A Bilingual Preschooler, English-Only Testing, and an Eligibility Decision
Layla is 4 years 8 months old and entered a district UPK in September; she had no prior preschool. Her family speaks Arabic at home, and her mother reports that Layla uses 3–4 word Arabic sentences, tells simple stories, and asks for 'juice' and 'outside.' The teacher referred her in December because she 'doesn't answer questions, repeats what I say, covers her ears at music, and spins the wheels of cars.' The school psychologist administered the Preschool Language Scales–Fifth Edition (PLS-5) and the DAYC-2 in English. Standard scores were 55 in language, 68 in cognitive, and 72 in adaptive. No bilingual SLP was involved; an interpreter was used only for the parent interview. Hearing and vision screenings were normal. At the CPSE meeting, the psychologist recommends a 6:1:1 class and says the scores indicate intellectual disability; the chair adds that 'she will learn English there.' The mother asks for testing in Arabic. The chair responds that 'the tests are standardized; we can't translate them.'
1. Critique the evaluation. Identify at least five specific problems and the legal or ethical principles involved.
Read the worked answer
Problems: (1) The PLS-5 and DAYC-2 were administered in English to a child with three months of English exposure; standard scores are not valid measures of her ability. (2) No bilingual SLP or bilingual school psychologist was involved; an interpreter for the parent interview is not an assessment in the native language. (3) The team did not assess Arabic language or get a language sample in Arabic; the mother's report of 3–4 word sentences and storytelling was not used. (4) The evaluation did not use dynamic assessment, test-teach-retest, or processing-dependent measures that reduce linguistic bias. (5) Adaptive behavior was measured with an English-language instrument without considering cultural context; the psychologist used the scores to conclude intellectual disability, which requires both cognitive and adaptive deficits. (6) The team jumped to a 6:1:1 placement before ruling out bilingual language acquisition and before an autism evaluation. (7) The chair's statement that tests cannot be translated reflects a misunderstanding: you do not translate standardized tests and use the norms, but you do assess in the native language with appropriate tools and trained interpreters. (8) The mother's request for Arabic testing was refused without a proper PWN. Legal principles include nondiscriminatory assessment, assessment in the native language, multiple sources of data, informed consent, and the prohibition on identifying a child as disabled when the determinant factor is limited English proficiency.
2. Design a comprehensive, nondiscriminatory evaluation plan to determine whether Layla has a disability and, if so, which classification fits.
Read the worked answer
Plan: (a) Obtain consent for a comprehensive bilingual evaluation. (b) Assign a bilingual SLP and bilingual school psychologist; if unavailable, use trained interpreters and document supervision. (c) Assess Arabic and English: semantics, syntax, narrative, pragmatics, phonology, and vocabulary; collect language samples in play and conversation; use dynamic assessment. (d) Assess nonverbal cognition with a nonverbal measure, and adaptive behavior through parent and caregiver interview and observation in home and school. (e) Autism-specific assessment: a bilingual clinician should administer the ADOS-2 and ADI-R if possible; observe joint attention, response to name, imitation, pretend play, repetitive behaviors, and sensory responses across settings. Use caution with an interpreter and interpret in cultural context. (f) Review hearing and vision results and consider a full audiological evaluation. (g) Gather teacher and parent reports in both languages and a home video if the family agrees. (h) Reconvene the CPSE with an interpreter and translated documents. Eligibility: consider speech or language impairment, autism, or intellectual disability only if the data support it; a language difference alone is not a disability. (i) If the child is eligible, develop goals in functional communication across languages and settings. The team should also monitor whether her English is developing typically for a sequential bilingual child.
3. How should present levels and goals be written so they reflect Layla's actual abilities and are measurable?
Read the worked answer
Present levels should be strengths-based and data-based: 'Layla follows one-step directions in Arabic with a gesture in 4/5 opportunities; she uses 3–4 word Arabic phrases to request and comment; in English she uses single words and echoes familiar phrases; she initiates joint attention with adults in 3/5 observations; she covers her ears during music and prefers to spin wheels.' Goals should be measurable and functional: 'During play with a peer, Layla will request a turn using Arabic, English, or a gesture in 4/5 opportunities across three consecutive sessions'; 'Layla will answer two wh-questions about a familiar story read in Arabic with visual supports in 4/5 trials'; 'Layla will use a visual choice board to request a break during music in 4/5 opportunities.' Avoid goals that simply require English compliance. Include accommodations: interpreter for parent communication, bilingual SLP, visual supports, sensory breaks, and a plan for progress monitoring every two weeks. The team should not write goals based on the invalid standard scores. The purpose of goals is to close the gap between current functioning and expected functioning in the least restrictive setting, not to punish her for being bilingual.