Marginalizing English as a second language teacher expertise: The exclusionary consequence of No Child Left Behind
No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2001) fails to recognize English as a second language (ESL) as a specialized academic discipline in which teachers should be “highly qualified.” In this paper we examine the impact of this policy failure on the practice of teachers of K-12 English language learners (ELLs), particularly in the context of reading instruction governed by Reading First under NCLB. We draw on teachers’ perspectives through interviews conducted with 52 ESL teachers addressing the impact of NCLB in Florida schools. Findings include the devaluing of ESL teacher expertise and instructional roles, and the homogenization of curriculum, instruction, and assessment of ELLs whose needs disappear in the mainstream educational setting. We recommend that re-authorization of NCLB, future state legislation and district policies explicitly acknowledge the distinct linguistic, cultural, and academic learning characteristics of ELLs and the specialized professional knowledge and skills required for teachers who are highly qualified to teach them.
KeywordsEnglish language learners English as a second language Highly qualified teachers No Child Left Behind Reading First Teacher expertise
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Allington, R. L. (Ed.). (2002). Big brother and the national reading curriculum: How ideology trumped evidence. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Antunez, B. (2002). Implementing Reading First with English language learners (Directions in Language and Education No. 15). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs. Available at http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/directions/15.pdf.
- August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Butler, T. (2007). Commissioner Blomberg congratulates “A” and “B” schools. Retrieved February 12, 2008 from http://www.flboe.org/news/2007/2007_06_29.asp.
- Chatterji, M. (2005). Closing Florida’s achievement gap. FIE Policy Brief 4. Florida Institute of Education at the University of North Florida. Jacksonville, FL.Google Scholar
- Commins, N. L., & Miramotes, O. B. (2005). Linguistic diversity and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Corson, D. (1999). Language policy in schools: A resource for teachers and administrators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Crandall, J. A. (Ed.). (1995). ESL through content-area instruction. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
- Crawford, J. (2003). A few things Ron Unz would prefer you didn’t know about English learners in California. Retrieved February 12, 2008 from http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/castats.htm.
- Crawford, J. (2004). No Child Left Behind: Misguided approach to school accountability for English language learners. Forum on Ideas to Improve the NCLB Accountability Provisions for Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners. Center on Education Policy. Available at http://www.cep-dc.org/.
- Creese, A. (2005). Teacher collaboration and talk in multilingual classrooms. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Davison, C. (2001). ESL in Australian schools: From the margins to the mainstream. In B. Mohan, C. Leung & C. Davison (Eds.), English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning and identity (pp. 11–29). London: Pearson.Google Scholar
- Florida Department of Education. (1995). Inclusion as an instructional model for LEP students. Technical Assistance Paper No. 019-ESOL-95. Tallahassee, Florida.Google Scholar
- Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2000). Teaching reading in multilingual classrooms. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Gamse, B. C., Bloom, H. S., Kemple, J. J., & Jacob, R. T. (2008). Reading First impact study: Interim report. Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
- Goodman, K., Shannon, P., Goodman, Y., & Rapoport, R. (Eds.). (2004). Saving our schools: The case for public education saying no to “No Child Left Behind”. Berkeley, CA: RDR Books.Google Scholar
- de Jong, E. J., & Harper, C. A. (2004). Is ESL just good teaching? In M. Bigelow & C. Walker (Eds.), Creating teacher community: selected papers from the third international conference on language teacher education (pp. 115–131). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquistion.Google Scholar
- de Jong, E. J., & Harper, C. A. (2005). Preparing mainstream teachers for English language learners: Is being a good teacher good enough? Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(2), 101–124.Google Scholar
- Harper, C. A., & de Jong, E. J. (2005). Working with ELLs: What’s the difference? In A. Huerta Macias (Ed.), Working with English language learners: Perspectives and practice (pp. 107–135). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.Google Scholar
- Harper, C. A., & de Jong, E. J. (in press). English language teacher expertise: The Elephant in the room. Education.Google Scholar
- Harper, C. A., & Platt, E. J. (Fall, 1998). Full inclusion for secondary ESOL students: Some concerns from Florida. TESOL Journal. 30–36.Google Scholar
- Harper, C. A., & Platt, E. J. (2007). No Child Left Behind is language policy. Paper presented at the meeting of the American association of applied linguistics, Costa Mesa CA.Google Scholar
- Harper, C. A., Platt, E. J., Naranjo, C. J., & Boynton, S. S. (2007). Marching in unison: Florida ESL teachers and No Child Left Behind. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 642–651.Google Scholar
- Krashen, S. D. (2002). More smoke and mirrors: A critique of the National Reading Panel Report on fluency. In R. L. Allington (Ed.), Big brother and the national reading curriculum: How ideology trumped evidence (pp. 112–124). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Langman, J. (2003). The effects of ESL-trained content-area teacher: Reducing middle-school students to incidental language learners. Prospect, 18(1), 14–26.Google Scholar
- Menken, K. (2006). Teaching to the test: How No Child Left Behind impacts language policy, curriculum, instruction for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 521–546.Google Scholar
- Menken, K. (2008). English learners left behind: Standardized testing as language policy. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
- Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Davison, C. (2001). English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning, and identity. Essex, UK: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
- Molnar, A. (Ed.). (2004). Reform Florida. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University Policy Research Unit. Available at http://edpolicylab.org.
- National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Retrieved June 11, 2008 from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/upload/smallbook_pdf.pdf.
- Olsen, L. (1997). Made in America. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C., (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Contributors: Advocates for Children of New York, The Civil Society Institute.Google Scholar
- Platt, E. J., & Harper, C. A. (Fall, 1997). Problems and possibilities of inclusion for LEP students. Sunshine State TESOL Journal, 9–19.Google Scholar
- Platt, E. J., Harper, C. A., & Mendoza, M. B. (2003). Dueling philosophies: Inclusion or separation for Florida’s English language learners? TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 105–133.Google Scholar
- Reeves, J. (2004). “Like everybody else”: Equalizing educational opportunity for English language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 43–66.Google Scholar
- Snow, M. A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 207–217.Google Scholar
- TESOL. (2002). TESOL/NCATE P-12 standards for teacher education programs. Alexandria, VA. Online documents at URL www.ncate.org/documents/ProgramStandards/tesol.pdf. September 3, 2007.
- TESOL. (2006). PreK-12 English language proficiency standards. Alexandria, VA: Author.Google Scholar
- Warford, J. (2005). Enrollment of Limited English Proficient students in required intenstive reading courses. Memorandum to Florida district school superintendent. Tallahassee, FL.Google Scholar
- Wright, W. E. (2006). A catch-22 for language learners. Educational Leadership, 64(3), 22–27.Google Scholar
- Zehler, A., Fleischman, H., Hopstock, P., Stephenson, T., Pendizick, M., & Sapru, S. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and LEP students with disabilities (Vol. 1). Research Report. Retrieved February 11, 2008 from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/resabout/research/descriptivestudyfiles/volI_research_fulltxt.pdf.