Regularly examine the validity of classification instruments and procedures, monitoring accuracy for student groups prone to classification errors¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

The report directs states and districts to regularly examine the frequency, types, and causes of misclassification errors, with special attention to migrant students, students with interrupted formal education, Native American and Alaska Native students, and students with disabilities, who may be more prone to classification errors. Careful review of misclassifications may lead to changes in how the classification instrument is interpreted and used and in classification procedures.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Systematic collection and review of misclassification frequency, types, and causes

Constraints¶

• A larger proportion of students appearing to be misclassified should trigger a system-level review of classification criteria, procedures, or tools

Target Learners¶

• Migrant students, students with interrupted formal education, Native American and Alaska Native students, and students with disabilities

Target Learning Goals¶

• Accurate EL classification and appropriate service delivery

Related Strategies¶

• Use trained staff, parent interviews, and EL classification committees to reduce initial EL misclassifications
• Establish a provisional classification period of roughly 45 to 90 days to detect and correct initial EL misclassifications
• Use different measures or thresholds than the KEI cohort threshold when identifying individual students at risk of not reading proficiently

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• H. Gary Cook & Robert Linquanti. (2015). Issues and options associated with initially classifying English learners (ELs). Council of Chief State School Officers. https://www.ccsso.org