No Child Left Behind Ell's Argument Analysis

1480 Words3 Pages

All four of these major flaws in the system combine to create an incredibly unfair atmosphere for English language learners in public schools. Data suggests that English learning students produce scores “20-40 percentage points below other students on statewide assessments,” (Menken). It is clear that the design of standardized tests are biased toward English speakers. Thus, as a result of the No Child Left Behind act, ELL’s are left behind significantly more than English speaking students strictly as a result of English comprehension. From these flaws and biases, Kate Menken argues that standardized tests are in fact a language policy issue. Menken claims that English literacy has become an important gate-keeper in immigration. She refers to Leibowitz’s words to support her argument: “English literacy tests and other statutory sanctions in favor of English were originally formulated as an indirect but effective means of …show more content…

Standardized tests are changed each year so that the questions are different, and so changing the complexity of the language on the test can be an easy change that takes place in just one year. Language simplification tested for students in grade 8 resulted in higher scores for ESL students, (Phelps). Simply changing the words used on the tests can help to fix a problem that has caused serious problems in the education field for years. Also, in order to not inflate the testing scale for those students who would do better with simplification, the language simplification could be a policy strictly implemented into the tests that could be made specifically for each type of ESL student. Considering that language is not a truly tested part of the test, it would seem fit that the ability to comprehend questions is made fair for all students, (LeChapelle). Thus, language simplification is a simple, non-intrusive solution to a large problem for LEP students in standardized

Open Document