# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and English Language Learners (ELLs)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NCLB is being replaced by ESSA as the latest reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Dr. Wayne E. Wright, Purdue University professor and author of Foundations for Teaching English Language Learners (2015, Caslon Publishing), addresses how this the new federal education policy is different, and discusses the implications for English Language Learners.

# data[].attributes.body
Emily:
-Views on how the policy impacts teachers in general and teachers of ELLs
-Recommendations
-Constructing/Editing Paper
Ashley:
-Varying viewpoints about effect of policy on different groups
-Editing Paper
-Creating Padlet

# data[].attributes.headline
Major Provisions of Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Related to the Education of English Learners

# data[].attributes.subject
Major Provisions of Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Related to the Education of English Learners

# data[].attributes.headline
ESSA's Impact on English Language Learners: What we Know so Far

# data[].attributes.subject
ESSA's Impact on English Language Learners: What we Know so Far

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
December 10, 2015, brought us the long-awaited reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which for the last 14 years was known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The new authorization, named the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) maintains basic components of accountability while devolving much of the control in defining what accountability will look like back to states and local schools. While many of the details of implementation await federal guidance due out in fall 2016, the broad parameters are found in the legislation.

Specifically with regards to English language learners, we know that ESSA moves accountability from Title III, the title directly pertaining to ELL Education, to Title I, the first and largest federal education title, responsible for assisting states and local schools with educating all educationally "disadvantaged students." This is significant because Title I is where the funding and influence have always lay in federal education. The intention? This will elevate the visibility of ELLs. The danger? ELL issues now rest--and potentially more easily hide--within a larger department responsible for the success of other student groups. Historically, the Title I Office has not dealt with specific ELL issues like English language development, multilingualism, and multiculturalism.
Other changes from ESSA
Schools, even more than districts, will be responsible now for ELL progress. This includes English proficiency growth and attainment even though reference to "annual measurable achievement objectives" (AMAOs) found under NCLB has gone away. States have more discretion in how to define growth targets and trajectories than before, and this is good since we know from research that ELL growth is nonlinear and subject to multiple, complex factors. It may be bad in that states could set targets that are less ambitious (or, on the flipside, too formulaic), and it is unclear what penalties if any would be set for not meeting targets. States must still identify schools that are not meeting the state established goals for ELLs, just as they would for all students.

Under ESSA, there are two options for including ELLs in language arts or reading tests.

Option 1: Schools would exclude ELLs from language arts/reading testing in year one, and in year two ELLs would test and be counted.

Option 2: Schools would include ELLs in year one language arts/reading testing but omit their scores for accountability purposes. Growth would be reported in year two, and attainment of content proficiency would be the goal by year three.

Another change: States and local schools may keep former ELLs within that subgroup for four years now--double the time allowed under NCLB. This is significant since it means schools now get to count their successes longer and earn credit for them.

States also must standardize their entry and exit definitions and procedures now. Look to Linquanti and Cook's work in this area for the latest information on definitions and classification of ELL students.
Distinguishing ELLs from students with disabilities
ESSA officially recognizes the intersection between ELLs and students with disabilities but identifies ELLs as a separate subgroup that must be appropriately assessed for content and language growth. This includes alternate content and language assessments for ELLs with disabilities, in cases where participation in the regular assessments, even with accommodations as allowable, would not be meaningful, valid, or reliable. This recognition will hopefully have the effect of making more prominent the language- and culture-related issues unique to "ELL-ness." We know from research that to be successful in meeting the needs of students, the totality of their profile needs to be considered, which is the point of individualized student plans. Despite this long-standing goal, we know that issues related to language development and the role of culture in achievement often have been inadequately considered, leading potentially to over-referral to special education or ineffective interventions with respect to these language and culture issues.
Small shifts with deep implications
State-approved English language development standards still are required under ESSA. These standards must correspond or "align" to content area standards, meaning there must be a relationship between the language goals and content goals as district and schools develop their curricula. Family engagement is more prominent under ESSA. This is certainly good news! And--finally--the out-of-date and derogatory term "limited-English proficient" has been officially replaced with "English learner."
Putting the research into practice
What does it all mean to you, the practitioner? Hopefully the new law buys you more flexibility to advocate for what you know works for ELLs. We need schools that are firstly language and literacy rich in every classroom. Secondly, we need everyone in our schools to understand the role of culture and primary language in the education of ELLs. Finally, the idea of differentiating instruction for language proficiency level is one that all teachers must understand, not just bilingual and ESL teachers.

The implications of these three points for practice and program model will vary depending on your local situation, but every school needs to look at how their ELLs are being served and whether they are achieving on par with their classmates. ESSA seems to be offering teachers and schools more control over how to accomplish that. Take the reins and do what you know is best for the ELLs you serve.

For a quick glance of ESSA changes as it relates to ELLs, download this summary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ESSA's impact on English Language Learners: What we know so far

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
December 10, 2015, brought us the long-awaited reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which for the last 14 years was known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The new authorization, named the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) maintains basic components of accountability while devolving much of the control in defining what accountability will look like back to states and local schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Different Between the Every Student Succeeds Act and No Child Left Behind

# data[].attributes.subject
The Different Between the Every Student Succeeds Act and No Child Left Behind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
State vs. Federal Authority

States are responsible for holding schools accountable for student achievement. The law provides a framework, but it's a flexible framework. Each state can set its own goals for student achievement within that federal framework.

States were responsible for holding schools accountable for student achievement. The law provided a framework for states, but there was less flexibility for states to set their own goals.

The law also put forward a universal goal that every student in every school be proficient in reading and math.

Annual Testing

States must test students in reading and math once a year in grades 3 through 8, as well as once in high school. They must also test kids in science once in grade school, middle school and high school.

Students with IEPs or 504 plans can get accommodations on all annual state tests.

States aren't limited to using their own tests. They can use nationally recognized tests, such as the SAT and ACT. (But those scores aren't necessarily valid for college admission.)

Only 1 percent of all students can be given "alternate" tests.

ESSA encourages states and districts to get rid of unnecessary testing. The law includes funding for them to audit their current testing.

ESSA will also provide funds for seven states to explore "innovative" tests. These are tests that align with personalized learning and competency-based education.

States had to test students in reading and math once a year in grades 3 through 8, as well as once in high school. They also had to test kids in science once in grade school, middle school and high school.

Students with IEPs or 504 plans could get accommodations on these tests.

States didn't have the option to use tests other than their own state tests.

There was no limit on the number of students who could take "alternate" tests.

Academic Standards

States have to adopt "challenging" academic standards in reading, math and science. That could be the Common Core State Standards. But the federal government can't try to influence a state's decision.

States had to adopt "challenging" academic standards in reading, math and science.

The law didn't bar the federal government from encouraging states to adopt a particular set of standards.

Accountability Measures

With ESSA, states must consider more than just test scores when evaluating schools.

Each state must use four academic factors that are included in the law. States can choose a fifth factor that impacts school quality.

The required academic factors must be:

Reading and math test scores

English-language proficiency test scores

High school graduation rates

A state-chosen academic measure for grade schools and middle schools

The school-quality factor could include things like:

Kindergarten readiness

Access to and completion of advanced coursework

College readiness

School climate and safety

Chronic absenteeism

Overall, states must give more weight to the academic factors than to the school-quality factors.

NCLB focused solely on student academic achievement and primarily used state reading and math test scores when evaluating how schools were doing.

Achievement Targets

States must set achievement targets for students in schools. States must also set ambitious goals for groups of students who are the furthest behind, like students in special education. These goals should help close the gap with other students.

There are no federal penalties for struggling schools. Instead, these schools will get more funding and will have to develop a plan to improve.

States had to bring all students up to the "proficient" level on state tests. This included students in special education.

States also had to set targets for improvement, called adequate yearly progress (AYP). If a school didn't meet AYP, it could be labeled as "needing improvement." It could be required to fire its staff and face other federal penalties.

Struggling Students and Schools

States and school districts must have a plan for helping schools that:

Have high drop-out rates

Are consistently struggling, or

Have a specific group of students, like those in special education, who are struggling

Decisions about what to do may be made by the state, or by local school districts and schools. But ESSA requires states to use evidence-based methods to help these struggling schools and students.

If a school or subgroup of students was struggling, the federal government offered the state a specific set of actions to take to improve the school. There was limited local decision-making.

State and School District Report Cards

Schools must publicly report test results, other measures of student achievement, and information about how much funding they are receiving.

They must break these down by "subgroups" of students. The reporting has to show the performance of students in special education, minorities, those in poverty and those learning English.

If a state identifies a school or subgroup as struggling, it must tell parents.

Schools had to publicly report test results and other measures of student achievement.

They had to break these down by "subgroups" of students. The reporting had to show the performance of students in special education, minorities, those in poverty and those learning English.

National Center on Reading Issues

ESSA calls for the creation of a national center focused on literacy and reading issues for kids with disabilities. This includes dyslexia.

The center will be a clearinghouse for information for parents and teachers.

NCLB didn't include a national literacy center.

Literacy Programs

ESSA has a literacy education grant program. This program authorizes up to $160 million in literacy grants to states and schools.

The grants fund evidence-based instruction in literacy skills, including writing, phonological awareness and decoding.

NCLB had several literacy programs that have since been defunded.

UDL and Personalized Learning

ESSA endorses Universal Design for Learning (UDL). This approach to teaching aims to meet the needs of all students, including those with learning and attention issues.

The law also encourages states to expand personalized learning for students.

NCLB didn't include UDL or personalized learning.

Parent Involvement

ESSA requires states to get input from parents and families as they create state plans. To get involved, reach out to your state's department of education.

NCLB didn't require states to include parent input when creating their state plans.

Opt-Out

ESSA doesn't create a federal opt-out option if parents don't want their child to take standardized tests.

But it also doesn't stop states from having their own opt-out laws.

NCLB didn't address the opt-out issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Difference Between the Every Student Succeeds Act and No Child Left Behind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
State vs. Federal Authority States are responsible for holding schools accountable for student achievement. The law provides a framework, but it's a flexible framework. Each state can set its own goals for student achievement within that federal framework. States were responsible for holding schools accountable for student achievement.