Notice of Public Meetings and Request for Input

RACE TO THE TOP ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS AND REQUEST FOR INPUT

December 1 & 2, 2009

Denver, Colorado

Questions on the Assessment of English Language Learners

General Comments

To best determine the answers to the two questions posed by the Department, it is critical that the assessments and their variations be based upon an accurate English learner student profile. The diversity of the English learner student population mandates that a variety of accommodations be available and to specifically address the academic and language proficiency level of ELs (i.e. native language testing, linguistic modification in English etc).

The EL student profile should include indicators such as EL proficiency level, educational background in L1, and length of stay in US schools and program of instruction.

To uniformly apply the attributes of validity and reliability to each states assessments, The Department should require that state submit psychometric evidence from the test developers of the validity and reliability of the assessments when administered to English learners.

Question 1

Provide recommendations for the development and administration of assessments for each content area that are valid and reliable for English language learners. How would you recommend that the assessments take into account the variations in English language proficiency of students in a manner that enables them to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in core academic areas? Innovative assessment designs and uses of technology have the potential to be inclusive of more students. How would you propose we take this into account?

Question 1

We highly recommend the following:

1. For first year beginning level students with little or no proficiency in English, they should be exempt from academic tests in their second language and the English proficiency test should serve as a proxy.

2. For recent immigrants (two years or less in US), speakers of indigenous languages, students with little or no schooling, students from war torn countries with interrupted schooling and for students without two consecutive years of educational experience in US (high mobility) should be exempt for two years from taking academic tests in their second language and the English proficiency test should serve as the proxy.

3. Assessments in reading/language arts be developed across the four language domains (listening, speaking, reading, and writing in L1* and L2) and across genres (narrative and expository texts);

4. There is a need to expand the limited types of performance-based assessments both in type of domain, by genres and EL proficiency levels.

5. For elementary level students (grades 3-5/6) rRetellings (oral and/or written) in L1* and L2 be one pathway to assess students’ comprehension and thus, allow students at different proficiency levels to demonstrate what they know and can do. The oral retell provides the opportunity for the teacher/school to gauge anthe ELD proficiency level simultaneously with reading comprehensions for elementary grades. Scoring through valid and reliable instruments/rubrics such as running records, miscue analysis demonstrate growth and inform instruction;

6. Retelling can be captured by audio tapping and then teams of teachers can score for reliability and serve as documentation of growth

7. Assessments need to inform instruction and go beyond filling in the bubble – performance based – e.g. writing in a variety of genre across all grade levels and content areas., running records, miscue analysis, etc.

8. Oral language development assessment needs to be embedded within the content standards. According to the National Literacy Panel for Language Minority and Youth, there is The report also documents thean absence of oral language development in instruction across all grade levels and content. What gets tested gets taught.

9. Need to control for linguistic complexity in writing the questions and answers for older students beyond beginning levels of English proficiency and as they are developing English proficiency in all four language domains, e.g., especially for content area assessments in English

10. The accommodations recommended by the Technical Advisory Panel on Uniform National Rules for NAEP testing of English Language Learners should be implemented by states to standardize the inclusion of English learners in federal accountability systems beyond on the NAEP testing.

Question 2

In the context of reflecting student achievement, what are the relative merits of developing and administering content assessments in native languages? What are the technical, logistical, and financial requirements?

The relative merits of developing and administering content assessments in native languages are as follows:

1. L1* testing results in an accurate picture of what students know and can do for students being instructed in that language or for those who come literate in their home language;

2. Given the national movement around world languages, Spanish and Chinese being the top two, L1 testing would align and support other initiatives promulgated by the federal government, i.e. World Languages and Strategic Language initiatives – in preparation for global citizenry.

3. Would reverse the practice of mislabeling students, schools and districts as program improvement based on a single tests that does not n’t measure what many studentsthey really know and can do. This would reverse the punitive nature of the current accountability system

Recommendations for technical, logistical, and financial requirements:

4. Double test only in Language Arts (L1* and L2) and test in one language for content areas based upon language of instruction or strength;

5. Use the native language tests from states that already have developed them. Also learn from their experience and build upon them –do not reinvent the wheel. The current available tests could be used to develop an item bank by content to align with common standards;

6. Use the new competition for consortia funds to do the developmental work on native language testing and to develop tools and resources for the various accommodations;

L1*-means that students have been taught in their native language or enrolled in schools proficient in their home language.