Pilot Study: ELL Assessment Practices and Recommendations for Practitioners
Download
1 / 1

Pilot Study: ELL Assessment Practices and Recommendations for Practitioners - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 119 Views
  • Uploaded on

Pilot Study: ELL Assessment Practices and Recommendations for Practitioners. Janeann M. Lineman and Cynthia E. Hazel, University of Denver. Abstract. Method. Results Continued.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Pilot Study: ELL Assessment Practices and Recommendations for Practitioners' - gage-pace


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Pilot Study: ELL Assessment Practices and Recommendations for Practitioners

Janeann M. Lineman and Cynthia E. Hazel, University of Denver

Abstract

Method

Results Continued

The purpose of this poster is to provide an overview of traditional and nontraditional assessment practices of school psychologists when working with English Language Learner (ELL) students. Using pilot data, frequencies of assessment practices and reasons for and against using various methods are presented. Recommendations are made for practitioners, districts, and states.

Participants received an email from their state association that included an electronic link to a survey. The survey was constructed using SurveyMonkey.com and consisted of 10-matrix items and demographic questions.

Participants were asked to report frequency of implementation for the following assessment tools.

Respondents were also asked to rate the following reason for/against implementation of assessment tools.

The most frequent reasons against implementation included lack of experience with the tool, high verbal loading, not being normed on ELL populations, not available, and other unspecified reasons.

Note. LEC = Lack of experience and comfort with tool; NA = Not Available; NN = Not Normed on ELL Population; DSR = District/State Regulations; HVL = High Verbal Loading.

Rationale and Current Study

The population of English Language Learners (ELL) is growing every year in the United States. According to National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), the ELL population has grown 95% from 1991 to 2002, with more than 400 languages spoken across this population (Lopez, 2006). For the state of Colorado, ELL students make up approximately 10% of Colorado’s K-12 school population (CDE, 2009). ELL student receive special education services more frequently than monolingual English-speaking students (Cárdenas-Hagan, Carlson, & Pollard, 2007). Consequently, it is important that school psychologists evaluate current assessment procedures and potential alternative methods for identifying current levels of performance, monitoring progress, and developing effective interventions for ELL students. This exploratory study surveyed Colorado school psychology practitioners regarding assessment practices with ELL students considered for special education services.

Question 1: “What are the frequency of implementation rates for traditional and nontraditional ability assessment methods?”

Question 2: “What are the practitioners’ reasons for and against implementing an ability assessment method?”

Discussion

  • Districts and states have put forth great effort towards guiding appropriate assessment practices when working with ELL populations. Respondents in this pilot stated that lack of availability was the primary reason for not using alternative standardized measures, whereas availability, comfort and experience were the main reasons for not using alternative assessment methods. Future research is needed to identify the needs of other states and districts to ensure that the training needs of school psychologists are being met. In turn, the following recommendations are made:

  • Practitioners:

  • Review district and state regulations for servicing ELL student populations, especially guidelines for ability assessments and advocate for professional development at your local, state, and national levels.

  • Districts and Administrators:

  • Conduct a needs assessment on ability assessment training needs. For example, use professional learning communities or workgroups to begin the development of a district survey.

  • State Departments of Education and Professional Organizations:

  • Coordinate with districts to host trainings that meet district needs. For example, hold a special topic meeting during an annual conference.

  • Limitations

  • The generalizability of these findings is limited due to a poor response rate and possible participants being limited to practicing school psychologists who were members of the Colorado Society of School Psychologists. The majority of practitioners who did respond reported a large ELL student case load and many had some second language ability. This would suggest that these practitioners are as well versed, or better, than the total practitioner population in assessing ELL students. Further studies are needed to better understand the assessment practices and logic for those practices of school psychologists who work with ELL students being considered for special education services.

Results

Sample

Question 1: “What are the frequency of implementation rates for traditional and nontraditional ability assessment methods?”

Note. n = number of respondents reporting that they used a particular ability assessment; N = total number of respondents for each ability assessment.

Question 2: “What are the reasons for and against implementing an ability assessment method?”

The most common reasons for implementation included low verbal loading, availability, and comfort/experience with the tool.

Note. EC = Experience and comfort with tool; A = Availability; N = Normed on ELL Population; DSR = District/State Regulations; E = Efficient; LVL = Low Verbal Loading.

State association members of the Colorado Society of School Psychologists (N = 475) were solicited for participation; 55 responded (12% response rate); 40 completed all questions. All respondents were fluent in English; 40% reported conversational skills in Spanish and 4% were fluent speakers. One response indicated conversational skills in Chinese; one response indicated conversational skills in Russian. 67.4% of participants reported a small to moderate caseload of ELL students (0-20%), with the remaining reporting larger caseloads (21 – 100%). Table 1 shows demographics.

REFERENCES

  • Lopez, E. (2006). English language learners. In G.G. Bear & K.M. Minke (Eds.), Children’s needs III (pp. 647-659). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

  • Cárdenas-Hagan, E., Carlson, C.D. & Pollard-Durodola, S.D. (2007). The cross-linguistic transfer of early literacy skills: The role of initial L1 and L2 skills and language of instruction. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 249-259.

  • National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (2006). NCELA frequently asked questions. Retrieved April 7, 2008, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/expert/faq/08leps.html

  • Colorado Department of Education (Revised April, 2009). Guidebook on designing, delivering, and evaluating services for English language learners (Ells). Retrieved June 17, 2009, from www.cde.state.co.us/cde_english/download/ELLGuidebook/ELLGuidebook08-09.pdf

Special thanks to Stephanie Figueroa for her for her assistance and support with this research.


ad