Accommodations Criteria

Many states incorporated language into their assessment policies that addressed the criteria that should be used to determine which students should be exempted from assessment. Overall, criteria for determining which students are eligible for ELL-responsive accommodations address two points:

1. The point at which ELLs might be ready to take the same assessments as their English-speaking peers and
2. The point at which ELLs might take other-than-standard versions of the assessment (August & Hakuta, 1997).

However, the criteria used for determining whether an ELL should be given accommodations are quite variable. These criteria are related to the following influences:

• Language -- includes the most frequently designated criteria
  • Student's English language proficiency
  • Student's native language proficiency
  • Student's language program placement
  • Primary language in which student receives instruction
    
    
• Time -- length of time a student has been in an academic environment in which English was the primary language of instruction
  • Time in US/English speaking schools
  • Time in state's schools
    
    
• Academic -- student's prior schooling and academic achievement as measured by test performance
  • Academic background in home language
  • Performance on other test(s)
    
    
• Opinion -- judgment of school personnel and/or family of student (including student)
  • Parent/guardian's opinion or permission
  • Teacher observation/
    recommendation
    

 

Although language proficiency is probably the most important of the criteria, it addresses only one aspect of ELLs' needs. Academic-related criteria can be helpful in taking into account important aspects, such as the kind of education a student has received before coming to the U.S. as well as the language in which he or she has received instruction in the U.S. For example, "time in U.S./English speaking schools" may help educators to understand and address socio-cultural impediments that ELLs frequently encounter as they attempt to gain access to U.S.-based teaching and learning processes.

Another consideration found in many states' policies is the use, during assessment, of only those accommodations used for instruction. This consideration is more pertinent to students with disabilities (SDs) than to ELLs. Indeed, states' assessment policies regarding the use of "routine classroom accommodations" for ELLs seem to be a vestige of policy developed for students with disabilities, like the use of an SD-responsive taxonomy for organizing ELL accommodations. In this instance, the use of a framework developed for SDs results in a misapplication of what seems to be a commonsensical requirement that students not be subjected to new procedures when taking a state assessment. However, this requirement falls short of its objective because it is based on the premise that there is a system in place to track the use of routine classroom accommodations. The Individual Education Plan of an SD provides such an apparatus, and the accommodations used during assessment are more likely to be those used routinely during instruction. In the case of ELLs, however, there is no such apparatus.

Rather than focusing on the use of "routine classroom accommodations," state policy would be better serve the needs of ELLs by requiring educators to take into account these students' programs of instruction, including language of instruction, curriculum, and resources available to students in English and in native languages.