Ingargiola 1 Gaby Ingargiola ENG 555 Dr. Kayi-Aydar December 11, 2017 The Problem with Arizona’s ESL Immersion Only Model Every year, a multitude of reports are put out by numerous news outlets and data collecting agencies in which the 50 states are ranked based on their quality of education. Almost undoubtedly, Arizona can be found at the bottom of this list each year. While these reports are intended to research only the quality of education produced, not the state’s attitude toward education, there is a lot of information to gain about the state’s standpoint on education in general. In the past, Arizona’s Department of Education has been accused of taking the quick and easy approach to education. Based on experience, it appears the accusers claim that Arizona is less concerned with providing its learners with a valuable education, but rather one that just barely meets standards and gets students by. This easy approach can be seen especially in the state’s English as a Second Language (ESL), and English Language Learner (ELL) programs across the board. Since the late 2000’s Arizona has been following an immersion only model that does not require educators to have an ELL background, segregates ELL students from their native speaking peers, and denies them a culturally inclusive learning environment. A sizable portion of ELLs are young learners—meaning they will start their language journey in a K-12 classroom. Since the quality of education is already low, it makes providing ESL learners with the information they need even more difficult. Adding to the already demanding task, the state has seen a fall in ELL trained teachers resulting in ELL students being taught by people who are not formally educated on the specific techniques and methods used to Ingargiola 2 teach ESL students properly and successfully. According to the Arizona Auditor General, from 2008 to 2010, only 27% of schools with ELL programs “did not have qualified ELL teachers” and 25% (as a result) were unable to properly group students of similar proficiency levels (AZ Auditor General, 2011). Although this individual study highlighted those without an ESL or ELL discipline, there are other studies that show this issue goes beyond formal training and into the advantages of being bilingual in a state where 81% of ELLs are Hispanic (González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar, 2012). A group of University professors conducted a study of their own in which they surveyed ELL teachers about their own performance as it pertained to newly implemented immersion-only laws. The study’s findings showed that 95% of Hispanic, bilingual teachers, felt that they were well prepared to teach ELLs compared to the 64% preparedness felt by non-Hispanic, non-bilingual, teachers (González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar, 2012). Additionally, these teachers (despite their ethnicity or bilingual abilities agreed that regardless of preparedness, the main issue was that the new immersion only model was not given adequate time for growth or achievement. English for the Children, more commonly known as Proposition 203, is a plan of action that ultimately put into motion what is now known as the Structured English Immersion Model, or the SEI. Prior to the passing of Prop. 203 in late 2000, instructors were able to choose whether they would base their ESL class on immersion or non-immersion models; but once the proposition passed, the SEI was created and eventually implemented state-wide in 2007; even if teachers felt it was not an appropriate fit for their students. ASU professor Eugene Garcia found in a self-conducted study that the main problem with the SEI is that it is “based on an assumption that ELLs can achieve proficiency in English very quickly (usually within a year) in an Englishonly instructional environment” (Garcia, 2012). Unfortunately, while it isn’t entirely impossible Ingargiola 3 for an ELL to progress to a level of proficiency that matches their grade level, many teachers find that allotting only a year’s time for such proficiency isn’t realistic for students and teachers alike, causing the probability of reaching the desired level of proficiency slim to none. Research has shown that learning a second or foreign language is easier to accomplish at younger ages. So, even though many ESL students start in an ELL program in elementary school, this isn’t always the case, and depending on the student’s skill, cognitive abilities, and motivation, learning English could very well take more than the ideal one year that the SEI allows for. González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar found that 90% teachers in their study, many of whom had been teaching for over five years, believed that English proficiency took more than a year (in fact, at least three years) to achieve (González Canché, Mall, and RiosAguilar, 2012). What’s more concerning about the foundation of the SEI model is that impact and effectiveness it provides is not yet concrete. The Arizona Auditor General’s 2010 study concluded that a whopping “63% [of schools] had not fully implemented all SEI requirements” (AZ Auditor General, 2011). Another reason the impact of the SEI is unknown is because students can test out of their ELL status just after a year which limits the data to students who are actively labeled ELL status. The Arizona English Language Learner Assessment (AZELLA) is not only used to determine proficiency level, but it is the only way a student can relieve themselves of their ELL status. While it is important that a student can be moved into mainstream classes, the AZELLA is faulty in that it only measures proficiency based on the student’s current grade level, instead of how the student has improved their overall English speaking ability and comprehension. In addition to the SEI, a similar, yet more intense model was designed to be used in unison with the SEI. The 4-Hour Block is a model that requires ELLs to undergo 4 hours of Ingargiola 4 immersed English Language Development a day. Just like with the SEI, the 4-Hour Block was created with the belief that ELLs would be able to rapidly become proficient in the English language within the first year of their ELL status. As draining as the 4-Hour Block is on students, research showed that it is also difficult for teachers to enforce as 45% of schools were completely disregarding it (AZ Auditor General). One district (studied by González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar) revealed that 60% of its teachers believed that only 50%, or less, of their ELL students were meeting grade level standards (González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar, 2012). The real issue with the 4-Hour Block is that it constrains ELLs opportunity to learn by removing them from the classroom completely; making it that much harder for instructors to provide them with the language development that they need in addition to state required content knowledge in other subject areas. As a result, this left 87% of teachers with varrying levels of concern about the probability of student success (González Canché, Mall, and Rios-Aguilar). Moreover, this sequestering of ELLs kept them from the necessary “interact[ion] with those beyond their own level of proficiency”, and from “participating in language and cognitive activities that involve academic content” (Garcia, 2012). More simply put, like the SEI, the 4Hour Block holds ELLs back from opportunities that are vital to their language development, comprehension, and use. The last, and perhaps the most damaging, issue related to Arizona’s immersion only approach is that it does not allow for students to bring their own culture into their education. Arizona has a huge Hispanic population and because Hispanic students also make up a vast majority of the student population it is important that they feel their cultural identity is respected. The Tucson Unified School District created the Mexican-American Studies Program in 1998 to provide students of Mexican heritage with an opportunity to learn in an environment where their Ingargiola 5 culture was both highlighted and explored. The importance of cultural identity may not be apparent to everyone, but when the district threatened to end the program, students who took part in it were furious. In 2012, roughly 175 students participated in a district wide walk-out in support of Mexican-American studies (Huicochea, 2012). This walk-out was started to demonstrate the students’ desire for their education to be inclusive of their culture; something that was not typically considered until the Mexican-American Studies Program was created. Prior to this protest, 120 students from Cholla High school staged a walk-out of their own when it was decided that a Mexican-American Studies course would no longer be offered at the school (Huicochea, 2012). Rather than hearing the students out and trying to understand what impact this program had on them, the school district chose to punish those who participated in the walkout and when the program was ended, made their students feel unwanted and irrelevant. Although the ending of the program was eventually deemed unconstitutional, the Tucson Unified School District was never able to repair the relationship it had tarnished with its students of Mexican-American descent. Without a doubt, there are many ways to go about teaching from methods, approaches, and techniques; to personal style and beliefs surrounding education. One thing that can be agreed upon, however, is that whatever approach is taken, it is important to reflect and evaluate what is working and what isn’t; no matter what type of class or students one is teaching. Educating ELLs is by no means a new concept, but it is one that has yet to be mastered. Although Arizona has chosen to follow immersion only methods, its low rank in education quality proves that there are some things that need to be improved and reworked in order to promote the necessary teacher and student satisfactory and accomplishment. Ingargiola 6 References Garcia, Eugene. (2012, November 30). The Education of English Language Learners in Arizona: A History of Underachievement. Retrieved December 6, 2017 from Teachers College Record Volume 114 Number 9. http://www.tcrecord.org.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/librar González Canché, Manuel, Mall, Luis, and Rios-Aguilar, Cecilia. A Study of Arizona’s Teachers of English Language Learners. Retrieved December 9, 2017 from Teachers College Record Volume 114 Number 9. http://www.tcrecord.org.ezproxy3.library.arizona.edu/library Huicochea, A. (2012, January 24). Students Walk out in Ethnic-studies Protest. Retrieved December 10, 2017 from http://tucson.com/news/local/education/precollegiate/studentswalk-out-in-ethnic-studies-protest/article_a462c23c-0eb7-57b8-9ad1-486d634371ef.html (2011, July 07). Arizona English Language Learner Program. Retrieved December 8, 2017, from https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/ELL_Highlights.pdf
