Psychometric Challenges in Assessing English Language Learners and Students With Disabilities

Culturally Responsive Teaching through the Lens of Dual Language Education: Intersections and Opportunities

“…They recommend a combination of standardized tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, narrative language samples, and observation of children's language in authentic settings [60][61][62]. To improve the validity of test results, practitioners are encouraged to make accommodations on large-scale assessments for bilinguals such as providing: simplified English in test directions, design, and question prompts; English dictionaries/glossaries; the language of tests in the language of instruction, and extended time, or use of untimed tests [63][64][65]. Additionally, test data should be collected over a period of time and administered by faculty and staff whose cultural attitudes not only recognize diversity, but are aligned with sustaining it also.…”

Assessment of English Language Learners in the Era of New Academic Content Standards

“…Both validity concerns arise in the context of interpreting the meaningfulness of results obtained for AMAO 3 at the nexus of Title I and Title III under NCLB. This third and final mandated objective of ELL assessment focuses on the English language arts and mathematics achievement of ELL students as a subgroup of the general student population for federal accountability reporting purposes (see Lane & Leventhal, 2015, this volume; Sireci & Faulkner-Bond, 2015, this volume). Every ELL student who has been resident in the United States for longer than 12 months must participate in their state’s annual testing program along with their English-speaking peers.…”

Promoting Validity in the Assessment of English Learners

“…With respect to statistical analyses, DIF analyses can promote the validity of assessments for ELs by identifying items that might be biased against them (Hauger & Sireci, 2008; Lane & Leventhal, 2015, this volume). The goal of a DIF analysis is to identify items that “function differentially” for different groups of students such as ELs and non-ELs.…”

“…The accommodation classifications made by Abedi and Ewers (2013) were based in part on reviews of empirical studies evaluating the effectiveness and validity of accommodations. In addition to their work, there have been at least four literature reviews on the effectiveness of test accommodations for ELs (see also Lane & Leventhal, 2015, this volume). In chronological order they are Sireci, Li, and Scarpati (2003), Kieffer, Lesaux, Rivera, and Francis (2009), Pennock-Roman and Rivera (2011), and Li and Suen (2012).…”