How Standardized Assessments Are Failing Emergent Multilingual Learners
In the fall of 2023 I entered a third grade classroom as a bright-eyed student teacher. I had finally completed all course requirements and felt well equipped to be a teacher. I completed my degree in elementary education with a certification in English Language Learners, or ELL. After so much discussion of pedagogy and teaching philosophies, I was ready. As I was soon to learn, and as most teachers know, this was far from the truth. Textbooks, discussions, and projects can only do so much. Practical classroom experience is the only way to truly develop the skills needed as an educator. This is true of most careers, but I would argue is even more true in the field of education. The nature of our education system is constantly changing — current trends focus on the number of minutes devoted to math and reading, small group over whole group instruction, and increased dependency on assessment. Additionally, the populations of children entering schools today are drastically different than those just a decade ago.
ELL is a complex aspect of education, as it involves children who speak who speak one (or more!) languages at home and need English support in school. I choose to use the term Emergent Multilingual Learner (EML) because it is more reflective of the deep linguistic repertoires possessed by these children. Additionally, this title sets the focus on the linguistic potential each child has rather than their deficits. In 2021, EMLs made up approximately 11 percent of the K-12 population (Migration Policy Institute, 2022). More recent data would show increases in these numbers and are projected to continue growing in coming years. To teach these students, one must understand the linguistic demands required of them in day-to-day life. Taking on an entirely new culture and language, often with experiences in forced migration or refugee statuses, these children have already had life experiences and academic skills that outweigh some adults. It is important to note that maintaining high academic expectations is critical — lowering the standard, even with the best intentions, does more harm than good. At the same time, the ways in which we gauge these students’ progress in core academic subjects should be adapted to reflect their linguistic and life experiences.
This brings me to my first day “on the job” in my third grade classroom. My heart nearly exploded at the meet the teacher night before school when I met Ahmed, a seven year old who had emigrated with his family from a Sudanese refugee camp just eight months prior. In college, I took several courses in Arabic and, despite the loss of most my speaking abilities, I was able to introduce myself and welcome Ahmed and his family into our classroom. In this moment, I felt the years of coursework had finally paid off.
As the school year progressed, I found myself spread more and more thin. Establishing our classroom community was just the beginning — quickly, like all teachers, I was swept up in behavior plans and IEPs, subject minutes, and (lest we forget) assessments. As you read this, whether you are an educator or not, I wonder if you have previously considered the multitude of assessments required of EMLs. English literacy has often been regarded through a narrow lens of reading and writing development. Our common definition of literacy has expanded significantly to include many literacies, including digital, civic, visual, and linguistic, as well as a multitude of others that have broadened our understanding of child development and academic success. In a single math problem, which may appear to be a question of math skills and not one of language, there could be tens of linguistic demands for an EML to meet before they can address the actual mathematical challenge. To confront this inequity in assessment, educators may utilize a range of accommodations.
“Test accommodations for [EMLs] are intended to reduce the language barrier and level the playing field, allowing ELs to better demonstrate their true proficiencies” (Roohr & Sireci, 2017).
Since the creation of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, assessments have played an increasingly important role in K-12 education. These scores can be a factor in student progress through grade levels, school funding, and state or federal level policy changes. Though this act may appear to close the “achievement gap”, it has largely resulted in more and more standardized assessments. This change makes it even harder to succeed as an EML. Assessments designed for students who have only ever spoken English do not meet the needs of those who speak multiple languages and are developing their English skills. This is not to say EMLs should not participate in assessments, but rather that assessments must be changed to be valid and reliable if we are to use their results in high-stakes decisions. Accommodations are changes made to an assessment that do not change the content, but attempt to level testing conditions to create more reliable results (Pennock-Roman & Rivera, 2011).
Most of the time, Ahmed’s assessment accommodations were just whipped up on the spot. Every time I presented a test, he would be the first to raise his hand and my heart would sink. I had overlooked his needs, yet again, and knew the consequences of my actions would be reflected in his test scores, not my own. I attempted to meet his needs by answering his questions thoughtfully, highlighting key components of each question, and offering longer test times when needed. This still was not enough to help him fully express his knowledge, and raised questions of validity. The testing accommodations I implemented were regrettably not based on data or research, but instead created in the moment as a band-aid to a much larger problem.
Now, as I pursue my Masters of Arts in Education, I have the time to devote to this research that I always wished I had in my student teaching. A basic search of EMLs and assessment reflects the same issues I confronted as a student teacher and continue to face as a full time teacher today. Most testing accommodations for EMLs are not based on any research (Abedi et al., 2020; Kopriva & Koran, 2008). Rather than approaching standardized tests with standardized accommodations, individual teachers are left to make these decisions that could alter the student’s academic future. Additionally, research shows that the most commonly used accommodations often have no positive impact and can produce invalid results (Wolf et al., 2012). These findings speak for themselves — anyone can see why this is problematic.
We are then left with the question — what can we do?
While the majority of accommodations are not rooted in research, we can identify several that have been studied and learn how to apply them to our own students. Overall, it is most important to understand that accommodations must be individualized (Koran & Kopriva, 2017). No EML’s language development journey is the same. Language is acquired in various ways on various timelines, with no “one size fits all” plan. This may be a disappointing result for teachers, as it again places more work on the teacher to identify individual needs and implement unique accommodations for each student.
At the same time, several accommodations for EMLs have been identified as highly successful in repeated research studies. These accommodations can provide a baseline list to more easily adapt for each student.
Accommodation #1: Pop-Up English Glossaries (Pennock-Roman & Rivera, 2011; Roohr & Sireci, 2017)
These glossaries are not your traditional printed books that require time and linguistic skills to navigate. The “pop-up” component means that definitions only appear when a student needs language support for a word or phrase. This removes barriers to use, as the information is presented as straight-forward as possible and only when the student requires it. This improves accommodation usage, efficiency, and ensures valid results. In its simplest form, the pop-up English glossary can be made from a quick read-through of the assessment, highlighting key/confusing words, and the addition of a basic definition or synonym for each word.
Accommodation #2: Sticker Paraphrasing Tool (Roohr & Sireci, 2017)
The sticker paraphrasing tool removes the most linguistically complex aspects of a text or question to improve student understanding. The content demands remain the same, but are made more accessible to students from various linguistic backgrounds. In a study of more than 1,000 elementary students, the paraphrasing tool was the most frequently used accommodation by students. Teachers may use technology to fast-track this accommodation, but could also provide oral paraphrasing of each question as-needed during the assessment.
Accommodation #3: Plain English or Translated Tests (Pennock-Roman & Rivera, 2011)
In a plain English test, language is simplified to remove unnecessary wording that may confuse an EML. Like the paraphrasing tool, language becomes less complicated and the student can focus on the task at-hand rather than deciphering complicated sentences. Teachers may rewrite test questions using simpler language, as featured in the table above. Translated tests have been shown to improve test scores for beginning EMLs, but it is important to use quality translations.
References
Abedi, J. (2009). Computer testing as a form of accommodation for English language learners. Educational Assessment, 14(3–4), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627190903448851.
Koran, J., & Kopriva, R. J. (2017). Framing appropriate accommodations in terms of individual need: Examining the fit of four approaches to selecting test accommodations for English language learners. Applied Measurement in Education, 30(2), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1243539.
Pennock-Roman, M. Rivera, Charlene. (2011). Mean effects of test accommodations for ELLs and non-ELLs: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(3), 10–28.
Roohr, K. C., & Sireci, S. G. (2017). Evaluating computer-based test accommodations for English learners. Educational Assessment, 22(1), 35–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2016.1271704.
Wolf, M. K., Kim, J., & Kao, J. (2012). The effects of glossary and read-aloud accommodations on English language learners’ performance on a mathematics assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 25(4), 347–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2012.703926.