How Some Schools Fail English Language Learners

Newswise — Mei, a 14-year-old sixth grader from China, intrigued Xiaoping Li, Central Michigan University professor, who encountered the girl while supervising student teachers at a small elementary school. Despite two years of English language tutoring, Mei struggled to read first-grade material. Using Mei’s experience as a case study, Li explored the educational factors that failed Mei in her effort to become proficient in English.

Li and Mingyuan Zhang’s research, published in the October 2004 Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, is a cautionary tale for parents, teachers, and principals. The number of limited English proficient (LEP) students is growing in small towns, not just big cities. According to most current available statistics, 3.8 million children, or about 8% of students, participate in English language learning (ELL). The number is expected to grow. In fact, some estimate that 40% of children in school in 2050 will speak a language other than English.

One problem for English language learners is the scarcity of teachers with the right skills. Four part-time English language teachers, who needed only state teaching certificates to qualify for the job, taught Mei’s pullout class over a two-year period. Nationally, 41.2% of teachers instruct LEP students, but only 12.5% claimed eight or more hours of training in the previous three years. Fewer than 3% of teachers with LEP students have earned a degree in English as a second language or bilingual education. Li found Mei’s homeroom teacher also unprepared. Although he had 16 years of teaching experience, Mei was his first LEP student, and he believed his teacher education and professional development programs did not adequately prepare him for his task. Because most LEP students spend less than 10% of instruction time in ELL programs, they are very dependent on classroom teachers for literacy instruction.

With little training or experience in instructional methods, teachers failed to identify effective materials for Mei. In the resource room, Mei’s only textbook was an ELL version of a basal reader, and her instruction involved studying discrete language items, like grammar rules and memorized dialogues. In her regular class, Mei was expected to do nothing but type English words or play computer games while the rest of her class read. Her homework was math only.

Even under the accountability requirements of the No Child Left Behind, LEP students like Mei can escape state and local accountability systems for several years. When they are tested, measuring achievement is problematic because English–only testing may not reflect what LEP students know and know how to do.

The ELL teachers and the classroom teacher did not collaborate for a number of reasons. Mei’s parents did not speak English, so there was also a lack of communication between them and the school. Li and Zhang note that intervention plans for LEP students need to engage classroom teachers, support staff, and parents.

The researchers conclude the article with a number of specific recommendations based on English language teaching and learning theories and practices. A copy of "Why Mei Cannot Read and What Can Be Done” can be purchased by calling the International Reading Association at 1-800-336-7323. IRA is a community of reading professionals with more than 80,000 members in nearly 100 countries, dedicated to promoting higher achievement levels in literacy, reading, and communication by continually advancing the quality of instruction worldwide. For more information about IRA and its publications, visit http://www.reading.org.