AmreinA. L., & BerlinerD. (2003). The effects of high-stakes testing on student motivation and learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 32–38.
2.
BartoloméL. I. (1994). Beyond the methods fetish: Toward a humanizing pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 64(2), 173–194.
3.
BatalovaJ., FixM. E., & MurrayJ. (2007). Measures of change: The demography and literacy of adolescent English language learners. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.
4.
CappsR., FixM. E., MurrayJ., OstJ., PasselJ. S., & HerwantoroS. H. (2005). The new demography of America's schools: Immigrants and the No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://www.urban.org/search/index.cfm.
5.
Center for Applied Linguistics. (2009). Directory of two-way bilingual immersion programs in the U.S. Retrieved January 6, 2010, from http://www.cal.org/twi/directory/grades.htm
6.
ChuongC. H. (1999). Vietnamese-American students: Between the pressure to succeed and the pressure to change. In ParkC. C. & ChiM. M.-Y. (Eds.), Asian-American education: Prospects and challenges (pp. 183–200). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
7.
CortinaR. (2009). Immigrant youth in high school: Understanding educational outcomes for students of Mexican origin. In WileyT. G., LeeJ. S., & RumbergerR. W. (Eds.), The education of language minority immigrants in the United States (pp. 113–135). Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
8.
CoulterC., & SmithM. L. (2006). English language learners in a comprehensive high school. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 309–335.
9.
CumminsJ. (1995). Power and pedagogy in the education of culturally diverse students: A discussion paper. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
10.
CumminsJ. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters LTD.
11.
Darling-HammondL. (2004). From “separate but equal” to “No Child Left Behind”: The collision of new standards and old inequalities. In MeierD. & WoodG. (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 3–32). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
12.
EchevarriaJ., & GravesA. (2007). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English learners with diverse abilities. Boston, MA: Pearson.
13.
FaltisC., & AriasB. (2007). Coming out of the ESL ghetto: Promising practices for Latino immigrant students and English learners in hypersegregated secondary schools. Journal of Border Educational Research, 6(2), 19–35.
14.
FaltisC., & CoulterC. (2007). Teaching English learners and immigrant students in secondary school settings. New York: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
15.
FasholaO. S., & SlavinR. E. (2001). Effective dropout prevention and college attendance programs for Latino students. In SlavinR. E. & CalderónM. (Eds.), Effective programs for Latino students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16.
FusarelliL. D. (2004). The potential impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on equity and diversity in American education. Educational Policy, 18(1), 71–94.
17.
GándaraP. (1999). Staying in the race: The challenge for Chicanos/as in higher education. In MorenoJ. F. (Ed.), The elusive quest for equality: 150 years of Chicano/Chicana education (pp. 169–196). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
18.
GándaraP., & ContrerasF. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
GeneseeF., Lindholm-LearyK., SaundersW., & ChristianD. (2005). English language learners in U.S. Schools: An overview of research findings. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(4), 363–385.
20.
GoldN., & Maxwell-JollyJ. (2006). The high schools English learners need (Policy Report). Santa Barbara, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
21.
GonzálezR., & Ayala-AlcantarC. U. (2008). Critical caring: Dispelling Latino stereotypes among preservice teachers. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(2), 129–143.
22.
GuthrieL. F., & GuthrieG. P. (2000). Longitudinal research on AVID, 1999-2000: Research, evaluation and training in education Retrieved January 12, 2010 from http://www.avidonline.org/content/pdf/418.pdf
23.
HallidayM. A. K., & MartinJ. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.
24.
HerL. (2010). When is a student an English learner? An ethnographic account of when students and educators invoke the institutional identity, “English language learner.” AAPI Nexus: Journal of Policy, Research and Practice, 7(1), 25–53.
25.
HowardE. R., & SugarmanJ. (2001). Two-way immersion programs: Features and statistics. ERIC DIGEST. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
26.
ImaK. (1995). Testing the American dream: Case studies of Southeast Asian refugee students in secondary schools. In RumbautR. G. & CorneliusW. (Eds.), California's immigrant children: Theory, research, and implications for educational policy (pp. 191–208). San Diego, CA: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies.
27.
ImaK., & NiedorfJ. (1998). Characteristics of Southeast Asian delinquents. In PangV. O. & ChengL.-R. L. (Eds.), The unmet needs of Asian Pacific American children (pp. 89–104). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
28.
KarpS. (2004). NCLB's selective vision of equality: Some gaps count more than others. In MeierD. & WoodG. (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 53–65). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
29.
KoyamaJ. (2004). Appropriating policy: Constructing positions for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(3), 401–423.
30.
LayzerC. (2000). Who's afraid of bilingual learners? The role of teachers’ attitudes and beliefs. Paper presented at the Spring Conference of National Council of Teachers of English, New York.
LightfootS. L. (1983). The good high school: Portraits of character and culture. New York: Basic Books.
33.
LongP. D. P. (1996). The dream shattered: Vietnamese gangs in America. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
34.
LucasT., HenzeR., & DonatoR. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino language-minority students: An exploratory study of six high schools. Harvard Educational Review, 60(3), 315–340.
35.
MacedoD. (1994). Literacies of power: What Americans are not allowed to know. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
36.
McNeilL. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. Routledge: New York.
37.
McNeilL., & ValenzuelaA. (2000). The harmful impact of the TAAS system of testing in Texas: Beneath the accountability rhetoric. In KornhaberM. & OrfieldG. (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education, (pp. 127–150). New York: Century Foundation.
38.
MenkenK. (2009). Policy features: No Child Left Behind and English language learners. In GroenkeS. L. & HatchJ. A. (Eds.), Critical pedagogy and teacher education in the neoliberal era: Small openings. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
39.
MichaelA., AndradeN., & BartlettL. (2007). Figuring “success” in a bilingual high school. The Urban Review, 39(2), 167–189.
40.
MinicucciC. (2000). Effective use of time in the education of English language learners. In GándaraP. (Ed.), The dimensions of time and the challenge of school reform. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
41.
NietoS. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Boston, MA: Pearson.
42.
NoddingsN. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York: Teachers College Press.
43.
OvandoC. J., CombsM. C., & CollierV. P. (2006). Bilingual and ESL classrooms: Teaching in a multicultural contexts. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
44.
PierceK. M. (2006). Posing, pretending, waiting for the bell: Life in high school classrooms. The High School Journal, 89(2), 1–15.
45.
PortesA., & RumbautR. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the second generation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
46.
ReyesP., ScribnerJ. D., ScribnerA. P. (Eds.). (1999). Lessons from high-performing Hispanic schools: Creating learning communities. New York: Teachers College Press.
47.
ReyesR.III. (2009). “Key interactions” as agency and empowerment: Providing a sense of the possible to marginalized, Mexican-descent students. Journal of Latinos and Education, 8(2), 105–118.
48.
Richardson BrunaK., VannR., & EscuderoM. P. (2007). What's language got to do with it? A case study of academic language instruction in a high school “English learner science” class. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 36–54.
49.
RodríguezL. F. (2008). Struggling to recognize their existence: Examining student-adult relationships in the urban high school context. The Urban Review, 40, 436–453.
50.
RomoH., & FalboT. (1996). Latino high school graduation: Defying the odds. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
51.
RothW.-M. (2005). Telling in purposeful activity and the emergence of scientific language. In YerrickR. K. & RothW.-M. (Eds.), Establishing scientific discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research (pp. 45–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52.
SchoenL., & FusarelliL. D. (2008). Innovation, NCLB, and the fear factor: The challenge of leading 21st-century schools in an era of accountability. Educational Policy, 22(1), 181–203.
53.
Stanton-SalazarR. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–40.
54.
Stanton-SalazarR. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College Press.
55.
Suárez-OrozcoC., Suárez-OrozcoM. M., & TodorovaI. (2008). Learning a new land: Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
56.
TsangS.-L., KatzA., & StackJ. (2008). Achievement testing for English language learners, ready or not?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(1), 1–26.
57.
U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Growing number of limited English proficient students 1993/94–2003/04. Retrieved January 12, 2010, from www.ncela.gwu.edu/policy/states/index.htm.
58.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2004). The conditions of education, 2004. Retrieved December 20, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe
59.
ValenzuelaA. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. New York: SUNY Press.
60.
ValenzuelaA. (2005). Leaving children behind: How “Texas-style” accountability fails Latino youth. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
61.
WoodG. (2004). NCLB's effects on classrooms and schools. In MeierD. & WoodG. (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 33–50). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
62.
WrightW. E. (2002). The effects of high-stakes testing on an inner-city elementary school: The curriculum, the teachers, and the English language learners. Current Issues in Education, 5(5). Retrieved December 21, 2009, from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume5/number5/
63.
WrightW., & ChoiD. (2006). The impact of language and high-stakes testing policies on elementary school English language learners in Arizona. Education Policy Analysis, 14(13). Retrieved November 20, 2009, from http://www.epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n13/