self-assessment

In Elena Shohamy's article, "Assessment", she discusses the necessity of and options for evaluating discourse, which she considers to be an important aspect of communicative competency. I wholeheartedly agree with Shohamy. I think that discourse is something that language learners are striving for; something that will make their learning seem worthwhile.

Her commentary on page 205 about the different types of discourses explains that a student's performance in one type of discourse, such as an interview, cannot predict a student's performance in another type of discourse, such as a role-play. She, therefore, suggests that students should be tested on different types of discourses, and it should not just be assumed that they have discourse competence if they can successfully participate in a debate, for example. I think this is true. However, her commentary seems to imply that students should be striving for mastery of all of these different types of discourses. I think it is important to keep in mind that even in a student's first language, they will have strengths and weaknesses in different discourses. Not everyone is good at role-play; not everyone is good at debate. Second language learners do not suddenly possess the ability to express themselves in all ways at all times simply because they are learning a second language. They will still be better at some things than at others. Perhaps sometimes we place too much pressure on second language learners to perform well in areas that give them trouble in their first language.

On page 211, Shohamy describes ways that discourse should be tested, as alternatives to traditional testing methods. She offers self-assessment, narratives, peer assessment, dialogue journals, oral debates, portfolios, and other assessment methods as viable alternatives to traditional testing. I have seen self-assessment come up more and more as a "good" alternative testing method, and I have to say that I disagree with this. Evaluation of oneself requires quite a bit of higher level thinking. Students' brains are not fully developed in high school, much less earlier than that in school. Thus, to offer self-assessment as an assessment method seems flawed. I think that it is important to guide students into evaluating their own work, but to use it as a reliable assessment tool at this stage does not seem like a wise idea. I believe that at this point in their learning, students are still looking for guidance and stability from teachers and other mentors. They are not looking for the academic freedom we seem to think that they need. Instead they are looking for direction in their education and are still learning how to learn. Higher level thinking, and consequently the ability to better evaluate one's own actions, thoughts, and needs, come later in life.

Shohamy has certainly given me something to think about, although I sometimes feel that we severely complicate things like this. The more we "unpack" things, I feel the less we accomplish. Assessing discourse maybe isn't quite as important as just giving students opportunities to practice it. I realize that what we assess is indirectly stating what we believe is most important in language learning, but sometimes I think that there is too much theory being thrown around about things like this. Theory rarely plays out in the classroom the same way that it does on paper.