Set Apart or Set Behind? How School Administrators Mediate the (Dis)Advantages of Linguistic Segregation

• In Event: A New Language for Segregation: Responding to and (Re)Producing the Isolation of English Learners

Abstract

Objective
Research suggests that the advantages and disadvantages of linguistic segregation are shaped by two layers. The first is the degree of segregation between ELs and non-ELs, whether between or within schools. Linguistic segregation allows schools to funnel specialized resources to ELs, although it limits ELs’ exposure to English (Suarez-Orozco, Suarez-Orozco, & Todorova, 2008). The second layer is the conditions for learning offered to ELs in segregated spaces. Ellen et al. (2002) found that when ELs are isolated in schools where the non-EL population is high performing and middle-income, they may benefit from segregation, while ELs concentrated in high-poverty and low-performing schools may suffer. Their work suggests that the degree of segregation between ELs and non-ELs cannot alone account for the consequences of linguistic segregation, but that we must also consider how educational opportunity varies between one isolated EL program and another.
In order to point to where interventions can be introduced to minimize the harms of linguistic segregation, I examine which actors and conditions shape ELs’ 1) degree of isolation and 2) conditions for learning in segregated classrooms.

Theoretical Framework
Neo-institutional theories of policy implementation propose that those in charge of enacting mandates for ELs have significant discretion (Lipsky, 1980; Menken & García, 2010). Spillane (2006) refers to individuals’ reinterpretation and reapplication of regulations as “interactive policymaking” (p. 5). The central role of school actors in the implementation process means that an understanding of their behavior and what shapes it is a prerequisite to understanding policy effects (Hamann & Rosen, 2011).

Methods & Data
I conducted an ethnographic case study of a public middle school where Bengali and Latino ELs were physically isolated in separate and officially identical bilingual programs. I analyzed more than 600 hours of observation and 73 semi-structured interviews with students, teachers, administrators, and parents through several iterative rounds of inductive and deductive coding (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). Within-case comparison captured variation between the Bangla- and Spanish- bilingual programs (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Results
I focus on the role of school administrators in how ELs 1) were placed into segregated classrooms rather than more integrated bilingual programs offered by the district and 2) experienced disparate conditions for learning in the Bangla- and Spanish- language classrooms.
I argue that the degree of segregation between ELs and non-ELs reflected how the school administrators were constrained by district policy and EL population size. The school administrators reluctantly maintained programs that segregated students and made efforts at integration, such as using Title III monies to fund schoolwide social activities. In contrast, the administration had great influence over ELs’ educational opportunities. Administrative decisions about scheduling, program design, and teacher assignment led to unequal conditions for learning in the Bangla- and Spanish- bilingual programs.

Significance
While school leaders can mitigate the disadvantages of linguistic segregation by ensuring that isolated classrooms provide equitable educational opportunities, the harms of linguistic segregation that come from the separation of ELs and non-ELs are better addressed at the district level where policies about program design are formed.

Author

• Rachel Garver, Montclair State University