Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

student achievement (Rumberger, 1995; Rumberger
& Palardy, 2005; Rumberger& Thomas, 2000). Finally,
research on achievement among ELL students
(Wang et al., 2007) has found that special education
status is also significant. This variable is sometimes
difficult to interpret as a result of the overrepresentation
of ELL students in special education referrals
(Hosp & Reschly, 2004), as was discussed in Chapter
III.
School-level factors (described in Chapter III) are also
related to the academic achievement of students.
For example, school size has been found to have a
significant effect on student achievement and the
likelihood of dropping out (Lee & Bryk, 1989; Lee
& Smith, 1999; Rumberger & Palardy, 2005; Wang
et al., 2007; Werblow & Duesbery, 2009). The percentage
of students who are of low income (Braun
et al., 2006; Hao & Bonstead-Bruns, 1998; Lee &
Smith, 1999; Werblow & Duesbery, 2009), percentage
of students who are LEP (Werblow & Duesbery,
2009), and percentage of students whose families
move within a school year (Rumberger & Palardy,
2005; Rumberger& Thomas, 2000) have also been
linked to the individual performance of students on
achievement tests. Another key school-level variable
in educational research is school quality, which
is measured in various ways. Most common are the
percentage of teachers who are highly qualified and
the percentage of teachers who are licensed in their
subject (Braun et al., 2006; Munoz & Chang, 2008;
Rumberger & Palardy, 2005; Rumberger& Thomas,
2000). In all of these studies higher school quality is
associated with improved educational outcomes.
In this study we use MCAS as it is traditionally used:
to compare results across time, populations, and
programs. In addition, we cross-tabulate MCAS
outcomes and MEPA performance in order to assess
the performance of students in schools and in
programs and to compare the outcomes of different
sub-groups of ELLs. In these comparisons we use
only the MCAS outcomes of students at MEPA
performance Levels 4 and 5 since only for these
students do we have some confidence that the
MCAS is measuring knowledge and understanding
of content and not just English proficiency.
In assessing the differences in outcomes between
programs and schools we must introduce a caveat:
that this study has not permitted an assessment
of the characteristics of the programs themselves
(or in evaluation terms, the “treatment” to which
students are exposed). Although the accompanying
study, Learning from Consistently High Performing
and Improving Schools for English Language
Learners in Boston Public Schools, sheds
some light on this for four programs, we are not
aware of the specific practices that are taking place
in most programs and schools as we review the
outcomes of their students. In other words we are
not certain that schools are appropriately identifying
the kind of instruction they are conducting (e.g.,
TBE vs. another model) or, given this and the kind
of data we have available, that we can determine
distinct categories of programs. According to the
literature, this is a common problem because of the
variety of ways in which individual districts, schools,
and, ultimately teachers, interpret the meaning of
“bilingual,” of “SEI,” of “two-way,” and of “TBE”
programs and the wide variety of experience and
skill that teachers bring to the implementation of
it in the classroom. Nevertheless, it does represent
a problem to those trying to assess the characteristics
and quality of programs and the outcomes of
students in them (Lindholm-Leary & Borsato, 2006,
p. 201) and ours is no exception.
A How Do MCAS Pass Rates of
English Language Learners
Compare with Those of English
Proficient Students? How Have
the MCAS Outcomes of English
Language Learners Changed
through Time?
There is substantial evidence that between SY2006
and SY2009 LEP students made strong gains in
academic achievement as measured by the MCAS.
Comparing students’ performance in SY2009 to
performance in SY2006, we found that ELA, Math,
and Science pass rates rose at every grade level
without exception and the gaps in MCAS scores between
LEP students and EP students declined, also
across grades and subjects without exception. Yet,
in spite of this advance, the pass rates remained
very low and LEP student pass rates for all subjects
were the lowest of all groups considered here. We
first present the traditional view of scores for LEP
students: in the aggregate. However, as discussed
later in this section, when LEP students are disaggregated
by MEPA performance level, we find that
LEP students at the highest levels of English proficiency
tended to outscore their EP peers.
Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools 65