Pedagogy and Assessment for ASL as a World Language
Domain 5: Pedagogy and Assessment for ASL as a World Language
This domain tests instructional design, proficiency orientation, and fair assessment of signed languages. Items may ask you to select an appropriate task, interpret a rubric, or identify a legal or ethical obligation.
Standards and proficiency
ACTFL's World-Readiness Standards organize learning around the 5 Cs: Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities. Proficiency ranges from Novice to Advanced, with Intermediate learners able to handle sentence-level discourse in familiar contexts. ASLTA provides professional standards for ASL teaching. Effective ASL classes use the target language visually, provide comprehensible input, and avoid English voicing as the default route to meaning.
Assessment
Assess both receptive and expressive ASL. Performance assessments include interpretive tasks (watching a signed text), interpersonal tasks (conversation), and presentational tasks (a signed presentation). Rubrics should name criteria such as grammar, vocabulary, non-manual grammar, fluency, discourse coherence, and cultural appropriateness. English glosses can document form, but they are not the target performance.
Legal and ethical context
ADA, Section 504, and IDEA create access obligations. IEP teams may address language and communication needs. Teachers should not use a student as an interpreter, should maintain confidentiality, and should respect Deaf cultural norms. Avoid 'sign language is universal' claims; ASL is one national sign language among many.
Worked example
For an Intermediate presentational task, ask students to describe a past weekend in ASL for two minutes. The rubric awards points for consistent spatial reference, appropriate non-manual grammar, comprehensible depiction, and discourse organization. Reasoning: the task is backward-designed from a proficiency goal, and the criteria match what the standard asks students to do. A vocabulary quiz alone would not measure the same construct.
Traps
Assessing only vocabulary; using English translation as the main evidence; overcorrecting fluency tasks; ignoring receptive skills; treating ASL as a visual code for English; assuming one sign language fits all Deaf students.