Do I Speak Good Enough? Is Proficiency Testing a Barrier Heritage Speakers of Spanish Face on the Road to Becoming Credentialed Bilingual Teachers?

• In Event: Preparing Linguistically Qualified Bilingual/Dual Language Teachers: Challenges and Opportunities in Spanish Language Assessment and Development

Abstract

Objectives: To report findings on how HL speakers of Spanish performed in a high-stakes language proficiency test (ACTFL’s OPIc) in comparison to native and L2 speakers; to address the question if HLs should be held to the same standard as speakers who have learned Spanish in formal school contexts for longer periods of time.

Theoretical framework: Although there are bilingual teacher education programs that do provide more relevant Spanish language assessment opportunities for bilingual teacher candidates, the field generally has relied on high-stakes language proficiency tests (i.e., CSET-LOTE; BTLPT; BEA; ACTFL’s OPI-c/WPT) to ensure bilingual teachers exhibit adequate Spanish language competencies. What happens when future bilingual teachers who identify themselves as either “Heritage Speakers” (HLs) of Spanish —“individuals raised in homes where a language other than English is spoken and who are to some degree bilingual in English and the heritage language” (Valdés, 2001)— are required to take a high-stakes language proficiency testing exam such as ACTFL’s OPI in order to show they are worthy of teaching in Spanish in bilingual/dual-language school contexts? In controlling the border of language testing in teacher education (Carlisle-Zepeda & Saldate, 1978; Elder, 2001; Wesche, 1992), should HLs be held to the same standard as speakers who have learned Spanish in formal contexts for longer periods of time? This paper reports results of a study that assessed the Spanish competencies of 21 future bilingual teachers employing ACTFL’s OPIc. I focus on the ratings of HL speakers in order to determine how these performed in comparison to the performance of native and L2 speakers as per ratings obtained. I then address the question if heritage speakers of Spanish should be held to the same language proficiency test standard as those who have learned Spanish only in formal school contexts for longer periods of time.

Methods: I analyzed responses to an on-line Qualtrics survey where research participants (n=20) responded to items pertaining to demographics, language, and educational backgrounds. I also analyzed participants’ official OPIc ratings (levels of language proficiency) and diagnostic reports and compared these across three language identity categories (heritage/HL, native, and second language/L2 speakers of Spanish).

Data: The data analyzed comprised official ACTFL OPIc ratings and “Comments/Diagnostic Reports”
(n=20), as well as responses to Qualtrics survey and data results where participants reflected on the official
ratings (level of Spanish proficiency) obtained.

Preliminary results: Diagnostic reports indicate HLs dis not meet ‘superior functions’ of language and exhibited difficulties in meeting ‘advanced-mid’ and ‘advanced-high’ functions. Furthermore, heritage HLs performed at equal or lower levels than L2 speakers, although HL had notable sociolinguistic advantages not taken into account by the assessment instrument. In relation to native speakers, HLs performed at lower levels of proficiency.

Significance: The field of bilingual teacher education is lacking a professionally relevant assessment instrument to measure Spanish language competencies of HL teacher candidates; an instrument that would take into consideration HLs language strengths. Employing a general assessment instrument may contribute to HLs linguistic identity struggles and sense of devalued sense of confidence.

Author

• Breann Mudrick, San Diego State University