Promoting the Educational Success of Children and Youth Learning English Promising Futures (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Policy Context
2 Policy Context
Pages 37-62
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 37... ...
This chapter examines the evolution of federal policies that have shaped practice in the education of ELs over the past 50 years, federal and state policies that govern early care and education (ECE) for DLLs and whether they are consistent with promising and effective practices,2 and current federal and state policies related to K-12 education for ELs that have followed the advent of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
|
From page 38... ...
It is important to recognize these historical origins of EL policies when considering policies related to children's access to learning English and to grade-level content instruction. In 1968, Congress passed the Bilingual Education Act as Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
|
From page 39... ...
During this same period, the courts became active in their interpretation of the Civil Rights Act of 19646 -- most notably Title VI, which declared, "No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the San Francisco Unified School District was in violation of this act for failing to provide 2,856 Chinese schoolchildren access to learning English or to the basic content of schooling because they had not developed the level of English proficiency necessary to benefit from subject matter instruction in English.7 The Court stated, "There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education." The Court declared, "Imposition of a requirement that, before a child can effectively participate in the educational program, he must already have acquired those basic skills is to make a mockery of public education." Congress followed the Lau decision by incorporating and extending its principles into the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.8 According to that act, no state could deny students the right to equal education as a result of "failure by an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs [emphasis added]
|
From page 40... ...
The Native American Languages Act of 1990b recognized the rights of communities to "preserve, protect, and promote the rights and freedom to use, practice, and develop Native American languages," and to do so in educational programs that used those languages as means of instruction in school. This act was amended in 2006 as the Esther Martinez Native American Languages Pres ervation Act,c which provided funds through grants to support language revitaliza tion efforts in many communities through the Administration for Native Americans.
|
From page 41... ...
The American Institutes for Research (Danoff et al., 1978) produced a congressionally mandated evaluation of Title VII-funded bilingual programs and found few positive effects for bilingual education.
|
From page 42... ...
The rhetoric shifted from accountability for spending of federal funds to accountability for demonstrated results. This shift changed the way in which the Bilingual Education Act was envisioned.
|
From page 43... ...
, 39 states and the District of Columbia indicated that districts receiving federal Title III funding had implemented at least one dual language program during that year. In total, these programs featured more than 30 different partner languages.
|
From page 44... ...
, as well as on the assessment process outlined by states, districts, and schools. Typically, the criteria include attainment of a stated level of proficiency in English language arts plus demonstration of proficiency in the other language (e.g., criteria available through advanced placement, international baccalaureate testing, or American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2015)
|
From page 45... ...
The resulting Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium developed assessments aligned with the Common Core State Standards in English language arts, literacy, and mathematics, creating synergies between the Common Core and state needs for relief from the NCLB accountability provisions. The Common Core and its variants gave educators a new appreciation
|
From page 46... ...
known as the "ELP/D Framework," which describes the English language proficiency required for students to engage in learning the grade-level course content specified by the Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards. In so doing, the report builds an explicit bridge between academic content and students' use of language.
|
From page 47... ...
. CURRENT POLICIES FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS As children's enrollment in early learning programs has increased during the past two decades (National Institute for Early Education Research, 2015)
|
From page 48... ...
The policy context in the ESSA era will provide more opportunities for schools, districts, and states to create programs for DLLs that start early with pre-K at ages 3 and 4 and are well aligned with grades K-3 and beyond. As discussed in Chapter 5, research findings indicate that starting early to build second language competence while supporting the home or primary language is a promising program strategy and policy direction.
|
From page 49... ...
In a DL educational setting, at least 50 percent of instructional time is in the child's home language, and 50 percent is focused on English language development. On the other end of the spectrum, states with an EI approach emphasize rapid acquisition of English in an English-only instructional environment and do not explicitly support home language maintenance.
|
From page 50... ...
California is one of the few states that provides a clear statement of philosophy about the goals for DLL learning; establishes a separate set of domains for DLLs on English language and home language development; and addresses DLLs' needs in communication, language, literacy, and social-emotional development (California Department of Education, 2009)
|
From page 51... ...
. The framework provides guidance on learning expectations for DLLs and stresses the importance of giving children the opportunity to express their knowledge in their home language: "Children who are dual language learners need intentional support for the development of their home language as well as for English acquisition" (Office of Head Start, 2015, p.
|
From page 52... ...
. There has, however, been no comprehensive evaluation of Head Start grantees on the degree of support for home language development, the quality of language inputs, or the amount of time spent using children's native language in the classroom.
|
From page 53... ...
. CURRENT POLICIES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS K-12 Federal K-12 Policies Related to Literacy, Language, and Content Learning ESSA, enacted on December 10, 2015, has broad implications for ELs through several notable changes related to their inclusion in state plans, school accountability, and entry/exit procedures for status as an EL.
|
From page 54... ...
. • Student progress toward English language proficiency, formerly part of a separate Title III accountability system, is now part of Title I accountability, and in their accountability plans, states must describe their rules for how this student progress is to be accom plished.
|
From page 55... ...
Title III requires schools "to promote parental, family, and community participation in language instruction educational programs for the parents, families, and communities of English learners."17 Within Title IV is a provision for assistance and support to state and local education agencies, schools, and educators for strengthening partnerships with parents and families of ELs. To that end, grants will be awarded to statewide organizations for the establishment of family engagement centers to implement parent and family engagement programs and provide training and technical assistance to state and local education agencies and organizations that support family-school partnerships.
|
From page 56... ...
, establishing language proficiency standards aligned with the state's academic content standards, and annually assessing the English language proficiency and content area knowledge of all ELs. Furthermore, states support ELs by providing additional funds to districts beyond the average per-student dollar amounts.
|
From page 57... ...
ESSA provides increased decision-making authority to states regarding the inclusion of ELs in state accountability plans, in how the accountability index for Title I is constructed, in how ELs' academic achievement and progress toward English language pro ficiency are assessed, and in how districts respond to schools identified for state assistance. Conclusion 2-2: As a result of changes in the Every Student Succeeds Act, schools rather than districts are now accountable for English learn ers' (ELs')
|
From page 58... ...
Conclusion 2-5: Greater state flexibility in accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act has led to concerns among civil rights and other organizations focused on underserved populations, such as English learners (ELs) , about protecting the legal rights of ELs to an ap propriate education as guaranteed under the Supreme Court decision in Lau v.
|
From page 59... ...
. Framework for English Language Proficiency Development Standards Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards.
|
From page 60... ...
. Allocating Federal Funds for State Programs for English Language Learners.
|
From page 61... ...
. Non-Regulatory Guidance: English Learners and Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.