Supervisors as Policymakers: Sensemaking and Implementation of English Language Development Standards in One State

• In Event: Bridging Policy and Practice for Multilingual Learners Through English Language Development Standards Implementation Research

Abstract

Purpose. The WIDA 2020 ELD Standards Framework calls for shifts in teachers’ pedagogies with multilingual learners that will require coordinated efforts across levels of the education system (e.g., Author, 2022; Molle & Wilfrid, 2021). In bringing policy initiatives, such as ELD standards, to implementation in the education system, instructional leaders play a “critical intermediary role” (Mavrogordato, 2022, p. 336), for example, through revising curriculum and designing professional learning. However, the voices of instructional leaders have rarely been elevated in research. The purpose of this study was to investigate K-12 ESL/bilingual supervisors’ sensemaking and implementation of WIDA 2020.

Perspective. The study was grounded in complementary theoretical perspectives on policy implementation from education research broadly and language education research specifically. Perspectives from education research (e.g., Spillane, 2009) emphasize the sensemaking involved in actively constructing one’s understanding of what policies mean. Perspectives from language education (e.g., Menken & García, 2010) view educators as on-the-ground policymakers who “act on their agency to change the various…policies they must translate into practice” (p. 1). Together, these perspectives depart from “top-down” models of policy implementation by positioning local actors (e.g., instructional supervisors) as active sensemakers and agentive implementers of policy initiatives (in our study, ELD standards).

Methods. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 supervisors across one state that has implemented various iterations of the WIDA standards since 2005. Supervisors were purposefully sampled from districts that varied by community type, size, and percent English/multilingual learners. The interview protocol asked participants about the shifts they understood the standards to call for as well as what they perceived to be the opportunities and challenges of implementation. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive coding and deductive coding based on theoretical perspectives on policy implementation (e.g., codes such as “influence of accountability mechanisms”).

Results. Three overarching themes emerged. First, supervisors largely interpreted the standards through the frame of reference of traditional approaches to teaching multilingual learners, which led them to retrofit existing curricula and professional learning. Second, supervisors identified a lack of collaborative infrastructure at the district level as a challenge to reaching content area teachers; as a result, they concentrated implementation efforts on ESL teachers. Third, supervisors emphasized the need to articulate implementation efforts with other policy initiatives at district and state levels (e.g., district testing mandates, state bilingual code), which they characterized as giving accountability “teeth” to the standards.

Significance. While the literature on language policy implementation has largely focused on bilingual education policy (e.g., Menken & García, 2010), this study contributes to the emerging knowledge base on ELD standards that affect over 2 million multilingual learners across the US. Elevating the voices of instructional leaders in research can inform ongoing efforts to promote systemwide implementation of ELD standards and, ultimately, more equitable opportunities and outcomes for multilingual learners. Consistent with the AERA 2025 conference theme, this study highlights both the promises and challenges associated with “remedying longstanding inequalities through policy” (AERA, 2024, p. 2).

Authors

• Scott Grapin, University of Miami

• Eunae Kim, University of Miami