I think for language teachers the best way that they can assess their children is through setting standards for each part of the language. For example, the teacher would grade the students on their improvements in reading, listening, writing, speaking, turning in homework, etc. These are all incredibly essential parts of understanding a language, and they should be able to make applications to all of these aspects to be fully immersed in it. Probably the best way to assess these is by having the children make some sort of portfolio during the semester. If the students have been given plenty of assignments to do during the grading period, they should be able to find proof that they have made improvements and can show the teacher this, which might give them motivation to keep trying to improve themselves. The only downside to this is that some students may have strong points and weak points in learning the language. One may be good speakers but not be able to comprehend what is being spoken to him. So some students may need extra help on some things.
I think that I will blog about both subject for this week, just because I have my own opinions about them. Personally I think that American education depends too much on analyzing test scores and doesn't put enough emphasis on actually thinking of ways to actually teach and help children learn and grow. I think that it can be ONE way to understand if students are all on the same page at a certain essential level, say, before they enter middle and high school. However we try too much to assume that, just because students get bad test scores, that the school that they're in is failing them. We also have the tendency to think that the tests are completely reliable; yet students who may not be accustomed to our culture or language may do especially bad because they don't understand the tests. Another problem is that the teachers are forced to teach the students what could be on the test instead of actually teaching them, and the schools are neglecting those classes and teachers which don't apply to the testing. For example, a school may fire its physical education teacher first before it fires some English or math teachers. Finally it can become a label for both the students and the teachers. A bad score can reflect badly on a student, and he might be labeled as "stupid" or "really smart (and therefore not needing help)." If the students in a teacher's class do poorly, that may reflect on her as a teacher, even though she did not directly have anything to do with the test. So, as long as we don't depend directly on standardized testing to decide how to treat our schools and students and use it instead to decide who needs help and doesn't, they can definitely be used.
