1. English Language Proficiency Tests, One Dimension or Many?: Yoonsun Lee Director of Assessment and Psychometrics Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

2. ELPT Requirements Under NCLB  States are required to: - Implement ELD standards - Implement ELP tests that assess skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing with an added comprehension measure - Administer ELP tests annually in grades K- 12 - Align ELP tests with academic content standards - Meet AMAO Title III objectives

3. More on Title III Measurement Demands  AMAO I requires setting target growth rates in English language proficiency status across years  AMAO II requires setting targets for attaining full English language proficiency across years  States attracted to ELP tests that implement vertical scales

4. Construct Validity Issue  Does it make sense to hypothesize that English language proficiency test is unidimensional? Or, is it multidimensional with four different domains (reading, writing, speaking, and listening)?

5. Washington Language Proficiency Test-II (WLPT-II)  Developed in 2006  Used Stanford English Language Proficiency Test (SELP) and added augmented items developed by Washington teachers  Four grade spans (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, & 9-12)  Four subtests (Reading, Writing, Listening & Speaking)

6. WLPT-II Test Specifications Grade Span ReadingWritingListeningSpeaking Total Number Primary (K-2) 21MC 15MC 8CR 20MC17CR 81 (112pts) Elementary (3-5) 24MC 20MC 2CR 20MC17CR 83 (110pts) Middle (6-8) 28MC 24MC 2CR 20MC17CR 91 (118pts) High (9-12) 31MC 24MC 2CR 20MC17CR 94 (121pts) MC: Multiple choice CR: Constructed response

7. Confirmatory Factor Analysis - 2006 WLPT-II - Sample: Approximately 15,000 students included in each grade span - EQS (Bentler, 1995) - Four models were examined

8. Models 1 & 2 E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16 Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Language Proficiency........ E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16 Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Language Proficiency........

9. Models 3 & 4 E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16. Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Reading Writing Listening Speaking Language Proficiency E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16. Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Reading Writing Listening Speaking D1 D2 D3 D4.............

10. Results (Primary level) ModeldfGFICFIRMSEA 1 (single with no corr) 16896.21890.670.751.33 2 (single with corr) 2445.41420.950.970.05 3 (four factor) 5472.141830.880.920.07 4 (second order) 6192.91850.870.910.08

11. Results (Primary: K-2) - was examined to compare models. Model 2 (Single Factor with errors correlated within subtest) produced a good fit to the data.

12. Results (Elementary, Middle, & High School) - Same result was found in Elementary, Middle, & High School) - Model 2 showed the best fit to the data (over 0.95 GFI and CFI and below 0.05 RMSEA) - No significant evidence to threaten construct validity with adding augmented items to the existing language test