Assessment Considerations for English Language Learners
Shelina Hassanali University of Calgary EDPY 652
2 Assessing English Language Learners Assessment Considerations for English Language Learners Student assessment is a well-researched area in the fields of education and school psychology. We have an extensive knowledge base related to best practices in assessment, various types of assessment, and the measurement of validity and reliability in assessment to ensure that the results and subsequent recommendations are sound and in the best interests of the students. The information that we have, however, is largely gleaned from samples of students who speak English as their first language. There is still much to learn about assessment of special populations, one of these being English Language Learners. In this paper we will discuss assessment considerations for English Language Learners, including a definition of who is included in this group, why special considerations need to be made, validity issues, as well as suggestions for best practices related to assessment of students in this population. Who are English language learners? Depending on location, school board, and over time, different terms have been used to classify this population. Alberta Education (2007) defines these students as students who first learned to speak, read and/or write a language other than English and whose level of English language proficiency precludes them from full participation in learning experiences provided in Alberta schools (pg. 8). This is a useful definition as it describes not only language differences, but also includes that these differences must effect students participation at school. This distinction is important because it could very well be the case that some students who first learned to communicate in a language other than English are perfectly capable of full participation in school experiences by the time they enter an English language school. Previously in many school boards, this group was referred to as ESL students (English as a Second 3 Assessing English Language Learners Language students), but recently professionals refer to this group as English Language Learners (ELL), which is the term used in this paper. The importance of considering ELL status for assessments There are many reasons why special considerations need to be made for the assessment of ELL students. It has been reported that by the year 2015, 30% of the school-aged population in the U.S. will be ELLs (Francis et al, 2006). It can be assumed that a similar upward trend in the amount of ELL students in Canadian classrooms would also be the case. This could mean that in any given classroom, close to one-third of the students would be ELLs, and this has many implications for how teachers and other professionals assess these students, the validity and reliability of such assessments, and the outcomes which will follow. One of the first considerations to be made is that assessments must be fair and non-biased for all students. ELL students by their very nature will likely come from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, and therefore it is important to ensure that the assessment tool being used does not pose an unfair cultural or other bias for the students. Another important consideration for assessment in general, but especially for assessment of ELL students, is that of validity. Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it claims to measure. It is suggested that one of the main threats when assessing these students is the increased possibility that the test is measuring something other than the construct or skill which it is intended to measure (Pitoniak et al, 2009). For example, a math assessment may also include word problems which the student must first read and understand, prior to completing the mathematical steps required to get the answer. In this case, an ELL student may be disadvantaged because although they may have the skills required to solve the equation, they may not have the skills required to read and understand the question. The validity of the test may be questioned in this situation because the construct 4 Assessing English Language Learners which is being tested should be math, but it is also testing the students reading ability. The results of this type of assessment might be considered invalid. Recently, there has been a shift in terms of how students are being asked to showcase their learning, and there is great diversity in assessment options which teachers and other professionals are offering to their students. In todays education system, technology is being used as part of assessment to varying degrees. Also, educators are offering the opportunity for students to show their learning and skills in many different ways on one assessment, including written work, oral presentations, visuals, tables, etc. Although this might be beneficial for some students, it has been suggested that the literature provides no real consensus on the benefit for ELL students, and in addition, that it might cause further validity and fairness issues (Pitoniak et al, 2009). While requiring multiple avenues of ELL student response on one assessment have been questioned due to potential confusion or taxing of reading ability, Alberta Education (2007) suggests that providing these students with multiple opportunities to showcase their learning in different ways over time might be beneficial. For example, teachers may consider assessing a skill via story writing, an oral presentation at another time, a picture, table, or graph at another time, etc. Suggestions for best practices when assessing ELL students Although much research is yet to be done in this area, there are many strategies and practices which can aid in the unbiased, valid and efficient assessment of ELL students. One suggestion is to provide assessment in the students first language instead of English, to ensure that the construct being tested is not influenced by developing language skills (Yzquierdo, Blalock & Torres-Velsquez, 2004). For a student who is completing an assessment where the only construct being tested is mathematical problem solving, it should not be an issue if the test 5 Assessing English Language Learners instructions and questions are provided in their first language. However, it must be determined that the student is in fact fluent enough in their first language and that the meaning of the translated questions is the same in both languages. Also, logistical questions must be considered (such as time and cost related to translating materials) given the number of diverse languages spoken by Canadian students. Improvements can also be made for ELL students in terms of the choice of assessment tools used. Pitoniak et al (2009) suggested that panels should be used to evaluate technical quality and accessibility of assessment tools for the ELL population. They also suggested that in the case of large-scale assessment, there should be specific scoring criteria for ELL students and that if possible, scoring leaders should be present who can help with unfamiliar or confusing responses from ELL students. Another suggested practice is to provide appropriate accommodations as necessary for ELL students. Some examples of these accommodations include, but are not limited to, the presentation of the assessment, how the student is allowed to respond, different equipment or materials, the amount of time allowed, and changes to the testing environment (Francis et al, 2006). Questions are often raised by professionals, parents, and even other students regarding the fairness of providing accommodations and if it gives ELL students an unfair advantage. Providing extra time, a glossary, or technology might be viewed as disadvantaging mainstream students, however, accommodations are only valid if they improve only the results of the students who actually need them, not if they improve performance of all students. In other words, an accommodation for an ELL student is valid only if a non-ELL student were to receive the same accommodation, it would not improve his/her performance at all (Francis et al, 2006). 6 Assessing English Language Learners Finally, another effective way to continuously assess ELL student performance and achievement at school is to provide portfolio-based assessment because it shows student language growth over a period of time and it can guide placement decisions. Portfolios can also include suggestions from standardized assessments and goals which were reached or work completed as a result of those assessments, and they are useful because they are continuous and collaborative and include information from many sources (Alberta Education, 2007). The assessment of English Language Learners is distinct from that of English-speaking students because it brings with it a host of different considerations such as cultural difference, bias in the content of questions, clarity of instructions, validity issues, and questions regarding the type and amount of accommodations which should be offered. Given the increasing number of ELL students in Canadian classrooms, this is an important area of further research for classroom teachers, administrators, school psychologists and any other professionals involved in the assessment of ELL students.
7 Assessing English Language Learners References Alberta Education. (2007). English as a second language: Guide to implementation. Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/media/507659/eslkto9gi.pdf Francis, D., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, H. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English Language Learners: research-based recommendations for the use of accommodations in large-scale assessments. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Pitoniak,M.J., Young, J.W., Martiniello, M., King, T.C., Buteux, A., Ginsburgh, M. (2009). Guidelines for the assessment of English Language Learners. Educational Testing Service. Yzquierdo, Z.A., Blalock, G., & Torres-Velasquez, D. (2004). Language-Appropriate Assessments for Determining Eligibility of English Language Learners for Special Education Services. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 29(17).