What works for English learners

When it comes to teaching kids who are still learning English, some elementary schools are missing the boat while others are making great strides. What's the difference? A new report looking at 237 California schools points to four key areas that seem to hold the key. And for the first time, the study doesn't just pit bilingual education against English-only or some other approach. Instead, it looks at effective classroom practices, something that Margarita Calderon, a key Johns Hopkins University researcher not associated with the report, called groundbreaking and compelling. What are the successful schools doing that the failing ones are not? Here's the list:

• Using student assessment data extensively to determine whether instruction is working for each students.
• Ensuring access to good teachers and instructional resources.
• Aligning the curriculum with state academic standards, within each grade level and between the grades.
• Setting measurable, ambitious goals for student achievement.

"It's all about what is happening in the classroom," Stanford University researcher Michael Kirst, who worked with EdSource on the report, told the Education Writers Association annual meeting in Los Angeles, where the report was released today.

Florida, which has its fair share of English learners, could learn a lot from this report and its findings. For instance, the study reveals that pull-out English language courses are more effective than having every classroom teacher get a "weak" English Language Learner credential - like Florida requires.

Comments

[Rosa Castro Feinberg]

The "weak" English language learner credential is going to get even weaker, because of a bill making its way to Governor Crist's desk. Senate Bill 2512 would reduce training time by 80 percent for public school teachers who provide critical reading instruction for students learning to speak English as a second language (ESOL). If implemented, this bill would be harmful to the education of English language learners (ELLs) in Florida schools.

While this bill would shrink ESOL training requirements for reading teachers with English language learners (ELL) from 300 to 60 hours, all other teachers of the language arts (and their students) continue to benefit from 300 hours of training. This set of requirements is not merely inconsistent. It is also harmful to ELL students as such a drastic erosion of standards would deprive the 234,000 English learners currently enrolled in Florida schools (including 23,000 in Hillsborough), plus countless thousands still to come, of teachers adequately prepared for the most important single subject in the curriculum. Denying, even delaying, acquisition of English-language literacy would negatively impact achievement in their other classes as well, such as science, mathematics, and social studies.

What we need to do is appeal to Governor Crist to veto this bill. The phone number is (850)488-5000. There is an answer machine at this number for calls made after office hours. The veto is the only way to stop this bad bill.

Please join ESOL teachers, professors, concerned citizens, and state and national professional organizations such as JNCL, NCLIS, and TESOL in asking for the veto. The deadline for calling Governor Crist to request a veto of this bill is tomorrow, Monday, June 18th. Please call now.

[Rosa Castro Feinberg]

Update: We may make calls to request a veto of SB 2512 for the rest of the week. The phone number is (850)488-5000.

[Linda Evans]

Research consistently points to highly qualified teachers as a key to student achievement. To be sure, Florida English learners would benefit from teachers with degrees in ESOL (English for speakers of other languages) or bilingual education, and there are many such qualified teachers in Florida. However, with graduation rates significantly lower and failure rates higher for English learners, more needs to be done to raise students' chances for success.

Florida has wisely required that its reading specialists have training to prepare them for the complex task of teaching students to read in a language they don't fully understand. However, the legislature recently created a bill--SB 2512--that would dramatically reduce the amount of training in ESOL for reading specialists. This flies in the face of research, particularly that cited in Mr. Solochek's article.

Highly qualified teachers can participate in and advocate for the elements in the research on successful schools cited in this article. They are better qualified to select appropriate instructional resources; to interpret assessment results for planning subsequent instruction; to contribute to aligning state standards and curriculum; and to set goals for student achievement and evaluate whether those goals are met.

Teachers are critical to student success, and students who struggle most need teachers who are the most highly qualified. Please join us in urging Governor Crist to veto misguided legislation that would put our English learners at greater risk of failure. Call (850)488-5000 today to ask for the veto.

[ENGLISH]

Put all of these kids into all day long English boot camp. They came here. We teach in English. Enough is enough. If it takes a whole year- great. They may be a year behind socially, but most ESOL kids don't integrate socially with the regular student population anyway.

[John Perry]

Holy moly, English. I'd be ashamed to sign my name to that, too.

"They came here?" Huh? Last I checked, kids don't decide to immigrate. Taking this hard-a** approach to little kids seems pretty mean-spirited.

What do you mean by "If it takes a whole year- great?" If WHAT takes a whole year? If students went into English immersion classes before going into regular classrooms, fine. But the best you can do in a year is get basic conversational English. Research shows that it can take 5-7 years to really master ACADEMIC English. From K-12, we need teachers who understand how this entire process works and how to bring ESOL students along. A year? That's just the beginning.

By the way, the "Boot Camp" reference is offensive. It seems that you believe kids would have to be taught English by brute force. Again, the hard-a** approach seems not only mean-spirited, but out of touch with the real attitudes and needs of children.

Finally, I would like to know how you came to the conclusion that "ESOL kids don't integrate socially with the regular student population anyway." I've been teaching "ESOL kids" for several years now, and they've been fully integrated. It seems like you're saying that they choose not be be fully integrated. My experience would indicate that this is a faulty assumption. How did you arrive at it?