(see section on technical quality in this chapter), use multiple types of assessments (including, as
appropriate, assessments given in the primary language) to gain a comprehensive portrait of a
student’s learning needs, and compare the student’s
results to those of her or his peers who are ELs or who
are deaf and not just to native English speakers.
According to the Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing (American Educational Research
Association [AERA], American Psychological Association
[APA], and National Council on Measurement in
Education [NCME] 1999), any test that uses language
is in part a test of language. Therefore, for ELs
and students who are deaf and use American Sign
Language, every test written in English—regardless
of the content area—is partially a test of their English
language proficiency and may not adequately assess
their content area knowledge and skills (Abedi 2002).
For this reason, it may be beneficial to assess them
in their primary language in order to gain a more complete picture of their strengths and needs.
However, it may not be appropriate to use content assessments in the primary language with every EL
student. For example, students who are literate or receiving formal instruction in their native language
in a content area and who are at lower English language proficiency levels are more likely to benefit
from a content assessment in the primary language than those who are not (Pennock-Roman and
Rivera, 2011; Bowles and Stansfield 2008; Stansfield and Bowles 2006). Similarly, evaluating emerging
bilinguals’ writing by looking at their Spanish writing side by side with their English writing can help
teachers see the how the languages reinforce one another, and provide a more comprehensive view of
the students’ developing biliteracy (Soltero-Gonzalez, Escamilla, and Hopewell 2012).
A range of assessments is available for diagnosing the
source of a student’s difficulties, and it is important to ensure
the appropriateness of these assessments for diagnostic
purposes. (See the section on technical quality in this chapter).
Because administering and interpreting some diagnostic
assessments requires special training and licensure, when
selecting diagnostic assessments it is important to determine
if the school has access to professionals who are qualified
to administer them. Teachers benefit from working closely
with reading specialists who have the necessary specialized
knowledge to interpret diagnostic data and provide guidance
regarding specific interventions (International Reading
Association 2000). It is advantageous for all available
professionals (e.g., teacher, reading specialist, and school psychologist) to work together in diagnosing
a student’s difficulties and planning appropriate interventions (Joseph 2002).
Progress Monitoring (Short or Medium Cycle)
Progress monitoring (sometimes referred to as curriculum-based measurement or curriculum-
based assessment) is the practice of assessing students’ academic performance on a regular basis for
three purposes: (1) to determine whether students are profiting appropriately from the instructional
program, including the curriculum; (2) to create more effective programs for those students who
are not benefitting; and (3) to estimate rates of student improvement (National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities 2006). To implement progress monitoring, a student’s current level of
... any test that uses language is in
part a test of language. Therefore,
for ELs and students who are deaf
and use American Sign Language,
every test written in English—
regardless of the content area—is
partially a test of their English
language proficiency and may not
adequately assess their content
area knowledge and skills
It is advantageous for all
available professionals (e.g.,
teacher, reading specialist,
and school psychologist) to
work together in diagnosing
a student’s difficulties and
planning appropriate
interventions.860 | Chapter 8 Assessment