One of the most important functions which a language instructor performs is the evaluation of students’ work, in terms both of ongoing progress, and of the success achieved by students at the end of the contracted learning period. The sum total of this evaluation, both the ongoing and the final, is rendered in the instructor’s judgment of the students’ achievement and is translated in most conventional institutions of higher learning into a letter grade or a final written report. Since self-instructional language programs, by definition, lack one ingredient present in regular classroom instruction the language instructor they must have alternative means and procedures for evaluating students’ work. Several existing programs of individualized and supervised self-instruction have addressed themselves to this issue and have provided alternative viable systems of evaluation. The self-instructional programs which have ignored or paid little attention to this all important aspect of a language program, have done so at the expense of the quality of their offerings, and have neglected to give their students meaningful and clear indications of their degree of mastery of new language skills. What shape the process of evaluation takes and how it is incorporated in self-instructional language programs depends on the objectives of such programs and on the basic features which determine their character. In general, evaluation procedures cannot be separate and independent of the totality of the learning experience, for they are an integral part of the instructional program. Fair and reliable measurement of students’ achievement can only be arrived at if the testing reflects the objectives and procedures which are part of the learning process. In this paper evaluation procedures in two existing programs of individualized instruction will be discussed: the Personalized System of Instruction (PSI) and the Self-Instructional Language Programs (SILP) which follow the model set by the National Association of Self-Instructional Language Programs (NASILP). PSI was developed as an alternative learning mode to classroom instruction. Developed by the psychologist Fred Keller and his associates, in this system students move through course material in small steps. They work with special self-instructional materials and at the end, when all requirements of the program are met, are considered to have successfully completed the instructional process. (1, part II, p. 5) The five defining features of PSI courses are that: (1) they are individually paced; (2) they are mastery oriented; (3) they are student proctored; (4) they use printed study guides for communication of information; and (5) they incorporate into the programs a set of
Read full abstract