1 Bilingual Special Education Evaluation Criselda Guajarado Alvarado

2 Definitions Dominant Language—the language spoken by the student most effectively and productively relative to his/her other language(s) Oral Language Proficiency—level of the student’s ability to comprehend and speak a language. Primary language—language the person first learned, or the language which is spoken in the person’s home 5 CCR 3001 Definitions

3 Definitions, continued Native Language—The term “native language”, when used with respect to an individual who is limited English proficient, means the language normally used by the individual or, in the case of a child, the language normally used by the parents of the child. IDEA ’04

4 Test Results Languag e of Instructio n Affective Factors Kind of Educational Programming Parent’s Language Social vs. Academi c Languag e Quality of Language Models Four Components of a Bilingual Special Education Evaluation Gathering of information for referral Oral language proficiency and dominance testing in the student’s two or more languages Academic testing Cognitive/IQ testing Student’s Level of Proficienc y Socio- Econom ic Factors Student’s Dominant Language

5 Gathering Information for Referral to Special Education Testing

6 Getting to Know Your Student: Educational Background Previous School Information  Track down where student has attended school since he first started.  Current & previous educational programs, identifying all programming since student started school (especially alternative language programming). Language proficiency testing (over time if avail.) Attendance Testing done by school

7 Getting to Know Your Student: Oral Language Environment Home Language Survey Current language spoken at home Language spoken with friends Language spoken in community Language spoken in the classroom

8 Getting to Know Your Student: Socio-Economic & Other Factors Pertinent cultural and lifestyle information Parent information  Developmental milestones  Family history  Comparison to siblings  Significant family events  Significant medical event  Any other pertinent information

9 Getting to Know Your Student: Teacher Input Teacher input on student’s language ability in both languages Teacher input on this student’s classroom performance Referral concern Other information

10 IDEA ’04—SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY (A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘specific learning disability’ means a disorder in 1 or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. (B) DISORDERS INCLUDED.—Such term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. (C) DISORDERS NOT INCLUDED.—Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

11 Case Study: Juan Student is 8 years old in the 2 nd grade. Student went to school in Mexico for PK and Kinder Family moved to the U.S. and Juan was enrolled in 1 st grade. He was retained and attended 1 st grade again. Parents denied bil. ed. and ESL services when Juan initially entered the 1 st grade in the U.S. Spanish is primary language of home. Mom knows very little English. Dad knows a little, enough to roughly communicate. Student speaks Spanish w/ friends & neighbors. Seems more comfortable speaking Spanish. English has been language of instruction for last 3 years.

12 IDEA 2004, Additional Requirements (3) Each local educational agency shall ensure that—(A) assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this section— (i) are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; (ii) are provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer; (iii) are used for purposes for which the assessment or measures are valid and reliable; (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel; and (v) are administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of such assessments;...

13 Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing

14 Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing Formal oral language testing should never be the only information used to determine oral language proficiency and dominance. Other information that may used include: Home Language Survey Teacher checklist Previous and current language proficiency testing Parent information on child’s language skills Student interview on language use and exposure

15 Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing Oral language testing should usually be conducted in both languages of the student. Strive for parallel oral language testing because test results in the two languages will usually be compared to determine dominance. Be aware that oral language tests may measure different aspects of language. Some oral language tests may measure social/conversational language, while others may measure cognitive/academic language. SLPs usually test functional language, while school psychologists test for academic language (different perspective on language).

16 Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing Interpret results based on amount and quality of student’s exposure to the language being tested. Determine dominance by comparing oral language totals in English and other language. Administer cognitive/IQ test in dominant/stronger language. If dominance is unclear, analyze tasks by level of language complexity. Determine if on the more complex aspects of language, a dominant language is indicated. If unclear dominance even after comparing the total scores & looking at task complexity, consider administering the cognitive/IQ test in student’s native language Be knowledgeable about the second language acquisition process. Interpret results in light of what is known about second language learning.

17 Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English PLS 4 English & Spanish WMLS-NU English & Spanish WMLS-R English & Spanish WLPB-R English & Spanish Oral Language Cluster in WJ III and Batería III CELF 4 English & CELF 3 Spanish * ____________________ * Use with caution. Can be used for proficiency testing, but not to determine dominance

18 Oral Lang. Proficiency & Dominance Testing Case Study: Juan English Oral Language WJ III ACH Pic. Voc Verb Analogies Story Recall Understanding Dir LISTENING COMP ORAL EXPRESS TOTAL Spanish Oral Language Batería III APROV Pic. Voc Verb Analogies Story Recall Understanding Dir LISTENING COMP ORAL EXPRES TOTAL94 8-6

19 Oral Language Proficiency & Dominance Testing Once a determination and interpretation of oral language proficiency and dominance has been made, other aspects of the evaluation can be addressed, including  the selection of appropriate tests and assessment strategies to use in the evaluation process,  language(s) and form to use with the student, and  qualified personnel to conduct the procedures.

20 Academic Testing

21 Academic Testing English academic testing is almost always done unless student is newly immigrated within the last few months. Academic testing in the other language is usually conducted if student has been exposed to academic instruction for one year or more. If tests in the other language are not available or if amount of instruction in the other language was negligible, informal academic testing may be necessary. Be aware that academic instruction can be received in other settings besides school. So even if student has not received instruction in that language at school, he/she may have received instruction elsewhere like home or church.

22 Interpretation of Academic Testing Results from the academic testing are interpreted in light of the amount and quality of academic exposure in that language. Be aware of the effects of different instructional programming on performance.

23 Oral Language Proficiency and Dominance Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English Spanish  Batería-R ACH  Batería-III APROV  ________________________

24 Academic Testing Case Study: Juan English Academic Testing WJ III BRS = RC = MC = MR = WE = Spanish Academic Testing Batería III BRS = RC = MC = MR = WE =

25 Cognitive/IQ Testing

26 Cognitive/IQ Testing Administer cognitive/IQ test in dominant language of the student. If cognitive/IQ testing is limited to nonverbal only, be sure that this was because of a student centered reason and not because it was easier and faster. Be aware of the impact of the second language acquisition process on test results

27 Cognitive/IQ Testing: Tests Available in Languages Other than English Spanish  Batería III COG Standard Scale Tests 1-7 for very Spanish monolingual students Early Development Scale for Spanish speaking 2 & 3 year old students or those who function on a 2 & 3 year old level Bilingual Scale for Spanish dominant students who also speak English Low Verbal Scale for Spanish dominant students w/ documented significant language delays Extended Scale (Tests 1-7 & 11-17) for more in-depth testing

28 IDEA 2004, Additional Requirements (3) Each local educational agency shall ensure that—(A) assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this section— (i) are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; (ii) are provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer; (iii) are used for purposes for which the assessment or measures are valid and reliable; (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel; and (v) are administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of such assessments;...

29 …for a non-native speaker and for a speaker of some dialects of English, every test given in English becomes, in part, a language or literacy test. Test results may not reflect accurately the abilities and competencies being measured if test performance depends on these test takers’ knowledge of English. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing American Psychological Association American Educational Research Association National Council on Measurement in Education

30 Cognitive/IQ Testing: Tests Appropriate for Bilingual, English Dominant Students WJ III  Bilingual Scale for English dominant students who also speak Spanish or one of the 16 languages in the BVAT K-ABC II  Allows translation of instructions & sample items (if necessary) and acceptance of responses in another language

31 Cognitive/IQ Testing Case Study: Juan Batería III Cognitiva, Bilingual Scale106

32 Evaluation Personnel

33 “Best Practice” dictates that the evaluation professional is fluent and literate in the two or more languages of the student being tested. The evaluation professional should also be knowledgeable of cultural and linguistic issues that can impact test results and have training on evaluation materials and practices appropriate for the culturally and linguistically diverse student. The evaluation materials should be in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information.

34 IDEA ’04, Personnel Qualifications. (A) In general.—The State educational agency has established and maintains qualifications to ensue that personnel necessary to carry out this part are appropriately and adequately prepared and trained, including that those personnel have the content knowledge and skills to serve children with disabilities.

35 APA Standard 9.11 When an interpreter is used in testing, the interpreter should be fluent in both the language of the test and the examinee’s native language, should have expertise in translating, and should have a basic understanding of the assessment process. Comment: Although individuals with limited proficiency in the language of the test should ideally be tested by professionally trained bilingual examiners, the use of an interpreter may be necessary in some situations. If an interpreter is required, the professional examiner is responsible for ensuring that the interpreter has the appropriate qualifications, experience, and preparation to assist appropriately in the administration of the test. It is necessary for the interpreter to understand the importance of following standardized procedures, how testing is conducted typically, the importance of accurately conveying to the examiner an examinee’s actual responses, and the role and responsibilities of the interpreter in testing. p. 100

36 Evaluation Report

37 Report  Results of the Home Language Survey  Teacher information  Language proficiency testing  Parent Information  Information from student interviews  Educational history Previous schooling in another country, including any interruptions Previous and current educational programming, especially alternative language programming  Relevant sociological/cultural information Document  Qualifications of evaluation personnel  Language(s) of the test  Evaluation practices utilized  Deviation from standardized administration  Consideration of the effects of environmental, cultural, and economic disadvantage, if appropriate.

38 Reevaluations

39 Some additional issues to consider:  Students who are in the second language acquisition process can experience dramatic changes between initial evaluation and reevaluation.  Testing practices may have significantly changed from the initial evaluation.  More appropriate and equitable standardized tests may now be available that were previously not available.

40