Evaluating the impact of restrictive language policies: The Arizona 4-hour English language development block

Language Policy

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 47-80

  Rios Aguilar, Cecilia ^a   González Canché, Manuel S ^b   Sabetghadam, Shirin ^b  

^a CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Difference in differences; English language learners; Policy evaluation; Structured English immersion

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858292692     PISSN: 15684555     EISSN: 15731863     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10993-011-9226-3     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abadie, A. (2005). Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. The Review of Economic Studies, 72(1), 1.
2. Angrist, J., & Krueger, A. B. (2001). Instrumental variables and the search for identification: From supply and demand to natural experiments. Mass, USA: National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge.
3. Arizona Department of Education [ADE]. (2004). The effects of bilingual education programs and structured English immersion programs on student achievement: A large-scale comparison. Phoenix, AZ.
4. Burkheimer, G. J. Jr., Conger, A. J., Dunteman, G. H., Elliott, B. G., & Mowbray, K. A. (1989). Effectiveness of services for language-minority limited-english-proficient students (2 vols.). Technical report. Research Triangle Park, N. C.: Research Triangle Institute.
5. Clark, K. (2009). The case for structured English immersion. Educational Leadership, 66(7), 42-46.
6. Combs, M., Evans, C., Fletcher, T., Parra, E., & Jiménez, A. (2005). Bilingualism for the children: Implementing a dual-language program in an English-only state. Education Policy, 19(5), 701-728.
7. Cummins, J. (1992). Bilingual education and English immersion: The Ramírez report in theoretical perspective. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 91-104.
8. Danoff, M. N. (1978). Evaluation of the impact of ESEA title VII Spanish/English bilingual education program. Overview of study and findings. Overview of study and findings. USA: American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, CA.
9. Davenport, D. (2008). Baseline study of Arizona's English language learner programs and data fiscal year 2007. State of Arizona: Office of the Auditor General.
10. Davenport, D. (2011). Arizona English language learner program: Fiscal year 2010. State of Arizona: Office of the Auditor General.
11. Gándara, P., & Gómez, M. C. (2009). Language policy in education. In B. Schneider, G. Sykes, & D. Plank (Eds.), AERA handbook on educational policy research. Washington, DC: AERA.
12. Gándara, P., & Hopkins, M. (Eds.). (2010). Forbidden language: English learners and restrictive language policies. New York: Teachers College Press.
13. Gándara, P., & Orfield, G. (2010). A return to the "Mexican room": The segregation of Arizona's English learners. Report for the UCLA Civil Rights Project. http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/a-return-to-the-mexican-room-the-segregation-of-arizonas-english-learners-1/gandara-return-mexican-room-2010. pdf.
14. García, E. (2010). Education and achievement: A focus on Latino immigrant children. The Urban Institute.
15. García, E. E., Jensen, B. T., Miller, L. S., & Huerta, T. (2005). Early childhood education of Hispanics in the United States. Tempe, AZ: The National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics.
16. García, E. E., Jensen, B. T., & Scribner, K. P. (2009). The demographic imperative. Educational Leadership, 66(7), 8-13.
17. Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What the research does-and does not-say. American Educator, pp 8-44.
18. Goldenberg, C. (2010). Reading instruction for English language learners. In M. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. IV, pp. 685-710). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
19. Goldenberg, C., & Rutherford-Quach, S. (2010). The Arizona home language survey and the identification of students for ELL services. Report for the UCLA Civil Rights Project (http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/the-arizona-home-language-survey-and-the-identification-of-students-for-ell-services).
20. Goldenberg, C., Rueda, R., & August, D. (2006). Sociocultural influences on the literacy attainment of language-minority children and youth. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report on the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth (pp. 269-319). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Greene, W. H. (1997). Econometric analysis (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall: New York University.
22. Grissom, J. B. (2004). Reclassification of English learners. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(36), 1-36.
23. Haas, E., & Gort, M. (2009). Demanding more: Legal standards and best practices for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 32(2), 115-135.
24. Hakuta, K., Butler, G. Y., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? University of California, Linguistic Minority Research Institute, Policy Report 2000-1.
25. Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodríguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309-334.
26. Haynes, J. (2007). Getting started with English language learners: How educators can meet the challenge. Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
27. Hernández, D., & Cervantes, W. (2011). Children in immigrant families: Ensuring opportunity for every child in America. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development.
28. Imbens, G., & Wooldridge, J. (2008). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Mass., USA: National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge.
29. Jost, K. (2010). Bilingual education vs. English immersion: Which is better for students with limited English? CQ Researcher, 19(43), 1029-1052.
30. Kossan, P. (2004, April 4). Arizona easing fed's rules for school standards. Arizona Republic (p. B1).
31. Leinhardt, G., & Pallay, A. (1982). Restrictive educational settings: Exile or haven? Review of Educational research, 52, 557-578.
32. Mahoney, K., MacSwan, J., Haladyna, T., & García, D. (2010). Castañeda's third prong: Evaluating the achievement of Arizona's English learners under restrictive language policy. In P. Gándara & M. Hopkins (Eds.), Forbidden language: English learners and restrictive language policies (pp. 50-64). New York: Teachers College Press.
33. Martinez-Wenzl, M., Pérez, K., Gándara, P. (2010). Is Arizona's approach to educating its ELs superior to other forms of instruction?http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/is-arizonas-approach-to-educating-its-els-superior-to-other-forms-of-instruction/martinez-wenzl-is-arizona-approach-superior-2010. pdf.
34. Matsudaira, J. (2005). Sinking or swimming? Evaluating the impact of English immersion versus bilingual education. Berkeley: University of California.
35. McCaslin, M., Burross, H., & Good, T. (2005). Change and continuity in student achievement from grades 3-5: A policy dilemma. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 13(1), 1-20.
36. McKinney, E., & Rios-Aguilar, C. (forthcoming). Negotiating between restrictive language policies and complex teaching conditions: The case of teachers of English learners in Arizona. Bilingual Research Journal.
37. Meyer, M. M., & Fienberg, S. E. (1992). Assessing evaluation studies: The case of bilingual education strategies. National Academies Press.
38. Mickelson, R. (2002, August). The academic consequences of desegregation and segregation: Evidence from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools. Paper presented at the conference on the resegregation of Southern Schools. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
39. Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31, 132-141.
40. Nieto, S. (2011). Speaking truth to power in educational research. Essays commissioned on the theme. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
41. Oakes, J. (1994). More than misapplied technology: A normative and political response to Hallinan on tracking. Sociology of Education, 67, 84-88.
42. Parrish, T. B., Merickel, A., Perez, M., Linquanti, R., Socias, M., Spain, A., et al. (2006). Effects of the implementation of proposition 227 on the education of English learners, k-12: Findings from a five-year evaluation. Final Report for AB 56 and AB 1116. American Institutes for Research, 381.
43. Ramirez, J. (1991). Longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language-minority children. fiongitudina. Volumes 1 and 2. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
44. Ramírez, D. (1986). Comparing structured English immersion and bilingual education: First-year results of national study. American Journal of Education, 95(1), 122-148.
45. Reese, L., & Goldenberg, C. (2006). Community contexts for literacy development of Latina/o children: Contrasting case-studies. Anthropology of Education Quarterly, 37, 42-61.
46. Rios-Aguilar, C., González Canché, M., & Moll, L. (2010a). A study of Arizona's teachers of English language learners. Report for the UCLA Civil Rights Project (http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/a-study-of-arizonas-teachers-of-english-language-learners/Author-arizonas-teachers-ell-2010. pdf).
47. Rios-Aguilar, C., González Canché, M., & Moll, L. (2010b). Implementing structured English immersion [SEI] in Arizona: Benefits, costs, challenges and opportunities. Report for the UCLA Civil Rights Project (http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/implementing-structured-english-immersion-sei-in-arizona-benefits-costs-challenges-and-opportunities/AZ-ELC-Study-7-7. pdf).
48. Robinson, J. (2011). Evaluating criteria for English learner reclassification: A causal-effects approach using binding-score regression discontinuity design with instrumental variables. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 267-292.
49. Rose Florez, I. (2010). Do the AZELLA cut scores meet the standards? A validation review of the Arizona English Language Learner Assessment. Report for the UCLA Civil832 Rights Project (http://civilrightsproject. ucla. edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students/do-the-azella-cut-scores-meet-the-standards-a-validation-review-of-the-arizona-english-language-learner-assessment/AZ-Florez_AZELLAFINAL-V7-8-1. pdf).
50. Sacchetti, M., & Tracy, J. (2006). Bilingual law fails first test: Most students not learning English quickly. Boston Globe, 21.
51. Slaving, R. E., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 247.
52. Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2007). Introduction to econometrics (2nd ed.). USA: Addison-Wesley Series in Economics.
54. Wightman, J. (2010). ELL education in Arizona: Unconstitutional segregation of just inappropriate? Texas Hispanic Journal of Law and Policy, 16, 121-135.
55. Wright, W. E. (2005). The political spectacle of Arizona's Proposition 203. Educational Policy, 19, 662-700.