How well do commonly used language instruments measure english oral-language proficiency?

Bilingual Research Journal

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 387-409

  Pray, Lisa ^a  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247848150     PISSN: 15235882     EISSN: 15235890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15235882.2005.10162841     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. American Educational Research Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. (1999). Washington, DC: Author.
2. Artiles, A. J. (1994). Overrepresentation of minority students in special education: Acontinuing debate. The Journal of Special Education, 27(4), 410-437.
3. Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2000). Factors associated with English-language learner representation in special education: Evidence from urban school districts in California. In D. Losen & G. Orfield (Eds.), Minority issues in special education in the public schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Publishing Group.
4. Brown, R. W. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.
6. Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-linguistic dimensions oflanguage proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14(3), 175-187.
8. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
9. Curtiss, S., Schaeffer, J., Sano, T., MacSwan, J., & Masilon, T. (1996). A grammatical coding and analysis system for language data from normal and brain-damaged children. Paper presented at the Joint International Conference ofthe Association for Literacy and Linguistic Computing and the Association for Computers and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Norway.
10. Dalton, E., & Barrett, T. (2001). IDEA oral language proficiency test, Forms E & FEnglish technical manual. Brea, CA: Ballard & Tighe.
11. DeAvila, A., & Duncan, S. (1990). Language Assessment Scales oral technical report. Monterey, CA: CTB Macmillan McGraw-Hill.
12. Fey, P. (2001, April). Of mushrooms, igloos and the Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey—Spanish (LSS), Sub tests I and II. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
13. Figuera, R. (1991). Bilingualism and psychometrics. Diagnostique, 17, 70-85.
14. Fromkin, V, & Rodman, R. (1993). An introduction to language (5th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
15. Geisinger, K. F., & Carlson, J. (1992). Assessing language-minority students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 356232)
16. Gleason, J. B. (1997). The development of language. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
17. Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G, & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? (policy Report 2000-1). Los Angeles, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
18. Hernández, R. D. (1994). Reducing bias in the assessment of culturally and linguistically diverse populations. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 14, 269-300.
19. Limbos, M., & Geva, E. (2001). Accuracy of teaching assessments of second-language students at risk for reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(2), 136-151.
20. MacSwan, J. (2000). The threshold hypothesis, semilingualism, and other contribution to a deficit view of linguistic minorities. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 20(1), 3-45.
21. MacSwan, J. (2001, April). The non-non crisis: Knowledge of language and problems of construct validity in native language assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
22. MacSwan, J., Rolstad K., & Glass, G. (2002). Do some school-age children have no language? Some problems of construct validity in the Pre-LAS Español. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(2), 213-238.
23. MacSwan, J., & Rolstad, K. (2003). Linguistic diversity, schooling, and social class: Rethinking our conception of language proficiency in language minority education. In C. B. Paulston & R. Tucker (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: The essential readings. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
24. Mahoney, K. (2001, April). The Idea Proficiency Test (IPT) Spanish: Seven strikes and you’re out! Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
25. Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? New York: Dial Books.
26. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Ortiz, A., & García, S. (1995). Serving Hispanic students with learning disabilities: Recommended policies and practices. Urban Education, 29(4), 471-481
28. Ortiz, J. (2001, April). The LAS—O Español: Language assessment scale or losing the ability to speak? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
29. Ochoa, S. H., Galarza, A., & González, D. (1996). An investigation of school psychologists’ assessment practices of language proficiency with bilingual and limited-English proficient students. Diagnostique, 21, 17-36.
30. Ochoa, S., & González, D. (1996). The training and use of interpreters in bilingual psycho-educational assessment: An alternative in need of study. Diagnostique, 21, 19-22.
31. Sommers, R. (1989). Language assessment: Issues in the use and interpretation of tests and measures. School Psychology Review, 18(4) 452-462.
32. Todd, S., Fiske, K, & Dopico, H. (1994). Vocational assessment for LEP students. Journal for Vocational and Special Needs Education, 16(2), 16-28.
33. Valadez, C., MacSwan, J., & Martínez, C. (1997, April). Toward a new view of low achieving bilinguals: Syntactic competence in designated “semilinguals.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
34. Woodcock, R., & Munoz-Sandoval, A. (2001). Woodcock-Munoz language survey normative update comprehensive manual. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
35. Zehler, A. M., Hopstock, P. J., Fleischman, H. L., & Greniuk, C. (1994). An examination of assessment of limited English proficient students. Retrieved June 25, 2005, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/siac/lepasses.htm