Identifying Ability in Second-Language Learners

In international schools across the Gulf, a large share of pupils are learning in their second or third language. When ability identification runs through English, it stops measuring ability and starts measuring English — and able children disappear into the gap. This is among the most consequential and most fixable equity problems in talent identification.

The mechanism

Verbal reasoning tests, teacher observations of classroom articulacy, and attainment data all reward language proficiency alongside the ability they aim to measure. A child reasoning brilliantly in Arabic, Urdu or Tagalog may produce unremarkable English-medium scores for years — precisely the years when identification decisions get made. Referral-based systems compound it: McBee’s (2006) analysis showed nomination rates vary sharply by demographic group before any test is sat, and language status shapes who looks “able” to a busy classroom observer.

What the measurement research advises

Lohman (2005) — a leading figure in ability testing — offers the balanced position: nonverbal and figural reasoning measures are valuable additional lenses for second-language learners, but no single instrument, nonverbal included, should carry an identification alone. His recommendations: use multiple measures including quantitative and nonverbal scales; compare children with others of similar opportunity to learn — the logic of local norms; and treat scores as snapshots that must be revisited as English develops. Universal screening (Card & Giuliano, 2016) removes the visibility filter entirely — every child is looked at, referred or not.

Practice for a multilingual school

Screen everyone with a battery that includes nonverbal scales. Norm within context and revisit annually — an EAL learner’s trajectory through their first two years tells more than any single score. Gather language-light evidence deliberately: mathematics, pattern work, design, and work samples in the home language where staff can access them. And brief teachers on what able-but-acquiring-English looks like: strong reasoning with simple vocabulary is a profile, not a contradiction.

Multiple measures, revisited on a cycle, are the backbone of the Talent Framework — built for schools exactly like these.

References

Lohman, D. F. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in identifying academically gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(2), 111–138.
McBee, M. T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(2), 103–111.
Card, D., & Giuliano, L. (2016). Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education. PNAS, 113(48), 13678–13683.