Getting an AAPPL Score Report can be like getting the gift you didn’t know you needed. Rather than a simple number or grade, reports are filled with detailed information, NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements, and strategies for continued learning and growth. But how does the rating happen, what factors determine the score, and how can learners and teachers better understand an AAPPL rating?
What are the scoring criteria for the AAPPL?
Far more than an assessment where students present rehearsed or memorized content, the AAPPL is designed to measure and elicit what learners can do with the language in real-life applications. The AAPPL assesses language performance towards proficiency within a familiar classroom context. Language proficiency is measured based on four core factors: function, comprehensibility, context, and text type, as described in the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines – 2024. Focusing on the language learner’s performance, the parameters include function, context, and text type (see image below). Other assessments on the market that attempt to assign an ACTFL rating use a two-criteria rubric based on text type (amount of language) and accuracy to assign scores to spoken and written responses, while ACTFL’s approach requires AAPPL raters to rate learners’ language skills based on “the tasks that speakers can handle at each level” (https://www.actfl.org/educator-resources/actfl-proficiency-guidelines/english/english-speaking).
The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines – 2024 for Speaking, Writing, Listening, and Reading include glossed terms and multimedia examples that can be useful. Educators can “examine the most current version of the Guidelines by skill or level, listen to and read samples that represent abilities at each of the major proficiency levels.” (https://www.actfl.org/educator-resources/actfl-proficiency-guidelines). The scoring rubric for the AAPPL was developed based on both the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines and the ACTFL Performance Descriptors for Language Learners. The descriptors are broken down by communicative mode (Interpretive, Interpersonal, Presentational). For instance, here’s an excerpt from the interpersonal mode descriptors:
How can we make it simpler for teachers, parents, and students to understand proficiency?
Sometimes teachers mistakenly consider mastery of grammar or a vast vocabulary as holistic indicators of proficiency. However, these are not true markers of proficiency. Instead, focus on the factors mentioned previously: functions, comprehensibility, content/context, and text type. It can be challenging to take all of these into account when informally trying to gauge the proficiency of students (or when students self-assess) but, with practice and familiarization, focusing on proficiency becomes easier over time.
Another part of the picture is the need to share with and educate parents and students more about proficiency and what it means. In 2019, Francesco Fratto of Herricks Public Schools in New York wrote a blog post about the parent proficiency night he started. The goal was to help parents understand that proficiency is more than being able to repeat vocabulary and memorized phrases. Over the years, he has transformed parent support and interest in the AAPPL, an assessment of performance toward proficiency, throughout his district. You can read about his annual parent proficiency night here.
How can we have more confidence in results?
As the AAPPL has grown in popularity and been adopted more widely, questions about ratings and results have become more common. It can be helpful to be aware of what is assessed in the AAPPL and how tasks are rated.
All AAPPL tasks target a specific major level of language proficiency (e.g., Novice, Intermediate, or Advanced) as described in the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2024 and the ACTFL Performance Descriptors for Language Learners. The performance tasks are designed to reflect the criteria for the level. For example, all Intermediate Interpersonal Listening/Speaking tasks ask the learner to create with language using sentence-level discourse on everyday topics in predictable contexts. AAPPL tasks are designed to provide multiple opportunities within the same content area to demonstrate ability at the intended level (what the learner can do consistently at that level) as well as multiple opportunities to demonstrate performance at the ceiling level (what the learner cannot do at the next higher level).
AAPPL Interpersonal Listening/Speaking (ILS) and Presentational Writing (PW) tasks are rated by ACTFL-certified AAPPL raters. Raters determine the extent to which responses within each topic area meet the criteria for the level. This thoughtful approach means that the rater has multiple opportunities to evaluate the test taker’s ability across tasks and across topics at one level as well as to evaluate ability at the next higher level. AAPPL Interpretive Listening (IL) and Interpretive Reading (IR) tasks are machine scored (https://www.languagetesting.com/aappl-faqs).
As explained earlier, AAPPL raters rate based on factors beyond just text type and accuracy. This makes AAPPL ratings more accurate than many other assessments in terms of measurement against the ACTFL scale.
How can we leverage score reports?
Score reports share detailed information and can be a very useful tool. AAPPL scores are an indication of a learner’s language ability within the Novice, Intermediate, and Advanced ranges. Scores can be used to establish baseline levels at the beginning of a course or at key milestones in a program to provide evidence of a learner’s performance as one progresses along the proficiency continuum. AAPPL scores document whether learners and programs are reaching designated benchmark levels and therefore can be used to evaluate the alignment of curricular learning targets with actual learner performance and with national or state standards.
Some teachers share the AAPPL score report with parents at Parent/Teacher conferences and use it as a talking point to explain what students can do with the language at their proficiency level. This leads to a conversation about Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) and classroom goals, as well as individual student goals and empowering students to own their learning.
Some teachers report they use the score report for students to develop their own personal language benchmarks. They look at the ‘strategies’ section of the report and create goals based off of the suggestions. Some teachers also use the ‘strategies’ section to guide instructional plans.
Stay tuned for a future blog post and interviews with experts that explain more about the rating process, student results, and interpreting scores for practical purposes!
