Alternative Assessment of Language and Literacy in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations
If you prefer, read the text-version of the infographic.
Culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students are often misdiagnosed with language and literacy problems. The authors discuss how traditional approaches to language and literacy assessment can be systematically inaccurate for CLD students and they present alternatives which may reduce this bias.
Limitations to Traditional Assessment for CLD Students
Norm- and criterion-referenced assessments compare students’ performance to an age-matched sample (norm) or a predetermined level of performance (criterion). They may misdiagnose CLD students due to:
Content Bias: When CLD students with the same ability level as other students score lower due to differences in background knowledge or unfamiliarity with test procedures.
Linguistic Bias: When a student’s language or dialect does not match the language or dialect of the tester or assessment.
The Potential of Alternative Approaches to Assessment for CLD Students
Dynamic and processing-dependent assessments can reduce content and linguistic bias when used in place of or addition to traditional assessments. However, future research and the development of assessments specifically for CLD students are necessary next steps.
Dynamic Assessments use a test-teach-retest method to evaluate both a student’s current performance and their ability to learn with responsive instruction. The focus on learning something new reduces content bias while the responsive teaching/testing reduces linguistic bias.
Processing-Dependent Assessments employ tasks which involve memorization or perceptual discrimination and are minimally dependent on prior knowledge or experience. The emphasis on processing reduces the risk of content bias for CLD students.
National Center on Improving Literacy (2024). Alternative Assessment of Language and Literacy in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Improving Literacy. Retrieved from http://improvingliteracy.org.
Laing, S. P., & Kamhi, A. (2003). Alternative assessment of language and literacy in culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34 (2003), pp. 44-55.
Traditional literacy diagnostic tools can be biased against minority populations. Research is being done on new types of assessments that more accurately evaluate the literacy skills of culturally and linguistically diverse families.
More on Evidence-based
The research reported here is funded by awards to the National Center on Improving Literacy from the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, in partnership with the Office of Special Education Programs (Award #: S283D160003). The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of OESE, OSEP, or the U.S. Department of Education. Copyright © 2024 National Center on Improving Literacy. https://improvingliteracy.org