Effects of High-Stakes Testing on English Language Learners

In 2001, NCLB established legislation in a sweeping overhaul of federal effort to support elementary and secondary education. The legislation (Section 11: Title III) holds school districts accountable for English proficiency and is based upon improved student achievement and accountability for results with an emphasis on doing what works based on scientific research (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). With NCLB accountability, districts much describe how they will hold elementary and secondary schools accountable for meeting the goals and objectives for increasing the English proficiency of current ELL’s (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). Districts must also hold elementary and secondary schools accountable for meeting the goals and objectives for increasing academic achievement for all current and former ELL’s (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). Further required is an improvement plan that outlines interventions and procedures implemented if districts fail to meet the Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAO). Procedures and implementation are monitored by SALA (Bureau of Student Achievement through Language Acquisition) (Florida Department of Education).

In the wake of educational initiatives such as No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, standardized tests have become a central part of elementary and secondary school instruction in the United States. Students in New York have been affected by high-stakes tests that are increasingly the primary method by which the performances of programs, schools, and teachers are evaluated and ranked. Unfortunately, these test scores carry considerable weight in day-to-day school decision making with administrators, teachers and students. In order to ensure academic progress of English Language Learners through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Title III funding has been tied to English language proficiency measures. New policies enacted at the national level have resulted in the mandatory implementation of language proficiency testing protocols in all states.

For the past 15 years, the No Child Left Behind Law (NCLB), every state has been required to provide each child with a test. This occurs every year; K-8th grade is tested on math and reading, and once in high school. Furthermore, districts have added a variety of tests to follow state-mandated tests. The Counsel of the Great City schools concluded that students take approximately 113 tests between grades K-12. Roberta Munoz (2006)

The English Language Learner (ELL) assessment process is different in each state. Each state must assess student’s performance in reading or language arts in order to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In addition NCLB requires that schools receiving Title III funds annually assess the English Proficiency of all Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students participating in Title III programs. Although the assessments may vary, the goals of the assessments are all the same, to assess where students are as they learn the English language. Is this assessment enough or should alternative assessments be required?

A never-ending issue has loomed over the head of our nation-- education. According to the Institute of Education Sciences, 63.7% of American students are below proficient in reading and 65.7% in math. In order to improve educational standards and increase student achievement, Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act (also known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) in 2002. Designed to increase the role of the federal government in education, it holds schools accountable based on how students perform on standardized tests. Statistics show that the average student completes about 110-115 mandatory, standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and end of twelfth grade (an average of eight tests per year). Standardized testing utilizes

Since the No Child Left Behind Act, also known as NCLB, has come into effect, it has caused some concerns with teachers and parents alike on how well it is working for the students. There have been issues that have arisen that needed to be addressed and instead been overlooked when a child does not meet with the school’s standardized testing and is pushed onto the next grade level.

This article, "What Do Test Scores In Texas Tell US?" by the Rand Corporation looks at the pros and cons to high stakes testing in Texas. High stakes testing was meant to improve academic scores and motivate teachers, but unintended concerns have risen. Professionals and the media question exactly how beneficial these test are, and if we should continue to use them. Texas was looked at because students had made huge strides in statewide testing. "Gains in Texas Assessment and Academic Skills (TAAS) reading and math scores for both majority and minority have been so dramatic that they have dubbed the 'Texas Miracle '" (Rand, 2000). The success was so great that Texas students were put through further test to validate that these impressive scores. Students tested on the National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP) between 1994 and 1998. After comparing the scores for TAAS to the scores of NAEP many questions arose for the validity of statewide testing. Tables in the article show that the TAAS scores are differ greatly than those of the NAEP. Though the scores between the two test were much different Texas students who took the NAEP were higher than the U.S. average. Also, by 1998 the gap between the scores of white students and students of color got smaller. Questions about why the gap between the TAAS scores and the NAEP scores were so great were never directly answered. Suggestions were made that Texas teachers could more easily prepare students for the

It remains to be seen the impact that this legislation has had on the academic outcomes of ELL students. In Arizona, research has suggested that the immersion program has been ineffective with only 11% of students entering the one year program actually obtaining English proficiency within a one year period (English for children, 2013). In California, due to the dramatic changes in the education policy of the state since the passage of Prop 227, it is difficult to measure the impact that Proposition 227 specifically has had on the outcome of these students (American Institutes for Research and WestEd, 2006). One thing is clear, the improvement in the outcomes for ELL students since the adoption of these state initiatives has not been noteworthy. "While there has been a slight decrease in

The NCLB Act has become the largest intervention by the federal government. This act promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between the white students and students of color. The law is aimed at having standardized test to measure student performance and quality of teacher. The Standardized exams are fully focused on reading and mathematics. This law characterizes an unequalled extension of the federal role into the realm of local educational accountability. High school graduation rates are also a requirement as an indicator of performance at secondary level. In low performing schools they get punished by receiving less funds and students have the choice to move to high performing school. The quality of our

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

The class is a mainstreamed first grade co-teach class of 34 students and two teachers. There are 16 females and 18 males that included 12 active English Language Learners (ELLs) (5 females, 7 males) and five Level 5 (proficient) students. The 12 ELL students represent five languages—Spanish (7), Chinese (1), Chin Burmese (1), and Arabic (2), Brazilian Portuguese (1). Eight of the twelve students tested at Level 1 on the WIDA language proficiency scale.

NCLB, the most recent version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, was preceded by the Improving America’s Schools Act. Under that law, high-quality teaching and learning were not prevalent in all schools, and achievement gaps persisted, leading to agreement that a greater federal role for accountability was necessary—from which NCLB was born. NCLB authorized 45 programs in 10 different areas, but public debate tended to focus on the law’s testing, accountability, and teacher-quality requirements. NCLB required that students be tested in the subjects of English language arts (ELA) and math in grades three through eight and once in high school, and for states to use the results to assess how well schools were meeting “adequate yearly progress” goals for student proficiency in these subjects. Schools that consistently did not meet these goals overall, or for subgroups of students, were targeted for interventions, and eventually for sanctions.

The NCLB Act has obligated the government to find a way to keep track of progress, which, in their minds, is administering high-stakes tests. High-stakes testing is scrutinized all the time, since some believe it is the only indicator of tracking students and teachers. They seemed to have been ridiculed by many and favored by few; nonetheless there are significant disparities in the public’s and government’s opinion. According to Dunne (2000), “Tests aren't just tests anymore -- at least not high-stakes tests, which are being used in some states to determine which students stay back a grade, which high school seniors receive diplomas, which teachers get bonuses, and more.”

It has been estimated that by the year 2025, approximately one out of every public school student will be identified as an ESL/ELL student in the United States. ESL stands for English as a Second Language and ELL stands for English Language Learner. An ESL/ELL student can be defined as a student whose predominant language or languages at home, is other than English, and would require additional English language support to develop reading, writing, listening and speaking skills. The difference between an ESL student and ELL student is minor; An ESL student participates in programs that are customarily specialized while an ELL student partakes in a traditional educational classroom. English Language Learners have surpassed other subgroups in becoming the fastest growing of the public school population. Despite the common misjudgement of some people towards the ESL/ELL population, 76% of the ESL/ELL students in elementary schools and 56% of the ESL/ELL students in secondary schools are native-born. The highest percentages of ELL/ESL students in public schools are found in the west of the United States. Taking the average of both bigger and smaller cities, ELL students make an average of 14% of the total public school enrollment and in suburban areas, ELL students make up an average of 8.5% of public school enrollment. The ESL/ELL population has more than doubled over the past 15 years and more than half of those students struggle with their academic performance. An ESL/ELL

Visualize a standardized test taken annually by millions of students in the U.S.A. that directly affects teaching methods, school budgets, and grade promotion. Presently, millions of schools are utilizing high-stakes tests to determine these major factors. The United States expects students to perform well on standardized testing, or school districts will suffer financial consequences under the No Child Left Behind Act (Au 502). This places pressure on everyone from administrators to students in a school district. Schools worldwide are stressed to succeed on these standardized tests when they only measure a fraction of a student’s intelligence. Standardized testing must be discontinued because it negatively affects school curricula,