April Ether Mark Baxmeyer Mary Mahon Advised ... - jinaweb.org
Assessment for Children Learning English as an Additional … › 2018 › ... · 2018-03-22 ·...
Transcript of Assessment for Children Learning English as an Additional … › 2018 › ... · 2018-03-22 ·...
Assessment for Children Learning English as an Additional Language
Claudine Bowyer-CraneDept of Education
[email protected]@ccrane74
Collaborators
• Dept of Human Communication Sciences, University of Sheffield
– Dr Silke Fricke
– Dr Blanca Schaefer
• Dept of English, University of Chester
– Dr Frank Herrman
Assessment in All Languages
• Assessment in ALL languages a child speaks is important– Tease apart children who may have difficulties
with language from those who simply lack proficiency in English
• Challenges– Norms
– Concept vs Lexical item (e.g. Gross et al, 2014)
– Culturally appropriate (e.g. Teoh et al, 2012)
Norms
• English norms not appropriate for children learning EAL
• Mahon & Crutchley, 2006 – BPVS
– 165 children in 3 schools in London Boroughs (n=96 EAL)
– Ages 4 – 10 years
– Raw scores showed weaker performance for EAL children.
Adapted from Mahon & Crutchley, 2006
Lexical Item vs ConceptN = 98 aged 5-
7yrs
40 monolingual English
39 simultaneous Spanish/English
19 Sequential Spanish/English
Receptive:• Peabody Picture Vocabulary• Test de Vocabulario en
Imágenes PeabodyExpressive• Woodcock Johnson III
Picture Vocabulary• Batería III Woodcock-Muñoz
Pruebas de aprovechamiento
ResultsTypical Scoring:English Receptive Vocabulary -Monolinguals < Simultaneous < SequentialEnglish Expressive Vocabulary –Monolinguals < Simultaneous < Sequential
Conceptual Scoring:English Receptive Vocabulary -Monolinguals = Simultaneous < SequentialEnglish Expressive Vocabulary –Monolinguals < Simultaneous = Sequential
Adapted from Gross et al, 2014
Culturally Appropriate (e.g. Teoh et al, 2012)
Expressive Vocabulary (CELF preschool)
Singapore English Action Picture Test
Poorer performance on EV test compared to UK norms (mean 6.96, SD
3.34)
A higher proportion of children identified as at-
risk using CELF than SEAPT
Importance of Vocabulary
• Knowledge of basic vocabulary is vital for communication
• Vocabulary is a fundamental building block for reading comprehension (e.g. Muter et al, 2004; Ricketts et al, 2007; Bowyer-Crane et al, 2016)
• Children with EAL tend to have poor expressive and receptive vocabulary knowledge
• And poor knowledge of multi-word phrases (e.g. Smith & Murphy, 2014; Smith & Bowyer-Crane, in prep)
Study Receptive Expressive
EAL ML EAL ML
Burgoyne et al, 2009
73.33 (12.90) 83.48 (11.41)
58.13 (12.19) 71.98 (13.95)
Burgoyne et al, 2013 80.44 (9.35) 92.25 (10.57) 58.88 (9.78) 79.44 (13.22)
Bowyer-Crane et al, 2016 - - 8.31 (6.73) 12.89 (5.76)
Babayigit, 2014 83.28 (16.36) 100.45 (14/15) - -
Babayigit, 2015 86.70 (15.54) 99.45 (12.46) - -
Role of Vocabulary
Longitudinal e.g.
All children improved but EAL
children < ML children at all
timepoints
Hutchinson et al, 2003• Receptive and Expressive
vocabulary • Years 2, 3 and 4
Burgoyne et al, 2011• Receptive and Expressive
Vocabulary• Years 3 and 4
Bowyer-Crane et al, 2016
Expressive Vocabulary
Reception and Year 1
Relationship between Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension in
Children with EAL
Vocabulary Knowledge e.g.
- Hutchinson et al, 2003
- Burgoyne et al, 2011
- Babayigit, 2014Reading Comprehension
Assessment: Receptive Vocabulary App
• User-friendly
• Quick to administer
• Presents instructions and items in child’s first language including English
• Data recorded directly to database
Selecting Items
• Kuperman et al (2012) – 63 verbs/74 nouns
– Concrete
– Culturally unbiased
• Online questionnaire
– Native speakers
– Do the words exist in …..?
– Does the word have a direct translation?
– Write word down in home language
• Final selection 22 nouns/22 verbs plus distractors
Report for Practitioners
Pilot 1: Schaefer et al, 2015
10 schools
EAL = 72
English version = 72
Home language = 38
ML = 67
• Weak language skills
• Composite– Early Repetition Battery
– Expressive Vocabulary
– Sentence Structure
• Low SES areas
• All taking part in RCT
• Beginning of Year 1
• Noun version onlyCzechn=6
Polishn=2
Punjabin=12
Urdun=18
ResultsChildren Measure N Mean SD Min/Max
Monolingual
BPVS Raw 67 69.31 14.2 39-92
CELF Raw 67 22.79 7.09 6-36
RVS Eng 67 17.12 2.14 8-20
Multilingual
BPVS Raw 72 61.65 15.10 15-85
CELF Raw 72 18.19 8.59 2-34
RVS Eng 72 17.04 2.13 12-20
RVS Home 38 15.13 4.63 5-20
Results
Groups N Chronbachs Alpha
RVS version
CELF Expressive Voc
BPVS RVS English
Monolingual 67 - English .324** .306*
Multilingual 72 - English .508*** .597***
38 .88 Home Language
.214 .391* .673***
Combined 139 .60 English .410*** .456***
Pilot 2: Schaefer et al, in prep
N= 80
(age 3:0-6;6)
44 monolingual German speakers
21 German-Turkish speakers
15 German-Polish speakers
Receptive Vocabulary Screener in German and Turkish/Polish
German receptive vocabulary (standardised) Patholinguistic Diagnosis, K(auschke & Siegmueller, 2002)
Results Children Measure N Mean SD
Monolingual
RVS German Nouns 44 17.95 1.26
RVS German Verbs 44 16.41 2.4
Bilingual
RVS German Nouns 36 15.11 3.68
RVS German Verbs36 13.86 3.80
RVS Polish – nouns 15 16.47 1.96
RVS Polish - verbs 15 15.20 2.65
RVS Turkish - nouns 21 14.19 3.66
RVS Turkish - verbs 21 13.62 3.58
Results Group Version PD nouns PD verbs
Monolingual RVS German - nouns .452** .404***
RVS German – verbs .266 ns .671***
Bilingual RVS German - nouns .748*** .816***
RVS German - verbs .671*** .820***
RVS home language -
nouns
.334* .239 ns
RVS home language -
verbs
.448** .476**
Whole group RVS German - nouns .715*** .702***
RVS German - verbs .580*** .780***
Summary
• App based screener designed to measure vocabulary multilingual learners
• Shows concurrent validity when compared with standardised measures of vocabulary in English and German
• Pilot work ongoing
Future Steps
• Trial with younger children
• Trial verb version
• Expand languages
• Extend upwards
• Develop cloudbased datasharing system to establish norms
• Produce Expressive measure
www.vocabularyapp.org.uk
• participating nurseries, schools and children centres and their staff for their commitment and support
• parents and children for taking part in the study
• research assistants for their hard work
• Sue Withey (Sheffield City Council), Beverley Booker (Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council)
• Sheffield University for funding the RVS project
A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO
Contact details:
Claudine Bowyer-Crane University of [email protected]://www.york.ac.uk/education/research/perc/
http://www.vocabularyapp.org/