Recommendations to Improve Accessibility of ELP Assessments
Drawing from the evidence in the field, we present general recommendations for improvements to ensure maximal accessibility to the target range of students eligible to take general ELP assessments and not alternate ELP assessments (those specifically designed to meet the needs of ELSCDs).
Recommendations for accessible assessment development practices include the previously mentioned universal design considerations. However, because of the unique challenges in developing an ELP assessment for ELSWDs (as discussed previously) that is more universally accessible for all students, we discuss additional recommendations to consider in improving the accessibility of ELP assessments. Understanding that states and multi-state consortia may produce computer-based as well as paper-based assessments (such as those available for students needing specific accommodations), we view the recommendations presented in the next sections as applicable for both computer-based and paper-based contexts.
Clearly Define the Constructs to Be Measured in an Inclusive and Universally Accessible Manner
In addition to identifying the target population, it is necessary to provide an accurate, explicit definition of the construct® (AERA et al., 2014; ETS, 2015) to consider accessibility implications from design and onward. As federal legislation requires that ELP assessments measure the four language domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing, many state ELP assessments are designed according to these four domains to meet accountability purposes. However, ELSWDs may access one or more of these language domains in non-traditional ways. For instance, students who are deaf/hard of hearing often experience challenges with ELP assessments because of the nature of the construct and the target skills to measure the construct. These students participate in mainstream settings through accommodations such as manual communication systems (e.g., sign language) or other assistive devices. In these instances, students may listen with their eyes and voice with their hands. This is in contrast to the typical sen-sory-oriented skills of listening with one’s ears and voicing with one’s mouth. Building on the previous recommendations, documenting the knowledge, skills, and abilities associated with the construct is necessary so that assessment developers can then design task types and develop items to fit with the allowed accommodations that precisely reflect the intended construct in a valid and reliable manner. When the construct is clearly defined, “all construct irrelevant cognitive, sensory, emotional, and physical barriers can be removed” (Thompson, Thurlow, & Malouf, 2004, p. 6).
Identify the Range of Test Taker Characteristics from Disabilities to Accommodations in Need
Critical issues related to accessible assessment development are assumptions that disabilities are static, well-defined categories and that accommodations are universally beneficial when assigned to students. To design an optimally accessible assessment for all students, it is critical to clearly identify and understand the target population of test takers (AERA et al., 2014; ETS, 2015). Sample questions to ask are What is the likely range of disabilities of the target participants taking the assessment? What sensory or cognitive characteristics do these students use to listen, speak, read, and write in English-speaking contexts? What are their commonly used accommodations? What are the ages, language, cultural and educational backgrounds and how might these characteristics impact their accommodations? What are the characteristics of the test examiners who might serve these students and conduct the administrations of the accommodated ELP assessments? Having these demographic and other characteristics of the test taking population detailed and documented at the onset allows for the design and development of appropriate and accessible items targeted to specific yet diverse groups of test takers.
Returning to our example of students with visual impairments, one possible path forward to enhance the accessibility of the assessment is to go beyond identifying the disability by acknowledging how the disability can manifest differently across students (e.g., low vision, blindness, congenital, early onset, late onset, etc.). These details may impact the range of accommodations that students have access to and are familiar with using. Taking this information into account, developing task types that are more universally accessible and avoid or minimize the use of graphics and avoid references to experiences that require visual acuity could be achieved sooner in the development process. Where graphics are determined to be necessary, art guidelines could be developed with this population in mind so that any graphics created could more easily be adapted into tactile graphics and/or picture descriptions could be written that are appropriate in terms of length, content, and the population, following standard braille and tactile graphic guidelines and for computer-based assessments, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines conformance (WCAG; see Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, 2019).
