practice. Many researchers agree upon the need to focus on academic language proficiency in order for ELLs to be successful in school.
Acquisition versus Learning
There is general agreement among researchers that there is a distinction between acquiring a language and learning a language.35 Acquisition involves being able to easily and naturally use the language to communicate in a variety of situations, both academic and social. Language learning requires a more conscious approach and might include being able to correctly complete a grammar worksheet. However, this does not mean the two are mutually exclusive.
Much debate over the place of explicit grammar study has occurred throughout the years. Recent research points to a balanced approach – that second language instruction can provide a combination of both explicit teaching of language features such as grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation, and implicit learning stemming from meaningful communication in the second language.36
This type of language instruction – using meaningful input and contexts to help students develop proficiency while also teaching specific language features and functions in context – is critical in helping ELLs meet the Common Core standards.
English Language Proficiency Levels
Researchers agree that ELLs progress through general stages of language acquisition. These stages have traditionally been divided into five levels of English proficiency: Beginning, Early Intermediate, Intermediate, Early Advanced, and Advanced. More recently, consortiums made up of states and organizations, who are working on new ELD standards and assessments aligned to Common Core, use different descriptors for each level. We will be discussing these groups and their work later in this chapter.
Table 1.2 illustrates how these different proficiency level labels correspond. In this book, we will use Beginning–Advanced because that is how our school district classifies ELL students.
Table 1.2 English Proficiency Level “Labels”
Of course, students' language acquisition often doesn't progress in a linear fashion within and across these proficiency levels. Students may demonstrate higher levels of proficiency in one domain versus another (e.g., listening versus writing) and may demonstrate different levels of proficiency within a domain depending upon the task. It is important to remember that a label of “Level 1” or “Beginner” doesn't identify the student, but identifies what a student knows and can do at any stage of English Language Development.
Common Core and English Language Learners: A Summary
In 2009, an effort to develop the Common Core State Standards was launched by state education leaders in 48 states, two territories, and the District of Columbia, through their membership in the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).37 The Common Core State Standards were released in June 2010 with the intention of establishing what students at each grade level need to know and be able to do in math and English Language Arts in order to graduate from high school ready to succeed “in college, career, and life, regardless of where they live.”38
Upon their release, states began their own processes of reviewing and adopting the new standards. Public controversy over the development and implementation of the Common Core emerged, and many questions, particularly about how to effectively implement and assess the standards, were brought to the forefront by parents, students, teachers, researchers, and policy makers. Many educators worried that the national standards were being touted as a silver bullet. They questioned whether the resources to train teachers in the new standards would be there or if the training would result in any value for their students. Other concerns were raised about how these standards would be assessed and the links to big profits that publishers and testing companies were sure to make. At the same time, other educators, including the leadership of major teacher unions, voiced their support for the new standards. They supported Common Core's focus on critical thinking and deeper learning instead of drills and memorization, and felt that the standards provided room for teachers to use professional judgment in implementing them.39, 40
Despite the controversy, 43 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the CCSS.41
The remaining states are developing their own set of “college and career ready” standards that seem to be very similar in intent to Common Core, but with different wording.42 They are also similar to international college and career readiness standards, and the authors of the CCSS state that the standards are “informed by other top-performing countries to prepare all students for success in our global economy and society.”43
For us, based on our years of teaching, we would have identified many other problems facing our students and schools as higher priorities over the lack of national standards. We are all for having our students be “college and career ready,” but we're not sure that the socioeconomic infrastructure is there yet to support students, teachers, and schools in meeting the Common Core standard's definition of that state of readiness. But, we live in the world as it is, not as we would like it to be, and therefore we feel the need to develop strategies to make Common Core standards work for our students, their families, and our schools.
Common Core Assessments
In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education awarded grants to two consortia of states to develop new assessments aligned to the CCSS. PARCC – Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (http://www.parcconline.org) and SBAC – Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (http://www.smarterbalanced.org) both received four-year grants to develop new content assessments that follow the guidelines below:
• Be valid and reliable
• Support and inform instruction
• Provide accurate information about what students know and can do
• Measure student achievement against standards designed to ensure that all students gain the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in college and the workplace.44
Federal law requires that ELLs participate in these state assessments annually in English language proficiency, reading/language arts, and mathematics.45
ELL students in their first 12 months of attending school in the United States are entitled to a one-time exemption from the state's English/language arts assessment, but not the math or science assessments.46 However, a number of states have sought waivers that would extend the “test-free” period to two years.47 At the time of this book's publication, Florida and Connecticut were the only states whose waivers were approved.48, 49 In December, 2015, Congress passed The Every Student Succeeds Act to replace No Child Left Behind. At the time of this book's publication, the new law's impact on these regulations was still unclear. Updated information
Krashen, S. D. (1982).
Goldenberg, C. (2008, Summer). Teaching English language learners: What the research does – and does not – say.
American Federation of Teachers. (n.d.).
National Education Association. (n.d.).
Common Core or something else? A map of state academic standards. (2015, July 20).
Felton, E. (2015, May 28). Why are so many states replacing Common Core with carbon copies?
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.).
U.S. Department of Education. (2003, February).
U.S. Department of Education. (2007, May).
Klein, A. (2015, June 18). Waiver states seek leeway for English-learners' impact on school ratings.
Klein, A. (2015, July 23). Seven states get NCLB waiver renewals, including opt-out friendly Oregon.
Mitchell, C. (2014, December 22). Federal officials grant Florida waiver on English-learner testing.
