English language learners and complexity theory: Why current accountability systems do not measure up

Educational Forum

Volumn 73, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 133-140

  Pappamihiel, N Eleni ^a   Walser, Tamara M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA WILMINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84994310236     PISSN: 00131725     EISSN: 19388098     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00131720902739544     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Abedi, J. 2002. Assessment and accommodations of English language learners: Issues, concerns, and recommendations. Journal of School Improvement 3(1): 83-89.
2. Abedi, J., C. Lord, C. Hofstetter, and E. Baker. 2000. Impact of accommodation strategies on English language learners' test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 19(3): 16-26.
3. Abella, R., J. Urrutia, and A. Shneyderman. 2006. An examination of the validity of English-language achievement test scores in an English language learner population. Bilingual Research Journal 29(1): 127-44.
4. American Federation of Teachers, American Association of School Administrators, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of Secondary School Principals, National Education Association, and National School Boards Association. 2007. Joint statement on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Available at: www.nea.org/esea/sixstatement.html.
5. Antunez, B. 2003. Assessing English language learners in the Great City Schools. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.
6. August, D., and K. Hakuta, eds. 1997. Improving schooling for language minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Byrne, D. 1998. Complexity theory and the social sciences: An introduction. New York: Routledge.
8. Canale, M. and M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics I: 1-47.
9. Cha, H. K. 2006. Korean elementary ESOL students’ English language anxiety and defense mechanism in the ESOL and mainstream classes: Theoretical and pedagogical implications for TESOL. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University
10. Celedón, S. 1998. An analysis of a teacher's and students' language use to negotiate meaning in an ESL/mathematics classroom. Dissertation Abstracts International 59(9A): 3331.
11. Cummins, J. 2000. Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters.
12. Darling-Hammond, L. 2007. Evaluating 'No Child Left Behind.' The Nation, May 2.
13. Davis, B., D. Sumara, and R. Luce-Kapler. 2000. Engaging minds: Learning and teaching in a complex world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
14. Glod, M. 2007. Fairfax resists 'No Child' provision: Immigrants' tests in English at issue. Washington Post, January 26.
15. Heubert, J. P., and R. M. Hauser, eds. 1999. High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Research Council, Committee on Appropriate Test Use.
16. Holmes, D., and S. Duron. 2000. LEP students and high-stakes assessment. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
17. Institute for Language and Education Policy. 2006. Talking points on No Child Left Behind and English language learners. Takoma Park, MD: Institute of Language and Education Policy. Available at: www.elladvocates.org/documents/ndb/NCLB_and_ELLs.pdf.
18. Krashen, S. D., and T. D. Terrell. 1983. The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. New York: Pergamon.
19. Larson-Freeman, D. 1997. Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18(2): 141-65.
20. Midgley, G. 2007. Systems thinking for evaluation. In Systems concepts in evaluation: An expert anthology, ed. B. Williams and I. Imam, 11-34. Fairhaven, MA: American Evaluation Association.
21. Mondada, L. 2005. Second language acquisition as situated practice: Task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review 61(4): 461-90.
22. Morrison, K. 2002. School leadership and complexity theory. New York: Routledge/Falmer.
23. No Child Left Behind Act. 2001. Public Law 107-110. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress.
24. Norton, B., and K. Toohey. 2004. Critical pedagogies and language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. Pinker, S. 1995. The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York: HarperPerennial.
26. U.S. Department of Education. 2006. Secretary Spellings announces final limited English proficiency regulations. Washington, DC: Author. Available at: www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2006/09/09132006a.html.
27. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, ed. M. Cole. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Westley, F., B. Zimmerman, and M. Q. Patton. 2007. Getting to maybe: How the world is changed. Toronto: Vintage Canada.
29. Wise, L. K., R. M. Hauser, K. J. Mitchell, and F. J. Feuer. 1999. Evaluation of the voluntary national test: Phase 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.