Gabriela Galvan3

Professor Louise Bown

English 2010

February 21, 2017

Assessing English Language Learners in Utah Schools

1. Introduction:

As a country, the U.S. is growing increasingly diverse as to even become an

eventual, majority minority society. By 2050, it is projected that 24.4% of the nations

population will be Hispanic. Public schools will need to educate a demographic

comprised of even more students that dont speak English, school leaders will need to

eliminate the achievement gaps for all groups to make sure that they dont grow

separate and unequal (Center). There must be a recognition of the need to have

culturally sensitive

assessments for

ELLs especially

with the increasing

growth of diverse

students in Utah

There are many whom assume that a students poor testing results are a direct

outcome of a learning disability. However, with ELLs, it is not the case, rather an issue

with language acquisition. Limited English proficiency learners are behind the general
student population and perform poorly on standardized tests and although the high

school graduation rate for students with limited English proficiency has risen 30% since

2008, it is still only at 45%, with the dropout rate listed as 52% (Ruark, 2010). The

overrepresentation of ELLs in special education is the result of not appropriately

addressing the language support needed for them through assessments. The purpose

of this document is to report on how to avoid inaccurate recommendations of ELLs for

special education services by creating tests that are not culturally biased and have been

written with knowledge of the ELL students linguistic needs. Accommodating

appropriately is done through the use of research-based assessments interventions that

do not change the construct but instead remove any hindering factors.

2. Prior Considerations

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 requires states to annually assess the

English language proficiency of their students who are classified as limited English

proficiency, also referred to as ELLs. The assessments that are to administered to

them must assess students progress in and mastery of these standards in four

domains: reading, writing, speaking and listening. Results from the annual

administration may also be used to identify ELL students and to determine when they

should end ELL status, (National 59). These ELP tests are to give evidence of the valid

decisions made about students English proficiency and the data gained from the ELP

tests are also used for instructional program placement. The next consideration to make

after knowing what is required by educational policies, is how each adjustment is to be

properly executed.

Testing accommodations must make sure that it does not affect the construct
being assessed, nor should they differently benefit those students who are permitted to

use the accommodation. ELLs do not have the assistance of IEPs to guide their needs

for the assessment, therefore it is not as easier to figure out the accommodations as it is

for students with disabilities. The examination to know what accommodations to be

made are comprised or the following identifications: Measuring reading, writing, listening

and speaking skills, examining the students home language, and then formally

assessing their English Language Proficiency (Young and Kind).

Another consideration to take is the analysis of the accommodation and its

effectiveness for students performance. Research-based decisions on the

accommodations have shown the best results for the various categories of needs that

ELLs have in testing. An algorithm created by Abedi and Ewers from the University of

California describes the usage and evidence for different interventions for assessments

and is divided into the following sections: 1)Use- This accommodation is supported by

research as effective in making assessments more accessible and/or valid. 2) Not Use-

An accommodation labeled when there is enough consistent evidence that suggests the

accommodation is not effective and alter the focal construct. 3)Unsure- The research-

based evidence is inconclusive or there is not enough evidence to make a judgement

about its validity. However, there is also not enough proof to reject the accommodation

as ineffective. The following diagrams show how some accommodations are deemed

(Previous page contains the referred diagram). Each of the different accommodations

listed have mostly been proven through studies to be effective in getting ELL students

an equal opportunity to test without changing the construct of the exam itself.
 3. Su

cc

es

sf

ul

Assessments and their Accommodations

The Utah Academic Language Proficiency Assessment makes the initial

determination of whether a student is classified as an English learner and places the

student at one of five levels of English Proficiency. There are four domains tested within

the exams structure: Listening, speaking, reading and writing (Haas et al. 3).

Administering the UALPA must be done by the set procedure of the Utah Department of

Education and will allow certain accommodations to take place. Class rosters show

students with accommodations test administrators may not make accommodation

decisions. Common allowable accommodations are: allow extra time, reduce

distractions, and administer test-one-on-one. (Canyons 25). There are other

accommodations that have been regarded as inappropriate such as: Reading direction

or questions aloud in English, oral translation of directions or question, bilingual word

lists, and translated formulas or use of a bilingual dictionary.

The College Board, which writes and sends all US schools the Advanced
Placement examinations at the end of the academic year, gives recommendations for

the most appropriate ELL accommodations. One controversial modification is in the

administration of the test in the students language. One the one hand, it will benefit

them only if they received prior classroom instruction in that language. On the other

hand, it is not appropriate unless the students degree of English language proficiency is

higher in that the linguistic modification of test items has no serious need to be done. An

accommodation that cannot take place with the UALPA but that have been

recommended non-high stakes tests are to provide students with English dictionaries.

Once again, it is only to be used if it was done during the content instruction in class.

Testing ELL students in a different setting, either individually of in a small group, relieves

much of the exam stress that commonly occurs in the process (Young and King 4).

4. Summary

Educational policies on assessments, ELL programs, and identification of students in

need of linguistic interventions are continually changing and it is important to know that

accommodations alone cannot eliminate the achievement gaps between ELLs and

native English speakers. Common used testing accommodations for ELLs as

recommended by state policies are extended time, reading items aloud, translating

directions orally into the native language, allowing students to respond orally in English

describing responses, and simplifying directions (Keiffer et. al. 4). The testing

modifications have shown to decrease irrelevant language demands that depress ELLs

test scores, but the real progress that will overcome the gaps are done by improving

instruction to teach ELLs the academic language and knowledge to succeed

 Works Cited

Abedi, Jamal and Ewers, Nancy. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium:

Accommodations for English Language Learners and Students with Disabilities:

A Research-Based Decision Algorithm. University of California, Feb. 2013,

https://portal.smarterbalanced.org/library/en/accommodations-for-english-

language-learners-and-students-with-disabilities-a-research-based-decision-

algorithm.pdf. Accessed 2 Mar. 2017.

Canyons School District. Administering the 2010-2011 Utah Academic Language

Proficiency Assessment Collaboration of Federal & State Programs and

Instructional Research & Assessment, n. d. Power point presentation. Accessed

3 Mar. 2017.

Center for Public Education. Changing Demographics: at a glance National School

Boards Association, 2012, http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-

Menu/Staffingstudents/Changing-Demographics-At-a-glance. Accessed 1 Mar.

2017.

Dickson, Sydnee. 2016-2017 Utah Participation and Accommodations Policy. Utah

State Board of Education, 2017,

http://schools.utah.gov/sars/Assessment/AccommodationsPolicyDraft.aspx.

Accessed 1 Mar. 2017.

Haas, Eric, et. al. The achievement progress of English learner students in Utah.

National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 2016,

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED568356.pdf. Accessed 3 Mar. 2017.

Kieffer, Michael J. et al. Research-Based Recommendations for the use of

Accommodations in Large-Scale Assessments Practical Guidelines for the

Education of English Language Learners, 2012,

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537635.pdf. Accessed 3 Mar. 2017.

National Research Council. Chapter 3: Quality and Comparability of State Tests of

English Language Proficiency. Allocating Federal Funds for State Programs for

English Language Learners, 2011, https://www.nap.edu/read/13090/chapter/5.

Accessed 2 Mar. 2017.

Poole, Mallory W. The Development and Evaluation of an In-service Training for

Informing Elementary School Personnel About Culturally Responsive

Assessment and Instruction for English Language Learning Students. Utah

State University: Special Education and Teaching Commons, 2013,

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?

article=1302&context=gradreports. Accessed 24 Feb. 2017.

Ruark, Erik A. English Language Learners and Public Education in Utah. Federation

For American Immigration Reform, 2012,

http://www.fairus.org/DocServer/Utah_LEP_final.pdf. Accessed 24 Feb. 2017.

Young, John W. & King, Teresa C. Testing Accommodations for English Language

Learners: A Review of State and District Policies. The College Board, New York,

2008, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED563044.pdf. Accessed 24 Feb. 2017.