Federal Report on State Implementation of Title III (March 2005)
“States have made significant progress in implementing Title III [of the No Child Left Behind Act] in a very short time,” according to the U.S. Department of Education. In a Congressionally mandated report, released March 15, the Department also concludes that English language learners “are making progress … in attaining English language proficiency and transitioning into classrooms not designed for limited English proficient students.”

But the fine print of the 503-page document tells a different story. In several states, ELLs are falling well short of “annual measurable achievement objectives” (AMAOs) in English acquisition. Even more are failing to make “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) in reading/language arts and mathematics on state achievement tests.

These results depend heavily on where states are setting the “accountability” bar, and their policies vary widely. In California, for example, AYP was set at just 13.6 percent proficiency in language arts in 2003-04; ELLs met this target in most grades. In Connecticut, AYP was set at 57 to 62 percent; ELLs failed to meet these targets in any grade, although they were rated as more proficient than their counterparts in California.

The Education Department reports that 41 states met “at least some” AMAOs for ELLs acquiring English proficiency last year. That sounds encouraging. But how should this finding be interpreted when New York (among others) set a target of just 5 percent, as compared to New Jersey’s 50 percent?

It is obviously difficult to make generalizations or comparisons when states operate under such different rules. One thing is certain, however. NCLB requires ELLs in all states to reach 100 percent proficiency by 2014. Schools with enough ELLs to constitute a “subgroup” will likely face sanctions for failure well before that date, even though these students are, by legal definition, unable “to meet the State’s proficient level of achievement on State assessments.” As new English learners enter the subgroup and others exit to the mainstream after acquiring English, average scores inevitably decline.

Simply put, as AYP targets rise for ELLs, it will be mathematically impossible for schools to meet them. This is a Catch-22 that neither the Bush administration nor Congress have been yet willing to address in a serious way.

What is perhaps most revealing about the Education Department report is what it fails to report. There are virtually no data about what schools are doing with their Title III formula grants. All we know is that most states offer a variety of instructional approaches, ranging from two-way developmental bilingual education to English-only immersion.

“In fiscal year (FY) 2003,” the report says, “States served more than four million LEP students through $477 million distributed through the Title III State Formula Grant Program.” This works out to roughly $118 per child.

What “services” can schools afford to provide at that level of funding? Are students enrolled in well implemented programs taught by qualified teachers? Is the money even being spent on ELLs? Apparently no one can say.

Ironically, the Bilingual Education Act – the competitive grant system that NCLB eliminated in the name of “holding schools accountable” – provided much more accountability, in how ELL programs were designed and how federal dollars were spent.

NEA Tracks Federal and State Legislation on NCLB (March 2005)
The National Education Association has compiled a comprehensive list of Congressional proposals to amend the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act – a.k.a. No Child Left Behind. Click here to download the details. The NEA is also tracking activity in state legislatures affecting NCLB implementation or calling on federal authorities to make changes in the law. Such bills are now pending in 18 states: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. Click here to download the complete list.

Click Here for Internet Resources on NCLB