I recently wrote my last ever paper as a Master’s student on
a topic that is very important to me professionally: the state of Florida’s
policies towards English language learners in the public K-12 system. I could
copy and paste my paper here, but I suspect that most of the people who bother
to read my blog don’t come here for academic writing and education jargon.
However, since this is a topic that I think is pretty important, I’ve decided to
convert my academic paper into a more accessible blog post.
Something like 220 languages are spoken in the state of
Florida. There are roughly 270,000 students in Florida’s public K-12 system
that are considered English Language Learners (ELLs). That’s roughly 10% of the
K-12 population. You would think that this would translate into a lot of
available jobs for people like me: experienced, qualified ESL teachers. Sadly,
that’s not the case. What is typically seen are ads for content-area teachers
holding ‘appropriate ESOL certification.’ There’s little to no demand for ESL
teachers in the K-12 system at all, just regular teachers with this ‘appropriate
ESOL certification.’ Why is that? What does having ‘appropriate ESOL
certification’ actually entail? And is this what is best for Florida’s
students?
Prior to 1990, the way ELLs were treated in the public K-12
system varied substantially by district, as there was no state level legislation
pertaining to how they should be treated. Some districts had really great
programs, including bilingual education, sheltered content instruction (in
which subject matter such as Math or Social Studies was taught to ELLs
specifically by an ESOL professional), and pull-out programs (in which students
were pulled out of mainstream classes during the day for one-on-one tutoring or
tutoring among a group of their ELL peers). Other districts had nothing;
students were simply tossed into mainstream classes with teachers who had no
training in dealing with ELLs. A group of advocates filed a lawsuit against the
State of Florida in the late 1980s, arguing that as legal residents of the
state, ELLs were entitled to equal access to education, understandable
instruction, and intensive English language instruction. They won their suit,
and in 1990, the Florida Consent Decree was enacted. The Consent Decree
mandated equal access, comprehensible instruction, and language instruction for
ELLs, and required that the state’s K-12 teachers actually have some sort of
training for working with ELLs. Elementary school teachers, as well as middle
school and high school language arts teachers were required to have 300 hours
of training for working with ELLs. Middle and high school math, science, and
social studies teachers were required to have 60 hours of training, and all
other instructors were required to have 18 hours. Sounds great, right? In
theory, perhaps, but not so much in actual fact.
One of results of the Consent Decree was that the Florida
Department of Education (FDOE) began pushing for mainstreaming of ELLs across
the state. While it was left up to each district as to the specifics of how
they would comply with the Consent Decree, there was a lot of pressure for
districts to work towards mainstreaming of ELLs. (Mainstreaming – sometimes referred
to as inclusion – is the practice of putting ELLs in regular classes with
native speakers.) The pressure to increase mainstreaming actually led to many
quality bilingual, sheltered, and pull-out programs being dismantled and
replaced with mainstreaming. After all, if all teachers are now “qualified” to
teach ELLs, this should be fine, right?
Well, just how “qualified” are they? Is receiving 300/60/18
hours of instruction in working with ELLs enough? And what kind of instruction
is that, anyway? Since 1999, all university teacher training and certification
programs in the state of Florida are required to provide their pre-service
teachers with their needed hours of ESOL training. However, pretty much all of
the universities did this not by adding 300 hours’ worth of required coursework
for their students, but instead by creating an ‘ESOL Infused’ program. This means
that topics pertaining to education of ELLs would be included in general
Education courses; very few of those 300/60/18 hours would be earned in a class
that actually focused in its entirety on teaching ELLs.
The university where I’ve just earned my MA in TESOL requires
its undergraduate Education majors to take only two courses that are
ESOL-specific. I just spent the past two semesters teaching one of those two
courses, and let me tell you, my students – junior and senior Education majors –
had no clue about teaching ELLs when
the semester began. Even at the end of the semester, there are very few of my students whom I would
recommend to work with ELLs, and yet most of them are now “qualified” to do so
according to state regulations.
While writing my paper, I read a lot of articles, including
a lot of published research on the views that teachers and program
administrators had of both mainstreaming and of the required ESOL training. The
majority of teachers and administrators did not approve of mainstreaming – with
the biggest complaint being that mainstream teachers lacked the time and/or the
skill to properly modify their lessons for their ELLs. The majority of teachers
themselves also complained that they did not feel adequately prepared to work
with their ELLs. One article I read referred to the results of the Consent
Decree as the “the
deprofessionalization of ESL teachers, rather than the specialization of
mainstream teachers” – and sadly, that seems to be the case.
Oh, and
the FCAT? That standardized test that one must pass in order to graduate from
high school in the state of Florida? ELLs are given one year – ONE YEAR – to get
their language skills up to par to pass the FCAT. Research in the field of
second language acquisition shows that it typically takes 5-7 years to master a
second language, yet ELLs are given just one to take a test that is often
challenging to native speakers. Seriously?
No comments:
Post a Comment