|
Given the mandate under NCLB to include ELLs in state
assessment systems and in NAEP, a discussion of effective accommodations
is more important than ever. Findings from state policy documents along
with the review of available accommodations studies highlight two important
aspects of accommodation that require the attention of policy makers at
the state and national levels:
First, analysis of states'
policies has revealed the need to provide strong guidance for the selection
of appropriate accommodations. Such guidance must focus on the needs
and characteristics of particular student groups.
Second, review of accommodations studies has shown that more
research must be conducted on the impact of particular accommodations
or groups of accommodations on the scores of ELLs.
Recommendations can be made in the following
areas:
(1) Provide detailed and accessible policies
that directly address ELLs' linguistic needs.
Detailed, comprehensive, and accessible policies at the state level are
needed to ensure that district and school personnel are provided enough
guidance to select appropriate accommodations for ELLs. Policies should
identify and describe accommodations that address the linguistic needs
of ELLs.
(2) Use student
background variables to inform selection of accommodations.
Background variables should be taken into consideration in identifying
appropriate accommodations for each ELL. Decisions regarding the use of
accommodations for ELLs need to be made on an individual basis, and variables
affecting these decisions should be discussed explicitly in policy. Policies
should
- provide a definition of English language learner
(or limited English proficient student),
- recommend that districts and schools consider
the English language proficiency level of ELLs when selecting accommodations,
- recommend that districts and schools consider
the extent to which ELLs have been instructed in the content of the
test when selecting accommodations, and
- recommend that districts and schools take into
account the language of instruction when determining which accommodations
are most appropriate for students.
(3) Designate appropriate decision
makers for determining which accommodations are to be used for particular
assessments.
Policies should explicitly recommend that a team of individuals make decisions
about which accommodations to allow ELLs at different levels of English
language proficiency and with different academic backgrounds. Decision-making
teams should include school leadership, assessment personnel, and ESL/bilingual
and general education teachers familiar with the overall school program
and specific academic program of the ELL.
(4) Use an ELL-responsive framework as a tool
to organize accommodations and guide appropriate selection of accommodations
for ELLs.
Currently the most often used taxonomy is one developed to classify accommodations
for students with disabilities. Because the assessment needs of ELLs and
SDs differ significantly, it is recommended that policy makers distinguish
the needs of these two student groups. State policies should use an ELL-responsive
framework to organize accommodations appropriate to address ELLs' need
to access the language of a test. At a minimum, the framework should recognize
accommodations providing linguistic support. The framework used for this
study acknowledges the unique linguistic needs of ELLs, categorizing accommodations
as direct linguistic support and indirect linguistic support. Such a tool
can be used to examine the appropriateness of an existing list of accommodations
for ELLs found in states' policies.
(5) Indicate clearly which accommodations are appropriate for use
with particular content areas.
State policies should provide specific guidance on the assessment and
content area for which an accommodation is allowed or prohibited. For
instance, policy makers should indicate that native language translation
is allowed for the state mathematics and science exams but prohibited
for the English language arts (ELA) exams.
(6) Use accommodations supported by research.
Although research on accommodations for ELLs is inconclusive, two kinds
of accommodations appear to have potential to support ELLs' access to
test content: native language and linguistic simplification. Combining
specific direct linguistic support accommodations (e.g., bilingual glossaries)
with specific indirect linguistic support accommodations (e.g., extra
time) also appears to support ELLs performance on assessments.
- Native
language accommodations
The limited number of studies focused on native language accommodations
suggests that decisions about the use of accommodations should be based
on the students' language of instruction. A student who has not been
schooled in his or her native language in mathematics, for example,
should not be accommodated on assessments of mathematics in the native
language. Furthermore, research on the effectiveness of native language
in instructional contexts points to its usefulness as a tool for helping
ELLs access content.
- Linguistic
simplification accommodations
Research suggests that linguistic simplification of test items or directions
may have a positive effect on the performance of ELLs on mathematics
and possibly science tests. However, it should be kept in mind that
this accommodation appears to be useful for students at lower and intermediate
levels of English language proficiency. Further research needs to be
conducted to examine the effects of this accommodation on ELLs who are
at more advanced stages of English language proficiency.
- Combinations
of direct and indirect linguistic support accommodations
Finally, combinations of direct and indirect linguistic support accommodations
support ELLs on state assessments. For example, there is a strong rationale
for combining the use of bilingual glossaries with extra time to complete
the assessment. If bilingual glossaries are to be used effectively,
it is reasonable to expect the student to need extra time to access
the glossary and to read the glossary and use it when decoding the test
items.
|
