination begins. Students who are absent should be noted and an ADU Student Exam Absentee Record must be completed for each absent student.

5. Ensure actual start and end times of the examination are written clearly on the

board. A working clock should be clearly visible for students.

6. Students must use blue ink pens in Grades 4-11 for paper examinations. In Grades 1-3 students may use pencils.

7. Invigilators are not allowed to give students any assistance whatsoever other

than ensuring the necessary personal details (SID number, name etc…) on the cover page are completed accurately. Explaining any part of the examination to students is considered as facilitating cheating and invigilators must not do it for this reason. This includes reading out questions and/or translating text / words / questions from English into Arabic. If any of the above incidents should occur, an ADU Exam Incident Report Form should be completed. Principals / Lead Teachers must be vigilant in this regard.

8. During the examination, the two invigilators should stand one at the front and one at the back – only moving around the room to deal with incidents. Invigilators must not sit down and engage in other activities that will divert their attention away from the students such as using a computer / laptop or mobile phone. These activities may also distract students from their examinations. Principals / Lead Teachers / English Coordinators should monitor and be vigilant in this regard.

9. Notify students when 15 minutes remain in an examination, and again when 5 minutes remain in an examination. However, limit yourself to these notifications.

10. Please note that no student may leave the exam room within the first hour of the exam. The only exception to this is in lower grades, when all students have finished their exam before the first hour and the exam papers have thus all been collected; then they may leave early.…………………………………..

11. At the end of an examination, ensure that all student examination papers have been collected and placed back in the exam envelope. This includes any examination papers that may have been unused. Do not allow any student to leave the examination room prior to all examination papers being collected. Once all examination papers have been collected, promptly return them to the secure examination storage room.………………………………………………..


12. If students wish to go to the bathroom during the exam (after the first one hour period), they must hand all examination materials to the invigilators who will return them to the student when the student returns. A designated hall monitor must accompany the student to the bathroom. Only one student is allowed to go to the bathroom at a time. No extra time to complete an examination is to be given. Please take note of the time the student leaves and returns to the examination room. If you suspect that the student has left the examination room for the purpose of cheating, please ensure the matter is addressed by filling out an ADU Exam Incident Report Form. DO NOT prevent the student from resuming their exam.

13. Note that – ideally – Lead Teachers would act as lead invigilators during English language exams; with responsibility for monitoring all rooms in which English exams are taking place and ensuring that no cheating is taking place and that invigilators are following correct procedures. Please work with your principal to facilitate taking these responsibilities.

7.6 Examination incidents

1. Complete an ADU Exam Incident Report Form for any incidents that occur during the examination. Each incident should have a separate form. An ADU Exam Incident Report Form must be filled out for incidents such as, when a student persistently looks over at another student’s paper (2 to 3 times even after a verbal warning has been given), a student takes an excessive bathroom break (please verify with the student why it took so long), a student is ill and is unable to finish their examination, a student chooses not to complete the examination or any other incident which is out of the ordinary in your professional opinion and would require an ADU Exam Incident Report Form to be completed.

2. Students who an invigilator suspects of cheating should be allowed to finish

the examination. The examination paper should be highlighted and ADU Exam Incident Report Form should be completed. Students suspected of cheating should remain in the room and complete their examination, apart from serious misconduct is witnessed, such as consistent talking or giving answers to other students. In this case students, should be moved to a separate pre-arranged room to complete the examination away from the other students.

3. In a case where a student falls ill and renders themselves incapable of

continuing to complete an examination, the invigilator should remove the student from the examination room as discretely as possible and the student should be escorted by the designated hall monitor to a place where the student can receive assistance.


7.7 Online examinations Online exams should begin promptly as per the Examination Schedule. If for any reason a student is unable to log on to their computer or connect to SwiftAssess within the first 30 minutes of the scheduled start time of an examination, please revert to the paper examination. Once a student has reverted to the paper examination, do not ask the student to resume / complete the SwiftAssess examination, even if you manage to get the student’s laptop to work. Allow the student to continue with the paper examination ensuring you have noted the time they began the paper examination and allow them the full scheduled time to complete the paper examination.

7.8 Marking the reading exam

Reading can be marked using the answer key which will be provided at a specified time after the exam has finished, through SIS.

All questions are worth one mark. In cases of e.g. matching, true-false-not given or multiple choice questions, the response must be the same as the answer key to be marked correctly. Please notify the relevant Grade member in the ADU immediately if you believe you have found an error in the answer key.

In the case of gap-fills or short-answer questions, the answer must match that given in the answer key precisely to be awarded the mark (e.g. it should not contain three words where only one has been asked for). However, marks should still be awarded in the case of spelling mistakes where the answer can clearly be interpreted as the correct one.

Exams should not be marked by the teacher of that class, and preferably teachers of other grades. Schools should arrange to swap exam envelopes between teachers in order to facilitate this.

7.9 – Writing marking processes and procedures Before marking any writing papers, it is essential that all teachers have undergone a writing marking standardisation session (see 8.3). When marking writing, markers should employ a blind marking process. Blind marking is when two markers independently mark the writing section of an examination paper. To ensure that writing sections are blindly marked:

Markers must not underline, highlight, or make notes on the students’

examination papers.

The first marker’s marks must be written on the reverse side of the last written

page of the students’ written answer. This will be dictated by the layout of the

exam paper.


The first marker and second marker should not discuss any disparities until

after the second marker has recorded their marks at the end of the writing

section*.

* For information on which disparities can be mediated by first and second markers and which must not be mediated and should instead be passed onto the LT for internal moderation, please refer to section 8.3.2 The LT should organise and decide which English teachers will mark which grades and classes. The LT should ensure that no English teacher marks their own classes unless manpower in the English Department dictates this as an impossibility. Where manpower dictates such situations, it is advisable to liaise with your sector specialist and other local LTs to see if it is possible to swap papers between schools for marking to ensure impartiality. The LT should not be involved in the initial marking process, unless the manpower in the English Department dictates a necessity for the LT to participate in marking. The LT, if they should be required to mark written papers, should take the role of the second marker. Essentially, this ensures that the LT also fulfills the role of internal moderator. See section 8.3 below for more detail on Writing standardisation and moderation.

7.10 Marking the writing exam – using the rubrics As stressed in section 6.3 above, it is essential for the reliability and the fairness of the national assessment system that writing is marked accurately to a rubric that is as specific and as objective as possible. The rubrics for writing are divided into four categories for writing; except the Grade 1 to 3 writing rubrics, which are just a single category due to the limited amount of produced text to assess. The four categories for writing are designed to match with common criteria which external exams use as well as attempting to include all aspects of writing skills. They are:

Task Completion > Have they completed all aspects of the prompt? Most writing prompts will contain three bullet points to cover and it is important students cover all three. > Is the content of what they have written relevant? Does it match closely to the writing prompt? > Is the style appropriate? If it is an informal letter or a formal essay, does it appear and read like one?

Vocabulary > Have they used a good range of vocabulary? Or do they rely on repeating certain words to get their message across? > Have they attempted to use vocabulary which is specific for that writing topic? Have they tried to use vocabulary that has been learnt in class?


> Is their spelling accurate? If not, is it basic words or more difficult words being spelt wrong?

Grammar > Are all their sentences short and simple? > Do they attempt to use a range of verb forms? e.g. using different tenses and/or modal verbs? > Are sentences more complex with e.g. relative clauses or conditional clauses? > How accurate is the grammar? Are there frequent grammatical mistakes? If there are mistakes, are they with basic grammar (e.g. subject-verb agreement) or with more complex grammar (e.g. use of tenses in hypothetical conditionals)?

Handwriting (Grade 4/5) Organisation (Grade 6-12)

> Are letters formed accurately? > Is the spacing between letters and words appropriate? > Have they used capitals and punctuation? > Is the text divided into clear and appropriate paragraphs? > Have they used accurate linking (e.g. words like ‘and’, ‘but’, ‘because’, ‘so’) and signposts (e.g. starting sentences with ‘For example,’, ‘However,’)? > Is linking repetitive (e.g. stringing many clauses together with ‘and’)?

As with the speaking above, there are strategies you can use to make the process of familiarising yourself with and using these rubrics less daunting for yourself. As you first start skimming through their writing, you will probably get a general holistic sense of their level compared to the level of their grade; remembering that the banding of the writing rubrics is the same as the speaking in that: > 4 = above the expected level of the Grade > 3 = clearly at the expected level of the Grade > 2 = nearly at / at the lower end of the expected level of the Grade > 1 = below the expected level of the Grade (where the expected level of the Grade can be seen in the matching CEFR level in the table above) You may wish to skim through the whole text first to check it answers the prompt fully, with appropriate style and register; before awarding a mark for ‘task


completion’. This will also give you a feel for the level and which band ‘area’ (e.g. between 2 and 3) they are roughly in. You can then revisit the text more closely to look at the mechanics e.g. try and note positive uses and inaccuracies within their vocabulary, grammar and handwriting/organisation in order to check which band most suits each criterion. Use the questions written above to help guide you for what to look for. Since the score given will be out of 16 (adding the four columns up), and the SIS will not accept half-marks, you cannot give half marks for any of the criteria. In other words, you need to decide whether a candidate’s e.g. grammar is band 3 or 4, you cannot give 3.5 because you feel it is a bit of both. The same principle as with using the speaking rubric applies here – ensure that the candidate has achieved all the positive descriptions in the grade. Where there are two bullet-pointed descriptors and one is achieved but not the other, then the lower band should be awarded. Where there are more than two bullet-point descriptors in a band, achieving the majority of the descriptors (i.e. 2 out of 3; or 3 out of 4) should be considered sufficient to award that band. As with speaking, be careful not to penalise the candidate for the same error under two different columns. For instance, if there are frequent spelling errors in a writing response, then they will likely get a lower mark for the ‘vocabulary’ criteria. However, these spelling errors should not then be taken into consideration when deciding on a mark for, say, task completion or organisation/handwriting. Areas which may affect more than one band are if responses are very under-length or if some form of plagiarism or pre-memorisation is suspected (see next section). The writing rubrics specify suggested word counts for the writing. However, these are only suggested and should only be used as a guide as the expected length of the answer required to sufficiently answer the question; there are no formal procedures for specific point deductions based on being under the word length. Markers are encouraged to use their judgement as to whether the text appears to be around the right length, rather than having to count the number of words. This means that a text that may be slightly under-length (say, around 10 or 20 words) is not necessarily penalised – the marker uses the rubrics as normal. If a text, though, is clearly under-length (i.e. it is obvious on first sight that it is, say half the required length) then this would count as a ‘significant aspect’ of the task not being achieved. This would limit them to 2 for Task Completion (even if all bullet points are covered – though it could also be the case that they haven’t been due to the text being under-length). It would also likely have a knock-on effect on other aspects. The candidate is unlikely to have shown a wide range of vocabulary, grammatical structures or aspects of cohesion (particularly paragraphing) and should be marked down as such if so. 7.11 – Awarding Zero Marks Written answers that are entirely copied directly from reading texts in the exam paper or a repetition of task instructions must be given zero. Where there is evidence of partial copying from the reading text in the exam paper or a repetition of task instructions combined with a student’s own independent work, then the copied work should be disregarded for marking, bracketed and cited. The independent work should then be marked to the rubric.


Dramatically off-topic answers should be marked as zero where the written answer bares no relation to the task; for example, an essay on the importance of digital technology in the classroom when the task relates to cycling in Amsterdam. Where a genuine misinterpretation of the essay question could conceivably have been made; for example, an essay on recycling in Amsterdam when the task relates to cycling in Amsterdam, must be marked to the rubric, (it would be expected here that task completion would receive a mark of 1). Slightly off-topic answers; for example, an essay on pollution in China when the task relates to global pollution, must be marked to the rubric. Memorised and plagiarised written answers from external sources should be marked as zero. However, as a marker you must be able to prove this empirically with citations of the external source; for example, texts in the curriculum course book, Wikipedia pages, etc… With no empirical proof, you must mark the written answer to the rubric. Copied, memorised and plagiarised answers which are repeatedly seen across multiple cases of students’ written answers must be marked as zero. Markers should cite other papers where identical written answers can be seen at the end of each student’s written answer and, if identifiable, the source. When a student’s written answer is a partial combination of any of the above examples and a student’s own independent work, then the copied aspects should be bracketed off and only the elements of the student’s own independent work should be marked as per the rubric. 8 SMME


The acronym SMME stands for Standardisation, Marking, Moderation and External Moderation. It is an essential process that all schools must follow to ensure the fair and accurate grading of students and to achieve academic integrity in assessment. All schools must be able to evidence that they have completed this process fully and thoroughly and it should be considered a priority focus in the run up to exam times. 8.1 Rationale behind SMME Standardisation in MOE English Assessment can be charaterised as using samples of students’ paper examinations and spoken examination audio recordings to reach a shared understanding of the features and characteristics of the elements of banded skills on a writing or speaking rubric. By holding professionally prepared, organised and coordinated writing and speaking examination standardisation sessions there is an expectation that summative assessment will be marked accurately by all markers throughout the MOE school system. Marking in MOE English Assessment can be characterised as the process of evaluating and assessing students’ paper and spoken examinations against answer keys and grade-appropriate speaking and writing rubrics. The aim is to accurately record marks that reflect a student’s demonstrated ability and achievement in each English skill to as reliable, standardised and objective a degree as possible. Accurate marking ensures all stakeholders have a transparent perspective on a student’s current ability and achievement as well as a reliable overview of a student’s progress through their academic years; as well as ability in comparison to peers. Internal Moderation in MOE English Assessment can be characterised as checking the judgments of markers or examiners when assessing students’ paper and speaking examinations within an individual school environment. Internal Moderation is a valuable tool used to assess and learn, where Lead Teachers (LTs) are able to identify improvements that can be made in the marking of summative assessment. Additionally, LTs will be able to evaluate students’ learning gaps and identify how summative assessment results can be improved in future examination periods. External Moderation in MOE English Assessment can be characterised as independently and objectively checking the judgements of markers or examiners when assessing students’ paper and speaking examinations within an individual school environment against national MOE expectations. Additionally, external moderation audits an individual school’s adherence to MOE English Assessment policies and procedures. External Moderation is a supportive tool that provides English Departments in MOE schools with transparent and constructive feedback in relation to MOE summative assessment. 8.2 Speaking standardisation


The Assessment Development Unit will provide materials for speaking standardisation sessions for any professional development (Learning Communities) sessions that are scheduled during the academic year for this purpose. Professional development sessions for speaking standardisation will address various aspects of speaking assessment. Typical areas of focus will be appropriacy of interlocutor conduct and interpretation of speaking rubrics. 8.2.1 Internal standardisation sessions Each school must conduct an internal speaking standardisation session before each EOT and EOY speaking examination. All English teachers should participate in this internal standardisation session and a record of attendance should be made on the ADU SMME Report. The Lead Teacher (LT) should organise and lead the internal speaking standardisation sessions. The ADU will provide speaking standardisation materials for all examination periods. These will be made available on SharePoint and the ADU will notify you through SharePoint - EMI Messages when they are available. The intended outcomes of the session should be:

English teachers are able to interpret a speaking rubric effectively

English teachers are able to mark speaking exams accurately to a speaking

rubric

English teachers are able to demonstrate understanding of the specification

and format of speaking examinations so that they are ready to fulfil the role of

interlocutor or examiner

English teachers are able to complete the ADU documentation that is used in

and complements a speaking examination

Before the session, teachers should familiarise themselves with section 5 of this guide. The LT should also address their findings from the previous internal and external (if applicable) moderation processes and incorporate these into the in-school speaking standardisation session. Assessing and learning from past experiences will enable MOE English teachers to synchronise more efficiently to new marking expectations. Speaking standardisation materials will be supported by ADU guidance on suggested marks and justifications. LTs will be able to use this guidance to analyse the accuracy of the marks awarded during speaking standardisation sessions and to take appropriate action – for example, mentoring, support and monitoring of teachers who are misinterpreting the marking criteria. 8.2.2 Internal moderation


The LT is responsible for the internal moderation of speaking examinations. The ADU expects the LT to moderate a random sample of 3 high (to include at least one example of students’ speaking examinations achieving 16 marks), 3 middle and 3 low speaking examinations in each grade. If no moderation issues are highlighted, then the LT will not be expected to moderate any further speaking examinations in the grade. However, if the LT identifies marking issues or has suspicions about the validity of students’ spoken answers then internal moderation should be escalated. Firstly, the LT should select a similar sample size and if issues continue to be identified then the LT must moderate all speaking examinations in that grade. The LT should ensure that the relevant ADU Speaking Exam Record (Individual or Pairs) is updated for each class after they have internally moderated the speaking examination audio recordings. Any changes to students’ marks should be accompanied by the internal moderator’s signature for purposes of transparency. The relevant ADU Speaking Exam Record (Individual or Pairs) document should be used by English Teachers to assist SIS entry after internal moderation has been completed. A positive by-product of internally moderating speaking examinations is the opportunity to assess and learn. The LT will be able to identify and appropriately feedback information to the relevant people and departments. Things that should be considered are:

Do you need to discuss marking issues with the examiners, or indeed praise

the quality of their marking?

Are there any issues that you should address in the speaking standardisation

session for the next examination period?

Are there characteristics seen in students’ answers in speaking examinations

that indicate learning gaps in the student population?

Are there characteristics seen in students’ answers in speaking examinations

that indicate issues with the format, timing, or content of an examination?

(feedback to ADU)

8.2.3 ADU SMME report The ADU SMME Report must be completed by the LT, with the cooperation of English teachers, for each examination period. The section pertaining to speaking examinations can be found in the first half of the document. The ADU SMME Report is designed to assist you with your in-school record keeping and will be requested by ADU representatives when they visit your school to audit examination periods, this enables us to have a transparent perspective of the expected SMME practices that you have followed. At the end of each term, ADU SMME Reports must be submitted to the English ADU for review. The review process enables the ADU to analyse issues observed in individual schools and across the MOE network during examination. 8.3. Writing SMME


8.3.1 Standardisation Each school must conduct an internal writing standardisation session before each EOT and EOY examination. All English teachers should participate in this internal standardisation session and a record of attendance should be made on the ADU SMME Report. The LT should organise and lead the internal writing standardisation sessions. The ADU will provide writing standardisation materials for all EOT and EOY examination periods. Additionally, it is best practice to supplement writing standardisation session materials with examples from within the school. It is advisable to use the most recent previous exam period papers, or students’ answers from the examination period’s sample papers, as these are most likely to be reflective of current exam formats. The selection of written answers should constitute an appropriate quantity for the time available for the internal writing standardisation session. Student’s examination papers that are used as additional standardisation materials must be photocopied before use as examination papers should remain in their original condition. The intended outcomes of the session should be:

English teachers are able to interpret the writing rubric effectively.

English teachers are able to mark papers accurately to the writing rubric.

English teachers are able to identify potential issues seen in written answers

and know how to react and mark affected papers.

English teachers are able to follow the blind marking / moderating process.

English teachers are able to complete the ADU documentation that is used in

a writing examination.

The LT should also address their findings from the previous internal and external (if applicable) moderation processes and incorporate these into the in-school writing standardisation session. Assessing and learning from past experiences will enable MOE English teachers to synchronise more efficiently to new marking expectations. From this academic year, writing standardisation materials will be supported by ADU guidance on suggested marks and justifications. LTs will be able to use this guidance to analyse the accuracy of the marks awarded during writing standardisation sessions and to take appropriate action. For example, mentoring, support and monitoring of teachers who are misinterpreting the marking criteria. 8.3.2 Internal moderation


The LT is responsible for the internal moderation of written papers. The ADU expects the LT to moderate a random sample of 5 high (to include some examples of papers achieving 16 marks), 5 middle and 5 low written papers in each grade. If no moderation issues are highlighted, then the LT will not be expected to moderate any further papers in the grade. However, if the LT identifies marking issues or has suspicions about the validity of students’ written answers then internal moderation must be escalated. Firstly, the LT should select a similar sample size and if issues continue to be identified then the LT must moderate all written papers. In addition to the process of internal moderation detailed above the following points should be noted:

An overall difference of 1-2 points between first and second markers, should

be discussed and mediated by the 1st and 2nd markers after they have blindly

marked the papers.

An overall difference of 3 or more marks must be moderated by the LT. The

LT’s decision will be the final mark.

A difference of 2 or more marks within a band in the rubric (regardless of the

overall mark) must be moderated by the LT. The LT’s decision will be the final

mark.

If the LT is the second marker, their mark shall be considered the final mark.

All written papers that are given a zero mark, where plagiarism, memorisation or copying have been identified by either first and/or second marker, must be moderated by the LT. The LT should carefully consider the guidance on zero marks in the section 6.11 of this document. The LT’s decision will be the final mark. The LT should create a report detailing all written papers that are given a zero mark, which must be given to, and discussed with, the school principal for each examination period. The school principal must also give the final approval on all papers awarded a zero mark. In the instance that a school principal disagrees with the award of a zero mark(s), the report must be sent to the ADU by e-mail. Written papers that receive a zero mark should be stored in the original examination paper envelope, but should be separated from other papers (grouped together at the top or in a separate envelope within the original examination paper envelope). The LT should ensure that the relevant ADU Writing Exam Record is completed for each class after they have internally moderated the examination papers. The relevant ADU Writing Exam Record document should be used by English teachers to assist SIS entry after internal moderation has been completed. A positive by-product of internally moderating written examinations is the opportunity to assess and learn. The LT will be able to identify and appropriately feedback information to the relevant people and departments. Things that should be considered are:

Have first and second markers followed the blind marking procedure?


Do you need to discuss marking issues with first or second markers, or indeed

praise the quality of their marking?

Are there any issues that you should address in the writing standardisation

session for the next examination period?

Are there suspicious patterns seen in students’ answers in listening, reading

and writing sections that you can address and/or prevent in the future?

Are there characteristics seen in students’ answers in listening, reading and

writing that indicate learning gaps in the student population?

Are there characteristics seen in students’ answers in listening, reading and

writing that indicate issues with the format, timing, or content of an

examination? (feedback to ADU)

8.3.3 ADU SMME report The ADU SMME Report must be completed by the LT, with the cooperation of English teachers, for each examination period. The section pertaining to written examinations can be found in the second half of the document. The ADU SMME Report is designed to assist you with your in-school record keeping and will be requested by ADU representatives when they visit your school to audit examination periods, this enables us to have a transparent perspective of the expected SMME practices that you have followed. At the end of each term ADU SMME Reports must be submitted to the English ADU for review. The review process enables the ADU to analyse issues observed in individual schools and across the MOE network during examination periods and ultimately facilitate improvement and necessary changes. 8.4 SMME: Continuous Assessment - Assessed Projects At the beginning of each term in which the Continuous Assessment tools include Assessed Projects, English teachers should refer to the Assessed Projects Guidance documents for Grades 1-4, Grades 5-8 and Grades 9-12. These are posted on SharePoint - Subjects - English - Assessment. Using this reference, English teachers will be able to begin planning the logistics and instruction of the assessed projects for the grades and classes that they teach. The ADU English Assessed Projects Record is a working document that outlines each English teacher’s approach to and implementation of an assessed project. The LT must implement a system in the school that ensures that students are forewarned of the dates of all assessed projects. Some possible ideas for such a system could include:

Requiring students in each class to sign a form/letter that notifies them of the

dates and deadlines for assessed projects.

A student and parent accessible English Department academic planner.

Posters in classrooms displaying dates and deadlines for assessed projects.

Notifications of dates and deadlines for assessed projects in school

newsletters.


Any deadlines given to students should be final deadlines and this should be made very clear to students. Assessed projects for all grades should be marked by the English teacher that is responsible for the English subject instruction for that class. All assessed projects should be marked accurately to the assessment criteria marking rubrics that are provided for each individual grade’s project. Similarly, the marks awarded must be recorded on the marks record / score sheet that is provided for each individual grade’s project. It is essential for the integrity of the entire national educational program that the marks entered into SIS for continuous assessment are fair, accurate and reflect the extent of a student’s abilities. To this end, the LT should regularly oversee and communicate with teachers regarding their assessment for CA; asking them occasionally what evidence they are able to produce for their assessment. The ADU will also visit schools at certain points during the academic year to audit the assessed project marks. To assist in this and to justify the scores that are in SIS, it is essential you maintain a full record of all your assessed project work. This includes:

copies of all written work completed by students

where appropriate, recordings of oral performances

copies of all marks records / score sheets

any supporting documentation e.g. absent student records

ADU English Assessed Projects Records

8.4.1 Pop Quizzes While the completion and marking of pop quizzes is objectively recorded and marked by the online platform, English teachers currently have to manually transfer data from reports created by the online platform into SIS. LTs should check at an appropriate time at the end of each term that the transfer of data from LMS to SIS has been accurately completed. Reports from both LMS and SIS should be retained for transparency and external auditing purposes. 8.5 External moderation - ADU audits


Following each examination period, the ADU conduct announced visit audits to schools across all three cycles. The purpose of ADU Announced Visit Audits is to primarily audit End-of-Term examinations. Your school will be notified of a visit shortly before the day should your school be selected. ADU announced visits are designed to ensure that schools are following SMME procedures and to assist schools in addressing issues regarding to summative assessment. The ADU will also request to see evidence of marks and students’ work for assessed projects. The school should be prepared to present the ADU English Assessed Projects Record and the relevant marks records / scoresheets on the auditor’s request. When your school is selected for an ADU Announced Visit Audit, the School Principal, Lead Teacher and Sector Director will be contacted by e-mail. This e-mail will contain the details of the school visit and a breakdown of the things you need to prepare for the announced visit. By following SMME procedures and acting upon the requests detailed in the e-mail notification, ADU Announced Visit Audits should be smooth and efficient. It is important to note that the ADU also conduct unannounced visits. ADU Unannounced Visits have a different purpose to ADU Announced Visit Audits. ADU Unannounced Visits focus on the implementation, conduct, and marking of continuous assessment and the qualitative application of formative assessment in the classroom.

9. Student Absence Policy For all students absent from an exam, documentation must be completed. The school administration will have official documentation to complete for absent students; however we also ask English department members to fill out the ADU documentation on Sharepoint. ……………………………………………………………... The next step is to ascertain whether the absence is excused or not-excused. According to the MOE student assessment policy 559 (of which your principal should have a copy), an excused absence may be classified as one of the following:

Excused absence (entered as “EA” or “ م غ “ in SIS)

1. Illness justified by a medical report attested by a governmental sector

(Ministry of Health).

2. Forbidden from sitting examination for exceeding the period of allowed

absence in school attendance

3. Death of relatives (son, daughter, father, mother, sister, brother, nephews,

husband, wife)

4. Call by an official party (e.g military / court) with evidence of a letter from that

party

5. Travel for a sudden emergency

6. Military training courses and other similar with evidence of a certificate from

the employer

However, note that principals at their discretion may allow other reasons for an excused absence if they feel it is a valid reason. In the special case of a student who


has an officially excused absence, the principal will fill out the official MOE excused absence form and along with any supporting documentation upload them through the SIS. In the case of a student being absent without a valid reason, a 0 mark should be awarded. However, note that you will liaise with your school administration to enter a 0 mark for the reason of non-excused absence.

Please note that, due to the mechanics of the SIS, a student cannot be marked as absent in one column of a parent category and then have a score in the other. Therefore, the following three situations may commonly arise which students need to be aware of:

Students should not normally be counted as absent for Continuous

Assessment – except in cases where they have been absent for the entirety

of the period in which continuous assessment was taking place.

In cases where students had an excused absence for the listening and/or

speaking exam, yet sat the final reading-writing exam; it is essential that

students are given the opportunity to sit a V2 of the listening and/or speaking

exam. A recommended time to do this would be the afternoon after which

they had taken their final exam.

In cases where students had sat the listening and/or speaking exam but had

an excused absence for the final exam, then teachers will need to enter an

excused absence in all four columns. However, listening/speaking scores

should be retained in case students resit their exams as a result of their

absence (in which case, the previously obtained listening and speaking

marks will go towards the final score. This is in contrast to those students

who are resitting due to not achieving the required year grade; for whom the

resit exam will be a standalone mark.

10. SEN Policy

In cases where you believe that the student has special educational needs, and this may impact on their assessment and require concessions to be made, then teachers should ensure this is done in line with MOE SEN policy. The first thing to ascertain is whether the student is registered as SEN by the MOE. Teachers will need to liaise with their school administration, social worker and local SEN coordinator in order to do this; or, additionally, in order to get students identified as SEN students who previously have not been. The MOE also has policies as to which concessions can be made for which educational needs. Teachers should work with the LDU and ADU SEN teams, their school administration and local SEN coordinator to fairly and effectively implement these.

In cases where the SEN student is not MOE identified, the following adjustments to the exam conditions can be granted (based on school practice):

Student can write the exam in a separate room.

Exam questions can be read out by the subject teacher.

Student can be given extra time.

In cases where the SEN student is MOE identified:


They should have an IEP (Individual Educational Plan); although it will likely

be in Arabic.

In the SIS system, next to the student’s name, the SEN status should appear

with a drop-down menu (in Arabic) where all provisions and accommodations

the student can be provided with are ticked.

Curriculum adjustments and intervention should have already taken place.

The IEP and the SIS system records should clearly state what kind of

adjustments and modifications the student is entitled to.

If the IEP/SIS states that the student should receive modified assessment, it is

the subject teacher’s responsibility to prepare it.

It is important to note that, in many cases, the IEP and SIS system only allows modifications to certain question types (MCQs, guided gap-fill, open-ended questions, possibility to give verbal answers which should be recorded, etc.) rather than a completely different level and format of assessment. In this case, the official ADU exam should be modified. If the curriculum content is not fully accessible to the SEN student and a separate test is required to be prepared, the subject teachers is responsible for creating it in alignment with the IEP. Ideally, the modified test should follow the ADU format (have the same number of available marks, be skill-based, etc.). Please ensure that any modified paper is approved by an ADU/LDU member or cluster SEN coordinator.

11. EmSAT English EmSAT English is an external examination which is obligatory for students at Grade 12; where it is an entrance exam to access national universities. For Grade 12 students, the EmSAT exam will comprise 10% of their year’s grade; forming the entirety of their Term 3 Continuous Assessment mark. In addition, improvement of EmSAT results is an essential KPI for the entire English department. Students may also take EmSAT exams in Grades 1, 4, 6, 8 and 10. The Grade 12 EmSAT English exam is a two-hour, fully computer-based exam which comprises of five sections – Grammar, Vocabulary, Cloze Reading, Extended Reading and Writing. Improving the EmSAT scores is an essential KPI for the English department and, to this end, the department is formulating an in-depth strategy to this end. This will include, but is not limited to:

various guides and training materials for teachers

numerous extra classes (enrichment, intervention, Saturday,

Masterclasses) to be delivered for Grade 12 students

a number of apps and online tools for students

monthly diagnostic tests to inform the focus of the strategy

12. Formative Assessment


Alongside the summative assessment, effective formative assessment is essential to the success and efficacy of an educational programme. All schools should harbour a culture of formative assessment and continually be adapting their teaching and learning approaches to address both the recognised needs of their students and the feedback obtained from summative assessment. To this end, the ADU is planning to create a strategy in order to begin implementing a strong culture of formative assessment in schools – including various tools and strategies, training sessions and school visits. In the meantime, though, provided below is a brief series of suggestions to use as formative assessment tools.

12.1 Defining formative assessment Formative assessment is as its name implies. It is designed to inform both teacher and student during the learning cycles as they take place and help the formation of practices and processes which lead to effective learning. Two types of formative assessment are ‘Assessment as Learning’ and ‘Assessment for Learning’. Both serve a different purpose in the classroom; hence the distinction between the two. The first – ‘Assessment as Learning’ – is used to help students develop their independence as learners and become more in tune with their own learning processes. The second – ‘Assessment for Learning’ – is about the tools that teachers and students utilize to ensure that the feedback loop between them is not only effective but actionable.

12.2 Formative - Assessment ‘as’ Learning:

12.2.1 Working with rubrics formatively The rubrics provided for writing and speaking are also a useful tool for in-class formative assessment. They can be used to give students an idea of what they are working towards and also to self or peer-evaluate their own speaking/writing. The ADU will be providing a ‘student speak’ version of the rubrics for you to use with the students. Using rubrics formatively serves a multi-functional purpose: • Used as evidence to inform instruction for the teacher • Used for self-assessment of learner to provide students an opportunity to think about their learning • Used for peer-evaluation to provide learners exemplars of others work, to provide feedback, and to provide collaboration. Below is a sample lesson outline which can be used in class to introduce students to using rubrics to evaluate their writing on a day to day basis: Starter: The learner can ask themselves the following questions: • Where am I now? • What do I need to improve? • Where do I want to be? • How do I close the gap? Teacher Instruction: The learner needs to become familiar with the steps needed in order to successfully use rubrics as a tool for learning. 1. The teacher needs to provide a hard copy of the rubric for each student. The teacher should go over the rubric; having the students underline, highlight or note


key words (vocabulary) in the document. What are the key words that distinguish the various levels? They should ask gist questions and ensure the students understand the key words and vocabulary used through perception checks, questioning, and provided examples. 2. Highlight main ideas: learning goals, criteria for success. 3. Skim through the rubric to get an idea of the overall learning outcomes. Checklist: The teacher should provide a checklist for both self-assessment and peer-assessment. The checklist should have the key outcomes, a section for ticking off items and a comment box. This is an evidence-based activity. Using evidence from the document, students will complete the checklist and the comment box with concrete examples from their own work or their classmate’s work. Example Checklist: Name: ________________________________ Grades 10, 11, 12: Writing Feedback Checklist: • Has completed all requirements of the task effectively Example and comments: • Appropriate content and style for the task Example and comments: • Uses appropriately a good range of vocabulary Example and comments: • Spelling is accurate Example and comments: • Shows good control of grammar throughout Example and comments: • Content is clearly organised into paragraphs as required by text Example and comments: • Uses a good range of links or signposts Example and comments: • Information is used accurately throughout Example and comments: • Good range of different ideas Example and comments: • Ideas are relevant Example and comments:


Self-assessment: The learner will use self-assessment as a tool to understand their current level and the desired level. They will then receive tools to overcome the gap between where they are currently and where they are headed. Using their document, the checklist and the rubric provided by the teacher, the student will go through their document looking for each specific item in the rubric. This is an evidence gathering exercise which should contain descriptive feedback. When evidence of it is found, it should be highlighted in the document and ticked in the appropriate box. In the comment box, an example should be provided and matched to the rubric. Explanations can also be added as needed. Both positive and constructive feedback can be included. Peer-assessment: After self-assessment, the writing can be exchanged with a peer. On the checklist the reviewer or peer’s name should be included. The process is then repeated. The peer will read over the document, find evidence, tick in the appropriate boxes where evidence is found and comment in comment box on level with reasons for decision. Note that, initially, the students may find this task difficult. However, the teacher can provide exemplars from the class and go over the exemplars with the group as a whole. Over time the process will become streamlined. Editing: Using the feedback provided, the student will rewrite the document and improve the learning outcomes using the feedback and evidence provided by themselves and their peer. Teacher tools: The teacher may consider initially providing exemplars of a low level, medium level and high level document which the class goes over together in order to instruct the process.

12.2.2 Using can-do statements We are working on creating broader can-do statements for each grade based on Student Learning Outcomes. They will be based on the different skills and sub-skills that students should be exhibiting in each level. Students can assess their strengths, their progress and what they still need to work on – setting targets for themselves. There are also unit-specific can-do statements located throughout the Activity Books. These often come in the form of checklists with statements that say what students should be able to do by the end of each set of lessons. With these statements, students are encouraged to reflect on their own learning and to answer honestly whether or not they are able to do each task. If not, they are encouraged to reflect on why. Can-do statements are used to give students a sense of accomplishment and a way for both teachers and students to keep track of progress and to see what areas may need to be worked on.


12.2.3 Setting targets Teachers should set specific targets for their students to help them improve their learning. Using the rubrics or can-do statements as tools can be effective ways to encourage students to be aware of their own learning. Students should always be aware of what they need to do to improve their skills and this should be recorded somewhere that teachers and students can easily access, in the inside of their books for example.

12.3 Formative - Assessment ‘for’ Learning One of the most important aspects of the assessment reform is the move towards formative assessment as a drive for change in the teaching and learning that occurs every day in our classrooms. As you have read already the use of assessment ‘as’ learning is more formal in its application, whereas assessment ‘for’ learning is much more fluid in its use. Assessment ‘for’ learning [AfL] is an embedded teaching and learning methodology that can be utilised by teachers at any given moment in a teaching and learning scenario (using the word ‘classroom’ here can be limiting in and of itself). AfL is essentially the constructive use of the feedback loop that exists between teachers and students. It is about the guidance that teachers give to students and about how teachers use information from their students to adapt their lesson. In order to do this effectively both teachers and students must understand the different strategies used to achieve this. Objectives and Outcomes: Sometimes known as learning goals or success criteria, these should be made very clear to the students and referred to during the lesson and at the end during the plenary or consolidation session at the end of the lesson. They should always be written in ‘student speak’ as they are for the students use, not the teachers. Teachers should also always ‘model’ criteria for students where applicable. Feedback to students: This can take the form of verbal feedback during a lesson or written feedback on a piece of work that leads to the setting of a formal target for improvement. These targets for improvement should not be abstract in nature, they should be concrete, achievable goals. Self-Assessment: Students should be given the tools to understand their own learning processes. This can be done through the use of target setting and using rubrics or other criteria. Questioning: Questions are a useful tool for making checks on learning [Bloom’s Taxonomy] and helping students to make additional connections to help facilitate deep learning and to ensure learning moves from working memory into long-term memory [SOLO Taxonomy]. Questioning should also be used to facilitate feedback to teachers, discussed below. Feedback to teachers: By using questioning and other techniques [thumbs, traffic lights, colour indicators, response criteria, AfL wheels, AfL fans – amongst others] teachers are able to adapt the pitch and pace of their lessons and to ensure that learning has taken place.


13. M&E [Monitoring and Evaluation] Since this is a new framework, it will be under a constant process of monitoring and evaluation to be undertaken by the Research Development Unit (RDU). This could take various forms including surveys after exams to check their validity and alignment to the curriculum and incorporating into school visits opportunities for teachers to give feedback on the assessment system. As the implementers of the new framework, your feedback is highly valued and respected. It will help us in continually improving the assessment system so that it is achievable and yet also of the highest international standards.

14. ADU Contacts

If you have any enquiries regarding English language assessment, please follow the steps below before contacting an ADU member:

1. Check all of the assessment information available on the Sharepoint

2. Contact your local support network of ETs/LTs to see if they have the answer

3. Contact your sector specialist

If none of these routes can answer your query, then the next step is to contact the relevant ADU member for the grade:

Name Grades Email

Buyiswa Mokhosi 1-4 (Lead) [email protected]

Gareth Williams 1-4 [email protected]

Janie Turner 5-8 (Lead) [email protected]

Christos Margaritis 5-8 [email protected]

Martina Dorn 9-12(Lead) [email protected]

Paul Lombard 9-10

[email protected]

Sema Judge

9-10

[email protected]

Amelia Ray

11-12

[email protected]

Samira Osman

11-12 [email protected]










english language assessment guide 2017 2018 - … · assessment guide: english 2017/2018 4 1.1 the...

Documents