Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

In Sum
Following a swift decline in ELL enrollments between
SY2003 and SY2005, enrollments between
ST2006 and SY2009 steadily increased. This
growth took place in the face of declines of the
overall enrollment of BPS and of English proficient
students.
Changes in the characteristics of LEP students show
that the most salient have been in distribution of
English proficiency in the population, with a decline
in students at the lower proficiency levels and an
increase at the higher levels of MEPA. This may
indicate a decrease in the proportion of entry-level
students (as a result of decreased immigration in
the latter part of the decade). This observation is
supported by the finding in the slight decrease of
mobility in this population, also pointing to more
stability.
Finally, significant differences between LEP and
EP students were found. LEP students tended to
have a significantly higher proportion of males,
of low-income students, and of mobile students
and slightly lower proportions of student with
disabilities. Lower income and higher mobility are
variables that have been shown to have significant
negative relationship to student achievement.
1 The nSOL-EP population is made up primarily of
children of long-term first generation immigrants
and students who are first generation immigrants
themselves but who immigrated when very young.
The decline in this population is remarkable and
likely due to the movement of these more established
populations out of the city and/or the enrollment of
these children in charter and parochial schools.
2 A LEP student becomes eligible to be re-designated
as a FLEP when s/he scores at Level 4 or 5 on
MEPA. Though districts may use their own discretion
in this determination, MDESE guidance suggests
using student’s performance on MCAS, district
assessments, teachers’ recommendations, and other
information about the student’s academic performance.
See MDESE (2009b).
3 Of the 1,627 LEP students in SY2006 who became
FLEP students by SY2009, 56% were native speakers
of Spanish, 13.7% of Chinese languages, 7.9%
of Haitian Creole, 7.6% of Vietnamese, 4.1% of
Cape Verdean Creole, 2.4% of Portuguese, 1.3% of
Somali, and 7.1% of other languages. Eighty-seven
percent of the students who became FLEPs in this
period were in ELL programs.
4 Between SY2005 and SY2006, Tung et al. show
a slightly lower rise in enrollment (to 9,726 LEP
students) than data obtained for this study (10.405
LEP students).
5 The source for SY2011 data is MDESE (n.d. d).
6 For reviews of this literature see Rothstein (2004).
7 Country of origin is not included in this study
because, although SIMS collects data on immigrants’
country of origin, it only collects this data for students
who meet the federal definition of immigrants:
a student who was not born in any U.S. state (including
Puerto Rico as a state) and who must not have
completed three full academic years of school in any
state. Thus, for the purposes of this study, country
of origin as collected by SIMS was not a meaningful
variable.
8 The group showing the most stability was former
LEP students (FLEPs), among whom the proportion
of mobile students was only 2.5%. See Appendix 2.
9 Effect size is the measure of the strength of the relationship
between two variables.
Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools 17