toukokuu 2011: Lukion kokeiden kehittämistyöryhmien suunnittelukokous

Transkriptio

1 Tuula Sutela

2 toukokuu 2011: Lukion kokeiden kehittämistyöryhmien suunnittelukokous äidinkieli ja kirjallisuus, modersmål och litteratur, kemia, maantiede, matematiikka, englanti käsikirjoitukset vuoden 2011 loppuun mennessä

3 pyrittäessä löytämään mahdollisimman toimiva ja aikaa kestävä arviointityökalu tekninen toteutus on viivästynyt ja pilotointi odotettavissa aikaisintaan loppuvuodesta 2012

4 Basic principles and pedagogy of the exam EN Course 6 curriculum themes and emphases it comprises both computer-based and web-based elements the exam is entirely monolingual

5 Basic principles and pedagogy of the exam reading strategies, listening for gist and detail, and writing for different purposes materials authentic, recent, and drawn from the web, or based on authentic materials where purpose-written an effort has been made to authenticate tasks, to give each one a real-world, meaningful application or purpose

6 Basic principles and pedagogy of the exam CEFR principles have been taken into account a) tasks derive from the real world, b) test provides a degree of self-direction and individual freedom, c) the exam draws on various types of competences and learning strategies

7 Basic principles and pedagogy of the exam A spell-checking feature and online dictionary are available for candidates to use during the exam Search engines such as Google are available for use during the exam As Google is readily accessible, safeguards against plagiarism have been considered in the rubrics

8

9 Candidates are required to search the web to find five points on the given topic and to list the sources consulted A collaborative wiki project with the first item inserted as an example Requirements # 1 Effective reading strategies for conducting an infoquest (7/5/2-3/0 points) # 2 Sources (2/1/0 points) # 3 Contents and comprehensibility (4/3/2/1-0 points)

10 Candidates access an article and reduce it to notes that could be used to support a short talk 5 bullet points, words Requirements # 1 Effective reading strategies; identifying and extracting five key points from the article (3/2/1/0 points) # 2 Comprehensibility and vocabulary: paraphrasing the key points in layperson s language (5-6/3-4/1-2/0 points) # 3 Contents; free from plagiarism and required length(4/3/2/0 points)

11 Candidates are to check the notes received from a partner; out of 7 statements 5 are incorrect and the candidates are to correct these misinterpretations Requirements Listening for detail and correcting misinterpretations (10-12/7-9/4-6/0-3 points)

12 Candidates are to rewrite a set of instructions, correcting all the mistakes they can find Requirements # 1 Recognition of incorrect forms (3/2/1/0 points) # 2 Language use: being able to correct the incorrect forms (6-7/4-5/2-3/0-1 points)

13 An online survey consisting of 5 open-ended questions, each question being two-fold Each answer should be between 40 and 60 words Requirements # 1 Comprehension and plagiarism (2/1/0 points) # 2 Comprehensibility and word count (2/1/0 points) Maximum score is 4 points per answer, 20 points altogether

14 Candidates watch a video and leave a comment speculating on the various reasons for the findings The length of comments between 60 and 100 words Requirements # 1 Comprehension and contents (5-7/3-4/1-2/0 points) # 2 Plagiarism (1/0) # 3 Comprehensibility (3/2/1/0 points) # 4 Word count (1/0points)

15 Candidates are to extend the given notes into a short online article Word count between 200 and 250 words Requirements # 1 Contents and comprehensibility; free from plagiarism; required length (9/7/5/0-2 points) # 2 Structure: coherence and cohesion, correct spelling and proofreading (9/6/3/0 points) # 3 Use of English: structural accuracy from the communicative point of view (3/2/1/0 points) # 4 Vocabulary: range, variety, register (9/6/3/0)

16 Kysymyksiä onko materiaalia sopivasti kolmen tunnin kokeeseen miten opiskelijat käyttävät optiota olla yhteydessä toisiinsa onko opettajalla liikaa korjattavaa ovatko opiskelijat riittävän valmiita suorittamaan edellisen kaltaisia tehtäviä