Education Law Involving Parents In English Language Learning Of Immigrant Students in America - Literature review Example

Education Law Involves Parents In English Language Learning Of Immigrant in US Introduction English language learners are children of newlyarrived immigrants in the US, refugees from war-torn countries or immigrants with a language other than English spoken at home. Whatever the circumstances that drove these families to make the US their new home, their children have even varying levels of education in their primary language, such that their ability to learn English fast and efficiently as their chief means of assimilating into American society becomes an extremely challenging task for the US school system. This shows in national and state surveys indicating that ethnic and racial minority children are the most at-risk group in social institutions, with the most significant academic underachievement, high poverty rates, high teen pregnancy rates, low skill levels, and low-paying employment opportunities. The projection is that by 2015 over 50 percent of all students in K-12 public schools across the US will be ELL students, boosting the number of this school population that has the highest dropout rate and the lowest ranking in academic achievement and expectations. The phenomenon necessarily speaks ill of the American public school system. Legal Issues The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was enacted precisely to address the problems being encountered by ELL students across the US, so that the educational system smoothens rather than retards their acculturation process. Among the salient features of the NCLB law is the provision that makes parental involvement a key component in the educational efforts to serve ELL needs. It defines parental involvement in children education as a regular, two-way and meaningful communication between parents and schools to ensure that parents are full partners in their children’s educational experience. The NCLB includes testing requirements for ELLs. These test scores may be factored into the determination of whether a school is making adequate yearly progress. (Gray & Fleischman, 2005) The problem is that in some cultures, parents see their roles as limited to the provision of their children’s needs for protection, discipline and moral guidance. In this view, schooling is outside their responsibility, which is best left to the professional educators (Tuite, 2003). This explains the lack or at least low level of interest of most parents in the education process for their children (Gray & Fleischman, 2005). The NCLB Act makes it imperative upon the schools to overcome this cultural barrier to ELL (Tuite, 2003) by establishing means of communication with the parents. The schools could invite the parents of immigrant families to such school activities like classroom demonstrations of their culture or awarding for children’s accomplishments. In communicating and coordinating with parents, it was suggested that the schools use the immigrants’ language and may thus need to hire special translators for the purpose (Gray & Fleischman, 2005). Otherwise, this may reinforce another perception common to immigrant parents in America that has to do with the issue of power. A common perception among immigrant parents is that English is the language of a rich and powerful postindustrial society, whereas their native language is less impressive and commands less respect (Walqui, 2000). Language learning, according to experts, is an interactive activity as dependent on social context as it is on cognitive transfer. All parents have the rights to choose the instructional program that best meets their child’s needs, this choice to be indicated in writing. For the first three years, students may be enrolled in a bilingual, dual or English-as-secondary-language program. Afterwards, the parents may elect to continue with the program or change to the mainstream classroom. This choice shall be made at an orientation session at the start of the school year, which focuses on orienting parents to the school system, explaining to them the program options, state and city standards, core curriculum and assessment tests. The parents’ rights and responsibilities are also discussed in the meeting (Tuite, 2003). The chief implementing agency of the NCLB Act under the Department of Education is the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA), whose task it is to establish linkages with other parent outreach specialists at the local, state and federal levels, and to help parents of English language learners understand their rights and responsibilities. The other government agencies involved include the Office of Educational Partnerships and Family Involvement (OEPFI), Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (OSDFS), and Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (CFBCI). (Ruiz & Koch, online) The inclusion of the OCR, OSDFS and CFBCI in the picture gives an added legal dimension to the NCLB Act because it suggests issues of civil rights, religion and drug use. It is common knowledge that ethnic minorities in the US are sensitive to civil rights, since most of them fled their home countries precisely for this reason. Another possible reason for such flight is religious persecution at home. As for drug use, there is a popular perception in the US that drug use is rampant among immigrants, especially Latinos, Italians and Asians. As a consequence, immigrant parents may be suspicious of school activities that imply religious prejudice and curtailment of their civil rights. They are also likely to resent any suggestions that their ethnic community is involved in illegal drugs. School Community The school environment is considered ELL-friendly if there is a strong, seamless link connecting home, school and the community, with the teachers involved adequately trained and showing eagerness to work with English learners. In other words, ELL is made a responsibility of the entire school community (Tuite, 2003). English language learning is expected to be difficult if the ELL students are isolated from other students, which situation deprives them of a sense of belonging. Other perceived organizational barriers to ELL include limited access to diverse educational opportunities and misinformed or untrained teachers. Kadamus (2004) examined the progress of ELL in New York and decided that the ELL needs are overlooked and underserved when school restructuring efforts do not build a school community conducive to ELL. Because of the absence of such an ideal school environment, the study showed that 45 percent of ELLs in New York middle schools and 15 percent of those in high school in 2000 did not attain English proficiency in their school stay. The ELLs also account for the highest dropout rates and made up the bulk of students in special catch-up classes. For these reasons, the education department is fostering a situation on the federal level in which parents, community organizations and government agencies work together to make sure that no child is left behind (Ruiz & Koch online). Already, the Office of English Language Acquisition has established linkages with community-based organizations concerned with the welfare of ELLs, among them the Office of Educational Partnerships and Family Involvements, Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, National Coalition for Parent Involvement in Education, National Educational Association and National Council of La Raza. The NCPIE is the umbrella organization of what used to be Parents-Teachers Associations across the US. In New York, state education authorities have launched a program called Children First Initiative to bring greater cohesion and higher quality ELL instruction throughout the public school system. Under the program, $20 million has been set aside to underwrite activities improving coordination and communication between the schools and the parents and families of ELLs. A special teacher academy will also be established for the ELL-geared development of school administrators, teachers and parent-school coordinators. In another study in California, Garcia (1991) examined pre-school, elementary and high school classrooms in the state, where the preponderance of ELLs are Latinos. Even before the NCLB Act, California schools had already enlisted parental support for the school activities of ELLs. Because of the important roles played by ELL parents and school administrators, which interaction is reinforced by teachers who know what they are doing, English language learning in the California area was found to be more rapid and efficient than in other states. These interlinked activities make up a dynamic school community that serves to give English a high status in the ethnic neighborhoods. If English enjoys such respect in an ethnic community, the students are more motivated to learn the language (Walqui, 2000). An ELL-friendly school community may be fostered by the school production and dissemination of newsletters, the holding of presentations, and making neighborly visits on ELL parents (Tuite, 2003). Language Issues Teachers can create a learning environment where students can thrive by making reading and writing instruction relevant to students’ interests and needs. Towards this end, Christy (online) suggests a set of classroom strategies led by warm-up activities, which may include pairing ELL students with native English speakers. Use of a translation dictionary is also important, as well as pictures to describe words, flashcards of key vocabulary words and local newspapers or radio-TV news using everyday English. Under the NCLB Act, ELL parents are encouraged to choose among these three instructional programs for their children: 1. Transitional Bilingual Program – this uses the student’s native language as vehicle for transition to English instruction on a 60-40 ratio. At first, the instruction will consist of 60 percent of native language and 40 percent of English, the ratio to be reversed as the student develops his English skill. 2. Dual Language Program – the goal of this program is to create bilingual, bi-literate and bi-cultural students. 3. English as Second Language Program – this uses ESL strategies to provide instruction in all the relevant content areas. At the beginning of each school year, the schools communicate with parents to make them decide which of the three instructional programs are appropriate for their children. After three years of either the transitional, dual or ESL programs, parents are given the option to continue with this program or change to the mainstream classroom. Under the NCLB Act, all schools should monitor the academic progress of former ELL students for two years. Linguistic distance between native language and English is another factor that makes ELL difficult. Chinese, Arabic and Japanese characters, for example, are harder than Spanish or Dutch which use the same symbolic representations. Notwithstanding these inherent difficulties, ELL students can be highly motivated in learning if English enjoys a high status in the community. The trick is to let parents and ELL students understand that learning English does not mean giving up one’s first language but adding a new one (Walqui, 2000). To involve parents in ELL, the educational system will provide the following services, materials and activities: 1) brochures in layman’s language for use as training material or for presentation purposes, which delineates the rights and responsibilities of parents and schools under the NCLB Act; a National Parent Leadership Training Workshop that will develop the cadre of parent leaders who would assist parents of ELL students in understanding their rights and responsibilities under the NCLB Act; a National Coalition of Parents of English Language Learners, which would expand the network of ELL parents knowledgeable about the law and their rights; printed materials in easy-to-understand language designed to further assist parents in becoming a resource to their children in the learning process; and continuing communication between involved organizations to share information and enhance parental involvement practices throughout the US (Ruiz & Koch, online). All ELL-related academic programs implement the Sheltered Instruction (SI) approach, which integrates instruction on language and content. SI serves as a means of making grade-level academic content more accessible to ELL students and at the same time promoting their English language development. Among the popular SI approaches are the Newcomer Program, which educates ELL students in a special environment for a certain period; the Transitional Bilingual Education, which uses the ELL student’s native language to make the transition to English easier; the Developmental Bilingual Education, which seeks to educate an ELL student towards literacy in a first and second language; and the Two-Way Immersion Program, which combines instruction for ELL and native English speakers. According to CREDE (online), any of these programs can be successful in meeting the special needs of ELL students as long as the school maintains a continuing and guided parental involvement and professional development for specialized and mainstream teachers. They also need strong leadership among classroom, school and district personnel. On the actual instruction techniques, the SI approaches may be complemented by scaffolding strategies, whose use is supported by many researchers in helping ELL students organize their thoughts in English, develop their study skills and follow classroom procedures. Scaffolding uses contextual supports in language learning such as simplified language, teacher modeling, visuals and graphics, and cooperative and hands-on learning methods. The general objectives in a scaffolding strategy is to make English language learning easier, which can be done by keeping the language simple, using actions and illustrations to reinforce oral statements, asking student to complete instead of generate ideas, using model correct usage, judiciously correcting errors, and using visual aids (Gray & Fleischman, 2005). References: CREDE. “Program Alternatives for Linguistically Diverse Students.” Available online at: www.cal.org/crede/pubs/. Christy, J. “Helping English Language Learners in the Classroom. Available online at: http://www.glencoe.com/sec/teachingtoday/subject/help_ELL_lit_la.phtml Garcia, E. (1991). “The Education of Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Students: Effective Instructional Practices.” University of California, Sta. Cruz, CA. Gray, T. & Fleischman, S. (2005). “Research Matters: Successful Strategies for English Language Learners.” Association for Supervision and Curriculum, December 2004-January 2005, Vol. 62. No. 4. Kadamus, J. (2004). “Report on Building Capacity to Improve the Performance of Limited English Proficient ELLs.” Albany, New York. Pelino, K. “Effective Strategies for English Language Learners.” TeAch-nology at: http://www. teach-nology.com Ruiz, J. & Koch, C. “English Language Learning.” Illinois State Board of Education, available online at: http://www.isbe.state.11.us/bilingual/htmls/parentNCLB.htm Tuite, A. (2003). “Meeting the Needs of English Language Learners in the New Century High Schools.” New Visions for Public Schools 1, State Education Department, New York. Walqui, A. (2000). “Contextual Factors in Second Language Acquisition.” CAL Digest, September 2000, San Francisco, California. Read More