2010 National Immigrant Integration Conference - Strategy Sessions

Public Schools
Sept. 30, 2010

The panel on public schools was focused specifically on English Language Learners (ELLs) and
Education in the U.S. Much of the discussion (led by Raul Gonzalez) was about No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) and how ELL youth are advantaged and disadvantaged by NCLB. This discussion included a
description of NCLB and its strengths and weaknesses, and a discussion (largely informed by Roger Rice’s
work with META) of what NCLB looks like in schools and on the ground when it is implemented. It also
touched on parental and community involvement in educating the U.S. ELL population, and how
philanthropists like Bob Hildreth can play a part. Panelists offered suggestions about what policy-makers,
parents, and community members could do to improve educational opportunities and outcomes for ELL
youth in U.S. schools. Report is organized into 3 parts and each part has a list of suggestions related to the
topic. Sections are:
1. U.S. Education Policy
2. U.S. Education Policy on ground
3. Parental and Community Involvement

U.S. Education Policy:

Panelists discussed how children of immigrants in U.S. schools has increased dramatically and that
many arrived in middle and late years of educational career which makes it difficult for them to acquire
English, then Academic English, and to matriculate. With No Child Left Behind (NCLB) issues of testing
and how to apply them fairly to these ELL youth, with their many challenges, come to the fore.

NCLB has to do with accountability, choice, reform, and competition. The Race to the
Top initiative increased competition among states and then forced those who receive it to implement
education policies that the Fed. Government is behind. While our government is interested in “cutting
edge ideas,” such as standards, accountability, and assessment—they do not work. For example, NCLB lets
states set own standards which directly means children’s education will vary depending on which state they
are in. Michigan sets high standards but kids in Michigan who do badly on the Michigan Test are viewed as
poorly performing students even though they rank okay in terms of national standards. In Arkansas it’s the
reverse.

NCLB’s accountability system does not work because the way we measure success of systems
doesn’t work (as in above). Thus, Obama’s focus on intervening with failing schools is pointless because
we don’t have accurate way of measuring whether schools are successful or failing. Newer NCLB features
include measuring “accumulative growth” of students from one year to next, which is improvement from
old system, which compared 4th grades in 2010 to other 4th grades in a different year, which was arbitrary.
Now students are compared to themselves to measure personal growth in educational achievement.
-Newer NCLB aspects also include giving government power to shut schools down that don’t meet success
standards. A school might be shut down and then reopened with entirely new teachers. No evidence
that this will work, so hopefully this policy won’t become law.

Future Suggestions: 1) We need to find out how to deal with teacher issue- while teacher-child
interaction is most important element in education—still don’t know how to make teachers better.
Supported by the
2) Performance Pay? Get rid of tenure? (Argues money won’t make teachers do better- they already have
incentive to do well) 3) New NCLB legislation will have more provisions for ELLs—there will be title for
“diverse learners” which will provide more services for their education. We overall need more resources
for ELL education.

Research has shown that it does work to close schools down and open them up as dual language
schools. More programs like this will be beneficial. Some measure of Accountability is ultimately good
for ELL youth as it holds schools accountable for their education. Need improved measures of
accountability.

What NCLB and education for ELLs Looks Like in Schools?

In Delaware and S. Carolina are school districts that are getting rid of ESL programs and bilingual
instructors. Bilingual instructors are replaced with bilingual tutors. Similarly, in Florida parents were not
allowed to enter school without ID card—threats to call ICE if parents entered w/o cards were made.
Beyond volatile climate for ELL youth and families is inadequate services in schools. To education ELL
youth may take twice as much as non-ELL youth, as a study Rice did for NYAC reported.

Even if states reserve sufficient funds for ELL youth, by the time money moves from state to
district, to school, or from state to mayor, to superintendent, to principal it may be have been reallocated
significantly so funds for ELL Youth are spent on others “needs of the school.” One principal admitting
using ELL funds she received from district to pay for different school needs.

In Massachusetts’ Race to the Top report, a lot more money was allocated for spending on
ELL/SPED students. Meanwhile Massachusetts has also fired many ELL teachers even though ELL student
population is growing. This happened in Brockton.

Very wide range of knowledge among principals and “ELL” teachers at different schools in U.S.
Some teachers teach ELL Students with no training for doing so, and their principals have no knowledge of
who their ELL Students are. Other principals know their ELL teachers, ELL students, and ELL parents
very well and ensure that ELL teachers are very well trained. In one such school in Denver, Colorado, Rice
found that principal was also up with the research on bilingual education. This shows that there is NO
STANDARD for defining or requiring highly qualified ELL teachers. Kids need structured English learning
all day given range of literacy levels of kids in U.S. schools.

Even though some ELL students achieve incredible things early on (uses example of Somali kids
moving from herding goats to writing short essays in 1st year of being in school), they still will not pass
MEPA or MCAS standards and teachers won’t meet AYP requirements.

Fears that given hostile anti-immigrant climate in U.S. and in U.S. schools, that Plyler V. Doe will
be overturned. Mentions that it was a 4/5 decision but Supreme Court Justice Roberts noted the decision
should be reversed and has overturned similar cases since. If it’s reversed, local districts will have power to
decide on serious issues around educating ELL youth (and specifically, those without citizenship…) and

Supported by the
what standards are set for them. Equal Education Opportunity Act of 1974 is only thing letting parents take
schools to courts.

Future Suggestions: 1)We need standard measure of quality ELL Teacher. 2) We need to make sure
money for ELL populations is properly allocated despite the trickle down funding system (State-District-
School) 3) “Don’t Mourn-Organize!”- Parents and communities need to organize against failing education
system for ELLs- All successful organizing in schools started with parents. We need to form local advocacy
groups and coalitions urgently

Parental and Community Involvement:

Obama administration is putting no money into Parental Educational Involvement-it is a blind spot
in our administration and in education reform. Parental Involvement is a focus in NCLB but policy-makers
still don’t know how to involve communities and parents in accountability testing. Even though parents
have “choice” in deciding which schools to send kids to—not very active in this process.

Hildreth’s FUEL is an example of how the community can be involved in education of ELL
population – he helps parents save money for kids’ future education and then matches the money they save,
in addition to supplying knowledge, networks, leadership activities, and access to academic after school
activities to ELL kids and parents in East Boston. FUEL also works on helping kids in E. Boston prepare for
the community college entrance exams- ACUPLACER- which improves chances of success in community
college and saves colleges and families money in long run by limiting expenses of remedial courses.
Students in FUEL have received full scholarships to colleges like UMASS, Amherst.

Future Suggestions: 1) Media should identify which schools are working and which ones aren’t and then
disseminate this information for parents to increase their involvement. 2) In1930’s, Mexican parents
organized against school that isolated Mexicans, similar thing occurred in 1940s…-ALL major Ed. Reform
in US began with parent organizing—we need more parent organizing! 3) We need more dual
language schools in poor communities like Lawrence which would include ELL Latinos and English speaking
Latinos in one classroom (this too requires advocacy). 4) Need more programs like FUEL to increase
financial, social, and human capital that immigrant families need for college attainment. 5) Have to help
parents demand an education for their kids (a “match” program is a way to add to parents’ motivation to
help kids receive good education). 6) Need to form more partnerships in community (FUEL operations
through partners with after-school programs, banks, and community organizations).

Panelists:
Moderator: Margie from Migration Policy Institute
1. Raul Gonzales, head of Legislative Affairs and Ed. Policy at the National Council of La Raza
(NCLR)
2. Roger Rice, Lawyer and long-time defender of ELL student rights and the head of META in
Boston
3. Bob Hildreth, Philanthropist and founder of Families United in Educational Leadership (FUEL)

Supported by the