Tinkering Toward Equity: Secondary English Learners' Opportunity to Learn in Two Metropolitan School Districts

• In Event: Examining Opportunity to Learn for Multilingual Students

Abstract

Objective: This paper examines how schools in two large metropolitan districts in California implemented English Language Development (ELD) course placement policies for secondary students identified as English learners (ELs), and the extent to which implementation decisions enabled and/or constrained course access. We focus on newcomers (i.e., ELs enrolled in US schools for less than one year) and long-term ELs (i.e., students identified as ELs for more than five years or LTELS), given that the majority of ELs at the secondary level fall into one of these groups.

Theoretical Frameworks: We took an equity-based ecological approach for policy implementation that addresses social, economic, and school-based academic factors (Bishop & Noguera, 2019; Bronfenbrenner, 1979/1986). This approach allowed us to understand how districts and schools, as systems, facilitated or hindered ELs’ opportunities to learn. We asked: How did the ecological context inform how district and school leaders implemented course placement policy for newcomers and LTELs at the secondary level? We operationalized our approach using Honig’s (2006) policy implementation framework to understand how and why interactions among policy, people, and places shaped implementation.

Data and Methods: Data sources included semi-structured interviews (N=94) with district officials as well as leaders and teachers from 17 schools purposively selected to vary by EL population size, diversity, and performance. Data were coded thematically with a policy, people, and places frame, and a team-based codebook was generated and applied. Initial codes included factors shaping ELD course placement policy implementation, such as data systems and monitoring, staffing, leadership, and demographics. Additional codes captured national, state, and local political and economic conditions.

Results: With respect to policies, whereas one district created systems and tools to hold schools accountable for course placement, the other district emphasized school-based autonomy and offered little oversight or support. Yet in both districts, other state policies (e.g., high school graduation requirements) sometimes took precedence over ELD course placement. In terms of place, the demographic context differed between districts and schools, where differences in the population of newcomers (e.g., attendance, home language, prior schooling) and LTELs (e.g., learning needs) created diverse contexts of reception that necessitated leaders’ use of an array of course placement strategies. Further, budgetary constraints required leaders to be nimble in their use of resources, which in some schools meant that few, if any, ELD courses were offered. Regarding people, one district employed district coaches and support staff to facilitate implementation, while the other district relied on schools to fund specialized positions. These systemic differences resulted in varying approaches to course placement policy across schools, which served to either facilitate or hinder secondary ELs’ access to ELD.

Significance: Despite having similar goals, the districts’ ecological contexts resulted in differences in implementation, compliance, and coherence across schools. Given how these differences shaped secondary ELs’ opportunities to learn, our findings indicate the need for district and school leaders to consider the broader ecology as they work to implement equity-minded policies.

Authors

• Magaly Lavadenz, Loyola Marymount University

• Megan Hopkins, University of California - San Diego

• Marco A Murillo, Santa Clara University

• Tara Vahdani, University of California - San Diego