The document outlines a sample assessment rubric for an ESL audience, requiring the submission of a paper describing an assessment method, including formative and/or summative elements. It emphasizes the need for alignment with relevant educational standards and describes the components of the submission: context, assessment, and a rationale. The rubric provides performance indicators across various criteria, focusing on understanding assessment issues, language proficiency, and classroom-based assessments.

1. Sample Assessment Rubric
The Sample Assessment requires submission of a paper
describing a suitable assessment intended for an ESL audience.
This assessment should apply some of the principles covered as
part of the course and reflect knowledge and ability to
implement assessments for ELs. It could consist of formative
and/or summative assessment as applicable, and can include any
type or alternative form of assessment (e.g., questionnaire,
interview, journal, test, quiz, dictation, etc.) deemed suitable
for the intended ESL population, grade level, age, etc. For
instance, you could consider this assessment as a component in
an actual lesson intended to address specific needs for the ESL
students, e.g. reading comprehension, vocabulary development,
knowledge of Wh-question formation. You will choose the
grade level, level of proficiency in ESL, setting (i.e., ESL or
EFL, etc.), and the specific assessment suitable to your specific
objectives/ activity- a quiz, an interview, a game, a rubric, a
journal, etc. The assessment should include three (3) sections:
1) A short description of context for the assessment, 2) The
assessment itself, 3) A one-page rationale (a reflection).
Objective/Criteria
Performance Indicators
Need Improvement
Meet Expectations
Exceptional
Content- Issues of assessment
(1 points)
Demonstrates limited understanding of various issues of
assessment, the importance of standards–based assessment, &
the difference between language proficiency & other types of
assessment (4.4.a).

2. Demonstrates limited understanding of the variety of ways in
which assessments of ESOL learners may be biased & how to
help ESOL students become familiar with the content and
conditions of tests in school (4.4.a).
Demonstrates difficulty assessing ESOL students in order to
help distinguish the differences among normal language
development, language differences, & learning problems (4.4.a).
(2 points)
Demonstrates understanding of various issues of assessment, the
importance of standards–based assessment, and the difference
between language proficiency and other types of assessment
(4.4.a).
Demonstrates understanding of the variety of ways in which
assessments of ESOL learners may be biased & how to help
ESOL students become familiar with the content & conditions
of tests in school (4.4.a).
Assesses ESOL students in order to help distinguish the
differences among normal language development, language
differences, & learning problems (4.4.a).
Uses multiple sources of information to make appropriate
adjustments (4.4.a).
(3 points)
Demonstrates a well- developed understanding of various issues
of assessment, the importance of standards–based assessment,
and the difference between language proficiency and other types
of assessment (4.4.a).
Demonstrates a well- developed understanding of the variety of
ways in which assessments of ESOL learners may be biased &
how to effectively help ESOL students become familiar with the
content and conditions of tests in school (4.4.a).

3. Expertly assesses ESOL students in order to help distinguish the
differences among normal language development, language
differences, & learning problems (4.4.a).
Expertly uses multiple sources of information to make
appropriate adjustments (4.4.a).
Language proficiency assessment
(1 points)
Demonstrates limited knowledge of & ability to use a variety of
standards-based language proficiency instruments to inform
instruction (4.4.b).
Demonstrates limited understanding of national and state
requirements, procedures, & instruments for identification,
reclassification, & exit from language support programs (4.4.b).
Demonstrates limited ability to design assessment tasks that
measure students’ discrete & integrated language skills and
ability to use language communicatively within a range of
contexts (4.4.b).
(2 points)
Demonstrates knowledge of & ability to use a variety of
standards-based language proficiency instruments to inform
instruction (4.4.b).
Demonstrates understanding of national and state requirements,
procedures, and instruments for identification, reclassification,
& exit from language support programs (4.4.b).
Demonstrates ability to design assessment tasks that measure
students’ discrete & integrated language skills & ability to use
language communicatively within a range of contexts (4.4.b).
(3 points)
Demonstrates well developed knowledge of & ability to
effectively use a variety of standards-based language
proficiency instruments to inform instruction (4.4.b).
Demonstrates well developed understanding of national and
state requirements, procedures, and instruments for
identification, reclassification, & exit from language support
programs (4.4.b).

4. Demonstrates well developed ability to effectively design
assessment tasks that measure students’ discrete & integrated
language skills & ability to use language communicatively
within a range of contexts (4.4.b).
Classroom-based assessment
(1 points)
Demonstrates limited ability to develop instructional tasks &
assessment tools that promote & measure student learning
(4.4.c).
Has difficulty designing & developing assessment goals, tools,
& tasks appropriate for ESOL students aligned with state &
national standards in ESOL & content areas (4.4.c).
Demonstrates limited ability to assess learners’ content-area
achievement independently from their language ability and
adapt classroom tests and tasks for ESOL learners at varying
stages of English language & literacy development (4.4.c).
Demonstrates limited ability to evaluate & develop classroom
measures using a variety of item types & elicitation & response
formats to assess students’ receptive & productive language
skills (4.4.c).
(2 points)
Demonstrates ability to develop instructional tasks &
assessment tools that promote & measure student learning
(4.4.c).
Designs and develops assessment goals, tools, & tasks
appropriate for ESOL students aligned with state & national
standards in ESOL content areas (4.4.c).
Demonstrates ability to assess learners’ content-area
achievement independently from their language ability & adapt
classroom tests and tasks for ESOL learners at varying stages of
English language & literacy development (4.4.c).

5. Demonstrates ability to evaluate & develop classroom measures
using a variety of item types & & response formats to assess
students’ receptive/ productive language skills (4.4.c).
elicitation & response formats to assess students’ receptive/
productive language skills (4.4.c).
(3 points)
Demonstrates well developed ability to develop instructional
tasks & assessment tools that promote & measure student
learning (4.4.c).
Expertly designs & develops assessment goals, tools, tasks
appropriate for ESOL students aligned with state & national
standards in ESOL & content areas (4.4.c).
Demonstrates well developed ability to assess learners’ content-
area achievement independently from their language ability &
effectively adapt classroom tests and tasks for ESOL learners at
varying stages of English language & literacy development
(4.4.c).
Demonstrates well developed ability to evaluate and develop
classroom measures using a variety of item types and elicitation
& response formats to assess students’ receptive/ productive
language skills (4.4.c).
Organization & Timeliness
(0 points)
Presentation not submitted by required date (more than a day
late). Organization has minor flaws and is somewhat easy to
navigate. Few of the relevant standards are evident and
reflections are not clear. There missing elements/ incomplete
submission.
(0.5 points)
Presentation submitted late (less than a day) due to mitigating
circumstances. Organization is generally clear, understandable
& mostly easy to navigate. Evidence & most reflections are

6. labeled. There is some additional supporting material from
added sources. Most of the required elements are present.
(1 points)
Presentation submitted by due date as required. Organization is
consistently clear & easy to navigate. Support & reflections are
labeled. There is significant additional supporting material from
added sources. All required elements are present.
Total: 10 out of 10
Comments:
Guidelines for Sample Assessment
The Sample Assessment requires submission of a paper
describing a suitable assessment intended for an ESL audience.
This assessment should apply some of the principles covered as
part of the course. It could consist of formative and/or
summative assessment as applicable, and can include any type
or alternative form of assessment (e.g., questionnaire,
interview, journal, test, quiz, dictation, etc.) deemed suitable
for the intended ESL population, grade level, age, etc. For
instance, you could consider this assessment as a component in
an actual lesson intended to address specific needs for the ESL
students, e.g. reading comprehension, vocabulary development,
knowledge of Wh-question formation. You will choose the
grade level, level of proficiency in ESL, setting (i.e., ESL or
EFL, etc.), and the specific assessment suitable to your specific
objectives/ activity- a quiz, an interview, a game, a rubric, a
journal, etc.
The assignment’s objectives, activities and assessment to be
included must be carefully aligned with relevant components
from:
Maryland’s School Curriculum (section for English Language
Proficiency at

7. http://www.mdk12.org/instruction/curriculum/elp/index.html)
and/or
The National TESOL Content Area Standards (or any other
pertinent source, Secondary English)—document provided under
Resources at the course site.
The paper to be submitted will include three parts:
1. A short description of context for the assessment (intended
audience, age/ grade level, proficiency); function the
assessment is serving (part of a lesson, unit, program
evaluation, etc); the relevant objectives and standards connected
to the assessment (list these).
2. The assessment itself (e.g. dictation, reading text and
related questions, quiz, game, worksheet, etc.) and any
references consulted.
3. A one-page rationale (a reflection) where you discuss the
benefits and dilemmas of administering this assessment and why
you think the same would be successful, i.e., elaborate as to
why do you think this will work with the intended students
based on your readings? Also, take time to consider and
specifically address relevant TESOL Standards for Teacher
Preparation Programs included with your syllabus and at the
homepage. Discuss how your submission addresses one or more
of the standards under Domain 4: Assessment.
XXXXXX
ENGL 528, S’11
Sample Assessment
PART 1

8. This assessment is one of the first pieces of written formative
feedback that my adult ESL students will receive in the English
083 Listening and Speaking at Wor-Wic Community College.
Thanks to the “gatekeeping” COMPASS test, my students are
roughly the equivalent of a “High Intermediate” proficiency
when they begin the course when compared to the Maryland
ELP State Curriculum. And this course is the only focused
instruction Wor-Wic offers ESL students for their speaking
skills before Speech 101. The assessment presented here is one
that I piloted this semester, but am working to improve because
it is meant to give students some non-threatening feedback on
their speaking skills as well as describe a couple concrete areas
for improvement. The course objectives that are related to the
assessment are 1 and 2: “Use correct vowel and consonant
sounds” and “Appreciate the role of rhythm, intonation and
stress in spoken English.”
PART 2
English 083
“About Me” Presentation
Overview: Once, in the first few weeks of this semester, you
are required to give a concise presentation about yourself. You
should use creativity and multimedia (pictures, illustrations,
“show-and-tell” items, etc.) to give the class a clear picture of
everything we should you about you!
Requirements: The presentation must be 5-7 minutes long.
That means it must last at least five minutes but no longer than
seven. Because we have many things to accomplish and a busy
schedule, presentations that do not meet the time requirements
will be severely punished. The presentation must use any
variety of multimedia—pictures, illustrations, music, passing
items around. The presentation must be clearly organized and
easy to understand. Most importantly, the presentation must be
all about you!

9. Due Date: Your presentation must be given on the date you
chose randomly on the first day of class. Your presentation is
due: _____________________________ (Write the date here!)
Grading: The presentation is worth 10 percent of your grade in
the course and it will be evaluated by the rubric, or grading
scale, below.
RUBRIC:
25
20
15
10
5
0
Clarity
The entire presentation was easy to understand
Most of the presentation was easy to understand
Some of the presentation was easy to understand
The presentation was very difficult to understand
The presentation was not clear at all
There was no presentation
Length
The presentation was between 5 and 7 minutes
The presentation was within 1 minute of the requirements
The presentation was 90 seconds off of the target
The presentation was within 2 minutes over
The presentation was very long or short
There was no presentation
Creativity

10. The presentation was engaging and creative. Wow!
The presentation was somewhat interesting
The presentation was not very interesting
The presentation was not creative at all
The presentation was very boring
There was no presentation
Multimedia
The presentation used a variety of multimedia
The presentation used some multimedia
The presentation used very little multimedia
The presentation was all lecture or pictures
The presentation was silent and pictureless
There was no presentation
TOTAL
________________/100
INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES on YOUR PRESENTATION:
PART 3
I piloted this assessment tool this semester, and I have mixed
feelings about the results.
The benefits were clear: it was easy to administer, it gave the
students a subject that they seemed to feel very comfortable
speaking about, the other students really enjoyed hearing more
about their classmates, and it gave me an opportunity to get to
know much more about my students than I might have learned
otherwise, and I did get to give one or two pieces of specific
feedback for each student regarding a pronunciation pattern of
error or a syntactical problem that recurred through the
presentation. It also was a great confidence booster, for the
students reviewed the assignment with some fear and trembling,

11. but concluded their paragraph and answered their peers’
questions confidently and assertively. Smiles filled the
classroom.
But the problems with this activity also quickly manifested
themselves in obvious manners. I’m not sure how effective the
rubric is to give students much formative feedback aside from
written comments, which I had to provide ad nauseam to make
up for the short comings of the original rubric. Additionally,
the rubric is not very well aligned with the course objectives
(which may be in need of revision in their own right—I
inherited them and have not yet felt confident in rewriting them
as my own).
I’d like to use this assessment again next semester, but I’d like
to revise the rubric in a way that will make it more a more valid
measure of the students’ actual speaking ability while still
making it a non-threatening activity.
I will most likely add a few more categories of checklists to the
rubric so that I can not only evaluate the categories personally,
as the instructor, but also give the students an idea of the
specific categories that they can work on through the semester
to improve their skills.
For instance, the “Clarity” category could be split into
subcategories (as Brown suggests—I read ahead because I
needed help on this!) like “Pronunciation” which can be split
into “Vowel Sounds,” “Consonant Sounds” to follow the course
and lab work that students are working on, and “Word Stress,”
and “Grammar” which can follow Brown’s chart on page 172,
and be augmented by specific comments like I did overall this
semester, and also “Vocabulary” and again, I’d like to use
Brown’s scale or something like it. In order to keep these
criteria from being non-threatening, I’ll probably weight them

12. on a smaller point scale than the creativity, length, and
multimedia categories. Additionally, I’d like to add a
mandatory “Question and Answer” portion to the assignment. It
was an unexpected byproduct of the pilot of the activity. The
students were very intrigued by the each others backgrounds
and asked many questions of each other. It would have been
great, as an instructor, to have been prepared for this and been
able to give credit to the students for being very capable, fluent,
and proficient in their answers!
After the activity, I will make a copy of the assessment sheet
about the students’ presentations, and this will be a great way
for me to compare their work early in the semester with their
work later. This way I can chart their progress with specific
concerns I have regarding their speaking ability (one of the
slipperiest skills to measure, for as Brown says, “Eliciting the
specific criterion you have designated for a task can be tricky”)
and develop appropriate curriculum and activities throughout
the course and track the students’ progress and encourage them
along the way.