Running Head: CAP PAPER IV: ELL RECLASSIFICATION

Cap Paper IV: Criteria for Reclassifying ELL Learners Sarah Schmidt de Carranza Minnesota State University, Mankato

EVALUATING CRITERIA FOR ELL RECLASSIFICATION Cap Paper IV: Evaluating Criteria for ELL Reclassification

Summary The article Evaluating Criteria For English Learner Reclassification: A Causal-Effects Approach Using A Binding-Score Regression Discontinuity Design With Instrumental Variables by Joseph P. Robinson seeks to understand the effect of transitioning from ELL classes to mainstream classes has on the language development of students. The article summarizes the existing research regarding reclassification of ELL students to R-FEP, or proficient, categories. The author maintains that there is an appropriate time and situation for reclassification and transition into principally mainstream classes. A difference that this article has in comparison with other research done about ELL reclassification is that this article looks to examine the effects of reclassification for ELL learners, where other research examines what is the cause of the reclassification. The author includes information from other studies in the literature review section of the paper, albeit a small body of research as there is less than a decade of data regarding the phenomena of ELL performances under NCLB. (Manna, 2011) Finally the article concludes with recommendations for plicy makers that ELL students be reclassified to R-FEP when they are intellectually and linguistically ready, and that reclassification may not always be the best option for a particular student. Critique and Implications The article is well researched and the study is well executed. In addition to the emphasis on the ELL reclassifications based on test scores, the authors also explain other barriers to

EVALUATING CRITERIA FOR ELL RECLASSIFICATION content that ELL students face in California, where the study took place. In California, ELL students can only take courses with teachers who hold an ELL or bilingual certification. If an

AP-History teacher does not hold that certification, the ELL student is prohibited from taking the course. This illustrates another variable that may have an effect on ELL students and should be studied further. Robinson (2011) also reiterated the importance of ensuring that ELL students are not forever kept in ELL classes when they do not require them, which was also the essence of Callahans (2005) study. When ELL students are denied access to age appropriate curriculum at a rigorous level, they do not make against as their mainstream counterparts do, which causes them to lag further behind. A particular area of strength of the article was the discussion of the studys findings. The author makes the limitations of the study very clear, and makes recommendations for further research and policy decisions. Robinson (2011) also includes a model for evaluating the effectiveness of reclassification that could be used in other states as well. An area of growth could be for the author to explain the findings in such a way so that they could be more easily understood by readers who lack a background in statistical analysis.

EVALUATING CRITERIA FOR ELL RECLASSIFICATION References Callahan, R. (2005). Tracking and High School English Learners: Limiting Opportunity to Learn. American Educational Research Journal. 42(2). Pp. 305-328 Keiffer, M.J., Lesaux, N., Rivera, M., & Francis D.J. (2009) Accomodations for English

Language Learners Taking Large Scale Assessments: A Meta-Analysis on Effectiveness and Validity. Review of Educational Research. (79)3. P. 1168-1201. Manna, P. (2011). Collision Course: Federal Education Policy Meets State and Local Realities. S.Q. Press. Washington, D.C. Robinson, J. P. (2011). Evaluating criteria for English learner reclassification: A causal-effects approach using a binding-score regression discontinuity design with instrumental variables. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 267-292. Solrzano, R.W. (2008) High Stakes Testing: Issues, Impliations, and Remedies for English Language Learners. Review of Educational Research. 78(2). P. 260-329