Whereas most existing research has examined the prevalence of current English learners (ELs) in special education, we propose and test the use of the ever-EL framework, which holds the subgroup of EL students stable by following all students who enter school classified as ELs. Drawing on two administrative data sets, discrete-time hazard analyses show that whereas current EL students are overrepresented in special education at the secondary level, students who enter school as ELs are significantly underrepresented in special education overall and within most disability categories. Reclassification patterns, in part, explain these findings: EL students with disabilities are far less likely than those without disabilities to exit EL services, resulting in large proportions of dually identified students at the secondary level. These findings shed new light on EL under- and overrepresentation in special education and offer insights into policies and practices that can decrease EL special education disproportionality.
This study uses 9 years of longitudinal, student-level data from the Los Angeles Unified School District to provide updated, empirically-based estimates of the time necessary for English learners (ELs) to become reclassified as proficient in English, as well as factors associated with variation in time to reclassification. To illustrate how different aspects of proficiency develop, estimates of the time necessary for ELs to attain six separate reclassification criteria are provided. Findings corroborate prior cross-sectional research suggesting that the development of full proficiency in a second language typically takes 4 to 7 years. However, after 9 years in the district, approximately one-fourth of students had not been reclassified. There appears to be a reclassification window during the upper elementary grades, and students not reclassified by this point in time become less likely ever to do so. Findings illustrate the crucial role that students’ initial academic language proficiencies, both in English and their primary language, play in their likelihood of reclassification. This work has implications for the design of next-generation assessment and accountability systems, as well as for instructional practices.
Using National Assessment of Educational Progress data from 2003 to 2015, this brief describes changes in the reading and mathematics performance of multilingual students—defined as students who report a primary home language or languages other than English. Although all students’ scores improved, multilingual students’ scores improved two to three times more than monolingual students’ scores in both subjects in Grades 4 and 8. There was little evidence that these trends were explained by cohort changes in racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, or regional composition. These promising trends are obscured when researchers and policymakers focus only on scores for students currently classified as English learners.
This article presents a set of recommendations that promote a more nuanced, meaningful accountability policy for English learners in the next authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The authors argue that the ESEA reauthorization must strengthen the law's capacity-building purpose so that federal, state, and local leaders support continued attention, direction, and innovation in effectively educating ELs. The recommendations put forth in this article focus on monitoring both current and former ELs, establishing time frames for the attainment of English language proficiency, and setting expectations for academic achievement that are reflective of English language proficiency level and time in the state's school system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.