Recently, more attention has been given to the need for culturally and linguistically responsive assessments, but little empirical work has examined how writing measures treat students' use of nonmainstream American English (NMAE). Guided by Dis/ability Critical Race Theory and Quantitative Critical Race Theory, this study interrogated potential linguistic bias in curriculum-based measurement in written expression. Specifically, we analyzed the correct minus incorrect writing sequences (CIWS) metric, which is widely used to monitor writing development but is normed on general American English conventions. A total of 428 compositions from students in Grades 3 to 5 were scored using both the original CIWS rules and a culturally responsive, modified set of rules designed to not penalize NMAE features. Multilevel models revealed that students whose writing included NMAE features received disproportionately lower scores under the original scoring system, even when controlling for writing productivity. The modified procedure significantly reduced this bias, producing scores that supported more equitable interpretation of students' writing without penalizing NMAE features. Findings provide empirical evidence that conventional CIWS scoring embeds linguistic bias, but that responsive scoring modifications can mitigate these inequities. This work advances linguistic justice in assessment and offers practical implications for educators, school psychologists, and speech-language pathologists.
Spanish-English-speaking multilinguals (MLs) with developmental language disorders (DLD) have greater difficulty with verb morphology compared to their typically developing peers. Similar patterns of errors are observed in both monolinguals and MLs with DLD. However, there are more studies that have explored the effectiveness of grammar interventions targeting verb morphology for monolinguals compared to MLs. Moreover, there are even fewer studies that compare the effectiveness of implicit and explicit approaches used in grammar intervention. Therefore, in this study with Spanish-English MLs with and without DLD in grades 3 to 5, we evaluated, using an adapted alternating treatment single-case design, the (1) effectiveness of implicit versus explicit approaches to grammar intervention that targeted the inflectional past tense -ed and third person singular -s and (2) efficiency of the implicit and explicit approaches for acquiring these grammatical morphemes. Five of the 8 participants showed stronger outcomes with explicit instruction, demonstrated by greater level changes, more rapid response to treatment, and consistent progress toward mastery, with mean accuracy approximately 5% higher than during implicit instruction. In contrast, several participants benefited more from implicit instruction, possibly due to reduced cognitive load and the influence of morphological frequency. Clinically, these results highlight the importance of tailoring intervention approaches, as responsiveness may vary depending on learners' processing capacity and the linguistic characteristics of the target forms.
Language varieties such as African American English and Southern American English are well-established dialects of English with historic importance and modern cultural capital. While features of language varieties, such as nonmainstream dialects, are well documented in children's spoken language, less has been studied about child dialect speakers' writing in academic settings. In this study, we explored the features and frequency of use of African American English and Southern American English in a sample of 250 second- and third-grade students located in the southeastern part of the US. We analyzed and compared nonmainstream dialect production in an oral narrative task and between 2 different written language samples, one elicited by a narrative prompt and the other by an expository prompt. Importantly, we discuss implications for teachers and other practitioners to consider when working with diverse students.
