Topic Multicultural Aspects of Assessment

Join Together: A Nationwide On-Line Community of Practice and Professional Development School Dedicated to Instructional Effectiveness and Academic Excellence within Deaf/Hard of Hearing Education

Objective 2.4 – Assessment

Submitted by:

Topical Team Leaders – John Luckner, Ed.D. and Sandy Bowen, Ph.D.

Topic – Multicultural Aspects of Assessment

Rationale:

Recently, federal initiatives and general education guidelines have emphasized the need for better and more assessments to ensure accountability, student progress, and program placement. Some of these assessment results will provide the basis for making decision regarding “high-stake” issues. Many have argued that assessments are not beneficial for all students and that in fact, students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds are often at a severe disadvantage when tested using the same tests and procedures as students from the mainstream culture because of inherent test bias.

General Guidelines – Hearing Students

There has been a caution from the fields of English Language Learners (ELL), bilingual education, and bilingual special education outlining the potential obstacles and complexities of assessing students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Many of these issues revolve around testing in English and using examples and experiences that are not multicultural in nature (Menken, 2000). Furthermore, the question exists if the assessment is actually testing a student’s knowledge of a topic or content, or simply testing the student’s abilities in the English language.

In the field of special education, the issues surround the overrepresentation of students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds in special education programs. Furthermore, questions arise concerning validity and reliability for assessments that are used to refer, diagnosis, and ultimately place students in programs for students with disabilities (Artiles, Harry, Reschly, & Chinn, 2002; Oregon Department of Education, Office of Special Education, 2001). “There is considerable evidence about the inadequacies of traditional assessment models with culturally diverse groups; however, research about the role of norming, content, linguistic, and cultural biases and test result uses on minority placement in special education is scarce” (Artiles, et.al., 2002, p. 3) .

Formal Assessment Best Practices – Hearing Students

As best practice, one should caution when using a standardized assessment that has not been normed on the population for which the assessment is being used. Additionally, one should recognize when a student is being tested on language skills rather than content. Coltrane (2002) advocates for providing appropriate accommodations during testing. Accommodations may include: additional time on a test, breaks during a test, administration of the test in a small group or alternate location, allowing the test to be translated into the students’ native language, allowing the test items to be explained or repeated, and allowing student’s to respond to the test items in their native language. However, he cautions:

While allowing an ELL more time to complete a test or administering the test in a smaller group in familiar surroundings may be helpful in some contexts, such accommodations do not ensure that learners' linguistic needs are being accounted for. On the other hand, additional explanations of test items, translation, and alternate ways by which students are allowed to respond to items all directly address ELLs' language needs and may increase the chances that learners will be able to demonstrate their knowledge. Accommodations should be selected carefully in order to ensure that ELLs are given appropriate support, including linguistic support, on standardized tests--especially when those tests are used as a basis for high-stakes decisions (2002, paragraph 8).

Informal Assessment Best Practices – Hearing Students

Educators are advocating for the use of more functional (alternative) assessments that use multiple methods to assess the student’s practical skills. Assessments such as portfolios, checklists, rating scales, self-reports, work-samples, interviews, and observations attempt to identify a student’s “real world” knowledge and skills in actual contexts. While alternative assessments can be readily used in the classroom, they may not substitute for formal or high-stakes testing.

General Guidelines – Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Many individuals who are Deaf pride themselves on their own (Deaf) cultural and (ASL) linguistic diversity (Lane, Hoffmeister & Bahan, 1996). Therefore each of the general guidelines and best practices mentioned above will also serve as guidelines and practices for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. However, one must be cautious in simply transferring strategies and practices from one field (ESL and Bilingual education) to another field (deaf education). There are differences that may be educationally significant. For example, students in ESL and traditional bilingual educational programs are able to draw from experiences and knowledge they attained in their first or native language; students who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing may or may not have a full first language. Similarly many of the students may already possess literacy skills in their native language; American Sign Language (ASL). ASL does not have a written form and therefore students do not have the opportunity to draw on linguistic background from another language when learning to read in English.

Moreover, students who are Deaf and who also come from a culturally or linguistically diverse background may experience a sense of double jeopardy regarding issues of assessment (Christensen, 2000). These individuals may have additional sign or oral language competency that is difficult to assess. For example a student may sign in a signed language other than ASL, but educators in the United States may be unable to adequately interpret the child’s communication. Therefore, the child is seen as having no language or knowledge, when indeed if understood, the child may have vast communication or knowledge.

Formal Assessment Best Practices – Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

There are no identified best practices for assessing students who are deaf or hard of hearing from diverse language and cultural backgrounds. However, as with students with normal hearing, one must be cautious to use procedures and materials that assess the student’s knowledge of the content, rather than his/her knowledge and use of the English language. Additionally, the use of appropriate accommodations must be considered. (Best practices in accommodations are outlined in another section of this literature review.)

Informal Assessment Best Practices – Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

References

Artiles, A. J.; Harry, B.; Reschly, D. J.; & Chinn, P. C.(2002). Over-identification of students of color in Special Education: A critical overview. Multicultural Perspectives, 4, (1), 3-10.

Christensen, K. (2000). Deaf plus: A multicultural perspective. San Diego, CA: Dawn Sign Press.

Coltrane, B. (2002). English language learners and high-stakes tests: An overview of the issues. ERIC Digest, ED470981. Retrieved June 13, 2004 from http://www.cal.org/ericcll/DIGEST.

Lane, H.; Hoffmeister, R. & Bahan, B. (1996). A journey into the Deaf- World. San Diego, CA: Dawn Sign Press.

Menken, K. (2000). What are the critical issues in wide-scale assessment of English language learners? (Issue Brief No. 6). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Retrieved June 17, 2004 from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/issuebriefs/ib6.htm

Oregon Department of Education, Office of Special Education. (2001). Special dducation assessment process for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Retrieved June 17, 2004 from http://www.tr.wou.edu/eec/AssessmentProcess2001.pdf

Sass-Lehrer, M. & Gerner de Garcia, B.(1997). Creating a multicultural school climate for Deaf children and their families. Gallaudet University Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center. Retrieved June 6, 2004 from http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/Products/Sharing-Ideas/creating/intro.html