At the broadest level, language learners are assessed on their ability to make meaning from input – through listening, reading, or viewing – and to be understood through their own communicative output. Learning targets for language learners include both concrete linguistic skills as well as more nuanced soft skills. For example, learners will need to perform discrete functions like expressing the time in the target language, while also demonstrating the perseverance and adaptability needed to engage in real-world communicative tasks outside of their comfort zone. 

The most effective assessment I have experienced in my own language learning journey was during my undergraduate study abroad program through Michigan State University. I spent eight weeks immersed in French language and culture in Tours, France living with a monolingual host family. While the program featured formal classes on French linguistics and history, preparing me for the language proficiency exam the DELF B2, the most impactful assessment took place in daily, unscripted interactions with my host family. Even more than the standardized test that was being used to rank my proficiency at the end of the trip, it was the moments sharing plans for the day, navigating household routines, and building relationships, I was able to push myself in authentic and high-stakes ways. Communicative success was required in real time, and the feedback loop was immediate. If we had a breakdown in communication, I had to rephrase, simplify, or try again using the linguistic resources I had. While the standardized test was going to offer me the validation of an internationally recognized organization, I needed these intermediary assessments to be able to judge my own ability and better prepare. The standardized test or the practice opportunities paled in comparison because while standardized tests seek to commodify learners and their knowledge the tests themselves become further and further removed from the social context that defines them (Au, 2008).

This informal form of assessment meets several criteria that make this so meaningful: authenticity, learner agency, and immediate feedback on the successes and gaps in proficiency. In these interactions, the context was entirely authentic. There was a true and immediate need for the task that was being performed. The task of communication was driven by genuine need. I had the autonomy to determine how to convey meaning and adapt based on the situation. The feedback was immediate and formative. Each interaction functioned as a performance assessment, revealing gaps in my skills while also allowing for the rewards of experimentation and stretching my proficiency. This was very different from my experience with my first language placement exam at university- to read more about this experience see my blog post, “Placement Exams – A call for contextualized language assessment.”

While there was no grade, no rubric, and no curricular guide framing my interactions, they offered clear and powerful reflection on my proficiency as well as how and where I wanted to grow next. These interactions acted as diagnostic tools to help me evaluate my readiness to operate in a francophone environment. While I was growing as a result of these interactions, there was a reciprocal learning experience happening for my host family as they too saw what was challenging for me and took new opportunities to slow down their speech or rephrase in order to support our mutual understanding. 

Ultimately, this experience highlighted the power of task based, formative assessment embedded in authentic contexts. It illuminated both what I could do and what I still needed to learn and did so in a way that supported my agency and ability to foster new relationships. It was real, relevant, and deeply motivating, making it the most meaningful assessment I have experienced to date.

References: 

Au, W. (2008). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. Routledge.