Standards, Assessments, and Accountability for the Improvement of Learning Outcomes of English Language Learners

• In Event: English Language Learner Policy Implementation at the State and Local Levels: The National Evaluation of Title III

Abstract

In 2001, Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), changed the accountability landscape for English language learners (ELLs). For the first time, federal law required states to develop English language proficiency (ELP) standards, to adopt valid and aligned ELP assessments, and to measure ELLs’ progress toward and attainment of English proficiency. State ELP standards must define expectations for academic ELP in reading, writing, speaking and listening in kindergarten through grade 12, and provide the basis for curriculum, instruction and assessment to support ELLs’ acquisition of academic English proficiency and attainment of the academic content standards. Likewise, the ELP assessment requirement mandated that states adopt a test that would measure individual growth, as well as the growth of the EL subgroup, and that it explicitly addresses aspects of language proficiency thought to influence student attainment of academic content knowledge and skills (Winter 2011).
Furthermore, Title III requires states to establish accountability systems, whereby states must define a set of three performance goals, known as annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs)—each of which focuses on a particular ELL outcome—and then hold districts accountable for meeting these performance goals every year. Title III districts that do not meet their AMAOs for either two or four consecutive years are subject to state actions and support outlined in the law.
This paper details the processes states have used to develop and implement ELP standards and assessments, to ensure the alignment or linkages between their ELP standards and content standards, and to ensure the alignment of their state ELP test with their state ELP standards. Furthermore, it explores the ways in which states and districts have implemented Title III accountability provisions, including the ways states have set their AMAO performance goals, how states and districts are faring with respect to meeting those AMAOs and the ways states and districts use AMAOs to promote improvement in educational services for ELLs.
This paper draws largely on data collected from interviews in 2009 with state officials who had primary responsibility for Title III. These interviews generated national data on the ways in which states are implementing ELP standards, assessing ELL students, setting AMAOs, holding districts accountable for AMAOs, monitoring Title III implementation and providing support to Title III districts. On many topics, these interviews provided state level longitudinal data to build on the two waves (2004 and 2006) of Title III data collection conducted for the Study of State Implementation of NCLB (SSI NCLB) (Le Floch et al. 2007). In addition, this paper draws on data collected from a survey of Title III districts administered by the study, which included inquiries into how local districts use state ELP standards (e.g., for curriculum development) and how they respond to Title III accountability designations.
Analyses and results for this symposium are complete but results are embargoed by the US Department of Education until the public release of the study’s final report which is expected winter 2011-12.

Authors

• Courtney Tanenbaum, American Institutes for Research

• Andrea Boyle, American Institutes for Research