Title: Key Legislative Events
Part 1- Legislative Events that have affected English Language Instruction in Arizona
English language instruction in Arizona was affected by two major legislative events. The events mandated that all students in public schools learn English. The two significant legal developments that have influenced English language instruction in Arizona include;
Lau v. Nichols (1974)
This court case challenged inadequate preparation for language minorities in the Supreme Court.
The parents of Chinese origin sued the schools over the fact that the school system required mastery of English for high school graduation. The system failed to provide some 1,800 non-English-speaking students with individual instruction so they could master the language. The Supreme Court established that there was a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The civil rights prohibited discrimination based on color, race, or origin. Violation of civil rights was particularly applicable in those programs that got federal monies.
Flores v. Arizona (2008)
In this ruling, the court established that Arizona was obligated to comply with the central district court. Funding instruction for English-language learners increased. The court rejected arguments that provisions in the No Child Left Behind law on ELL students significantly altered the code.
Federal laws affecting ELLs
The Central office for civil rights issued a notice for equal opportunity for all, including ELLs.
In its 1974 decision in Lau v. Nichols, the United States Supreme Court upheld OCR’s 1970 memo. The basis for the case was the claim that the students could not understand the language of instruction; therefore, they did not get an equal education. The Supreme Court agreed, saying that; equality is not about learners having the same facilities and materials as students who don’t understand English will be disadvantaged (Menken 124).
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), is an educational policy reform bill. It expands the state responsibility for schools, hence provide grants to charter schools, and reduce the federal test-based accountability system of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). ESSA is more flexible.
Arizona policies that affected the ELL program model
Proposition 203
The mandate stems from a long-running debate over how English Language Learners are taught. It was voted in 2000, which repealed previous bilingual education laws and approved a new law requiring every class to be taught in English, paving the way for lawmakers to enact the four-hour mandate. (Mahoney, 3)
House bill 2010
In December 2001, the Legislature passed House Bill 2010, which provided approximately $144 million over four years. HB 2010 increased the ELL student funding weight to 11.5 percent, up from 6 percent ($340, up from $179). (Lillie, 25)
Part 2: Description of the ELLs program model in Arizona.
The ELL program is based on laws enacted in 2006 for public schools and chartered schools to adopt. Demography of ELL included approximately 83,500 students in Arizona that are a percentage of 7%. ELL program eligibility includes administering a home language survey during students’ registration and having students take a language proficiency exam.
A home language survey,
Bits of help identify students who may need English development services based on the degree of English exposure.
An English language assessment
It helps assess the student’s language proficiency and confirms the student’s language status.
Arizona English Language learner Assessment (AZELLA).
Used for placement of kindergarten pupils and assess their competence in English. These are pupils whose first language is not English. It is a 20-minute test on speaking and listening skills.
The AZELLA test qualifies the student into three categories;
- Emergent/Pre-Emergent
- Basic/intermediate
- Proficient
A student identified as being not EL proficient enrolls in the ELL program. They are tested annually for two years to test proficiency, and if they have not improved, the student re-enters the ELL program to continue learning English.
The ELL task force developed a Structured English Immersion (SEI). They SEI models was designed to teach ELL students. The model requires students to get 4 hours per day of English language teaching to be proficient within a year. This model is not efficient because no data that has is available across confirming that students get four hours per day of English teaching.
Individualized language learner plans (ILLPs) is taught in schools with students’ population of less than 20. A school with few ELL students means that a teacher will have personalized attention with each student. ELL students have reduced since most of them speak Spanish. LLPs are common because there are very few students enrolled in the EL public schools. (Menken, 128).
Bilingual education is also another form of teaching. Teachers in schools teach students English language skills in English and at the same time teaching them other subjects. For example, topics such as math, science, and social studies, are shown in their native language. Bilingual teaching guarantees that they maintain the required grade level expected in those subjects (Rolstad, 40).
There are different types of bilingual programs available in Arizona. They include some volume of teaching in English since day one. As time goes by, the amount rises over time. In turn, the students become more acquainted with the language. In Arizona, 37% of ELs are in bilingual classes. Bilingual education has more success rates in students. Results show that these students perform better than the students in the other teaching models.
Conclusion
For the success of the ELL program, qualified teachers, monitoring frequency, and training teachers well are essential. Since the introduction of SEI models in 2008, data has shown that the proficiency rate has increased.
References
Lillie, Karen E., et al. “Policy in practice: The implementation of structured English immersion in Arizona.” (2010).
Mahoney, Kate, Marilyn Thompson, and Jeff MacSwan. “The condition of English language learners in Arizona: 2005.” The condition of pre-K–12 education in Arizona: 2005 (2005): 3-1.
Menken, Kate. “NCLB and English language learners: Challenges and consequences.” Theory Into Practice 49.2 (2010): 121-128.
Rolstad, Kellie, Kate S. Mahoney, and Gene V. Glass. “Weighing the evidence: A meta-analysis of bilingual education in Arizona.” Bilingual Research Journal 29.1 (2005): 43-67.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/lau.html