Search

In this article, I specify a conceptual framework for test validity research on content assessments taken by English language learners (ELLs) in U.S. schools in grades K-12. This framework is modeled after one previously delineated by Willingham et al. (1988), which was developed to guide research on students with disabilities. In this framework for research on ELLs, there are eight indicators of test comparability. Five of these indicators are measures of score comparability, while three indicators are measures of task comparability. To date, research has been conducted on six of the indicators of test comparability for content assessments taken by ELLs. For these indicators, findings from representative studies are summarized. For the remaining two indicators of test comparability for which no published research currently exists, I describe the types of research studies that are necessary to gather evidence to evaluate the comparability of content assessments for ELLs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The No Child Left Behind Act has made a great impact on states' policies in assessing English language learner (ELL) students. The legislation requires states to develop or adopt sound assessments to validly measure the ELL students' English language proficiency (ELP). Although states have moved rapidly to meet these requirements, they face challenges to validate their current assessment and accountability systems for ELL students, partly because of the lack of resources. Considering the significant role of assessments in guiding decisions about organizations and individuals, it is of paramount importance to establish a valid assessment system. With the purpose of providing an overview to critical issues in validating the use of ELP assessments, this article reviews validity framework, key issues to consider in validating the ELP assessment system, and the current status of practice relative to validating ELP assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, when English language learners (ELLs) are tested, they are usually tested in English and their limited English proficiency is a potential cause of construct-irrelevant variance. When such irrelevancies affect test scores, inaccurate interpretations of ELLs' knowledge, skills, and abilities may occur. In this article, we review validity issues relevant to the educational assessment of ELLs and discuss methods that can be used to evaluate the degree to which interpretations of their test scores are valid. Our discussion is organized using the five sources of validity evidence promulgated by the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Technical details for some validation methods are provided. When evaluating the validity of a test for ELLs, the evaluation methods should be selected so that the evidence gathered specifically addresses appropriate test use. Such evaluations should be comprehensive and based on multiple sources of validity evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

English language learners (ELLs) constitute one of the fastest growing subpopulations of students in the United States. It is important to determine whether the assessments used by states in determining students' proficiencies are valid and fair for ELLs. This study focused on several standards-based assessments in mathematics and science administered to 5th and 8th graders. In assessing construct validity, all of the assessments were found to be essentially unidimensional in their underlying factor structure for native English speakers and for several ELL examinee groups. The use of translation glossaries/word lists as a testing accommodation was effective for supporting the unidimensionality of some of these assessments, specifically for the one at the 8th-grade level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accountability for educational quality is a priority at all levels of education. Low-stakes testing is one way to measure the quality of education that students receive and make inferences about what students know and can do. Aggregate test scores from low-stakes testing programs are suspect, however, to the degree that these scores are influenced by low test-taker effort. This study examined the generalizability of a recently developed technique called motivation filtering, whereby scores for students of low motivation are systemically filtered from test data to determine aggregate test scores that more accurately reflect student performance and that can be used for reporting purposes. Across assessment tests in five different content areas, motivation filtering was found to consistently increase mean test performance and convergent validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]