Issues in Assessing English Language Learners: English Language Proficiency Measures and Accommodation Uses

Abstract

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has made a great impact on states' policies in assessing English language learner (ELL) students. The legislation requires states to develop or adopt sound assessments in order to validly measure the ELL students' English language proficiency (ELP), as well as content knowledge and skills. Although states have moved rapidly to meet these requirements, they face challenges to validate their current assessment and accountability systems for ELL students, partly due to the lack of resources. Considering the significant role of assessments in guiding decisions about organizations and individuals, it is of paramount importance to establish a valid assessment system. In light of this, we reviewed the current literature and policy regarding ELL assessment in order to inform practitioners of the key issues to consider in their validation processes. Drawn from our review of literature and practice, we developed a set of guidelines and recommendations for practitioners to use as a resource to improve their ELL assessment systems. We have compiled a series of three reports. The present report is the first component of the series, containing pertinent literature related to assessing ELL students. The areas being reviewed include validity theory, the construct of ELP assessments, and the effects of accommodations in the assessment of ELL students' content knowledge.

Next‐Generation Summative English Language Proficiency Assessments for English Learners: Priorities for Policy and Research

“…Linquanti (2014) noted that many states use multiple criteria for reclassifying EL students, and these criteria can include ELP assessment scores, content assessment scores, local criteria such as grades or GPA and teacher/parent/guardian recommendations (see Linquanti & Cook, 2013;Wolf et al, 2008). Discussing the variability in reclassification criteria and the validity challenges this raises, Linquanti noted that many instruments used for reclassification are neither designed nor intended to measure language proficiency.…”

The politics of schools and money: Building awareness about channeling practices for supplemental resource allocations to serve English language learners

“…Further, and to emphasize an earlier point, increased accountability measures under NCLB require all students to be subjected to standardized testing (in addition to English language proficiency tests) on an annual basis even if they do not speak English, all of which marks ELLs as a low-performing group, additionally contributing to an already-formed deficit view of the ELL population (Gándara & Baca, 2008). Relatedly, on the subject of the persisting achievement gap between ELLs and their monolingual English-speaking counterparts, several scholars, including Rumberger and Gándara (2004), Abedi (2008), Wolf et al (2008), and García & Rodríguez (2011) question the validity and fairness of existing standardized assessments. In summary, not only are the conditions under which ELLs are expected to learn and achieve rarely conducive to their academic success, but widely held Englishonly notions, reflected in both state and federal mandates, are completely misdirected to focus purely on accountability (as measured by standardized tests-both academic and language proficiency) as compared to providing quality education that truly addresses the needs of this student population (Wixom, 2015).…”

Review of Issues of Language Assessments for Non-native Speakers of English

“…They also mentioned a third related term, variation, which they defined as the test a cover term that includes accommodation and modification, used to refer to any changes in a standardised test. Wolf et al (2008) reduced linguistic complexity that does not change the construct of the test item and changed the settings-for instance from a big group to a small-are also types of accommodations strategies used. They posited that the commonest accommodation used is the provision of bilingual dictionaries, glossaries, and word list during the test.…”

“…Thus, Abedi, Hofstetter and Baker (2000, p. 17) cautioned against the use of "a one-fits-all accommodation option for all situations". Wolf et al (2008) mentioned that the law accommodation for English and Mathematics test for students from grades 3 and 8 and at least more less that the first year of high school. Abedi et al (2004) complained that although sometimes there is a clear case that students should be considered for accommodation, it is done because it may not be logistically feasible.…”

“…Wolf et al (2008) explained that it used to characterise students who have a degree of difficulty in speaking, reading, writing, and understanding English. Another related term used in the literature (Abedi, Hofstetter, & Lord) is students with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).…”