medium) but also meaningful in making informed
decisions regarding programming and placement
of these students.
Evaluators may not agree with my practices
as the bilingual educational diagnostician for students with visual and multiple disabilities in a
school district that houses one of the largest
population of students with visual impairments
from CLDB. Disagreeing is fine, but what are the
alternatives? The alternative to not test and fill out
thce Full and Individual Evaluation/
Comprehensive Individual Assessment (FIE/CIA)
with the words "untestable," "no tests available,"
etc., is not an acceptable option. Evaluators have
an ethical, moral, and legal responsibility to complete an assessment that will inform educational
plans for students and set them up for success.
Students who are from CLDB in the U.S. have the
right to receive and experience effective, appropriate, high-quality assessments under assessment conditions that support their learning and
development (NAEYC, 2005). It is my hope that
the information contained here will assist all
evaluators of students who are CLDB with visual
impairments in providing the highest quality assessments that will inform best practice in educational planning, programming, and placement.
References
Gargiulo, R.M. (2012). Cultural and linguistic diversity and exceptionality. In Gargiulo, R.M.,
Special education in contemporary society,
4e-media edition an introduction to
exceptionality (pp. 85-111). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Loftin, M. (2005). Making evaluation meaningful:
Determining additional eligibilities and
appropriate instructional strategies for blind
and visually impaired students. Austin,
23
