Merits of bilingual education

¶ … Raymond Williams

The merits and disadvantages of bilingual education: ELL students and standardized assessment

One of the rationales used in defense of No Child Left behind, and other state-run programs deploying standardized testing as a means of school quality control is that it presumably ensures that the education of students traditionally excluded from the mainstream environment of many classrooms, including ELL (English language learning) students are monitored through a 'quality control' program. However, many fear that rather than address systemic deficits, these kinds of standards-based assessments will merely result in ELL students being unfairly labeled and judged early on in their academic career.

Elizabeth a. Mahon's 2006 study from the Bilingual Research Journal entitled "High-stakes testing and English Language Learners: Questions of validity," assesses the claims of such tests by asking the question: To what extent does English language proficiency, as measured by the WMLS (Woodcock-Munoz Language Survey) and similar language scales, predict English academic achievement, as measured by the CSAP (Colorado Student Assessment Program), on the fourth- and fifth grade levels? To test the hypothesis that tests such as the WMLS, which measures English language proficiency, positively correlates with English academic proficiency, as measured by the CSAP, she compiled both descriptive and inferential statistics of student scores of 200 ELLs in the fourth and fifth grades (Mahon 2006:479-480).

The test population's schools were selected on the basis of sociological variety and representation of a variety of approaches to ELL education (Mahon 483). All of the different schools assessed in the study used different types of programs. For example, the Clay and Iris Elementary Schools used a transitional bilingual education model. 30% to 40% of all students were labeled ELLs and 26% and 42% of the student population qualified for free and reduced lunch programs respectively. The use of free lunches was the means by which the study assessed the relative poverty or affluence of the district. In the Butler District, Linda Elementary School, a "pull-out" ESL program model there were approximately 17% ELLs and 22% free and reduced lunch recipients. Pine Mountain was the dual language site, with 54% ELLs and 44% free and reduced lunch recipients.

Mahon's findings concluded that English proficiency was significantly related to English academic achievement, even for ELL students who had been in U.S. schools for three years or longer. However, an almost immediate problem arises regarding her methodology and hypothesis. Mahon essentially theorized that students who do well on one kind of standardized test, namely a test of English proficiency for ELL students, do well on another kind of standard test. This supports the policy that ELL students must be brought 'up to standard' on English language skills as quickly as possible, to compete with their native-speaking peers. It also confirms idea that general standardized tests of academic performance are a good means of assessing student's English language ability.

The dependent variable of the study was students' performance on language assessment tests geared towards ELL students, and the independent variable was that of performance on general academic assessment test. However, there was an underlying assumption that the first component of the assessment, namely that of the measured language proficiency was 'correct.' Other forms of proficiency, such as general life skills, classroom performance, and teacher perception of student improvement were not tabulated nor assessed through quantitative or qualitative methodology.