Accurately assessing  the academic knowledge of these students in English is challenging. Students with Limited English Proficiency Performed below Progress Goals in 2004 in Two-Thirds of States, but States We Studied Are Working to Improve Student Academic Performance

In school year 2003-2004, the percentage of students with limited English  proficiency reported by states as scoring proficient on a state’s language  arts and mathematics tests was lower than the state’s annual progress  goals (established for all students) in nearly two-thirds of the 48 states for  which we obtained data. However, factors  other than student academic performance can influence whether a state  meets its progress goals, such as which students a state includes in the  limited English proficient group and how a state establishes its annual  progress goals. North  Carolina officials reported that they oversample for students with limited  English proficiency to ensure that these students are adequately  represented in the field tests. Both Education’s Peer Reviews and Our Group of Experts Raised Concerns Regarding State Efforts to Ensure Valid and Reliable Results

Education’s recent NCLBA peer reviews of 38 states found that 25 did not  provide sufficient evidence on the validity or reliability of results for  students with limited English proficiency, although states have been  required to include these students in their assessments since 1994. Members indicated that some  states may need assistance to conduct appropriate analyses that will offer  useful information about the validity of their academic assessments for  these students. Our review of state Web  sites found available documentation on accommodations for 42 states. According to our expert group and our review of the relevant literature,  research is lacking on what specific accommodations are appropriate for  students with limited English proficiency, as well as their effectiveness in  improving the validity of assessment results. Our group of experts told us that this type of assessment is  difficult and costly to develop. Development of a valid  native language assessment involves more than a simple translation of the  original test; in most situations, a process of test development and  validation similar to that of the nontranslated test is recommended to  ensure the validity of the test. Many States Are Still in the Process of Establishing the Validity and Reliability of English Language Proficiency Assessments

Officials in our study states and test developers we interviewed reported  that they commonly apply generally accepted test development  procedures in the development of English language proficiency  assessments, but some are still in the process of documenting the validity  and reliability of these assessments. Education Has Provided Assistance, but States Reported Need for Additional Guidance and Flexibility

Education has offered states a variety of technical assistance to help them  appropriately assess students with limited English proficiency, such as  providing training and expert reviews of their assessment systems, as well  as flexibility in assessing these students. However, Education has issued  little written guidance on how states are expected to assess and track the  English proficiency of these students, leaving state officials unclear about  Education’s expectations. To support states’ efforts to incorporate these  students into their accountability systems, Education has offered states  some flexibilities in how they track progress goals for these students. These officials indicated that additional flexibility is needed to  ensure that the federal progress measures accurately track the academic  progress of these students. However, officials in about  one-third of the 33 states we visited or directly contacted expressed  uncertainty about implementing these requirements. Further, Education noted that it is in the process of completing a  regulation on flexibility for these students. Specifically, we asked the group to discuss the  following questions:    To meet the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA),  what steps should states take to ensure the validity and reliability of  language arts and mathematics assessments for students with limited  English proficiency? How can the U.S. Department of Education assist states in their efforts  to meet NCLBA’s assessment and accountability requirements for  students with limited English proficiency? Appendix V: Enhanced Assessment Consortia Participation

	World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium

Mountain West  Assessment  Consortium (MWAC)
Pennsylvania Enhanced  Assessment Grant (PA  EAG)
Assessing Comprehension  and Communication in  English State-to-State for  English Language Learners  (ACCESS for ELLs)
English Language  Development Assessment  (ELDA)
Comprehensive English  Language Learning  Assessment (CELLA)

Appendix VI: English Language Proficiency Assessments Used in the 2005-2006 School Year, by State

Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Stanford English Language Proficiency Test  MAC II (Maculaitis Assessment of Competencies) Test of English  Language Proficiency  California English Language Development Test   LAS (Language Assessment System) Links  Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
LAS (Language Assessment System) Links  Mountain West Assessment Consortium test items  Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
LAS (Language Assessment System) Links  English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
Kansas English Language Proficiency Assessment   2004 IDEA Proficiency Test or Language Assessment Scales (LAS)
English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
LAS (Language Assessment System) Links  English Language Proficiency Assessment(includes Mountain  West Consortium test items)
Test of Emerging Academic English, Minnesota Student Oral  Language Observation Matrix, and checklist for reading and writing  for K-2 students  Stanford English Language Proficiency Test  MAC II (Maculaitis Assessment of Competencies) Test of English  Language Proficiency  Iowa Test of Basic Skills, Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey  (English), or other state-approved test  English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
LAS (Language Assessment System) Links  Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
New Mexico English Language Proficiency Assessment (includes  Mountain West Consortium test items)
New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test   2004 IDEA Proficiency Test, Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey  (English), and Language Assessment Scales (LAS)
English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Stanford English Language Proficiency Test  Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
Dakota English Language Proficiency assessment   Comprehensive English Language Learning Assessment (PA EAG)
Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System; consists  of Reading Proficiency Tests in English and Texas Observation  Protocols  Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
Stanford English Language Proficiency Test  English Language Development Assessment (SCASS)
Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (WIDA)
State allows school districts to individually choose tests. GAO-06-661. GAO-06-25.
Why GAO Did This Study

For the Spanish translation of the highlights page for this document, see GAO-06-1111 . Ley para que ningun nino se quede atras: La ayuda del Departamento de Educacion puede contribuir a que los Estados midan mejor el progreso de los alumnos que no dominan bien el ingles. GAO-06-1111 , Julio de 2006. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA) focused attention on the academic achievement of more than 5 million students with limited English proficiency. Obtaining valid test results for these students is challenging, given their language barriers. This report describes (1) the extent to which these students are meeting annual academic progress goals, (2) what states have done to ensure the validity of their academic assessments, (3) what states are doing to ensure the validity of their English language proficiency assessments, and (4) how the U.S. Department of Education (Education) is supporting states' efforts to meet NCLBA's assessment requirements for these students. To collect this information, we convened a group of experts and studied five states (California, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Texas). We also conducted a state survey and reviewed state and Education documents.

What GAO Found

For the Spanish translation of the highlights page for this document, see GAO-06-1111 . Ley para que ningun nino se quede atras: La ayuda del Departamento de Educacion puede contribuir a que los Estados midan mejor el progreso de los alumnos que no dominan bien el ingles. GAO-06-1111 , Julio de 2006. In the 2003-2004 school year, state data showed that the percentage of students with limited English proficiency scoring proficient on a state's language arts and mathematics tests was lower than the state's annual progress goals in nearly two-thirds of the 48 states for which we obtained data. Further, our review of data 49 states submitted to Education showed that in most states, these students generally did not perform as well as other student groups on state mathematics tests. Factors other than student knowledge, such as how a state establishes its annual progress goals, can influence whether states meet their goals. For their academic assessments, officials in our five study states reported taking steps to follow generally accepted test development procedures and to ensure the validity and reliability of these tests for students with limited English proficiency, such as reviewing test questions for bias. However, our group of experts expressed concerns about whether all states are assessing these students in a valid manner, noting that some states lack the resources and technical expertise to take appropriate steps to ensure the validity of tests for these students. Further, Education's peer reviews of assessments in 38 states found that 25 states did not provide adequate evidence to ensure the validity or reliability of academic test results for these students. To improve the validity of these test results, most states offer accommodations, such as a bilingual dictionary. However, our experts reported that research is lacking on what accommodations are effective in mitigating language barriers. A minority of states used native language or alternate assessments for students with limited English proficiency, but these tests are costly to develop and are not appropriate for all students. Many states are implementing new English language proficiency assessments in 2006 to meet NCLBA requirements; as a result, complete information on their validity and reliability is not yet available. In 2006, 22 states used tests developed by one of four state consortia. Consortia and state officials reported taking steps to ensure the validity of these tests, such as conducting field tests. A 2005 Education-funded technical review of available documentation for 17 English language proficiency tests found insufficient documentation of the validity of these assessments' results. Education has offered a variety of technical assistance to help states assess students with limited English proficiency, such as peer reviews of states' academic assessments. However, Education has issued little written guidance to states on developing English language proficiency tests. Officials in one-third of the 33 states we visited or directly contacted told us they wanted more guidance about how to develop tests that meet NCLBA requirements. Education has offered states some flexibility in how they assess students with limited English proficiency, but officials in our study states told us that additional flexibility is needed to ensure that progress measures appropriately track the academic progress of these students.