Educational language policies in the United States: a critical discourse analysis of ELPA21

European Journal of Language Policy (2020), 12, (1), 5–27.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3828/ejlp.2020.2
Language: English
Pages: 23

Abstract

This study examines the definitions of learners and programmes in state and district policy documents in the English Language Proficiency Assessment for the twenty-first century (ELPA-21) consortium and scrutinises how the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 still influences the state and district policy documents. Framed by Tollefson’s critical language policy (2006) and Fairclough’s (1995) critical discourse analysis, it finds that the federal definitions for English Learners (ELs) and programmes heavily influenced the state and district policy documents in the United States. More specifically, states relate to the federal definitions of ELs and programmes in how they emphasise students’ “other” languages and prioritise English development and academic achievement in English-speaking classrooms. The study also finds that districts appropriate federal and state definitions by creating tools for identification and assessment, namely through a home language survey and an initial language proficiency screener. Districts also comply with federal and state regulations to measure ELs’ language development in an annual proficiency test. However, there is evidence to support that districts appropriate these definitions in complex ways because some create space for bilingualism while others specify English development as the only stated programme goal.

Cet article examine les définitions des apprenants et des programmes proposées dans les documents de politique des États et des districts du Consortium pour l’évaluation des compétences en langue anglaise pour le 21e siècle (ELPA-21). Il montre comment la loi No Child Left Behind (NCLB) de 2001 influence encore les documents de politique émis par les États et les districts. Encadré par la Critical Language Policy (2006) de Tollefson et l’analyse critique du discours de Fairclough (1995), il constate que les définitions fédérales des apprenants d’anglais (EL) et des programmes ont fortement influencé les documents de politique des États et des districts aux États-Unis. Plus précisément, les États se rapportent aux définitions fédérales des EL et des programmes dans la façon dont ils mettent l’accent sur les «autres» langues des élèves, et donnent la priorité au développement de l’anglais et à la réussite scolaire dans les classes anglophones. Cette étude révèle également que les districts s’approprient les définitions fédérales et étatiques en créant des outils d’identification et d’évaluation, notamment par le biais d’une enquête sur la langue parlée à la maison et d’un examen initial des compétences linguistiques. Les districts se conforment également aux réglementations fédérales et étatiques pour mesurer le développement linguistique des EL dans un test de compétence annuel. Cependant, il existe des indications que les districts s’approprient ces définitions de manière complexe car certains créent un espace pour le bilinguisme tandis que d’autres spécifient le développement de l’anglais comme le seul objectif déclaré du programme.

FormatArticle

£25.00

READ THIS ARTICLE

If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

References

Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C.H. and Lord, C. (2004) ‘Assessment Accommodations for English Language Learners: Implications for Policy-based Empirical Research’, Review of Educational Research 74(1): 1–28. Google Scholar

ADE (Arkansas Department of Education) (2015) ESOL Program Guide: Guidance for Providing ESOL (English to Speakers of Other Languages) Services. Available at: http://bit.ly/2Q91wkl (accessed 30 September 2016). Google Scholar

Bakhtin, M. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press. Google Scholar

BCS (Berkeley County Schools) (n.d.) Every Student Succeeds Act. Available at: http://bit.ly/38NNcUI (accessed 30 September 2018). Google Scholar

CCS (Columbus City Schools) (2016) English as a Second Language. Available at: http://bit.ly/2WjiSiv (accessed 30 September 2016). Google Scholar

Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide to Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar

Davis, K.A. (1999) ‘Dynamics of Indigenous Language Maintenance’, in T. Huebner and K.A. Davis (eds), Sociopolitical Perspectives on Language Policy and Planning in the USA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 67–98. Google Scholar

DMPS (Des Moines Public Schools) (2016) English Language Learners. Available at: http://bit.ly/2IITASE (accessed 1 October 2016). Google Scholar

Evans, B.A. and Hornberger, N.A. (2005) ‘No Child Left Behind: Repealing and Unpeeling Federal Education Policy in the United States’, Language Policy 4(1): 87–106. Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Study of Language. London: Longman. Google Scholar

Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W. and Christian, D. (2005) ‘English Language Learners in US Schools: An Overview of Research Findings’, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 10(4): 363–85. Google Scholar

Goertz, M.E. (2005) ‘Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act: Challenges for the States’, Peabody Journal of Education 80(2): 73–89. Google Scholar

Hakuta, K. (2011) ‘Educating Language Minority Students and Affirming their Equal Rights: Research and Practical Perspectives’, Educational Researcher 40(4): 163–74. Google Scholar

Iowa Department of Education (2015) Educating Iowa’s English Learners (ELs): A Handbook for Administrators and Teachers. Available at: http://bit.ly/2WfgeKe (accessed 30 September 2016). Google Scholar

Johnson, D.C. (2009) ‘Ethnography of Language Policy’, Language Policy 8(2): 139–59. Google Scholar

Johnson, D.C. and Johnson, E.J. (2015) ‘Power and Agency in Language Policy Appropriation’, Language Policy 14(3): 221–43. Google Scholar

Kristeva, J. (1986) ‘Word, Dialogue, and Novel’, in T. Moi (ed.), The Kristeva Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 34–61. Google Scholar

Lanvers, U. (2018) ‘Public Debates of the Englishization of Education in Germany: A Critical Discourse Analysis’, European Journal of Language Policy 10(1): 39–76. Google Scholar

Leckie, A.G., Kaplan, S.E. and Rubinstein-Ávila, E. (2013) ‘The Need for Speed: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Reclassification of English Language Learners in Arizona’, Language Policy 12(2): 159–76. Google Scholar

Mahoney, K. (2017) The Assessment Practices of Emergent Bilinguals: Supporting English Language Learners. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar

Manuel, N.N. and Johnson, D.C. (2018) ‘Intertextuality Across Angolan Medium of Instruction Policy Texts, Discourses, and Practices’, Current Issues in Language Planning 19(2): 161–82. Google Scholar

Menken, K. (2008) English Learners Left Behind: Standardized Testing as Language Policy. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar

Menken, K. and Kleyn, T. (2010) ‘The Long-term Impact of Subtractive Schooling in the Educational Experiences of Secondary English Language Learners’, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 13(4): 399–417. Google Scholar

NCLB (No Child Left Behind) (2002) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115. Stat, 1425, 107–10. Google Scholar

Nebraska Department of Education (2012) Rule 15: Guide for Implementation. Available at: http://bit.ly/38NAIwt (accessed 26 September 2016). Google Scholar

Nebraska Department of Education (2013) ELL Program: Guide for Administrators. Available at: http://bit.ly/2TXwQUo (accessed 3 October 2017). Google Scholar

OHDE (Ohio Department of Education) (n.d.) English Language Learners. Available at: http://bit.ly/33aLv2s (accessed 1 October 2016). Google Scholar

OPS (Omaha Public Schools) (2012) ESL Information. Available at: http://bit.ly/38OymNH (accessed 29 September 2018). Google Scholar

OSDE (Oregon Department of Education) (2016) English Learners Program Guide. Available at: http://bit.ly/2TO0Kvr (accessed 28 September 2018). Google Scholar

Palmer, D, Henderson, K., Wall, D., Zúñiga, C.E. and Berthelsen, S. (2016) ‘Team Teaching among Mixed Messages: Implementing Two-way Dual Language Bilingual Education at Third Grade in Texas’, Language Policy 15(4): 393–413. Google Scholar

Ragan, A. and Lesaux, N. (2006) ‘Federal, State, and District Level English Language Learner Program Entry and Exit Requirements: Effects on the Education of Language Minority Learners’, Education Policy Analysis Archives 14(20): 1–32. Google Scholar

Ravitch, D. (2016) The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education. New York: Basic Books. Google Scholar

Ricento, T.K. and Hornberger, N.H. (1996) ‘Unpeeling the Onion: Language Planning and Policy and the ELT Professional’, TESOL Quarterly 30(3): 401–27. Google Scholar

Ruíz, R. (1984) ‘Orientations in Language Planning’, NABE Journal 8(2): 15–34. Google Scholar

SKS (Salem-Keizer School District) (n.d.) K-12 English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). Available at: http://bit.ly/3cS4KlX (accessed 30 September 2018). Google Scholar

SPS (Seattle Public Schools) (2018) English Language Learners Program Resource Binder. Available at: http://bit.ly/2TO5Is5 (accessed 3 October 2017). Google Scholar

SSD (Springdale School District) (2017) ESL Program Handbook. Available at: http://bit.ly/39NHDaa (accessed 28 September 2018). Google Scholar

Taylor-Leech, K. and Liddicoat, A.J. (2014) ‘Macro-Language Planning for Multilingual Education: Focus on Programmes and Provision’, Current Issues in Language Planning 15(4): 353–60. Google Scholar

Tollefson, J.W. (2006) ‘Critical Theory in Language Policy’, in T. Ricento (ed.), An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 42–59. Google Scholar

USDE (United States Department of Education) National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD) (2015) Local Education Agency (School District) Universal Survey Directory Data. Available at: http://bit.ly/3cRtH0R (accessed 26 September 2018). Google Scholar

USDE (United States Department of Education) Office of English Language Acquisition (2016) English Learner Tool Kit. Available at: http://bit.ly/2W7K3fS (accessed 26 September 2017). Google Scholar

Wiley, T.G. and Lukes, M. (1996) ‘English-only and Standard English Ideologies in the US’, TESOL Quarterly 30(3): 511–35. Google Scholar

WSDE (Washington State Department of Education) (2015a) Identifying English Language Learners: Definitions and Procedures. Available at: http://bit.ly/39Owoyu (accessed 3 October 2017). Google Scholar

WSDE (Washington State Department of Education) (2015b) Program Models and Services. Available at: http://bit.ly/2TIcYp8 (accessed 3 October 2017). Google Scholar

WSDE (Washington State Department of Education) (2016) Migrant and Bilingual Education. Available at: http://bit.ly/2IGnrv1 (accessed 27 September 2017). Google Scholar

WVSDE (West Virginia Department of Education) (n.d.) Language Instruction Educational Programs. Charleston: West Virginia Department of Education. Available at: http://bit.ly/38MbH4X (accessed 2 October 2017). Google Scholar

WVSDE (West Virginia Department of Education) (2010) Memorandum. Available at: http://bit.ly/38J6VoM (accessed 2 October 2017). Google Scholar

WVSDE (West Virginia Department of Education) (2015) Guidelines for Supporting and Accommodating English Language Learner (ELL) Students. Available at: http://bit.ly/2W7OJlZ (accessed 27 September 2018). Google Scholar

If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

Details

Author details

Giles, Amanda

Yazan, Bedrettin

Keles, Ufuk

European Journal of Language Policy