A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

Teacher’s evaluation

---

3 0 6
F U R T H E R I S S U E S I N L E A R N I N G , T E A C H I N G , A N D A S S E S S M E N T
Example 10 shows how teachers could assess learners according to their
intentions, while at the same time probing their linguistic ability to produce
community norms. Ultimately the degree of success is assessed not just 
by way of community norms, but also by the learners’ level of pragmatic
awareness and their ability to align their language with its community 
interpretation.
In the examples 8–10 above, a range of L2 community norms becomes
the baseline when learners attempt to speak according to the range of target
community norms. Then, their language is assessed in terms of how closely
it approximates the range of community norms. However, when learners do
wish to divert from what they think is a community norm due to their sub-
jectivity, community norms will no longer be the sole point of comparison.
Nonetheless, teacher readers may feel that this type of assessment is too
complex for their particular learners or too time-consuming in their instruc-
tional context. If that is the case, teachers could consider using another
approach, which is simpler, yet equally sensitive to learners’ subjectivity.
That would be to encourage learners to imagine a character – a typical 
member of the L2 community – and then to demonstrate the language that
this character would be expected to use. For instance, instead of asking:
What would you say in this situation?
The questions could be rephrased as follows:
■
What would most speakers say in this situation?
■
What would Mike [an imaginary character] say in this situation?
■
What could Mike say and couldn’t say in this situation? or,
■
What would be a typical response in this situation?
In this way, teachers can reconcile the wish to respect learners’ (occasional)
intention not to speak like other L2 community members, on the one 
hand, with the need to assess learners’ pragmatic awareness and linguistic
command on the other. Another culturally sensitive approach to pragmatics
assessment would be to have learners assess their own language use for their
own purposes, and we now turn to that approach.
Self-assessment
The role of reflection in self-assessment of 
pragmatic ability
Self-assessment affords learners an opportunity to take responsibility for
assessing themselves, typically with some reflective prompts or evaluative

---

A S S E S S M E N T O F P R A G M A T I C S I N T H E C L A S S R O O M
3 0 7
criteria provided by their teachers (also see Chapters 7 and 11). In the spirit
of a “learners-as-researchers” approach,
17
they do not just wait for their
teacher’s assessment of their language use, but conduct their own analysis of
their L2 pragmatics. The process of making and renewing hypotheses about
L2 pragmatics calls for an active monitoring and evaluating of pragmatic
awareness and use. Reflection has already been identified elsewhere as
potentially contributing to the effectiveness of L2 teaching and learning.
18
The reflection process entails having learners think deliberately about their
own L2 production and comprehension, and can take the form of self-
assessment along with other activities such as peer review and debriefing.
For L2 pragmatic learning, metapragmatic reflection (as in Examples 6
and 7 above) is likely to work to the learners’ advantage as they gain more
advanced pragmatic ability.
19
Learners can carefully observe other speakers’
linguistic behavior and analyze contextual factors and L2 pragmatic forms.
Extending this approach to the assessment process, learners can further be
encouraged to reflect on their own L2 awareness and production, especially
using the authentic feedback they obtain from their conversational partners
in natural settings and from instructors in the classroom.
Teacher scaffolding in self-assessment
In order to make self-assessment an effective part of instruction, learners
need varying levels of guidance in how to conduct systematic self-reflection
and self-evaluation. Learners can be given a rubric or checklist with some
clear examples. Teachers might routinely use the same self-assessment format
during instruction before formally assessing learners’ pragmatic language, so
that learners know what to do and how to do it. In a self-assessment task,
learners can be asked to compare their production with L2 models provided
in order to evaluate key features of their own L2 pragmatic use. Depending
on learners’ characteristics and learning style preferences, self-assessment
tasks such as this one might require various degrees of direction and feed-
back from the teacher.
Self-assessment might also be undertaken in collaboration with teachers.
Unlike the case of assessment conducted by teachers alone, in collaborative
17
Tanaka (1997).
18
The Proficiency-Oriented Language Instruction and Assessment (POLIA) Handbook
(Tedick 2002), a curriculum handbook adapting National Standards for Foreign
Language Education has reflection as one of the six pillars of effective language learn-
ing. This resource is available online (http://www.carla.umn.edu/articulation/MNAP_
handbook.html, accessed December 10, 2009).
19
Kasper and Rose (2002).

---