Bilingual Special Education Evaluation

1. Bilingual Special Education Evaluation Criselda Guajarado Alvarado

2. Correcting Some Myths • Bilingual special education evaluation means testing in two languages. • Bilingual special education evaluation is not only for students identified as LEP (EL). There will be many referred students who are considered English fluent, who need a bilingual special education evaluation.

3. Definitions • Dominant Language—the language spoken by the student most effectively and productively relative to his/her other language(s) • Oral Language Proficiency—level of the student’s ability to comprehend and speak a language. • Primary language—language the person first learned, or the language which is spoken in the person’s home5 CCR 3001 Definitions

4. Definitions, continued • Native Language—The term “native language”, when used with respect to an individual who is limited English proficient, means the language normally used by the individual or, in the case of a child, the language normally used by the parents of the child. IDEA ’04

5. Agenda • Four components of a bilingual psycho-educational evaluation • Available tests in languages other than English • Case study: Juan

6. Test Results Four Components of a Bilingual Special Education Evaluation Affective Factors Language of Instruction • Gathering of information for referral • Oral language proficiency and dominance testing in the student’s two or more languages • Academic testing • Cognitive/IQ testing Parent’s Language Quality of Language Models Student’s Dominant Language Student’s Level of Proficiency Social vs. Academic Language Socio-Economic Factors Kind of Educational Programming

7. Gathering Information for Referral to Special Education Testing

8. Getting to Know Your Student: Educational Background • Previous School Information • Track down where student has attended school since he first started. • Current & previous educational programs, identifying all programming since student started school (especially alternative language programming). • Language proficiency testing (over time if avail.) • Attendance • Testing done by school

9. Getting to Know Your Student: Oral Language Environment • Home Language Survey • Current language spoken at home • Language spoken with friends • Language spoken in community • Language spoken in the classroom

10. Getting to Know Your Student: Socio-Economic & Other Factors • Pertinent cultural and lifestyle information • Parent information • Developmental milestones • Family history • Comparison to siblings • Significant family events • Significant medical event • Any other pertinent information

11. Getting to Know Your Student:Teacher Input • Teacher input on student’s language ability in both languages • Teacher input on this student’s classroom performance • Referral concern • Other information

12. 30 EC 56441.11—Special Education Eligibility Criteria for Preschool Children • A child is not eligible for special education and services if the child does not otherwise meet the eligibility criteria and his or her educational needs are due primarily to: • Unfamiliarity with the English language. • Social maladjustment. • Environmental, cultural, or economic factors. • Temporary physical disabilities.

13. 30 EC 56337—Specific Learning Disability; Discrepancies • (a) A severe discrepancy exists between the intellectual ability and achievements in one or more of the following academic areas. Oral expression Basic reading skills Math calculation Listening comprehension Reading comprehension Written expressions Math reasoning • (b) The discrepancy is due to a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes and is not the result of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantages. • (c) The discrepancy cannot be corrected through other regular or categorical services offered within the regular instructional program.

14. IDEA ’04—SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY (A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘specific learning disability’ means a disorder in 1 or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. (B) DISORDERS INCLUDED.—Such term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. (C) DISORDERS NOT INCLUDED.—Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

15. Case Study: Juan • Student is 8 years old in the 2nd grade. • Student went to school in Mexico for PK and Kinder • Family moved to the U.S. and Juan was enrolled in 1st grade. He was retained and attended 1st grade again. • Parents denied bil. ed. and ESL services when Juan initially entered the 1st grade in the U.S. • Spanish is primary language of home. Mom knows very little English. Dad knows a little, enough to roughly communicate. • Student speaks Spanish w/ friends & neighbors. Seems more comfortable speaking Spanish. • English has been language of instruction for last 3 years.

16. IDEA 2004, Additional Requirements (3) Each local educational agency shall ensure that—(A) assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this section— (i) are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; (ii) are provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer; (iii) are used for purposes for which the assessment or measures are valid and reliable; (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel; and (v) are administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of such assessments; . . .

17. Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing

18. Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing • Formal oral language testing should never be the only information used to determine oral language proficiency and dominance. Other information that may used include: • Home Language Survey • Teacher checklist • Previous and current language proficiency testing • Parent information on child’s language skills • Student interview on language use and exposure

19. Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing • Oral language testing should usually be conducted in both languages of the student. • Strive for parallel oral language testing because test results in the two languages will usually be compared to determine dominance. • Be aware that oral language tests may measure different aspects of language. Some oral language tests may measure social/conversational language, while others may measure cognitive/academic language. • SLPs usually test functional language, while school psychologists test for academic language (different perspective on language).

20. Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing • Interpret results based on amount and quality of student’s exposure to the language being tested. • Determine dominance by comparing oral language totals in English and other language. Administer cognitive/IQ test in dominant/stronger language. • If dominance is unclear, analyze tasks by level of language complexity. Determine if on the more complex aspects of language, a dominant language is indicated. • If unclear dominance even after comparing the total scores & looking at task complexity, consider administering the cognitive/IQ test in student’s native language • Be knowledgeable about the second language acquisition process. Interpret results in light of what is known about second language learning.

21. OCR v. Denver Public Schools • In order to account for the effect of language on test results, staff persons at some school districts consider students’ “dominant language” or “primary language”, often using the terms interchangeably. However, determining that a student is dominant in English is not equivalent to determining that the student is proficient in the language skills required to produce valid, reliable results on a special education evaluation instrument.

22. OCR received several forms used in the pre-referral, referral, and placement process, some of which are specifically for use with language-minority students. One example, the Pre-Referral Background Information and Language Survey for Limited English Proficient Children form, is used to determine "language dominance." Like the other forms furnished to OCR, the instructions on this form limit its use to students who have already been identified as LEP, and includes no space to record objective assessment of proficiency in English or any other language. The determination of "language dominance" is not based on a comparison of objective assessment of proficiency in two or more languages. Rather, staff persons are invited to draw a judgment of language dominance based on subjective information regarding the student’s language use and background. The person completing the form, who is not necessarily qualified to administer special education testing instruments, may suggest the language to be used for testing.OCR v. Denver Public Schools

23. Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English • PLS 4 English & Spanish • WMLS-NU English & Spanish • WMLS-R English & Spanish • WLPB-R English & Spanish • Oral Language Cluster in WJ III and Batería III • CELF 4 English & CELF 3 Spanish * • ____________________ • ____________________ * Use with caution. Can be used for proficiency testing, but not to determine dominance

24. English Oral Language WJ III ACH Pic. Voc 75 6-0 Verb Analogies 82 7-8 Story Recall 85 7-9 Understanding Dir. 76 6-0 LISTENING COMP. 83 6-8 ORAL EXPRESS. 72 6-0 TOTAL 75 6-1 Spanish Oral Language Batería III APROV Pic. Voc 85 7-9 Verb Analogies 90 7-11 Story Recall 102 8-4 Understanding Dir. 98 8-0 LISTENING COMP. 96 8-2 ORAL EXPRES. 93 8-5 TOTAL 94 8-6 Oral Lang. Proficiency & Dominance TestingCase Study: Juan

25. Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing • Once a determination and interpretation of oral language proficiency and dominance has been made, other aspects of the evaluation can be addressed, including • the selection of appropriate tests and assessment strategies to use in the evaluation process, • language(s) to use with the student, and • qualified personnel to conduct the procedures.

26. Academic Testing

27. Academic Testing • English academic testing is almost always done unless student is newly immigrated within the last few months. • Academic testing in the other language is usually conducted if student has been exposed to academic instruction for one year or more. • If tests in the other language are not available or if amount of instruction in the other language was negligible, informal academic testing may be necessary. • Be aware that academic instruction can be received in other settings besides school. So even if student has not received instruction in that language at school, he/she may have received instruction elsewhere like home or church.

28. Interpretation of Academic Testing • Results from the academic testing are interpreted in light of the amount and quality of academic exposure in that language. • Be aware of the effects of different instructional programming on performance.

29. Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English • Spanish • Batería-R ACH • Batería-III APROV • ________________________ • ________________________

30. English Academic Testing WJ III BRS = 78 6-4 RC = 77 6-6 MC = 99 8-6 MR = 89 7-8 WE = 72 6-0 Spanish Academic Testing Batería III BRS = 75 6-2 RC = 70 5-11 MC = 99 8-5 MR = 95 8-5 WE = 65 5-9 Academic Testing Case Study: Juan

31. Cognitive/IQ Testing

32. Cognitive/IQ Testing • Administer cognitive/IQ test in dominant language of the student. • If cognitive/IQ testing is limited to nonverbal only, be sure that this was because of a student centered reason and not because it was easier and faster. • Be aware of the impact of the second language acquisition process on test results

33. Cognitive/IQ Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English • Spanish • Batería III COG • Standard Scale Tests 1-7 for very Spanish monolingual students • Early Development Scale for Spanish speaking 2 & 3 year old students or those who function on a 2 & 3 year old level • Bilingual Scale for Spanish dominant students who also speak English • Low Verbal Scale for Spanish dominant students w/ documented significant language delays • Extended Scale (Tests 1-7 & 11-17) for more in-depth testing • Spanish Wechsler IV

34. IDEA 2004, Additional Requirements (3) Each local educational agency shall ensure that—(A) assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this section— (i) are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; (ii) are provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer; (iii) are used for purposes for which the assessment or measures are valid and reliable; (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel; and (v) are administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of such assessments; . . .

35. …for a non-native speaker and for a speaker of some dialects of English, every test given in English becomes, in part, a language or literacy test. Test results may not reflect accurately the abilities and competencies being measured if test performance depends on these test takers’ knowledge of English. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing American Psychological Association American Educational Research Association National Council on Measurement in Education

36. Cognitive/IQ Testing: Tests Appropriate for Bilingual, English Dominant Students • WJ III • Bilingual Scale for English dominant students who also speak Spanish or one of the 16 languages in the BVAT • K-ABC II • Allows translation of instructions & sample items (if necessary) and acceptance of responses in another language

37. Cognitive/IQ Testing Case Study: Juan • Batería III Cognitiva, Bilingual Scale 106

38. Evaluation Personnel

39. “Best Practice” dictates that the evaluation professional is fluent and literate in the two or more languages of the student being tested. The evaluation professional should also be knowledgeable of cultural and linguistic issues that can impact test results and have training on evaluation materials and practices appropriate for the culturally and linguistically diverse student. The evaluation materials should be in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information.

40. IDEA ’04, Personnel Qualifications. (A) In general.—The State educational agency has established and maintains qualifications to ensue that personnel necessary to carry out this part are appropriately and adequately prepared and trained, including that those personnel have the content knowledge and skills to serve children with disabilities.

41. 30 EC 56362.7 Bilingual-Crosscultural Certificate of Assessment Competence (a) The Legislature recognizes the need for specially trained professionals to assess and serve pupils of limited-English proficiency. This is particularly true of pupils with exceptional needs or pupils with suspected handicaps. (b) The commission shall develop a bilingual-crosscultural certificate of assessment competence for those professional who may participate in assessments for placements in special education programs. The certificate shall be issued to holders of appropriate credentials, certificates, or authorizations who demonstrate, by written and oral examination, all of the following: (1) That the person is competent in both the oral and written skills of a language other than English. (2) That the person has both the knowledge and understanding of the cultural and historical heritage of the limited-English-proficient individuals to be served. (3) That the person has the ability to perform the assessment functions that candidate is certified or authorized to perform in English and in a language other than English. (4) That the person has knowledge of the use of instruments and other assessment techniques appropriate to evaluate limited-English-proficient individuals with exceptional needs and ability to develop appropriate data, instructional strategies, individual educational plans, and evaluations.

42. APA Standard 9.11 When an interpreter is used in testing, the interpreter should be fluent in both the language of the test and the examinee’s native language, should have expertise in translating, and should have a basic understanding of the assessment process. Comment: Although individuals with limited proficiency in the language of the test should ideally be tested by professionally trained bilingual examiners, the use of an interpreter may be necessary in some situations. If an interpreter is required, the professional examiner is responsible for ensuring that the interpreter has the appropriate qualifications, experience, and preparation to assist appropriately in the administration of the test. It is necessary for the interpreter to understand the importance of following standardized procedures, how testing is conducted typically, the importance of accurately conveying to the examiner an examinee’s actual responses, and the role and responsibilities of the interpreter in testing. p. 100

43. Evaluation Report

44. Report • Results of the Home Language Survey • Teacher information • Language proficiency testing • Parent Information • Information from student interviews • Educational history • Previous schooling in another country, including any interruptions • Previous and current educational programming, especially alternative language programming • Relevant sociological/cultural information • Document • Qualifications of evaluation personnel • Language(s) of the test • Evaluation practices utilized • Deviation from standardized administration • Consideration of the effects of environmental, cultural, and economic disadvantage, if appropriate.

45. 30 EC 56327, Assessment Results; Reports The personnel who assess the pupil shall prepare a written report, or reports, as appropriate, of the results of each assessment. The report shall include, but not be limited to, all the following: (a) Whether the pupil may need special education and related services. (b) The basis for making the determination. (c) The relevant behavior noted during the observation of the pupil in an appropriate setting. (d) The relationship of that behavior to the pupil’s academic and social functioning. (e) The educationally relevant health and development, and medical findings, if any. (f) For pupils with learning disabilities whether there is such a discrepancy between achievement and ability that it cannot be corrected without special education and related services. (g) A determination concerning the effects of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage, where appropriate. (h) The need for specialized services, materials, and equipment for pupils with low incidence disabilities, consistent with guidelines established pursuant to Section 56136.

46. Reevaluations

47. Some additional issues to consider: • Students who are in the second language acquisition process can experience dramatic changes between initial evaluation and reevaluation. • Testing practices may have significantly changed from the initial evaluation. • More appropriate and equitable standardized tests may now be available that were previously not available.