Examining Long-Term English Learners' (LTELs') Academic English Language Skills in the Pre-LTEL Period

• In Event: Reassessing the Long-Term English Learner: Theorizing and Conceptualizing Multilingual Learners in Research, Policy, and Practice

Abstract

A particular sub-group of English learner (EL) students that deserves attention is long-term English learners (LTELs) who stay as ELs for more than five years (Every Student Succeeds Act [ESSA], 2015; Linquanti & Cook, 2015; U.S. Department of Education, 2016). Prior research shows LTELs’ underperformance than their EL peers (Flores, Batalova, & Fix, 2012; Olsen, 2010; Shin, 2020) and a range of contributing factors to becoming LTELs, including inappropriate programs, unreasonable exit policies, limited opportunities to learn, etc. (Brooks, 2018; Flores et al., 2015; Kibler et al., 2018; Menken et al., 2012; Olsen, 2010; Thompson, 2015). While it is essential to evaluate external and systematic factors attributable to ELs’ becoming LTELs, it is also crucial to understand LTELs’ prior academic English language skills (before their becoming LTELs) compared to those of ELs who are reclassified within five years (on-track ELs). This study examines English language knowledge and skills that appear to be more challenging for LTELs than for on-track ELs. This study asks the following research question: 1) To what extent do LTELs demonstrate different overall-, domain- and task-level performances from on-track ELs? 2) What language skills are related to the likelihood of ELs becoming LTELs? We use a longitudinal dataset from five states administering a common English language proficiency assessment (ELPA21) and follow students from 2015-16 until 2019-20. The ELP assessment measures students’ English language performance in four domains: Reading, Writing, Listening, and Speaking. Each domain consists of tasks that reflect English as it is used in the context of the students’ school, classroom, and life experience. We use descriptive analysis and logistic regression to compare overall-, domain- and task-level performance between LTELs and on-track ELs. As preliminary analyses, we ran descriptive statistics to examine potential LTELs and non-LTELs in terms of their performance in the annual ELPA21 summative assessments. Not surprisingly, LTELs achieved significantly lower scale scores and performance levels than non-LTELs in all the four domains and the grade levels. The gap was smallest in listening, although it was still a whole one performance level difference throughout the three grade levels (from Grades 2 through 4). The difference between the two groups was even more prominent in the other three domains, and the most significant gap was observed in reading. Likewise, LTELs’ mean performance in both reading and writing did not reach the intermediate level (Level 3) until Grade 4, whereas the students reached Level 3 or beyond in the oral skills. The planned logistic analysis will shed more light on more specific language skills (task-type-level skills) where LTELs lag behind non-LTELs. More specifically, the findings will inform us of specific domains and task types that are particularly challenging for LTELs. This will reveal how differently or similarly LTELs develop their language skills compared to non-LTELs, while also identifying concrete language skills that this group of students find especially difficult. This information will help us diagnose ELs who are likely to become LTELs so that appropriate supports and interventions can be provided.

Authors

• Nami Shin, University of California - Los Angeles

• Mark Hansen, University of California - Los Angeles