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 will be available at Larry's blog under The Best Resources for Learning about the Next Generation of State Testing.50
No matter what exemptions may or may not be granted, the reality is that the vast majority of English Language Learners in this country have already taken or soon will be taking these new assessments. An important requirement of the grants to create these assessments was to include testing accommodation policies for ELLs and students with disabilities. The new assessments from both PARCC and SBAC, which were operational for the 2014–2015 school year, were mostly administered by computer and did contain technology-based accommodations, such as pop-up glossaries, audio captions, and text-to-speech and speech-to-text options. Other, nonembedded accommodations include the use of bilingual, word-to-word dictionaries, test directions being read aloud or in a student's native language, smaller testing environments, and extended time.51, 52
As teachers, we know in real life that even with testing accommodations these assessments can be a source of frustration and anxiety for our ELL students. It is important for both teachers and students to remember the “end game” – that acquiring language and content in meaningful ways is the goal, not learning how to score higher on a state test.
English Language Proficiency Standards
Common Core standards lay out the academic concepts and content that students need to know in different academic subjects. Teachers and students use language to teach and learn these subjects. In order for teachers to effectively provide scaffolds for ELLs so they can learn the academic content specified in Common Core, they must know how language develops across proficiency levels and be aware of the specific language practices students need in order to access this content. English Language Proficiency standards are one resource teachers can use to gain that knowledge.
Several major efforts have been undertaken across the United States in the past few years to develop these types of English Language Proficiency standards that align to Common Core. In terms of helping English Learners to meet the Common Core, very little guidance was provided in the original publication of the standards. Basically, it was left up to each state to determine how to best align their English Language