144
not proficient in either language. Their work reveals that these same
students were proficient in both English and Spanish when observed
within the neighborhood rather than the school environment.
The focus of this research has been on students who have supposedly
gained proficiency in both oral and written expression in their first
language and who are in the process of acquiring their second language.
The test instruments chosen for this research represent, in the opinion
of this researcher, the best nationally used means of assessment
currently available. In fairness to the students, these tests are not
without flaws and do not provide conclusive information about the students'
language proficiency.
On measures of expressive language, students were rated as being
more proficient in their oral production in English and written pro
duction in Spanish. When correlations of these measures were performed,
only the oral Spanish rating was significantly correlated with Spanish
total score. There was a tendency towards significance for both the
oral and written English scores as well as the oral Spanish score to
significantly correlate with English total scores.
Ratings of English proficiency by the ESL teacher were significantly
correlated with total English scores. Ratings of Spanish proficiency
by the bilingual teachers were not significantly correlated with total
Spanish achievement, in spite of the fact that the two teachers' ratings
were significantly correlated with each other.
Measures of listening were significantly correlated with total
scores within and across languages for the spring administration of
the LAB. Increases in listening skill appear to correspond to general