A “universal” Spanish placement exam: Content and administration issues

1. A “universal” Spanish placement exam:Content and administration issues Kim Potowski & MaryAnn Parada The University of Illinois at Chicago Department of Hispanic & Italian Studies To download this PowerPoint: potowski.org/UICspanishplacement

3. Conclusion: There is a high probability for many instructors that heritage speakers will be enrolled in Spanish classes.

4. Heritage speakers vs. L2 learners Heritage speakers’ linguistic, affective, and educational needs are different from those of L2 learners.

5. Heritage speakers can also be very different from each other • 60% were born in the U.S. • 40% were born abroad, but arrived at different ages. • All can have different schooling experiences, exposure to Spanish, family variety of Spanish, etc.

6. Example 1: Marta • Born in Mexico, came to U.S. at age 7 • Family from a small, rural ranch. Some non-prestige features of Spanish. Intermittent schooling. • Three years in bilingual education. • Speaks 100% Spanish at home with parents, 50% with siblings.

7. Example 2: Luis • Born in the U.S., but lived from ages 3-5 in Santurce, Puerto Rico. • No bilingual education. • Speaks ~50% in Spanish with parents, 100% in English with siblings.

8. Example 3: Roberto • Born in Argentina, came to the U.S. at age 12. • Regular schooling; middle-class family; parents completed high school. • Speaks only Spanish at home; a prestige variety.

9. Example 4: Carolina • Born in the U.S. to U.S.-born parents. • Grandparents from Honduras. • Speaks 100% English at home with parents & siblings. • Speaks Spanish with grandmother who lives in the house.

10. Example 5: José (most typical in Chicago) Born in U.S., parents immigrated from Mexico as adults. 100% Spanish with parents, 50% with siblings. Began school monolingual (or very dominant) in Spanish. By 3rd grade, dominant in English, although still uses Spanish with parents.

11. Assuming there is a heritage speaker program: How should we place students there appropriately? Into which level?

12. The University of Illinois at Chicago Currently: • Heritage speakers self-identify as such and take the heritage placement exam. ~120 students per semester. • L2 learners take the L2 placement exam. ~1,200 students per semester. • Approximately 15-20 HS per semester enroll in basic language program  evaluated and usually moved to HS program. • Both exams are old, never been evaluated.

13. We wanted a new placement exam that: • Is administered online. • Distinguishes between heritage speakers and L2 learners (appropriate track) using ONLY linguistic criteria, and • Places all students into the appropriate level of each track.

14. Difference between placement & proficiency exams Placement Is linked to the goals of a particular program. Proficiency Like a “thermometer” – determines the general abilities of a student.

16. Our L2 program

17. Our heritage program • Focus on academic writing (argument, audience/purpose, transition words, organization, etc.) • Students exhibit relatively high levels of oral proficiency – range from Intermediate High through Advanced High on ACTFL OPI. • Writing relatively strong; exhibits contact phenomena.  Need for programs and placement exams to take into account the characteristics of the local population

18. Test B: Entry point

19. Test A – 101 or 102?

20. Test C – L2 or heritage?

21. How can we distinguish a high proficiency L2 from a heritage speaker using multiple choice, language-focused questions?

22. Decision: • Test informal vocabulary that even low level heritage speakers would know, but that most high proficiency L2 learners probably would not. • Test grammatical terminology that high proficiency L2 learners would probably know, but that heritage speakers might not. UIC population: 80% second generation Mexican  combination of Mexican, Puerto Rican, and general lexical items.

23. Test C – L2 or heritage?

24. Test C continued Accents & spellig: High proficiency L2 should do better than low proficiency HS. But this will likely NOT help us separate speakers with similar proficiency levels.

25. Test C continued Informal/spelling: High proficiency L2 should do better than low proficiency HS. But this will likely NOT help us separate speakers with similar proficiency levels.

26. Test C continued Metalinguistic knowledge: L2 will likely score higher than HS at all levels.

27. Test D, L2 – 103,104, or place out?

28. Test D, HS – 113,114, or place out?

29. Test D, HS continued

30. Test D, HS continued

31. Test D, HS continued

32. First pilot: Spring 2009 Basic Spanish 101 = 55 students 102 = 100 students 103 = 100 students 104 = 100 students Heritage Spanish 113 = 42 students 114 = 64 students

33. Test C

34. 94 Average % correct Basic Spanish 101: 29% 102: 30% 103: 31% 104: 31% Heritage speakers 113: 84% 114: 85% 88 96 98 81 87 93 61 95 85 73 51

35. Average % correct Basic Spanish Heritage speakers 101: 66% 113: 76% 102: 66% 114: 77% 103: 64% 104: 69%

36. Average % correct Basic Spanish Heritage speakers 101: 41% 113: 55% 102: 44% 114: 59% 103: 44% 104: 47%

37. Average % correct Basic Spanish 101: 40% 102: 60% 103: 59% 104: 68% Heritage speakers 113: 54% 114: 60%

38. Test D-HS

39. Test D-HS Pilot #1: 113 (Heritage speakers I) = 60% 114 (Heritage speakers II) = 64% Bigger gap needed.

40. Second pilot: Spring 2010 Basic Spanish 101 = 199 students 102 = 202 students 103 = 294 students 104 = 358 students Heritage Spanish 113 = 47 students 114 = 67 students

41. Pilot #2, Changes Part C: New items Part D-HS: New items that reflect curriculum of new textbook. Certain amount of guesswork as to the hierarchy of linguistic control.

42. Pilot #2: Results, Test C (20 items total) Spring 2010 Spring 2009 Average % correct Basic Spanish Heritage speakers 101: 29% 102: 30% 103: 31% 113: 84% 104: 31% 114: 85% Average % correct Basic Spanish Heritage speakers 103: 27% 113: 85% 104: 30% 114: 87%

43. How HS did on each item 92 88 95 51 71 95 97 95 89 87 97 8187 83 90 83 94 76 93 72

44. Test D-HS • Intent: To separate 113 from 114 students • Items from Pilot 1 did not work (60% vs. 64% overall) • Pilot 2: Utilized items from new textbook

45. Pilot #2: Results, D-HS(30 items total) • 6 items = not enough difference between 113 & 114 • 21 items =10-22 percentage points difference between 113 & 114 • 3 items = 30 percentage points difference between 113 & 114

46. 6 items = not enough difference 1. ____ inglés fue difícil para ellos. a. Aprendiendo b. Aprender c. A aprender113=68%, 114=76% 2. Mi sobrina ___ inglés desde que nació. a. empezó hablar b. empezó ablar c. empezó a hablar 113=66%, 114=66% 3. Se ___ muriendo mucha gente en la frontera. a. esté b. esta c. está113=66%, 114=54%

47. 21 items =10-22 percentage points difference 1. No sé _____ decidieron vender la casa. a. porque b. por qué c. por que 113=53%, 114=63% 2. Ese plan ______ estudiado en todos sus detalles. a. hacido b. a sido c. ha sido 113=62%, 114=78% 3. En realidad, yo no ____ si tu idea es buena. a. se b. sabo c. sé113=60%, 114=82%

48. 3 items = 30 percentage points difference 1. ¿Qué _____ ella cuando termine de estudiar? a. va hacer b. va a ser c. va a hacer 113=32%, 114=63% 2. Es increíble que mi abuelo se ___ comprado un Blackberry. a. haiga b. haya c. alla 113=51%, 114=96% 3. Siempre ____ cosas que nos molestan en la vida. a. va a ver b. va haber c. va a haber 113=34%, 114=69%

49. Why did we see these large differences between 113 & 114? • Implicational hierarchies – not necessarily • Half of the 114 students had taken 113 the previous semester • In 113, they studied:

50. Test D, HS Choose one of the following topics and write your answer, filling the lines provided (approx. 15) • “Los inmigrantes a los Estados Unidos deberían olvidar su cultura de herencia y adaptarse a la cultura de este país.” • “Se debe usar uniformes en las escuelas públicas.” • “Se debe eliminar la “acción afirmativa” (affirmative action) que concede a los grupos minoritarios preferencia en los trabajos.”