1. XXXXXX
EN 4-528 Spring 2011
Field Observation Report
This semester I spent 2 hours observing a class of 4 students in
a pull-out ESOL class at North Dorchester high school. These
students are in varying grades from 10th to 12th grade. They
are also at varying levels as far as their fluency is concerned.
One student has only been in the United States for 6 months and
is at a low-beginner level. Another student has been at this
school and taking ESOL for 2 years but yet is still at the low-
beginner level (the ESOL teacher and I have discussed possible
learning disabilities). Then there are two other students that
have been talking ESOL for three and four years and they are
definatley classified as high-intermediate. So, this class is very
small but the abilities are varying which is always a challenge
when trying to differentiate.
Every Friday the teacher gives the students a spelling test. The
students are completely prepared and know what to expect. As
far as face validity was concerned the teacher accomplished this
goal without a doubt. The teacher gives the students 10 new
words every Monday that the students copy down. The teacher
also gives them sentences with the words that they copy down
along with a definition. Their job is to learn what the words
mean, be able to spell them and use them in their own sentence.
This is homework for them. The teacher allows the student to
write the sentences and meanings in L1 when the student is new.
I think that this is important because as we have been learning
from Brown and Tinajero, we need to embrace L1 and allow
students to use L1 more often. So, on this day I stayed and
watched the teacher administer the test. I really appreciated the
fact that the student knew what to expect and there were no

2. surprises. I also enjoyed the way the teacher differentiated the
test for all learners. She repeated the words twice for the
students but pronounced them several times for anyone that
needed it and pronounced them the way that they were
phonetically spelled at times. She also employed the context-
embedded technique of reading her sentences to the class so that
they could tap their prior knowledge based on the sentences she
gave them in the beginning. I am not sure about authenticity as
much though because we don’t pronounce every word
phonetically that way in English. She allowed the students to
verbalize the words to themselves if they needed to before they
began writing. I feel that this is another great way to
incorporate listening, speaking reading and writing, as the
students really need to employ all of them to internalize the
words.
The teacher gave back the spelling tests. Beneficial wash back
was achieved as the teacher was able to spend one-on one time
with every student. Brown reminds us that this type of
formative assessment provides necessary wash back. As far as
grading goes the teacher took off one point for grammatical
errors. I think that this makes sense but I thought it would be
more valid of a score if the teacher actually counted the words
the student used and then deducted 1 point for each grammatical
error. My question to the teacher was about global errors. I
asked what she did when she could not understand the sentence
or part of it. She said she took points off for each global error.
I did not suggest it but thought maybe a tiny rubric or simple
checklist like Tinajero shows in chapter one for each sentence
could be used. By providing this, the students know exactly
what to do to improve next time they write sentences. For
example not only should she take off for each grammatical error
but award each sentence 1-5 points based on "not
understandable " to "perfect" or something to that effect.
In addition to this visit the teacher practiced speaking in order

3. to prepare the students for the standardized LAS test that they
must pass in order to test out of their ESOL classes. The
teacher read a prompt like: “Tell your teacher that you need
more time to finish the warm-up”. The teacher repeated it twice
for the intermediate levels but she had to repeat about 5 times
for the lower levels. I was able to observe several reasons that
Brown cites for these issues with listening and speaking
exercises. First of all the teacher tried to help with clustering
by reading vital information with pauses and it seemed to help
eventually. She was careful to avoid slang or as Brown calls it
“colloquial language”. She was able to interact naturally and
flow “from listening to speaking to listening” (brown, 122) I
enjoyed this practice because it was very authentic and
mimicked “real-world” and open-ended and because the students
really do need to be prepared for these standardized tests. I
spoke to the teacher about this test and she seemed very stressed
and pressured because she feels that if they don’t pass it would
be a direct reflection on her. Also, as Brown writes, these tests
are not fair because standardized tests assume that the tests
“correctly assess all learners equally well” (p. 68) I really
enjoyed and would not change a thing about the LAS
preparation assessment because it was conducted naturally,
without threat and authenticity was achieved while informal
assessment was conducted throughout. I would definitely assess
through listening and speaking prompts often to ensure oral
practice but to prepare the students for the standardized test.
Overall I really learned and observed many things that I will
definitely use. The spelling test incorporated many skills and
built on all of the work the students had been learning in the
week. The LAS preparation assessment was informal but useful
as the standardized is coming up and the students need to
prepare.

4. Assignment 3: Excel Problems
At the end of each module, you will apply the module’s
concepts by completing comprehensive assignments from the
textbook.
Complete problems P16A-17B (p. 898), P16A-19B (p.
899), P18-24A (p. 979), P18-26A (p. 980) in your textbook.
Present your analysis of the assigned problems in Excel format.
Enter non-numerical responses in the same worksheet using
textboxes.