ED 349 801

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

PUB DATECONTRACTNOTEPUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

FL 020 519

Minicucci, Catherine; Olsen, LauriePrograms for Secondary Limited English ProficientStudents: A California Study. FOCUS Number 5.Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education.National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education,Washington, DC.Office of Bilingual Education and Minority LanguagesAffairs (ED), Washington, DC.92T28900400121p.

Reports Research/Technical (143)

MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage.Demography; Interviews; *Limited English Speaking;Program Effectiveness; *Program Implementation;Resource Materials; School Districts; SecondaryEducation; *Secondary School Students; StaffDevelopment; State Departments of Education; StateSurveys*California; Content Area Teaching

The results of an exploratory study that investigatedthe range of programs available to limited English proficient (LEP)students in California secondary schools are addressed. The studyconsisted of several components: a telephone survey to 27 secondaryschools that were demographically and regionally representative ofCalifornia high schools and intermediate schools with LEPpopulations; site visits to five schools selected for the richness oftheir programs; a literature review; and individual consultations andinterviews with local school district and State Department ofEducation personnel. Innovative efforts to address the needs of LEPstudents throughout California were found, but all of these effortsfaced difficulties in implementation. Regardless of the language ofinstruction, fewer than one-fourth of the schools surveyed were ableto offer a full menu of core content courses to LEP students. Fourrecommendations resulting from the survey were made. These include:establishment of state-supported, locally based networks todisseminate information and allow educators to share ideas about whatworks under different conditions; comprehensive staff development;increase in state investment in resource materials for LEP students;and an initiative by the State Department of Education to bringpractitioners together to advance effective programs and services forthese students. (.1L)

***********************************************************************

nepioctucLions suppLi eu by LDAb are me pest that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

OccasionalPapersin

BilingualEducation

Spring 1992

Number 5

Programs for

Secondary

Limited English Proficient

Students:

A California Study

Catherine MinicucciLaurie Olsen

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

National Clearinghousefor Bilingual Education

NCBE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educ.ationat Research and improvementED ATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC/

This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it

O Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Points of new or opinions stated in this docu-ment do not necessarily represent officialOEM position or policy

2

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

The National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education(NCBE) is funded by the U.S. Department of Education sOffice of Bilingual Education and Minority LanguagesAffairs (OBEMLA) and is operated under Contract No.T289004001 by The George Washington University sCenter for the Study of Education ana NationalDeveiopment. jointly with the Carter for Applied_inauistics. The contents of this publicaton do not

necessarily reflect the views or policies of theDepartment of Education. nor does the mention or tradenames. commercial oroaucts. or organizations implyandors..arnent by the J.S.. Government. Reaaers are tree:0 auoncate and use :nese materials in keeping wanaccepted publication stanaaras. NOSE reauests thatproper credit be given :n the event or reoroauction.

National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education1118 22nd Street NW, Washington DC 20037

Director: Joel GomezPublications Coorainator: Lorraine Valdez Pierce

3 3EST COPY AVAILAM

Programs

for

Secondary

Limited

English

Proficient

Students:ACaliforniaStudy

Catherine Minicucci

Laurie Olsen

4

2

Introduction

In 1987, a gubernatorial veto allowed thelaw mandating bilingual education pro-grams in California schools to expire.That law (AB 507, Chapter 1339, Stat-utes of 1980) required schools to offer bi-lingual education programs at Grades K-6 whenever there were ten or morelimited English proficient (LEP) studentsin a given grade at the same school whoshared the same native language. InGrades 7-12, school districts were re-quired to provide English language de-velopment to limited English proficientstudents, but the exact nature of the pro-gram(s) to be offered was not specified.The status of current state law relating tothese students in Grades 7-12 is some-what ambiguous. Districts are required toassess and serve LEP students and toseek appropriately trained staff for them.State legal mandates rest on federalcase law and the unrepealed intent sec-tion of the former state bilingual law.

In 1988, the state legislature requested astudy of services available to limited En-glish proficient students in Californiaschools. One aspect of the study in-volved an exploratory, descriptive investi-gation into the range of programs avail-able to these students in secondaryschools. This publication addresses theresults of that investigation.

Limited English Proficient (LEP) is the of-ficial term designated by California law torefer to students whose home or nativelanguage is not English and who requirespecialized instruction in order to partici-pate meaningfully in school. Recently,the term English learner has been pro-posed in the state legislature to replacethis term. In this publication, the term lim-ited English proficient will be used wher-ever it is essential to ensure accuracy.

Historically, California state policy on bi-lingual education has focused on ele-mentary school programs. This emphasis

is understandable: there have traditional-ly been more limited English proficientstudents in elementary schools than insecondary schools. However, the numberof these students in secondary schools isgrowing rapidly. In 1987, LEP studentsenrolled in Grades 7-12 totaled 181,442.In 1990, that number grew to 260,398, oralmost one-third of the state's LEP popu-lation. Furthermore, the lack of informa-tion about available services at the sec-ondary level suggests a need fordirecting policy attention toward second-ary programs.

The exploratory study of secondaryschool programs for limited English profi-cient students was conducted throughout1991 and consisted of several compo-nents: a telephone survey to twenty-sev-en seconds schools which were demo-graphically and regionally representativeof California high schools and intermedi-ate schools with LEP populations; sitevisits to five schools selected for the rich-ness of their programs; a literature re-view; and individual consultations and in-terviews with local school district andState Department of Education person-nel. The school sites visited were chosento reflect schools with extensive programofferings for LEP students. Informationgleaned from the site visits served tobroaden our perspective: of the survey'sfindings and explore critical issues. Agroup of advisors was also convened tocomment on the findings and provide ad-ditional data.

Demographic Context

Rapid growth

California is in the midst of a profounddemographic upheaval. Over the pastdecade, the state's total population grew26 percent, faster than in any other statein the nation. The 1990 Census reportedsix million foreign-born persons residingin Californiathe result of a major immi-gration wave. Newcomers from every

continent and from dozens of cultural andlanguage groups joined an already di-verse population to form an unprecedent-ed mixture of cultural, linguistic, national,and ethnic diversity. Almost two-thirds ofnew residents in California in 1990 wereforeign-born immigrants. This demo-graphic change is being felt profoundly inthe state's secondary schools. Almostone quarter of a million LEP students areenrolled in California's secondaryschools, representing a 42 percent in-crease in just the past three years.

Twenty-one of the twenty-seven schoolssurveyed reported "dramatic" and unan-ticipated growth in their secondary LEPpopulation. The planning difficulties inher-ent in such unanticipated growth, and thedifficulties of changing school programsto accommodate new student needs weremajor issues in discussions with schooladministrators and coordinators of LEPprograms throughout the state.

Diversity

Aside from sheer numbers, the growingsecondary population of limited Englishproficient students is both linguisticallyand culturally diverse. Statewide, ninety-six different language groups are repre-sented in Grades 7-12. Sixty-eight per-cent of the LEP student population inthose grades speak Spanish, 20 percentspeak Asian languages, and 12 percentspeak other languages. Almost half of theschools surveyed reported a changingcomposition of LEP students, includingthe emergence of new language and cul-tural groups, decreasing numbers of LEPstudents from a language or culturalgroup that schools had already adjustedto serving, and changes in students' so-cio-economic status and prior schoolinglevels. As one coordinator of LEP pro-grams declared:

"We're learning to just accept thatchangein our students and it )ur pro-gramis going to be a regular feature of

our lives here. We never know what toexpect, never know what we'll get or whatkinds of challenges it will present. It's likebeing in the middle of a tornado, youdon't know where or when you'll touchdown."

Based on a legislative history outliningthe schools' responsibility to address lan-guage barriers for non-English speakingstudents, schools identify and serve stu-dents expressly in terms of their Englishlanguage fluency and language group.Yet, the secondary LEP student popula-tion presents a complex array of academ-ic and other needs which go far beyondlanguage. It is the combination of thesethat presents such a challenge to the sec-ondary schools.

By definition, LEP students are not fluentin English. However, within this popula-tion at every grade level in California'ssecondary schools, there is a wide rangeof English language fluency and prior ac-ademic preparation. This is an importantfactor because secondary school coursesare based on assumptions about basic lit-eracy skill levels and prior academicbackgrounds.

With regard to prior academic back-ground, secondary English learners tendto fall into one of three broad and oftenoverlapping categories:

(1) recent immigrants who have receivedexcellent previous schooling (in anothercountry);

(2) those who have participated in lan-guage programs in elementary schools inthe United States and continue into sec-ondary schools with insufficient Englishfluency and academic content knowledgeto be mainstreamed; and

(3) those who have little prior schoolingand are lacking in both basic literacyskills and academic content knowledge.

4

Students in the first category have re-ceived excellent continuous schooling pri-or to immigrating to the United States andare well-prepared in many respects tolearn in American schools. However, theyface difficulties as a result of being edu-cated in national education systemswhich differ from the local- and state-based systems in this country. The curric-ulum content and sequence, teachingpedagogy, and particular skills which areemphasized may differ radically fromthose valued in U.S. schools. Thus, eventhose who arrive as adolescents withstrong academic backgrounds face whatcan be a difficult transition to our form ofschooling as well as unexpected academ-ic gaps, particularly in subjects such associal studies or history. However, thesestudents (usually from middle class orprofessional families from industrializedurban centers) possess self-confidence intheir abilities as students and strong aca-demic and study skills to apply to newcontent.

Students in the second category repre-sent a large number continuing into sec-ondary schools from U.S. elementaryschools. These students have varyinglevels of oral English fluency and aca-demic content knowledge. While descrip-tions of these students are varied, mostschools reported that the average con-tinuing student has a fourth- to sixth-grade academic skill level when he/sheenters high school; this is far below theacademic level expected for the standardninth-grade curriculum. Even when thesestudents are orally fluent in English, theymay be weak in reading and writing. Dur-ing the course of their secondary schoolexperience, most evidently complete thefull sequence of English as a SecondLanguage (ESL) classes and achieve oralEnglish fluency but remain unable to bereclassified as fluent English proficient(FEP) or to compete in challenging aca-demic areas. Many are placed in remedi-al classes. Continuing LEP students havebeen gloomily labeled "ESL lifers" by

staff. Within this group are immigrant stu-dents who arrived in the United Stateswith gaps in their schooling which theywere unable to overcome and studentswho have been classified as LEP sinceelementary school. Teachers and coun-selors suggest that many of these stu-dents have failed to make progress dueto transiency, resulting in large blocks ofmissed schooling in the earlier grades(Records were examined, for example,for LEP students who had been enrolledin five schools by sixth grade and whohad missed twenty to thirty days of schooleach year). There is also some evidenceto indicate that as students move fromschool to school or from grade to grade,they are enrolled in programs based onvery different (and sometimes conflicting)pedagogical approaches.

An increasing and highly visible numberof students with little or no prior schoolingand little or no basic literacy in their na-tive language form the third category ofEnglish learners in secondary schools.These students tend to be from rural, im-poverished, or war-devastated regions ofthe world. Staff at twenty-five of the twen-ty-seven schools surveyed spoke of thecomplexity of designing programs for thiscategory of student. Addressing theneeds of these students requires ap-proaches to developing basic literacy inan accelerated fashion and designing in-structional programs for filling gaps in ac-ademic content. Faced with this chal-lenge, some secondary schools areestablishing special classes. However,finding the appropriate materials for theseclasses, identifying teachers with the nec-essary skills, and creating a pedagogyand accelerated program are deemedmajor problems.

The demand made on the schools by thewide range of academic preparationacross the three categories of studentsdescribed above is profound. Given theminimal numbers of students from anyone category necessary for creating

classes and assigning teachers, this di-versity directly affects the ability ofschools to develop appropriate place-ments and programs for students.

Pressures on Secondary Students

Just as educators face more than a broadrange of English proficiency levels, limit-ed English proficient students face morethan academic challenges. The legal andeconomic pressures of immigration, diffi-culties in adapting to a new culture, andneeds for physical and mental health allaffect a student's participation in school.

School attendance problems are commonamong students because of the legal andfinancial concerns many immigrant andlanguage minority families must copewith. It is estimated that as many as 50percent et the immigrants in Californiaare undocumented persons. For stu-dents, this can lead to fears of divulgingfamily information which might lead toINS detention or deportation and placestremendous legal pressures on the fami-ly. These pressures often result in tran-siency and changing schools. Further-more, most immigrant teenagers,regardless of legal status, also feel tre-mendous pressure to work in order tosupport themselves or contribute to theirfamily income. Many must also stay athome to take care of younger siblings sothat parents or other adults in the familycan work.

Trying to adjust to a new culture and lan-guage can be very difficult for teenagers.For recent immigrants, this is compound-ed by trying to cope with a new schoolculture and daily procedures. Fromchanging classes at the sound of a bell tostoring books in lockers to buying lunch inthe school cafeteria, language minorityteens face novelty at every turn. Movingfrom class to class in large schools, fewstudents are able to develop close rela-tionships with their teachers. Speakingout in class, participating in discussions,

and maintaining relatively informal rela-tionships with teachers are all quite newphenomena to students who have beeneducated in other countries. Trying tobridge two cultures, particularly for newly-arrived teenagers, can be painful and dif-ficult. Juggling culturally different expec-tations about what it means to be amature and responsible person and han-dling culturally different sex role expecta-tions is difficult. Rightfully, students oftenfeel caught between two worlds.

Immigrant adolescents coming from rela-tively homogeneous cultures have tolearn to live in our heterogeneous and ra-cially stratified society. In many communi-ties, the new immigrant is at the bottomrung of the social ladder. Many perceivethe new world they are entering as hostileand unwelcoming. This view is supportedby a recent California Attorney General'sreport (California Department of Justice,1990), which documented an increase inanti-immigrant hostilities and racially mo-tivated hate crimes in schools and amongyoung people.

In this context, providing the support toensure that students attend school con-sistently is requisite to offering instructionin the schools. A coordinator of LEP stu-dents in one high school said:

"Despite the difficulties sometimes in de-livering instruction, that's not our big gap.The gap is in being able to provide for theneeds of the kids and their families sothey can be in school. Everything fromglasses, clothes, jackets, primary healthcare. Within the past ten days alone I'vehad to call 911 five times. They comewith big health problems, and no meansof getting health care. The kids don'tspeak English and the parents don't ei-ther. So we have to put a lot of moneyinto translation to communicate with thekids and the parents, to help them get theservices and support they need. It's over-whelming. We need home-school liaisonsfor each of our language groups. It's a

8

5

6

glaring need. And it has to be dealt withbefore you can even begin to talk aboutinstruction."

In the face of this complexity of needs,many secondary schools in California areactively involved in trying new approach-es, in scrambling to find new solutions.Many others are aware of the need for"something different" but feel frustratedabout what they could or should be doing,particularly in light of their limited resourc-es and lack of models. All, however, facea massive challenge in changing thestructure and curriculum of secondaryschools to make them more responsive toand appropriate for the rapidly increasingpopulation of students learning English asa non-native language.

Programs and Policies

This discussion of secondary school pro-grams and policies is divided into fiveparts: assessment and placement proce-dures; content program models; ESL pro-grams; content area coverage; andschool policy factors.

Assessment and Placement Procedures

Given the tremendous range of academicneeds (English language literacy, nativelanguage literacy and academic skills),appropriate assessment of language mi-nority students is critical for accurate pro-gram planning and placement. In Califor-nia, the assessment of these studentswhen they enter the secondary level fol-lows state-required procedures. A homelanguage survey is given to the studentand the parent(s) to determine the lan-guage used at home. If a student comesfrom a home in which another languageis spoken, he/she is tested on a state-ap-proved instrument to assess oral Englishfluency. In California, these instrumentsinclude the Language AssessmentScales (LAS), the IDEA Oral Proficiency

Test (IPT), and the Bilingual Syntax Mea-sure (BSM).

In addition to oral English fluency,schools assess students' English aca-demic skills. Commonly used instrumentsinclude the Comprehensive Test of BasicSkills (CTBS) or other English languagestandardized achievement tests. Somedistricts augment this assessment bytesting academic skills in the native lan-guage, reviewing transcripts at the highschool level, and/or interviewing the stu-dent and parent(s) in the native languageto determine previous schooling experi-ence.

In the schools surveyed, the areas con-sistently assessed include oral Englishfluency and English reading, language,and mathematics achievement. Englishwriting is assessed in half of the interme-diate schools (both middle and junior highschools) and two-thirds of the highschools surveyed. A few schools also as-sess academic skills in the native lan-guage, attempt to determine previousschooling, or supplement standardizedEnglish reading tests with individually ad-ministered instruments.

Assessment at the high school level ap-pears to be more extensive than at the in-termediate level. One-third of the highschools surveyed use English languageplacement tests in addition to screeningfor oral English fluency. Most of the highschools rely on the CTBS to assess Eng-lish reading. While high schools makemore of an effort than intermediateschools to determine students' previousschooling and academic achievement inthe native language, only half of the highschools surveyed actually conduct as-sessment in the native language.

Current assessment practices of studentsin the secondary schools surveyed focuson meeting state legal requirements forassessing oral English fluency at the timeof school entry and measuring academic

7

achievement on English language stan-dardized tests for possible reclassifica-tion. However, native language assess-ment to determine academic skills isconducted on a much more limited basis.When such assessments are conducted,content area classroom teachers do notreceive the results for individual students,and previous schooling experience isgenerally not taken into consideration.

Content Program Models

All of the schools surveyed in the studyoffer two types of cl6sses to students ac-quiring English: ESL and selected elec-tives in the mainstream such as physicaleducation or music. Beyond these twocommon elements, schools vary widely intheir approach to teaching content. Someschools use the native language of stu-dents to teach content classes while oth-ers use Sheltered English. Some placestudents in mainstream classes while oth-ers delay academic content instructionuntil English fluency is achieved.

Sheltered English is an approach inwhich content instruction is offered inEnglish to classes composed solely ofEnglish learners. The term "shelteredEnglish" was coined by Krashen(Edwards et al., 1984) to mean subject-matter instruction made comprehensibleto these students. In the Sheltered Eng-lish classroom, the focus is on subjectmatter and the students' attention is fo-cused on the message (content) ratherthan the medium (language). Krashenstressed the fact that native English-speaking students are excluded from theSheltered English classroom so that in-struction can be directed at the Englishlearners' level of comprehension.Sheltered English classes may use any ofthe following instructional strategies: (1)visual cues and manipulatives to help stu-dents understand what is being communi-cated; (2) language modifications (paus-es, repetition, elaboration); (3) interactive

1_0

lectures in which there is a continuousteacher-student dialogue; and (4) focuson key concepts rather than on details.

Programs for secondary English learnersin California appear to divide into four ba-sic models:

Model ASheltered English Only pro-grams use Sheltered English exclusivelyto deliver academic content instruction.

Model BNative Language programsuse the students' native language(s) todeliver academic content instruction. Inthis study, this model was observed ex-clusively for Spanish-speaking students.

Model CNative Language combinedwith Sheltered English programs usenative language instruction for some aca-demic content classes and ShelteredEnglish instruction for others. Native lan-guage instruction may be used withSpanish speakers (because there arelarger numbers of this group) whileSheltered English is used with mixed lan-guage groups. Or, native language in-struction may be used with students hav-ing less-developed native language skillsand Sheltered English instruction re-served for students with more advancednative language literacy.

Model DMainstream Placement pro-grams place students in mainstream con-tent classes rather than creating specialclasses exclusively for them. Studentsmay or may not be clustered by languagegroup in these classes. In some cases,native language aides may be used. Stu-dents are placed in mainstream contentclasses after they reach an intermediatelevel of fluency in oral English.

Within these program models, schoolsdiffer in the extent of content coverageprovided to students learning English.Content coverage ranges from full con-tent coverage to partial and sparse con-tent coverage.

8

Full content coverage means all subjectareas at all grade levels are taught inclasses designed to address the needs ofstudents. Students in full content pro-grams are enrolled in a complete menu ofclasses including ESL, math, science, so-cial studies and electives.

In schools offering partial content cov-erage, a few classes in content areas aredesigned to meet the needs of students.Frequently, this is because there are in-sufficient openings to accommodate allstudents learning English in core contentclasses. Students in partial content pro-grams receive a short schedule of class-es; typically, it will include ESL and oneor more content classes. The remainderof the school day is spent in study halls orin elective courses. Students may, for ex-ample, be scheduled for either a mathe-matics or a science class but not both.

Sparse content coverage refers to largegaps in content area coverage. A specificcontent area such as science or math

may not be scheduled and/or may not beoffered at particular grade levels. Stu-dents in sparse content programs are en-rolled in ESL and elective courses. Theydo not take science or math and may, forexample, be limited to courses offered inGrades 9 and 10 only.

Table 1 shows the number of schools inthe survey by program model and contentarea coverage. Regardless of the ap-proach taken to content instruction, fewerthan one-fourth of the schools surveyedoffer full programs for students learningEnglish. More than half of the highschools and one-third of the intermediateschools have major gaps in their offeringsor offer no content classes at all. Thirteenof the twenty-seven schools surveyed ei-ther offer few or no content area classesfor students. This means that many Eng-lish learners in California may not be en-rolled in content area subjects. As a re-sult, they will have limited access tofurther education and career opportuni-ties.

Table 1

Models of Secondary ProgramsSurvey results

Approach to teaching content

Intermediateschools

Highschools

Total

Model A: Full coverage 0 0 0

ShelteredEnglish

Partial coverage 5 2 7

Sparse coverage 3 3 6

Model B: Full coverage 2 1 3

PrimaryLanguage

Partial coverage 0 0 0

Sparse coverage 1 1 2

Model C: Full coverage 2 1 3

ShelteredEnglish and Partial coverage 0 1 1

PrimaryLanguage Sparse coverage 0 2 2

Model D: Mainstream 1 2 3

Total 14 13 27

Program models and theextent of coverage foundin the limited survey wereanalyzed to determine ifany consistent relation-ships to demographicfactors existed. No sys-tematic relationship wasfound between the choiceof model and the extentof content area coverageand relevant factors suchas: the total number oflimited English proficientstudents enrolled in aschool; the percent of to-tal school enrollment ac-counted for by these stu-dents; the numbers ofspeakers of any one lan-guage; or the level ofschool (intermediate orhigh school). However, itshould be noted that the

number of schools surveyed is too smallto consider these findings conclusive.

ESL Programs

All of the schools surveyed have ESLprograms and all but one offer more thanone level of ESL instruction. Goals ofESL classes at the secondary level in-clude development of oral English andreading skills. In addition, some interme-diate level and nearly all high school levelESL classes focus on building writingskills. In all the schools surveyed, assess-ment results are used to place students inESL classes. In ten of the twenty-sevenschools, initial ESL placement is basedsolely on oral English fluency; twelveschools consider the student's Englishreading level in addition to hihe/sher oralEnglish fluency. Two intermediateschools consider literacy in the native lan-guage as a placement criterion and placestudents with advanced native languageliteracy skills in more advanced :SLclasses.

Once a student is placed in ESL, move-ment from level to level depends primarilycn teacher judgment. Only three of thehigh schools surveyed use an Englishlanguage proficiency test to determinemovement from one ESL level to another.One high school has developed its ownESL placement test for this purpose.

Although there is variation in the numberof levels of ESL classes offered, almosthalf of the schools surveyed offer at leastthree. Eleven schools offer more thanthree levels, usually including an intro-ductory or newcomer level of ESL as wellas a transitional class taught in the Eng-lish department at the end of the ESL se-quence. Advanced ESL classes stress lit-erature and writing skills. TransitionalEnglish classes are a relatively recent of-fering in many schools and have beendeveloped in response to the large num-bers of students who have completed theESL sequence and are tailing in main-

stream English classes. Transitional Eng-lish classes provide additional support tothese students by developing their abilityto perform tasks required in mainstreamclasses. Transitional English classes alsofocus on literature and writing skills, butthey are the first classes in the main-stream offered to students who havecompleted the ESL program sequence. Ingeneral, schools with larger numbers ofthese students have developed morecourse offerings in ESL.

Placement policies in ESL programs haveimportant consequences on class compo-sition. For example, when either oral orreading ability is used as a criterion forplacement, students who are orally fluentbut lack reading comprehension skillsmay be placed in the same class as newarrivals who are not yet fluent in oralEnglish. Thus, students fluent in oral lan-guage may have to sit through oralEnglish development activities that theydo not need instead of receiving the read-ing and writing instruction that they doneed. When oral English is the soleplacement criterion, classes tend to con-tain wide variations among students byage, previous schooling, and native lan-guage literacy.

Secondary students learning English arequite diverse in their needs for Englishlanguage development. Some need oralas well as reading and writing skills whileothers need only literacy skills. Some stu-dents are already literate in their nativelanguage; some are not. Despite theavailability of multiple levels of ESL class-es, the range of student needs does notappear to be met by ESL program offer-ings in most of the schools surveyed.

2

Content Area Coverage

Aside from the extent of overall contentarea coverage discussed above, this sur-vey sampling of programs available tosecondary limited English proficient stu-dents in California explored how content

10

area instruction offered to these studentsfits into larger structures. Factors exam-ined included placement criteria, tracking(general versus college preparatory),grade level coverage, and content ap-proach (native language, Sheltered Eng-lish, or mainstream).

Placement criteria

Placement in content classes is usuallybased on a student's English proficiencylevel. Generally, students at the begin-ning and intermediate levels are placedinto content classes designed for them,pending availability; advanced ESL stu-dents generally enter mainstream aca-demic or remedial classes. In more thanhalf of the secondary schools surveyed, astudent's English proficiency level is thesole criterion considered in placing him/her in content courses. In the remainingschools, other variables were taken intoaccount: two schools consider native lan-guage literacy; two consider math levelfor placement in math; two take into ac-count age and grade; and four use acombination of these variables.

Tracking

At the intermediate school level, mostmath, science, and social studies classesare in the general academic track. Eightof the eleven intermediate schools offer-ing math, seven of the ten offering sci-ence, and eleven of the thirteen offeringsocial studies provide only general trackclasses to English learners. Two of the in-termediate schools in the survey provideself-contained bilingual, non-tracked con-tent instruction. Only one school offerscollege preparatory courses in math andscience at the intermediate level. At thehigh school level, about one-third of theschools offer at least some college prepa-ratory classes in math, science, and so-cial studies.

Grade level coverage

In eight of the fourteen intermediateschools surveyed, social studies is of-fered at all grade levels. Science is of-fered at all grade levels in only six of theschools while mathematics is offeredacross all grade levels in five schools.

In most high schools surveyed, contentcourses are offered to students in Grades9 and 10 but not in Grades 11 and 12.Generally, science and social studies areoffered at more grade levels than is math.However, some students do enroll in ad-vanced mainstream math classes.

The reasons that content courses inGrades 11 and 12 are not offered to stu-dents vary. One school has a policy notto enroll new students beyond the age ofsixteen who are limited English proficientin high school and, instead, refers themto adult education programs. Anotherhigh school 'aces all incoming studentsdetermined tc t,e limited English profi-cient in ninth c. ode regardless of age orprevious schcorng. In this school, accessto content clay ses is provided in the tenthgrade when student achieves minimaloral English ft icy. Several high schoolsreported that the dropout rate was suffi-ciently high among these students as tomake eleventh and twelfth grade contentclasses unnecessary.

Content teaching approaches

The schools surveyed in this study use avariety of approaches to teach academiccontent to English learners. ShelteredEnglish is the preferred approach used byboth intermediate and high schools.While native language instruction is usedin about one-third of the intermediateschools' science, math, and social stud-ies courses, such instruction is limited toSpanish.

At the high school level, there is less useof native language instruction in contentclasses than at the intermediate level.

Sheltered English alone, or in combina-tion with native language content cours-es, is used to teach content classes. Atone high school, native language contentinstruction is offered to Spanish speakerswhile Sheltered English is offered tomixed language groups. At another highschool, native language instruction is of-fered to Spanish-speaking students withweak native language skills while moreadvanced Spanish-speaking students aretaught in Sheltered English classrooms.

There appears to be a striking differencein curriculum between middle school con-tent courses using students' native lan-guage and junior and senior high coursesusing Sheltered English. Middle schoolsoffer more self-contained classes and relyless on departmental structure than juniorhigh schools. For example, middleschools may offer a combined "core"class for language arts and social stud-ies. Bilingual middle schools are able touse textbooks available in both Englishand Spanish that adhere to California cur-ricular frameworks. In this way, theseschools offer a math, science, and lan-guage arts curriculum for students whichis comparable to that offered in the main-stream. At the high school level, nativelanguage content classes are hamperedby a lack of materials. For example, thehigh school bilingual science programsincluded in the study use science booksin Spanish designed for use in middleschool classrooms because Spanish lan-guage science textbooks are not avail-able for high school students. None of thebilingual science classes in our surveyschools qualify to receive credit for col-lege entrance because they are in thegeneral track and do not include laborato-ry components.

Secondary school programs which offercontent area instruction through a Shel-tered English approach are experiencingserious gaps in materials and ambiguityin their curriculum content. ShelteredEnglish courses rely solely on teacher-

made materials or use English texts butmove more slowly through the material,using paraprofessionals to assist in trans-lation.

Curriculum coverage

At the intermediate level, many schoolsoffer neither Sheltered English nor con-tent area classes in the students' nativelanguage. For example, four of the four-teen schools surveyed do not offer sci-ence to English learners, three do not of-fer math, and one does not offer socialstudies. At the high school level, three ofthe thirteen schools surveyed do not offermath, two do not offer science, and twodo not offer social studies through Shel-tered English or native language ap-proaches. The pattern of content area of-fering through instructional approacheswhich make the material meaningful tostudents learning English varies greatlyfrom school to school. Thus, a student'saccess to meaningful content area in-struction appears to be determined large-ly by the school he/she attends.

Fewer than half of the schools surveyedoffer one or more foreign language class-es designed specifically for native speak-ers. Seven of thirteen high schools andfive of fourteen intermediate schools offerSpanish for Spanish speakers. In rarecases, Asian languages are also offered.

School Policy

School policy factors that appear to influ-ence the nature and extent of program-ming for English learners at the second-ary level are: district leadership, siteleadership, staff availability, teacher will-ingness to teach students, and schoolstructure.

District leadership

District leadership is expressed in masterplans for second language programs, inassessment policies and practices, in

.14

11

12

staff development activities which pre-pare teachers to work with English learn-ers, in incentives for teachers to partici-pate in these activities, and in support ofESL department Chairs and on-siteresource personnel. In addition, districtdirectors of programs serving LEP stu-dents can encourage secondary schooladministrators to add course offerings forthese students and promote participationof teachers in staff development activitieswhich focus on effective teaching strate-gies for them. Most directors at the dis-trict level, however, reported frustrationwith the slow pace of progress in thedevelopment and implementation of pro-grams for English learners in theirschools.

In each of three districts, pairs of schoolsat the same level (intermediate or highschool) were surveyed in order to gain in-sights into the impact of district-levelleadership. The districts exhibited a rangefrom strong to limited leadership withinprograms serving students acquiring En-glish as a second language.

Of those districts exhibiting strong leader-ship, two intermediate schools in one uni-fied district offer full content coverage inmath, science, and social studies. Strongleadership is illustrated in another unifiedschool district. Two high schools operat-ing within the same district context andhaving many of the same program ele-ments independently make critical deci-sions about the extent of programming.While both high schools offer ShelteredEnglish, three levels of ESL, and bilingualsupport laboratories for students whoneed additional assistance, they vary inthe extent of content coverage offered tostudents.

Limited leadership was evident in onelarge high school district. In this district,there did not appear to be a district-wide"program model"; instead, each schooldeveloped its own approach to servingstudents. One high school, for example,

offers no content classes designed spe-cifically for students learning English. In-coming students are placed into ESL,physical education, and electives duringthe first year and are held out of academ-ic courses until their second year at theschool. Another high school offers Shel-tered English courses: two in science andtwo in social studies, but none in math.All content classes offered are in the gen-eral academic track.

Site leadership

There appears to be more content cover-age available to students in schools inwhich a site administrator takes an activeleadership role than in sites in which theESL Chair or a counselor takes responsi-bility for programs. In the six schools withfull content coverage, the principal, or acoordinator for LEP programs with thesupport of the principal, exercises signifi-cant leadership over these programs.

The scarce literature on effective second-ary school programs for English learnerssuggests the importance of a school-wideemphasis and shared responsibility forstudents. Effective site leadership is criti-cal if a school is to envision an overallprogram for these students by assessingtheir academic needs and developing awhole-school response.

Staff availability

The availability of teachers prepared tooffer either native language instruction orSheltered English content instruction is amajor factor in determining what courseswill be offered in a secondary school.Survey respondents reported that theywere reluctant to assign English learnersto unwilling and/or unprepared teachers,fearing that it would be a negative experi-ence for the students. For example if, in ascience department of six teachers, twoteachers are trained to teach Englishlearners, science offerings tend to be lim-ited to the space available in their class-

15

rooms. However, increases in the enroll-ment of these students sometimes resultin unwilling or unqualified teachers beingassigned to ESL classes. In severalschools, staffing assignment shifts be-came necessary due to changes in thestudent population and fiscal constraintson new hiring. As English learners com-prise a greater proportion of the second-ary school population, more teachersmust be prepared and assigned to teachthem.

Teacher willingness

The willingness of secondary schoolteachers to participate in staff develop-ment programs is an important factor in aschool's ability to offer special programsto English learners. Most districts sur-veyed have a state-approved plan to rem-edy the shortage of staff trained to servethese students. Districts offer a range ofincentives including paid staff develop-ment opportunities and special bonusesto teachers who participate in them. How-ever, if teachers do not choose to re-spond to those incentives, there is nomechanism to compel them to do so. Asa result, it is common for new, monolin-gual English teachers to be assigned toclasses of English learners as a conditionof employment. Teachers fluent in Span-ish but having no other special qualifica-tions may also be required to teach theseclasses. Teachers drafted into teachingstudents may or may not be willing to par-ticipate in staff development that will helpthem serve this population. Some ofthese teachers choose not to participatebecause of fears that they will be"trapped" into teaching these students onan ongoing basis. Others are intrigued bythe challenge and want to participate. Be-cause of the limited nature of the explor-atory study, it is not possible to tell whatproportion of experienced secondaryschool teachers are willing to participatein staff development programs related tostudents learning English as a non-nativelanguage.

16

School structure

The departmentalization of most second-ary school faculty by content areas hasmajor repercussions for programs offeredto students. In the typical, departmental-ized high school, no single person is incharge of a comprehensive approach tostudent programming. The ESL depart-ment may be in charge of English lan-guage instruction, but it is up to each con-tent area department chairperson torespond to the academic course needs ofstudents. Responsibility for making con-tent courses available to students, as-signing teachers, and grouping and clus-tering students in content area classesmost often falls to each content areaChair. Some chairpersons are assertivein developing a program for students; oth-ers are resistant. For example, in oneschool, a fairly full menu of science offer-ings was available to students, althoughmath was not. In another school, only onebasic science class was available to stu-dents. In yet another school, a Spanishbilingual world history course was avail-able because there was a staff memberwilling to teach it, but other languagegroups were placed in Sheltered Englishcourses. The priorities and philosophiesabout whether and how to serve Englishlearners could and often did vary marked-ly across departments within the sameschool. The result is limited and unevenaccess to content courses.

In some secondary schools, tension be-tween the ESL/bilingual department andthe content area departments was evi-dent. Some content area faculty felt thatthe ESL teachers were trying to "coddle"students and hold them back, while someESL faculty felt that the content area fac-ulty were refusing to deal with the aca-demic needs of the students. This tensionwas exacerbated in those schools wherethe principal did not articulate an overallphilosophy or vision for programs servingstudents.

13

1

14

The master course schedule of each highschool poses significant constraints formounting programs for students learningEnglish. The schedule sets forth theclasses to be taught, the faculty to teachthe classes, the number of students ineach class, and the number of sections ineach subject. The schedule must accom-modate college entrance requirements forstudents in college preparatory programs.The schedule is set in the spring or sum-mer preceding the school year and allowslittle room for modification once theschool year commences.

The constraints of the master schedulemay also limit the extent to which ateacher prepared to teach Sheltered Eng-lish is assigned such classes. Classesneeded for students learning English maynot be offered because the qualifiedteacher is required to teach other class-es. Not assigning teachers qualified toteach in Sheltered English classes tothose classes limits their opportunities togain classroom experience with Englishlearners. This is one factor contributing tothe practice of assigning unqualified newteachers to these students.

While high schools appear to be strug-gling to serve English learners, intermedi-ate schools seem to enjoy greater latitudein designing programs for these students.Several middle schools in the survey offera three-period language and content areaclass with a bilingual teacher, thereby of-fering full content and literacy develop-ment in the native language. Englishlearners mix with English-speaking peersfor electives.

The structural rigidity of departmentalizedsecondary schools is particularly unsuitedto the educational needs of students ac-quiring English as a second language.These students enter school at differentages with varying levels of English lan-guage ability, previous schooling, and na-tive language literacy. To address thewide range of abilities students represent,

secondary schools need to have the flexi-bility to change schedules and programsin order to meet students' needs.

Summary

The secondary schools included in thisCalifornia survey implement four programmodels for limited English proficient stu-dents. All of these models offer ESL andEnglish language elective courses.Schools vary in their approach to teach-ing content (whether Sheltered English orthe native language is used) and the ex-tent of content coverage. The pattern ofcourse offerings appears to relate to thenature of both district and site leadership,staff availability and willingness to taketraining, and the decentralized nature ofdecision making in the departmentalizedsecondary school.

The departmental system can be an un-yielding structure in which the schedule isset in advance and the school cannotreadily respond to sudden influxes of LEPstudents. The large numbers of these stu-dents entering high school is a relativelyrecent phenomenon in California, and theneeds of these students are outside thescope of many high school teachers edu-cated in the 1960s and 1970s. The highschools in our survey seem to be strug-gling with the challenge posed by servinglarge numbers of limited English profi-cient students of varying educationalbackgrounds through secondary schoolsthat lack the flexibility to meet these stu-dents' needs.

In the secondary schools surveyed, thesupply of content classes for LEP stu-dents is exceeded by the number of stu-dents who need the classes. As a result,some students take only science whileothers take only math or social studies.This limits their ability to graduate fromhigh school, enter college, or preparethemselves to become productive mem-bers of the work force.

17

15

Conclusion and Summary

Although this exploratory examination ofprograms and services for limited Englishproficient students at the secondary levelwas conducted in a single state, the find-ings from the telephone survey of twenty-seven secondary schools and visits tofive additional schools suggest severalcritical issues for the design and imple-mentation of programs for these studentsat both the state and national levels. Inlight of the serious concerns about limitedaccess to content area courses and themajor challenges confronting secondaryschools in California, concerted stateleadership and support are needed.

A major immigration wave during the pastdecade has created a rapidly increasingpopulation of English learners in second-ary schools in California. Each year,these students represent a proportionate-ly larger part of the secondary studentpopulation, and this trend is expected tocontinue. It appears that secondaryschools are aware, at least to some ex-tent, of the complex challenges presentedby this population and are actively de-signing new courses, developing pedago-gy, and implementing support services toaddress them. Yet, the findings also sug-gest major gaps in meeting the academicand related needs of these students, andthat schools need improved access to re-search, models, and resources in order todevelop effective strategies and pro-grams to educate them.

Innovative efforts to address the complexneeds of English learners were foundthroughout the state but, in all cases,these efforts faced severe problems inimplementation. Regardless of the lan-guage of instruction, fewer than one-fourth of the schools surveyed were ableto offer a full menu of core content cours-es to these students. Several factors con-tribute to this lack of access:

18

the diverse and complex needs of therapidly growing student population;

assessment practices which provide toolittle information to gauge academicneeds;

a critical shortage of qualified teacherswho are willing and/or able to teach stu-dents;

increasing separation of students learn-ing English from mainstream gradematesthrough the proliferation of ShelteredEnglish approaches without clear agree-ment on what these approaches entail,with little monitoring or evaluation, withostensibly inadequate training and sup-port for teachers, and with inadequatecurricular materials;

an absence of theoretical models toserve as the underpinning for effective,comprehensive secondary school pro-grams for students learning English as anon-native language;

difficulties in obtaining appropriate text-books and materials; and

rigidity in the departmentalized structureand schedule of secondary schools thatresults in a lack of comprehensive pro-gram planning for students.

In those schools most effectively re-sponding to these challenges, the follow-ing processes were apparent:

attempts to build a shared school-widevision which includes English learners;

a culturally supportive school climate;

ongoing training and staff support in-volving all teachers in the preparation forand planning of programs for studentslearning English; and

coordination and articulation betweenthe ESUBilingual Education departmentand other departments, and between dif-ferent grade levels.

16

Recommendations

Policy recommendations resulting fromthis survey focus on the state role in help-ing secondary schools meet the needs oftheir limited English proficient students.Four major recommendations flow fromthe findings:

The establishment of state-supported,locally-based networks to disseminate in-formation and allow educators to sharewhat they know about what works forthese students under different demo-graphic conditions.

Comprehensive staff developmentaimed at providing all teachers in second-ary schools throughout the state withtraining in second language acquisition.

An increase in the state's investment inclassroom resource materials for lan-guage minority students.

An initiative by the State Department ofEducation to bring practitioners and re-searchers together to advance the state-of-the-art of providing effective programsand services for students at the second-ary level. A strongly supported knowledgedevelopment effort is central to the abilityof schools to meet the needs of studentslearning English in secondary schools.

This exploratory study has raised manyquestions. Given the serious implicationsof the findings, additional research shouldbe undertaken, both in California and inother states, to determine how wide-spread these trends and patterns of limit-ed access may be. Outside of California,states can use the findings from thisstudy to stimulate discussion and to re-view their own programs, including ac-cess to content area instruction. Onlywhen the extent and nature of the chal-lenges are known, and programmatic ef-fectiveness under various conditions un-derstood, can the rights of all students toreceive a meaningful secondary educa-tion be ensured.

References

California Department of Education.(1987-1990). Annual language census.Sacramento, CA: Author.

California Department of Justice. (1990,April). Commission on Racial, Ethnic, Re-ligious and Minority Violence. Final re-port. Sacramento, CA: Author.

Edwards, H., Wesche, M., Krashen, S.,Clement, R., & Kruidenier, B. (1984).Second language acquisition throughsubject-matter learning: A study of shel-tered psychology classes at the Universi-ty of Ottawa. Canadian Modern LanguageReview, 41, 268-282.

1 9

liD/0131:KII.A92-2

About the Authors

Catherine Minicucci is an educationalconsultant based in Sacramento, Califor-nia. She served on the study team led oyBerman Weiler Associates of Berkeley fora recently completed study of programsfor LEP students in California. Currentlyshe is working on a study of school reform for the Office of Educational Re-search and Improvement. U.S. Depart-ment of Education.

Laurie Olsen is Executive Director ofCalifornia Tomorrow and served as co-di-rector for the study on which this publica-ton is based. She is the chatroerson forthe National Coalition of Advocates forStudents and has authored several stud-ies on immigrant students for CaliforniaTomorrow, including Crossing theSchoolhouse Border (1988) and Bridges(1989).

20