Butler, F. A. & Stevens, R. (2001). Standardized assessment of the content knowledge of English language learners’ k-12: Current trends and old dilemmas. Language Testing, 18 (4), 409-427. Los Angeles, CA.
O’Malley, M. & Pierce, L. V. (1996) Content area assessment
Some of the similarities between the two readings involve ELL’s being tested using the old system of standardized approaches which we have learned and discussed innumerably this quarter is not valid. Some of the reason to test in content areas includes accountability, continued programs for funding, and to see how schools are doing across the board. This process seems helpful in a way that school are accountable for their learners, however the way in which testing is carried out proves invalid for several reasons stated in both readings, such as: students are more diverse that come in speaking another language other than English, testing is usually standardized, little or no accommodations are made to meet individual needs, these assessment are mostly one time deal and so often is not a valid measurement, and do not test in language of the ELL’s.
In Butler’s article some solutions were suggested such as to look into accommodations for the ELL’s and to provide a measure of growth in English. Accommodations would be in the area of test and procedural modifications and Measures of growth is screening students to see if they are proficient enough to participate in high stakes testing.
O’Malley and Pierce suggested authentic means of testing such as scaffolding to show if students can respond to tasks, such as Graphic Organizers to help thinking skills, problem solving, and strategic approaches to learning.
Further it has always been suggested to include the learners in the process through their prior knowledge, self-assessments, and empowerment of their educational process by setting goals. This can mean that the teacher include and not exclude learners in assessing and or creating rubrics so that learners know and understand the criteria.
One thing I will remember from this reading is the differentiated scoring. My district does encourage us to differentiate instruction as we teach in multilevelized classrooms. It does make sense that we should also differentiate scoring. A good example is differentiating writing from the grammatical and the concepts. I will try to include more writing in their Math, which I seem to shy away from as compared to other Content Areas. One example I have begun to use is for them to explain in their own words how they came to this conclusion or to explain their results.
3 comments:
Hi Superwoman,
I conduct research on ELL accommodations and just received a Google Alert about your blog.
As you point out, accommodations are not always implemented in a standardized fashion during testing. There are several things folks can do at the district level to help improve the accommodation of ELLs (excerpted from the 2008 GW-CEEE research posted at http://ceee.gwu.edu/ellaccommodations/)
**Use a team to determine accommodations. The decision-making process is a key aspect of ensuring ELLs receive appropriate accommodations. Decisions should not be made by an individual. Members of the team might include teachers of English language learners or bilingual students and general educators involved in supporting the student, translators, (as appropriate), parent(s) and/or guardian(s), or the student (as appropriate). Two guiding questions to frame the team’s discussion are
1.What does this individual student need to show us what he/she really knows?
2. If we provide that, will it change what the test is trying to measure?
**Avoid a one-size-fits-all approach when assigning accommodations. The diversity of the ELL population adds another layer to the task of selecting appropriate accommodations in state policies. Students who are learning English as a second language vary widely on a range of factors such as level of English language proficiency, level of literacy in English and the native language, language(s) of instruction, age, continuous years of formal schooling in each country, and type(s) of language support program (Abedi, 2004; Martiniello, 2007; Solano-Flores, 2006; Solano-Flores & Trumbull, 2008). These background factors have important implications because a “one-size-fits-all” approach cannot be used to meet the needs of such a diverse population.
**Assign accommodations to address ELLs’ needs. Recent research on the provision of accommodations highlights the impact of appropriate assignment on ELL test scores. Kopriva, Emick, Hipolito-Delgado, Porfirio, and Cameron (2007) observed that ELLs with assigned accommodations matched to their linguistic and cultural needs scored higher than ELLs with “incomplete” accommodations – i.e., assignment done without matching accommodations to ELL-responsive criteria –or ELLs who were not assigned any accommodations at all. When determining which accommodations to offer, consider the following:
1.The student’s English Language Proficiency
2.The student’s literacy levels in English and the native language
--------------------------------------
Additional considerations include
3.The student’s age/grade level
4.If appropriate, language of instruction of the student’s current schooling
5.If possible, the student’s years of formal schooling
**Select accommodations that provide ELLs with standardized access to test content. Use of unstandardized accommodations that might provide undue assistance or contribute to measurement error due to variations in implementation. Scripting accommodations can prevent variations in the presentation of test items that might provide either undue assistance or hinder a student’s access to the intended meaning.
Good luck with your blog and your course work.
Best wishes,
Lynn Willner
Senior Research Scientist
GW-CEEE
Joanne,
Lynn gives some great resources and ideas about accomodations. I especially like her reference to the Kopriva, Emick, Hipolito-Delgado, Porfirio, and Cameron (2007) observed that ELLs with assigned accommodations matched to their linguistic and cultural needs scored higher than ELLs with “incomplete” accommodations – I haven't read this piece but the ideas make a lot of sense. It resonates with the ideas we've shared in this class about the need for accommodations.
Marilee
Quyana Lynn for your valuable insights in these pressing issues in Language Assesment and Linguistics. I like how you expressed that Team effort is needed here in thinking of accomodating the learners. Good reminder here to include teachers, translators, and parents/guardians. We have discussed backgrounds of the learners throughout the process of Language acquisition and/or learning and here throughout this Assessment class. Things like the learners' English Language Proficiency, age, grade level, number of formal education, and other language insights regarding the learners will benefit the test administrators. This is a great way to close my semester by having a researcher in ELL accomodations respond and share. My professor here is pleased, and so I am. Once again Quyana for your input! :D
Post a Comment