This article is focused on the different Home Language Surveys (HLS) used across U.S. states as a means of identifying students who, with further assessment, may prove eligible for language-support services. The majority of states mandate some form of HLS, be it state- or district-created. However, there is great variation in the number and the phrasing of survey items across states that raises issues of equity. To date, there is a dearth of evidence for the validity of HLS in the procedures used for identifying students for English learner (EL) status. States must recognize that the fundamental role of an HLS in their English-language proficiency assessment systems necessitates its further scrutiny as part of the assessment validation process. The article concludes with a series of recommendations for federal- and state-level actions to help remedy current concerns with EL identification processes around the nation.
AbediJ. (2008). Classification systems for English language learners: Issues and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(3), 17-31.
2.
AbediJ.LordC.PlummerJ. (1997). Language background as a variable in NAEP mathematics performance (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 429). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
BaileyA. L. (2010). Implications for instruction and assessment. In ShatzM.WilkinsonL. (Eds.), The Education of English Language Learners (pp. 222-247). New York, NY: Guilford.
5.
BeringerM. L. (1976). Ber-Sil Spanish Test, revised edition. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA: The Ber-Sil Company.
6.
Bernard Cohen Research and Development Inc. (1980). Language assessment umpire. Compton, CA: Santillana.
Colorado Department of Education. (2008). Guidebook on designing, delivering, and evaluating services for English language learners. Denver: English Language Acquisition Unit, Colorado State Board of Education.
De HouwerA. (1995). Bilingual language acquisition. In FletcherP.MacWhinneyB. (Eds.), The handbook of child language (pp. 219-250). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
11.
DuránR. P. (2008). Assessing English-language learners’ achievement. Review of Research in Education, 32, 292-327.
12.
DuursmaE.Romero-ContrerasS.SzuberA.ProctorP.SnowC.AugustD.CalderónM. (2007). The role of home literacy and language environment on bilinguals’ English and Spanish vocabulary development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(1), 171-190.
13.
ForteE.Faulkner-BondM. (2010). The administrator’s guide to federal programs for English learners. Washington, DC: Thompson.
GoodzN. S. (1989). Parental language mixing in bilingual families. Infant Mental Health Journal, 10(1), 25-44.
16.
GonzalezV. (1991). A model of cognitive, cultural, and linguistic variables affecting bilingual Spanish/English children’s development of concepts and language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
17.
GonzalezV.BauerleP.Felix-HoltM. (1996). Theoretical and practical implications of assessing cognitive and language development in bilingual children with qualitative methods. Bilingual Research Journal, 20(1), 93-131.
18.
Gutiérrez-ClellenV. F.KreiterJ. (2003). Understanding child bilingual acquisition using parent and teacher reports. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 267-288.
19.
HoffmanN. H. M. (1934). The measurement of bilingual background. New York, NY: Columbia Teachers College.
20.
JamesP. (1974). James Language Dominance Test. Austin, TX: Learning Concepts.
KaneM. (2006). Content-related validity evidence in test development. In HaladynaT. M.DowningS. (Eds.), Handbook on test development (pp. 131-152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23.
KaufmanM. (1968). Will instruction in reading Spanish affect ability in reading English?Journal of Reading, 11, 521-527.
24.
LambertW. E. (1977). Effects of bilingualism on the individual: Cognitive and socio cultural consequences. In HornbyP. A. (Ed.), Bilingualism: Psychological, social and educational implications (pp. 15-28). New York, NY: Academic Press.
25.
LandryR. G. (1974). A comparison of second language learners and monolinguals on divergent thinking tasks at the elementary school level. Modern Language Journal, 58(1/2), 10-15.
26.
LewisH. P.LewisE. R. (1965). Written language performance of sixth-grade children of low socioeconomic status from bilingual and monolingual backgrounds. Journal of Experimental Education, 33, 237-242.
27.
LesemanP. P. M.de JongP. F. (1998). Home literacy: Opportunity, instruction, cooperation, and social-emotional quality predicting early reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 294-318.
28.
LittlejohnJ. (1998). Federal control out of control: The Office for Civil Rights’ hiddenpolicies on bilingual education. Sterling, VA: Center for Equal Opportunity. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED426598.pdf
29.
Lindholm-LearyK.HernandezA. (2009, April). Disaggregating background factors in the achievement and attitudes of Hispanic students in dual language programs. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.
30.
MackeyW. F. (1972). Bilingual education in a binational school. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
31.
MagnusonK.LahaicC.WaldfogelJ. (2006). Preschool and school readiness in children of immigrants. Social Science Quarterly, 87(5), 169-196.
32.
MerinoB. J. (1976). Language acquisition in bilingual children: Aspects of syntacticdevelopment in English and Spanish by Chicano children in Grades K-4 (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
33.
National Research Council. (2011). Allocating federal funds for state programs for English language learners (Committee on National Statistics and Boards on Testing and Assessment). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
34.
No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). Title III: Language instruction for limited English proficient and immigrant students (107th Congress, 1st Session, December13, 2001; printed version prepared by the National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education). Washington, DC: George Washington University, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
35.
Office of Public Instruction. (2007). Criteria for the identification of limited English proficiency. Helena, MT: Author.
36.
PearsonB. Z.FernandezS. C.LewedegV.OllerD. K. (1997). The relation of input factors to lexical learning by bilingual infants. Applied Psycholinguistics, 18, 41-58.
37.
PintnerR.ArseniaS. (1937). The relation of bilingualism to verbal intelligence and school adjustment. Journal of Educational Research, 31, 255-263.
38.
ReeseL.GoldenbergC. (2008). Community literacy resources and home literacy practices among immigrant Latino families. Marriage and Family Review, 43, 109-139.
39.
ReeseL.ThompsonS. L.GoldenbergC. (2008). Variability in community characteristics and Spanish-speaking children’s home language and literacy opportunities. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29, 271-290.
40.
ScheeleA. F.LesemanP. P. M.MayoA. Y. (2010). The home language environment of monolingual and bilingual children and their language proficiency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 117-140.
41.
SkoczylasR. (1971). Home bilingual usage estimate. Gilroy, CA: R. Skoczylas.
42.
SpeeceD. L.CooperD. H. (2004). Methodological issues in research on language and early literacy from the perspective of early identification and instruction. In StoneC. A.SillimanE. R.EhrenB. J.ApelK. (Eds.), The handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 82-94). London, UK: Guilford.
43.
SpencerM. (1984). Language proficiency assessments in California: Research and deliberation toward better solutions. In RiveraC. (Ed.), Placement procedures in bilingual education: Education and policy issues (pp. 31-39). Avon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
44.
SpolskyB.MurphyP.HolmW.FerrelA. (1972). Three functional tests of oral proficiency. TESOL Quarterly, 6, 221-235.
TownsendD.CollinsP. (2008). English or Spanish? Assessing Latino/a children in the home and school languages for risk of reading disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 28(1), 61-83.
48.
TrudeauG. (1985). Multicultural Vocabulary Test–Spanish. San Diego, CA: Los Amigos Research Associates.
WolfM. K.KaoJ.GriffinN.HermanJ.BachmanP. L.ChangS.&FarnsworthT. (2008). Issues in assessing English language learners: English language proficiency measures and accommodation uses—Practice review (CRESST Report 732). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
53.
WoodcockR. J. (1991). Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery–Revised. Chicago, IL: Riverside.
54.
WoodcockR. W.Muñoz-SandovalA. F. (1995). Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery–Revised, Spanish form: Supplemental manual. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
