AMERICAN COUNCIL ON THE TEACHING OF

FOREIGN LANGUAGES

(ACTFL)

 

 

DRAFT OF PROGRAM STANDARDS

 

FOR

 

FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHER PREPARATION

 

(INITIAL LEVEL)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prepared by the NCATE Foreign Language Teacher Standards Writing Team

March 6, 2002

 

 

Copies of the standards may be obtained from The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL): 6 Executive Blvd., Yonkers, NY 10701, or from the ACTFL web-site: www.actfl.org

 

Contact persons: 

 

Eileen W. Glisan, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Spanish & Classical Languages, 472 Sutton Hall, Indiana, PA 15705; 724/935-0799; glisan@nauticom.net

 

June K. Phillips, Dean, College of Arts & Humanities, Weber State University, 1904 University Circle, Ogden, UT 84408-1904; 801/626-6425; jphillips@weber.edu

 

 

NCATE FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING TEAM

 

 

Eileen W. Glisan (Co-Chair)                           Indiana University of Pennsylvania

 

June K. Phillips (Co-Chair)                            Weber State University, Ogden, Utah

 

Leroy Hopkins                                               Millersville University of Pennsylvania

 

Nancy Humbach                                             Miami University, Ohio

 

Stephen Levy                                                  American Council on the Teaching of

Foreign Languages (ACTFL)

 

Mary Lynn Redmond                                     Wake Forest University, North Carolina

 

Laurel RasplicaRodd                                       University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado

 

Duarte Silva                                                    Stanford University, California

 

Marjorie Tussing                                            California State University-Fullerton

 

Deborah Robinson                                          Ohio State Department of Education

 

Helene Zimmer-Loew                                     American Association of Teachers of

                                                                        German (AATG), Cherry Hill, New Jersey

 

 

 

This project is being funded by the National Foreign Language Standards Board.

II.             Introduction

 

The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) is a national organization for the foreign language teaching profession. It was created in 1967 by the leadership of the Modern Language Association (MLA) to address issues regarding teacher education, language instruction, and curriculum development. ACTFL is the only national organization dedicated to the improvement and expansion of the teaching and learning of all languages at all levels of instruction. It is an individual membership organization of more than 7,000 foreign language educators and administrators from elementary through graduate education, as well as government and industry. ACTFL publishes the journal Foreign Language Annals, which includes a “Member News Section,” and a yearly foreign language education series volume. It sponsors an annual conference and provides a wealth of professional development workshops and seminars for its membership dealing with a wide variety of topics such as oral proficiency testing, standards-based instruction, authentic assessment, and second language acquisition research.

 

As a national organization, ACTFL works closely with the language associations in all 50 states. Among the members of the ACTFL Executive Council are representatives of the five regional conferences: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (NECTFL), Southern Conference on Language Teaching (SCOLT), Central States Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (CSC), Southwest Conference on Language Teaching (SWCOLT),  and the Pacific Northwest Council for Foreign Languages (PNCFL). Working in conjunction with ACTFL are the national language specific organizations on the National Foreign Language Standards Board, together representing close to 40,000 foreign language educators:

 

American Association of Teachers of French (AATF)

American Association of Teachers of German (AATG)

American Association of Teachers of Italian (AATI)

American Association of Teachers of Spanish & Portuguese (AATSP)

American Classical League (ACL)

American Council of Teachers of Russian (ACTR)

Chinese Language Association of Secondary-Elementary Schools (CLASS) and Chinese Language Teachers Association (CLTA)

National Council of Japanese Language Teachers (NCJLT) and Association of Teachers of Japanese (ATJ)

 

The ACTFL Delegate Assembly held during ACTFL’s annual conference includes representatives from all 50 states, the regional organizations, the language specific organizations listed above, as well as other language organizations.

 

In 1996, ACTFL, in collaboration with the AATF, AATG, and AATSP, published its Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st Century, which describe what students should know and be able to do as a result of language study at the K-12 levels of instruction. In 1999 ACTFL and the other language-specific organizations listed above expanded the initial 1996 publication of generic standards to include language-specific standards at the K-16 levels of instruction for nine languages, Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century, which build upon the original generic standards.

 

In consonance with its mission to serve teacher education, ACTFL developed “Provisional Program Guidelines for Foreign Language Teacher Education” in 1988, which have been used by teacher-preparation institutions as they develop and revise their programs. ACTFL became a member organization of NCATE in 1998, with the support of the National Foreign Language Standards Board. With student standards in place and being implemented across the nation, ACTFL, in collaboration with the National Foreign Language Standards Board, has developed a draft of new Program Standards for Foreign Language Teacher Preparation for final approval by NCATE in 2002. These standards, which represent a broad range of involvement of the profession, will replace the 1988 program guidelines. As in the case of the new student standards, these teacher education program standards are performance-based and outline the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to be an effective foreign language teacher.

 

 

III. REQUIREMENTS FOR PROGRAMS OF

FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHER PREPARATION

 

The preparation of foreign language teachers is the joint responsibility of the faculty in foreign languages and education. In order for foreign language teacher candidates to attain the knowledge, skills, and dispositions described in the ACTFL Program Standards for Foreign Language Teacher Preparation, foreign language programs of teacher preparation must demonstrate that they have the components and characteristics described below.

 

1.     Development of candidates’ foreign language proficiency in all areas of communication, with special emphasis on developing oral proficiency, in all language courses. Upper-level courses should be taught in the foreign language.

2.     Ongoing assessment of candidates’ oral proficiency and provision of diagnostic feedback to candidates concerning their progress in meeting required levels of proficiency.

3.     Language, linguistics, culture, and literature components.

4.     A methods course that deals specifically with the teaching of foreign languages, and which is taught by a qualified faculty member whose expertise is foreign language education and who is knowledgeable about current instructional approaches and issues.

5.     Field experiences prior to student teaching that include experiences in foreign language classrooms.

6.     Field experiences, including student teaching, that are supervised by a qualified foreign language educator who is knowledgeable about current instructional approaches and issues in the field of foreign language education.

7.     Opportunities for candidates to experience technology-enhanced instruction and to use technology in their own teaching.

8.     Opportunities for candidates to participate in a structured study abroad program and/or intensive immersion experience in a target language community.

 

 

 

 

IV.           DRAFT OF PROGRAM STANDARDS FOR FOREIGN LANGUAGE
TEACHER PREPARATION

 

STANDARD #1: LANGUAGE, LINGUISTICS, COMPARISONS

 

STANDARD #2: CULTURES, LITERATURES, CROSS-DISCIPLINARY CONCEPTS

 

STANDARD #3: LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORIES AND

                              INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES

 

STANDARD #4: INTEGRATION OF STANDARDS INTO CURRICULUM &

                              INSTRUCTION

 

STANDARD #5: ASSESSMENT OF LANGUAGES AND CULTURES

 

STANDARD #6: PROFESSIONALISM

 

 

 

STANDARD #1: LANGUAGE, LINGUISTICS, COMPARISONS

 

 

Standard 1.a. Demonstrating Language Proficiency. Candidates demonstrate a high level of proficiency in the target language, and they seek opportunities to strengthen their proficiency.

 

Standard 1.b. Understanding Linguistics. Candidates recognize the changing nature of language, they know the linguistic elements of the target language system, and they accommodate for any gaps in their own knowledge of the target language system by learning on their own.

 

Standard 1.c. Identifying Language Comparisons. Candidates know the similarities and differences between the target language and other languages, they identify the key differences in varieties of the target language, and they seek opportunities to learn about varieties of the target language on their own.

 

Standard 1.a. Demonstrating Language Proficiency.  Candidates demonstrate a high level of proficiency in the target language, and they seek opportunities to strengthen their proficiency.

 

 

 

 

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates are able to communicate successfully in the three modes of communication (interpersonal, interpretive, presentational) in the target language they intend to teach. The heart of language instruction is the ability to teach students to communicate, which can only be possible if teachers themselves exemplify effective communicative skills. Undergirding effective implementation of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century (1999) is the expectation that teachers will provide effective oral and written input in the classroom. 

 

For interpersonal communication (both speaking and writing) and written presentational communication, candidates must demonstrate a specific level of proficiency as described in the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines-Speaking (1999) and ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines-Writing (2001). Teacher candidates are expected to attain a certain level of proficiency depending on the target language they teach. These program standards have categorized languages into two groups: 1) those that use an alphabetic writing system (e.g., French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish), and 2) those that use a non-alphabetic writing system (e.g., Chinese, Japanese). It is expected that candidates teaching target languages that use an alphabetic writing system are able to attain a higher level of oral and written proficiency in those languages because they are able to spend a sufficient amount of time developing these skills and do not have to focus on learning a new writing system. Candidates teaching target languages that use a non-alphabetic writing system have to devote more time to learning the writing systems of those languages and may not initially reach the same level of speaking and writing proficiency as their counterparts in languages that use alphabetic writing systems.

 

Therefore, for target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates must speak and write the target language at the Advanced-Low level or higher. In the case of target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates must speak and write at the Intermediate High level or higher.

 

Candidates must be able to present orally information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners. They must know their audience and adjust their presentation accordingly. Candidates must be able to deliver oral presentations that may be pre-planned, but in which they speak extemporaneously, referring to notes as needed, but not reading them verbatim. They must use connected discourse in various time frames, vocabulary specific to the context of the presentation, and extralinguistic support as necessary to make the message clear to the audience (e.g., visuals). Presentations may consist of literary and cultural topics as well as topics of personal interest to the presenter.

 

Candidates must also be able to comprehend and interpret printed and oral texts in the target language. Their ability to interpret texts is based on the type of text and the degree to which they are familiar with the content of the text. Regardless of the target language, candidates must comprehend and interpret printed texts including realia (e.g., signs, flyers, menus), social communication, newspaper and magazine articles, narratives and descriptions, and literary selections representing various genres. The level of detail of the comprehension is contingent on the interpreter’s familiarity with the topic of the text. For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates will demonstrate understanding and interpretation at a higher level of detail than would be expected of those that work with target languages that use a non-alphabetic writing system.


Candidates must comprehend and interpret oral texts including face-to-face and telephone conversation, news broadcasts, narratives and descriptions in various time frames, speeches, and debates. The level of detail of the comprehension is contingent on the interpreter’s familiarity with the topic of the text.

Since the primary goal of teachers of classical languages lies in the interpretation of written texts, no specific speaking and writing proficiency levels are established for candidates who teach these languages. However, teachers of classical languages should be able to ask simple comprehension questions in the target language based on the texts being read. They should also have the ability to write simple sentences in the target language. Candidates teaching classical languages must be able to comprehend and interpret original written works in these languages. Their ability to interpret texts is based on the type of text and the degree to which they are familiar with the content of the text.

 

Candidates seek opportunities to develop and strengthen their target language proficiency outside of the classroom. For example, they interact with target language speakers in the community, access target language materials via technology, and take advantage of study abroad/immersion opportunities.

 

 

Note:  All rubrics are additive. “Meets Standard” assumes that candidates have also met the criteria under “Approaches Standard.” “Exceeds Standard” assumes that candidates have also met the criteria under both “Approaches Standard” and “Meets Standard.”

 

Elements
Approaches Standard
Meets Standard
Exceeds Standard

 

Interpersonal  communication: Speaking

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates speak at the "Intermediate High" level on the ACTFL scale: they use mostly connected sentences and some paragraphs, speak accurately mostly in present time frame, do some narration and description in past and future time frames (although with greater inaccuracy), are unable to deal fully with a complicated survival situation, and are understood by listeners used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

For target languages that use non- alphabetic writing systems, candidates speak at the “Intermediate Mid” level on the ACTFL scale: they speak at the sentence level in the present time frame, ask and answer questions, deal with a survival-level situation, and are understood by listeners used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates speak at the "Advanced Low" level on the ACTFL scale: they narrate and describe in present, past, and future time frames, speak in paragraphs, successfully manage a survival situation with a complication, and are understood by listeners who may not be used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

 

 

 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates speak at the “Intermediate High” level on the ACTFL scale: they use mostly connected sentences and some paragraphs, speak accurately mostly in present time frame, do some narration and description in past and future time frames (although with greater inaccuracy), are unable to deal fully with a complicated survival situation, and are understood by listeners used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates speak at the "Advanced Mid" level on the ACTFL scale (or higher): they speak in paragraphs with the use of substantial details, narrate and describe in all major time frames with good control of aspect, have substantial fluency and extensive use of vocabulary, are often able to state an opinion but may not be able to logically support it, and are easily understood by listeners who are not used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates speak at the "Advanced Low" level on the ACTFL scale: they narrate and describe in present, past, and future time frames, speak in paragraphs, successfully manage a survival situation with a complication, and are understood by listeners who may not be used to interacting with second language speakers.

 

 

Presentational communication: Speaking

 

Candidates deliver oral pre-planned presentations dealing with familiar topics. They speak using notes, and they often read verbatim. They may speak in strings of sentences using basic vocabulary. They often focus more on the content of the presentation rather than considering the audience.

Candidates deliver oral presentations extemporaneously, without reading notes verbatim. Presentations consist of familiar literary and cultural topics and those of personal interest. They speak in connected discourse using a variety of time frames and vocabulary appropriate to the topic. They use extralinguistic support as needed to facilitate audience comprehension (e.g., visuals).

 

Candidates deliver oral presentations on a wide variety of topics, including those of personal interest. They speak in extended discourse and use specialized vocabulary. They use a variety of strategies to tailor the presentation to the needs of their audience (e.g., circumlocution, selecting appropriate level of formality).

Interpersonal & presentational

Communication:  Writing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates write at the "Intermediate High" level on the ACTFL scale: they meet most practical writing needs (uncomplicated letters, summaries, paraphrases concerning familiar topics, biographical data, work, school experience), they use mostly connected sentences and some paragraphs, they write in some detail simple descriptions and narrations of paragraph length in different time frames, they demonstrate sustained control of simple sentence structures and partial control of more complex sentence structures, and their writing is understood by readers accustomed to the writing of second language learners.

 

For target languages that use non- alphabetic writing systems, candidates write at the “Intermediate Mid” level on the ACTFL scale: they write short simple letters and descriptions based on personal experiences and immediate surroundings, they write in present time with minimal use of grammatical and cohesive elements, and their writing is a collection of discrete sentences and can be understood by readers accustomed to the writing of second language learners.

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates write at the "Advanced Low" level on the ACTFL scale: they  write routine social correspondence, they write about familiar topics by means of  narratives, descriptions and summaries of a factual nature in major time frames, they join sentences in texts of several paragraphs in length, and their writing demonstrates good control of frequently used syntactic structures and is understood by readers accustomed to the writing of second language learners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For target languages that use non- alphabetic writing systems, candidates write at the "Intermediate High" level on the ACTFL scale: they meet most practical writing needs (uncomplicated letters, summaries, paraphrases concerning familiar topics, biographical data, work, school experience), they use mostly connected sentences and some paragraphs, they write in some detail simple descriptions and narrations of paragraph length in different time frames, they demonstrate sustained control of simple sentence structures and partial control of more complex sentence structures, and their writing is understood by readers accustomed to the writing of second language learners.

 

 

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates write at the "Advanced Mid" level on the ACTFL scale (or higher): they describe and narrate in all major time frames, with good control of aspect, they write about a variety of topics with detail, they handle most social and informal correspondence, they have good control of a range of grammatical structures and a fairly wide vocabulary, and their writing demonstrates a good sense of organization.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates write at the "Advanced Low" level on the ACTFL scale: they write routine social correspondence, they write about familiar topics by means of  narratives, descriptions and summaries of a factual nature in major time frames, they join sentences in texts of several paragraphs in length, and their writing demonstrates good control of frequently used syntactic structures and is understood by readers accustomed to the writing of second language learners.

 

 

 

 

 

Interpretive communication:

Listening, reading, viewing

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates identify main ideas and most important details, move beyond literal comprehension, and may identify author’s perspective and/or cultural perspectives.

 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates demonstrate a literal level of comprehension.

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates move beyond literal comprehension, analyze author’s perspective and/or cultural perspectives, and offer personal interpretation of text.

 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates identify main ideas and most important details, move beyond literal comprehension, and may identify author’s perspective and/or cultural perspectives.

For target languages that use an alphabetic writing system, candidates interpret the text on a number of levels, analyze it from a number of perspectives, and offer a detailed personal interpretation of the text supported by a rich range of cultural knowledge. 

 

For target languages that use non-alphabetic writing systems, candidates move beyond literal comprehension, analyze author’s perspective and/or cultural perspectives, and offer personal interpretation of text.

 

Dispositions for acquiring proficiency

Candidates make minimal use of resources such as readings and the internet in order to access the target language world beyond the classroom.

Candidates maintain and enhance their proficiency by interacting in the target language outside of the classroom, reading, and using technology to access target language communities.

Candidates have developed a systematic approach for enhancing their language proficiency on an ongoing basis by using a variety of effective materials, methodologies, and technologies.

 

Standard 1.b. Understanding Linguistics. Candidates recognize the changing nature of language, they know the linguistic elements of the target language system, and they accommodate for any gaps in their own knowledge of the target language system by learning on their own.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

In order to be effective language teachers, candidates have a good understanding of the target language system. They are able to describe its phonological features (phonemes and allophones) and diagnose pronunciation problems of non-native speakers of the target language. They understand and can describe how words are formed (morphological rules) and used (semantics), how sentences are put together (syntactic patterns) in the target language, and how connected discourse is constructed. They understand and can explain the major components of the grammatical system of the target language, including the verb system (time, aspect, mood), agreement (nouns and adjectives/articles, verbs and subjects), word order, the pronominal system, use of key prepositions/postpositions and other grammatical elements, and interrogatives. They are familiar with varieties of the spoken target language. They recognize that language changes over time, and they are willing to keep abreast of these changes. When confronted with gaps in their knowledge of the target language system, they accommodate by investigating on their own.

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard
Meets Standard
Exceeds Standard

Phonology

 

 

Candidates recognize that the target language has different phonemes and allophones than the native language. They describe how some of the target language sounds are articulated.

 

 

 

 

Candidates identify phonemes and allophones of the target language. They diagnose pronunciation problems of non-native speakers of the target language.

 

Candidates describe the differences between the phonological systems of the target and native language. They identify potential pronunciation difficulties for non-native speakers of the target language and describe ways to practice articulation of specific sounds.

 

Morphology

 

Candidates recognize that languages have different ways in which morphemes (parts of words) are put together to form words. 

 

Candidates identify morphemes (affixes and stems) in the target language and how they are put together to form words. They help students to recognize the meaning of new words by using morphological clues (e.g., word families).

 

 

 

Candidates use strategies for identifying and using new words in the target language by recombining morphemes. They provide systematic classroom practice in identifying and using new words by recombining morphemes.

Syntax

Candidates recognize that the target language has specific syntactic patterns that may be similar to or different from the student's native language.  Candidates view discourse as a string of sentences.

Candidates describe syntactic patterns of the target language, such as formation of simple sentences and questions, and contrast them with those of other languages.

Candidates recognize key cohesive devices used in connected discourse (e.g., conjunctions, adverbs).

Candidates identify ways in which syntactic patterns in the target language can be used to reflect nuances of meaning and provide systematic classroom practice of different syntactic patterns.

Candidates identify various ways to create connected discourse and provide examples of connected discourse in their teaching.

Grammar

 

Candidates recognize that the target language has a set of grammatical rules that govern the language. They identify key regularities such as those that are characteristic of the verbal system, agreement, use of pronouns, prepositions or postpositions, word order, and interrogatives.

 

 

Candidates explain the key grammatical rules of the target language such as those that govern the verbal system, agreement, use of pronouns, prepositions and postpositions, word order, and interrogatives in terms of regularities and irregularities. They exemplify these rules with target language examples.

 

Candidates provide detailed descriptions of the regularities and irregularities of the target language grammatical system. They compare the grammatical systems of the target and native languages. They explain how grammar can be used to express nuances of meaning.

 

Changing nature of language

 

Candidates recognize that the target language has changed over time. They rely on target language examples as presented in the textbook.

 

Candidates identify key changes in the target language that have occurred over time (such as writing system, introduction of new words, spelling conventions, grammatical elements, etc.). They identify discrepancies that may exist between the target language of the textbook and contemporary usage.

 

Candidates describe the system of changes that have occurred in the target language over time. They are familiar with contemporary target language usage and adapt the language of the textbook accordingly.

 

 

Dispositions for accommodating for gaps in knowledge of target language system

 

Candidates frequently ask questions when they lack knowledge of specific aspects of the target language system.

 

Candidates investigate the target language system and examples on their own when faced with specific aspects of the system with which they are not familiar.

Candidates take courses and/or seek remedial help in order to accommodate for gaps in their knowledge of the target language system.

 

 


Standard 1.c. Identifying Language Comparisons. Candidates know the similarities and differences between the target language and other languages, they identify the key differences in varieties of the target language, and they seek opportunities to learn about varieties of the target language on their own.

 

 

Supporting Explanation

 

One of the benefits of knowing a second language is that one gains a greater understanding of his or her own language. Teacher candidates must be able to compare and contrast the target language with the native/other languages in order to help their students gain insights into the nature of language systems. This knowledge enables teacher candidates to organize and sequence language instruction, diagnose their students’ linguistic difficulties, and assist them in understanding linguistic concepts. Candidates must also have knowledge of variations of the target language in order to expose students to authentic language from a variety of regions where the language is spoken.

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

 

 

Comparisons between target & other languages

 

 

Candidates recognize that differences exist between the target and other languages.

Candidates identify key differences between the target and other languages and include this information in language instruction.

Candidates use comparisons of target and other languages to systematically plan for and sequence language instruction. 

Language variation

 

Candidates recognize that varieties of the target language exist.

 

Candidates identify key features of varieties of the target language in terms of gender and dialectical differences and provide examples to students.

 

Candidates describe the system of rules that govern differences among varieties of the target language and explain the factors that affect these differences such as geography, culture, politics, level of education, gender, and social class. They engage students in investigating target language varieties through a variety of means including technology.

Dispositions for learning about target language varieties

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates learn target language varieties presented in formal educational contexts (e.g., course work).

Candidates learn about target language varieties through interaction with native speakers outside of class and by accessing authentic target language samples through a variety of means such as technology.

Candidates learn about target language varieties through experiences in immersion situations including study abroad.

 

 

SAMPLE CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #1:

 

ü     Official or Advisory OPI / SOPI (MUST HAVE ONE OF THESE)

ü     Analyses of video taped or audio taped oral presentations

ü     Samples of written interpersonal/presentational tasks

ü     Summaries of interpretive tasks done (listening of news broadcast, reading of literary text, viewing of film), together with reflections

ü     Evidence of plan for continuous language and cultural growth

ü     Performance on examinations demonstrating knowledge of linguistics

ü     Reports / papers / class work in which language comparisons are made

ü     Analyses of interviews demonstrating interaction with native speaker(s) of the target language

ü     Reflections on study abroad and/or immersion experiences and experiences in target language communities

 


 

STANDARD #2:  CULTURES, LITERATURES, CROSS-DISCIPLINARY

                                CONCEPTS

 

Standard 2.a.  Demonstrating Cultural Understandings. Candidates demonstrate that they understand the connections among the perspectives of a culture and its practices and products, and they integrate the cultural framework for foreign language standards into their instructional practices.

 

Standard 2.b.  Demonstrating Understanding of Literary and Cultural Texts and Traditions. Candidates recognize the value and role of literary and cultural texts and use them to interpret and reflect upon the perspectives of the target cultures over time.

 

Standard 2.c.  Integrating Other Disciplines In Instruction. Candidates integrate knowledge of other disciplines into foreign language instruction and identify distinctive viewpoints accessible only through the target language.

 

Standard 2.a.  Demonstrating Cultural Understandings. Candidates demonstrate that they understand the connections among the perspectives of a culture and its practices and products, and they integrate the cultural framework for foreign language standards into their instructional practices.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates acquire knowledge of cultural perspectives as they are reflected in the practices and products of the target language.  That knowledge comes from direct study of culture, from literary texts, and from direct experiences in the target culture. This knowledge and experience enable candidates to recognize and counteract cultural stereotypes. Candidates integrate textual and experiential knowledge into their instructional practice.

 

Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among the perspectives, practices, and products of a culture which comprise the cultural framework for foreign language standards.  The scope of cultural knowledge extends to daily living patterns and societal structures and to geography, history, religious and political systems, literature, fine arts, media, and a variety of cultural products. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the similarities and differences between the target and heritage cultures, and they know how to make comparisons between them. They know how to locate authentic cultural resources appropriate to support instruction.

 

Given that no one can be in possession of all the cultural concepts, contemporary and historical, it is important that teacher education candidates know how to investigate and hypothesize about the dynamic dimensions of culture. They pursue new insights into culture and expand their repertoire of knowledge by analyzing new cultural information that allows learners to join communities in the target culture, including information contained in documents, interactions with native speakers, and social and institutional frameworks.


Candidates recognize cultural stereotypes and their effect on student perceptions of  culture and acknowledge the importance of viewing culture as a dynamic system while keeping abreast of cultural changes. Using their experiences as learners of  other cultures they help students make comparisons. They follow processes to identify, analyze, and evaluate themes, ideas, and perspectives related to the products and practices of the target culture(s). They discuss and analyze expressive products of the target culture(s) and reflect on such intangible products as social, economic, and political institutions, and they explore relationships among these institutions and the perspectives of the target culture(s). Candidates then present information about the target culture products, practices, and perspectives to an audience of listeners/speakers.

 

Candidates use the framework of perspectives, practices, and products, not only for their own learning, but to help students analyze and understand culture. They embed culture into curriculum, instruction, and assessment.  They distinguish between authentic cultural resources (that is, those materials that are created by and for native speakers of the target language) and those that may trivialize or provide an inaccurate view of the culture.  They  engage students in cultural investigations and projects.  Candidates teach cultural comparisons when appropriate for instruction, engage students in investigating cultural comparisons, and conduct classroom activities that heighten students’ awareness of their own culture(s). They use the community and technology as resources for integrating and teaching culture.

 

Native speakers of the target language understand the language and culture of the community in which they teach so that they can elicit linguistic and cultural comparisons, make connections to the other disciplines in the curriculum, and reach out to the broader community.

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard

 

Meets Standard

 

Exceeds Standard

 

Cultural knowledge

 

Candidates cite examples of cultural practices, products, perspectives, but the concepts they know tend to be arbitrarily selected.

 

Candidates cite key cultural perspectives and provide support through description of products and practices.

 

Candidates view the target culture as a system in which  cultural perspectives are reflected through practices and products.

 

Cultural experience

 

Candidates’ experience with the target culture has been limited to travel/tourism or instruction.

 

Candidates have spent planned time in a target culture or community so that they have personal experience to support academic study.

 

Candidates interpret journals or observations from cultural informants, which narrate or describe experiences in studying, living, or working in a target culture.  Candidates also collect their own cultural observations from extended time in the target culture or, for native speakers, from their personal experiences growing up in a target culture.

 

Process of analyzing cultures

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates rely on cultural analyses that are ready available (in textbooks) or are learned (information they have acquired through study and/or personal experiences).  

 

Candidates demonstrate that they can analyze and hypothesize about unfamiliar or unknown cultural issues.  They use the framework of the foreign language standards or another cultural model to investigate hypotheses that arise from materials or events that contain cultural questions or assumptions.

 

Candidates collect and use in instruction materials that pose significant cultural questions or that illustrate cultural changes.  They use a cultural  framework to keep abreast of the changing nature of culture and its cultural variations.

Integrating culture into instruction

 

 

 

 

Candidates integrate into instruction discrete pieces of cultural information, either found in textbooks or acquired through study and/or personal experiences. They expect students to learn discrete pieces of information about the target culture.

Candidates use the standards framework or other cultural model to integrate culture into daily lessons and units of instruction. They engage students in exploring the products and practices that relate to specific perspectives of the target culture.

Candidates use a systematic approach for integrating culture into instruction and/or they use culture as the content for language instruction. They give students the tools for analyzing ways in which cultural products, practices, and perspectives are connected in the target culture.

 

Dispositions for cultural learning

 

Candidates limit their own and their students’ cultural work to familiar and factual cultural content.

 

Candidates integrate cultural insights with the target language in its communicative functions and content areas.  They work to extend their knowledge of culture through independent work and interactions with native speakers.

 

Candidates emphasize cultural concepts as they teach language, analyze and synthesize cultural information from authentic sources in various media and in relation to specific communities or audiences.  They work to build a large repertoire of cultural knowledge and experiences.

 

Standard 2.b.  Demonstrating Understanding of Literary and Cultural Texts and Traditions.  Candidates recognize the value and role of literary and cultural texts and use them to interpret and reflect upon the perspectives of the target cultures over time.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates have a broad understanding of and an appreciation for traditions in the target language. They are able to identify the contributions of major writers, thinkers, artists, and cultural icons, the roles they play, and references made to them in the culture. They are familiar with and able to interpret texts in the variety of discourses that represent the target culture’s traditions and contemporary variations.

 

Candidates read at the level of analysis, interpretation, and synthesis.  They use their knowledge of the literary traditions to interpret changes in the culture over time. Candidates are able to compare and contrast literary traditions in the target culture with those of other cultures. In turn, candidates select and adapt literary texts in ways that engage their students in activities that heighten awareness of target cultures and advance students’ communicative proficiencies. Candidates expand their own language proficiency and cultural knowledge through independent and on-going work with literary and cultural texts.

 

 

 

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard

 

Meets Standard

 

Exceeds Standard

 

Knowledge of literary and cultural texts

 

Candidates are aware of major literary texts and have read excerpts,  abridgements, or reviews of those works and authors. 

 

 

Candidates interpret literary texts that represent defining works in the target cultures. They identify themes, authors, historical style preference, and text types that the cultures deem important in understanding the traditions of the cultures.

 

Candidates interpret and synthesize ideas and critical issues from literary and other cultural texts that represent the historical and contemporary works of a wide range of writers in a wide range of forms and media.  They interpret from multiple viewpoints and approaches.

 

Integrating texts from literature and other media in  instruction

 

Candidates use literary and cultural texts only as they accompany teaching plans in textbooks or supplementary materials, and they elicit a literal interpretation of them.

 

Candidates select literary and cultural  texts appropriate to age, interests, and proficiency level of their students. They integrate these texts into lessons, design activities that develop language competencies based on these texts, and engage students in interpreting their meaning and the cultural perspectives that they represent.

 

Candidates systematically use literary and cultural texts as the basis for helping students to gain insights into the products, practices, and perspectives of the target culture(s) and to expand language competencies.

Dispositions toward exploring literatures and other texts and media

Candidates limit the texts they teach to those outlined and available in the curriculum.

Candidates identify from their studies lists of texts they plan to use and adapt in their teaching. They enrich classroom content with texts and topics valued by the culture.  These texts are taken from literature and other media.

Candidates seek out age-appropriate materials valued by the culture that represent literature, film, and media to expand the repertoire of texts they use in instruction.

 

Standard 2.c.  Integrating Other Disciplines In Instruction. Candidates integrate knowledge of other disciplines into foreign language instruction and identify distinctive viewpoints accessible only through the target language.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates use their proficiency in the target language to access information on disciplines and interdisciplinary perspectives that represent the target culture. Virtually every document, oral or written, that has been created in the target language provides insights, conveys ideas, or represents creative expression from the culture.  The foreign language field has always been heavily interdisciplinary, and candidates derive much of their knowledge of the culture from content in fields such as, history, geography, art history, theater, and philosophy, as well as political and natural sciences.  Candidates are expected to expand their academic knowledge by reading texts or listening to or watching tapes, film, or video from a variety of disciplinary sources.

 

Candidates demonstrate knowledge in the target language of a variety of disciplines and their applications to the interpretation of cultures, they understand how to integrate content from other subject areas into the foreign language curriculum, and they locate content area sources that are appropriate for the level of instruction, age of students, program goals, and interests of students. Candidates can reinforce subject area content in the foreign language in a comprehensible and meaningful manner and provide their students with strategies for learning the content of other subject areas through the foreign language.

 

Candidates believe that other subject areas can be enhanced through foreign language study and recognize that subject area content motivates learners and connects the foreign language with other disciplines in the curriculum. They are curious about and seek opportunities to collaborate with colleagues from other disciplines to find appropriate areas of connection between foreign language and other subjects in the curriculum. Recognizing the value of using authentic texts to provide students with distinctive viewpoints, they are willing to work collaboratively with students to learn new subject area content.

 

Candidates believe that they can acquire new information and distinctive viewpoints that are accessible only through the target language. Therefore, candidates provide opportunities for their students to explore specialized topics or areas of interest through foreign language texts and materials. Since candidates may not be familiar with all areas of interest of their students, they are willing to work collaboratively with students to learn new subject content. Their classrooms, therefore, become communities of learners in which both the teacher and learner explore and learn new content together.

 

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

 

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

Integration of other subject areas into language instruction

 

Candidates may integrate discrete pieces of  information from other subject areas, usually as they appear in the textbook.

Candidates integrate concepts from other subject areas such as math, science, social studies, art, and music. They teach students strategies for learning this new content in the foreign language.

Candidates implement a content-based approach to language instruction that is based on the integration of language and subject-area content.

Planning for

cross-disciplinary instruction

 

Candidates intermittently  plan to integrate subject-area content. Resources are limited to those that accompany the textbook program.

Candidates collaborate with colleagues in making connections between language and other subject areas. They locate authentic resources appropriate to the age, grade level, program goals, and interests of their students.

Candidates systematically plan for instruction with colleagues from other subject areas. They may do team-teaching in order to fully integrate instruction.

Dispositions for integrating other subject areas into language instruction

Candidates’ philosophy of language teaching does not yet emphasize the  integration of other subject areas into language instruction.

 

Candidates devote time to finding ways to integrate subject-area content and to locating authentic resources. They are willing to learn new content with students.

Candidates create a community of learners within the classroom, in which the teacher and learners work together to acquire new information and perspectives across disciplines.

 

 

SAMPLE CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #2:

 

ü     Projects / technology-enhanced presentations on literary or cultural topics

ü     Performance on examinations demonstrating understanding of cultural framework

ü     Capstone projects / research reports dealing with the discipline

ü     Reports on classroom experiences, describing cultural knowledge/perspectives acquired

ü     Journal entries that illustrate knowledge and understanding of the culture, acquired as a result of interaction with target-language communities

ü     Philosophy of teaching statement that addresses the role of culture, literature, and cross-disciplinary content

ü     Lesson plans demonstrating the integration of culture and content from other disciplines into language lessons

ü     P-12 student work samples that illustrate cultural learning

ü     Annotated list of extra-curricular events attended, such as theatre, round-table discussions, etc.

ü     Literary interpretations of a variety of texts

ü     Annotated list of websites that serve as sources of cultural and subject-matter content

 

 

 

STANDARD #3: LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORIES AND

                 INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES

 

Standard 3.a. Understanding Language Acquisition and Creating Supportive Classroom. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of language acquisition at various developmental levels and use this knowledge to create a supportive classroom learning environment that includes target language input and opportunities for negotiation of meaning and meaningful interaction.

 

Standard 3.b. Developing Instructional Practices That Reflect Language Outcomes and Learner Diversity. Candidates develop a variety of instructional practices that reflect language outcomes and articulated program models and address the needs of diverse language learners.

 

 

 

Standard 3.a. Understanding Language Acquisition and Creating Supportive Classroom. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of language acquisition at various developmental levels and use this knowledge to create a supportive classroom learning environment that includes target language input and opportunities for negotiation of meaning and meaningful interaction.

 

Supporting Explanation:

 

Candidates understand how language acquisition occurs at various developmental levels (e.g., elementary school students vs. adolescents) both within and outside of the formal classroom setting. They use the target language in the classroom to the maximum extent possible, provide meaningful target language input, and assist students in understanding this input.  Teachers build lessons around topics drawn from a variety of subject areas; such content-based lessons integrate language, culture, and student interests.  Candidates provide guided assistance to students to help them learn to negotiate meaning and take risks with the language as they use it to express thoughts and ideas. They provide opportunities for students to use the target language to express meaning and fulfill a variety of communicative needs. They design tasks through which students interact meaningfully with one another, with the teacher, and with native speakers of the target language. Candidates possess the dispositions necessary for creating a supportive classroom environment that is reflective of student needs. They are able to assume a role as facilitator, their feedback to students focuses not only on linguistic accuracy but also on meaning of their messages, and they offer encouragement and affirmation of their students’ progress in the target language. They recognize that errors occur as part of the language acquisition process, and they encourage students to take risks in using the target language. 

 

 

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

 

Language acquisition theories

 

 

Candidates exhibit an awareness of the key concepts of language acquisition theories as they relate to learners at various developmental levels. They illustrate an ability to connect theory with practice. They show a growing awareness of the connection between student learning and the use of instructional strategies.

Candidates exhibit an understanding of language acquisition theories, including the use of target language input, negotiation of meaning, interaction, and a supportive learning environment. They draw on their knowledge of theories, as they apply to learners at various developmental levels, in designing teaching strategies that facilitate language acquisition.

 

Candidates exhibit ease and flexibility in applying language acquisition theories to instructional practice. They use a wide variety of strategies to meet the linguistic needs of their students at various developmental levels. Candidates exhibit originality in the planning, creation and implementation of instructional strategies that reflect language theories.

 

 

Target language input

 

 

Candidates use the target language for specific parts of classroom lessons at all levels of instruction, but may avoid spontaneous interaction with students in the target language. They may use some strategies to help students understand oral and written input.

 

 

 

Candidates use the target language to the maximum extent in classes at all levels of instruction. They designate certain times for spontaneous interaction  with students in the target language. They tailor language use to students’ developing proficiency levels. They use a variety of strategies to help students understand oral and written input.  They use the target language to

design content-based language lessons.

 

Candidates conduct classes in the target language at all levels of instruction. A key component of their classes is their spontaneous interaction with students in the target language.  They assist students in developing a repertoire of strategies for understanding oral and written input. They use the target language to teach a variety of subject-matter and cultural content.

 

 

 

 

Negotiation of meaning

 

Candidates do not regularly negotiate meaning with students. They teach students some expressions in the target language for negotiating meaning, such as “Could you repeat that, please?”

 

 

 

Candidates negotiate meaning with students when spontaneous interaction occurs. They teach students a variety of ways to negotiate meaning with others and provide opportunities for them to do so in classroom activities.

Negotiation of meaning is an integral part of classroom interaction. Candidates negotiate meaning regularly with students. They teach students to integrate negotiation of meaning strategies into their communication with others.

Meaningful classroom interaction

Candidates use communicative textbook activities as the basis for engaging students in meaningful classroom interaction.  Meaningful contexts are those that occur in the textbook.

 

 

 

Candidates design activities in which students will have opportunities to interact meaningfully with one another.  The majority of activities and tasks have meaningful contexts that reflect curricular themes and students’ interests.

 

 

Meaningful classroom interaction is at the heart of language instruction. Candidates engage students in communicative and interesting activities and tasks on a regular basis. All classroom interaction reflects engaging contexts that are personalized to the interests of students and reflect curricular goals.

 

Dispositions for creating a supportive classroom environment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates employ exercises and activities that require students to provide predictable and/or correct  right answers.

 

 

Candidates assume a traditional role of teacher as director of learning.

 

 

 

 

 

The feedback that candidates offer students is primarily evaluative in nature and focuses on the accuracy of their language.

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates encourage students to progress within the framework of the textbook. 

Candidates employ exercises and activities that require students to provide open-ended, personalized responses.

 

 

Candidates often assume the role of facilitator in classroom activities. Some activities provide opportunities for them to learn with their students.

 

 

Candidates provide feedback to students that focuses on meaning as well as linguistic accuracy. They view errors as a normal part of the language acquisition process.

 

 

 

Candidates employ strategies to encourage and affirm student progress.

Candidates encourage students to take risks in using the target language.

Candidates use an approach in which personalized, creative language use is central to all activities.

 

 

 

The principal role of the candidate is as facilitator of learning in the language classroom. Candidates value opportunities to learn with their students.

 

 

Candidates engage students in monitoring their own progress and in asking for assistance from the teacher. They engage students in tracking their own errors and their progress and in providing feedback to their peers.

 

Candidates reward students for taking risks in using the target language.

 


Standard 3.b. Developing Instructional Practices That Reflect Language Outcomes and Learner Diversity. Candidates develop a variety of instructional practices that reflect language outcomes and articulated program models and address the needs of diverse language learners.

 

Supporting Explanation:

 

Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the physical, cognitive, emotional, and social development of students at all levels of instruction. They understand the important effects of language acquisition theories and learner development on instructional planning and practice. They understand the relationship of foreign language program models and language outcomes. As schools develop longer sequences, candidates recognize the benefits of well-articulated sequences of instruction. They provide a range of learning opportunities for learners of various ages, developmental and linguistic levels, language backgrounds, and learning styles. They demonstrate the ability to adapt language instruction to address students’ multiple ways of learning and to meet their special needs. They are willing to seek out information about their students’ needs in order to adapt instruction accordingly.

 

Candidates use a variety of instructional strategies to engage students in critical thinking and problem solving. They value the role of inquiry and collaboration in the language classroom. They maximize learning and interaction through the use of pair, small group, and large group activities. Candidates use questioning strategies and task-based instruction as appropriate given the goals of instruction in the language classroom.

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

Theories of learner development and instruction

 

Candidates recognize that K-12 students have different physical, cognitive, emotional, and social developmental characteristics.  Candidates  recognize the need to tailor instruction to accommodate their students’  developmental needs.  They are aware that many different instructional models and techniques exist.

 

Candidates describe the physical, cognitive, emotional, and social developmental characteristics of K-12 students. They implement a variety of instructional  models and techniques to accommodate these differences.

 

 

Candidates plan for instruction according to the physical, cognitive, emotional, and social developmental needs of their students. They tailor instruction to meet the developmental needs of their students.

 

 

Understanding of relationship of articulated program models to language outcomes.

 

Candidates recognize that  different foreign language program models (e.g., FLES, FLEX, immersion) exist and lead to different language outcomes.

Candidates describe how foreign language program models (e.g., FLES, FLEX, immersion) lead to different language outcomes.

 

Candidates design and/or implement specific foreign language program models that lead to different language outcomes.

 

Adapting instruction to address students’ language levels, language backgrounds, learning styles

 

 

 

 

Candidates recognize that their students have a wide range of language levels, language backgrounds, and learning styles. They attempt to address these differences by using a limited variety of  instructional strategies.

 

 

Candidates seek out information regarding their students’ language levels, language backgrounds, and learning styles. They implement a variety of instructional models and techniques to address these student differences.

 

 

Candidates consistently use information about their students’ language levels, language backgrounds, and learning styles to plan for and implement language instruction.

 

 

Adapting instruction to address students’ multiple ways of learning

Candidates recognize that students approach language learning in a variety of ways. They identify how individual students learn.

 

 

Candidates identify multiple ways in which students learn when engaged in language classroom activities.

 

 

Candidates plan for and implement a variety of instructional models and strategies that accommodate different ways of learning.

 

 

Adapting instruction to meet students’ special needs

 

Candidates identify special needs of their students, including cognitive, physical, linguistic, social, and emotional needs. They recognize that they may need to adapt instruction to meet these special needs.

 

Candidates implement a variety of instructional models and techniques that address specific special needs of their students.

 

Candidates anticipate their students’ special needs by planning for alternative classroom activities as necessary.

 

 

Critical thinking and problem solving

 

 

Candidates tend to implement activities that have a limited number of answers and allow little room for critical thinking and/or problem solving.

 

Candidates implement activities that promote critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

 

Candidates reward their students for engaging in critical thinking and problem solving.

 

 

Grouping

 

Candidates teach primarily with large-group instruction.  Pair- and small-group activities generally consist of students grouped together but working individually.

 

Candidates conduct activities in which students work collaboratively in pairs and small groups. They define and model the task, give a time limit and expectations for follow-up, group students, assign students roles, monitor the task, and conduct a follow-up activity.

 

Candidates provide regular opportunities for students to work collaboratively in pairs and small-groups. They teach their students strategies for assuming roles, monitoring their progress in the task, and evaluating their performance at the end of the task.

 

Use of questioning and tasks

 

 

Candidates use short-answer questioning as the primary strategy for eliciting language from students. They use tasks as they appear in the textbook.

 

Candidates recognize that questioning strategies and task-based activities serve different instructional objectives. They identify the effect of the questioning or task on the nature of language use and the responses elicited from students.

 

Candidates have an approach to planning and instruction that integrates the appropriate use of both questioning strategies and task-based activities, based on instructional objectives and the nature of language use that they want to elicit from students.

Dispositions about student diversity

 

 

 

Candidates adapt instruction to address students’ needs if they are given specific instructions of how to do so.

Candidates seek out opportunities to learn about their students, their backgrounds, and their special needs. They adapt instruction to address students’ needs.

Candidates value diversity in their classrooms. They work with students, parents, colleagues, and others to address the special needs of their students.

 

 

SAMPLE CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #3:

 

ü     Performance on examinations demonstrating understanding of language acquisition theories and the relationship between theory and practice

ü     Reflections on classroom observations and/or case study reports that include discussion of theory and practice

ü     Lesson plans (and reflections lessons) that illustrate teaching practices based on language acquisition theories

ü     Self-evaluations/reflections on video taped lessons taught by candidate

ü     Written classroom learning scenarios in which the candidate describes expected outcomes of the teaching segments, instructional decisions made prior to and during the lessons, and an assessment of P-12 student learning and teaching performance

ü     Analysis of teaching performance over time that addresses progress made in providing target language input, using negotiation of meaning, engaging students in interactions, serving as facilitator in the classroom, providing feedback that focuses on meaning and accuracy, using questions and tasks appropriately, and encouraging students to take risks in using the target language

ü     Lesson plans (and reflections on lessons) that illustrate modifications to meet specific learner needs, address multiple ways of learning, promote cultural thinking and problem solving, and engage students in pair and group activities

ü     Written summaries of professional journal articles that deal with current research and/or teaching practices, together with a reflection on the information learned

 

 

 

 


STANDARD #4: INTEGRATION OF STANDARDS INTO CURRICULUM

     AND INSTRUCTION

 

 

Standard 4.a. Understanding and Integrating Standards In Planning. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards, and they integrate these frameworks into curricular planning.

 

Standard 4.b. Integrating Standards in Instruction. Candidates integrate the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards into language instruction.

 

Standard 4.c.  Selecting and Designing Instructional Materials. Candidates use standards and curricular goals to evaluate, select, design, and adapt instructional resources.

 

 

 

Standard 4.a. Understanding and Integrating Standards In Planning. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning, and their state standards, and they integrate these frameworks into curricular planning.

 

 

Supporting Explanation:

 

The Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century (1999) have defined what our students should know and be able to do as a result of their experiences in foreign language classrooms across the nation. If our national vision for foreign language study in grades K-12 is to be realized, teacher candidates must have a thorough understanding of the five goal areas (Communication, Cultures, Comparisons, Connections, Communities) and eleven content standards. They identify the five goal areas and describe the eleven standards. They design unit and daily lesson plan objectives that address the goal areas and standards. They identify the goal areas and standards addressed in textbook and classroom activities, and they design activities that address specific goal areas and standards. They are willing to integrate standards in some way even if their textbook does not. In addition, candidates are familiar with their state standards for foreign language learning and recognize the connection between the state and national standards. 

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

 

Understanding of goal areas and standards

 

 

Candidates name the goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning, and identify the similarities between their state and national foreign language standards.

Candidates identify the goal areas and standards (both national and state) addressed in specific textbook and/or classroom activities.

 

 

Candidates use the national and state foreign language standards as a rationale for the significance of language study.

 

 

Integration of standards into planning

 

Candidates integrate goal areas and standards (both national and state) into planning to the extent that the textbook does so.

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates create unit/lesson plan objectives that address  specific goal areas and standards (national and state).They design activities and/or adapt textbook exercises and activities to address specific standards.

 

Candidates use the goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning, as well as their state standards, to design curriculum and unit/lesson plans.

 

 

Dispositions for integrating standards into planning

Candidates integrate national and state standards into their planning only if they are explicitly integrated in their textbook.

Candidates integrate national and state standards into their curricular planning, even if their textbook is not standards-based.

 

 

Candidates justify and use standards as the focus of their curriculum.

 

Standard 4.b. Integrating Standards in Instruction. Candidates integrate the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards into language instruction.

 

Supporting Explanation:

 

Candidates use their knowledge of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and of their state standards to make instructional decisions. They find ways to conduct classroom activities that address specific goal areas and standards. When necessary, they adapt textbook exercises in order to align them with the standards and thus bring about communication that mirrors more closely communication that occurs outside of the classroom. They have a good understanding of the interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational modes of communication, and they manage communication in their classrooms by integrating these three modes in instruction. Accordingly, their activities and tasks lead students from one mode to the next, reflecting communication as it naturally occurs.  Candidates understand culture from an anthropological view and engage their students in exploring cultural systems in terms of their interrelated products, practices, and perspectives. Candidates find ways to integrate content from other subject areas into their language teaching, enabling their students to learn content and language simultaneously. Integrating connections with other disciplines often requires collaboration with other teachers of other subject areas in the school or school district. Candidates provide opportunities for their students to connect with target-language communities through a variety of means, including technology. Candidates view the connection with communities as an important way of helping their students to use the language beyond the classroom and to begin to be life-long language learners.  Candidates design standards-based activities, even if their textbook is not standards-based, and they are willing to acquire whatever knowledge and skills that are necessary to do so.

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

 

Overall integration of standards into instruction

 

Candidates conduct activities that address specific goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards to the extent that the textbook includes a  connection to standards.

 

Candidates adapt textbook exercises and activities as necessary to address specific goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards.

 

The goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning

and/or their state standards are the focus of all classroom activities.

 

 

Integration of three modes of communication

 

Candidates understand the connection between the interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational modes of communication.  They primarily focus on one mode at a time in instruction and classroom activities.

 

Candidates design opportunities for their students to communicate by using the interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational modes in an integrated manner.

 

 

 

Candidates consistently plan for and manage communication in the foreign language classroom by integrating the interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational modes of communication in activities and tasks.

 

Integration of cultural products, practices, perspectives

 

Candidates understand the anthropological view of culture in terms of products, practices, and perspectives. They may refer to one or more of these areas in their teaching of culture.

Candidates design opportunities for their students to explore the target language culture(s) by means of cultural products, practices, and perspectives.

Candidates consistently plan for and implement cultural instruction in terms of the products-practices-perspectives framework.

 

 

 

Connections to other subject areas

 

Candidates make connections to other subject areas as these connections are made in the textbook.

 

 

Candidates plan for and design opportunities for their students to learn about other subject areas in the foreign language. They may collaborate with colleagues from other subject areas.

 

Candidates design a content-based curriculum and collaborate with colleagues from other subject areas.  They assist their students in  acquiring new information from other disciplines in the foreign language.

 

 

Connections to target- language communities

Candidates help their students to connect with target-language communities through the use of videos that accompany the textbook and/or native speaker presentations in the classroom.

 

Candidates provide opportunities for their students to connect to target-language communities through a variety of means such as technology and  authentic materials.

 

Candidates use connections to target-language communities as a key component of their planning and instruction.

 

Dispositions for integrating standards into instruction

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Candidates integrate goal areas and standards into instruction to the extent that they are integrated in their textbook.

 

Candidates design and implement activities that are standards-based, even if their textbook and curriculum are not standards-based.  They acquire knowledge and skills to be able to do this.

 

Candidates use the goal areas and standards to drive language instruction.  They participate in professional development activities to enhance their knowledge and expertise with standards.

 

Standard 4.c. Selecting and Designing Instructional Materials. Candidates use standards and curricular goals to evaluate, select, adapt, and design instructional materials.

 

Supporting Explanation:

 

The Standards for Foreign Language Learning have served as a catalyst for change, not only in the areas of planning and classroom instruction, but also in the selection, adaptation, and design of instructional materials. Candidates use the organizing principles of the standards as they evaluate, select, and create instructional materials. Where in the past the textbook was the primary resource, candidates now use the textbook as one of many resources. These resources include visuals, realia, authentic printed and oral texts, and other authentic materials obtained through technology (e.g., internet). Candidates locate and use authentic materials in their teaching, since the value of authentic materials is that they reflect real-world language as it is used by native speakers in target cultures. Candidates adapt the textbook and other materials to align them with standards-based goals. They spend the time necessary to locate effective materials, to adapt them, and to design their own.

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

 

Evaluation, selection, creation of standards-based materials

 

 

 

Candidates base their selection and design of materials on short-term instructional objectives rather than on standards and/or curricular goals.

Candidates use their knowledge of standards and curricular goals to evaluate, select, and design materials, including visuals, realia, authentic printed and oral materials, and other resources obtained through technology.

 

 

Candidates base their selection and design of materials on the standards philosophy and their curricular goals. They creatively use a wealth of resources including visuals, realia, authentic printed and oral materials, and other resources obtained through technology. They justify the use of these materials.

 

Use of authentic materials

 

Candidates primarily use materials created for formal classroom use.

 

 

Candidates identify and integrate authentic materials into classroom activities (e.g., tape recorded news broadcasts and talk shows, magazine and newspaper articles, literary selections, video taped talk shows, realia).

They help students to acquire strategies for understanding and interpreting authentic texts.

 

Candidates use authentic materials to plan for instruction. They implement a variety of classroom activities based on authentic materials. They engage students in acquiring new information by exploring authentic texts. 

 

Adaptation of materials

Candidates make few adaptations to instructional materials.

Candidates adapt materials as necessary to reflect standards-based goals and instruction.

 

An integral part of candidates’ planning is to adapt materials so that they address the standards and curricular goals more effectively.

 

Dispositions for locating resources and creating materials

 

 

 

 

Candidates tend to use materials that accompany the textbook program and/or that are readily available.

Candidates are willing to spend time to locate resources and to create materials that address the standards.

A regular part of candidates’ planning time is devoted to locating resources and creating materials that address the standards.

 

 

SAMPLE CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #4:

 

ü     Written correlation of the candidate’s state standards to national standards

ü     Written classroom learning scenarios that illustrate integration of standards into teaching

ü     Unit / lesson plans (with reflections) that illustrate standards-based lessons and samples of P-12 student work

ü     Written rationales for the selection of materials used in lessons

ü     List of sources of standards-based lesson materials, including authentic materials and those obtained through various technologies

ü     Journal entries that describe how the candidate uses technology to integrate the standards into instruction

ü     Written critiques of instructional resources such as the text, websites, video segments

ü     Instructional materials created by the candidate and a description of how materials are used and for which learning outcomes

ü     Instructional materials adapted by the candidate with a description of how and why materials were adapted

 

 

 

STANDARD #5: ASSESSMENT OF LANGUAGES AND CULTURES

 

 

Standard 5.a.  Knowing assessment models and using them appropriately.  Candidates believe that assessment is ongoing, and they demonstrate knowledge of multiple ways of assessment that are age- and level-appropriate by implementing purposeful measures.

 

Standard 5.b.   Reflecting on assessment.   Candidates reflect on the results of student assessments, adjust instruction accordingly, analyze the results of assessments, and use success and failure to determine the direction of instruction.

 

Standard 5.c.  Reporting assessment results.  Candidates interpret and report the results of student performances to all stakeholders and provide opportunity for discussion.

 

Standard 5.a.  Knowing assessment models and using them appropriately.  Candidates believe that assessment is ongoing, and they demonstrate knowledge of multiple ways of assessment that are age- and level-appropriate by implementing purposeful measures.

 

 

Supporting Explanation

Recent years have seen dramatic changes in the formats of testing that are appropriate to measuring foreign language performances. Although there are aspects of assessment that may be addressed in general testing courses, assessment of communicative and cultural competencies in foreign languages require processes, procedures, and evaluation unique to specific languages. 

 

Candidates understand that appropriate assessment of students is a continual process that informs classroom instruction. Foreign language assessments can be both formative and summative and teachers recognize and utilize both models purposefully.  The various modes of communication and the acquisition of cultural knowledge all require specific measurement models that focus on student performance.  Candidates are able to assess interpersonal communication, interpretive communication, and presentational communication orally and in writing.   Listening/speaking in the interpersonal mode is assessed through oral interviews or tasks in which the student’s ability to negotiate meaning can be observed.  An interview or variations thereof allow teachers to see at what level students consistently perform as well as where they must compensate for their evolving competence.  Successful communication requires more than words; it is also contingent upon appropriate cultural behaviors and the approach to topics.  Interpretive communication looks at how students, as listeners or readers, derive meaning from authentic texts, literary and informational.  Measures should reveal not only what is understood but what is inferred from the cultural context, and responses should include forced choice, short answer, and open-ended formats.  Presentational communication, planned speaking or writing, should assess the end product of the student’s work and scoring should include a holistic measure and not just a detailing of errors.  Candidates should be familiar with the ACTFL  (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages) Performance Guidelines for K-12 Learners.


Candidates are able to assess student learning about the perspectives, practices, and products of the target cultures and comparisons to their own.  Candidates seek opportunities to assess how students use their language in culturally appropriate ways beyond the classroom.  Candidates also integrate assessment measures into regular classroom instruction and understand that performance assessment frequently encompasses multiple areas of student knowledge and skills.

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard

 

Meets Standard

 

Exceeds Standard

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formative & summative assessment models

 

Candidates recognize the purposes of  formative and summative assessments as set forth in prepared testing materials.

 

Candidates design formative assessments to measure progress within a unit of instruction and summative assessments to measure performance at the end of a unit or chapter.

 

Candidates design a system of formative and summative assessments to measure student progress in an ongoing manner and at culminating points in the total program.

 

Interpretive communication

 

Candidates limit assessment measures to those found in textbooks and materials prepared by others.   The reading/listening materials with which they work tend to be those prepared for pedagogical purposes.

 

Candidates design  performance assessments that measure students’ abilities to comprehend and interpret authentic oral and written texts from the target cultures.  The assessments they design and use encompass a variety of response types from forced choice to essays.

 

Candidates design assessment procedures that encourage students to interpret reading and listening texts of their choice.  Many of these involve students’ developing self-assessment skills to encourage independent reading/listening.

 

Presentational communication

 

Candidates limit assessments of presentational communication to assignments that are narrowly built upon material taught.

 

Candidates design and use assessments that capture how  well student speak and write in planned contexts.  The assessments focus on the final products created after a drafting process and look at how meaning is conveyed in culturally appropriate ways.  They create and use effective holistic and/or analytical scoring methods.

 

Candidates create presentational  tasks that develop students’ abilities to self-assess which includes self-correction and revision.  They encourage students to write or to speak on topics of interest to the students.

 

Cultural perspectives

 

Candidates limit assessments of culture to isolated facts presented in textbooks and prepared materials.

Candidates devise assessments that allow students to apply the cultural framework to authentic documents.  Student tasks may include identifying the products, practices, and perspectives embedded in those documents.

 

Candidates design assessments  of problem-solving tasks in content areas of interest to students and possibly on topics not familiar to the teacher.

 

Integrated  communication assessments

 

Candidates recognize that assessment units can lead students from, for example, a reading task to a presentational one to a discussion, but they tend to score the pieces rather than the overall accomplishment.

 

Candidates utilize existing standards-based performance assessments (e.g., IPAs: Integrated Performance Assessments), that allow students to work through a series of communicative tasks on a theme (e.g., wellness, travel).  They are able to evaluate performance in an overall fashion and on subsets of skills and content.

 

Candidates design standards-based performance assessments for their students based upon  models available in the literature or from professional organizations.

 

Dispositions toward global assessments

 

Candidates may recognize the role of performance assessment in the classroom and attempt to measure performances periodically.  However, they rely primarily on assessments that are discrete point in nature or right answer responses.

 

Candidates assess what students know and are able to do by using and designing assessments that capture successful communication and cultural understandings. They commit the time and effort necessary to measure end performances.

 

Candidates demonstrate that they have shifted most of their assessment practices to performances that are global and integrative and from those they derive the analytical information that informs their teaching.  They commit time and energy to assessment projects that are creative and interesting to students.

 

 

Standard 5.b.   Reflecting on assessment.   Candidates reflect on the results of student assessments, adjust instruction accordingly, analyze the results of assessments, and use success and failure to determine the direction of instruction.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates systematically reflect upon the student performances in order to adapt their instruction. The results of assessment indicate to teachers where student strengths lie, where alternative instructional strategies are necessary, where skills or knowledge must be reinforced, where additional practice must be provided.  Candidates recognize that students acquire proficiency over time and that the equation between what is taught and what is learned is imperfect; students’ performances provide evidence of different rates of acquisition.

 

 

 

Elements

 

Approaches Standard

 

Meets Standard

 

Exceeds Standard

 

 

Reflection

 

Candidates interpret  assessments as correct/incorrect student responses even when reflecting upon  holistic measures.

 

Candidates observe and analyze the results of student performances so as to discern both global success and underlying inaccuracies.

 

Candidates teach students to reflect upon their performances in both a global and analytical fashion.

 

Adjusting instruction

 

Candidates tend to adjust instruction  through whole group remediation or  review.

 

Candidates skillfully use insights gained from assessing student performances to adapt, change, vary, reinforce instruction.

 

Candidates work with students to help them identify the gaps in their knowledge and skills.

 

Dispositions for committing time to reflection

 

Candidates use  assessments that can be scored quickly and  mechanically and move forward without due consideration of how results affect student progress.

 

Candidates  incorporate what they have learned from assessments and show how they have adjusted instruction. The commitment to do this is established in their planning.

 

Candidates design assessments and commit time to seeing how results be used to improve teaching and student learning.

 

 

Standard 5.c.  Reporting assessment results.  Candidates interpret and report the results of student performances to all stakeholders and provide opportunity for discussion.

 

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates believe in the transparency embedded in performance assessment in that the assessment tasks themselves reveal the strengths and areas for growth of student knowledge and skills.  Candidates are able to help students understand the level at which they perform most competently and how they progress to a more advanced level. Performance assessments demonstrate how well and to what degree students can use the language effectively for communication and behave appropriately in the target cultures.  Candidates are able to describe what their students can do and begin to develop that message for the various publics.  They are willing to take the time to report assessment results accurately and clearly.

 

 

 

 

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

 

 

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

Interpreting and reporting progress to students

 

Candidates tend to report student progress in terms of grades, scores, and information on discrete aspects of language or cultural facts.

Candidates interpret and report accurately the progress students are making in terms of language proficiency and cultural knowledge.  They  use the performances to illustrate both what students can do and how they can advance.

 

Candidates identify ways of involving students in understanding testing procedures and scoring mechanisms so that students gain confidence in self-assessment and in planning for personal growth.

Communicating with stakeholders

 

Candidates identify the stakeholders and their roles and interests in assessment of student progress.

Candidates report student progress to students and parents. 

They use appropriate terminology and share examples that illustrate student learning.

 

Candidates communicate to audiences in the schools and community how assessment reflects language proficiency and cultural experiences.

 

Dispositions for taking time to report assessment results

Candidates find short-cut ways to report assessment results.

Candidates devote time to reporting assessment results accurately and clearly.

Candidates commit time to reporting assessment results in a way that is tailored to particular groups of stakeholders.

 

 

 

SAMPLE CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #5:

 

ü     Performance on examinations demonstrating knowledge of assessment principles and models

ü     Samples of formative and summative P-12 assessments/rubrics across the communicative modes and cultural framework

ü     Analyses of video taped student performances on assessment tasks, together with rubrics and assessment results

ü     Samples and analyses of integrated performance assessments

ü     Reports of how assessment results were used to improve future instruction

ü     Summaries, journal entries, and/or case studies describing parent-teacher conferences and/or how student progress was reported

 

 

 

 

 

STANDARD #6: PROFESSIONALISM

 

 

Standard 6.a. Engaging in Professional Development. Candidates engage in professional development opportunities that strengthen their own linguistic and cultural competence and promote reflection on practice. 

 

Standard 6.b. Knowing the Value of Foreign Language Learning. Teacher candidates know the value of foreign language learning to the overall success of all students and understand that they will need to become advocates with students, colleagues, and members of the community to promote the field.

 

Standard 6.a. Engaging in Professional Development. Candidates engage in professional development opportunities that strengthen their own linguistic and cultural competence and promote reflection on practice. 

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates understand the importance and benefits of belonging to a professional community.  They are aware that there are different communities that support them in different ways at various points in their careers.  More importantly, they understand that professional development is a life-long endeavor and an indispensable asset to becoming a contributing member of the profession. Professional development may include such activities as participating in conferences and workshops, reading professional journals, and linking theory and practice by systematically reflecting on teaching, learning and assessment.  Candidates believe that it is their responsibility to seek counsel from mentors as to which organizations might be most appropriate for their specific needs. Candidates develop the ability to reflect on the outcomes of their involvement in these professional communities and on how their continued participation will strengthen their own linguistic and cultural competence and refine their pedagogical practices. They understand the importance of seeking professional growth.

 

Elements

 

Approaches  Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

Awareness of professional community

 

Candidates identify appropriate professional communities.

 

Candidates identify and participate in at least one professional organization.

 

Candidates identify and participate in multiple professional communities.

Life-long commitment to professional growth

 

 

Candidates articulate the need for ongoing professional development.

 

Candidates identify immediate professional development needs and a potential source of support.

 

 

Candidates outline a process for identifying ongoing professional development needs and the potential providers to meet these needs.

 

Reflection as a critical tool for growth

 

Candidates recognize the potential of reflection and research as essential tools for becoming an effective practitioner.  They rely on others’ questions to frame reflection.

 

Candidates begin to frame their own reflection and research questions and show evidence of engaging in a reflective process to improve teaching and learning.

Candidates systematically engage in a reflective process for analyzing student work and planning future instruction.  They begin to identify possibilities of classroom-based research to inform practice.

Dispositions for seeking professional growth

Candidates often respond to the suggestions that others make regarding candidates’ own professional growth.

Candidates seek opportunities for professional growth.

Candidates develop a plan for their continued  professional growth.

 

 

 

Standard 6.b. Knowing the Value of Foreign Language Learning. Candidates know the value of foreign language learning to the overall success of all students and understand that they will need to become advocates with students, colleagues, and members of the community to promote the field.

 

Supporting Explanation

 

Candidates believe that all students can benefit from language study. They develop and learn how to articulate a rationale for the importance of foreign languages in the overall curriculum.  Candidates learn how to access relevant data to support this position and make a case for foreign language programs that offer a variety of language options and engage all students.  They can articulate the multiple benefits of foreign language learning and can communicate these messages to multiple audiences.  Candidates understand the importance of building ongoing alliances with all stakeholders to promote the goal of language learning for all students and know how to incorporate diverse viewpoints into advocacy messages.

 

Elements

Approaches Standard

Meets Standard

Exceeds Standard

Development of a rationale for foreign language learning

 

 

Candidates realize the importance of developing a rationale that supports foreign language learning.

 

 

Candidates develop a rationale that includes key benefits of foreign language learning.

 

Candidates develop and articulate a rationale for foreign language learning that includes the cognitive, academic, and affective benefits to students and society.

 

Accessing and employing data to support foreign language learning

 

Candidates identify the main data sources (both print and online) for accessing foreign language-specific data.

 

 

 

Candidates choose appropriate data sources to develop products in support of foreign language learning for designated audiences.

Candidates access multiple sources of data and synthesize findings to prepare a coherent rationale for foreign language learning for diverse audiences.

The importance of building alliances for advocacy

 

Candidates understand the importance of networks and the role they play in advocacy efforts.

 

Candidates provide evidence of the importance of building alliances to advocate for foreign language learning.

 

 

Candidates demonstrate evidence that collaborating with colleagues is a significant factor in successfully advocating for foreign language learning.

 

Dispositions regarding the value of language study

Candidates believe that foreign language study benefits mostly a particular group of students.

Based on readings and field experiences, candidates believe that all students should have opportunities to learn a foreign language.

Candidates argue or make a case for foreign language opportunities for all students.

 

 

SUMMARY OF CANDIDATE EVIDENCE FOR STANDARD #6:

 

ü     List of professional organizations with which the candidate is familiar

ü     List of professional membership(s) and evidence of participation

ü     Description of professional activities in which the candidate has participated and benefits to candidate (e.g., workshop/conference attendance)

ü     List of research questions that the candidate has at this point in career

ü     A professional development plan

ü     List of sources for accessing data foreign-language specific data (e.g., types of programs offered across state/nation, student enrollment figures)

ü     Philosophy statement, position paper, or simulated presentation to the school board, community members, and/or other stakeholders, to demonstrate advocacy for foreign language learning