There is a lot of talk these days, as almost always in education, about the delicate subject of evaluation. What is its legitimate place? How to proceed to do it? What should it be used for? What lessons can be drawn from this? These are big and often controversial questions.
At the moment, they arise in particular about the famous written French test that future teachers must pass, the Certification Test in Written French for Teaching (TECFEE). The results
are disappointing.
Is it an appropriate tool? Is it too difficult? What to do in the face of so many failures? In reflecting on these and other questions that arise here, it is important to remember that while an assessment certainly assesses the person who undergoes it, it also assesses who has taught and how he or she has do. Test failures should therefore challenge us on the teaching of written French, on its evaluation and on what we have done and are still doing with this precious data.
I have no doubt that this file is complex and that many factors play a role. But I would like to take you into the field and tell you an interesting and, it seems to me, very instructive story.
In the field
He is a high school science teacher. He teaches students who are mostly allophones or who have learning difficulties. For years, he has been correcting the written French of his students, in particular on their laboratory reports, and he attributes 10% of the mark to this variable. Our teacher gives the students a document on this aspect of his correction which explains how he will proceed.
This year, as always, he asked the school’s printing department to have this document printed. But we informed him that we wouldn’t. The school administration opposes it. The argument put forward is that he does not have the right to assess his students’ French. He doesn’t have the skill to do that and it’s who teaches French, and that person only,
to do.
It’s new, this position, and our teacher, surprised and not convinced, will ask for an explanation.
The administrative maze
From here, good luck to anyone who wants to follow what’s going on. You will be like Theseus in the labyrinth, but without Ariadne.
The teacher demonstrates Competency 3 of the Science and Technology program for Secondary Cycle Two. It reads that, in order to achieve this skill, it is necessary to “produce and transmit messages of a scientific and technological nature; take into account the recipient and the context; structure your message; use appropriate forms of language in accordance with established standards and conventions; use appropriate forms of presentation; demonstrate rigor and
consistency “.
He argues for section 35 of the Basic school regulation: “The school must take the necessary measures to ensure that the quality of the written and spoken language, in learning and in school life, is the concern of each teacher. , whatever the subject taught, and of all school staff. »
It asserts the Education Act and the rights of the teacher recalled therein (art. 19), for example: group or for each pupil entrusted to him; 2. choose the evaluation instruments of the students entrusted to him in order to constantly and periodically measure and evaluate the needs and the achievement of the objectives in relation to each of the students entrusted to him, based on the progress made. »
He highlights the local science program, which he must also follow, and which devotes an entire chapter to the question of French in science classes (understanding the question asked, self-correction of texts).
The union, challenged, gets involved. The official documents summoned multiply, and at the same time their interpretations. What exactly does the Education Act say? The Pedagogical Regime? The evaluation policy of the MEQ? The science course assessment framework? The science course syllabus?
Finally, for the moment, it seems that this teacher’s union will not defend him. The legal arguments would not be in his favour. The teacher, this year, will not be able to assess the written French of his students as he has done for years.
Big disappointment
The teacher had told me his story in writing. I talked to him. His disappointment is great. He argues, with the help of figures collected by him on the issue and other data he cites, that by asking his students to pay attention to written French, to what they read and write, their grades in science have improved a lot. And he is therefore saddened by the fact that these students have been let down in this way.
He even sees it as a political issue. “An allophone student who masters French will have more interest in continuing his studies in French. He will be more inclined to associate with the French-speaking community. He will even enjoy speaking it. That is all that is taken away from this future citizen. All teachers should have the opportunity to assess French other than during French lessons. Not allowing it is such a sad thing. »
He is an experienced teacher. He tells me that he is thinking of retiring prematurely.