English learners (ELs), students from a home where a language other than English is spoken and who are in the process of developing English proficiency themselves, represent more than 10% of the U.S. student population. Oftentimes, education policies and practices create barriers for ELs to achieve access and outcomes that are equitable to those of their non-EL peers. Recent education research—often using experimental and quasi-experimental designs—provides new insights on how to evaluate EL policies, as well as how best to alter current policies to yield more equitable outcomes for ELs. Topics discussed include (a) EL classification and services, (b) language of instruction, (c) access to core content, and (d) assessments.
AbediJ. (2004). The No Child Left Behind act and English language learners: Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Researcher, 33, 4-14.
2.
AbediJ. (2009). Computer testing as a form of accommodation for English language learners. Educational Assessment, 14, 195-211.
3.
AbediJ.HofstetterC.LordC. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: Implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74, 1-28.
4.
AdesopeO. O.LavinT.ThompsonT.UngerleiderC. (2010). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the cognitive correlates of bilingualism. Review of Educational Research, 80, 207-245.
5.
AugustD.ShanahanT. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
BarnettW. S.YaroszD. J.ThomasJ.JungK.BlancoD. (2007). Two-way and monolingual English immersion in preschool education: An experimental comparison. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 277-293.
7.
BlanchardS.MullerC. (2015). Gatekeepers of the American dream: How teachers’ perceptions shape the academic outcomes of immigrant and language-minority students. Social Science Research, 51, 262-275.
8.
CallahanR. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunity to learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 305-328.
9.
CallahanR.GándaraP. (Eds.). (2014). The bilingual advantage: Language, literacy, and the labor market. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
10.
CallahanR.WilkinsonL.MullerC. (2010). Academic achievement and course taking among language minority youth in US schools: Effects of ESL placement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32, 84-117.
11.
CongerD. (2009). Testing, time limits, and English learners: Does age of entry affect how quickly students can learn English?Social Science Research, 38, 383-396.
12.
CraikF. I. M.BialystokE.FreedmanM. (2010). Delaying the onset of Alzheimer disease: Bilingualism as a form of cognitive reserve. Neurology, 75, 1726-1729.
13.
CumminsJ. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
14.
DabachD. (2014). I am not a shelter!” Stigma and social boundaries in teachers’ accounts of students’ experience in separate “sheltered” English learner classrooms. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 19, 98-124.
15.
DabachD. (2015). Teacher placement into immigrant English learner classrooms: Limiting access in comprehensive high schools. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 243-274.
16.
EstradaP. (2014). English learner curricular streams in four middle schools: Triage in the trenches. The Urban Review, 46, 535-573.
17.
GándaraP.HopkinsM. (2010). Forbidden language: English learners and restrictive language policies. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
18.
GándaraP.Maxwell-JollyJ.DriscollA. (2005). Listening to Teachers of English language learners: A survey of California teachers. Berkeley, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education.
19.
GándaraP.RumbergerR.Maxwell-JollyJ.CallahanR. (2003). English learners in California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(36), 1-54.
20.
García-NevarezA. G.StaffordM. E.AriasB. (2005). Arizona elementary teachers’ attitudes toward English language learners and the use of Spanish in classroom instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 29, 295-317.
21.
GreeneJ. P. (1997). A meta-analysis of the Rossell & Baker review of bilingual education research. Bilingual Research Journal, 21, 103-122
22.
HaertelE.HoA. (in press). Fairness using derived scores. In DoransN. J.CookL. L. (Eds.), NCME applications of educational measurement and assessment book series: Fairness in educational assessment and measurement. New York: Routledge.
23.
HakutaK.ButlerY. G.WittD. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? (UC Language Minority Research Institute Policy Report 2000-1). Davis: University of California, Davis.
24.
HambletonR. K.MerendaP. F.SpielbergerC. D. (Eds.). (2004). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press.
25.
HarklauL. (1994). Tracking and linguistic minority students: Consequences of ability grouping for second language learners. Linguistics and Education, 6, 217-244.
26.
HarrisE. A. (2015, January15). New York City education department to add or expand 40 dual-language programs. The New York Times, p. A24.
27.
HofstetterC. H. (2003). Contextual and mathematics accommodation test effects for English-language learners. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 159-188.
28.
HopkinsM.LowenhauptR.SweetT. M. (2015). Organizing English learner instruction in new immigrant destinations: District infrastructure and subject-specific school practice. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 408-439.
29.
HopkinsM.Martinez-WenzlM.AldanaU. S.GándaraP. (2013). Cultivating capital: Latino newcomer young men in a US urban high school. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 44, 286-303.
30.
HopkinsM.ThompsonK. D.LinquantiR.HakutaK.AugustD. (2013). Fully accounting for English learner performance: A key issue in ESEA reauthorization. Educational Researcher, 42, 101-108.
31.
JonesN. D.BuzickH. M.TurkanS. (2013). Including students with disabilities and English learners in measures of educator effectiveness. Educational Researcher, 42, 234-241.
32.
KannoY.KangasS. (2014). “I’m not going to be, like, for the AP”: English language learners’ limited access to advanced college-preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 848-878.
33.
KiefferM. J.LesauxN. K.RiveraM.FrancisD. J. (2009). Accommodations for English language learners taking large-scale assessments: A meta-analysis on effectiveness and validity. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1168-1201.
34.
KoprivaR. J.EmickJ. E.Hipolito-DelgadoC. P.CameronC. A. (2007). Do proper accommodation assignments make a difference? Examining the impact of improved decision making on scores for English language learners. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26, 11-20.
35.
LakinJ. M.YoungJ. W. (2013). Evaluating growth for ELL students: Implications for accountability policies. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 32, 11-26.
36.
Lau v. Nichols, No. 414 U.S. 563 (1974).
37.
LillieK. E.MarkosA.AriasM. B.WileyT. G. (2012). Separate and not equal: The implementation of structured English immersion in Arizona’s classrooms. Teachers College Record, 114, 1-33.
38.
Linan-ThompsonS. (2010). Response to instruction, English language learners and disproportionate representation: The role of assessment. Psicothema, 22, 970-974.
39.
LinquantiR. (2001). The reclassification dilemma: Challenges and choices in fostering meaningful accountability for English learners (UC Language Minority Research Institute Policy Report 2001-01). Davis: University of California, Davis.
40.
LinquantiR.CookH. G. (2015). Re-examining reclassification: Guidance from a national working session on policies and practices for exiting students from English learner status. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
National Research Council. (2011). Allocating federal funds for state programs for English Language Learners. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
43.
No Child Left Behind. (2002). No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425.
44.
OakesJ. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45.
RaganA.LesauxN. (2006). Federal, state, and district level English language learner program entry and exit requirements: Effects on the education of language minority learners. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(20). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n20/
46.
ReardonS. F.RaudenbushS. W. (2009). Assumptions of value-added models for estimating school effects. Education Finance and Policy, 4, 492-519.
47.
RiveraC.CollumE. (2014). State assessment policy and practice for English language learners: A national perspective. New York: Routledge.
48.
RobinsonJ. P. (2010). The effects of test translation on young English learners’ mathematics performance. Educational Researcher, 39, 582-590.
49.
RobinsonJ. P. (2011). Evaluating criteria for English learner reclassification: A causal-effects approach using a binding-score regression discontinuity design with instrumental variables. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 267-292.
50.
Robinson-CimpianJ. P.MakowskiM. B. (2015, February). One threshold or many? Understanding moderators of reclassification effects to inform policy decisions. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education Finance and Policy, Washington, DC.
51.
Robinson-CimpianJ. P.ThompsonK. D. (2015). The effects of changing test-based policies for reclassifying English learners. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Advance online publication. doi:10.1002/pam.21882
52.
RolstadK.MahoneyK.GlassG. V. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy, 19, 572-594.
53.
RossellC. H.BakerK. (1996). The effectiveness of bilingual education. Research in the Teaching of English, 30, 7-74.
54.
RothsteinJ. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 175-214.
55.
RyanC. (2013). Language use in the United States: 2011. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
56.
SaundersW. M.MarcellettiD. 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, 139-156.
57.
SlavinR. E.CheungA. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction. Review of Educational Research, 75, 247-284.
58.
SlavinR. E.MaddenN.CalderónM.ChamberlainA.HennessyM. (2011). Reading and language outcomes of a multiyear randomized evaluation of transitional bilingual education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 47-58.
59.
SolórzanoR. W. (2008). High stakes testing: Issues, implications, and remedies for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 78, 260-329.
60.
SteeleJ. L.SlaterR. O.ZamarroG.MillerT.LiJ.BurkhauserS.BaconM. (in press). Effects of dual-language immersion programs on student achievement: Evidence from lottery data. American Educational Research Journal.
61.
ThompsonK. D. (2015a). English learners’ time to reclassification: An analysis. Educational Policy. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0895904815598394
62.
ThompsonK. D. (2015b). Questioning the long-term English learner label: How classification and categorization can blind us to students’ abilities. Teachers College Record, 117, 1-50.
63.
ThompsonK. D. (2015c, April). What blocks the gate? Exploring current and former English learners’ math course-taking in secondary school. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
64.
UmanskyI. M. (2014). Leveled and exclusionary tracking: English learners’ access to core content in middle school. Stanford, CA: Center for Education Policy Analysis, Stanford University.
65.
UmanskyI. M.ReardonS. F. (2014). Reclassification patterns among Latino English learner students in bilingual, dual immersion, and English immersion classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 879-912.
66.
UmanskyI. M.ReardonS.HakutaK.ThompsonK. D.EstradaP.HayesK.. . . GoldenbergC. (2015). Improving the opportunities and outcomes of California’s students learning English: Findings from school district-university collaborative partnerships. Sacramento: Policy Analysis for California Education.
67.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). The condition of education 2015 (NCES 2015-144). Jessup, MD: National Center for Education Statistics.
68.
ValentinoR. A.ReardonS. F. (2015). Effectiveness of four instructional programs designed to serve English learners: Variation by ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 612-637.
69.
WilligA. (1985). A meta-analysis of selected studies on the effectiveness of bilingual education. Review of Educational Research, 55, 269-317.
