Progress Monitoring of Language Acquisition and Academic Content for English Learners

Meeting the needs of English learners (ELs) effectively must be an individualized, purposeful, and data–driven process. Progress monitoring can help practitioners to target their EL students’ most significant academic and linguistic needs and, subsequently, develop and deliver instructional programming that may help students develop to their fullest potential with regards to language acquisition as well as content knowledge. This article offers considerations of best practices for educators in K–12 settings interested in learning more about progress monitoring of the academic and language proficiency of ELs receiving instruction in varied settings. Considerations regarding progress monitoring for ELs are reviewed, and tables of resources for instructional activities and supporting materials are provided.

The dynamic evolution of P-12 instruction in today's classrooms warrants the use of effective tools to ensure all students have access to high-quality education and make expected progress (Bailey et al., 2021).Effective assessment and systematic progress monitoring is particularly important when planning instruction for English learners (ELs) to ensure equitable, culturally responsive, and linguistically accessible instruction (Orosco & O'Connor, 2014;Stecker & Fuchs, 2000).English learners face the challenge of simultaneously learning a second language and academic content.This challenge is especially difficult for young learners who have not reached mastery of a first language.ELs, also known in the literature as English language learners (ELLs), limited English proficient (LEP), or English as a second language (ESL) students, often require the use of linguistic accommodations during instruction and assessment to minimize language barriers that hinder their performance (Orosco & Klingner, 2010).The number of ELs varies geographically, but a total of approximately 21% (10 million) ELs representing 400+ languages are enrolled in K-12 settings (U.S.Department of Education, 2018).
The EL student population presents a challenge to many local education agencies as students' achievement is often compromised by linguistic proficiency level (Atwell et al., 2019;Grewenig et al., 2021).National academic achievement data reveal that ELs consistently lag behind their native-speaking peers.In fact, 2020 National Assessment of Requests for reprints should be sent to Mabel O. Rivera, University of North Carolina Pembroke.Electronic inquiries should be sent to mabel.rivera@uncp.edu.
Educational Progress data for reading and math note a sustained gap for ELs in fourth and eighth grade (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020).Consequently, systematic progress monitoring (PM) of academic and linguistic skill acquisition is critical when making instructional decisions for this group of students.This article offers educators considerations regarding the use of PM to inform instruction of ELs, especially those who experience learning difficulties (Albers & Martinez, 2015).

PROGRESS MONITORING
Progress monitoring is often integrated into the response to intervention (RtI) model as a means of estimating the rate of academic achievement and evaluate instruction (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006).As part of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) updated by Congress in 2004, the RtI model of assessment originally sought to screen and identify students who would benefit from intensive support (Stecker et al., 2008).Once students who may need intensive intervention are identified and appropriate monitoring tools are selected, data regarding student responses to instruction should be collected on a regular basis before instruction to gather baseline data as well as during instruction/intervention (Mahdavi, 2021).
Progress monitoring can include several types of assessments, diagnostic, formative, summative, or standardized (e.g., criterion, norm-referenced), according to student need, content, and developmental level.Further, assessments can be formal (e.g., tests), informal (e.g., observation, conferencing, questioning techniques), or a mixture of both.Formal and informal assessments help to identify knowledge gaps and to plan targeted instruction (Mahdavi, 2021).Regardless of the type of assessment used, the goal is to monitor learning and provide learners with direct, specific, meaningful, and ongoing feedback to improve learning (Espin et al., 2009;McMillan et al., 2017).
To maximize effectiveness, PM must be (a) practical (not monopolize instructional time), (b) designed to measure learner change, and (c) linked to relevant and meaningful instructional goals (Stecker et al., 2008).To implement PM, global and subskill curriculum concepts can be generated into short-term instructional objectives with specific measurable goals.Appropriate assessment tools are selected or designed to target specific skill deficits, and to measure and document expected learning within a finite time frame (Mahdavi, 2021).The frequency of PM varies according to the student's needs.Once a schedule has been formulated, data are collected to measure progress in a particular skill and illustrated in a chart with trend or progress lines (McMillan et al., 2017).Charting is followed by analysis that guides informed decisions about student progress and instructional next steps (Johnsen & Sulak, 2021).Next steps may include remediation and selection of additional interventions, moving through the levels of intervention, and the addition or elimination of instructional resources (Hoover et al., 2018).In the case of ELs, linguistic accommodations during instruction and assessment, such as extended time, allowing oral responses, use of bilingual dictionaries, and simplifying directions help to "level the field."The systematic use of PM in measuring literacy constructs (e.g., reading fluency, word recognition, writing, spelling) plays an important role in language acquisition proficiency for ELs (Sandberg & Reschly, 2011).

Measuring Progress
Practitioners frequently use curriculum-based assessment (CBA) measures as a standardized method to assess progress and effectiveness of instruction with ELs and other struggling learners (Bartlett, 2021;Jenkins et al., 2017;Sandberg & Reschly, 2011).Frequently, CBA measures are used to collect PM data of basic academic and behavior performance.CBA encompasses a set of measurement practices that use observation and recording of a student's performance within the classroom curriculum as a basis for gathering information to guide instructional decisions (Deno, 1985;Hintze et al., 2006).Measures are brief assessments that allow teachers to evaluate progress.CBA approaches have been organized into two distinct forms of assessment, depending on whether they represent a form of specific subskill mastery measurement or general outcome measurement (Fuchs & Deno, 1991), and may be used to measure simple and multifaceted skills.These valid and reliable measures are often utilized in areas like reading, math, writing and spelling to assess key information about ELs participating in Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions (Shin & McMaster, 2019).
Computer-adaptive tests (CAT) are another form of progress measure that can be useful for ELs as they are designed to automatically modify difficulty level according to learner responses.These probes record correct answers and generate useful visual representations of data needed to generate aim and trend lines over time (Shapiro & Gebhardt, 2012).In addition, CATs can be used in traditional and remote learning settings and assess a broad range of student skills in periods as short as 10−15 minutes.Student responses to instruction can be assessed in comparison with the aim lines to assist with data-based decision-making with regard to future instruction (Wood & Schatschneider, 2021).

Progress Monitoring with ELs
Data derived from PM play a key role when deciding if ELs are making adequate progress and if instruction meets their needs (McMillan et al., 2017;Stecker & Fuchs, 2000).Researchers in language acquisition consistently report the need for educators and other service providers to recognize the unique needs of ELs as they progress through levels of language proficiency and content knowledge (Sandberg & Reschly, 2011).The use of PM as a goal-oriented practice benefits ELs as it facilitates informed instructional decisions, documents progress, and improves collaboration and communication with families and other stakeholders (Weingarten et al., 2020).
Generally, PM should occur at least monthly, but may be implemented more often according to learning goals, intervention intensity, and individualized needs of learners (August, 2018;Gesel & Lemons, 2020;Jenkins et al., 2017).The predictive utility of PM to guide instruction has been widely validated in literature for students considered at risk of academic difficulties (Filderman et al., 2018).Although there is a marked paucity of research focused specifically on PM with ELs, existing studies consistently reinforce the need for cautious PM interpretation and instructional decisionmaking as differential results for ELs may be due to the language acquisition process rather than or in conjunction with curriculum goal mastery (Mahdavi, 2021;Sandberg & Reschly, 2011).
Esparza Brown and Sanford (2011) recommended using PM tools with ELs to monitor progress in all languages of instruction, set rigorous goals that support mastery of gradelevel standards, evaluate growth frequently (increasing intensity when needed), and compare growth with peers.In addition, they cautioned that cultural differences, such as socioeconomic status and exposure to English at home, among others, may exacerbate the difficulty in determining what constitutes progress for ELs as content growth rate may be related to differences in learning due to language acquisition (Lumbrears & Rupley, 2019;Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).Orosco and Abdulrahim (2018) integrated PM as part of comprehensive strategy instruction (CSI) for ELs.The researchers examined the effect of CSI on third-grade learners' word problem-solving skills and found that ongoing assessment of progress helped ELs with math word problem-solving.Based on these findings, recommendations for teacher education programs and professional development for educators included ensuring that teachers understand how to assess student needs and, subsequently, plan and deliver explicit instruction matched to relevant needs in both content and language acquisition.In addition, the researchers suggested the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs), such as activating prior knowledge, ongoing PM, explicit feedback, direct instruction, modeling, repetition, visual support, cooperative learning, hands-on activities and integrating multidisciplinary skills, into learning experiences as much as possible (e.g., reading and writing skills integrated into math lessons).
Recently, Adams et al. (2020) used PM and forms of existing data to help determine oral reading fluency (ORF), reading retell, and language proficiency among ELs.Specifically, the authors focused on how to use PM within the multitier support system (MTSS) framework to address ELs' needs in an inclusive manner using CBA.The CBA measures in their study were brief probes of grade-level academic skills for 231 ELs.The authors found predictive validity of retell quality and the listening/speaking PM using CBA measures for ORF.These findings support the use of language proficiency monitoring for EL students and emphasize the need for policy makers to use PM and data-driven decision-making to accurately identify and meet the needs of ELs (Mahdavi, 2021;McMillan et al., 2017).
Other research efforts have examined teacher efficacy and preparation to implement PM with ELs.For example, Stairs-Davenport (2021) surveyed K-12 mainstream teachers via a selected-response and open-ended survey to identify themes in teacher questions.Results suggested that teachers felt unprepared to teach ELs.Concerns identified by teachers included the ability to adapt assessment measures to accurately determine student needs and to subsequently plan effective instruction to address students' language acquisition and content knowledge needs (Rivera & McKeithan, 2019).Additional concerns included building community, language barriers versus disability, and even how to begin to teach ELs (Prezas & Joe, 2017;Stairs-Davenport, 2021).
The researchers noted a lack of training and/or professional development opportunities to help educators better understand how to address both language and content needs simultaneously using appropriate PM and recommended EBPs (Best & Conceição, 2017).The practical considerations that follow reflect the need to implement effective progress monitoring to guide data-driven instruction of ELs, especially when schools must be prepared to make ongoing and sudden decisions and changes in delivery methods based on local and global circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Yükselir & Yuvayapan, 2021).

Progress Monitoring and MTSS
Progress monitoring is used as a component of the MTSS framework in many schools across the nation (Esparza Brown & Sanford, 2011).This system of ongoing assessment and targeted interventions is designed to address the varied academic and behavioral challenges of all students (Johnsen & Sulak, 2021).The primary components of MTSS include universal screening, schoolwide expectations and supports, ongoing PM, and tiered interventions identified and developed by each specific school/setting and community to address the academic, social, and behavioral needs of all students (Radley & Dart, 2019;Snyder, 2020).While MTSS is not specifically an EL program, the framework assists ELs in mastering basic skills as they progress through academic and language acquisition (Atwell et al., 2019;Grewenig et al., 2021).However, obtaining accurate PM of ELs can be a challenge because of their multifaceted cultural and linguistic needs.As a result, practitioners must be cautious about making assumptions when ELs do not make expected progress (Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).
Points of emphasis related to ELs and MTSS are shared in Table 1.For instance, teachers must allow enough time for an intervention to work and collect enough data points before engaging in decision-making.Extraneous factors could compromise reliability and validity of an assessment such as language proficiency, ethnic backgrounds and experiences, test styles, administration procedures, test anxiety, and examiner bias (Vanderwood et al., 2014).When setting goals, it is important to create a preset schedule for PM data collection and analysis that includes engaging the student in the PM process by tracking the results together with the student and discussing future goals (McMillan et al., 2017).
English learners benefit from data-driven instruction linking assessed needs, the evidence-based strategies used, and the overall learning environment, to prevent and remediate some of their difficulties (Seel et al., 2017;Stecker et al., 2008).Progress monitoring should include valid and reliable measures of performance in content areas and utilize tests in the ELs' native language when available and appropriate (Orosco & Klingner, 2010;Sailor et al., 2021).Whether using CBA measures or other instruments, teachers must monitor and assess the progress of ELs in English language proficiency (ELP) and content knowledge frequently.Local education agencies should monitor the progress of ELs in both achieving English language proficiency and acquiring gradelevel core content knowledge at least annually (U.S.Department of Education, 2018), but more frequent and systematic assessment of benchmarks can inform instruction and drive goal changes as needed.
Given that acquisition of content knowledge is intrinsically related to their ELP, teachers must use a variety of sources across frequent points to establish a fair assessment of ELs (Mahdavi, 2021;McMillian et al., 2017;Radley & Dart, 2019;Reister & Blanchard, 2020).Assessment instruments designed to measure intelligence, learning capacity, or subject knowledge are often used as a measurement of language ability but may not be an accurate indicator of individual progress (Sandberg & Reschly, 2011).A range of assessments or alternative assessments should be considered when monitoring progress as many traditional tests require learners to employ complex literacy skills (e.g., make inferences, compare/contrast, include unfamiliar cultural references) in addition to content knowledge (Orosco & Klingner, 2010).Linguistically and culturally diverse students may have difficulty demonstrating skills in unfamiliar settings or on traditional assessment measures (Bartlett, 2021).
Further, assessments used for PM should be reviewed for cultural bias to maximize the validity of results focused on content knowledge rather than language acquisition.

TABLE 1 MTSS and English Learners-Points of Emphasis
• Assessment of the native language (SLP paired with an interpreter or a bilingual SLP) is needed to determine whether a child has a true language disorder or a language difference (Prezas & Jo, 2017).• Assessments used for ELs must be culturally attuned, collaborative, unbiased, research-based to assess language acquisition from disability (Hoover & Soltero-Gonzalez, 2018;Sullivan & Osher, 2019).• Effectively addressing the needs of ELs requires educators with knowledge of and training in the implementation of evidence-based practices for ELs (Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).• MTSS frameworks must ensure educators understand the academic impact of second language acquisition on ELs (Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).• Students with strong L1 literacy skills may require different instructional supports than students with the same English instructional profile but low L1 literacy skills (Prezas & Jo, 2017).• Progress monitoring must consider the impact of English language proficiency assessment measures (Albers & Martinez, 2015).
• RTI and the discrepancy model can be subjective, misunderstood, and unevenly applied as "a one-size-fits-all" approach that may not sufficiently meet the needs of ELs (Hoover & Soltero-Gonzalez, 2018;Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).• Slow progress may be related to language acquisition rather than learning deficit (Orosco & Abdulrahim, 2018).
• Standards for progress and growth rates should not always be the same for Els (Hoover et al., 2016;Rodriguez & Shihadeh, 2020).
• There is a scarcity of culturally responsive practices that can prevent accurate screening and assessment of Els (Orosco & O'Connor, 2014).
Flexibility is key to success with ELs as there is no single assessment method that can reliably measure progress for all learners (McMillan et al., 2017).Consider offering ELs the chance to demonstrate mastery of constructs utilizing performance-based assessments or other authentic assessments that measure mastery in real-world contexts.Also, it is important to teach ELs to differentiate between main ideas and minor details, so they are not distracted by extraneous information when communicating what they know (Espin et al., 2009).Successful use of accommodations during assessment depends on the consistent use of the accommodation during instruction (Kieffer et al., 2012).When selecting or designing assessments, consider using easy-to-read, simplified language, and provide test study guides.Consider the language demand with regard to test format (e.g., essay test vs. multiple-choice or fill-in-the-blank) when writing tests and/or making decisions about assessment settings.Student developmental level and characteristics of learners at different levels of language acquisition are important factors to consider when choosing when and where to measure student progress (Gómez González, 2017).Finally, it is important to remember that English learners at beginning levels of English language acquisition may be reluctant to respond verbally in front of peers but may be willing to use gestures, make drawings, create presentations, and so on, to demonstrate understanding (Graham et al., 2021).
If the purpose of an assessment is for students to demonstrate content knowledge rather than fluency, consider offering additional time to respond or breaking test sessions into smaller sessions so ELs do not become overwhelmed (Echevarria et al., 2017).Students should not be surprised by what is on the test.Teachers should clearly state what is being taught, why the material is relevant, and exactly how and when students will be assessed.Teaching test-taking strategies and offering multiple practice test sessions or word banks may also be beneficial (Kieffer et al., 2012;McKeithan et al., 2021).When possible, engage in conversations with students, their families, and other service providers to learn their interests, and match student abilities, interests, and instructional goals when choosing a PM tool (Weingarten et al., 2020).Keep in mind the need to analyze and interpret assessment data to ensure ELs receive instruction aligned with their needs.Collaboration with the student, other stakeholders, and decision makers is vital when making decisions about courses and settings that enable ELs to succeed (Filderman et al., 2018).Additional assessment considerations for ELs are presented in Table 2.
When planning assessment based on PM results for ELs in remote settings, teachers must be cognizant of the transactional distance-the psychological and communication gap due to physical separation between students and peers (social presence), students and instructors (instructor presence), and students and content in online classrooms (McKeithan et al., 2021;Stopa, 2017).Practitioners must be able to differentiate and avoid low-quality and ineffective virtual learning experiences and actively promote student engagement and progress toward meeting learning goals (Best & Conceição, 2017).Virtual instruction must be linked to PM data and extensively planned from the learner's perspective (Black & Allen, 2019;Rivera & McKeithan, 2019).Table 3 summarizes additional resources that can be used with ELs in varied settings.

Assessment of Reading and Writing
ELs and other learners who struggle with constructing meaning from text require assessment and intensive instruction with one or more of the following skills: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocab development, comprehension, text structures, and so on (Albers & Martinez, 2015;Newell et al., 2020;Newton et al., 2018).Many evidence-based practices used with native language speakers to teach reading and writing can also be implemented  with ELs (Graham et al., 2015); however, educators and other service providers must be cognizant of the language acquisition processing needs of ELs as they design instruction and choose tools to conduct PM with ELs (August, 2018).Educators must clearly communicate the connection between the five language domains (reading, writing, listening, speaking, and viewing) as much as possible to help ELs connect what they are learning with what they already know (Graham et al., 2015;Newton et al., 2018).Helping ELs learn to develop vocabulary (word meaning knowledge) is a vital component of effective instruction (Vaughn et al., 2021).Teaching ELs to think about and use writing as a tool to communicate their ideas to a given audience (reader) is essential.Ensure ELs understand the relationships between reading and writing as well as between author and audience.Everything is written (author) for a reason and with an intended audience (reader) in mind.Understanding this relationship may assist ELs in recognizing the purpose of writing (narrate, describe, persuade, or explain) and how the writer desires a response from the reader or audience (McMaster et al., 2011).
Using PM to regularly monitor ELs' understanding of the purpose and format of the writing expectation may make it easier to begin the task of thinking through how to structure a written response when considering what is being written from the reader's perspective (Graham et al., 2021).Model by using teacher talk and scaffolding as instruction is broken into clearly distinguished steps and procedures.Use PM informally as a gauge for understanding, having ELs repeat the steps and reasoning behind the steps and procedures (Mahdavi, 2021;McKeithan et al., 2021).Help ELs understand that all strands of communication are connected and necessary throughout life in all settings and are vital for personal as well as professional success.When ELs understand why they are doing what they are being asked to do, as well as the benefits of learning and applying a given skill, motivation can be positively impacted (Newton et al., 2018).
Teachers often have a plethora of content reading assessments available to conduct PM in reading, decoding, vocabulary, and comprehension; however, it is important to teach, reteach, and refer to basic story structure and plot elements (e.g., characters, exposition or introduction, rising action, climax/turning point, resolution/falling action) (Albers & Martinez, 2015).ELs may find answering questions about the author's purpose and/or composing a narrative easier if they have a sound understanding of the basic components of story structure and plot elements (Rivera & McKeithan, 2019).Model expectations of how to create a narrative from the beginning to the end using the writing process, thinkaloud materials and visual supports (Cho et al., 2019).
Descriptive writing may be difficult for learners with ELs because using unfamiliar vocabulary with enough detail to create a mental picture is a challenge at the beginning stages of language proficiency (Reister & Blanchard, 2020).Ongoing assessment and direct instruction when teaching descriptive writing are essential for EL authors.Learning to use descriptive details can help EL writers communicate and connect with readers through visualization and engagement with their five senses (Echevarria et al., 2017).Authors who can write descriptively often have more interesting and engaging final products.Consider using pictures, movies, and music as examples of how to elaborate descriptions to help ELs recognize how words can be used to build suspense and make the reading or listening more enjoyable (Newton et al., 2018).Rubrics and teacher/student conferences can be used to ask questions about what is being read or written (Espin et al., 2009).The learner can work cooperatively with others to connect with the reading or writing from a different perspective and evaluate whether the writer was successful (Bartlett, 2021).

Assessment of Listening and Speaking
Teachers can use formal and informal assessments to PM response to instruction.Informal assessments can be short and straightforward comprehension checks or listening and reading comprehension tests that can be quickly administered and graded (Newton et al., 2018).The COVID-19 pandemic, which has required many educators to incorporate technology in their instruction, has reinforced the ease with which to generate online quizzes that are graded immediately and offer feedback to both teachers and students.Electronic student work samples can be uploaded to virtual portfolios that can be used to assess student responses to learning and assist students, teachers, and caregivers to monitor developing language proficiency and content knowledge over time (Seel et al., 2017).Teachers can analyze assessments, consider ef-fectiveness of instruction, identify gaps in learning, and adjust (e.g., reteach or move onto subsequent content goals) as needed (Filderman et al., 2018).Teachers can also use rubrics and checklists to assess a variety of informal assessments to PM ELs' ability to comprehend visual literacy as well as words that are spoken in varied settings.
Informal assessments of listening and speaking might include having students listen to narratives that incorporate pictures and texts and then asking them to retell the sequence of events or using pictures and match them to spoken words or phrases (McMillan et al., 2017).Rubrics and checklists can be utilized to monitor students' oral language abilities.Examples include structured conversations ranging from using oral cloze tasks or picture-sequencing activities to asking ELs to elaborate on how to complete a task they are familiar with or share a personal narrative elaborating on what happened, when, and where (Mahoney, 2017).Additional resources that can be used for ELs are listed in Table 4.

Substantive Feedback
Using data to provide substantive feedback to students is an essential component of PM.Substantive feedback is focused, actionable, specific, and appropriate, and helps ELs understand and identify areas of strength and need (Espin et al., 2009).In addition, feedback related to the relevance of what students are learning and why it is important for them to achieve their personal performance goals can be motivating and help ELs gain confidence that they can be successful (Lumbrears & Rupley, 2019;Stecker & Fuchs, 2000).Teachers and ELs must work collaboratively to identify gaps and next steps.Teach ELs to use self-assessments and metacognitive strategies to recognize when they need help and how to seek assistance when needed (Espin et al., 2009).Collecting data, analyzing, and sharing results with colleagues, families, school officials, and other decision makers can help practitioners learn more about student interests and needs in different settings and result in partnerships with others who can then reinforce language and content skill deficits (McMillan et al., 2017;Weingarten et al., 2020).Collaboration among these stakeholders can enhance the competencies of practitioners to improve student outcomes via commonly agreed-upon goals and PM tools aligned with language proficiency and curriculum content.Effective implementation of MTSS and PM is tightly linked to practitioner buy-in (Harper-Young, 2018).

CONCLUSIONS
ELs are the fastest growing subgroup of public school students in the United States.Consequently, all educators will likely serve ELs over the course of their professional careers and, therefore, need to be prepared to use evidence-based effective practices (Irwin et al., 2021) for these learners.The literature consistently notes that research on PM and ELs is limited, and more research on valid and reliable assessments is needed (Gesel & Lemons, 2020;Newell et al., 2020).Further, descriptions of available services for ELs are often in-complete, limited, and inadequate in the K−12 education system, leading to monolithic policies that perpetuate the gap between ELs and their peers (Kangas, 2018).
Across instructional settings, PM is a vital part of the MTSS framework used by many institutions to determine if students (ELs as well as their native-speaking peers) are making adequate progress or need additional assistance.The limited existing research on ELs and PM suggests that when teachers implement monitoring structures with fidelity, ELs can develop both language proficiency and academic content, as PM can provide the data necessary to determine if the instruction needs to be altered (Harper-Young, 2018).
However, to be effective, PM for ELs must be systematically conducted with valid and reliable measures for teachers who are knowledgeable about the second-language acquisition process to recognize whether learner growth, or lack thereof, is due to teaching and learning, the assessment instrument, or the language proficiency level of the student (Reister & Blanchard, 2020;Rodriguez & Shihadeh, 2020).Educational leaders at the school, local, state, and national levels must be responsible stewards of school funds and provide practitioners with the training needed to adequately assess and address ELs' needs using evidencebased instructional practices that can be readily integrated into instructional planning and delivery to improve learning for all students (Harper-Young, 2018).Staff development should include realistic and engaging opportunities for educators to target specific practices (Vaughn et al., 2021).Similarly, teacher education programs within institutions of higher learning that are preparing teachers for service must integrate the knowledgebase needed to understand the complex needs of ELs and subsequently train educators to understand, identify, and implement appropriate PM tools to maximize the potential for all students to achieve (Albers & Martinez, 2015;Echevarria et al., 2017;Mahdavi, 2021;Sailor et al., 2021;Stairs-Davenport, 2021).
Allowing ELs to demonstrate content mastery by responding orally in English and describing responses • Creative projects (posters, folded books, other fun ideas to lower anxiety while assessing comprehension and critical thinking) and presentations • Allowing students to use language to describe, explain, summarize, retell, paraphrase • Oral reports, role plays, visual cues, gestures, or physical activity • Physical demonstration (paint, gesture, act out, thumbs up/down, nod yes/no) • Pictorial products (manipulate or create drawings, diagrams, dioramas, models, graphs, charts; label pictures; keep a picture journal) • Portfolios of student progress • Providing manipulatives to enable ELs to demonstrate content mastery Sources: Albers and Martinez (2015); Echevarria et al. (2017); Esparza Brown & Sanford (2011); and Keiffer et al. (2012).