CIQ Abstract and Conclusions

Abstract

The purpose of this project was to examine the classroom experience of English Language Learners in New Jersey, both in the urban and suburban areas of Newark and Carteret, and how these issues relate to state testing and No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Interviews were conducted with faculty members at East Side High School in Newark and Carteret High School in Carteret, NJ. Both schools were chosen due to the sizeable populations of ELL’s that both schools serve. ESHS is located in the Ironbound section of Newark and serves ELL’s who regularly experience language difficulty when transitioning between speaking native languages like Spanish and Portuguese to English. Carteret High serves a population of ESL students who speak mostly Spanish or Punjabi. The project findings suggest inequity in the NCLB system as students within the three levels of ESL are held accountable on state tests before they have a sufficient command of English. Consequently, these state examinations are the same tests that are used to predict AYP for the school and may push it towards a “failing” status. Therefore, it is increasingly important to make changes to the system that holds ELLs accountable for language knowledge before they are ready.

Conclusion

This project taught me an immense amount about teaching in an urban district as well as the kinds of issues students, teachers, administrators, and parents have. There is a lot of bureaucracy when it comes to urban education, especially as it relates to NCLB and the equity it sometimes fails to create for students. The project topic began on a hunch and ended with some definitive examples of inequality within NCLB and examples where the purpose of the initiative isn’t matching up. The process started with a review of literature on the topic. Through analyzing publications like Double the Work and others, I saw that the progress of those students still in ESL and those students who have left ESL is very important as it relates to state tests.

During my interviews, I learned that state testing is a point of frustration for ESL teachers. The task of preparing students without a core understanding of English for a far-reaching, all encompassing Language Arts and Reading component of a state test, especially one that may include a cultural bias, is a difficult one. The testing process for ELLs and their teachers is made even more frustrating because of the fact that the final outcome, the test score, often doesn’t reflect the work that is being done.

Often, the more I read, the more upset I became that the system appears to disadvantage a large population of learners. In talking with teachers in both districts, I learned that high school students have it worse than students who learn English early, but, at the high school level it is nearly impossible to show progress or acquisition of new language and reading skills. The gaps in the system make it possible for good students to fall through the cracks, all because they can’t prove their progress on a state test. Thus, the SRA process is the only way they can graduate high school.

If a newly certified teacher is planning on being able to serve all populations of students, especially those who from diverse communities, then he or she needs to consider language and its impact in the classroom and on state tests. Furthermore, as a future English teacher, I need to be aware of the role that language plays and plan accordingly. If I plan on being able to serve different populations of students and plan on being able to teach anywhere and in any environment, then I have to be prepared to teach ELLs the skills they need to succeed once they leave ESL and find themselves in a new classroom and using a new language. The project findings have opened up my eyes to NCLB and its effect on school systems and the education of ELLs in the state. This is all information I will likely use in my career as a teacher.