Human Intelligence and Language Learning

In research terms, intelligence is taken as a construct which explain human behavior, though we cannot prove it exists we can only observe their effects on human beings; and although language proficiency is inevitably a strong determiner of test performance, it can by no means be measured through a median measure of central tendency alone.

Most schools today administer achievement tests in an attempt to measure what an individual has learned and determine his or her present level of performance. Schools, moreover, use these types of tests to determine individual or group status in academic learning. Achievement test scores, in the case of the No Child Left Behind Act, was used in placing, advancing, or retaining students at particular grade levels to diagnose their strengths and weaknesses.

Consequently, one of the major problems that NCLB saw were the differences caused by language factors between LEP and non-LEP groups, thus creating a restricted range distribution of scores. Because of the strong effect of language factors on the instruction and assessment of LEP students, some LEP lagged far behind native English speakers. Most important, since schools differed in terms of their resources, opportunities to learn, socioeconomic status, and level of parent education, these differences have shown tonegatively correlate with their performance on standardized achievement test scores.[2]

“Tests that are used for the purposes of placement and classification have become highly controversial and their use has been prohibited in many communities. The fact that some individuals with culturally different backgrounds do not score well on these tests has led to charges of discrimination against members of minority groups, because most of these tests do not accurately predict academic achievement because their contents are culturally biased. However, it is extremely difficult to eliminate culture totally and develop one test that is equally fair for all” (John Best & James Kahn, 1989).

Since the authors admit that NLCB was unable to operationally define the idea behind effective language proficiency before administering the achievement tests, it would have been a good idea to consider a mean measure of central tendency. Because while the median tends to ignore, for example, extremely high scores and extremely low scores and tends to overgeneralze an overall performance of the total group, the mean is the most frequently used measure of central tendency because it takes into account, every score. For the majority of the data, in other words, the mean is the most appropriate measure of central tendency.

However, since it was inferred earlier that the median cannot account for the overall performance of Language English Proficiency students alone, the mean and median are both ideal to measure test performance. It is apparent, however, based on NCLB findings, that averages did not fully describe the differences in achievement between students’ scores on the test, it is necessary then to use a measure of score spread or dispersion.[3] This will, decidedly reduce the heterogeneity that NCLB engenders.[4]

Descriptive statistical analysis further dictates that the mean measure of central tendency limits generalization to the group of individuals observed. No conclusions, then, can be extended beyond the group and any similarity to those outside that group cannot be assumed because in research, we are not interested in making cases but rather describing the data in the most accurate way.

Finally, the degree to which we measure language proficiency will determine the validity of the achievement scores. Most important, when using test for evaluative purposes, it is important not to generalize beyond specific elements measured to identify language proficiency with limited products or sources measured by ordinary achievement tests would be to define language proficiency and acquisition too narrowly (Kahn & Best, 1989). Hence, the No Child Left Behind Act produced instability because it over generalized the achievement of learners.