Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lauren Porter
Introduction
This paper will take a top-down approach to examine language policy and planning
(LPP) in the United States, in addition to what this LPP looks like on a state and district level in
education within the state of Colorado. I will also present resources (people and documents) I
can contact and utilize, respectively, in order to understand what this LPP looks like in terms of
classroom instruction and differentiation, language attitudes, and teacher support in districts
where I will likely be searching for jobs once I graduate with an MA TEFL/TESL and MEd and
licensure program in the spring of 2018. Additionally, delving deeper into the classes offered at
different schools in Northern Colorado will affect where I want to do my student teaching in
2018 before I graduate. In other words, after examining LPP on a variety of levels, this paper sets
me up to begin to conduct interviews to learn more about teaching ELLs in different districts in
Northern Colorado. I hypothesize that each district and school will model their English Language
Acquisition (ELA) instruction based on Colorado Department of Education (CDE) standards, but
that the implementation of these will look different district to district, and school to school,
terminology within the field of LPP, and to understand what language policy, and language
planning, are. According to Wardhaugh & Fuller (2015), language planning is the attempt to
change languages in their form or function, and is often co-existent with language policy, which
deals with policy decisions regarding language. It is noted that policy and planning have a
complex relationship and that, planning does not always lead to policy or vice versa, rather they
are intertwined processes (Wardhaugh & Fuller, 2015, p. 368). Language policy can also be
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 3
understood as having three components. These are: the practices of a language in a community,
ideologies about language, and intervention, planning, and management efforts that are intended
policy the way Spolsky defines it, in terms of the planning and management that occurs (via
district and/or school policy) of curriculum and English language development (ELD) courses in
So, what does LPP look like in the United States? Unlike many countries, the U.S.
has no official language. However, LPP is of great concern to the U.S. because there is a large
Fuller, 2015, p. 382). In the year 2000, 12 percent of the population was Hispanic, and that
number is estimated to increase to 25 percent by 2040 (Huntington, 2004). These are important
figures to note because, though it does not mean that all Hispanics speak only Spanish, these
numbers carry significant weight in terms of questions such as, How many of these people
speak Spanish only?, How many wish to raise their children as balanced bilinguals?, How
many children grow up in Spanish-only speaking homes?, What implications are there for a
large percentage of the population potentially not speaking English?, etc. The National Center
on Immigration Integration Policy published a 2011 report, based on the 2010 census, that
identified 9 percent of the population of the U.S. as limited English proficiency (LEP).
According to this report, over 60 percent of these LEPs were Spanish speakers. Although other
languages have LEP speakers, Spanish is the native language of the majority of these LEPs as a
whole across the U.S. These large numbers of Hispanics and LEP native Spanish speakers are
mirrored in data from Weld County School District 6 (Greeley and Evans, CO), which will be
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 4
discussed later. According to Wardhaugh & Fuller (2015), the large numbers of LEP Spanish
speakers can be attributed to the number of individuals, and their constant replenishment in the
U.S.
Although the U.S. does not have an official language, there have been attempts to
make English the official language of the U.S. since 1982. Because these bills have not passed in
both the Senate and the House, state legislatures have begun passing legislation on their own.
There are conflicting ideologies and viewpoints as to the merits and motivations of establishing
English as the official language of the U.S. As Wardhaugh & Fuller (2015) describe, those in
favor of this move believe that the increasing use of languages other than English in the United
States and, in particular, the increasing use of Spanish, poses some kind of internal threat (p.
382). They also mention that, We must note that language planning is often done to benefit
already powerful sectors of society, as opposed to benefitting all members of society equally
Jong (2008) outlines some of the arguments for, and against, making English the
official language. According to Jong (2008), English-only supporters build on the popular
image of the United States as a nation of immigrants, who have succeeded economically by
learning English and leaving their ethnic roots behind (p. 352). The study goes on to state that
English-only supporters emphasize the need for a shared language for communication and
government to be efficient, but also warn of Englishs threatened status because of perceived lack
However, there seems to be bias on both sides of the argument. For example,
Usenglish.org, the website which outlines the movement toward English as the official language,
claims numerous times that it is not advocating for English-only. This loaded term seems to be
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 5
imposed on the movement even though it doesnt claim to favor English-only. According to the
term for any piece of Official English legislation. U.S. English claims that it never has and never
will advocate for legislation that bans the use of languages other than English in the U.S.
Biases on both sides of LPP, or conflicting statements, rather, can be revealed when
comparing the Usenglish.org website and Jong (2008). This is not surprising considering that this
is a politicized issue. For example, Jong believes that Official English advocates want minorities
to leave their ethnic roots behind, while Usenglish.org states, Official Enlgish legislation does
not infringe upon individual rights, nor does it prevent immigrants from preserving their cultural
According the US English website, the Official English legislation would declare
English the official language of government, but would make exceptions to allow use of other
languages for issues of public health and safety and other areas.
The idea of making English the official language can be quite a debate, as witnessed
in the fact that on a federal level legislation has not passed both the House and Senate. However,
31 states have passed legislation on the matter, and Colorado is one of them. In 1988, Colorado
passed Initiative 1 (The Colorado English as Official State Language Initiative), which declared
English as the official language of the state (ballotpedia.org). The measure passed with 61.15%
of the votes, and appeared on the ballot saying, Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado
Constitution to declare that the English language is the official language of the State of
Colorado? (ballotpedia.org).
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 6
Now that LPP has been examined at a federal and state level, the focus will shift to
more local information on LPP, specifically in regard to education. The Colorado Department of
Education (CDE) provides information regarding the English Language Proficiency Act (ELPA).
In May of 2014, the Colorado governor signed HB14-1298, which re-enacted the ELPA and
provided funding for districts in the state with English language learners (ELLs)
(cde.state.co.us). Specifically for 2016-2017, funding for districts with ELLs will go toward the
English Language Proficiency Program (ELPA) and the Professional Development and Student
language proficiency program for ELLs, and its goal is to increase English language proficiency
and academic performance of English learners. The Professional Development and Student
Support Program provides money to offset the cost of providing professional development for
educators who work with ELLs. For the fiscal year 2016-2017, HB14-1298 provided
$18,785,784 for the ELPA and $27,000,000 for the Professional Development and Student
This information shows that, although Colorado has adopted legislation that makes
English the official language of the state, the CDE still supports programs that provide funding
for ELLs and their educators. This is important because, as can be seen in the 2015-2016 Weld
County District 6 English Language Development Implementation Guide, there is a large need
for ELL support in Northern Colorado. Information on District 6 and Poudre School District is
especially interesting and important for me, because they are two districts in which I will most
likely be searching for jobs. The data taken from the English Language Development
Implementation Guide also provides me with good background information to know before
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 7
interviewing educators from WCSD6 on language attitudes, planning, policy, support, and
implementation in their jobs. These interviews are the framework of the research study I would
conduct to collect this information before applying to jobs, and to understand LPP on a local
level.
in District 6 (which serves Greeley and Evans). This information comes from the 2008-2014
Table 1.
As the table above shows, there is a large percentage of EL students in WCSD6, and
the fact that these numbers are staying stable at approximately 25% is encouraging for me when
looking for jobs because it shows a steady, and large, percentage of EL students in need here in
English language learner, which represents great need for ELL instructors in the district. The
extensive information on demographics, culture and equity, policies, procedures, and mandates,
assessment, curriculum and instruction, and parent engagement and interaction. The fact that the
district has compiled this nearly 100-page document indicates to me that it is attempting to be
organized and thorough in its treatment of ELLs. As I will describe later, I have found multiple
people within the district with whom I would like to speak about the document, and their
teaching practices specifically, in addition to learning more about language policies and attitudes
WCSD6 is only one of the prospective school districts in which Id like to interview,
so I also found information on both Poudre School District and Thompson School Districts ELD
plans and attitudes. According to Thompson School Districts home page, the ELA department
within the district serves LEP students, and their main goal is help ELLs with English language
skills and academic support in order to help them achieve the ultimate goal of high school
graduation. Lucile Erwin, one of the middle schools within Thompson School District, goes even
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 9
further by outlining a specific language policy for the school. According to the Lucile Erwin
page on the school districts site, Lucile Erwin school says, our goal is to establish an engaging
academic setting in which students learn and excel in Language and Lit and Language
Acquisition. They continue to say that, As ELD students are producing written and oral work
in a language other than their mother tongue, we recognize that the communication of ideas and
content knowledge plays a greater role in assessment than usage and mechanics. All appropriate
accommodations will be made for ELD students. In this sense, Thompson seems to understand
the hierarchy of concerns in terms of grading and evaluating ELLs, namely that it is important
for them to achieve communicative competence, and that that is more important than correcting
And, finally, Poudre School District has information on their site indicating that ELLs
receive instruction that is based both in Colorado Academic Standards and in Colorado English
Language Proficiency frameworks, and that there are many options for ELLs, especially at
Lincoln Middle School and Poudre High School. Those websites indicate classes called
newcomer (subject area) and sheltered (subject area), so I would definitely like to learn more
about those programs, and their differentiation, when interviewing instructors from both of those
Overall, I feel that I have a good grasp on what the language support looks like from
the CDE website and the individual district websites, but to learn more, Id definitely want to
conduct interviews to see how all of these policies, and claims of language support for ELLs,
look like in practice. Table 2 shows which teachers, including their roles and contact information,
Id like to talk to at different schools in each district. Because Im planning to go into secondary
education, I have chosen teachers from different middle and high schools specifically.
LANGUAGE POLICY & PLANNING IN NORTHERN COLORADO 10
Table 2.
I would like to move forward by contacting some of these individuals in the next year
or so in order to make connections with these instructors and interview them to understand how
their various roles as instructors of ELLs function in their respective schools and districts and to
test my hypothesis that, although each district with ELA instruction based on CDE standards,
federal, state, and district levels in terms of legal language, documents, etc., but to truly
understand what the day-to-day and support for these teachers looks like, it would be best to
speak with them all personally. In addition to interviewing these instructors, I would love to
shadow them to understand what these roles look like at the middle school and high school
References
Huntington, S.P. (2004). Who are we? The challenges to Americas national identity.
New York: Simon and Shuster.
National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy. (2011). LEP Data Brief. Migration Policy
Institute.
Wardhaugh, R., & Fuller, J.M. (2015). An introduction to sociolinguistics (7th ed.). Wiley
Blackwell.