Bilingual Assessments 

        Issues in assessment and strategies to improve the assessment of dual language learners have been the focus of research in North America and Europe (Peña, Bedore, & Baron, 2017). Even though it has been proved that the use of monolingual norm-referenced testing materials with bilingual children can lead to biased assessments and diagnostics, it continues to be a common practice (Cesar & Kohler, 2007). There is also considerable evidence about the lack of sensitivity and specificity in the identification of children from culturally and linguistically different backgrounds. This persistent bias in standardized language assessments goes together with the fact that many of the features of which standardized look for, have been demonstrated to be a clinical marker of language impairment in speakers of mainstream American English but may be produced in other non-mainstream dialects. Also, the norms used for monolingual children in standardized measures do not apply to bilingual or multicultural populations (Horton-Ikard & Ellis Weismer, 2007; Restrepo & Silverman, 2001). Unfortunately, norm-referenced standardized testing continues to be almost the solely acceptable method of identifying and justifying children for services (Caesar & Kohler, 2007; Figueroa & Newsome, 2006; Gandara, 2010; National Research Council, 2002).

        Taking all this into consideration, it is important to evaluate alternative methods of assessment that could reduce the bias when assessing bilinguals. These can be using adaptations of existing measures for different linguistic and cultural populations, measuring other language skills, or using alternative assessments methods. Using one or more alternative assessments would help reduce the risk of misidentification even though, the research on these strategies shows that there is no single test or simple technique that will address all these issues. It is recommended that clinicians use a test battery covering a range of linguistic and psycholinguistic skills, to maximize information available for accurate decision making (Paradis, Genesee, & Crago, 2021). Intervention and its efficacy definitely depend upon how well clinicians choose, administer, and interpret these assessment measures to discriminate between language differences, delays, and disorder to make an accurate diagnostic.