Purpose
The purpose of this study was to ascertain the extent to which school-based speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) assessment practices with individual English learners (ELs) align with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines. Specifically, we were interested in examining SLPs' use of multiple tools during individual EL assessments, as well as relationships between practices and number of types of training experiences.
Method
School-based SLPs in a Midwestern state were recruited in person or via e-mail to complete an online survey pertaining to assessment. Of the 562 respondents who completed the survey, 222 (39.5%) indicated past or present experience with ELs, and thus, their data were included in the analyses. The questionnaire solicited information about respondent's demographics, caseload composition, perceived knowledge and skills and training experiences pertaining to working with ELs (e.g., graduate school, self-teaching, professional conferences), and assessment practices used in schools.
Results
The majority of respondents reported using multiple tools rather than a single tool with
each
EL they assess. Case history and observation were tools used
often
or
always
by the largest number of participants. SLPs who used multiple tools reported using both direct (e.g., standardized tests, dynamic assessment) and indirect tools (e.g., case history, interviews). Analyses revealed low to moderate positive associations between tools, as well as the use of speech-language samples and number of types of training experiences.
Conclusions
School-based SLPs in the current study reported using EL assessment practices that comply with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines for EL assessment. These results enhance our understanding of school-based SLPs' assessment practices with ELs and may be indicative of a positive shift toward evidence-based practice.
Experiencing Differentiated Instructions as the Effort of Promoting Reading Comprehension Level
