A group of states designing tests to measure how well students are mastering the common standards last week approved a slate of testing supports that includes read-aloud accommodations on the English/language arts assessment for students with disabilities and written word-to-word translations to some English-language learners鈥� native languages.
The 21-state Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, or PARCC, signed off on its first edition of an accommodations and accessibility manual for students with disabilities and English-learners. The testing supports鈥攚hich also include interpreting the English/language arts assessment for students who use American Sign Language鈥攚ill be field-tested in the 2013-14 school year, and adjusted as needed before the tests debut in 2014-15, PARCC officials said.
Expanding Access
Overall, PARCC鈥檚 policies are meant to expand access to tests beyond what may be currently available for students in some states. Some accommodations once linked to students with special needs鈥攕uch as repeating instructions aloud or magnifying text鈥攁re now among the test鈥檚 鈥渆mbedded supports鈥� available to any student, even those who are not formally identified as ELLs or students in special education.
But allowing a read-aloud accommodation for students with disabilities will be a major shift in testing policy for most states in the PARCC consortium; only Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Tennessee currently allow text passages on language arts state tests to be read aloud, though read-aloud can be used for tests measuring other academic areas.
That prompted state leaders from Colorado鈥攚ho said allowing the accommodation on the English/language arts test would not be a true measurement of reading鈥攖o vote against approving the manual. It was the only dissenting vote.
69传媒 who use the read-aloud and American Sign Language accommodations will have notations on their score reports indicating that no claims can be made about their ability to demonstrate foundational print skills such as decoding and fluency.
Joyce Zurkowski, the executive director of assessment for Colorado, told her PARCC colleagues that she had talked with the original writers of the English/language arts standards, who said 鈥渋f kids can鈥檛 access that text independently, they can鈥檛 be considered proficient readers.鈥� Oklahoma鈥檚 schools chief, Janet Barresi, voiced reservations about allowing American Sign Language interpretation unless it can be 鈥渓iterally word-for-word鈥� and said that students would have need to have already had that kind of support leading up to the test in order for their scores to be comparable.
The read-aloud portion of the accommodations manual had been one of the most-debated sections of the document, drawing thousands of responses to earlier policy drafts. Some special education advocacy groups argued in favor of a broad use of multiple ways of accessing text, including read-aloud, unless the test was specifically a measurement of decoding.
Among the groups taking that stance is the Center for Applied Special Technology, a Wakefield, Mass.-based research organization that promotes universal design in instruction and test development. Chuck Hitchcock, CAST鈥檚 chief officer of policy and technology, said the current manual is better, from his perspective, than earlier drafts that took a more restrictive approach to the use of read-aloud.
However, in an email to PARCC leaders, he said he still had concerns with the organization鈥檚 plan to put a notation on student score reports indicating that where read-aloud is used, no claims can be made about a student鈥檚 foundational print skills.
English-Learners
PARCC鈥檚 policy for ELLs calls for accommodations to be available, in large measure, by the level of an English-learner鈥檚 language proficiency. 69传媒 at beginning levels of proficiency, for example, can have test directions 鈥渃larified鈥� by a test administrator in their native language for both the math and English/language arts exams, though that accommodation is not recommended for ELLs with advanced proficiency. Beginning ELLs will also be allowed to have their oral responses to math test items transcribed to text.
Written word-to-word translations from English to an ELL鈥檚 native language are recommended for those with intermediate and advanced proficiency levels. The manual states that students at the lowest proficiency levels generally benefit more from oral test supports than written ones.
Extended time will also be available to all English-learners, regardless of proficiency.
PARCC has not yet addressed the issue of native language translations of the assessments. With member states like Arizona, an 鈥淓nglish-only鈥� state, and New York, which provides assessments in multiple languages, PARCC staff members said that issue will take more time to resolve.
