English Language Proficiency Tests, One Dimension or Many?: Yoonsun Lee Director of Assessment and Psychometrics Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment

Advertisements

NCLB Accountability Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) as Amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) Presented.

Understanding the English Proficiency Levels of ELLs Catawba County Schools

Amelia Courts, WESTELL Putting it All Together WV Department of Education.

Alaskas English Language Proficiency Standards 2005 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development February 8, 2006.

Connecting Assessment, Language, and Learning. Today’s Agenda Meeting TEA testing requirements What is LAS Links™? L, S, Subtests Adding it up LAS Links™

NM ELD Standards l Education Secretary García states: ELD Standards developed by state taskforce of NM educators led by professional team from World Class.

Kansas English Language Proficiency Assessment (KELPA)

Assessment, Accountability and NCLB Education 388 Lecture March 15, 2007 Kenji Hakuta, Professor.

California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and Reclassification Palm Middle School

Susan Inman, Educational Improvement and Innovation Kathleen Vanderwall, Assessment and Information Services 1.

Surveys of Enacted Curriculum – English Language Learner Project Jacqueline Iribarren Abby Potter John Smithson Shelley Lee.

SAISD Board Report Office of Research and Evaluation

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) Results September 2007.

Title III Notice of Proposed Interpretations & Implications for California’s Accountability System Robert Linquanti Cathy George Project Director & Sr.

ON TARGET WITH AMAOS 1, 2, 3 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS September 29, 2009 Welcome.

Jamal Abedi University of California, Davis/CRESST Presented at: The Race to the Top Assessment Program Public & Expert Input Meeting December 2, 2009.

Education 330 Teaching English Language Learners: Issues in Policy, Leadership, and Instruction Fall, 2014.

Jacqueline A. Iribarren, Ph.D. Title III, ESL & Bilingual Ed Consultant.

Jacqueline A. Iribarren, Ph.D. Title III Consultant Fall

Seattle Public School ELL Data Veronica Maria Gallardo, Director of ELL 1.

English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) for English Language Learners (ELLs) Pennsylvania Department of Education Bureau of Teaching Learning and.

1 NYSESLAT Training Copyright 2005 by Harcourt Assessment, Inc. NYSESLAT CONTENTS OF THIS OVERVIEW  Test features  Materials  Administration.

How to Interpret and Use Standards of Learning (SOL) and ACCESS for ELLs® Data to Make Instructional Decisions for English Learners.

Data Interpretation ACCESS for ELLs® The Rhode Island Department of Education Presented by Bob Measel ELL Specialist Office of Instruction, Assessment,

English Language Development Assessment (ELDA) Background to ELDA for Test Coordinator and Administrator Training Mike Fast, AIR CCSSO/LEP-SCASS March.

What ACCESS, the New Virginia Test for LEP Students, Means for School Districts LEP Caucus Presentation July 2008.

Title III Accountability. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives How well are English Learners achieving academically? How well are English Learners.

San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel.

A CALIFORNIA PERSPECTIVE Credentialing for world language teachers Thanks to Sally Mearns, Helene Chan Phyllis Jacobson, California Commission on Teacher.

ACCESS for ELLs® Interpreting the Results Developed by the WIDA Consortium.

Fall Testing Update David Abrams Assistant Commissioner for Standards, Assessment, & Reporting Middle Level Liaisons & Support Schools Network November.

ELD Transition Sessions

Acquiring English Proficiency in the Torrington Public Schools Programs, Process, and Student Progress Cheryl F. Kloczko.

Virginia Department of Education May 8, English Language Proficiency Targets: Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 2.

Title III Notice of Proposed Interpretations Presentation for LEP SCASS/CCSSO May 7, 2008.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Enhanced Assessment Grant: English Language Proficiency Assessment.

English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) for English Language Learners (ELLs) Pennsylvania Department of Education Bureau of Teaching Learning and.

© 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, on behalf of the WIDA Consortium WIDA Focus on Growth H Gary Cook, Ph.D. WIDA.

Annual Measurable Achievement Objective s (AMAOs): Update Jacqueline A. Iribarren, DPI September 27, 2007.

Silvia C. Dorta-Duque de Reyes San Diego County Office of Education

LAUSD Student Data ELD Implementation Report 2006.

Connecticut’s Performance on Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives, Presentation to Connecticut Administrators of Programs for English.

Title III Updates & AMAOs Jacqueline A. Iribarren, Title III Susan Ketchum, Office of Educational Accountability September 24, 2008.

Greathen Derenne EDU 536.  All students fill out a Home Language Survey when they register. There is a box to check about which language is spoken at.

Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program Presentation to Board of Directors Shelton School District September 8, 2009 Gail Straus, Assistant.

Jpschools.org ADMINISTRATION OF ELDA K-2 SPRING 2016 jpschools.org.

The Arizona English Language Learner Assessment (AZELLA)

E L P A. ELPA Understand the definition and purpose of the English Language Proficiency Assessment Administer ELPA appropriately Objectives.

ACCESS for ELLs Score Report Interpretation Developed by the Center for Applied Linguistics ESL Program Asheboro City Schools.

Assessment Update Wood Acres Elementary February 7, 2006 KPJ 2006.

Mathematics Initiative Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Mathematics Initiative Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction CAA Options.

NCLB Assessment and Accountability Provisions: Issues for English-language Learners Diane August Center for Applied Linguistics.

Minnesota Assessments June 25, 2012 Presenter: Jennifer Dugan.

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING ESOL ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. ESOL Teacher: Anastasiya Ard.

Collecting Data What does it tell us about the student?

ESEA Title III Accountability System. JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 22 Title III Requires States to: Define two annual measurable.

WIDA ACCESS Testing Information Session & Community Literacy Resources Parents as Educational Partners Tuesday, January 13, 2015 Jonathan Hudgens- WIDA.

The Arizona English Language Learner Assessment (AZELLA)

ESU Title III Update Fall 2016.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ELPAC

Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program

Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program

Credentialing for world language teachers

Grand Ridge Assessment Overview 2015

The Arizona English Language Learner Assessment (AZELLA)

Introduction to the WIDA Consortium

CELDT MOVEMENT BY LEVELS

Hawaii TAC Meeting WIDA Assessments

Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program

Presentation transcript:

English Language Proficiency Tests, One Dimension or Many?: Yoonsun Lee Director of Assessment and Psychometrics Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

ELPT Requirements Under NCLB  States are required to: - Implement ELD standards - Implement ELP tests that assess skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing with an added comprehension measure - Administer ELP tests annually in grades K Align ELP tests with academic content standards - Meet AMAO Title III objectives

More on Title III Measurement Demands  AMAO I requires setting target growth rates in English language proficiency status across years  AMAO II requires setting targets for attaining full English language proficiency across years  States attracted to ELP tests that implement vertical scales

Construct Validity Issue  Does it make sense to hypothesize that English language proficiency test is unidimensional? Or, is it multidimensional with four different domains (reading, writing, speaking, and listening)?

Washington Language Proficiency Test-II (WLPT-II)  Developed in 2006  Used Stanford English Language Proficiency Test (SELP) and added augmented items developed by Washington teachers  Four grade spans (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, & 9-12)  Four subtests (Reading, Writing, Listening & Speaking)

WLPT-II Test Specifications Grade Span ReadingWritingListeningSpeaking Total Number Primary (K-2) 21MC 15MC 8CR 20MC17CR 81 (112pts) Elementary (3-5) 24MC 20MC 2CR 20MC17CR 83 (110pts) Middle (6-8) 28MC 24MC 2CR 20MC17CR 91 (118pts) High (9-12) 31MC 24MC 2CR 20MC17CR 94 (121pts) MC: Multiple choice CR: Constructed response

Confirmatory Factor Analysis WLPT-II - Sample: Approximately 15,000 students included in each grade span - EQS (Bentler, 1995) - Four models were examined

Models 1 & 2 E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16 Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Language Proficiency E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16 Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Language Proficiency

Models 3 & 4 E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16. Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Reading Writing Listening Speaking Language Proficiency E1 E4 E5 E9 E10 E12 E13 E16. Rdg cluster 1 Rdg cluster 4 Wri cluster 1 Wri cluster 5 Lis cluster 1 Lis cluster 3 Spe cluster 1 Spe cluster 4 Reading Writing Listening Speaking D1 D2 D3 D

Results (Primary level) ModeldfGFICFIRMSEA 1 (single with no corr) (single with corr) (four factor) (second order)

Results (Primary: K-2) - was examined to compare models. Model 2 (Single Factor with errors correlated within subtest) produced a good fit to the data.

Results (Elementary, Middle, & High School) - Same result was found in Elementary, Middle, & High School) - Model 2 showed the best fit to the data (over 0.95 GFI and CFI and below 0.05 RMSEA) - No significant evidence to threaten construct validity with adding augmented items to the existing language test