A key concept in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) is the learner as an agent of social change. “Language education should therefore create learning contexts that encourage learners to grow in their role as social agents, as autonomous and responsible language users. Learners as social agents can then take responsibility for their learning process, and become powerful lifelong learners” (https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/the-user/learners-as-a-social-agent). Consider the burden of responsibility we may inadvertently place upon young learners by assessing their language at an age where it is still in early (and very dynamic) development. Do we want to test language at an age where we would not yet expect them to take responsibility for their learning process independently?
Assessment OF versus FOR Learning
Butler (2016) cites the inherent issues with assessment of learning among young learners and suggests the value of instead assessment for learning. Because learning development is dynamic among early learners, formal assessment of learning risks being an unreliable indication of actual learning or competency. However, targeted and intentional assessment for learning can integrate gracefully with instructional strategies, supporting learners in their content learning and mastery.
Some may ask, should we test language learners younger than age 7 or 8 at all? Certainly, there is room for assessment for learning, designed to support development and continued learning. But when we start using assessment of learning with an intent to monitor specific outcomes, it may introduce the risk of unreliability and inaccurate prediction of progress or achievement. In fact, standardized testing is often implemented beginning in grade 3 or 4, when most U.S. schools begin to introduce content through reading, rather than testing younger learners. Some schools may opt to test earlier with specific objectives in mind, such as identifying potential developmental delays or exceptional ability (aptitude testing) or measuring understanding of instructional material presented (achievement testing).
What is Being Assessed and Why?
You might think of two key questions with early learners:
- What is the test designed to measure?
- What is the intended outcome of testing at this age?
Is the assessment designed to measure vocabulary size or mastery of sight words (as we often see in assessment of early literacy development)? Is it designed to check for understanding as increasingly complex ideas are presented to learners? Is it a review of basic facts or information (e.g., math quiz of basic addition)? Is it designed to measure fundamental skills needed before building into more complex ideas (e.g., sight words and phrases before full sentences)? When it comes to measuring language ability, is the assessment designed to measure ability in the/a first language as well as in additional language(s)?
When assessing language proficiency in one or more languages, consider the goal with testing among early learners. Is it to qualify for specific programming (e.g., qualification for English Language Development coursework)? Is it to monitor language development (e.g. in dual immersion programs), to evaluate literacy development, to monitor progress, etc.?
Literacy development changes significantly between early grades and 3rd/4th grades, making it difficult to accurately assess among young learners (Byrne et al, 2009). Likewise, literacy in a second language is difficult to reliably assess among younger learners (Roessingh, 2009). In other words, literacy development in a first language typically isn’t high enough to reliably assess reading and writing skills in a second language among younger children. If your desired outcome is to measure language development in multiple languages, waiting to test until 3rd or 4th grade can significantly improve the reliability of assessment results, thus making an outcome like progress monitoring more attainable.
Language Assessments for Grades 3+
How do you identify the best age group for an assessment? Technical documentation, external studies of validity and reliability, or test user manuals can provide valuable insights around what a test is designed to assess and for what age groups it is best suited. Although some test providers may support use of a test outside of its intended parameters, ACTFL actively works to preserve the validity and reliability of their assessments for all ages of learners by supporting test use as designed.
The AAPPL is an assessment designed to assess world language learners in grades 3 through 12. Similarly, other assessments on the market indicate a targeted use for grades 3 and higher in their technical documentation. (Note: only the Interpersonal Listening and Speaking component is available for grades 3-4; all AAPPL components are available for grades 5-12).
Using the assessment outside of this intended use and test-taker population crosses the line of test validity, and, therefore, accuracy of results cannot be ensured. Knowing a test was validated for use in grades 3 or higher can give you confidence and peace of mind as you target your assessment strategies and leverage test data for various objectives.
While every school will identify what assessments to use and how to use them, you can help your school consider the risks and opportunities that come with assessing young learners. To learn more language assessment options for your elementary aged learners, contact Language Testing International, the exclusive licensee of ACTFL at sales@languagetesting.com.
Sources
Bacsa, É., & Csíkos, C. (2016). The role of individual differences in the development of listening comprehension in the early stages of language learning. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives. New York: Springer.
Benigno, V., & de Jong, J. (2016). A CEFR-based inventory of YL descriptors: Principles and challenges. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives. New York: Springer.
Butler, Y. G. (2016). Self-assessment of and for young learners’ foreign language learning. Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives, 291-315.Cambridge, E. S. O. L. (2007). Cambridge Young Learners English Tests-Handbook. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, ESOL Examinations.
Byrne, B., Coventry, W. L., Olson, R. K., Samuelsson, S., Corley, R., Willcutt, E. G., … & DeFries, J. C. (2009). Genetic and environmental influences on aspects of literacy and language in early childhood: Continuity and change from preschool to Grade 2. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(3), 219-236.
Council of Europe. Council for Cultural Co-operation. Education Committee. Modern Languages Division. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, T. L., & Malone, M. E. (2018). A validity argument to support the ACTFL Assessment of Performance Toward Proficiency in Languages (AAPPL). Foreign Language Annals, 51(3), 548-574.
Indrisano, R., & Chall, J. S. (1995). Literacy development. Journal of Education, 177(1), 63-83.
Roessingh, H., & Elgie, S. (2009). Early language and literacy development among young English language learners: Preliminary insights from a longitudinal study. TESL Canada Journal, 24-45.
