20.4 Assessing Academic Language, Listening, Speaking, and Writing
Key Takeaways
- PECT 0009.8 applies screening, diagnosis, benchmark, formative, and summative assessment to academic language and to listening, speaking, and writing — then interpret and change instruction and accommodations.
- Classroom tools are rubrics, writing samples, and observation of talk. Match the evidence to the construct: academic language is not ORF, and handwriting is not writing.
- A universal screener flags who needs a closer look; it does not diagnose a disability. Use multiple indicators before a high-stakes decision.
- Do not invent commercial writing-test cuts, trait scaled scores, or fake PECT proficient numbers. If a stem does not hand you a score, describe what the child can do.
- PSSA ELA is a statewide summative in tested grades beginning Grade 3, not a PreK–2 writing or listening diagnostic. Results exist to plan, modify, differentiate, and accommodate — including scribes, extra time, AAC, and home-language evidence.
20.4 Assessing Academic Language, Listening, Speaking, and Writing
Quick answer: PECT 0009.8 applies screening, diagnosis, benchmark, formative, and summative assessment to academic language and to listening, speaking, and writing. You select the tool for the decision, interpret the evidence, and use it to plan, modify, and differentiate instruction and to make accommodations. Classroom tools include rubrics, writing samples, and observation of talk. Do not invent commercial writing-test cuts. This is not 0006.8 (developmental oral language such as naming and story retell), not 0007.8 (the code), and not 0008.8 (fluency, vocabulary, comprehension of print).
Chapter 4 defined SAS types. Chapter 19 taught academic language, conventions, listening, and speaking. 0009.5–0009.7 taught writing, spelling, and research. This descriptor is whether those outputs are growing, and what you do when they are not. Module 2 Subarea I remains about 66% of Module 2.
Four constructs, one objective
Keep the evidence matched to the construct.
| Construct | What you are sampling | PreK–4 evidence | Wrong construct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Academic language | Language of books and classroom discourse: phrase, sentence, discourse (0009.1–0009.2) | Uses because/evidence/habitat in talk or writing; unpacks a long sentence; stays on a topic across turns | Conversational BICS only; a phoneme-segmentation score |
| Listening | 0009.3: directions, stories, new vocabulary in read-alouds, nonverbal cues | Follows a two-step then three-step direction; shows understanding of a read-aloud; reads a peer's face | ORF rate; a spelling inventory |
| Speaking | 0009.4: intelligible talk, growing syntax, conversation, voice/volume/intonation | Explains a result to the class; asks a relevant question; adjusts volume | Handwriting grade |
| Writing | 0009.5–0009.7: purpose, process, encoding, research products | Writing sample with beginning–middle–end; opinion with a reason; a captioned research poster | Timed WCPM |
Multiple indicators. A silent child on the rug may speak richly in play (context). A neat writer may have empty academic language. A fluent speaker may not follow three-step directions. Do not let one journal page or one speaking turn become a disability label.
0006.8 sampled developmental oral language (naming, sequencing, retell for language growth). 0009.8 still uses talk, but the package is academic language plus listening, speaking, and writing as school outputs. If the stem is only Can this child retell a familiar nursery sequence?, prefer 0006.8. If the stem is a writing rubric, a multi-step direction check, a research share, or academic sentence frames, you are in 0009.8.
Match SAS type to the output decision
| Type | Decision | Snapshot | Misuse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screening | Who needs a closer look at language or writing output? | Brief universal listening-direction check; a one-drawing dictation; a short academic-word use in context | Treating a 4-minute sample as an IEP |
| Diagnostic | Which output skill is thin? | After a flag: writing sample analyzed for purpose, organization, encoding; language sample for academic vs social talk; listening probe (one- vs multi-step) | Deep inventory of the whole class every Monday |
| Formative | What do I teach in tomorrow's writing or talk? | Conference notes; whether children followed the three-step art direction; a sticky note on a draft's missing ending | Filing drafts with no conference |
| Benchmark | On track this term for speaking/listening/writing standards? | Periodic common writing prompt or oral-explanation task aligned to PA Core CC.1.4 / CC.1.5 | Using the winter prompt as the only plan for one child's next ten minutes |
| Summative | After teaching, can they listen, speak, or write at the target? | End-of-unit writing rubric; scored research share; PSSA ELA is statewide summative in tested grades beginning Grade 3, not a PreK writing diagnostic | Calling PSSA the kindergarten writing test |
Authentic evidence still counts: a real how-to for the class snack, an interview share, a science talk. Authentic is a method; it still maps to a standard.
Rubrics, writing samples, observation of talk — no invented cuts
Writing samples are the workhorse for 0009.5–0009.7. Collect a piece with a known purpose (opinion, informative, narrative) and look at topic/task/audience, beginning–middle–end, details, cohesion, and — separately — encoding. A sample without a purpose is hard to score.
Rubrics turn a sample or a talk into a decision. Keep criteria observable and tied to PA Core writing / speaking-listening and to Pearson's lists, not to personality (try-hard, cute).
| Criterion (classroom example) | Emerging | Developing | On-target for the taught grain |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose and audience | Marks or talk with no job | Names a topic | Opinion/informative/narrative matches the task; someone could be the reader |
| Organization | Random | Two parts | Recognizable beginning, middle, end |
| Academic language | Everyday labels only | One school word with support | Uses a taught phrase or sentence frame in talk or writing |
| Listening | Misses one-step directions | Follows one-step; loses two-step | Follows the taught multi-step direction |
| Speaking | Inaudible or off-topic | Talks; limited turn-taking | Speaks clearly enough; relevant question or explanation |
| Encoding (separate line) | Precommunicative / early invented | Phonetic | Taught patterns appear in published work |
Do not invent commercial writing-test cuts. Classroom analytic rubrics, 6+1-style trait language, or a district four-point writing rubric may appear in buildings. PECT does not publish those publishers' numbers, scaled scores, or proficient = 3.2. PDE does not ask you to memorize a commercial writing-test table for this exam. If a stem hands you a local rubric score, use it as that item's evidence. If it does not, describe what the child can do and what to teach next.
Observation of talk is how you assess listening and speaking without a bubble test: anecdotal notes during morning meeting, a checklist for following directions, a speaking rubric on a research share. Record what was said and what was followed, not good talker. Nonverbal cues (0009.3) belong in the listening observation: Did the child use a peer's gesture or face as information?
Interpret, then change teaching — and accommodations
| Finding | Plan / differentiate | Accommodation |
|---|---|---|
| Strong talk, empty writing | More shared/interactive writing; organizers; keep oral rehearsal before drafting | Scribe or dictation for the content while teaching encoding separately; extra time |
| Follows one-step, loses three-step | Teach listening in two steps, then three; preview (0009.3) | Visual schedule of the steps; repeat; quieter setting |
| Social chat fine, academic language thin | Sentence frames (I think ___ because ___); unpack book sentences | Home-language bridge; wait time; do not score BICS as CALP |
| Phonetic spelling in Grade 2 published work | Word study plus dictation (0009.6); still keep writing volume | Do not freeze all composing until spelling is perfect |
| ELL with rich L1 explanation | Assess meaning in L1 when you can; teach English academic language | Accept L1 or drawn evidence of ideas; extra time; bilingual support |
| IEP: scribe, extra time, AAC, quiet room | Same writing or speaking target unless the IEP modifies it | Provide the listed accommodation during the sample |
| Flags on universal writing/talk screen | Diagnostic sample; hearing/vision/language context | Not a disability label from one prompt |
Modify the standard only when an IEP requires a changed goal. Most 0009.8 stems want accommodations (time, setting, scribe, AAC, visuals, home language) while keeping listening, speaking, writing, or academic language as the target. A scribe captures ideas; it does not skip teaching encoding. Dropping writing because a child is an English learner contradicts 0006.3 and Chapter 6.
Do not wait for PSSA to notice a first grader cannot follow two-step directions or produce a beginning–middle–end. PSSA is a Grade 3+ statewide summative of a broad ELA construct (reading and writing in tested grades). PreK–2 need classroom samples and talk observation now. Do not invent a PSSA writing scaled-score cut as official PECT content.
Scenario: kindergarten listening screen
Ms. Brennan gives every child a brief two-step direction and a dictated caption as a screener. Four children flag. She does not invent a writing scaled score. She watches talk at snack, collects a longer writing sample, checks home language, and plans small-group direction-following and interactive writing. Screening found them; multiple indicators sorted them.
Scenario: Grade 4 writing rubric
Winter benchmark prompt: informative paragraph on a science topic. Omar's piece is neat, off-purpose (a narrative), and thin on academic language. Ms. Ibarra uses the rubric to target purpose and academic vocabulary, not handwriting. Formative conferences that week change the next draft. She does not quote a fake commercial cut as a Pearson law.
Scenario: waiting for PSSA
A Grade 2 child never speaks in sharing and writes only a name. The team wants to wait for Grade 3 ELA PSSA. Wrong clock and wrong grain. 0009.8 wants a language/writing sample now, observation of talk, and instruction in speaking and composing now.
Exam traps for 0009.8
- Invented commercial writing-test cuts (publisher scaled scores, fake PECT proficient numbers).
- Screener as diagnosis or IEP.
- PSSA as PreK–2 writing or listening diagnostic.
- One construct only. Academic language, listening, speaking, and writing.
- File and ignore. Results must plan, modify, differentiate, or accommodate.
- English-only verdict on a dual language learner's ideas.
- Wrong objective. Naming/retell without academic or written output leans 0006.8; letter-sounds 0007.8; ORF 0008.8.
- Handwriting as writing assessment. Look at purpose, organization, language, and encoding separately.
Ask: Which output — academic language, listening, speaking, or writing — and which decision? Choose the type, use a sample, rubric, or talk observation, refuse fake cut scores, and change the next lesson.
Which plan best applies 0009.8 assessment to academic language, listening, speaking, and writing?
Which statement correctly describes classroom tools and cut scores for 0009.8?
Winter writing is neat but off-purpose, academic language is thin, and a dual language learner explains the science richly in Spanish. What is the best 0009.8 use of results?