Accountability Lessons for Indiana Schools Serving English Learners
Abstract
Indiana English learners (ELs) are low-performers on the annual standardized test and they constitute a rapidly growing segment of the school-aged population. Authors of this exploratory study implement descriptive statistics to compare demographic and accountability data of schools serving large EL populations to those of schools serving smaller EL populations and schools not serving ELs. Analyses of performance and adequate yearly progress (AYP) reports on schools and school corporations between 2002 and 2011 show that schools serving large EL populations are less likely to make AYP, are held accountable for more subgroups, and serve larger percentages of low-income students. These findings provide evidence that Indiana’s accountability system put schools with large EL populations at an unfair disadvantage. Starting in the 2010-11 school year, Indiana began using an A-F grading system to evaluate its schools. While the stated intention of the new, stricter accountability system is to raise the performance of all students, it may result in serious consequences for schools which were already struggling to make AYP under the previous system. Based on their findings, the authors discuss the implications and offer recommendations for teachers, administrators, and policymakers to increase the general understanding of how policies impact schools serving ELs.
References
Balfanz, R., Legters, N., West, T.C., &Weber, L.M. (2007). Are NCLB’s measures, incentives, and improvement strategies the right ones for the nation’s low-performing high schools? American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 559-593.
CTB McGraw-Hill. (2011). ISTEP+ Disaggregation Summary. Indiana Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/assessment/ds-gr-3-8.pdf
Center on Education Policy. (2010). State test score trends through 2007-08, part 6: Has progress been made in raising achievement for English language learners? Washington, D.C. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED509348.pdf
Indiana Department of Education. (2011). 2011-2012 ISTEP+ Program Manual. Office of Student Assessment. Indianapolis, Indiana. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/assessment/2011-12-istep-program-manual11-30-11final-kc.pdf
Indiana Department of Education. (2012a). 2011 Public Law 221 (P.L. 221). Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/improvement/accountability/2011-public-law-221-pl-221
Indiana Department of Education. (2012b). ESEA flexibility request. Submitted to the U.S. Department of Education (OMB No. 1810-0708). Retrieved from http://www.cep-dc.org/documents/StateWaivers/Indiana.pdf
Indiana Department of Education. (2012c). Find School and Corporation Data Reports. IDOE Data Center. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/improvement/accountability/find-school-and-corporation-data-reports
LeFloch, K., Martinez, F., O'Day, J., Stecher, B., & Taylor, J. (2007). State and local implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act: Volume II--Accountability under NCLB: Interim Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition. (2011). The growing numbers of English learner students 1998/99-2008/09. Retrieved from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/publications
Stullich, S., Abrams, A., Eisner, E., & Lee, E. (2009). Title I implementation--Update on recent evaluation findings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development Policy and Program Studies Service.
Stullich, S., Eisner, E., McCrary, J., & Rooney, C. (2006). National assessment of Title I interim report volume I: Implementation of Title I (NCEE 2006-4001). Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, U.S. Department of Education.
Working Group on ELL Policy. (2009). The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Recommendations for addressing the needs of English language learners. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.