A comparative study of the Language Assessment Battery, the Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey and the portfolio assessment results of language learners.

摘要

Second language proficiency of bilingual students when assessed with different instruments may lead to incongruence in outcome. This study compared the results of the Language Assessment Battery (LAB), the Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey (W-MLS) and the Language Portfolio Assessment (LPA) of bilingual students at the elementary level.; The correlational analyses conducted to compare the tests and portfolio assessment results of the students concluded that they all agreed on which students passed or failed. However, for each of these comparisons, there was lack of agreement for at least 12% of the subjects. Though not statistically significant, some student placement in or out of the bilingual program would be affected by the choice of instrument selected for placement.; These correlational analyses were also performed for the subtests (Oral and Reading/Writing) of the LAB, W-MLS and LPA. Here again, the same students were identified for passing or failing the subtests.; Additional analyses were performed to compare test results when the subjects were divided for grade level clusters (primary and intermediate) and for native language (Spanish and Haitian Creole). Here, differences were noted in the analyses. When the results of students in the primary grades were compared to those of the intermediate grades, the LAB and the LPA exited and retained the primary grade students at a higher rate than those in the intermediate grades. The W-MLS exited all students at the same rate. When the students' test results were compared in function of their native language, the LAB and the W-MLS exited all students at the same rate. However, more Spanish speaking students exited the bilingual program than the Haitian Creole students did when the results of the LPA were used.; The teachers of the participating students were interviewed to determine their perceived reasons for the outcome of the analyses. Their reasons focussed mainly on the individual characteristics of the students, the design of the tests and the resources of the bilingual program.