[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-586023-105":59,"doc-detail-586023-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","english-learners-access-to-core-content-august-2024","ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACCESS TO CORE CONTENT - AUGUST 2024","","Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s Lau v. Nichols (1974) ruling, students classified as English Learners (ELs) still encounter intersecting barriers to accessing grade-level curriculum. This brief uses statewide data from Oregon (2013/14–2018/19) and Michigan (2011/12–2014/15) to examine the prevalence of exclusionary tracking in high school. It analyzes predictors of EL course enrollment and whether English language development (ELD) participation crowds out content course schedules.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/english-learners-access-to-core-content-august-2024/586023/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/english-learners-access-to-core-content-august-2024/586023.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Jordan Avery","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":19},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What problem does the brief address regarding English Learner students?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It examines exclusionary tracking that limits EL students’ enrollment in grade-level content courses, undermining the equitable access asserted by Lau v. Nichols.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Which states and time periods does the analysis use?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The brief uses statewide data from Oregon (2013/14–2018/19) and Michigan (2011/12–2014/15).",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Do ELD classes explain exclusion from core content courses?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Enrollment in ELD courses does not explain the overall prevalence of exclusion from core courses in either state. However, taking more than one ELD period may crowd out access for students with beginning English proficiency.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},586023,1792899458,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":19,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":14,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":24,"preview_page_count":4},1099523882367,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","National Research & Development Center to Improve  \nEDUCATION FOR SECONDARY ENGLISH LEARNERS  \nAUGUST 2024  \nENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACCESS TO  \nCORE CONTENT  \nACADEMIC COURSE ENROLLMENT IN HIGH SCHOOL  \nExploring English Learner Students’ Access to Content  \nDespite the U. S. Supreme Court’s Lau v. Nichols (1974) ruling 50 years ago, students classified as English Learners (EL students) still face multiple and intersecting challenges to their opportunity to learn. One example is exclusionary tracking in which EL students are less likely to be enrolled in content courses than students who have exited EL status (former EL students) and those who were never EL-classified (never EL students) .  \nEL exclusionary tracking potentially undermines one of EL students’ core rights under Lauv. Nichols , which asserts that EL students have the right to equitable, grade-level curricular content.  \nUsing statewide data from Oregon (2013/14–2018/19) and Michigan (2011/12–2014/15), this brief explores the prevalence of EL students’ exclusionary tracking in high school, compared to former and never ELs . The brief also examines the factors that were associated with EL students’ course enrollment and whether English language development (ELD) classes crowded out EL students’schedules . Because the data are not current, they do not necessarily represent patterns in more recent years .  \nPercentages of EL, Former EL, and Never EL Students Enrolled in Content Courses  \n\n|  |\n| --- |\n| \u003Cbr>Oregon Michigan |\n| \u003Cbr>ELA\u003Cbr>Math\u003Cbr>Science Social Studies All Core\u003Cbr>Electives\u003Cbr>ELA\u003Cbr>Math\u003Cbr>Science Social Studies All Core\u003Cbr>Electives |\n\nData: Oregon Department of Education, 2013/14–2018/19, and Michigan Department of Education, 2011/12–2014/15. Note: All Core = enrolled in ELA, math, science, and social studies.  \nEL-classified students experienced exclusionary tracking in both Oregon and Michigan  \nOver the period examined, EL students experienced exclusionary tracking in both Oregon and Michigan, meaning they had lower rates of content enrollment compared to former and never EL students. In Oregon, 55% of EL students were in all core courses (English language arts [ELA], math, science, and social studies), compared to 69% of former EL students and 67% of never EL students. EL students in Oregon experienced exclusionary tracking across all subject areas, with the largest enrollment gaps in ELA (10% less likely to be enrolled than never EL students), social studies, and science. In Michigan, EL exclusionary tracking was less prevalent. Sixty-six percent of EL students were enrolled in all core courses, compared to 71% of former and never EL students. Across content subject areas, gaps were smaller than those in Oregon and were primarily in ELA. EL students in Michigan were 4% less likely to be enrolled in ELA than former and never EL students.  \nDifferences in exclusionary tracking between Oregon and Michigan may have been due to structural, organizational, and demographic differences between the two states. For example, EL students in Oregon were more likely to take standalone ELD classes than their Michigan peers, leading to fewer periods available for content courses. In addition, EL students in Oregon were more likely to be economically disadvantaged (81%) and Latino/a (67%)—groups that face inequitable core content access irrespective of EL status—than their counterparts in Michigan (63% and 44%, respectively). In both states, exclusionary tracking decreased year-by-year as EL students’ content enrollment improved.  \nThese analyses were conducted by Dr. Ilana Umansky (University of Oregon [UO]), Dr. Nami Shin (ATLAS/University of Kansas), Dr. Karen D. Thompson (Oregon State University [OSU]), Janette Avelar (UO), and Jaclyn Bovee (OSU) . The authors thank the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) and the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) for providing the data used in this analysis. This research was supported by the Institute of Education Scien","cbCainSauTqbvj9j","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainSauTqbvj9j","pdf",205002,"English","# Background and research purpose\n## Exclusionary tracking and Lau v. Nichols\n# Statewide data and study approach\n## Oregon and Michigan data periods\n## Outcomes: content course enrollment\n# Findings on enrollment gaps\n## Oregon: larger subject-area gaps\n## Michigan: smaller gaps primarily in ELA\n# Factors associated with exclusionary tracking\n## Structural, organizational, and demographic predictors\n## Role of ELD enrollment\n# Predicted enrollment patterns\n## Predicted probability models across content areas and subgroups","[{\"question\":\"What problem does the brief address regarding English Learner students?\",\"answer\":\"It examines exclusionary tracking that limits EL students’ enrollment in grade-level content courses, undermining the equitable access asserted by Lau v. Nichols.\"},{\"question\":\"Which states and time periods does the analysis use?\",\"answer\":\"The brief uses statewide data from Oregon (2013/14–2018/19) and Michigan (2011/12–2014/15).\"},{\"question\":\"Do ELD classes explain exclusion from core content courses?\",\"answer\":\"Enrollment in ELD courses does not explain the overall prevalence of exclusion from core courses in either state. However, taking more than one ELD period may crowd out access for students with beginning English proficiency.\"}]","ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACCESS TO CORE CONTENT - AUGUST 2024 | PDF",1792056634]