Project
6.3
A Sociocultural Approach to Non-Discriminatory Assessment for Exceptional
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students
Any information taken from the following
documents must be referenced:
Kline,S.R. (1999) Alternative Assessment of Exceptional Culturally and
Linguistically Diverse Students [On-Line]. Available: http://www.crede/Reports/intsummain.html
A Sociocultural Approach to Non-Discriminatory Assessment for Exceptional Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students
Sybil Kline, University of California, Santa Cruz
Although federal regulations require assessment materials used in evaluating and placing children with disabilities "be selected and administered so as not to be racially or culturally discriminatory" (C.F.R. §300.531), culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students continue to be over-represented in programs for children with learning disabilities and under-represented in programs for gifted and talented students (Artiles & Trent, 2000). It is suspected that evaluation and placement practices, which have been ruled to be discriminatory toward some CLD students, could be contributing to this problem. During the past hundred years, schools have commonly used intelligence quotient (IQ) tests to evaluate cognitive ability for special education placement purposes. But the practice of using IQ tests to evaluate CLD students has been questionable for at least thirty years, since California courts found such tests racially and culturally biased (Larry P. v Wilson Riles, 1972) and inappropriate for limited English proficient students (Diana v California State Board of Education, 1970). These rulings indicate that the practice of using IQ tests with CLD students does not meet the federal mandate for nondiscriminatory assessment.
IQ tests are typically interpreted as an index of fixed heritable ability. This interpretation has led to the nature-nurture debate over the relative influences of environmental and genetic factors on cognitive development. Understandably, this debate has been particularly sensitive in regard to CLD students whose sociocultural influences on development vary from the mainstream U.S. population. Research (Kline, 1996) suggests that IQ tests measure both nature and nurture, but are interpreted simply as a measure of nature. It is suspected that excluding sociocultural influences on cognitive development in the interpretation of academic intelligence tests has contributed to the over-representation of CLD students in special education programs.
CREDE project 6.3, Alternative Assessment for Exceptional Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students, is developing the "Opportunity Model" as a non-discriminatory approach to special education evaluation to more fairly identify and serve learning disabled and gifted CLD students. Key features of this model are a socioculturally-based alternative to the IQ test, and the introduction of the concepts of "teachability", "opportunity niche", and "cognitive nurturance" into the special education eligibility and intervention process.
Both nature and nurture
The PASS+S Dynamic Assessment
An important contribution to the non-discriminatory assessment of
CLD students is the PASS+S Dynamic Assessment (PASS+S), an alternative
cognitive assessment designed to measure the model of cognitive processing
formulated by A.R. Luria from medical research to discover the neuropsychological
foundations of the cultural-historical theory. The subtests on the
PASS+S are tailored to measure how the cognitive processes defined
by Luria are used in the classroom, and thus provide a measure of
cognitive competence for schooling. These processes also match those
required for special education evaluations and provide useful results
for school practitioners. The PASS+S includes an opportunity norm
sample for LEP students; assessment materials reduced to four shapes
and six colors; administration in Spanish or English, and a standardized
dynamic format.
The Opportunity Niche and Cognitive Nurturance
This CREDE project takes the position that the cognitive development
of CLD students should be evaluated within a sociocultural norm sample.
The method developed by this project incorporates the three planes
of analysis proposed by Rogoff (1995) for investigating sociocultural
influences on development. These three planes are assigned demographic
descriptors and collapsed to create subsets, or opportunity niches,
of a student sample. Opportunity niches provide appropriate comparison
groups for evaluating the cognitive development of CLD students by
grouping students with similar daily routines, which provide practice
with higher mental functioning, or cognitive nurturance. This integrates
the informal education of students from diverse backgrounds into the
assessment process and allows students to be compared to peers who
have had similar opportunities to practice and develop the skills
measured on cognitive assessments. This method reduces the bias embedded
in cognitive assessments that compare students from groups which vary
across preparation for school-like activities and cognitive demands.
Teachability
Vygotsky introduced the concept of the zone of proximal development
(ZPD) as an appropriate unit of analysis for assessing cognitive development.
ZPD ranges from a learner’s assisted to independent skills on
a particular task. It can be measured using a dynamic assessment which
typically includes a pre-test, mediation, and a posttest (Lidz, 1991).
Dynamic assessment results provide information on a student’s
response to instruction rather than simply measuring the initial knowledge
a student brings to a testing situation. The measurement of a student’s
learning ability when interacting with a teacher is coined teachability
by this CREDE project, and is considered essential for the fair evaluation
of students from various opportunity contexts. This sociocultural
model assumes that teachability develops with practice and is requisite
for academic success, and thus recommends that the nurturing of teachability
be incorporated into the educational intervention plans for exceptional
CLD students. Future work planned for this project will attempt to
incorporate the CREDE Five Standards of Effective Education, which
map onto Luria’s cognitive processes, into culturally responsive
instruction for CLD students.
Conclusion
The Opportunity Model suggests a guideline for integrating innovative
principles into special education procedures to help ensure a nondiscriminatory
assessment of exceptional CLD students. It incorporates the position
that what is practiced is what develops, and what develops is reflected
on measures of cognitive processing (Kline, 1996). Therefore, a nondiscriminatory
assessment must consider the contributions of both nature and nurture
to cognitive development. The method suggested here is to conduct
a dynamic assessment using sociocultural norms; This provides a rating
of a student’s teachability in comparison to sociocultural peers,
who theoretically have experienced similar cognitive nurturance. This
socioculturally-based model considers a dynamic assessment within
the opportunity niche to be the essence of a nondiscriminatory assessment.
References
Artiles, A., & Trent, S. (2000). Disproportionality in special and gifted programs. In C.R. Reynolds, & E. Flectcher-Jantzen (Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Diana v California State Board of Education (1970). No. C-70-37, United States District court of Northern California. .
Kline, S. (1996). Sociocultural influences on the development of cognitive processing as measured by the PASS+S Dynamic Assessment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Califonia, Santa Cruz.
Larry P. v Wilson Riles (1972). United States District Court, N.D. California.
Lidz, C.S. (1991). Practitioner's guide to dynamic assessment. New York: Guilford Press
Luria, A.R. (1976). Cognitive development; Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, C. F. R., 530. (1997). .
Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In P. M. J. Goodnow, & F. Kessel (Ed.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp.139-164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky. Cambridge: Blackwell.
