A bilingual education for a monolingual test? the pressure to prepare for TAKS and its influence on choices for language of instruction in Texas elementary bilingual classrooms

Language Policy

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 217-235

  Palmer, Deborah ^a   Lynch, Anissa Wicktor ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Bilingual education; English language learners; High stakes testing; No child left behind; Teacher sense making; Testing accommodations; Transition

Indexed keywords

EID: 51649100457     PISSN: 15684555     EISSN: 15731863     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10993-008-9100-0     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Abedi, J. (2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometrics issues. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 231-257.
2. Abedi, J. (2004). The no child left behind act and English language learners: Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 4-14.
3. Abedi, J., & Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219-234.
4. Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C., & Lord, C. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: Implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 1-28.
5. Alamillo, L., & Viramontes, C. (2000). Reflections from the classroom: Teachers perspectives on the implementation of proposition 227. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(1-2), 155-168.
6. Alamillo, L., Palmer, D., Viramontes, C., & Garcia, E. (2005). In A. Valenzuela (Ed.), Leaving children behind: How Texas-style accountability fails Latino youth (pp. 201-224). Albany: State University of New York Press.
7. American Institutes for Research. (1999). Voluntary national tests in reading and math: Background paper reviewing laws and regulations, current practice, and research relevant to inclusion and accommodations for students with limited English proficiency. Palo Alto, CA: Author.
8. Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258-267.
9. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Cheng, L., Watanabe, Y., & Curtis, A. (Eds.). (2004). Washback in language testing: Researchy contexts and methods. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11. Clotfelter, C., & Ladd, H. (1996). Recognizing and rewarding success in public schools. In H. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 23-64). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
12. Coburn, C. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145-170.
13. Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). The unforgivable complexity of teaching: Avoiding simplicity in an age of accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 3-5.
14. Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English learners: Language diversity in the classroom (5th ed). Losangeles, CA: Bilingual Educational Services, Inc.
15. Cummins, D., Kintsch, W., Reusser, K., & Weismer, R. (1998). The role of understanding in solving word problems. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 405-438.
16. Darling-Hammond, L., & Millman, J. (Eds.). (1990). The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
17. De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & DeWin, L. (1985). Influences of rewording verbal problems on children's problem representations and solutions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 27(4), 460-470.
18. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (1998). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Powers, K. (2006). School reform and standards-based education: A model for English-language learners. Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 195-210.
20. Francis, D., Leseaux, N., & August, D. (2006). Language of instruction. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners (pp. 365-413). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Genesee, R., et al. (2006). Educating English language learners: A synthesis of research evidence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Goldstein, L. (2007). Beyond the DAP versus standards dilemma: Examining the unforgiving complexity of kindergarten teaching in the United States. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 39-54.
23. Greene, J. P. (1997). A meta-analysis of the Rosell and Baker review. Bilingual Research Journal, 21(2-3), 103-123. http://ifl.lrdc.pitt.edu/ifl/ index.php?section=about.
24. Hudson, T. (1983). Correspondences and numerical differences between disjoint sets. Child Development, 54, 84-90.
25. Jennings, N. (1996). Interpreting policy in real classrooms: Case studies of state reform and teacher practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
26. Kohn, A. (2000). Burn at the high stakes. Journal of Education, 51(4), 315-327.
27. Kopriva, R. (2000). Ensuring accuracy in testing for English language learners. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
28. Krashen, S., & McField, G. (2005). What works? Reviewing the latest evidence on bilingual education. Language Learner, 1(2), 7-10, 34.
29. Legarreta, D. (1979). The effects of program models on language acquisition by Spanish-speaking children. TESOL Quarterly, 8, 521-534.
30. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
31. Linn, R., & Gronlund, N. (2000). Measurement and assessment in teaching (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
32. Menken, K. (2008). English learners left behind: Standardized testing as language policy. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
33. Mestre, J. P. (1998). The role of language comprehension in mathematics, problem solving. In R. R. Cocking & J. P. Mestre (Eds.), Linguistic and cultural influences on learning mathematics (pp. 200-220). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Michaels, S., O'Connor, M. C., Hall, M. W., & Resnick, L. (2002). Accountable talk: Classroom conversation that works, CD-ROM Set. On principles of learning. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburg.
35. Mischler, E. G. (1991). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge: Harvard.
36. No Child Left Behind Act. Public Law 107-110.
37. Olsen, J. F., & Goldstein, A. A. (1997). The inclusion of students with disabilities and limited English proficiency students in large-scale assessments: A summary of recent progress. (NCES Publication no. 97-482). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
38. Orfield, G., & Lee, C. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Civil Rights Project.
39. Porac, J. F., Thomas, H., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1989). Competitive groups as cognitive communities: The case of Scottish knotwear manufacturers. Journal of Management Studies, 26, 397-416.
40. Ramirez, D. (1992). Executive summary of the longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language minority children. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 1-62.
41. Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children's problem-solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153-196). New York: Academic Press.
42. Rivera, C., & Collum, E. (Eds.). (2006). State assessment policy and practice for English language learners: A national perspective. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
43. Rivera, C., & Stansfield, C. W. (1998). Leveling the playing field for English learners: Increasing participation in state, local assessments through accommodations. In R. Brandt (Ed.), Assessing student learning: New rules, new realities (pp. 65-92). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
44. Roderick, M. (1994). Grade retention and school dropout: Investigating the association. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 729-759.
45. Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy 19(4), 572-594.
46. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and schools. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 583-625.
48. Slavin, R., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 247-284.
49. Spillane, J. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teacher's zone of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143-175.
50. Spillane, J. (2004). Standard deviation: How schools misunderstand educational policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Spillane, J., & Jennings, N. (1997). Aligned instructional policy and ambitious pedagogy: Exploring instructional reform from the classroom perspective. Teachers College Record, 98, 439-481.
52. Stritikus, T., & Garcia, E. (2000). Education of limited English proficient students in California schools: An assessment of the influence of proposition 227 on selected teachers and classrooms. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association annual meeting, San Francisco, CA.
53. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54. Wall, D. (1997). Impact and washback in language testing. In C. Clapham & D. Corson (Eds.), Language testing and assessment, Encyclopedia of language and education (Vol. 7, pp. 291-302). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Pulbishers.
55. Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
56. Westrum, R. (1982). Social intelligence about hidden events. Knowledge, 3(3), 381-400.
57. Wright, W. (2002). The effects of high stakes testing on an inner-city elementary school: The curriculum, the teachers, and the English language learners. Current Issues in Education, 5(5). Retrieved January 16, 2007 from: http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume5/number5/.
58. Wright, W. (2005). English language learners left behind in Arizona: The nullification of accommodations in the intersection of federal and state policies. Bilingual Research Journal, 29.
59. Wright, W. & Choi, D. (2005). Voices from the classroom: A statewide survey of experienced third-grade English language learner teachers on the impact of language and high-stakes testing policies in Arizona. Language Policy Research Unit.