English learners – Public Policy Institute of California

Without Testing, Challenges for School Districts Add Up

Distance learning due to COVID-19 is not going to be a temporary phenomenon. Now, with K–12 campuses closed since mid-March and likely to stay shuttered for the remainder of the school year, students will miss out on about a third of their 180 in-person instructional days. The timing of these closures means no statewide end-of-year standardized tests, posing significant difficulties for teachers and districts when schools reopen.

Even before most districts announced the end of in-person classrooms, most California public school parents expressed concerns over providing productive learning at home—70% say they are somewhat or very concerned, in PPIC’s April Statewide Survey.

And success at distance learning for some students is uncertain because access to the internet and devices, curriculum, the demands of home life, and learning needs—especially for English Learners and students with disabilities—can vary so widely. Differences are already being revealed—according to a survey of public school teachers in late April, 25% of students are not logging in or making contact with their teachers during distance learning. In districts where poverty rates exceed three-quarters of the student population, 36% of students are not in contact with their teachers.

When schools do reopen, teachers must determine how to accelerate the learning of students who fell behind—whether opening happens in July, as Governor Newsom has advocated, or through expanded summer school, or on planned fall start dates. And without results from spring 2020 standardized tests, helping students catch up may require a sustained effort. Some local education agencies are making plans to use formative assessments to assist in reopening, given that California, like all other states, has received a waiver for the federally required statewide assessments.

Typically, students in grades 3–8 and in grade 11 take statewide standardized tests in the spring. These tests of English language arts, math, and science help measure student learning during the year and may be used to place students in fall math courses. Such end-of-year assessments to gauge student learning are essential to California’s accountability system.

The results can also give teachers more insight into the mix of students who show up in their classroom in the fall, as well as identify schools and districts in need of extra support. For 11th graders, the assessments can signal how prepared they are for the rigors of college coursework: the results are later used to place students in English and math in the CSU system.

Furthermore, few districts completed the standardized tests that measure the English proficiency of English Learners before spring closures, tests that determine if students can exit English Learner status. In some districts, English proficiency test results determine the courses students take in the fall.

Given how rapidly the COVID-19 crisis unfolded, these test cancellations were unavoidable. But the absence of test results compounds the challenges of reopening schools: teachers will lack vital knowledge about how distance learning has impacted their students.

Teachers and school staff will likely conduct plenty of assessing on their own, planning lessons for the diverse needs of their students. The hope is their efforts can smooth the way for students’ return to their classrooms; but we are at least a year away from understanding how the crisis has impacted our students systemwide.

Remote Learning for English Learners and Special Needs Students during COVID-19

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]For California’s most vulnerable students, including 1.2 million English Learners (EL) and over 700,000 students with special educational needs, remote learning in the wake of COVID-19 presents particular challenges. As districts across the state roll out distance learning plans to minimize disruption to K–12 students, educators must find alternate ways to meet all student needs.

English Learners and special education students typically require more in-person support, such as occupational and speech therapy, in their daily learning than students in general. Educators are struggling to devise and implement plans to address these requirements remotely. Access to internet and devices is one area of concern, but so is providing intensive learning experiences that can stand in for in-person services.

Most EL and special education students live in large urban areas with access to broadband, and school districts in these counties, such as in the Bay Area and coastal counties in Southern California, may be able to partner with philanthropy and technology providers to supplement households currently without broadband access. Rural areas, however, may not have the same supports.

In counties where broadband access is low—that is, over 18% of households with school-age children lack it—and where the share of EL or students with disabilities is high (over 26%), online learning is a hurdle. This includes Colusa, Yolo, Napa, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Monterey, Kern, and Imperial, which together account for over 220,000 students who have special education needs or are English Learners.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row max_width=”80″ visibility=”visible-desktop”][vc_column][vc_column_text][infogram id=”1p1qw10yewvk2dfmxmvky16prlb6pw1mvrm?live”][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row max_width=”80″ visibility=”visible-tablet-landscape”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

[infogram id=”1p1qw10yewvk2dfmxmvky16prlb6pw1mvrm?live”]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row visibility=”visible-tablet-portrait”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

[infogram id=”1p1qw10yewvk2dfmxmvky16prlb6pw1mvrm?live”]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row visibility=”visible-phone”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

[infogram id=”1p1qw10yewvk2dfmxmvky16prlb6pw1mvrm?live”]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]There are an additional 50,000 such students in counties where we cannot estimate the share of families without broadband, but where concentrations of EL or students with special needs are disproportionately high. In these rural counties—which include San Benito, Mono, Tulare, Modoc, and Yuba—educators must determine how to compensate for lack of internet while offering intensive, though not in-person, instruction.

And it isn’t just students tested by the move to online instruction. In a typical school year, only 67% of teachers received professional development in using computers for instruction. Most received less than eight hours of training.

To fill the gap, more districts are providing training on how to teach students remotely. Courses cover online tools such as Zoom, Google Classroom, Canvas, and Seesaw; how to monitor and assess student learning; and how to manage and cater to student needs in an online environment. The California Department of Education also provided resources and idea banks to help districts accommodate students with varying learning needs, with guidance on options for delivering individualized education.

California continues to provide funding to districts to implement distance learning, through the governor’s executive orders and recent legislation. While distance learning cannot replace in-person instruction and services, educators are exploring alternatives, from reading assignments over the telephone to moving speech and occupational therapy online. Districts are also discussing extending the school year as they work to provide effective and equitable learning to the state’s most vulnerable students.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

How Community College Reforms Could Help English Learners

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Due in large part to their mission of access and affordability, community colleges play a key role in educating immigrant students, especially those who are English Learners. In 2016–17, more than 58,000 first-time community college students in California enrolled in English as a Second Language (ESL) courses.

For many students, taking ESL courses may be linked to the desire to improve their socioeconomic prospects. Indeed, community college students who earn a credential or transfer to get a four-year degree are well positioned to climb the economic ladder. In an economy that increasingly demands skilled workers, there is tremendous untapped potential in increasing the educational attainment—and economic trajectories—of ESL students.

California’s community colleges have undertaken several reforms that aim to improve student success and close equity gaps. These reforms—spurred by AB 705 and the new Guided Pathways framework—present a ripe opportunity to help more ESL students get on the path to completing college composition, a requirement to earn a college credential or transfer.

These initiatives are primarily focused on addressing the needs of students who intend to pursue a degree or transfer. However, our most recent research finds that about two-thirds of ESL students (66%) are not on track to do so—and may consequently be left out of the reforms. (We consider students on track if they take any ESL course required to access college composition and at least one course other than ESL or English.)

ESL students who are not on track are more likely to come from historically underrepresented groups. For instance, we find that compared to students taking ESL courses needed for college composition, those not taking these courses are more likely to be older and Latino. They are also more likely to have unknown citizenship status (a possible signal of being undocumented) and to have not graduated high school.

As colleges across the state reform their ESL sequences and programs of study, it will be critical to ensure that all students have the opportunity to earn a degree or transfer. The two-thirds of ESL students currently not on track to do so are the most vulnerable. These students have already taken the major step of enrolling in college. To improve their likelihood of advancing, colleges could provide clearer and more effective ESL sequences and degree and transfer pathways, as well as stronger student supports, including advising, placement, and information about available degrees and certificates.

Some colleges are already working on these issues. Initiatives like the Guided Pathways ESL Milestone certificates at Cypress College—the result of AB 705 and Guided Pathways efforts—present a unique example of how colleges can structure ESL programs and certificates to help English Learners get on a pathway toward a college credential.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that there are some ESL students who take ESL coursework for reasons unrelated to a degree. As colleges redesign their ESL programs, working alongside non-credit ESL programs, adult education schools, and community-based ESL programs could help ensure that colleges are keeping the diverse needs of ESL students in mind.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Video: English as a Second Language in California Community Colleges

While the educational goals of students who enroll in ESL courses at California’s community colleges may vary, the economic benefits of effective ESL programs are clear: English proficiency can facilitate social and economic mobility for non-native speakers. But little is known about ESL programs across the state, or about the trajectories of ESL students. Now that a new law—Assembly Bill (AB) 705—is motivating colleges across the state to assess and reform their ESL programs, we need to better understand the ESL student population and the programs that serve them.

At an event in Sacramento earlier this week, PPIC researcher Bonnie Brooks outlined the findings of a new report on ESL in the community colleges and a panel of experts discussed AB 705’s impact on ESL in the community college system.

Kathryn Wada, who has taught ESL for 30 years at Cypress College, noted that the fact that AB 705 distinguishes ESL from developmental (or remedial) English and recognizes that ESL students are working toward proficiency in a foreign language is “huge for our field.”

AB 705 requires colleges to reform “credit” ESL programs—which offer credit-bearing courses for which students pay tuition—so that they do not deter or delay educational progress. By fall 2020, colleges must implement policies that maximize the chances that students complete a transfer-level English course within three years.

A look at the length of ESL course sequences across the system indicates that students at many colleges could, theoretically, complete transfer-level English in three years. In reality, however, most students don’t get this far. As Brooks noted, simply offering a sequence that is short enough to allow students to get through transfer-level English in three years “isn’t necessarily enough to maximize the probability of completion.”

Fortunately, many colleges are taking new approaches to ESL instruction that do increase the likelihood of completion. Courses that take an integrated approach—teaching more than one English skill at a time—and policies that allow students to move directly from ESL to transfer-level English instead of requiring them to enroll in developmental courses are likely to be key to fulfilling AB 705’s mandate. And, as Wada noted, new policies that make credits from advanced ESL courses transferable to UC and CSU moves credit ESL programs beyond the goals of AB 705: “If students are able to fulfill CSU and UC general education requirements directly with ESL courses . . . that’s huge.”

These new instructional approaches usher in a new era for ESL students. As Alice Perez, vice chancellor of academic affairs in the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office noted, “Many of our faculty and our institutions are set up to receive students assuming a major deficit: ‘You’re not college ready, and this placement test shows us this.’” Melissa Reeve, an English and ESL professor at Solano College, echoed Perez’s call for a “mindset shift,” citing the importance of “all of us having a belief in our students and what they are able to do, and sharing that with them in every facet of what we do.”

Video: Academic Progress for English Learners

More than 40 percent of students in California’s public K–12 system speak a language other than English at home. Almost half of these students are considered English Learners (ELs), in need of language and academic support to succeed in school. In middle and high school, ELs face the dual challenge of attaining fluency in English and working toward a high school diploma.

At a lunchtime briefing in Sacramento last week, Laura Hill—a senior research fellow at PPIC—and Megan Hopkins—an assistant professor at UC San Diego—outlined the findings of a new report on two distinct types of EL students: long-term ELs, who have been in US schools for several years without being reclassified as fluent in English, and late-arriving ELs, who first enroll in the district in grade 6 or higher. The authors looked at the impact of a school’s language environment on academic progress and examined trends in English language development (ELD) courses.

The report focused on the state’s two largest school districts, Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD). Together, they enroll about 14% of the state’s EL population—and about 4% of the EL population in schools nationwide. As Laura Hill put it, “It’s a big deal to be able to study in these two districts.”

How might the language mix among students at a school be associated with academic outcomes—both for both fluent English speakers and for ELs? The report finds that the academic outcomes of native or initially fluent English speakers was not related to the percentage of EL students at a school. The evidence is mixed on the relationship between the percentage of ELs in a school and the academic performance of ELs.

Megan Hopkins outlined key findings on ELD courses. She noted that in recent years the rate of EL students receiving ELD instruction has declined in Los Angeles and risen somewhat in San Diego. These trends may be influenced by district-level factors; they are important because, in both SDUSD and LAUSD, long-term ELs who do not have ELD instruction experience slower growth on statewide English language arts tests. These findings suggest that efforts should be made to support ongoing ELD and other language supports, but Hopkins noted that ensuring access to core academic content is also important.

More generally, this study underlines the importance of understanding the factors that contribute to the progress and struggles of California’s large EL population—so that schools can help all ELs advance linguistically and academically.

Video: Improving Outcomes for English Learners

An important aim of California’s recent K–12 reforms is to change how the state funds, assesses, and holds districts accountable for the education of English Learners (ELs). These policies are beginning to have an impact, and more reforms are on the horizon. At a recent event in Sacramento, PPIC senior fellow Laura Hill outlined the effects of these reforms on ELs and an expert panel delved into the issues from state and local perspectives.

As Hill pointed out, in many ways English Learners are the future in California. A key group in the state’s K‒12 system, ELs currently make up about 21% of the public school population. English Learner status is meant to be temporary—indeed, reclassified ELs (who are deemed proficient enough in English to succeed academically without language support) are among the best performing students in the state. But students who remain ELs for longer periods have poor outcomes.

The panel covered a range of issues, from the aims of reform and the challenges of implementation to the impact of recent immigration enforcement efforts on teachers and students. Panelists agreed that integrating English language development into the academic curriculum is a key aspect of the reforms.

Hilda Maldonado, executive director of the Multilingual and Multicultural Education Department of the Los Angeles Unified School District, said that in LAUSD, “the priority should be to value our students’ home languages as we look at how we can ensure that they succeed.” She also emphasized early intervention: “Focusing on intervening for students in the later grades is a lot harder than focusing on K–3 literacy instruction.”

Veronica Aguila, director of the English Learner Support Division at the California Department of Education, said that the state prioritized the translation of the new academic standards into Spanish. This means that the vast majority of ELs have full access to academic content while they are gaining proficiency in English.

The panelists agreed that the reforms require many teachers to modify their approach so that language development is intertwined with academic content. WestEd’s Robert Linquanti—who works with states and districts on EL assessment, evaluation, and accountability—explained that “teachers need support in order to create the conditions in classrooms where kids really have those rich language opportunities every day.” For example, instead of asking a question that only one student answers, a teacher could set up “situations where students have to work together to solve problems.”

Although there are still many challenges to be addressed, the reforms mark an important shift toward seeing the bilingualism of ELs as an asset. As Aguila put it, “Multilingual education is for all students, not just ELs.”

California’s K–12 Educational Progress: Good News and Bad News

New data on the educational progress of California’s K–12 students offers a mixed picture: there have been sizable gains in grade 8 reading scores, but more work is needed to close achievement gaps for English Learner, low-income, and African American and Latino students.

The data comes from the 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), commonly referred to as the nation’s report card. Administered periodically in grades 4, 8, and 12, NAEP serves as a common yardstick for states and informs many national policy decisions.

The NAEP results show that the average reading score for California 8th graders has risen from 259 to 263. While the latest score is still below the national average (267), it marks a significant improvement, and the state’s 4 point gain is larger than the 1 point increase at the national level. The increase is driven by improvement at both ends performance scale: fewer students performed at the lowest level and more students performed at the advanced level.

However, there were no significant improvements in grade 8 math and no gains in either subject in grade 4. Also, California did not see any significant narrowing of its student achievement gaps. For instance, the average reading score for Latino students in grade 8 was 27 points lower than that of white students; this gap is not significantly different from the 30 point gap in 1998. Similarly, the average score for low-income students was 28 points lower than that of other students, and that gap is not different than it was as in 1998 (32 points).

The NAEP results provide a useful benchmark of student performance; this is especially important in light of the sea changes under way in California’s public K–12 system. The state revamped its school finance and accountability systems with a focus on improving outcomes among English Learners and other “high-need” students. It also adopted new educational standards in math, English language arts, science, and English language development, and implemented a new assessment system.

A recent PPIC survey finds that a solid majority of adults believe that the financial reforms, in particular, will improve the achievement of English Learners and low-income students. As the reforms take hold, PPIC will continue to monitor their impact.

K–12 Test Scores Vary Widely across Student Groups

The 2017 test results for California’s public K–12 school students were essentially unchanged from 2016. But behind the overall results, there were significant differences among student groups. Economically disadvantaged students—mostly those who are eligible for free or reduced price school meals—continued to score far below students not in this category. Students with disabilities and English Learner (EL) students performed at levels significantly below those of low-income students. Gaps in achievement among these groups were essentially unchanged in 2017.

Known as the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), tests in English and mathematics are administered to virtually all K–12 students in grades 3 through 8 and in grade 11. Students take the computer-based assessments in late spring each year. The scores are reported across four performance levels. In English this year, 45% percent of students performed at the top two levels, which signal that they are working at or above the state’s standard for proficiency. About 28% of all tested students fell into the lowest performance level, “below standard.” In comparison, fewer students had mastered the mathematics skills needed to meet state standards, with 38% earning a proficient score. More than a third (36%) scored at the lowest performance level.

When we look at the proportion of students in each grade who scored at the two top performance levels on the mathematics test, we see that 47% of third graders meet the standard, while fewer students in subsequent grades meet state standards. By grade 11, only 34% are at the top two levels.

The state’s Local Control Funding Formula recognizes that family income is highly related to student success, and the test results reflect that relationship. Only 33% of economically disadvantaged students in third-grade and 20% in eleventh grade scored at proficient levels in mathematics. For students who are not economically disadvantaged, proficiency rates are more than twice as high—68% in third grade and 48% in eleventh grade. This divide is particularly important because 60% of students tested are economically disadvantaged.

Fewer than one-quarter of third grade students with disabilities or English Learners met the state’s mathematics standard. Performance is lower in the higher grades, and by grade 11 only about 5% of these groups are scoring at proficient levels. These data, however, understate the performance of these students. English Learner students who master English are reclassified as fluent, and are therefore no longer included in the EL group; the testing data show that reclassified students perform at higher levels than native English speakers. Also, newly arrived EL students in grades 3 through 11 tend to lower average EL test scores. These dynamics result in the data showing persistently low EL proficiency rates. A similar dynamic affects special education scores.

The new test scores reemphasize the need to boost outcomes for California’s low-income students. Students who are not considered low-income perform pretty well, yet even this group’s mathematics achievement lags in the higher grades. The data also underscore the need for better information on English Learners and students with disabilities. It is likely that the progress of these students is better than suggested by these scores. The state should consider using the individual student data to develop more accurate measures of progress for EL students and other groups.

Early Results from Education Reforms

California’s K–12 system is implementing an unprecedented number of reforms. The state’s school funding system and curriculum standards are new, as are all statewide tests. A new school accountability system is being developed. A number of large urban districts are changing their high school graduation requirements. These reforms are designed to equalize opportunities for students and close achievement gaps among demographic groups.

It will be some time before we know what all of these changes add up to, but PPIC researchers who examined the early results of two reforms presented their findings at a PPIC event in Sacramento last week.

California’s New Standardized Tests

PPIC senior fellow Laura Hill summarized the results of California’s new standardized tests, the focus of a PPIC report she coauthored. The scores show that English Learners and economically disadvantaged students are far behind other student groups—possibly farther behind than initially thought. As the accountability system evolves in the state, the test results are an important call to action for districts and schools struggling to help high-need students, Hill said. High-need students did well in some schools and districts, and the first-year results provide an opportunity to learn from their experiences.

College Prep for All?

Julian Betts, an economics professor at the University of California, San Diego, and PPIC adjunct fellow, examined a high school graduation requirement that makes college preparatory courses mandatory for all students. Major urban school districts—including Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, and Oakland—recently implemented this requirement, making it mandatory for students to complete the a–g sequence of classes required for admission to the University of California or California State University. Based on a PPIC analysis of the San Diego Unified School Districts’ Class of 2016, Betts and his coauthors concluded that this requirement is likely to help many students but damage the prospects of others. He suggested steps that San Diego and other districts can take to help lower-achieving students meet the new graduation goals.

Learn more

Visit PPIC’s K–12 education pages
Visit the PPIC Higher Education Center

English Learners and the New State Tests

California’s K–12 students struggled on the new statewide Smarter Balanced assessments (SBAC) last year. The results highlight the challenges facing students and teachers as the state shifts to computer-based tests on new curricula with higher standards for achievement. Disadvantaged groups like low-income students and English Learners (ELs) saw much lower achievement levels than their peers, and many of the state’s 1.4 million ELs could have a harder time getting reclassified as fluent in English due to tougher testing.

Reclassified ELs are among the best performing students in the state. They consistently outperform continuing ELs and often have higher achievement levels than English-only students. Policymakers are interested in helping ELs with sufficient English skills transition more quickly out of English Learner programs, increasing their access to academic instruction in other subject areas. In the past year, 11% of English Learners—about 155,000 students—were reclassified. Altogether, almost 2.7 million students—about 43% of the state’s total enrollment—are current or former English Learners.

The State Board of Education’s guidelines for EL reclassification incorporate student performance on the state standards tests and English proficiency tests, as well as parent consultations and teacher evaluations. However, districts’ testing requirements often exceed the state’s suggestions. PPIC research found that the state’s prior assessment (the California Standards Test, or CST) was a significant hurdle for English Learners to clear in order to be reclassified. The SBAC may make this hurdle even higher.

To estimate the percentage of students who might meet their district’s reclassification criteria following the shift to SBAC, we analyzed the results of a PPIC survey on reclassification policies. This survey collected data from 300 districts, which together serve more than half of the state’s students. When moving from the CST to the SBAC, the share of students who would have met their district’s reclassification criteria falls considerably. Overall, between 45% and 64% of ELs would have met their district’s criteria on the CST, but only 16% to 26% would have met the standard on the SBAC.

This chart illustrates the share of ELs meeting reclassification standards by the rigor of their district’s CST reclassification requirement. Districts that required a CST level of Basic for reclassification would see a substantial drop in ELs meeting this standard, with 65% of students meeting the reclassification standard under CST, compared to 21% under the analogous SBAC standard. Districts with more rigorous criteria would see the share of students meeting their reclassification standard drop even lower when moving from the CST to the SBAC—from 40% to 17%.

With the new Local Control Funding Formula and the adoption of the Common Core State Standards, much of California’s K–12 education system is in flux. There are several changes looming for EL reclassification policy as well. For example, federal law now requires that the state establish uniform standards for every district, and the Smarter Balanced tests could make it much more difficult for ELs to meet the basic skills criteria for reclassification. Additionally, recent research suggests that relying solely on the English language proficiency test may suffice to determine whether a student can succeed without additional EL supports. Given the changing landscape and emerging research, the timing is right for state and district educators to reassess EL reclassification policy, ensuring that criteria are set to maximize academic success for both English Learners and reclassified students.

Source: Authors’ calculations based on California Standards Tests 2012–13 results and California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress 2014–15 results.

Note: The CST and SBAC use different achievement levels. We consider CST’s Basic and Proficient as analogous to SBAC’s Standard Nearly Met and Standard Met, respectively. About 45% of districts require that ELs score at or above Mid-Basic to be reclassified. However, due to insufficient data, the share of students who would meet that standard on the SBAC is not shown here.