Quote:
Originally Posted by 1908Revelations
KSig RC, let me ask what you think about ESL/ELL (English Language Learners) taking standardized test?
The students go to their ESL/ELL classes, but when they take standardized test they are not allowed any help. That is a part of the inclusion of ALL atudents that NCLB brought. Many of the students who would be able to recieve more help in self-contained classrooms are not getting more focused help in the general ed classrooms. These students take the standardized test and often fail them miserably. It is not that the ESL/ELL students are stupid, but they do not understand what is on the test. We can't blame the ESL/ELL teachers b/c the students are only with the teacher for a portion of the day. When they go home they are likely speaking which ever is thier native language, not to mention they are speaking these languages all summer. Many of the ESL/ELL students know functional English which is not good enough for testing. The horrible test scored are factored in with the rest of the school and then some schools can't meet AYP goals.
|
I agree that this portion may need rethinking - however, I think there are multiple issues here. First, we may need to rethink our definitions of "functional" English, and whether ESL classes are structured properly to encourage their desired outcome (which should be 'mastery of English for education and living' - note 'education' there).
Second, according to the stated goals of NCLB, these statistics are included both as part of the overall school, and then also broken out by race and ESL status for reporting purposes. If focus and funding do not recognize this, it's obviously a problem with how NCLB is being implemented (and how the district is responding).
This creates a chicken-and-egg scenario, I'll agree - it's hard to say whether testing creates a problem or identifies a problem, but I can see how this specific scenario is troubling. However, it's not hopeless.
Threaded Mode
