T ti A d i L P fi i f P i S h l ChildTesting Academic Language Proficiency of Primary School ChildrenTesting Academic Language Proficiency of Primary School ChildrenTesting Academic Language Proficiency of Primary School Childreng g g y y1 1 2 3 1Karin Berendes1 Nina Dragon1 Birgit Heppt2 Petra Stanat3 Sabine Weinert1Karin Berendes1, Nina Dragon1, Birgit Heppt2, Petra Stanat3, Sabine Weinert1Karin Berendes , Nina Dragon , Birgit Heppt , Petra Stanat , Sabine Weinert

1U i it f B b 2F i U i ität B li 3I tit t f Ed ti l Q lit I t (IQB)1University of Bamberg, 2Freie Universität Berlin, 3Institute for Educational Quality Improvement (IQB)University of Bamberg,  Freie Universität Berlin,  Institute for Educational Quality Improvement (IQB)

Th i l b k dTheoretical backgroundTheoretical backgroundTheoretical backgroundAcademic lang age proficienc is considered to be an important precondition of academic hich e tent primar school children possess competencies in academic lang ageAcademic language proficiency is considered to be an important precondition of academic which extent primary school children possess competencies in academic languageg g p y p p

(G li 2009) A di t C i (1979) di ti ti b t ti l dp y p p g g

(E kh dt 2008) Th f d i l fi i f i h l hild fsuccess (Gogolin, 2009). According to Cummins (1979), a distinction between conversational and (Eckhardt, 2008). Therefore, academic language proficiency of primary school children fromsuccess (Gogolin, 2009). According to Cummins (1979), a distinction between conversational andd i l i d A d i l i d t h l

(Eckhardt, 2008). Therefore, academic language proficiency of primary school children fromdiff t f il b k d i d ithi th f th t d Bildacademic language is made Academic language is assumed to have a more complex grammar different family backgrounds is measured within the scope of the study Bildungs-academic language is made. Academic language is assumed to have a more complex grammar different family backgrounds is measured within the scope of the study Bildungs

and a more demanding vocabulary than everyday language (Bailey & Butler 2003) Typical sprachliche Kompetenzen (BiSpra; Academic Language Proficiency) By varying linguisticand a more demanding vocabulary than everyday language (Bailey & Butler, 2003). Typical sprachliche Kompetenzen (BiSpra; Academic Language Proficiency). By varying linguisticfeatures are the use of passive voice nominalisations many subordinate clauses and specific demands systematically differences between children from German-speaking families andfeatures are the use of passive voice, nominalisations, many subordinate clauses and specific, demands systematically, differences between children from German-speaking families andoften abstract vocabulary In Germany only insufficient data exists concerning the question to families with a migration background will be examinedFig. 1: Conversational vs. academic languageoften abstract vocabulary. In Germany, only insufficient data exists concerning the question to families with a migration background will be examined.Fig. 1: Conversational vs. academic language

(Chamot & O'Malley 1994 p 40)y y y g q g g

(Chamot, & O Malley 1994, p. 40)

h dMethodsMethodsMethodsIn order to measure children‘s competencies in academic language listening comprehension tasks were developed which consist of twelve texts withIn order to measure children s competencies in academic language, listening comprehension tasks were developed which consist of twelve texts with

children with i l diffi ltdifferent content connected by a frame story The complexity of grammar (simple vs complex) and vocabulary (simple vs difficult) was varied systematicallyGerman native children with  simple difficultdifferent content, connected by a frame story. The complexity of grammar (simple vs. complex) and vocabulary (simple vs. difficult) was varied systematicallyGerman native  migrationwithin each text so that four text versions of different complexity were produced Two text versions and their respective items were piloted with third gradespeakers migration 

b k d Ø record length 8 34 21 03within each text so that four text versions of different complexity were produced. Two text versions and their respective items were piloted with third gradespeakers background Ø record length 8.34 21.03

pupils in Berlin and Nuremberg in winter 2010/2011g

Øpupils in Berlin and Nuremberg in winter 2010/2011.72 87 Ø number of passive 0 2 00p p g72 87 Ø number of passive 

i t ti0.17 2.00

In the pilot study the children were separated into two groups: One group listened to texts with simple vocabulary and simple grammar while the other group♂ ♀ ♂ ♀voice constructionsIn the pilot study, the children were separated into two groups: One group listened to texts with simple vocabulary and simple grammar, while the other group♂ ♀ ♂ ♀ p y p g p g p p y p g g p

received texts with difficult vocabulary and complex grammar After each text the children had to answer questions regarding the content of the text whereby♂ ♀ ♂ ♀

Ø number of wordsreceived texts with difficult vocabulary and complex grammar. After each text, the children had to answer questions regarding the content of the text, whereby42 30 39 48 Ø number of words  11 25 19 25y p g , q g g , yb th h d t th t f it A dditi l t ti i d t th i f ti b t th li i ti b k d d th

42 30 39 48with >2 syllables

11.25 19.25both groups had to answer the same set of items. An additional parent questionnaire was used to gather information about the linguistic background and the with >2 syllables

Tab 1: sample descriptiong p p q g g g

diti f l i iti f th hild d th i i t t f th f iliTab. 1: sample description (third graders; N 159) Tab 2: description of listening comprehension tasksconditions of language acquisition of the children and the socioeconomic status of the families.(third graders; N = 159) Tab. 2: description of listening comprehension tasksconditions of language acquisition of the children and the socioeconomic status of the families.

Results and outlookResults and outlookResults and outlookIn order to select appropriate items item selectivity and item difficulty wereR l Additi ll th l i f i i di t th t At t f th t k b iIn order to select appropriate items, item selectivity and item difficulty wereResults: Additionally, the analysis of variance indicates that At present, further tasks are beingOutlook:pp p , y y

l l t d Th it l ti i d t b d th l d l d tResults: Additionally, the analysis of variance indicates thatthi d d f G ki f ili h

At present, further tasks are beingOutlook:calculated. The item selection was carried out based on these values and lead to aResults: third graders of German-speaking families show a piloted that measure the compre-Outlook:calculated. The item selection was carried out based on these values and lead to ai ifi tl h t d th f i t t i T bl 3 h th it t

third graders of German speaking families show a piloted that measure the compresignificantly shorter and therefore more economic test version. Table 3 shows the item parameters significantly better performance than those of hension of clause connectors These language related tasks willsignificantly shorter and therefore more economic test version. Table 3 shows the item parameters significantly better performance than those of hension of clause connectors. These language related tasks willafter the item selection For third graders the revised test version has a Cronbach’s α = 80 (simple multilingual background (F (1 155) = 17 8 p < 001 be used in the main study along with the listeningafter the item selection. For third graders, the revised test version has a Cronbach s α .80 (simple multilingual background (F (1,155) = 17.8, p < .001, be used in the main study along with the listeningtext version) respectively a Cronbach‘s α = 82 (difficult text version) η2 = 10) An interaction between text version and comprehension tasks In the course of this study the fourtext version) respectively a Cronbach s α = .82 (difficult text version). η2 = .10). An interaction between text version and comprehension tasks. In the course of this study, the fourη )

linguistic background was not evident (Fig 3)p y,

versions of the listening comprehension texts will be rotated inThe distribution of the children’s performance (Fig 2) indicates that better results are achieved with the linguistic background was not evident (Fig. 3). versions of the listening comprehension texts will be rotated inThe distribution of the children s performance (Fig. 2) indicates that better results are achieved with the g g ( g ) g pi t l d i F th b i ti l i lsimple text version than with the difficult text version This indication was secured statistically by an experimental design. Furthermore, basic semantic-lexicalsimple text version than with the difficult text version. This indication was secured statistically by an experimental design. Furthermore, basic semantic lexical

d t ti biliti ill b d d I dditi tmeans of an analysis of variance The results suggest that the items were answered significantly better and syntactic abilities will be recorded In addition parents asmeans of an analysis of variance. The results suggest that the items were answered significantly better and syntactic abilities will be recorded. In addition, parents asy gg g ywith the simple text versions than with the difficult text versions (F (1 155) = 27 9 p < 001 η2 = 15) well as teachers will be questioned about the background ofwith the simple text versions than with the difficult text versions (F (1,155) = 27.9, p < .001, η2 = .15). well as teachers will be questioned about the background ofp ( ( , ) , p , η )

language acquisition and the level of school performance of thelanguage acquisition and the level of school performance of theparticipating childrenparticipating children.p p g

The long term objective is to findThe long-term objective is to findit diffi lt it l ti it

g jout more about the differentitem difficulty item selectivity out more about the differenty y

68 29 d i l fi i iM = .68 M = .29 academic language proficienciessimple

acade c a guage p o c e c esf i h l hild llsimple SD = .19 SD = .09 of primary school children as well

text versionSD   .19 SD   .09 of primary school children as well

te t e s o( 26 92) ( 12 45) as to develop a standardized(.26 ‐ .92) (.12 ‐ .45) as to develop a standardizedM = .43 M = .31 instrument to analyse children’sdifficultM   .43 M   .31SD 19 SD 09

instrument to analyse children sdifficultt t i

SD = .19 SD = .09 competencies in academic lantext version( 11 72) ( 13 52)

competencies in academic lan-(.11 ‐ .72) (.13 ‐ .52)

guage which may serve as aguage which may serve as aTab. 3: levels of item difficulty and item selectivity for third

g g ybasis for the promotion of specific ld iTab. 3: levels of item difficulty and item selectivity for third

graders after item selection basis for the promotion of specific goldencow_images –Fotolia.comgraders after item selection p p

l killlanguage skills.Fig 2: boxplots for third graders after item selection Fig 3: group differences related to text version and linguistic background language skills.Fig. 2: boxplots for third graders after item selection Fig. 3: group differences related to text version and linguistic background

LiteratureLiteratureLiteratureBailey, A. L., & Butler, F. A. (2003). An evidentiary framework for operationalizing academic language for broad application to K-12 education: A design document. Los Angeles, University of California: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, andBailey, A. L., & Butler, F. A. (2003). An evidentiary framework for operationalizing academic language for broad application to K 12 education: A design document. Los Angeles, University of California: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST)Student Testing (CRESST).Chamot A U & O'Malley J M (1994) The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach Reading MA: Addison-WesleyChamot, A. U., & O Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.C i J (1979) C iti / d i l fi i li i ti i t d d th ti ti d th tt W ki P Bili li N 19 121 129Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academinc language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121-129.( ) g g g p y g p p g q g p gEckhardt A G (2008) Sprache als Barriere für den schulischen Erfolg Potentielle Schwierigkeiten beim Erwerb schulbezogener Sprache für Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund Münster: WaxmannEckhardt, A. G. (2008). Sprache als Barriere für den schulischen Erfolg. Potentielle Schwierigkeiten beim Erwerb schulbezogener Sprache für Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund. Münster: Waxmann.G li I (2009) Z i hi k i d di E i kl bild hli h Fähi k i I I G li & U N (Ed ) S i f ll Z i hi k i Th bili li ( 263 280) Wi b d VS V l fü S i l i h fGogolin, I. (2009). Zweisprachigkeit und die Entwicklung bildungssprachlicher Fähigkeiten. In I. Gogolin & U. Neumann (Eds.), Streitfall Zweisprachigkeit – The bilingualism controversy (pp. 263-280). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.g , ( ) p g g g p g g ( ), p g g y (pp ) g

karin berendes@ ni bamber de ● nina dra on@ ni bamber de ● bir it heppt@f berlin dekarin.berendes@uni‐bamberg.de ● nina.dragon@uni‐bamberg.de ● birgit.heppt@fu‐berlin.dekarin.berendes@uni bamberg.de  nina.dragon@uni bamberg.de  birgit.heppt@fu berlin.de