B1 ~ Revised Project Assignment

From the MIIS Spring, 2005, MATFL/MATESOL Portfolio Guidelines:

B1: Revised Project
The Portfolio will include a major project originally completed as a course assignment that has been substantially reworked (expanded and revised), above and beyond the requirements of any MATESOL or MATFL course. To satisfy the breadth criterion (Criterion 5), the revised project must exemplify the candidate’s expertise in two of the following topical areas: (1) Language; (2) Social and psychological factors of language acquisition and use; (3) Language pedagogy; (4) Educational research and assessment.

Candidates must include the original assignment (with the course instructor’s feedback and comments provided in the course), along with a minimum of two subsequent versions. Instructor and peer commentary in initial and subsequent iterations must also be included in Section B1. An acceptable reworked project will reflect substantial development of the original, thus demonstrating the writer’s skill in using expert and peer feedback in a meaningful revision process. An acceptable reworked project will likewise involve the addition of a novel and substantial component that widens the scope of the initial assignment and covers further disciplinary territory. The series of documents presented in Section B1 will therefore provide persuasive, significant evidence of the candidate’s learning in at least two disciplinary areas, demonstrating his or her autonomy as a student and future professional.

The selection of an assignment to revise may be driven by a number of factors. For example, a candidate may elect to develop an “A” project by considerably expanding it (see examples, below). Alternatively, a student may decide to work through and correct weaknesses in an assigned project, subsequently constructing an additional component that measurably broadens the final product’s theoretical and practical scope. Reworked products must be complete in every respect, representing work that stands alone on its own merits and can be situated with respect to an academic or professional genre. A “clean” version of the project must immediately follow the cover note (see below). Drafts and intermediate versions with instructor and peer commentary must be submitted as supporting material, preferably in reverse chronological sequence.

The following descriptions exemplify just a few of the options available for selecting appropriate assignments and for fulfilling the requirements of Section B1:

• A data analysis project assigned in Language Analysis, Sociolinguistics, or Second Language Acquisition might lead the candidate to develop the original paper’s theoretical framework and strengthen the literature review. A practical extension of such work might involve the creation of a unit plan as well as a representative (and detailed) lesson plan and materials set.
• A curriculum design project may involve the writer in an exploration of Language Acquisition and Sociolinguistics research literature that further supports the theoretical underpinnings of the curriculum. To round out the curriculum, the candidate might devise and pilot an appropriate assessment instrument.
• Following on the successful revision of a proposal for an empirical classroom study in Educational Research, a candidate may design and complete a rigorous pilot investigation in Applied Linguistics Research. On the basis of the findings of that study as well as peer and instructor feedback, the candidate may rework the design and replicate the investigation under more desirable conditions, leading him or her to write a research report of potentially publishable quality.

In a two-page cover note, the candidate must:

• describe the original assignment(s) and articulate his or her motivation for selecting that work for inclusion in the Portfolio;
• specify the topical strands that the body of work covers;
• concisely characterize all iterations leading to the final product (candidates often find it useful to document revisions and modifications by presenting a simple flowchart that maps the phases of the project);
• explain how and why he or she made use of expert and peer feedback in the process of reworking the project;
• comment critically and incisively on how the final product exemplifies meaningful development in terms of content and form;
• elucidate the project’s academic and professional significance, including ways in which the final product exemplifies the candidate’s best work and contribution to the profession.