Education Week, September 15, 2010

The headline that caught my eye this week was "U.S. Finds Programs For ELLs in Arizona Violate Civil Rights" by Mary Ann Zehr.   According to the article there is a legal battle which started in 1992 when parents from the Nogales, Arizona, school district filed a lawsuit arguing that programs for ELL students were deficient. What is going on in Arizona is interesting to me because it could have implications for how English Language Learners are educated nation-wide.  I find it shocking that this court case has been going on for eighteen years!

The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights identified two practices in Arizona that they say violate federal law:  1. Arizona has simplified the Home Language Survey schools give to parents to help identify students that need to be tested for ELL services.  (It was reduced from three questions down to one.)  2.  The English Language Proficiency test does not accurately evaluate whether ELL students are proficient "in each language domain" before they are moved from ELL services and whether these students are "able to participate meaningfully in Arizona's .... educational programs."

Another issue that was mentioned is that for the past two school years, Arizona has required that ELL students be separated from other students for four hours each day to learn English skills.  Questions have been raised about whether these four-hour English Language Development classes violate the federal Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.  There are concerns that a four hour a day pull-out model is a form of segregation and that ELL students are being denied access to academic content and curriculum.  The article I discussed in my second blog post identified a lack of access to the regular curriculum as one common feature of schools that were not effective with ELL students.

One interesting aspect about what is going in in Arizona, if I have correctly understood this article, is that critics seem to feel that school districts in Arizona are violating ELL students' civil rights in two ways.  First of all, they are under-identifying ELL students with an oversimplified Home Language Survey and then graduating them from English classes before they are actually proficient.  It was suggested that these two practices were being done to save money.  Secondly, school districts in Arizona are in hot water for "over-serving" (my terminology) ELL students by requiring that they spend four hours a day in English Language classes.  I am again left wondering what ELL specialists recommend and what the research tells us about effective methods for teaching English Language Learners.

Both of my children are native speakers of English, and they are attending a Spanish immersion, dual-language program at a public school.  We have been extremely pleased with the education they are receiving.  Approximately fifty percent of their classmates are native speakers of Spanish.  It has been my understanding that dual language programs benefit ELL students by allowing them to learn and cover academic content in their native language, while also developing their English skills.  The model for the dual language program starts out with  90% of instructional time in Spanish in Kindergarten.  By the third grade, 50% of the instructional time is in English and 50% is in Spanish.  I am wondering why we do not have more dual language programs around the country.  These types of programs can help us provide ELL students with a meaningful, valuable education and enrich the educational experience of native English speakers as well.  I hope to observe in several different local schools that work with ELL students as part of my 90 observational hours.

Successful ELL Policies

After reading about the issues school districts are facing around the country trying to meet the needs of English Language Learners or ELL students, I searched the Education Week archives looking for articles talking about school districts that have had some success.  I found this article published online on October 22, 2009:  Four Cities Cited For Successful ELL Policies.  Four urban school districts in Dallas, San Francisco, New York City, and St. Paul, Minnesota, demonstrated an improvement in state reading test scores of 3rd and 4th grade ELL students between 2002 and 2006.

According to the article, which was based on a report by the Council of the Great City Schools, school districts that are successful with ELL students employ three common best practices:  1.  They provide strong oversight from a central office responsible for ELLs.  2.  These districts ensure that teachers receive training and professional development on how to work with ELLs.  3.  Successful districts use student data to improve instruction.

The report also stated that districts that are not successful with ELL students have the following in common:  1.  They do not have a vision for educating ELL students.  2.  They limit access to the general curriculum.  3.  They have not given authority and resources to the district office responsible for ELLs.
4.  They do not use disaggregated student data in a systematic way.

This article leads me to yet more questions.  What are the policies in the Salem-Keizer School District regarding English Language Learners?  What are the current state laws regarding ELL education in Oregon?

Reflection on "Reviews Find ELL Programs Lacking in Four Districts"

"Reviews Find ELL Programs Lacking in Four Districts", written by Mary Ann Zehr, was published online July 30, 2010.  This article caught my attention because I am particularly interested in working with English Language Learners or ELL students.  I have already worked with some ELL elementary students on a volunteer basis, providing extra support in reading.

According to the article, reviews of four urban school districts (Boston, Buffalo, NY, Seattle, and Portland) found that these school districts did not provide services and assistance to learn English to all the students entitled to it under federal law.  The Obama Administration, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Education, state governments, and private, independent groups are now investigating ELL programs all around the country.  There is concern that the civil rights of ELL students are being violated because schools are not providing English language support, and ELL students, thus, do not have equal access to education.  This violates the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.  School District Officials  have identified the following problems they are having:

1.  They are confused about how to apply federal civil rights laws to the education of ELL students. 

2.  Districts are not sure when it is appropriate to move students out of ELL programs.

3.  In some states, parents can choose to have their child "opt out" of ELL programs.

4.  There is a lack of clarity on how best to identify ELL students.  Some districts use a "Home Language Survey" completed by parents and others are screening or interviewing students.  Some districts have bilingual staff conducting the interviews and some do not.  One district only evaluated speaking and listening, but not reading and writing.

5.  Districts are also sometimes unprepared to handle unexpected, large numbers of immigrants.

This is clearly a complicated issue and many state and federal agencies are involved.  One could even argue that "too many cooks spoil the soup."  Perhaps a task force or a board with representatives from all the government agencies, private institutions, and universities could be established to look into these issues.  This article brought up several questions for me.  If we are not meeting the needs of ELL students in Portland, Boston, Buffalo, and Seattle, are there any districts around the country that are doing a better job?  If so, what are these districts doing?  What does the research tell us about how to help ELL students be successful?