(click icon images to see a large version)
Page 1 (JPG, 453KB)	Page 2 (JPG, 400KB)
Page 3 (JPG, 430KB)	Page 4 (JPG, 495KB)
Page 5 (JPG, 320KB)	Page 6 (JPG, 539KB)
Page 7 (JPG, 357KB)	Page 8 (JPG, 299KB)
Learner interaction 3 - video

The evidence for this learner meets the standard required for Achieved.

The interactions have occurred as part of normal classroom activities, meeting the requirements of explanatory note (EN) 2.  They are also of sufficient length and complexity to demonstrate evidence of competency:  evidence of two one-to-one and one small group interactions is provided (see clarifications of the standard).  The three activities have occurred over a period of two months, which is a reasonable length of time to meet the intention of EN 3.

The evidence is appropriately documented on two observer sheets for two interactions, and digitally recorded evidence for the group interaction is provided in the accompanying video file, which was submitted on a DVD.  Note that where evidence is filmed, it can be verified through the digital visual evidence – that is, an observation sheet is not required. However, the context, purpose and date of the filmed interaction need to be recorded and attested to somewhere (in this case, on the Assessed Work cover sheet).

Where the evidence is captured through an observer filling in an observation sheet record in this portfolio, the context of the interaction, the participants and the purpose of the interaction have been noted.  Documented examples of the learner’s contributions across the three interactions enable assessor decisions to be verified.  “Documented examples” refers to the brief description of what the learner did or said that supports a tick given (the tick represents the assessor’s decision; the description is the evidence.)

This portfolio contains valid evidence to show that the learner can interact, using appropriate behaviours, with different sized groups and can repeat these behaviours over time.

All evidence requirements have been met over the three activities.

For this standard, evidence requirement (ER) 1.1 needs only to be met somewhere over three interactions (not necessarily within each one). This portfolio therefore provides more than sufficient evidence – for example, interaction 1 in this portfolio could be used just to evidence the competence of the learner contributing ideas, and interaction 3 for their ability to sustain dialogue. Note that the minimum over three interactions would be two ideas and one example of sustaining dialogue (so three ticks with documented examples would be sufficient as evidence for ER 1.1). However, the assessor still must make the decision against EN 3, that they are satisfied the learner can repeat the kinds of behaviours in other situations, and at other times.

The learner’s participation (in terms of behaviour, language and tone) has not been inappropriate for the participants or intended purpose in any of the three interactions for which evidence has been presented in this portfolio (and upon which the assessment decision has been based).  ER 1.2 has therefore been met (refer clarifications for this standard).

Interaction 1 (one-to-one sharing of ideas with a classmate on a set activity)

The purpose (to share ideas) and description of the context (exploration of ideas during a literature study) are supplied on the Observation sheet.

Comments and examples in support of ER 1.1 are appropriate. For example, although it is unclear whether the comment ‘names of camps’ [note 1] refers to initiating a new idea or adding details, the comment is acceptably specific to this learner’s utterances.  The evidence recorded for the learner’s competence in sustaining dialogue is acceptably detailed [note 2] to justify the assessor’s tick against “asking questions” and “responding to questions” (note: only one of these would be needed).

The observer has not provided any justification for the decisions for ER 1.2; however, comments that provide adequate support for similar decisions are provided on the observation sheets for interaction, and are made visible in the filmed evidence for interaction 3.  Importantly, the assessor has judged the learner’s participation to be appropriate (as indicated by their ticks against ER 1.2), and not inappropriate to the intended purpose or other participant (refer clarification).

Interaction 2 (one-to-one with a teacher, explaining learner’s responses to reading)

The observation sheet records the purpose and context of the interaction. Note that teacher/student interactions as evidence for this standard can be problematic if the nature of the interaction relies significantly on the teacher asking questions and the learner answering. This standard requires evidence from interactions in which the learner is actively participating in terms of spontaneity, engagement, and initiative. A teacher/student interaction is appropriate if the learner has expanded on responses and demonstrated these aspects.

The observation sheet for this interaction is taken as verifiable evidence that the learner participates appropriately in interactions in terms of the purpose and the participant (ER 1.2),asspecific descriptions of behaviour, language and tone are recorded [note 3]. 

Interaction 3 (video clip of group interaction preparing a feedback response to a class activity on a film)

The digital evidence, an audio-visual recording of the interaction, provides sufficient evidence in itself to verify the assessor’s decisions as recorded on the Assessed Work cover sheet [note 4].

The video evidence shows that, while the learner dominates the discussion somewhat through contributing a lot of ideas (“she knows what she wants…she’s capable…self reliant”), this is balanced out through her actively encouraging others’ contributions (“should we write that?”), and looking at participants to gain agreement (ER 1.1). Her participation (behaviour, language, tone) is appropriate both in terms of the purpose and the participants (ER 1.2).

This piece of filmed evidence supports the assessor’s decision overall that the learner’s behaviours, and contributions over the whole portfolio justify the judgement that she can actively participate in spoken interactions at the level required by this standard.

A Visual digital evidence cover sheet was supplied in this portfolio so that the learner whose evidence is being presented is clearly identified in the filmed clip [note 5].