Using the ELP as a basis for self- and peer assessment when selecting “best” work in modern-language degree programmes

Fiona Dalziel; Gillian Davies; Amy Han

doi:10.1515/cercles-2016-0020

Article

Using the ELP as a basis for self- and peer assessment when selecting “best” work in modern-language degree programmes

Fiona Dalziel
Fiona Dalziel is associate professor of English Language and Translation at the Department of Linguistic and Literary Studies of the University of Padova, Italy, where she teaches academic writing on the undergraduate programme in Language and Cultural Mediation. Her research interests include: promoting metacognitive learning strategies and learner autonomy; teaching academic writing; the use of drama in language learning; English-medium instruction (EMI).
, Gillian Davies
Gillian Davies is a language teacher at the University of Padova, Italy. She has been actively involved in promoting the use of the European Language Portfolio since the CercleS version was adopted on an experimental basis during the academic year 2002–2003. She is particularly interested in exploring ways of fostering language-learning strategies which help develop learner autonomy.
and Amy Han
Amy Han is a language teacher at the University of Padova, Italy. She teaches in the first year of the undergraduate programme in the Language and Cultural Mediation. Working with the CercleS European Language Portfolio (ELP) since 2002–2003, she is especially interested in promoting learner autonomy through learner awareness and reflection.

Published/Copyright: October 6, 2016

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Language Learning in Higher Education Volume 6 Issue 2

Abstract

The European Language Portfolio (ELP) was designed as a tool that “supports reflective learning and fosters the development of learner autonomy” (Little 2009, The European Language Portfolio: Where pedagogy and assessment meet. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680459fa5 (accessed 20 June 2016)); it thus facilitates students in exploring, creating and documenting their own learning paths. This article will investigate an action-oriented approach to learning and teaching in an undergraduate language degree course at the University of Padova, Italy, based on the pedagogical principles of the ELP (Council of Europe 2011, European Language Portfolio (ELP): Principles and guidelines, with added explanatory notes. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016804586ba (accessed 20 June 2016)). Students who enrol on this degree course arrive with varying degrees of language ability and diverse language learning backgrounds; due to the disparate nature of their proficiency levels, fostering language learning awareness is crucial. Task-based activities are fundamental to this approach, enabling students to explore and develop their communicative language competences through authentic target language use, and to reflect on their progress through guided self- and peer assessment. In the article, we will showcase examples of tasks which demonstrate the approach adopted. We will first explore how peer assessment of audio recordings was used in a course where first-year students were aiming to develop their spoken production skills. We will then illustrate how second-year students engaged in self-assessment of their skills in activities designed to explore the language of interaction and production. Finally, we will focus on the use of the ELP Dossier as a pedagogical tool, with students compiling an Academic Dossier and reflecting on the choices of work to include in it.

Keywords: autonomy; European Language Portfolio (ELP); language (learning) awareness; learning paths; reflection; self/peer assessment

About the authors

Fiona Dalziel

Fiona Dalziel is associate professor of English Language and Translation at the Department of Linguistic and Literary Studies of the University of Padova, Italy, where she teaches academic writing on the undergraduate programme in Language and Cultural Mediation. Her research interests include: promoting metacognitive learning strategies and learner autonomy; teaching academic writing; the use of drama in language learning; English-medium instruction (EMI).

Gillian Davies

Gillian Davies is a language teacher at the University of Padova, Italy. She has been actively involved in promoting the use of the European Language Portfolio since the CercleS version was adopted on an experimental basis during the academic year 2002–2003. She is particularly interested in exploring ways of fostering language-learning strategies which help develop learner autonomy.

Amy Han

Amy Han is a language teacher at the University of Padova, Italy. She teaches in the first year of the undergraduate programme in the Language and Cultural Mediation. Working with the CercleS European Language Portfolio (ELP) since 2002–2003, she is especially interested in promoting learner autonomy through learner awareness and reflection.

References

Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2011. European Language Portfolio (ELP): Principles and guidelines, with added explanatory notes. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016804586ba (accessed 20 June 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Dalziel, Fiona. 2011. A flexible approach to the use of the European Language Portfolio in higher education contexts. Language Learning in Higher Education 1(1). 179–194.10.1515/cercles-2011-0012Search in Google Scholar

Dam, Leni. 1995. Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.Search in Google Scholar

Han, Amy. 2011. Gaining insights into student reflection from online learner diaries. Language Learning in Higher Education 1(1). 195–210.10.1515/cercles-2011-0013Search in Google Scholar

DiGiovanni, Elaine & Girija Nagaswami. 2001. Online peer review: An alternative to face-to-face? ELT Journal 55(3). 263–272.10.1093/elt/55.3.263Search in Google Scholar

Kohonen, Viljo. 2001. Exploring the educational possibilities of the “Dossier”: Suggestions for developing the pedagogical function of the European Language Portfolio. In Viljo Kohonen & Gerard Westhoff (eds.), Enhancing the pedagogical aspects of the European Language Portfolio (ELP), 5–31. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680459fa2 (accessed 20 June 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Kohonen, Viljo. 2012. Developing autonomy through ELP-oriented pedagogy: Exploring the interplay of shallow and deep structures in a major change within language education. In Bärbel Kühn & Maria Luisa Perez Cavana (eds.), Perspectives from the European Language Portfolio: Learner autonomy and self-assessment, 22–42. Abingdon: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Little, David. 1991. Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.Search in Google Scholar

Little, David. 2004. Democracy, discourse and learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom. Utbilding & Demokrati 13(3). 105–126.10.48059/uod.v13i3.784Search in Google Scholar

Little, David. 2009. The European Language Portfolio: Where pedagogy and assessment meet. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680459fa5 (accessed 20 June 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Little, David. 2012. The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the European Language Portfolio: Some history, a view of language learner autonomy, and some implications for language learning in higher education. Language Learning in Higher Education 2(1). 1–16.10.1515/cercles-2012-0001Search in Google Scholar

Lowie, Wander. 2012. The CEFR and the dynamics of second language learning: Trends and challenges. Language Learning in Higher Education 2(1). 17–34.10.1515/cercles-2012-0002Search in Google Scholar

Schärer, Rolf. 2010. The European Language Portfolio: Goals, boundaries and timelines. In Breffni O’Rouke & Lorna Carson (eds.), Language learner autonomy: Policy curriculum, classroom. A Festschrift in honour of David Little, 327–336. Bern: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Sisamakis, Manolis. 2010. The motivational potential of the European Language Portfolio. In Breffni O’Rouke & Lorna Carson (eds.), Language learner autonomy: Policy curriculum, classroom. A Festschrift in honour of David Little, 352–371. Bern: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, Richard C. 2003. Teacher education for teacher-learner autonomy. In Jacqueline Gollin, Gibson Ferguson & Hugh Trappes-Lomax (eds.), Symposium for language teacher educators: Papers from three IALS symposia. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, IALS.Search in Google Scholar

Ushioda, Ema. 2011. Why autonomy? Insights from motivation theory and research. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 5(2). 221–232.10.1080/17501229.2011.577536Search in Google Scholar

Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803932Search in Google Scholar

White, Cynthia. 2008. Language learning strategies in independent language learning: An overview. In Stella Hurd & Tim Lewis (eds.), Language learning in independent settings, 3–24. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847690999-003Search in Google Scholar

Appendix: Peer feedback questionnaire

Please answer each question to the best of your ability. All of your responses will remain anonymous and will only be used for research purposes.

Before giving feedback on the 7^th oral recording, had you ever given feedback on another student’s work before? (circle your answer)
Yes No
How difficult did you find it to give feedback to a peer?
(5 = extremely difficult, 1 = not difficult at all)
1 2 3 4 5
Were the instructions given by the teachers helpful?
(5 = very helpful, 1 = not helpful at all)
1 2 3 4 5
Did you receive feedback from a peer?
Yes No
How helpful did you find the peer feedback you received?
(5 = very helpful, 1 = not helpful at all)
1 2 3 4 5
Did you use the any of the suggestions your peer gave you for your second recording?
Yes No
Did you feel that the feedback was accurate? (5 = very accurate, 1 = not at all accurate)
1 2 3 4 5
Would you like to participate in more peer feedback or similar tasks?
Yes No
Overall, how would you rate this type of task (i. e. peer feedback) as a learning activity?
(5 = very good, 1 = not good)
1 2 3 4 5
Do you feel that you can learn aspects of language from your peers?
(5 = definitely, 1 = definitely not)
1 2 3 4 5
Do you feel that feedback should only come from the teacher?
(5 = definitely, 1 = definitely not)
1 2 3 4 5
Do you think that the peer feedback activity could have been improved?
Yes No
How do you think that the peer feedback could have been improved? Please write out any thoughts you have.

Published Online: 2016-10-6

Published in Print: 2016-10-1

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2016-0020

Keywords for this article

autonomy; European Language Portfolio (ELP); language (learning) awareness; learning paths; reflection; self/peer assessment