برچسب: learners

  • How California can transform math education for English learners

    How California can transform math education for English learners


    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    In California and across the country, English learners are too frequently an afterthought.

    Though they are one of the largest student groups — California has more than 1 million students who are learning English as a second language, and that number is growing — their academic performance has barely budged over the last two decades. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 4% of English learners are proficient in eighth grade math, compared with 29% of non-English learners. Furthermore, NAEP reading scores revealed that only 10% of fourth grade English learners are proficient in reading, compared to 37% of non-English learners in the same grade.

    There are many reasons for this. But one of the most important is also one of the most fundamental: The textbooks and other instructional materials used in classrooms every day are typically not written with English learners in mind. While these textbooks may be rigorous and aligned with state standards, they lack the cultural relevance and language support necessary for students who are learning English. Teachers know this to be true. A survey found that 82% of teachers believe their current materials either somewhat or not at all reflect the needed academic rigor for English learners.

    Fortunately, California has an opportunity to start making this right. Next year, our State Board of Education will release its first math adoption list of state-approved curricula since 2014 — recommending math instructional materials that state education leaders believe align with California’s revised math framework. While some California districts have already started or completed their selection process, many districts in the state will soon choose a new math curriculum from that list.

    There is a common misconception that mathematical concepts transcend linguistic differences, so the needs of English learners shouldn’t be a concern. However, the reality is that language is critical for math instruction — and so math instruction materials that incorporate language support can help all learners. If the state recommends materials that center on the needs of English learners — and districts ultimately purchase and adopt them — we can make significant progress toward making our math curriculum more accessible for all students.

    Curriculum adoption may feel technical and esoteric, but it is essential to promote equity — especially for English learners. High-quality instructional materials serve as a “floor” for instruction, providing teachers with the materials they need to connect with every student in their classroom. 

    Unfortunately, our classrooms — especially those serving English learners — too often fail to reach that floor. A recent report from the Center for Education Market Dynamics revealed that California districts with greater percentages of English learners are the least likely to have adopted a new math curriculum. Many of those districts are waiting for the state adoption list before moving forward. This means that the adoption — and the curricula ultimately selected by districts — will have a dramatic effect on the academic experience of English learners, in particular.

    How can we get this process right? While California provides a list of state-approved curricula, it does not review instructional materials for specific populations, including English learners. This means districts and counties must figure out which math curriculum is most supportive of English learners. State leaders should provide guidance and resources to county offices of education so that districts are well positioned to run their own adoption processes. To support these efforts, California created math criteria that feature guides for how curriculum should support language and English learners. Districts should then base their curriculum selection on clear, research-based criteria focused on meeting the needs of all learners.

    Many districts in California and across the country are facing fiscal challenges due to the expiration of federal Covid-relief (ESSER) funding, declining student enrollment and other factors. This is likely to reduce the resources districts can target to the needs of English learners and other marginalized groups. 

    But selection and adoption of instructional materials is likely already in district budgets — and so, by picking an inclusive curriculum, district leaders can make significant headway on equity without significant additional investment. After all, it will always be more resource-intensive and less effective to supplement or modify curriculum after the fact.

    Additionally, teachers currently spend their own money on supplemental materials to fill gaps in existing curricula, a trend that is both unsustainable and inequitable. By adopting inclusive materials and ensuring teachers are supported in implementing those materials, districts will reduce these additional costs and provide a more cohesive and effective learning experience for all students.

    We are proud to say that California’s math vision is strong and there are many possibilities in terms of changing the way instruction happens in the classroom. It’s time to ensure that districts act wisely in their curriculum adoption. 

    School districts with high English learner populations need to come together and demand better options for our students. We have a chance to set the tone for the rest of the nation in developing and adopting instructional materials that truly support all students.

    It is time to invest in adopting educational resources that reflect our state’s — and our country’s — wonderfully diverse student population. 

    •••

    Crystal Gonzales is the founder and executive director of the English Learners Success Forum. Martha Hernandez is the executive director of Californians Together.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Trump’s budget would abolish funding for English learners, adult ed, teacher recruitment

    Trump’s budget would abolish funding for English learners, adult ed, teacher recruitment


    A sixth-grade math teacher helps two students during a lesson about math and music.

    Credit: Allison Shelley / EDUimages

    Top Takeaways
    • The president dismissed many programs as outdated or “woke.”
    • Advocates for English learners argue that the cuts will reverse progress.
    • The initial budget will face resistance from Democrats and maybe some Republicans.

    President Donald Trump would maintain funding levels for students with disabilities and for Title I aid for low-income students while wiping out long-standing programs serving migrant children, teachers in training, college-bound students, English learners and adult learners  in the education budget for fiscal 2026.

    Trump’s “skinny budget,” which he released on Friday, would cut $12 billion or about 15% of K-12 and some higher education programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education. It contains sparse, sometimes dismissive, language explaining why he is eliminating programs and offers no details about plans to consolidate $6.5 billion in 18 unspecified programs into a single $2 billion grant program.

    “K-12 outcomes will improve as education returns to the states, which would make remedial education for adults less necessary,” according to the one-paragraph explanation for the full $729 million cut to adult education. 

    The budget summary justified eliminating funding for programs like Upward Bound and GEAR UP, which focus on increasing the college and career readiness of low-income students, as “a relic of the past when financial incentives were needed to motivate Institutions of Higher Education to engage with low-income students and increase access.”

    “I don’t think the budget request reflects a deep understanding of what the programs are and what they do. The language is designed to capture headlines, not hearts and minds,” said Reg Leichty, founding partner of Washington, D.C.-based Foresight Law + Policy, which advises education groups, including the Association of California School Administrators, on congressional education policies. 

    “(Trump) has eliminated programs that it’s taken decades to build,” said U.S. Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, a California Democrat serving the East Bay. “There’s been no analysis of what the financial assessment would mean to the communities served. You can always find more efficiencies, but just cutting everything is just mindless.”

    Only charter schools would receive more money — $60 million to bring the total federal spending on charter schools to $500 million.

    The U.S. Department of Education spent about $150 billion in fiscal 2024 on programs in states and school districts, of which California received $18.6 billion, according to the Pew Research Center.

    Trump’s initial budget is the first step in what will likely be a lengthy and contentious process in Congress before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

    “It’s not a budget reflective of the perspectives of many Republicans on Capitol Hill. We’ll see how they try to accommodate the administration,” said Leichty. “It’s a different Congress, it’s a different moment, but still, cuts of this scale and scope are hard to imagine how even the House (with a tiny Republican majority) would pass them.”

    The two largest federal K-12 programs — Title I grants of $18.4 billion and $15.5 billion for the Students with Disabilities Act — reach every school district nationwide and have bipartisan support, but Trump has proposed reshaping both programs as block grants administered by states with less oversight and more local control — actions requiring congressional approval.

    “With a budget that cuts the Department of Education by so much, we’re really pleased to see it does not cut funding for IDEA,” said Kuna Tavalin, senior policy and advocacy adviser for the Council for Exceptional Children, referring to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. “Of course, the devil is in the details.”

    The federal government funds programs that support students with disabilities from early childhood through 21 years old. Consolidation raises the specter that funding for some stages may be fungible, which “could potentially be really damaging,” Tavalin said.

    “This raises the hair on the back of my neck,” he said.

    Programs that Trump would abolish include:

    • TRIO organizations like Upward Bound and GEAR UP, $1.579 billion.
    • English language acquisition through Title III, $890 million.
    • Migrant education, $428 million
    • Teacher quality partnerships, $70 million
    • Federal work-study, $980 million
    • Preschool development grants, $315 million

    The budget proposal also calls for cutting $49 million from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. The office would shift the focus from enforcing Title IX and programs with goals of raising achievement for minority students to carrying out presidential executive orders and ending the office’s “ability to push DEI programs and promote radical transgender ideology.”

    The budget is silent on several significant programs, including Head Start, research funding through the Institute of Education Sciences, the Child Care and Development Block Grant, and the state assessment program.

    Reactions

    Title III

    This funding helps English learners and immigrant students learn to speak, read, and write English fluently, learn other subjects such as math and science, and meet graduation requirements. California received about $157 million in 2024-25 from Title III.

    Students who are not yet fluent in English when they begin school are entitled under federal law to get help to learn the language.

    According to the budget, “To end overreach from Washington and restore the rightful role of state oversight in education, the Budget proposes to eliminate the misnamed English Language Acquisition program, which actually deemphasizes English primacy by funding (non-profit organizations) and states to encourage bilingualism.”

    Advocates for English learners disputed the reasoning. 

     “The claim that Title III ‘deemphasizes English primacy’ ignores decades of research and legal precedent,” said Anya Hurwitz, executive director of SEAL (Sobrato Early Academic Language), a nonprofit organization. “Supporting bilingualism does not come at the expense of English proficiency — it enhances it.”

    “Without these funds, many schools will be forced to abandon evidence-based strategies that work and cut services,” said Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together. She said that without targeted support, more students may take longer to learn English and become “long-term English learners” who struggle to thrive in middle and high school.

    Migrant education

    The Migrant Education Program supports children of agricultural, dairy, lumber, and fishing workers who have moved during the past three years. California received $120 million for this program in 2024-25.

    Debra Duardo, superintendent of schools in Los Angeles County, wrote in an email that the loss of these funds will drastically reduce academic support and widen academic achievement gaps. “This decision would have devastating impacts on Los Angeles County schools, where we serve one of the nation’s largest populations of English learners and children from migrant families,” she said.

    Preschool Development Grants

    These programs help states improve their preschool and child care programs, for example, by conducting needs assessments, teacher training and quality improvement. California received Preschool Development Grants in the past, but is not currently a grantee. However, eliminating the grant program could impact California in the future, said Donna Sneeringer, vice president and chief strategy officer for Child Care Resource Center, a nonprofit organization based in Los Angeles that was a partner in the state’s last preschool development grant.

    “There’s still work to be done,” Sneeringer said. “California has made significant changes in our early learning landscape. With transitional kindergarten being available to all 4-year-olds, there are a lot of changes that our child care and early learning providers are having to go through.”

    In the budget proposal, the Trump administration called Preschool Development Grants “unproductive” and said they had been “weaponized by the Biden-Harris Administration [sic] to extend the federal reach and push DEI policies on to toddlers. 

    Adult education

    Unlike K-12 schools, adult education is heavily reliant on federal funding. Sharon Bonney, CEO of the Coalition on Adult Basic Education, said she found the proposed cuts “shocking” and fears the cuts would mean adult schools would rely on volunteers rather than trained teachers. She believes that this is a part of the Trump immigration agenda — 6 out of 10 adult education students are immigrants. 

    Adult schools offer career education or training, but much of their programming is aimed at helping immigrants assimilate and prepare for the citizenship test or learning English as a second language. 

    Teacher quality grants

    Federal funding for the Teacher Quality Partnership grant helps recruit and train teachers for high-needs schools and for hard-to-fill teaching positions.

    University, school district and nonprofit teacher preparation programs use grants from the $70 million fund to recruit and train teacher candidates for high-needs schools and hard-to-fill teaching positions, and sometimes to offer them stipends and other financial help. 

    “These abrupt, short-sighted cuts will directly disrupt critical teacher residency programs that were actively preparing new educators for high-need positions in urban and rural districts across the state,” said Marvin Lopez, executive director of the California Center on Teaching Careers. 

    The grants have been “weaponized to indoctrinate new teachers” in divisive ideologies, according to information attached to a letter from Russell T. Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, to Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. 

    “Cutting grants aimed at supporting and diversifying the teaching profession, at the same time that the nation’s student body is becoming increasingly more diverse and as many districts are struggling to recruit enough teachers, is senseless,” said Eric Duncan, director of P-12 policy at EdTrust West.





    Source link