ELLs and AYP

[nthom814]

Bill # H.R. 2228 allows states to include students formerly identified as limited English proficient in the limited English proficient subgroup for three years after they are no longer identified as such. This is mean to help this subgroup make adequate yearly progress toward state academic performance standards. Including these students in the subgroup may help with AYP, but will this benefit the students or be a disservice to them?

[aziza22]

I personally would have supported this notion. I think that including these students in these subgroups makes them visible and gives them the inclusion and support they need. Schools need to redouble their efforts to boost achievement for ELL students and students with disabilities.

[cmq98]

I also support this notion, if for no other reason than possible erroneous ACCESS scores. I have seen firsthand some students being exited out of ESL due to flukey ACCESS scores, but are nowhere near proficient enough to pass the standarized testing they need to contribute towards AYP. The speaking portion of ACCESS can especially be erroneously scored as it is very subjectively assessed by the teacher facilitating the test and can easily boost the student's overall score and exit them from ESL before they are ready.

[nthom814]

I understand that it is extremely difficult for the ELL subgroup to make AYP, and that is one of the reasons why students who are out of the program can be included in the subgroup. However, how can you accurately measure the performance and growth of students who are LEP, and still in an ELL program, if they are being grouped with students who are no longer LEP? By 2014 the subgroup is expected to have 100% proficiency. Keeping in mind that it takes about 5-7 years to become proficient in a language, how is including the students who are out of the program for three years going to balance out the influx of LEP students and help make AYP, and eventually 100% proficiency in 2014?

[cunnin49]

I agree with the notion. I think any way these subgroups can get the attention they deserve is great. If they are being monitored for the 3 subsequent years, then there is hope that they will get extra help if necessary. If these students are just put in mainstream without monitoring their progress, there is no hope for them. They need at the least some form of check while put in mainstream to make sure they thrive.