Using a nationally representative sample of kindergarteners and first graders, this study asks if native-language test translations help English language learners (ELLs) demonstrate their mathematics skills. ELLs frequently encounter testing hurdles because they are not proficient in English, the predominant language of assessments. Low scores on these assessments can limit ELLs’ academic opportunities through inappropriate track placements and decreased confidence. This study uses a rigorous quasi-experimental design (regression discontinuity design) and finds that Spanish-speaking ELLs perform significantly better on mathematics assessments when tested in Spanish (instead of English) in kindergarten and first grade (Cohen’s ds > 0.85). Because these and other findings suggest that test translations may provide ELLs with opportunities to demonstrate their mathematics knowledge, policy makers should consider adding translations to the list of available accommodations.
AbediJ. (2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometrics issues. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 231–257.
2.
AbediJ. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act and English language learners: Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 4–14.
3.
AbediJ.HofstetterC. H.LordC. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: Implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 1–28.
4.
AbediJ.LordC. (2001). The language factor in mathematics testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219–234.
5.
AbediJ.LordC.HofstetterC. H. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students’ NAEP math performance (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 478). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
6.
AbediJ.LordC.HofstetterC. H.Baker, (2000). Impact of accommodation strategies on English language learners’ test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16–26.
7.
AlexanderK. L.EntwisleD. R.HorseyC. S. (1997). From first grade forward: Early foundations of high school dropout. Sociology of Education, 70(2), 87–107.
8.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
9.
AugustD.HakutaK. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10.
BanduraA. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.
11.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
12.
BloomH. (2010). Modern regression discontinuity analysis. New York: MDRC.
13.
BorsboomD.MellenberghG. J.van HeerdenJ. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071.
14.
BryantM. J.HammondK. A.BocianK. M.RettigM. F.MillerC. A.CardulloR. A. (2008). School performance will fail to meet legislated benchmarks. Science, 321, 1781–1782.
15.
ButlerF. A.StevensR. (1997). Accommodation strategies for English language learners on large-scale assessments: Student characteristics and other considerations (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 448). Los Angeles: University of California National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
16.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
CongerD. (2009). Testing, time limits, and English learners: Does age of entry affect how quickly students can learn English?Social Science Research, 38(2), 383–396.
18.
CookT. D.ShadishW. R.WongV. C. (2008). Three conditions under which experiments and observational studies produce comparable estimates: New findings from within-study comparisons. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4), 724–750.
19.
HackettG.BetzN. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 261–273.
20.
HahnJ.ToddP.van der KlaauwW. (2001). Identification and estimation of treatment effects with a regression-discontinuity design. Econometrica, 69(1), 201–209.
21.
HambletonR. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages. In HambletonR. K.MerendaP. F.SpielbergerC. D., (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessments (pp. 3–38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
HofstetterC. H. (2003). Contextual and mathematics accommodation test effects for English-language learners. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(2), 159–188.
23.
JacobB. A. (2009). Test-based accountability and student achievement: An investigation of differential performance on NAEP and state assessments (CLOSUP Working Paper No. 17). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy.
24.
KiefferM. J.LesauxN. K.RiveraM.FrancisD. J. (2009). Accommodations for English language learners taking large-scale assessments: A meta-analysis on effectiveness and validity. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1168–1201.
25.
KoprivaR. J. (2000). Ensuring accuracy in testing for English language learners. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
26.
KoprivaR. J.EmickJ. E.Hipolito-DelgadoC. P.CameronC. A. (2007). Do proper accommodation assignments make a difference? Examining the impact of improved decision making on scores for English language learners. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 11–20.
27.
LaCelle-PetersonM. W.RiveraC. (1994). Is it real for kids? A framework for equitable assessment policies for English language learners. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 55–75.
28.
LeeD. S.LemieuxT. (2009). Regression discontinuity designs in economics (NBER Working Paper No. 14723). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
29.
McCraryJ. (2008). Manipulation of the running variable in the regression discontinuity design: A density test. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 698–714.
30.
MessickS. (1989a). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5–11.
31.
MessickS. (1989b). Validity. In LinnR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). New York: Macmillan.
32.
MessickS. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
33.
MurnaneR. J.WillettJ. B. (2010). Methods matter: Improving causal inference in educational and social science research. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
OakesJ. (2005). Keeping track (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
35.
PáezM. M.TaborsP. O.LópezL. M. (2007). Dual language and literacy development of Spanish-speaking preschool children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(2), 85–102.
36.
PajaresF.MillerM. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematics problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193–203.
37.
ReardonS. F.GalindoC. (2009). The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 853–891.
38.
ReardonS. F.RobinsonJ. P. (2008). Patterns and trends in racial/ethnic and socioeconomic academic achievement gaps. In LaddH. F.FiskeE. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research in education finance and policy (pp. 499–518). New York: Routledge.
39.
RiveraC.CollumE.WillnerL. S.SiaJ. K. (2006). An analysis of state assessment policies addressing the accommodation of English language learners. In RiveraC.CollumE. (Eds.), A national review of state assessment policy and practice for English language learners (pp. 1–173). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
RobinsonJ. P. (2010). Evaluating criteria for English learner reclassification: A causal-effects approach using a binding-score regression discontinuity with instrumental variables. Manuscript submitted for publication.
41.
RobinsonJ. P.ReardonS. F. (2009, March). Multiple regression discontinuity design: Implementation issues and empirical examples from education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Alexandria, VA.
42.
RowanB.MiracleA. W. (1983). Systems of ability grouping and the stratification of achievement in elementary schools. Sociology of Education, 56(3), 133–144.
43.
SchneiderB.CarnoyM.KilpatrickJ.SchmidtW. H.ShavelsonR. J. (2007). Estimating causal effects using experimental and observational designs. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
44.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
45.
Solano-FloresG. (2006). The use of generalizability (G) theory in the testing of linguistic minorities. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(1), 13–22.
46.
Solano-FloresG. (2008). Who is given tests in what language by whom, when, and where? The need for probabilistic views of language in the testing of English language learners. Educational Researcher, 37(4), 189–199.
47.
Solano-FloresG.TrumbullE. (2008). In what language should English language learners be tested? In KoprivaR. J. (Ed.), Improving testing for English language learners (pp. 168–200). New York: Routledge.
48.
SolórzanoR. W. (2007). High stakes testing: Issues, implications, and remedies for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 78(2), 260–329.
49.
StansfieldC. W. (2003). Test translation and adaptation in public education in the USA. Language Testing, 20(2), 189–207.
50.
StevensT.OlivarezA.LanW. Y.Tallend-RunnelsM. K. (2004). Role of mathematics self-efficacy and motivation in mathematics performance across ethnicity. Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 208–221.
51.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). User’s manual for the ECLS-K base year public-use data files and electronic codebook (NCES 2001-029). Washington, DC: Author.
52.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). ECLS–K psychometric report for kindergarten through 1st grade (NCES 2002-005). Washington, DC: Author.
53.
WillnerL. S.RiveraC.AcostaB. D. (2008). Descriptive study of state assessment policies for accommodating English language learners. Arlington, VA: George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
