English immersion is not working well

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>]

> From: Stephen Krashen <skrashen@yahoo.com>
>
> Published in the Seattle Statesman Journal
> Guest Opinion
>
> Substituting English immersion for bilingual education
> is not working well
> Stephen Krashen
> April 11, 2006
> Regarding the March 28 online column ?California?s
> English learners: Can you say ?Held back??? Kelly
> Torrance feels that the increase of English learners
> scoring in the two highest levels of the California
> English Language Development Test (CELDT) shows that
> dismantling bilingual education (Proposition 227)
> worked. But these increases appear to have nothing to
> do with real improvement.
> This January, the California Legislative Analyst?s
> Office reported that at least some of the increase in
> the percentage of students at the top two CELDT levels
> was because of a traffic jam: Many children in these
> levels have been there for several years; the
> percentage of those moving into the advanced levels
> has actually decreased.
> The overall progress of children in California under
> English immersion is actually very slow; average gains
> are less than one level of the CELDT per year, out of
> five levels, where level five means ?ready for the
> mainstream.? Also, an analysis done by the American
> Institutes for Research and WestEd showed that
> substituting English immersion for bilingual education
> has not accelerated the English development of
> California?s English learners.
> Stephen Krashen is a professor emeritus, University of
> Southern California. He is the author of ?Condemned
> without a Trial: Bogus Arguments against Bilingual
> Education.? He can be reached at skrashen@yahoo.com.
>
>
>
> Some bibliography:
>
> Hill, E. 2006. Update, 2002-2004: The progress of
> English learner students. Sacramento, CA: Legislative
> Analyst.
> Jepsen, C. and de Alth, S. 2005. English learners in
> California schools. San Francisco:  Public Policy
> Institute of California.
> Linn, R., Graue, E., and Sanders, N. 1990. Comparing
> state and district test results to national norms: The
> validity of claims that ?everyone is above average.?
> Educational  Measurement: Issues and Practice 10:
> 5-14.
> Parrish, T. et. al. 2006. Effects of the
> Implementation of  Proposition 227 on the Education
> of English Learners, K­12, American Institutes for
> Research and WestEd.
>
>
>
>
> California's English learners: Can you say 'held
> back??
> By Kelly Torrance,
>
>
>  THE LATEST TEST scores of California's English
> learners show that immigrant children are continuing
> to do well under English immersion, defying the
> doomsday predictions by opponents of 1998's
> Proposition 227. The mandate that schools teach
> children "overwhelmingly" in English, rather than in
> their native languages, has resulted in a large,
> demonstrable improvement in English proficiency.
>
>  Last year, more than 1.3 million English learners
> took the California English Language Development Test.
> For kindergarteners and first-graders, the exam
> assesses listening and speaking skills. For second
> through 12th grades, it also measures reading and
> writing skills.
>
> In 2005, 47% of California's English learners scored
> in the top two categories of English proficiency ?
> "early advanced" or "advanced." By comparison, only
> 25% scored in the top two categories in 2001, shortly
> after many school districts began eliminating their
> bilingual programs. That's a remarkable improvement.
>
>  Although many California school districts, including
> many that were previously resistant to immersion,
> continue to see improvement, the system has failed to
> keep pace in the important and often-overlooked area
> of "reclassification." Proposition 227 called for
> structured English-immersion programs, followed by a
> temporary transition period to mainstream instruction
> "not normally intended to exceed one year."
>
>  But California schools are failing to transition
> English learners to English classes within the
> required 12 months.
>
>  As long as they don't score below "intermediate" on
> any one section, students with an overall language
> test score of "early advanced" or "advanced" are
> considered by the state to be proficient in English.
> But although almost half of California's English
> learners scored in these top two categories in the
> last two years, fewer than one in 10 were reclassified
> as English-proficient.
>
>  In other words, even though these students speak
> English, many are still being kept out of
> English-speaking classrooms. Between 2001 and 2005, as
> proficiency was increasing from 25% to 47%,
> reclassification inched forward from 7.8% to 9%.
>
>  California's lack of good data contributes to the
> trouble. The state provides only an annual snapshot of
> its English learners, so it is unclear how many years
> individual students are trapped in immersion or
> bilingual programs. Schools also receive additional
> funds for each student classified as an English
> learner, giving them an incentive to keep kids out of
> regular classrooms.
>
>  The state Board of Education recognizes the problem.
> "We clearly need to look at why this gap is occurring
> and determine how to address it," said Jack O'Connell,
> the state superintendent of public instruction. He is
> now urging districts to review their reclassification
> procedures, which is a step in the right direction.
> But he hasn't offered any specific guidelines.
>
>  Finding better educational solutions for this large
> and growing segment of the population will be critical
> - not just for their future but for California's
> economic future. Students classified as English
> learners usually do not have access to more
> challenging curriculums that can better prepare them
> for college and beyond, such as advanced placement
> courses that could give them college credit.
>
>  The good news is that once immigrant students learn
> English and attend mainstream classes, they often do
> very well. Some school districts recognize this and
> are way ahead of the game. Long Beach Unified, for
> example, has a reclassification rate of 18%, twice the
> state average. Others, sadly, are lagging far behind.
> San Bernardino City Unified and San Juan Unified had
> reclassification rates of 5.5% and 5.3%, respectively.
>
>  "I was just at a high school this morning where
> students who were reclassified outscored everyone on
> that campus by far, in English and math," said
> Elizabeth Hartung-Cole, Long Beach's Eng lish language
> development curriculum leader for sixth through 12th
> grades. "Those are kids who obviously worked hard and
> had to be disciplined to learn a second language."