Assessment
Domain III tests how teachers identify, place, monitor, and reclassify English learners, and how to keep assessment fair when language is not the construct being measured.
Core rules and concepts
- Purposes: screening/identification (home language survey, then an ELP screener), diagnostic, formative, progress monitoring, summative, and exit/reclassification.
- Technical qualities: validity (measures the intended construct), reliability (consistency), and fairness/bias.
- Score types: norm-referenced (percentile ranks) vs. criterion-referenced (proficiency levels).
- Ohio context: the annual English language proficiency assessment (OELPA) is aligned to Ohio's ELP standards; content tests are given with allowable accommodations.
- Accommodations: extended time, small-group administration, read-aloud of directions in English, bilingual word-to-word dictionary, simplified language-not translation of content tests. ELs are generally exempt from the state ELA test for one year.
- Authentic assessment: portfolios, performance tasks, sentence frames, oral interviews; assess content separately from language.
Worked example
A teacher needs to check whether ELs understand density. She uses a hands-on lab with a word bank and the frame "The ___ is denser because ___", not a multiple-choice quiz with dense academic phrasing. Rationale: the lab removes construct-irrelevant language demand, so the score reflects science knowledge rather than English proficiency-a validity decision.
Traps
- Confusing reliability (consistency) with validity (measuring the right thing).
- Using a language-loaded test to measure content knowledge.
- Reading a low norm-referenced percentile for an EL as a disability without ruling out language.
- Mixing up screening, progress monitoring, and summative purposes.