A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Chapter 1 Introduction: Accommodating Language Diversity in Schools

The introduction to this report describes the study's process of data collection and the conditions of language diversity that produce the need for studies like this one. The second chapter sketches a vision of effective schooling for all students, highlighting features that have special significance for LEP students. This vision serves as the basis for identifying the principles of professional development that undergird the designs of the projects visited in this study. The literature in several related disciplines supports competing hypotheses about what features contribute most to the productivity of programs for students with limited English proficiency and, hence, what features should characterize teacher education for such programs. The different priorities of social, political, and educational agendas give different weights to various program attributes. The choice of the projects visited in this study (and those in the initial pool) reflects a vision of education based on available evidence and several other factors that influence conceptions of effectiveness, all of which are summarized in the framework in the first part of Chapter 2 and illustrated in the second part with examples from the field. The third chapter tells the stories of each project in its own terms, including goals, major components, outcomes, and lessons from experience. The fourth chapter discusses ongoing challenges to successful professional development in this area of education. The final chapter explores some of the policy implications of both research and the experience of educators and communities associated with these projects.

Our Approach to the Study

Accommodating Language Diversity: A Challenge to Public Education

About three-fourths of these students speak Spanish; the nine other largest groups, in descending order of size, are: Vietnamese, Hmong, Cantonese, Cambodian, Korean, Laotian, Navajo, Tagalog, and Russian. Demographic projections indicate that this diversity will continue. Moreover, distinctive settlement patterns cause the proportion of students in particular language groups to vary widely within and among districts. For example, at least 1,000 school districts in the United States serve eight different language groups. More than 40 percent of schools enrolling LEP students serve at least four different language groups. (California Department of Education, 1991a, and Fleischman and Hopstock, 1994, report these data and trends in detail.)

The natural attraction of familiar community subcultures may continue to draw new immigrants to states such as California, Texas, and New York, where large populations of many language minority groups live and where school systems are practiced in responding to their varied needs. However, recent evidence suggests an increasing need for districts elsewhere to implement effective programs for LEP students. Factory openings in rural Tennessee and Missouri brought influxes of Japanese families whose children filled classrooms in the local districts. Emigration from Eastern Europe released a flow of Polish students to South Bend, Indiana; Russian students to West Hartford, Connecticut; and Ukrainian students to Salem, Oregon. Creole-Haitians have begun their American residency in south Florida schools, and Vietnamese fishermen have settled with their families in coastal villages along the Gulf of Mexico. According to 1990 Census data (GAO, 1994), almost half of LEP students are immigrants and about 40 percent are poor.

Shifting demographics and major immigrant waves arising from multiple national and international developments have made repeated demands on American public school systems. From time to time, districts have provided instructional programs--including texts and curriculum materials--in students' primary languages as a routine response to new populations. (Arias and Casanova [1993] provide a brief analytic summary of this history.) However, the rapid growth of language minority populations and their patterns of concentration, modern conceptions of educational adequacy and equity, and present budget shortfalls are straining many communities. Consider the dilemma of one California district already working diligently to meet high state standards for all students and particularly for its predominantly Hispanic LEP students. Within a decade, an influx of Southeast Asian immigrants of various nationalities swelled its enrollment by 14,000 LEP students. The district's existing bilingual workforce included few certified teachers qualified to teach in any of their several languages. When the district tried to recruit within the immigrant community, few possessed enough formal education to earn a teaching certificate in time to be of assistance. The present pace and extent of the increase in LEP student populations generate situations like this with alarming frequency across the country.

The rate of increase in LEP students outstrips the rate of increase in teachers with skills necessary to serve them. On the basis of an analysis of findings from recent studies of teacher supply and demand, Macias (1989) estimated a need for about 170,000 additional teachers qualified to serve LEP students by the year 2000. In recent Congressional testimony, an official of the National Education Association¹ estimated the shortage of teachers for LEP students at 175,000 (GAO, 1994). The National Center for Education Statistics reports that during the 1990-91 school year, districts found it "very difficult" or "impossible" to fill 38 percent of the vacancies in bilingual and ESL programs with qualified candidates. OBEMLA (1992) indicates that almost 25 percent of students identified as limited English proficient receive no services. Several studies (e.g., Fleischman & Hopstock, 1994; Macias, 1989) report that services to LEP students are often provided by teachers with little or no special training. Many states require that regular programs be provided in students' primary language when the enrollment of students in any language minority group reaches a certain size, but few states have enough qualified instructors to fill all the positions created by their mandates. California reported in 1990 that its shortage of teachers skilled in the areas of English as a Second Language (ESL) or bilingual instruction had reached 20,000; more than half of its existing staff were teaching under waivers (National Forum, 1990). In some cases, states also lack the classroom space to house these special programs.

Fleischman and Hopstock (1994) report that more than 15 percent of the teachers in this country have one or more LEP students in their classes, yet only 10 percent of these teachers are certified in bilingual education and another 8 percent are certified in teaching English as a Second Language. Less than half of the teachers of LEP students speak a non-English language shared by one or more students; almost one-third report that they use English of the same difficulty and complexity to teach both LEP students and English-speaking students.

The mission of public education has been forged by the national experience; the general welfare is profoundly affected when schools successfully provide all students with the knowledge and skills they need in order to participate in community life and the larger society. In addition to learning the standard school curriculum, students lacking English proficiency need teachers who can help them develop English skills, yet more than 80 percent of the teachers serving LEP students have little preparation for doing this job well. The next section reviews the research on effective teaching and its application to programs for LEP students, identifies principles of professional development that lead to effective teaching, and describes how some projects are putting those principles to work.

[Using This Report]

[Chapter 2 Principles of Effectiveness and Promising Practices]