Assessing ESL student results is often done with one of a battery of well-known tests from organizations such as the Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System (CASAS) from California, and the Basic English Skills Test (BEST). There are others, such as the Basic Inventory of Natural Language (BINL), that measure grammatical skills. Many of these industry-standard assessments are designed for specific ESL skill testing -- grammar and mathematics, for example -- as well as ethnic origin.
Assessing ESL students with surveys, observation and checklists is an alternative solution. These tools allow for a more personalized assessment based on the specific dynamics of a student or group of students. Teacher-developed measuring of student progress and student-inspired feedback are also considered alternative solutions.
Implementing either an industry-standard or alternative assessment solution comes with advantages and disadvantages. The industry-standard assessments are well known and fairly easy to administer. Also, some ESL programs may require attaining a minimum score on a standardized test to secure future funding and other benefits. However, not having the flexibility to reflect an individual students needs, with little or no student feedback, may not provide an accurate assessment of learning results. Alternative ESL measures will often include an oral assessment between student and teacher. It could be argued that these are the two people best able to gauge learning results. With flexibility and the chance to customize assessments to specific situations comes the matter of time. Developing, implementing and reviewing results of alternative methods can be quite time-consuming, and ultimately more expensive than the more generic solutions available.
A decision on which assessment tool is appropriate must be based on the unique factors of each classroom, budget constraints and the availability of time for the ESL teacher to administer these important tools.There appears to be consensus among those in the ESL educational industry that the conventional, industry testing solutions are lacking in a number of areas. The prevailing practice of assessing ESL students and programs appears to be a combination of the two methods.