Testing the Tests: An Investigation into the Effectiveness of Alternative Assessment Methods for Bilingual Language-Impaired Children

Alternative language assessment procedures are gaining in prominence as authentic alternatives to traditional measures, but scant data exist regarding the relative effectiveness of the data they provide. This paper first summarizes the criteria for effective language assessment of bilingual children as documented in the literature, and then comparatively evaluates the effectiveness of research studies employing the three most-cited alternative assessment approaches: descriptive, dynamic, and curriculum-based. Conclusions regarding the impact of appropriate assessment on issues of overand under-representation of bilingual Hispanic students are also discussed. Testing the Tests: An Investigation into the Effectiveness of Alternative Assessment Methods for Bilingual Language-Impaired Children Limited data exist regarding the impact of limited English proficiency on the referral and placement of bilingual children in special education and speech-language programs. The need for this type of information is becoming increasingly urgent. Minority populations are growing at unprecedented rates and the nation’s classrooms are becoming rapidly multicultural. Of the 63 racial/cultural categories identified by the US Bureau of the Census (2000), Hispanics comprise the fastest growing minority population in the United States —having grown from about 9 % of the United States population in 1990, to about 13 % in 2000. Whereas in 1982, Hispanics comprised only 1 in 10 school-aged children, this number is expected to increase to 1 in 3 by the year 2020 (Gersten & Woodward, 1994; US Census Report, 2000). The assessments of children who are linguistically different as well as culturally diverse has become one of education’s greatest challenges. The stakes multiply in importance for students being assessed for special education or speech-language pathology (SLP) services. For such students, the assessment process has been called into question, especially in light of the fact that students from minority populations (especially Hispanics and African-Americans) are disproportionately overrepresented in special education. For example, according to data cited by Correa and Heward (2000), although 32.5 % of the entire school-age population can be classified as minority, nearly 40 % of children identified as mild or moderately mentally impaired belong to a minority group. In terms of the Hispanic population, evidence of both overand under-representation exists. Current data indicate that 80% of Hispanics referred for special education services are placed in learning disability (LD) and speech-language pathology (SLP) programs— both of which directly involve language proficiency and competence. The rise in the number of Hispanic students now being referred to LD and SLP programs has been accompanied by a comparable reduction in the number of Hispanic students now being placed in programs for children who are mildly mentally retarded or gifted and talented (Ortiz, 1997). Several possible causes for this disparity have been cited in the literature. Burnett (2000) attributes the crisis to the national scarcity of qualified bilingual personnel and the lack of appropriate assessment tools, but Oritz and Garcia (1995) place the blame on a broader set of causative factors including the absence of guidelines and data which can be used to develop procedures which (a) help distinguish cultural or linguistic differences from disabilities, (b) yield a non-biased assessment, (c) assure due process in decision making, and (d) result in individualized education programs which help language-minority students with disabilities achieve their potential (p.147). The Hilltop Review http://www.wmich.edu/gsac/publications 2005, Volume 1 All Rights Reserved The Hilltop Review: A Journal of Western Michigan Graduate Research http://www.wmich.edu/gsac/hilltop This article © Lena G. Caesar