{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027340513670256836, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0016570008285004142, 'mean_word_length': 5.459893048128342, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How Well Do Commonly Used Language Instruments Measure English Oral-Language Proficiency?

Abstract This research examines three tests commonly used to assess the English oral-language proficiency of students who are English language learners (ELLs): the Language Assessment Scales—Oral, the Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey, and the IDEA Proficiency Test. These tests were given to native English-speaking non-Hispanic White and Hispanic students from varied socioeconomic levels. Since these tests use native-language proficiency as the standard by which responses are evaluated, it is reasonable to expect native English speakers to perform extremely well on these instruments. The extent to which the native speakers of the language do not perform well on these instruments calls their validity into question. Findings indicated that none of the native English-speaking children who took the Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey scored in the “fluent” or “advanced fluent” English ability. One hundred percent of the students scored in the “fluent English speaking” range of the Language Assessment Scales—Oral, and 87% of the students scored in the “fluent English speaking” range of the IDEA Proficiency Test.