Although educational policies for emergent bilinguals in New York City schools have historically supported the provision of bilingual education, the past decade has borne witness to a dramatic loss of bilingual education programs in city schools. This study examines the factors that determine language education policies adopted by school principals, through qualitative research in 10 city schools that have eliminated their bilingual education programs in recent years and replaced them with English-only programs. Our findings draw a causal link between the pressures of test-based accountability imposed by No Child Left Behind and the adoption of English-only policies in city schools. Testing and accountability are used as the justification for dismantling bilingual education programs and create a disincentive to serve emergent bilingual students, as schools are far more likely to be labeled low performing and risk sanctions such as closure simply for admitting and educating these students.
Advocates for Children and Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. (2009). Empty promises: A case study of restructuring and exclusion of English language learners in two Brooklyn high schools. New York, NY: Author.
2.
BakerC. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (5th ed.). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
3.
CooperR. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
CorsonD. (1999). Language policy in schools: A resource for teachers and administrators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
CrawfordJ. (2007, March). The decline of bilingual education: How to reverse a troubling trend?International Multilingual Research Journal, 1(1), 33-37.
6.
CrawfordJ.KrashenS. (2007). English language learners in American classrooms: 101 questions, 101 answers. New York, NY: Scholastic.
7.
CumminsJ. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
8.
FloresN.ChuJ. (2011, March). How does size matter? The impact of the rise of small schools on Latinos and Emergent Bilinguals in New York City. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14, 155-170.
9.
GándaraP.HopkinsM. (Eds.). (2010). Forbidden language: English learners and restrictive language policies. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
10.
GarcíaO. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
11.
GarcíaO. (2011). Educating New York’s bilingual children: Constructing a future from the past. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14, 133-153.
HornbergerN. (2005). Nichols to NCLB: Local and global perspectives on U.S. language education policy. Working Papers in Education Linguistics, 20(2), 1-17.
14.
HornbergerN.JohnsonD. (2007). Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 509-533.
15.
KrashenS.McFieldG. (2005, November/December). What works? Reviewing the latest evidence on bilingual education. Language Learner, 1(2), 7-10, 34.
16.
LeCompteM.PreissleJ. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17.
MilesM.HubermanA. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
MenkenK. (2008). English learners left behind: Standardized testing as language policy. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
19.
MenkenK. (2009, March). “No child left behind” and its effects on language policy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 2009(29), 103-117.
20.
MenkenK. (2010, Spring). No Child Left Behind and English language learners: The challenges and consequences of high-stakes testing. Theory Into Practice, 49, 121-128.
21.
MenkenK. (2011, March). From policy to practice in the multilingual apple: Bilingual education in New York City. Editorial Introduction. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14(2), 123-133.
22.
MenkenK.KleynT. (2010, February). The long-term impact of subtractive schooling in the educational experiences of secondary English language learners. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13, 399-417.
23.
MenkenK.GarcíaO. (Eds.). (2010). Negotiating language policies in schools: Educators as policymakers. New York: Routledge.
24.
National Council of Teachers of English. (2006). NCTE position paper on the role of English teachers in educating English language learners. Urbana, IL: Author.
New York City Department of Education, Division of Students with Disabilities and ELLs. (2011, September). Corrective action plan. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/biling/docs/CAP0922Final.pdf
New York State Education Department, Office of Bilingual Education and Foreign Language Studies. (2009). New York State language allocation policy—CR Part 154. Albany, NY: Author. Retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/biling/docs/LAPtable12-09.pdf
30.
PalmerD.Snodgrass-RangelV. (2011). High stakes accountability and policy implementation: Teacher decision making in bilingual classrooms in Texas. Educational Policy, 25, 614-647.
31.
ReyesL. (2003). Surviving the “perfect storm”: Bilingual education policymaking in New York City. Journal of Latinos and Education, 2(1), 23-30.
32.
ReyesL. (2006, Fall). The Aspira consent decree: A thirtieth-anniversary retrospective of bilingual education in New York City. Harvard Educational Review, 76, 369-400.
33.
RotbergI. (2000, March29). Campaign 2000: Notes to the next president on education policy. Education Week, 19(28).
34.
ShohamyE. (2006). Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches. London, UK: Routledge.
35.
SpolskyB. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
ThomasW.CollierV. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
37.
TollefsonJ. (Ed.). (2012). Language policies in education: Critical issues. New York, NY: Routledge.
38.
ValenzuelaA. (2005). Subtractive schooling, caring relations, and social capital in the schooling of U.S.-Mexican youth. In WeisL.FineM. (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United States schools (pp. 83-94). Albany: State University of New York Press.
39.
WileyT.WrightW. (2004). Against the undertow: Language-minority education policy and politics in the “age of accountability.”Educational Policy, 18, 142-168.
40.
WrightW. (2010). Foundations for teaching English language learners: Research, theory, policy, and practice. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon Publishing.
41.
WrightW.LiX. (2008, September). High-stakes math tests: How No Child Left Behind leaves newcomer English language learners behind. Language Policy, 7, 237-266.
42.
ZehlerA.FleishmanH.HopstockP.StephensonT.PendzikM.SapruS. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and to LEP students with disabilities; Policy report: Summary of findings related to LEP and SpEd-LEP students. Arlington, VA: Development Associates.
