Which score is adequate : approximation to the assessment rationale used in a Science through English CLIL written test
Despite the surge of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) studies in many areas, assessment practices in CLIL contexts are considered to be much unaccounted for (Poisel, 2007; Hönig, 2009, Maggi, 2012). This paper intends to become a contribution to this area and addresses the issue by ap...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2013 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:114063 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/114063 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.5565/rev/jtl3.541 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Science assessment CLIL assessment Assessment practices Teacher development Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenido en Lengua Extranjera (AICLE) Evaluación de ciencias Evaluación AICLE Prácticas de evaluación Desarrollo del profesorado Aprenentatge Integrat de Continguts en Llengua Estrangera (AICLE) Avaluació de ciències Avaluació AICLE Pràctiques d'avaluació Desenvolupament del professorat |
| Sumario: | Despite the surge of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) studies in many areas, assessment practices in CLIL contexts are considered to be much unaccounted for (Poisel, 2007; Hönig, 2009, Maggi, 2012). This paper intends to become a contribution to this area and addresses the issue by approaching to the case study of a Science through English CLIL unit implemented on a state-funded secondary school in Barcelona, Spain. The paper focuses on the written test of the unit and analyzes the students' responses and degree of satisfaction of the teacher after implementing and correcting the test, which provides valuable insights in the light of teacher development and offers a snapshot of CLIL assessment practices and their effects. The results present a close look at the teacher's attitude towards content and language errors and points out the lights and shadows of assessment in CLIL while highlighting the need of disclosing further assessment practices in similar contexts. |
|---|