DOCUMENT RESUME ED 467 738 FL 027 426 Gonzalez-Jensen, Margarita; Beckett, E. Carol AUTHOR How Teachers Assess ESL Reading: Implications for Change. TITLE 2002-00-00 PUB DATE NOTE 17p. Reports Research (143) PUB TYPE EDRS Price MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE Elementary Education; *English (Second Language); Evaluation DESCRIPTORS Methods; Language Teachers; *Reading Skills; Second Language Instruction; *Student Evaluation; Teaching Methods Arizona IDENTIFIERS ABSTRACT Development of reading skills for all second language learners is of utmost importance for success in all academic areas. Reading skills assessment must guide instructional planning for English language learners. This manuscript examines the reading assessment practices used by 50 inservice K-8 elementary English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers in a large metropolitan area in the southwest United States. The findings indicated that many teachers did not differentiate between formal and informal assessment practices in their classrooms, did not regularly assess (ELLs') reading growth, and did not the English language learners' differentiate reading assessment practices for fluent English speakers and ELLs. Conclusions from this study include the need for effective preservice and inservice opportunities to increase awareness of the effectiveness of reading assessment in planning instruction. Colleges of education need to consider ways to improve ESL teachers' basic conceptual understanding of assessment and provide them opportunities to refine practices of administering the appropriate reading assessments. (Contains 18 references.) (Author/SM) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. 1 How Teachers Assess ESL Reading: Implications for Change U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND ItiCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS CENTER (ERIC) BEEN GRANIED BY This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Carol Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES document do not necessarily represent INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) official OERI position or policy. 1 Margarita Gonzalez-Jensen, Ed.D., Associate Professor E. Carol Beckett, Ed.D., Assistant Professor College of Education/MC 3151 Arizona State University West P. 0. Box 47100 Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100 Phone: (602) 543-6368 Email: carol .beckett@asu. edu Submitted to: ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics July 22, 2002 BEST COPY AMIABLE 2 Abstract Development of reading skills for all second language learners is of utmost importance for success in all academic areas. Reading skills assessment must guide instructional planning for English language learners. This manuscript examines the reading assessment practices used by 50 in-service K-8 elementary ESL teachers in a large metropolitan area in the Southwest United States. The findings indicated many teachers did not differentiate between formal and informal assessment practices in their classrooms, did not regularly assess the English language learners' (ELLs) reading growth, and did not differentiate reading assessment practices for fluent English speakers and ELLs. Conclusions from the study include the need for effective pre-service and in- service opportunities to increase awareness of the effectiveness of reading assessment in planning instruction. Colleges of education need to consider ways to improve ESL teachers' basic conceptual understanding of assessment and provide them opportunities to refine practices of administering the appropriate reading assessments. 3 3 How Teachers Assess ESL Reading: Implications for Change Public education for students who are English language learners (ELLs) has never faced a more critical time. English language learning programs are under attack in many states. At the same time, academic standards specifying grade level competencies for elementary and high school students have been adopted by every state. What students should know and be able to do is at the forefront of concerns. ELLs are especially vulnerable when decisions are made that have an affect on educational opportunities. Many states have policies in place mandating decisions about students' promotion to the next grade level or even graduation from high school based on test scores (Holmes & Duron, n. d.). Concurrently, there is also public demand for more teacher accountability for whether or not students show achievement on mandated tests (Zoch, n. d.; Bradley, 1999). The Council of Chief State School Officers stated that ELLs success in school depends on gaining access to effective second language learning opportunities in order to take advantage of a full educational program (CCSSO, 1992 in Short, 1993). ELLs' access to a full educational program means providing effective assessments and instruction in English reading. ELLs access to a full educational program means providing effective assessments and instruction in English reading. Therefore, a teacher's ability to assess reading performance in order to plan effective instruction for ELLs must be examined. ELLs need teachers who will make reading a key focus in their instructional program (Schmitt & Carter, 2000). Development of reading skills is of utmost importance for success in all areas of academic content. Chamot and O'Malley state that ELLs need to practice reading a variety of kinds of information. Examples are science information, mathematics word problems, maps and charts in geography, biographies in history, and stories and poems in literature (Chamot & O'Malley, 1994). 4 4 ELLs need teachers who are accomplished at determining their students' reading learning needs through effective use of assessment strategies so as to avoid lost opportunities to plan effective instructions (Gersten, 1999). The purpose of this paper is to: a) describe current assessment practices in assessment of ELLs' reading skills, and b) present the results of a survey of elementary teachers enrolled in classes leading to an English as a second language (ESL) endorsement to teach ELLs in Arizona. Assessment Impacts Instruction Reading is one of the most important areas that ELLs need to master for success in the mainstream English language classroom. Assessment of students' reading abilities is a way to measure achievement and to guide and improve instruction (Carrasquillo & Rodriguez, 1996). Many other researchers agree that in order for students to become proficient readers of English, teachers must have adequate information about their students' reading skills so that informed instruction can be provided in the needed skill areas (Ervin, 1998; Hancock, 1994; Checkley, 1997; Spangenberg-Ubschat & Prichard, 1994; Tierney & Readence, 2000). Researchers who specialize in instructional practices for English language learners and their development have noted the need of ongoing reading assessment for decades. For example, Thonis stated in 1976, Evaluation is concerned with such questions as: What have we taught; what have pupils learned; and how do we know...? Unless evaluation occurs on a regular basis teachers are apt to have spent a great deal of teaching time without knowing if they make a difference in the lives of their students" (pp 213-214). 5 Twenty years later, in 1995, Krashen voiced the same belief in the need for assessment stating that tests have a "huge impact on classroom behavior" and that the instructional value has greater importance than measuring student progress (p. 177). Assessment of ELLs Reading skills Most school districts assess ELLs' English proficiency using standardized tests. Law & Eckes (1995) reported the language proficiency tests most commonly used include the Language Assessment Scales (LAS), Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey (WMLS), and the Ideal Proficiency Test (IPT). These instruments contain components for assess oral, reading and writing skills so that an overall view of language skills can be obtained. Although standardized tests such as the LAS, IPT, and WMLS are somewhat limited in the information obtained as far as lesson planning is concerned, teachers are able to obtain a comprehensive picture of students' English language abilities that directly interface with development of literacy skills. The Study The authors' concern for the state of ELLs' reading instruction grew when we coupled the perceived lack of classroom reading assessment with the practice whereby ELLs are excluded from district and state testing in Arizona for a specified period of time. Moreover, the authors wanted to find out what preparation ESL teachers were receiving in assessing reading growth. Our goal was to determine what type of reading assessment was occurring in ELLs' classrooms, particularly the current practices of ELLs' teachers within a large metropolitan area in the Southwest United States. In order to accomplish our goal we asked teachers taking classes required for an ESL endorsement to complete a survey about the reading skills of both their fluent English speaking and non- fluent English language learners regarding the type and manner of reading assessment that were regularly performed in their classrooms. The participants were also asked to gauge the degree of satisfaction they 6 6 felt when using different types of reading assessments and to reflect on the type of specific information gathered from assessment that would improve their reading instruction. Participants Fifty in-service K-8 elementary teachers taking ESL endorsement classes as required by the State of Arizona participated in the study. The ESL endorsement is required of teachers who teach large numbers of ELLs in their classrooms or are preparing to do so. Forty-three of the teachers had Bachelors' degrees in education, including twenty-six in regular elementary, three in Special Education, four in Bilingual, four in ESL and six with combined degrees. Of the remaining seven teachers with Masters' degrees, four specified the type of Masters' degree they held. Three were in Elementary Education and one was in Special Education. The teachers responding to the survey represented a wide range of levels of experience. Twenty-five, or half, of the respondents were new teachers whose experience ranged from 0 to 5 years, while the other half of the teachers reported wider ranges of experience, from 6 to 28 years. Although the teachers participating in the study lived and taught in an area of the country where most ELLs were Spanish speakers, more than half of the respondents reported having more than one language group represented in their classes. One teacher reported having a total of nineteen ELLs who spoke six different languages. Type of Analysis This preliminary study, conducted with a questionnaire of open-ended questions, yielded highly varied answers and the participants did not respond to all the items. Therefore, given the number and type of responses, the authors performed a formative evaluation by analyzing participants' responses using percentages and descriptive data wherever possible. 7 7 Findings Formal Assessment In Arizona the legislature requires districts to administer yearly formal reading assessments of students as components of a standardized test. For example, the Stanford Achievement Test 9, Ninth Edition (SAT 9) is given all students in grades one through nine annually although other assessments can also be administered. The questionnaire asked participants to report all formal reading assessments they administered in their classrooms to all students. The participants named the SAT 9, district assessment plans, language proficiency tests such as the IPT and LAS, and criterion referenced tests (CRT) as instruments used for measuring children's reading skills. Published basal tests and teacher-made CRTs that measure specific skill mastery such as identifying the main idea and sequencing were also listed. The responses indicated the teachers used the same assessments for all students regardless of English language proficiency. Informal Assessment When asked about informal assessments, participants named strategies as widely dissimilar as: flashcards with pictures, book reports, observation, letter and sound correspondence, oral reading, daily work, group activities, and discussions for both ELLs and fluent English speaking (FES) students. Publisher material such as program placement tests and primary language level tests were also listed as means to determine reading levels for English language learners. Interestingly, only one teacher indicated using running records as a means to informally assess reading growth. Frequency of Assessment The participants reported varying frequency rates of formal assessment for both the FES and the ELLs. While most teachers indicated the use of yearly SAT 9 assessment, twelve teachers 8 reported conducting FES reading assessments four times a year. Ten teachers reported testing four times a year for ELLs students. Other time intervals for formal assessment for all children included bi-weekly, tri-weekly, and bi-annually. Eight teachers stated they formally assessed reading skills for ELLs every two years. Frequency rates for informal reading assessments for all students were the same as the frequency rates for formal assessments. As with formal assessments, administering informal assessments appeared to be an individual teacher decision with answers ranging from "on going" to "as often as needed" to "once a year". Degree of Satisfaction with Assessment Overall participants indicated greater satisfaction levels with information obtained from informal assessments for ELLs. Ten of the fifty, or 20%, of the participants reported satisfaction with formal assessments for ELLs while thirty, or 60%, of the participants indicated satisfaction with information obtained from the informal assessments. Several of the participants gave written comments to explain their answers. Teachers who were satisfied with their procedures seemed to have a clear sense of assessment by adding comments such as: "Yes, but never completely," "only if used with teacher evaluations," and "yes, I only use it to jump-start the year." The comments from the teachers who were dissatisfied with assessments lacked specificity in their concerns. Some of their comments included: "No, because they don't show growth," and "I need to look at various aspects of child's reading." One respondent vented her dissatisfaction by stating that, "attempting formal reading skill assessment for ELLs students is inappropriate." Information needed for effective instruction 9 The respondents were asked what information they needed in order to teach reading more effectively; specifically, what might help ELLs grow and develop in English language reading. Very few teachers responding to this question identified needing information about reading skills, citing concerns such as smaller class sizes and more help as the key to more effective, [sic] individualized reading instruction. Those teachers who responded about reading skills cited generic although compelling needs such as wanting more information on students' first language skills, more information on phonics, decoding, sight vocabulary and comprehension. When asked what type of assessment would be ideal for helping teachers more fully understand the ELLs' performance levels twenty-one of the fifty (42%) participants indicated they wanted information about first language reading skills, recognizing the importance of first language skills in learning to read in a second language. Eight teachers wanted some type of multiple assessment (IRI or running records listed by two) and information on the transition process from first language to second language. Discussion & Implications Gee (1999) states that students learning English must have support if they are to become proficient readers. The importance of reading assessment as part of the support system cannot be understated. The teachers in our study were performing reading assessments although not all had differentiated between formal and informal reading assessment. A further generalization of our findings, and one that possibly results from the previous understanding indicates the majority of the teachers are satisfied with the results of both types of assessments. We are concerned however, about the apparent lack of knowledge of informal reading assessments on the part of some respondents, since these informal assessment techniques can be very valuable in ascertaining students' reading levels and or reading strengths and weaknesses. 10