Planning a Special Education Evaluation for Multilingual Learners

Purpose 

A linguistic profile captures how a student uses each of their languages across contexts, settings, and language domains to understand others and to make themselves understood. When the team has a solid, shared understanding of a student's unique Linguistic Profile, they can select appropriate assessments, choose the right language of administration, and interpret results fairly and accurately.

The profile should describe validity and reliability considerations across all five language domains: reading, writing, speaking, listening, and viewing.

See: CDE Linguistic Profile Resource

Purpose

Every ML is entitled to a Language Instruction Educational Program (LIEP), structured, evidence-based services designed to develop English proficiency. Before drawing conclusions about academic performance, teams must examine whether the student has had meaningful access to quality language instruction and has been making expected progress. If the LIEP has not been consistently provided, academic struggles may reflect that gap not disability.

Grounded in federal requirements under ESSA and Colorado law. C.R.S. 22-24-101 (ELPA); 20 U.S.C. §6301.

Purpose

Academic data should be interpreted using Like-Peer Comparative data whenever possible, and within a system where such comparisons inform programmatic adjustments. When interpreting Behavioral data, teams must carefully consider the child's language proficiency, cultural background, and lived experience, including the potential impact of competing cultural norms and expectations.

For linguistically loaded tasks — such as reading and writing — teams should note the child's assessed language proficiency and consider whether they could understand what was being asked. Teams should also consider how pervasive cultural bias in test items and a child's potential lack of exposure to certain background knowledge may affect construct validity.

See CDE’s resource on CDE Like-Peer Comparative Data resource.

Purpose

Evaluations must be individualized and tailored to each student's demonstrated areas of concern. Because language is most often the vehicle for assessment, teams must be deliberate about identifying only the areas where formal evaluation is necessary to avoid over-testing Multilingual Learners.

IDEA is clear: evaluations must be comprehensive enough to address referral concerns but must also avoid unnecessary assessment. (20 U.S.C. §1414(b)(2)–(3); 34 C.F.R. §300.304)

Purpose

To identify assessment tools and methods that will yield the most accurate, meaningful, and equitable information about the student’s abilities and needs across languages and contexts. The multidisciplinary team should carefully consider whether each assessment is linguistically and culturally responsive, appropriate for the student’s experiences and proficiency levels, and capable of measuring the intended construct rather than reflecting differences in language proficiency, cultural background, prior educational opportunity, or familiarity with dominant cultural norms.

IDEA requires that assessments must:

• Be selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis;
• Be provided in the child’s native language or other mode of communication;
• Be used only for the purposes for which they are valid and reliable; and
• Include a variety of tools and strategies rather than relying on a single measure. (34 C.F.R. §300.304)

Purpose

Now that assessment tools and methods have been selected for the child, the team must identify the most appropriate evaluators based on their linguistic and cultural competence and their ability to appropriately interpret the data gleaned while following local guidelines. Assigning the wrong evaluator can undermine the validity of the evaluation. Cross-disciplinary collaboration is essential, and teams should reach out to leaders for support as needed.

IDEA requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary evaluation conducted by trained personnel. (34 C.F.R. §§300.304–300.305)

Purpose

Before finalizing the plan, the team should evaluate it as a whole: Will the selected assessments yield results that are accurate, interpretable, and legally defensible for this specific student? Known limitations must be documented, and multiple data sources must be planned to triangulate conclusions.

IDEA requires that assessments yield valid, reliable, and non-discriminatory data to support eligibility decisions. (34 C.F.R. §300.304(c))

Purpose

Clear, thorough documentation is the foundation of a legally and ethically defensible evaluation process. Every key decision must be recorded with explicit justification. Documentation protects the student, the team, and the district and ensures that evaluation results are interpreted appropriately during eligibility determinations.

IDEA requires documentation that supports the transparent interpretation of standardized scores and the integration and synthesis of multiple data sources. (34 C.F.R. §300.306)

Abedi, J. (2006). Psychometric issues in the assessment of English language learners. Teachers College Record, 108(11), 2282–2303.

Colorado Department of Education. (n.d.). English Language Proficiency Act (ELPA). https://www.cde.state.co.us/cde_english/elpa

Colorado Department of Education. (n.d.). English language proficiency assessments. https://www.cde.state.co.us/cde_english/english-language-proficiency-assessment

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§1414(b)(2)–(5) (2004).

Kieffer, M. J. (2008). Catching up or falling behind? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 851–868.

Ortiz, S. O., Flanagan, D. P., & Dynda, A. M. (2008). Best practices in working with culturally and linguistically diverse children and families. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 1721–1738). NASP.

Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J., & Witmer, S. (2013). Assessment in special and inclusive education (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Solano-Flores, G. (2008). Who is given tests in what language? Educational Researcher, 37(4), 189–199.

Solano-Flores, G., & Trumbull, E. (2003). Examining language in context. Educational Researcher, 32(2), 3–13.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. §§300.304–300.306.

C.R.S. 22-24-101 (Colorado English Language Proficiency Act).

20 U.S.C. §6301 (Every Student Succeeds Act).