Improving Understanding of English Learner Education Through an Expanded Analytic Framework

Abstract

Existing analytic frameworks used to analyze and report on English learner (EL) students have important limitations that complicate the efforts of policymakers, practitioners, and researchers to fully understand this group’s experiences and outcomes and respond accordingly. To address this issue, we argue that education agencies should report and analyze outcomes for four categories of students: current ELs, former ELs, ever ELs (the combined group of current and former ELs), and never ELs. We present empirical data from six applications of our proposed four-category framework, illustrating the insights it provides.

Keywords

English language learners educational equity accountability educational policy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Achieve. (2018). On track or falling behind? How states include measures of 9th grade performance in their ESSA plans. https://www.achieve.org/files/On-Track-Brief.pdf

Arizona Department of Education. (n.d.). AZELLA. https://www.azed.gov/assessment/azella

Artiles

A. J.

Harry

Reschly

D. J.

Chinn

P. C.

(2002). Over-identification of students of color in special education: A critical overview. Multicultural Perspectives, 4(1), 3–10.

Bailey

K. D.

(2000). Typologies. In Borgatta

E. F.

Borgatta

M. L.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of sociology (5th ed., pp. 3180–3189). Macmillan.

California Department of Education. (n.d.). Reclassification. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/rd/

Callahan

Wilkinson

Muller

Frisco

(2009). ESL placement and schools: Effects on immigrant achievement. Educational Policy, 23(2), 355–384.

Carnoy

García

(2017). Five key trends in U.S. student performance. Economic Policy Institute. http://www.epi.org/files/pdf/113217.pdf

Collier

LaPorte

Seawright

(2012). Putting typologies to work: Concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly, 65(1), 217–232.

Consentino

Cohen

Deterding

Clewell

B.C.

(2005). Who’s left behind? Immigrant children in high and low LEP schools. The Urban Institute. https://www.fcd-us.org/assets/2016/04/WhosLeftBehind.pdf

10.

Data Quality Campaign. (2020, January). Growth data: It matters, and it’s complicated. https://dataqualitycampaign.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/DQC-Growth-Data-Resources.pdf

11.

de la Torre

Blanchard

Allensworth

Freire

(2019). English learners in Chicago public schools. UChicago Consortium on School Research.

12.

Education Commission of the States. (2018). English language learner reclassification: Response to information request. https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/ELL-Reclassification-Info-Request-07-2018.pdf

13.

Estrada

Wang

(2018). Making English learner reclassification to fluent English proficient attainable or elusive: When meeting criteria is and is not enough. American Educational Research Journal, 55(2), 207–242.

14.

Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2015).

15.

Garcia

(2009). Emergent bilinguals and TESOL: What’s in a name? TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 322–326.

16.

Gordon

(2017). How state ESSA accountability plans can shine a statistically sound light on more students. Brookings Institute. https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-state-essa-accountability-plans-can-shine-a-statistically-sound-light-on-more-students/

17.

Hanson

Bisht

Greenberg Motamedi

(2016). Advanced course enrollment and performance among English learner students in Washington State (REL 2017–187). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northwest. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs

18.

Hopkins

Thompson

K. D.

Linquanti

August

Hakuta

(2013). Fully accounting for English learner performance: A key issue in ESEA reauthorization. Educational Researcher 42(2), 101–108.

19.

Kieffer

M. J.

Parker

C. E.

(2016). Patterns of English learner student reclassification in New York City public schools (REL 2017–200). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs

20.

Kieffer

M. J.

Thompson

K. D.

(2018). Hidden progress of multilingual students on NAEP. Educational Researcher, 47(6), 391–398.

21.

Kostyo

Cardichon

Darling-Hammond

(2018). Making ESSA’s equity promise real: State strategies to close the opportunity gap. Learning Policy Institute.

22.

Lavadenz

Armas

Jáurequi Hodge

(2018). Masking the focus on English learners: The consequences of California’s accountability system dashboard results on year 4 local control and accountability plans (LCAPs). Californians Together. https://www.californianstogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/21007-LCAP-Report-Web-12.pdf

23.

Layton

C. A.

Lock

R. H.

(2002). Sensitizing teachers to English language learner evaluation procedures for students with learning disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(4), 362–367.

24.

Lazarsfeld

P. F.

(1937). Some remarks on the typological procedures in social research. Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung, 6(1), 119–139.

25.

Linn

R. L.

Haug

(2002). Stability of school-building accountability scores and gains. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 29–36.

26.

Murnane

R. J.

(2013). US high school graduation rates: Patterns and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 51(2), 370–422.

27.

Murphy

Johnson

(2020). Dual identification? The effects of English learner status on special education placement (EdWorkingPaper No. 20-293). Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University. https://www.edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai20-293.pdf

28.

Oakes

(2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). Yale University Press.

29.

Oregon Department of Education. (2018). Executive Numbered Memo 002-2018-19: School improvement identification and new support model. https://www.oregon.gov/ode/about-us/Documents/Identification%20and%20Supports%20Executive%20Numbered%20Memo%20002-2018-19.pdf

30.

Oregon Department of Education. (2020). English language learners in Oregon: Annual report 2018-19. https://www.oregon.gov/ode/reports-and-data/LegReports/Documents/Oregon%20English%20Learners%20Report%202018-19%20Final.pdf

31.

Polat

Zarecky-Hodge

Schreiber

J. B.

(2016). Academic growth trajectories of ELLs in NAEP data: The case of fourth-and eighth-grade ELLs and non-ELLs on mathematics and reading tests. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 541–553.

32.

Saunders

W. M.

Marcelletti

D. J.

(2013). The gap that can’t go away: The catch-22 of reclassification in monitoring the progress of English learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 139–156.

33.

Strong

K. A.

Escamilla

(2020). The need for nuance: Relationships between EL English proficiency and accountability outcomes. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(1), 92–110.

34.

Sugarman

(2019). The unintended consequences for English learners of using the four-year graduation rate for school accountability. Migration Policy Institute.

35.

Sugarman

(2020). Which English learners count when? Understanding state EL subgroup definitions in ESSA reporting. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/state-english-learner-subgroup-definitions-essa

36.

Thompson

K. D.

Umansky

I. M.

Porter

(2020). Examining contexts of reception for newcomer students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 19(1), 10–35.

37.

Umansky

I. M.

Reardon

S. F.

(2014). Reclassification patterns among Latino English learner students in bilingual, dual immersion, and English immersion classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 879–912.

38.

Umansky

I. M.

Thompson

K. D.

Díaz

(2017). Using an ever–English learner framework to examine disproportionality in special education. Exceptional Children, 84(1), 76–96.

39.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). New no child left behind regulations: Flexibility and accountability for limited English proficient students. https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/lepfactsheet.pdf

40.

U.S. Department of Education. (2008). No child left behind high school graduation rate: Non-regulatory guidance. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/hsgrguidance.pdf

41.

U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Every Student Succeeds Act state and local report cards: Non-regulatory guidance. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/essastatereportcard.pdf

42.

U.S. Department of Education. (2018). Academic performance and outcomes for English learners. https://www2.ed.gov/datastory/el-outcomes/index.html

43.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2020). English language learners in public schools. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp

44.

Villegas

Pompa

(2020). The patchy landscape of state English learner policies under ESSA. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/state-english-learner-policies-essa