No one would argue that a person has to be fluent in two languages to be able to communicate just like no artist is expected to be able to create through multiple mediums. However, a mediocre artist or a person who is not fluent in any language will face much greater challenges when trying to have any meaningful impact in the world around them.  

An English learner is faced with multiple challenges when entering the public school system in the United States.  The student needs to achieve fluency in the English language while at the same time master the content required of all students assigned to the same grade level.  Unfortunately, the instruction offered to English learners doesn't always reflect these dual goals and sometimes serves to undermine both of them. 

As of July 1, 1976 Illinois school districts have been required by Public Act 78-727 to offer bilingual education programs (English and one other language) whenever 20 or more students of limited-English fluency were enrolled in one school. However, John Hood of the John Locke Foundation ascertained almost ten years ago that, "A review of 300 "studies" of bilingual education by federal researchers found only 72 that were methodologically sound. Of those studies, 83 percent comparing bilingual education to immersion found that kids learned to read better through immersion. Not a single study found the reverse." (Immersion vs. bilingual education)

NCLB, by requiring schools to disaggregate data derived from test scores to give a more accurate picture of who is learning what, has created a much greater public awareness about the problems faced by English learners and has brought to our attention that many of them fall under the category of "left behind" at the end of the educational process.  NCLB is meant to force the education system to remedy these types of problems so that every student is given equal opportunity to succeed in our society.

How is Illinois addressing the situation?  In some ways Illinois is going backwards. According to a new study by Christine Rossell of the Lexington Institute, the, "Illinois Board of Education lowered the score one must obtain on the IMAGE to be "proficient” which would apply to 2004-2005 results, as well as future results.  In addition, the state board voted to increase the minimum size of a sub-group from 40 to 50 before it can be held accountable." This gives schools some relief in making AYP (adequate yearly progress) goals.

In Illinois, individual school districts like Elgin U46 will be required to use the ACCESS test to determine English proficiency of LEP students. "Having one uniform statewide English proficiency exam is an improvement, but it does not solve the essential flaw in English proficiency tests – they frequently cannot distinguish the difference between a student who does not know the answer and a student who does not know English." (Rossell)

Recommendations such as more professional development for EL teachers and standardization of EL curriculum will help improve the situation. But even more needs to be done.

"Standards will improve the education of LEP children by giving all teachers in a state the same benchmarks and skills they should be looking for at different grades and different English proficiency levels." (Rossell) However, implementing standards will not ensure that LEP students get to the state’s proficient level unless there is a road map designed to get them there.

As Robert Linquanti suggests in The Redesignation Dilemma, specific procedures must be put into place that will assure annual monitoring of students' academic progress and appropriate remediation for those who most assuredly will be left behind under the current system.  There needs to be clear performance expectations and progress indicators for English Learners in English Language Development and English Language Arts, such as the following.

1.  Delineate when English Learners are expected to reach grade level performance in academic subjects.

2.  Carefully monitor which ELs are making adequate progress and which are not.

3.  Monitor how well former ELs are meeting grade-level standards since exiting the program.

4.  Provide frequent interventions to ELs and former ELs who are not progressing.

Whatever it takes, changing curriculum, programs, policies, it must be implemented to make sure these procedures take effect.

Statistics show ELs likelier to drop out than graduate.  To prevent this from happening, families must be guaranteed that their children will receive academic instruction from qualified teachers, fluent in English, and who will provide "best practice" in their methods of instruction. Anything less pays lip service to the crisis which spurred the attachment of accountability measures to federal education funding in the first place.
 

Related Reading:

Immersion vs. bilingual education
http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/1997/12/29/editorial3.html

Inside the Law
http://www.districtadministration.com/page.cfm?p=1194

Making Uneven Strides: State Standards for Achieving English Language Proficiency Under the No Child Left Behind Act", by Christine Rossell, Ph.D., September 2005

Student Assessment Division
http://www.isbe.state.il.us/assessment/default.htm

The Redesignation Dilemma: Challenges and Choices in Fostering Meaningful Accountability for English Learners
http://lmri.ucsb.edu/resdiss/2/pdf_files/redesignationdilemma.pdf