Bilingual Instruction

Tags: American Indian ELL Students; Asian ELL Students; Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Books and Other Reading Materials; Curriculum; Differentiated Instruction; Instructional Programs; Language of Instruction; Latino ELL Students; Motivation; Other ELL Students (Middle Eastern, African, European, etc.); Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA;

Target Population: Middle and high school students, parents, teachers, administrators, and guidance counselors.

Research Questions the Report Poses: This article questions how important it is for higher education institutions, schools, states, and the federal government to help students prepare for post-secondary education and graduate successfully.

Findings:

• For many students, the decision not to apply for college does not reflect a lack of higher education aspirations; instead, many students are discouraged by the application process and tuition rates.
• There is a growing consensus that high schools should be accountable for what their students' outcomes are after high graduation and that high schools and governments at all levels to increase the academic readiness.
• Proper guidance and easy access to available programs of financial aid and college admission application need to be highly promoted in all states, especially for low-income students.

Policy Recommendations:

The report authors identify three strategies that the federal government and states can potentially pursue in order to help all students enter and suceed in higher education:

• Create data systems that track college readiness and attainment and build accountability.
• Support and build the capacity of high school and college educators.
• Develop strong signals and clear incentives to students about the path to college.

The federal government is encouraged to take note of the recommendations made in this article on the economic, social, and academic factors that can prevent students from attending college. In addition, policymakers at the state and federal level are encouraged to create programs that facilitate the transition from high school to college by promoting students current and future college aspirations.

• Read the Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
Center for American Progress 1333 H Street, NW, 10th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005

Nagaoka, Jenny; Roderick, Melissa; Coca, Vanessa. (2009). Barriers to College Attainment: Lessons from Chicago. Washington, D.C. Center for American Progress.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Language of Instruction; Language Proficiency; Latino ELL Students; Motivation; Reading;

Target Population: High school, post-secondary (non-collegiate)

Research Questions the Report Poses:

1. What is the policy background for the provision of ESL courses in California? What distinguishes adult schools from other providers?
2. How has the ESL target population changed throughout the state since 1980? What is the level of predicted enrollment and what demographic changes affect enrollment in ESL courses?
3. What are the trends in the provision of ESL courses by adult schools and community colleges statewide and in the different regions of the state? Does the adult school funding formula limit adult school enrollment? To what extent do adult school districts exceed their level of funding?
4. What do adult schools that exceed their funding limit forgo in terms of quality of adult education classes and future growth of adult education programs? How much does the redistribution of unused funding alleviate the challenges facing high-demand regions? How would adult education providers benefit from increased funding?

Findings:

• There is a $15.7 million gap between money spent by adult schools on ESL programs and money awarded to these schools by the state of California.
• Though the adult ELL demographic is growing across the state, it is growing at different rates in different parts of the state.
• Close to 60 percent of adult schools in California exceed their funding limit.
• Among adult schools that do over-enroll students, nearly 80 percent exceed their funding limit by over 2.5 percent.

Policy Recommendations:

The authors recommend:

• Increased overall funding to adult ESL programs
• More mechanisms for distributing funds for ESL programs to areas and schools that have high demand
• Increasd enrollment caps so that schools do not have to pay out of their own pocket to have adult ESL programs

• Link to Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111

Gonzalez, A. California's Commitment to Adult English Learners: Caught Between Funding and Need. (2007). San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.

Tags: Asian ELL Students; Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Latino ELL Students; Other ELL Students (Middle Eastern, African, European, etc.); Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA;

Target Population: Preschool

Research Questions the Report Poses: None; instead makes the case that newcomer families and the children within them are, and will continue to be, a significant demographic in American education.

Findings:

• 25 percent of children from newcomer families have a parent who was born in the United States.
• Two-thirds of children from newcomer families have parents who have lived in the United States for ten or more years.
• 80% of children from newcomer families are US citizens
• Almost 60% of children have at least one parent who speaks English exclusively or very well
• Three-quarters of children from newcomer families speak English exclusively or very well
• Almost half of newcomer children speak both English and another language fluently or close to fluently
• Approximately a quarter of newcomer children are from linguistically isolated households
• Children from newcomer families going to pre-school with lower prevalence than children from native born families

Policy Recommendations:

• More resources need to be devoted to getting good early education to children from newcomer families
• A re-examination must take place of education policy toward language instruction, especially views of bi-literacy and bilingualism
• Education programs can and should improve outreach to newcomer parents

• Link to Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
Child Trends
Bonnie Wahiba
4301 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite 350
Washington, DC 20008
E-Mail: bwahiba@childtrends.org
Phone: (202) 572-6136
Fax: (202) 362-8420 (third floor, Suite 350)

Hernandez, D., Denton, N., and Macartney, S. (2007, April). Child Trends and Children in Immigrant Families - The U.S. and 50 States: National Origins, Language, and Early Education. Albany, NY: Center for Social and Demographic Analysis at SUNY-Albany

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Reading; Vocabulary;

• Purchase article

Carlo, M.S., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C.E., Dressler, C., Lippman, D.N., Lively, T.J., & White, C.E. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 188-215.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Comprehension; Content Areas: Math; Content Areas: Science; Content Areas: Social Studies; Content Areas: The Arts; Curriculum; Differentiated Instruction; Fluency; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Language of Instruction; Language Proficiency; Phonics; Phonological Awareness; Placement; Vocabulary; Writing;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: How do ELL students acquire literacy in a second language?

Findings:

• Instructional approaches that focus on phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension-have clear benefits for ELLs. Like their native English speaking peers, ELLs benefit from these strategies as well as writing instruction.
• For students to become literate in English several instructional qualities need to be met including: content coverage, intensity and thorough instruction,
• ELL specific instruction, monitoring learning, and teacher preparation.
• Oral proficiency and literacy in the first language can be used to facilitate literacy development in English.
• Researchers have documented few sociocultural impacts on literacy achievement or development. However, researchers have found that home language experiences can have a positive impact on literacy achievement.

• Link to Full Report

August, D. and Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Center for Applied Linguistics, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Language Proficiency; Rights, Students;

Target Population: Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: What are the current state policies and practices related to ELLs with disabilities?

Findings:

State-level personnel report a:

• Lack of qualified personnel trained in ELL or bilingual education to manage state-wide ELL needs;
• Lack of appropriate assessment instruments in languages other than English;
• Cultural barriers in communicating with ELL parents; and
• Need for sustained collaboration between bilingual education and special education personnel.

Policy Recommendations:

The authors offer a number of recommendations that include improved:

• Local accountability
• Statewide policies and guidance
• Teacher training and licensure
• Coordination between special education and ELL professionals

• Download full report (64KB PDF)*

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
NASDSE 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 320 Alexandria, VA 22314

Keller-Allen, C. (2006). English Language Learners with Disabilities: Identification and Other State Policies and Issues. Project Forum, National Association of State Directors of Special Education: Alexandria, VA.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Comprehension; Fluency; Instructional Programs; Language Proficiency; Phonics; Phonological Awareness; Placement; Spelling; Transfer of Literacy Skills; Vocabulary;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary

Research Questions the Report Poses: In spite of the debate over bilingual versus English-only education, the fundamental question remains: What are the best ways to teach English literacy to English language learners, and what rate of achievement in English is realistic to expect?

Findings:

• ELLs need the same kind of reading instruction that works for native speakers, more of it, and they need to be watched carefully so they get help adjusted to their language development needs as soon as they encounter problems;
• ELL students can learn basic English reading skills in two years, but their chances of falling behind later in school are greater than native English speaking children;
• There is no evidence that the extra teaching that ELLs need can be effectively offered in "pullout" programs that are not closely integrated with the main literacy program;
• ELLs benefit from lengthening the school day and/or year; and
• ELLs need teachers who can deliver reading instruction shown to be most effective, and these teachers need intensive professional development

Policy Recommendations:

• Give English language learners extra time and instruction in literacy, either through longer school days or extended years;
• Assign the best teachers to English learners and provide professional development in effective teaching strategies;
• Use proven techniques for teaching basic word recognition skills, including phonics and phonological awareness;
• Provide lots of practice reading and frequent assessments to pinpoint children's reading strengths and weaknesses;
• Provide structured academic conversation, built around books and other subject matter activities to build vocabulary and comprehension; and
• Provide several years of intensive, high-quality instruction to help students master the vocabulary, comprehension, and oral language skills that will make them fully fluent in speaking, reading, and writing English.

• Download research brief (89KB PDF)*

Resnick, L.B., Ed. (2004). English Language Learners: Boosting Academic Achievement. Research Points, 2(1). American Educational Research Association: Washington DC.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Comprehension; Curriculum; Differentiated Instruction; Fluency; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Language of Instruction; Language Proficiency; Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA; Struggling Readers; Transfer of Literacy Skills; Vocabulary; Writing;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: The paper provides an overview of research and knowledge that educators can use to create schools in which English learners thrive and achieve at high levels.

Policy Recommendations:

• Invest in building a qualified educator workforce;
• Build a meaningful accountability system for English learners;
• Assure that educators have the materials they need to deliver high quality English Language Development; and
• Demonstrate new models of successful schools for English learners

• Link to Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
University of California
Linguistic Minority Research Institute
4722 South Hall
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-3220

Olsen, L. (2006). Ensuring Academic Success for English Learners. University of California: Linguistic Minority Research Institute.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Books and Other Reading Materials; Comprehension; Differentiated Instruction; Instructional Programs; Motivation; Reading; Struggling Readers; Transfer of Literacy Skills; Vocabulary;

Target Population: Elementary School

Research Questions the Report Poses: What are the most effective ways to teach vocabulary to diverse learners?

Findings:
This article focuses on strategies and techniques for integrating vocabulary into the classroom. Some of the vocabulary areas covered are:

• Synonyms
• Antonyms
• Compound words
• Root words
• Using technology to teach vocabulary

Policy Recommendations:
N/A

• Download full article (159KB PDF)*

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
Learning Point Associates 1100 17th Street N.W., Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036

Blachowicz, C.L.Z, Watts-Taffe, S. & Fisher, P. (2005). Learning Point Associates.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Comprehension; Content Areas: Math; Content Areas: Science; Content Areas: Social Studies; Content Areas: The Arts; Curriculum; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Language of Instruction; Language Proficiency;

Target Population: Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: The report uses the example of Coachella school district's legal battle to examine whether state assessments are appropriate accountability measures for English language learners.

Findings:
N/A

Policy Recommendations:
N/A

• Purchase Report

Dillon, N. (2005). Language Test. American School Board Journal, 192(8). National School Boards Association.

Tags: Asian ELL Students; Bilingual Instruction; Language Proficiency;

Target Population: All

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• What are the statistics regarding Asian American students/ELLs?
• How do schools neglect Asian American students?
• What can be changed to close the achievement gap of Asian American students and provide them sufficient resources for success?

Findings:

• 24% of Asian American students are ELLs.
• Asian Americans comprise 12% of all ELLs, though they are only 5% of the total population.
• The four largest Asian ethnic ELL populations nationwide are: Chinese (115,000), Vietnamese (95,000), Korean (51,000), and Asian Indian (47,000).
• Improved and increased ELL services are clearly a dire need for Asian American students and must not be overlooked due to the "model minority myth" which postures Asian Americans as automatically higher-achieving.

Policy Recommendations:

• Devalue high-stakes testing: Resources should be devoted to language acquisition and learning experience rather than testing. Furthermore standardized testing should not be used to penalize schools by denying them funding or to penalize students by denying grade promotion or graduation.
• Create more native-language assessments based on demographics of cities or districts, not whole states, or using a statewide absolute numerical threshold (as opposed to the current 10% rule.)
• Create more bilingual education programs (as opposed to English-only instruction).
• Address high pushout/dropout rates: Schools should provide truancy intervention, ELL programs, high quality ELL teachers, and native language materials.
• Use multiple forms of assessment: ELLs should be assessed according to individual growth, using classroom-based results, and with appropriate accommodations. Assessments should be aligned to the instruction they receive (ie language acquisition, not traditional literacy development.)
• Increase professional development, providing ELL-teaching-specific training, and increase hiring of ELL teachers.
• Enable parental involvement: Provide native-language materials about the public education system and specific schools, translators for parent-teacher communication, community outreach, and Adult Literacy/ESL classes for parents.
• Disaggregate data to get a clearer picture of Asian American students' demographics and performance.

• Read the Full Report

Redondo, B., Aung, K.M., Fung, M., & Yu, N.W. Left in the Margins: Asian American Students & the No Child Left Behind Act. (2008). New York: Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Comprehension; Latino ELL Students; Transfer of Literacy Skills;

• Download Executive Summary (96KB PDF)*
• Order copy of full report

August, D. and Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Center for Applied Linguistics, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Latino ELL Students; Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA; Reading;

Target Population: Preschool

Research Questions the Report Poses: How does Pre–K education positively impact the Latino population?

Findings:

• Despite education being prominent and important in many Latinos' home countries, many Latinos in the United States do not have their children enrolled in Pre-K programs.
• Pre-K programs are often cost-prohibitive for Latinos or unavailable in their areas.
• Research shows that disadvantaged children who receive Pre-K education stand to make the biggest gains from that education.

Policy Recommendations:

• Outreach to parents needs to be more effective. Parents of ELLs need to know about the options available to them in terms of Pre-K programs available.
• Pre–K instruction needs to be available in the home language of minorities, especially ELLs.
• In conjunction with the above, critical staff at Pre-K programs need to be bilingual to accommodate more ELL students' language needs.
• Enrollment and eligibility requirements both need to be modified so as not to discriminate against ELLs or hinder them from getting into Pre–K programs.

• Read the full report (128KB PDF)*
• Download Executive Summary in Spanish (7KB PDF)*

Garcia, E.E., Gonzales, D.M. (2006). Pre-K and Latinos: The Foundation for America's Future. Pre-K Now Research Series: Washington, DC.

Tags: American Indian ELL Students; Asian ELL Students; Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Curriculum; Latino ELL Students; Other ELL Students (Middle Eastern, African, European, etc.); Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA; Placement; Rights, Parents; Rights, Students;

Target Population:

• All students in preschool, elementary, middle or high school in the Latino community.
• Parents of students attending preschool, elementary, middle or high school in the Latino community.

Research Questions the Report Poses: This article raises the question of the importance of the No Child Left Behind Act to improve the education for limited English proficient students in the Latino community.

Findings:

• Limited English Proficiency students are the fastest growing population in elementary schools in the US.
• Limited English proficient students are concentrated in a few states but are spreading rapidly throughout the nation.
• While five states—California, Texas, New York, Florida, and Illinois—are home to almost 70 percent of all LEP students in elementary school, growth in this student population has been more rapid in other destinations.
• The majority of LEP elementary school students are concentrated in a small number of schools: nearly 70 percent of the nation’s LEP students enroll in only 10 percent of elementary schools.
• The incidence of poverty and health problems is significantly higher in high-LEP than in other schools.
• Instructional contexts vary significantly across schools: high-LEP schools are more likely to offer support and remedial programs (pre-K, enrichment, after-school, summer school).
• Native language instruction is more prevalent in high- than low-LEP schools. The difference in use of other LEP-targeted instructional techniques, though significant, is less marked.
• High-LEP schools face more difficulties filling teaching vacancies and are more likely to rely on unqualified and substitute teachers than schools with few or no LEP children.
• High-LEP schools are more likely to be involved in parental outreach and support activities than schools with lower concentrations of LEP students.
• Teachers in high-LEP schools are more likely to hold ESL/bilingual certification in addition to their main certification.
• Teachers in high-LEP schools are more likely to have provisional, emergency, or temporary certification than are those in other schools.
• High-LEP schools have more new teachers than schools with fewer or no LEP students, and these teachers are substantially more likely to be uncertified than those at other schools.
• Teachers in high-LEP schools tend to report receiving more professional development than do teachers in other types of schools.
• There was a great deal of variation in the way districts with high-LEP schools implemented NCLB testing requirements in both subject areas and ELP (English Language Proficiency).
• Parents of ELL students in high-LEP enrollment schools professed to have very little knowledge of the requirements of NCLB.

Policy Recommendations:

• The U.S. Department of Education should make the development of an appropriate English language proficiency test a national priority and require its use by all states and districts.
• States should ensure that (a) policies are in place to conduct subject matter testing of ELL students using appropriate tests and accommodations and (b) reasonable exemptions are granted.
• The inclusion of pre-K education should be considered in the reauthorization of NCLB. While it is evident from our study that NCLB is changing pre-K education in high-LEP schools, including this component of the educational system in the law would enforce and standardize these changes across all districts and states.
• The NCLB provisions for school choice and Supplemental Educational Services (SES) should be reexamined. These provisions do not seem to be having the intended effect and their feasibility and effectiveness should be studied.
• Teacher Quality
• Districts should assume responsibility for the training and professional development of teachers—including bilingual/ESL teachers—to assist them in meeting the NCLB requirements for high-quality teachers. This assistance might include working with local colleges to increase the production of high-quality bilingual/ESL teachers and to offer courses in areas where current teachers need to acquire credits for certification. Local colleges and alternative certification programs should be encouraged to incorporate courses on ELL instruction as part of the required general teacher education curriculum. These courses should be required for certification or employment of all teachers, at least in high-ELL-enrollment districts but preferably in all districts.
• More effective strategies are needed for conducting parental outreach and information efforts with parents of ELL students. Districts and schools must acquire a greater understanding of effective strategies to reach this group of parents, who face many barriers to understanding the requirements of NCLB and their role in supporting its goals.

• Read the Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
The Urban Institute 2100 M Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037

Consentino de Cohen, Clemencia and Beatriz Chu Clewell. (2007). Putting English Language Learners on the Education Map: The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented. Washington, D.C. The Urban Institute.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Differentiated Instruction; Fluency; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Language of Instruction; Language Proficiency; Placement; Reading; Struggling Readers; Transfer of Literacy Skills; Vocabulary;

Target Population: Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: How accommodated are Students with Interrupted Formal Education (SIFEs) in NYC public schools? Why SIFEs are struggling academically and what are can be done to improve it?

Findings:

• SIFEs often have poor literary skills in any language, and are likely behind their age level in knowledge-content.
• SIFEs have complex social and psychological needs due to multiple factors including migration, unfamiliarity with surroundings, etc.
• SIFEs need more English language support, and often more individualized instruction to make progress.
• SIFEs lack foundational skills for academic work in English and in most cases their native language.
• Many SIFEs are not steered towards programs that can help them, and the schools they are placed in don't have the resources to teach them properly.
• Many SIFEs as often classified as having disabilities when cases show that this is typically not the case.

• Read the Full Report

Students with Interrupted Education: A Challenge for New York City Public Schools. (2010, May). Advocates for Children of New York. Retrieved July 28, 2010 from http://advocatesforchildren.org/SIFE%20Paper%20final.pdf

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Differentiated Instruction; Language of Instruction; Placement;

Target Population: Elementary School

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• What are the key elements of successful bilingual schools?
• How do these six high–achieving bilingual schools implement those strategies?

Findings:
Among the features of effective schools and effective programs for English learner found in these six schools were:

• The bilingual programs were a school-wide effort.
• Teachers collaborated and team–taught, particularly for ELD instruction.
• Staff demonstrated extensive language and cultural competence.
• Staff displayed overall support for language and cultural diversity.
• Staff demonstrated a focus on the individual student and differentiated instruction.
• The school culture emphasized consistent monitoring of students' progress and teaching to rigorous academic standards.
• Staff articulated rigorous expectations of staff and students.
• Consistent leadership supported and benefited programs and instruction.
• Staff demonstrated a focus on consistent, coherent program design.

Policy Recommendations:

• Rather than debate the best approach for all English learners, we should improve schools by employing the most effective practices, whether using only English or with some form of bilingual instruction.
• Staff should identify areas of strength already in place at their own school, and then decide which paradigm features schools might improve their school.
• Additional research should be conducted, making use of the tools developed by the five–year Proposition 227 study to identify other successful schools with large proportions of English learners. Additional documentation of successful schools can counterbalance the impact of state and federal accountability systems that more often emphasize the schools that fail to perform to standards.

• Read the Full Report

Gold, N. (2006) Successful Bilingual Schools: Six Effective Programs in California. San Diego, CA: San Diego County Office of Education.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Latino ELL Students; Parent Involvement and Outreach / PTA;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School, Post-Secondary

Findings:

• In 2008, Latinos were about half as likely as African Americans and a third as likely as White students to obtain a college degree.
• “According to the U.S. Census, almost 29 percent of Latino children lived below the poverty line nationally in 2007 (compared to 15 percent of White children), and the effects of poverty on intellectual and academic achievement can be pernicious.”
• Latina mothers have the lowest education of all ethnic groups.
• Low-income Latino parents are often overlooked by schools often related to low levels of education or limited English.
• Learning to read and build vocabulary in Spanish can be an key stepping stone to learning English.
• A randomized study of preschool programs (English bilingual versus two-way immersion) Spanish-speaking students in the dual-language program showed significant growth in Spanish vocabulary with similar learning gains.
• Latino children of poverty often have fewer “opportunities to learn,” which can impede learning.
• Latino children, especially those learning English, who enter school underprepared need significant additional instructional time.
• In the West, 60% of Latinos in large cities attend schools with 90-100% non-white peers. English language learners face similar hyper-segregation that limits social capital.
• “Housing is the fulcrum of opportunity.” Segregated housing perpetuates intergenerational inequality.
• Latino students are more likely than others to move frequently, which can have a negative impact on academic achievement.
• Many Latino students are out of school a significant time due to preventable illness as a result of lack of health care access.
• Integrated physical and mental health, when implemented well, can impact children’s health, achievement, and mobility.
• California’s Healthy Start centers showed extensive effects but has been defunded.
• Well-prepared teachers for Latino students are hard to attract and retain.
• American schools often treat speaking a language other than English as an impediment, unlike other developed nations. This limits the human resource and cognitive advantage of being literate in another language.
• Students in two-way immersion classes have positive intercultural relations.
• College access and preparation programs, which often begin too late or include too few students, are severely limited in effect.
• Most Latino students attend two-year colleges, which are less likely to provide financial aid. Lack of funding is a key deterrent for Latinos going to college.
• RAND study indicated that doubling college completion rate of Latinos would cost $6.5 billion but benefit society by $13 billion.

Policy Recommendations:

• Early and continuing cognitive enrichment
• Early intervention that extends parents’ “Funds of knowledge”
• Preschool that builds incorporates home language
• Use of bilingual instruction with good models of both languages
• Subsidized preschool programs
• Housing Policies
• “Latino students must be assigned to schools that will give them the chance to break the vicious cycle of poor schooling and limited opportunity.”
• Changing school boundaries to prevent socioeconomic and linguistic isolation
• Desegregated housing (mayoral collaboration with school boards)
• Policies to help low-income families establish stable housing in a community
• School desegregation and residential stabilization
• Integrated Social Services
• Concerted effort to establish more school-based health clinics for low-income students/families
• Universal health care accessed at school sites or local communities
• Recruiting and Preparing Extraordinary Teachers
• Recruit teachers from students’ communities
• Improving work conditions (smaller classes, supportive leadership, planning time, and safe campuses)
• Targeted recruitment and tuition support for teachers in bilingual programs.
• Exploiting the Latino Linguistic Advantage
• Languages should be seen as resources.
• College Preparation and Support Programs
• Bridge K-12 schools with institutes of higher education.
• Recruit Latino students
• Create supports for peer study and social groups
• Place the best teachers in freshman classes
• Extend program components beyond the freshman year
• Acknowledge cumulative skill development
• Provide meaningful financial aid
• Cost-free four-year education for qualified individuals (through alignment of federal and state aid)
• Support for the passage of the Dream Act that would provide undocumented students with no criminal record conditional legal status and access to student aid
• Supports for dual language programs
• Dropout prevention and college access programs

• Read the Full Report

Gándara, P. (2010). The Latino Education Crisis: Rescuing the American Dream. WestEd. Retrieved from: http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/pp-10-02.pdf

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Bilingualism / Biliteracy; Curriculum; Instructional Programs; Language of Instruction;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• What types of programs should we provide for ELLs?
• Which programs are effective?
• How long should children be in these programs?
• Has Proposition 227 in California created gains for ELL students in the state?

Findings:

• Reviewing California data indicates that Proposition 227 has not resulted in major gains for ELLs.
• The implementation of one-year English immersion programs raises "significant legal questions" as well as civil rights questions.
• Inappropriate assessment for ELLs can result in students not receiving appropriate services and instruction and may also affect a student's likelihood of graduating from high school.

Policy Recommendations:

The authors recommend:

• Including language support programs as part of a comprehensive ELL strategy.
• Giving parents and schools flexible options for implementing language support programs.
• Clarifying the goals of federal language support programs so that schools can align instruction.
• Supporting appropriate evaluations to determine when children are ready to transition out of ELL/bilingual classes.
• Increasing accountability for schools and districts regarding achievement, assessment, and graduation rates.
• Focusing on improved instruction for ELLs and additional funding to support better instruction / professional development
• Supporting additional research to evaluate language support programs, assessment, and accommodations.
• Disseminate research-based information to policymakers.

• Link to Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
The Civil Rights Project 124 Mount Auburn Street, 500 North Cambridge, MA 02138

Ma, J. (2002, September). What works for the children? What we know and don't know about bilingual education. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project Harvard University.