Planning interventions for English Language Learners using English test results

1
Planning interventions for English Language
Learners using English test results

• By
• Deborah Rhein, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
• New Mexico State University
• drhein_at_nmsu.edu

2
Speaker background

• Spent over a decade providing direct and
  consultative services to school districts for
  ELLs
• Currently a faculty member at New Mexico State
  University
• Project director for Bilingual program in
  communication disorders program at NMSU

3
Core Issues

• SLPs frequently asked to determine difference
  versus disorder in students who are not native
  speakers of English
• Usually requires use of assessments in both
  languages
• If using a standardized assessment in English,
  most SLPs opt to not use the normative data

4
Assessment purposes

• Two purposes
• 1) Establish benchmarks of childs language
  knowledge in all of his/her languages
• 2) Determination of disability make statements
  about language-learning ability

5
Establish benchmarks of childs linguistic
knowledge

• Bilingual children have varied opportunities to
  learn in either of their languages, all normative
  data does need to be interpreted with caution
• Normative data provides estimates of childs
  linguistic knowledge in comparison to classmates
• This provides opportunities for SLPs to address
  linguistic demands of the classroom

6
One option Use of standardized batteries but
only reporting raw scores

• Rationale
• Standardized batteries allow examiner to explore
  several aspects of language knowledge in
  relatively short period of time
• Fear of misidentifying ELLs as having a
  disability is primary reason for not using
  English normative data

7
Option Use of standardized batteries but only
reporting raw scores

• Problems
• -Raw scores are meaningless in and of themselves
• -Raw score reporting do not allow examiners to
  compare and contrast knowledge of different
  aspects of language within a child
• -Raw scores do not allow the examiner to compare
  knowledge of English to classmates and classroom
  demands

8
ESL requirement

• As long as a school has 10 or more students who
  are not native speakers of English, must provide
  and ESL program to assist students who are
  learning English (the 10 students may have 10
  different native languages)
• If fewer than 10 students, must have IEP for
  second language, not special education
• Progress in learning English must be evaluated
  yearly

9
Problem

• Referral for speech language evaluation may occur
  when student is still receiving ESL services
• Referral for assessment often occurs after
  student has been labeled FEP (Fully English
  Proficient) and exited from ESL program
• FEP label usually means students receive no
  classroom accommodations or modifications

10
Solution

• Results of our language assessment may indicate
  areas where student still requires
  modification/accommodations to succeed in general
  classroom
• That data can only be obtained using normative
  data that compares student to monolingual peers

11
Reporting Scores for English CELF-IV
12
Reporting Scores for English CELF-IV
13
Conclusion

• FEP label does not mean student doesnt still
  require accommodations/modifications to succeed
  in general classroom
• Analysis of case indicates child would be at
  significant disadvantage if placed in
  English-only classroom without additional supports

14
Need to be very clear about limits and purposes
of using English norms

• For reporting purposes, raw scores have been
  converted to standard scores, which compare Xs
  performance to monolingual peers. Low scores in a
  second language should not be considered an
  indication of a language disorder, but rather are
  useful in understanding the disadvantage an
  incomplete acquisition of English would create if
  a child were required to function in an English
  classroom without modifications or
  accommodations.
• --Rhein, 2009

15
Establishment of disability

• Make statements about language-learning ability
• Core assumption the child has had adequate
  opportunity to learn that which he/she is being
  tested on
• Good reason for caution when using norms based on
  monolingual peers

16
Using English test results to establish disability

• Normative scores of English results useful to
  explore overall pattern of knowledge
• If scores are low in both languages in one
  area, for example, syntax, that provides some
  support for possible SLI, provided language
  sample analysis and other sources support this
  conclusion.

17
If using English norms, acknowledge that
comparisons are made to monolingual peers

• Because comparisons are being made between X,
  who is not a native speaker of English and native
  speakers, low scores by themselves should not be
  considered evidence of a language disorder.
  However, comparisons between the performance in
  the first and second language may reveal overall
  patterns of linguistic strengths and weaknesses.
• --Rhein, 2009

18
Analysis of patterns in L1 and L2

• Caveat
• Because of possibility of L1 language loss, low
  scores in L1 are not always indicative of a
  disability either

19
In addition

• Standardized tests results only one part of an
  evaluation
• Should include information on home and school
  language use and history
• Performance measures from home and school work
• Language sample analysis in both languages

20
(No Transcript)
21
Analysis of patterns in L1 and L2

• X scores in Spanish are WNL except for two
  subtests
• Xs scores are lowest on the same two subtests
  (CD and RS) in both languages
• These subtests rely on auditory memory

22
Conclusions

• In general, X does not appear to have a
  generalized language learning disorder. However,
  X does display lower scores in both languages on
  tasks rely heavily on auditory memory.

23
Recommendations for further evaluation

• Comprehensive evaluation of auditory memory if
  other indications are present, to include
  anecdotal evidence from parents and teachers in
  both languages
• Consider possibility of referral for CAPD if
  other indications are present

24
Xs English skills indicate need

• All Xs skills in English place him at
  disadvantage compared to monolingual peers
• Provide opportunities for him to demonstrate
  knowledge in ways that rely less heavily on
  linguistic knowledge
• Example If studying Aztecs, allow him to make a
  temple or demonstrate by a dance research
  materials rather than written report

25
Other recommendations for in class scaffolding

• Introduce novel vocabulary in ways that allows X
  to experience new word
• Provide multiple opportunities to use novel
  vocabulary
• Break multi-step instructions down
• Older gradesprovide advance organizers for
  note-taking

26
Final thoughts

• ELL students require between 7 to 10 years to
  develop academic English proficiency, so should
  have classroom modification opportunities
  throughout most of K-12
• Differentiating disorder versus difference is
  only one part of our assessmentswe have an
  obligation to provide suggestions that will help
  a child succeed whether or not there is a disorder