----

##  Statewide Assessment Programs: Policies and Practices for the                   Inclusion of Limited English Proficient Students. ERIC/AE Digest.            

The standards-based educational reform initiatives of the 1990s call            for assessment innovations in support of high standards. The move to            standards requires consideration of how assessments, both those                 currently used and those that states and school districts are                   currently developing, will enable all students, including LEP                   students, to demonstrate what they know and can                                 do (LaCelle-Peterson & Rivera, 1994). 
The assessment of LEP                   students' educational progress has long posed a dilemma for state               departments of education, which generally use state assessment data             to report student achievement. LEP students have typically been                 either exempted from state assessments or included inappropriately.             Because kindergarten through twelfth grade students whose first                 language is not English constitute a large and growing segment of               the U.S. population (Waggoner, 1995), it is critical that state                 education departments be able to monitor and report on the academic             progress of all students, including LEP students, through statewide             assessment programs. 
To document state assessment policies and to             develop policy recommendations, The George Washington                           University (GW) Center for Equity and Excellence in Education (CEEE)            surveyed state assessment directors in 1994 [Note 1]. The GW/CEEE               survey, Policies and Practices, 1993-1994 Statewide Assessment                  Programs: Participation of Limited English Proficient Students, was             sent to all state assessment directors and was augmented with                   relevant data regularly collected through the CCSSO/NCREL annual                state directors' assessment survey (Bond, van der Ploeg, and                    Braskamp, 1995). 
Survey data from the fifty states and the                    District of Columbia were aggregated and analyzed to examine state              policy/practice questions related to (1) the nature and extent of               statewide assessment programs, (2) the extent to which LEP students             are included in statewide assessment programs, (3) the extent to                which individual state assessments are modified to include LEP                  students, and (4) the extent to which state assessments are used for            accountability purposes. CONTEXT OF THE STUDYAlthough a                   federal definition of limited English proficiency exists (see                   Improving America*s Schools Act, Title VII, Part E, Sec. 7501 (8)),             there is no common operational definition used by states to identify            LEP students. The variation among states in the criteria and                    instruments used means, in effect, that a student could be                      considered LEP in one state but not in another. In the school year              1993-94, when the GW/CEEE survey was conducted, 3,037,922 LEP                   students were identified out of a total of 45,443,389 students                  enrolled in U.S. public schools in the 50 states and the District of            Columbia (Donly, Henderson, & Strang, 1995). RESPONSE TO THE                  GW/CEEE STATE DIRECTORS SURVEYFifty states and the District of              Columbia responded to the survey. In 45 of the states (88%), the                directors of assessment or a designated person in the assessment                office completed the survey. Six of the states (12%) delegated                  completion of the survey to the state Title VII (bilingual                      education) director. New Hampshire provided partial                             data. FINDINGS

THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT               PROGRAMSForty-eight states, including the District of Columbia,             reported using 117 assessment programs (an average of about 2.3                 assessment programs per state), covering a range of grades and                  subjects. Minnesota, Nebraska, and Wyoming were the only states that            reported not conducting statewide assessment programs in 1993-1994.             Iowa and Montana reported that they permit local district choice of             assessment instruments, although student achievement data are                   compiled and reported by the state. THE EXTENT TO WHICH LEP                   STUDENTS ARE INCLUDED IN STATEWIDE

ASSESSMENT                                PROGRAMSForty-five states indicated including some or all LEP               students in at least one statewide assessment program, although only            15 (33%) reported the actual number of LEP students assessed. 
Of              the 48 states with statewide assessment programs, 44 reported                   allowing exemptions for LEP students on at least one statewide                  assessment. The most frequently reported criteria for exempting LEP             students from statewide assessments in all states are shown in Table            1 [at end of Digest]. THE EXTENT TO WHICH INDIVIDUAL STATE                    ASSESSMENTS ARE MODIFIED

TO INCLUDE LEP STUDENTSAs shown in              Table 2 [at end of Digest], 27 states (52%) reported that they                  allowed test modifications for LEP students on at least one                     statewide assessment. Four states-Arizona, Hawaii, New Mexico, and              New York-reported developing, translating or using commercially                 available instruments for LEP students in languages other than                  English. California and Texas reported piloting statewide assessment            programs in a language other than English [Note 2]. THE EXTENT TO             WHICH STATE ASSESSMENTS ARE USED FOR

ACCOUNTABILITY                          PURPOSESSeventeen states, about one-third, reported having a                policy requiring students to pass a high school graduation test to              receive a standard diploma. These states are Alabama, Florida,                  Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New                  Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina,             Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Eleven of these states (65%) permit             a range of modifications in statewide assessment instruments. Four              of the states reported having test alternatives to the high school              graduation test. New Mexico and New Jersey reported permitting the              use of alternative assessments designed for non-native English                  speakers. Hawaii and New York reported allowing alternative                     tests (not specifically targeted to LEP students) for all students.             Two states--New Mexico and New York--provided versions of the                   required high school graduation test in one or more non-English                 languages. Texas reported that it was developing a Spanish language             version of the statewide assessment program for the lower grade                 levels; however, no plan is in place to develop a Spanish language              version of the test required for high school                                    graduation. CONCLUSIONSThe findings provide insights into                 overall trends in state policies for including LEP students in state            assessment programs and suggest directions for further                          research. 
Overall, the findings suggest that states are struggling            to develop appropriate policies to include LEP students in statewide            assessment programs. The evidence indicates that states have not                regularly included LEP students in most state assessment programs.              Furthermore, policies for testing LEP students are sometimes                    inconsistent within and across states. For example, some states have            policies to exempt LEP students from taking statewide assessments               and at the same time have another policy that allows LEP students to            take certain statewide assessments with modifications. 
In                     addition, the findings suggest several areas for the development of             policies and extended research. First, states need to refine                    policies for reporting LEP student data and to include them in state            accountability reports. Second, since there is little documentation             of their effectiveness, test modifications identified through the               survey should be studied further. Implications for  using test                  modifications with LEP students who possess varying levels of                   English language proficiency should be tracked and evaluated. Third,            in states that offer certain assessments in languages other than                English, further study is needed to ensure high technical quality of            the translated tests (Stansfield, 1996). In addition, studies are               needed to evaluate the best strategies for administering translated             tests (e.g., test format). And, finally, for the seventeen states               that require high school graduation tests, there is a need to study             the validity of the assessments for LEP students and to identify                strategies for allowing LEP students to participate in these                    assessments early on and in meaningful ways. [NOTES:1. This               research was carried out with funding from grant # T003H10002 from              the U.S. Department of Education. The views expressed in this                   document are those of the authors and do not represent an official              position of the Department of Education. 
2. The initiative in                 California has since been abandoned.] REFERENCESBond, L., van             der Ploeg, A., & Braskamp, D. (1994). Student assessment programs               database. North Central Educational Laboratory and the Council of               Chief State School Officers: Oak Brook, IL. 
Donly, B., Henderson,             A., & Strang, W. (1995). Summary of the bilingual education state               educational agency program survey of states' limited English                    proficient persons and available educational resources 1993-94.                 Arlington, VA: Development Associates, Inc. 
LaCelle-Peterson,                 M., & Rivera, C. (1994). "Is it real for all kids? A framework for              equitable assessment policies for English language learners."                   Harvard Educational Review, 64 (1), 55-75. 
Stansfield, C. (1996).             Content assessment in the native language. ERIC Digest. Washington,             DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. 
Waggoner,                D. (1995). Language minority population increased by more than one              third between 1980 and 1990. Numbers and Needs, 5 (1). 
This                   publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational            Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under                   contract RR93002002. The opinions expressed in this report do not               necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the U.S.               Department of Education. Permission is granted to copy and                      distribute this ERIC/AE Digest. ##TABLE 1?? 
CRITERIA USED BY                  STATES TO EXEMPT LEP STUDENTS?? States reporting each?? exemption               criterion?? (N=44)?? 
Exemption Criterion               Number % of            total?? 
--------------------------------------------------??                  
English language proficiency level    27    61?? 
Time in U.S. or            school district       20    45?? 
Teacher/administrator                        recommendations 16    36?? 
Special program participation                      15                                                                              34?? 
=================================================?? 
TABLE              2?? 
MOST FREQUENT TEST MODIFICATIONS REPORTED BY STATES?? 
Type              of modification         No. of states    % of?? Using (N=27)                    Total?? 
-------------------------------------------------?? 
Extra           time                        22          81?? 
Small group                      administration        20          74?? 
Flexible scheduling                    17          63?? 
Simplified directions in English  15   56?? 
Use            of dictionaries or word lists 14                                                52?? ==============================================&&                        **Title:** Statewide Assessment Programs: Policies and Practices for the                   Inclusion of Limited English Proficient Students. ERIC/AE Digest.            **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, 210 O'Boyle Hall,              The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC 20064; phone:                800-464-3742.                                                                **Descriptors:**  Accountability, Educational Assessment, Educational Policy,                    Elementary Secondary Education,  Limited English Speaking,  Policy              Formation, Special Education, Special Needs Students,  State                    Programs, Test Use,  Testing Programs                                        **Identifiers:** ERIC Digests                                                                 
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]