Applying Risk Reduction Features to Limited English Proficient Students

One can view the notion of risk from many vantage points in evaluation. Problems emerge in attempting to identify risks that affect limited English proficient students, and the relationship of these risks as barriers to targeted academic performance. The article introduces features of the Goal Attainment Risk Reduction model as possible evaluation considerations by a campus or district. Focus is given to risk analyses, and to a number of risk reduction analytical features from multiple disciplines, and how these could apply to limited English proficient students. The issue of “risk’ often emerges in the terminology of bilingual education in various ways. Limited English proficient (LEP) students are often described as “at risk” in their academic performance, of dropping out, of being retained in grade, among other vantage points. Then there are the “risks” that are associated with the term “at risk” that may connote a classification. Sometimes a risk can be viewed in very broad and general terms. Other times it may be more specifically defined and represented as performance on a test, attendance rates, etc. What are some ways we can look at risk from an evaluation perspective? How can the evaluation perspective specifically help to understand the nature of the risk, and be applied in a practical way? For our purposes, the term risk means the resulting product of identification processes and analyses that you can proverbially “see, hear, taste, touch or feel”. It is something that can potentially affect the immediate environment and performance of the LEP student. More critically, the risk can be measured and monitored in concrete terms, either through its own reduction, and/ or through the attainment of an outcome because of its reduction as a barrier to achievement. The authors introduce a possible way of viewing risks through one type of model. Focus is upon two features of the model. The first presents an approach to defining and visualizing risks to LEP students through analyses. The second looks at several possible approaches in representing the results of risk reduction as measurable outcomes. TABE Journal, 7, 129-138. Applying GARR Features: One framework, and certainly not the only way, of viewing risk management in relation to educational goal/ objective attainment is the use of the Goal Assessment Risk Reduction (GARR) model (Seidner, 1988; 1991; in press). The model in itself reflects an interdisciplinary approach from various fields. A number of its features resemble characteristics of models advanced by Stufflebeam (1968; and Shinkfield, 1985), Scriven (1993; 1980), and Patton (1997; 1987), among others. Other features are similar to the risk assessment models in medicine, engineering, military planning, and finance, as well as by forensic experts in various areas (Newman and Strojan, 1998; Ward and Chapman, 2002; Molak, 1996; Hall, 1998; National Research Council, 1994; Walker, 1996). The model can contribute to the institutionalization of evaluation processes, especially as an integrated part of the day-by-day operations of campuses with limited English proficient (LEP) populations (see Stufflebeam 1997; Sanders, 2002). One of the issues that have emerged over the years has been the mainstreaming or internalization of evaluation by schools as part of their ongoing management plans and processes. The President of The American Evaluation Association recently addressed this in his address to the membership.1 The GARR model or its variations may provide a practical way of incorporating evaluation issues pertaining to LEP students with a school’s organizational processes. The model provides a visual plan and depiction of desired student outcomes and potential barriers to performance identified as risks, and the provision of strategies (i.e., human and material,) to overcome them. Essentially, its application would allow educators to: a) identify real risks as barriers to performance outcomes by LEP students; b) associate the risk with a targeted educational performance; c) systematically identify strategies that work to reduce the risks; d) use the model practical applications, and in more defined research studies; and, e) use information from the model to help individualize interventions for LEP students. The GARR Model as a process evaluation looks at the attainment of targeted goals over time, while monitoring the reduction of risks, through the application of strategies, which, in turn, are constantly assessed in terms of their effectiveness (see figure 1): These monitoring processes then allow the organization to review the targeted attainment of goals, make periodic adjustments as necessary, and reevaluate which risks periodically come into play and the impact of strategies. The most critical stage of the model involves the processes of risk analyses.