In language teaching, assessment is done for various reasons, such as determining which class to place a student in (placement test), determining what areas should be taught (diagnostic test), and what progress has been made by learners during a course (achievement test). However, it is important to understand that assessment does not automatically mean administering tests. In addition to formal assessment (i.e., graded), it can also be informal (i.e., ungraded). Some examples of informal assessment include playing a game, administering an exit ticket, or simply observing the learners while they are working on an activity. For teachers, informal assessment is just as important as formal assessment because it helps make quick, formative teaching and learning decisions in between larger graded assessments. Additionally, tests are not the only way to assess student progress at the end of a course. In our Testing and Assessment course (LT 549), we learned about ways to create effective alternative assessments, such as projects and portfolios. This M.A. capstone portfolio is itself an example of alternative assessment. In this portfolio, I include three informal assessments I have created as artifacts demonstrating my understanding of the principles we studied.

Through Coombe, Fose and Hubley (2007) and Brown and Abeywickrama (2018), we learned about the “cornerstones” of testing, or principles that govern good test design, development, and analysis. These principles include usefulness, validity, reliability, practicality, washback, authenticity, transparency and security. Among these, extra attention was paid to validity, reliability, practicality, washback, and authenticity. These last five principles were also echoed in our other courses. Validity refers to the extent to which a test actually measures what it is meant to measure. In other words, the content of the assessment reflects the course objectives, the methodology of the course, and leads to similar results as other course assessments on the same content. Additionally, face validity demonstrates that the assessment looks as though it tests what it is supposed to test. Reliability refers to the consistency of test scores. It answers the question: Will results be similar if it were given at another time and to another group of learners? Reliability depends on test, administrative, affective, and rater factors. Practicality refers to how “teacher friendly” the assessment is. Washback is the effect of testing on teaching and learning. Authenticity refers to real-world situations and contexts of language use.

Using these principles, I created an informal assessment for an imagined first-year Russian university course, titled “Assessment Creation Activity 2: Listening.” The purpose was to measure listening comprehension skills of vocabulary covered in the unit. First, I looked at course objectives and ACTFL Can-Do statements. Next, I thought about what students would need to know in order to complete a follow-up activity. In order to truly test listening skills, I made it into a multiple-choice activity, where students listen to me (or a recording) read a passage while looking at pictures. They select the pictures that reflect what they are hearing. They do not need to read, write, or speak anything during this assessment. I also explored the benefits and drawbacks of this assessment. Finally, I outlined how a similar assessment could be created by others.

The next artifact, titled “Assessment Creation Activity 5: Pragmatics,” was done in a similar manner and considering the same context, but this time it tested the skill of pragmatic ability. As a class, students would first study the IPIC model related to navigating the formality of "you" with strangers. In English, there is only one “you,” but in Russian, as in many other languages, there are different words for “you” based on formality. This concept is often difficult for novice learners to remember, but it can also lead to awkward situations if students don’t begin to apply it as soon as possible. Thus, this formative achievement assessment would provide both learners and the teachers with an idea of how well the topic has been grasped. Students would be provided with a page that has four scenarios of adults speaking to each other. The scenarios are mostly in English because students most likely would not have learned the complex language that is required to explain this concept. Independently, students choose the appropriate decision for each scenario. Afterwards, maybe in the next class session, the class together (or possibly in small groups) would justify their decisions.