502 verbs spanish pdf free download

Search inside document. Documents Similar To Words. Shashi Kant Singh. Edison Flores. Competitive Enterprise Institute. Kristine J McAdams Lancaster. Saadiah Md Noor. Alex Raynor. Abid Yusuf. Michael Davenport. Sharul Hakimi. Gurpartap Singh. John Phillpotts. Jose Lopez. Building bridges between refugee parents and schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12 4 , Ramirez, A. Dismay and disappointment: Parental involvement of Latino immigrant parents.

The Urban Review, 35 2 , Ransford-Kaldon, C. Roberts, T. Home storybook reading in primary or secondary language with preschool children: Evidence of equal effectiveness for second-language vocabulary acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 43 2 , Rogoff, B. The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Rolstad, K. The big picture: A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English language learners.

Educational Policy, 19 4 , Rossell, C. The educational effectiveness of bilingual education. Research in the Teaching of English, 30 1 , Ryoo, K. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Peer-assisted learning strategies for English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children , 71 3 , Saunders, W.

The Elementary School Journal , 99 4 , Research to guide English Language Development instruction. Dolson and L. Burnham-Massey Eds. Oral language. Is a separate block of time for oral English language development in programs for English learners needed?

The Elementary School Journal, 2 , English language development: Guidelines for instruction. American Educator , Schallert, D.

Center for the Study of Reading Technical Report, Champaign: University of Illinois. Scientific Learning Corporation. Improved language skills by children with low reading performance who used FastForWord language. MAPS for Learning , 3 1 , Shanahan, T.

Effective literacy teaching for English-language learners. Shim, J. Involving the parents of English language learners in a rural area: Focus on the dynamics of teacher-parent interactions. Rural Educator, 34 3 , Sibley, E. Family educational involvement and child achievement in early elementary school for American-born and immigrant families.

Psychology in the Schools, 51 8 , Silva, K. Child Development , 81 3 , Silverman, R. The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in prekindergarten through second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2 , Slavin, R. A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction for English language learners.

Review of Educational Research, 75 2 , Sobrato Family Foundation. Community Impact. Solari, E. Early comprehension instruction for Spanish-speaking English language learners: Teaching text-level reading skills while maintaining effects on word-level skills. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23 4 , Journal of Literacy Research , 48 1. Souto-Manning, M. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34 2 , Sullivan, A.

Social inequalities in cognitive scores at age The role of reading. Taguchi, N. System , 48 , Takanishi, R. First Things First! New York: Teachers College Press. Tarasawa, B. Increasing parental involvement of English language learner families: What the research says. Journal of Children and Poverty, 21 2 , Thompson, K. Educational Policy, 31 3 , Tinkler, B. Denver, CO: University of Denver.

Tobin, J. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Tong, F. Accelerating early academic oral English development in transitional bilingual and structured English immersion programs. American Educational Research Journal , 45 4 , Integrating literacy and science for English language learners: From learning-to-read to reading-to-learn. The Journal of Educational Research, 5 , Tucker, M. Fixing Our National Accountability System. Uchikoshi, Y. Narrative development in bilingual kindergarteners: Can Arthur help?

Developmental Psychology, 41 3 , Umansky, I. Reclassification patterns among Latino English learner students in bilingual, dual immersion, and English immersion classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 51 5 , Valencia, R. New York: Routledge. Valentino, R. Effectiveness of four instructional programs designed to serve English learners variation by ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 37 4 , Vaughn, S.

Pollard-Durodola, S. Effectiveness of an English intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading problems. Elementary School Journal , 2 , Effectiveness of a Spanish intervention and an English intervention for English-language learners at risk for reading problems.

American Educational Research Journal, 43 3 , Walker, A. Waterman, R. Practitioner Brief. Westrich, L. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities. Wilder, S. Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement: A meta-synthesis. Educational Review, 66 3 , Willig, A. A meta-analysis of selected studies on the effectiveness of bilingual education.

Review of Educational Research, 55 3 , Xiong, T. Cultural connections and disconnections between non-Hmong principals and Hmong parents. Multicultural Perspectives , 15 1 , Educating dual language learners DLLs and English learners ELs effectively is a national challenge with consequences both for individuals and for American society. Despite their linguistic, cognitive, and social potential, many ELs—who account for more than 9 percent of enrollment in grades K in U.

Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website. Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book. Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter. Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released. Get This Book. Visit NAP. Looking for other ways to read this? No thanks.

Page Share Cite. Program Models The two broad approaches used to teach ELs English in grades pre-K to 12 are 1 English as a second language ESL approaches, in which English is the predominant language used for instruction, and 2 bilingual.

Findings from Evaluation Research Syntheses of studies that compare outcomes for ELs instructed in English-only programs with outcomes for ELs instructed bilingually have found either that there are no differences in outcomes measured in English or that ELs in bilingual programs outperform those instructed only in English when outcomes are measured in English and in the partner lan-.

ESL-certified teacher a English proficiency, including grammar, vocabulary, and communication skills Students may have a dedicated ESL class in their school day or may receive pull-out ESL instruction, wherein they work with a specialist for short periods during other classes. Content-based English as a Second Language ELs are provided with language instruction that uses content as a medium for building language skills.

Although using content as a means, instruction is still focused primarily on learning English. ESL-certified teacher Academic achievement, proficiency in English Students may have a dedicated ESL class in their school day or may receive pull-out ESL instruction, wherein they work with a specialist for short periods during other classes.

Likely to be a general education teacher but may be an ESL-certified teacher Academic achievement, proficiency in English Generally used in EL-only classrooms, designed specifically for ELs. L1 is used to leverage second language L2 acquisition, but L1 proficiency is not a program goal. Teachers proficient in both English and the L1 and certified for teaching the particular grade level and bilingual education Academic achievement, proficiency in English Balance of L1 and L2.

The division of the languages across instructional time and content areas may vary from program to program. The different kinds of language groups that can be served in these programs are ELs learning their home language and English; English-proficient students learning English and a world language; and heritage language learners b studying English and their heritage language e.

May be bilingual teachers, or teachers who teach in English who use sheltered instruction techniques to make their instruction accessible for ELs Academic achievement, proficiency in English, bilingualism and biliteracy, cross-cultural understanding Students typically begin in grade K or 1. Regardless of when or whether students attain proficiency in English, the program is designed to keep them enrolled through its completion typically, the end of elementary school.

May be bilingual teachers who use sheltered instructional techniques to make content comprehensible or who team teach, where one teacher communicates in English and one communicates in the second language Academic achievement, proficiency in English, bilingualism and biliteracy, biculturalism, cross-cultural understanding Balance of L1 and L2.

Programs follow either model or model which ultimately transitions to Programs may balance languages by dividing instructional time according to content area, class period, instructor, week, or unit. The program is designed to keep them enrolled through its completion, in some cases through high school graduation.

But I also like being alone. Declension of sol. Danish Wikipedia has an article on: sol. Italian Wikipedia has an article on: Sol nota. Singular Dual Plural Nominative sol soli soli Genitive soli solowu solow Dative soli soloma solam Accusative sol soli soli Instrumental solu soloma solami Locative soli soloma solach. Solen skinner. The sun is shining. Norwegian Nynorsk Wikipedia has an article on: Sola.

Sola skin i dag. The sun shines today. Det er sol ute. There is sunshine outside. Declension of sol strong-a-stem. Case Singular Plural nominative sol solu accusative sol solu genitive soles sola dative sole solum. Declension of sol — Strong. Singular Masculine Feminine Neuter Nominative sol solu , solo sol Accusative solne sole sol Genitive soles solre soles Dative solum solre solum Instrumental sole solre sole Plural Masculine Feminine Neuter Nominative sole sola , sole solu , solo Accusative sole sola , sole solu , solo Genitive solra solra solra Dative solum solum solum Instrumental solum solum solum.

Declension of sol — Weak. Disaggregating findings for elementary and middle school students would have been desirable to provide a more nuanced overview. As noted above, however, many if not most students who were tested while in middle school had begun school in the United States in the elementary grades, so it is difficult to isolate middle school from prior elementary school effects.

This review is based on a large sample of key studies on time to reclassification. Studies were included if testing was carried out between kindergarten and grade 7 or 8. The percentage of ELs reclassified as proficient is calculated as a function of the number of students who were classified as ELs at the beginning of the study or at the beginning of the study period if the study examined data retroactively. The influence of grade level and age at entry on the attainment of a rating of proficient also is discussed.

Three studies report the average or median number of years required by ELs, on average, to attain reclassification as proficient in English, regardless of their starting grade. MacSwan and Pray estimate the average time to proficiency as 3. Greenberg-Motamedi , discussed in the subsection on high school ELs because the study also included high school students, estimate the time to reclassification as 3.

There are likely several explanations for the variation found in these studies, including different conceptualizations of English language proficiency, technical differences among the tests themselves, and possibly student background characteristics, among other factors. Students in dual language.

Arguably, extensive exposure to English outside school and the overall sociocultural value of English as the majority language in the United States may account, at least in part, for these findings by affording more opportunities to hear and use English outside school. In contrast, exposure in school may be relatively more important for learning a minority language, such as Spanish, because these advantages are lacking. Notwithstanding variation in the estimates of time to proficiency across studies, they all indicate that ELs require several grades or years to be rated proficient— years is frequently reported.

With the exception of Lindholm-Leary , who tested ELs only until grade 2, the time most commonly reported for a substantial number of ELs to achieve proficiency is 5 years. These estimates are corroborated by earlier reviews of research on this issue, which indicate that it can take ELs years to achieve proficiency in English for academic purposes Cummins, ; Lindholm-Leary and Borsato, ; National Research Council, ; Thomas and Collier, In addition, it shortened the time ELs stayed in sheltered English immersion classes to 1 year under normal circumstances and required that ELs move from such classes to mainstream classes once they had a good working knowledge of English.

On the other hand, these studies also indicate that a substantial percentage of ELs fail to achieve proficiency in English even after 5 years of schooling in English. These studies also reveal important differences among groups of learners.

Greenberg-Motamedi , for example, found that speakers of Arabic, Amharic, and Korean took relatively less time to achieve proficiency in English, whereas speakers of Samoan and Spanish took relatively longer; in general, Hispanic students took more time 4. These differences may be due, at least in part, to differences in socioeconomic status since, as the authors note, students in schools with a relatively high percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch take longer to achieve proficiency in English relative to students in schools with lower percentages of such students Hakuta et al.

Students eligible for special education services also were found to take longer than those who were not receiving such services 5. Likewise, U. It should be noted that other factors may influence the results for foreign-born students, such as the level and nature of their prior education, the socioeconomic status and education of their parents, the medical and emotional state of the children at the time of their immigration, the qualifications of teachers, and the quality of instruction.

Researchers working outside the United States have similarly concluded that achieving proficiency in a second language takes time, even when learning starts early.

In these studies, unlike most of the reclassification studies reviewed here, proficiency is defined relative to the performance of native speakers of the target language. Research conducted in Sweden by Abrahamsson and Hyltenstam found that, compared with native Swedish speakers, only 40 percent of adults who had immigrated to Sweden during the preschool years scored in the native range on a battery of diverse language tests, even after more than 20 years of exposure.

In a similar vein, research in Canada on children internationally adopted from China at ages months showed that they scored significantly lower than nonadopted native French-speaking children matched on socioeconomic status on a variety of standardized measures of language ability, including expressive and receptive vocabulary and grammar.

This was the case even after the adopted children had experienced more than 12 years of using French in their homes and been educated exclusively in that language Delcenserie and Genesee, In a review of research on child L2 learners, Paradis , p.

That it can take ELs so long to achieve proficiency in English for academic purposes probably reflects several factors. Of note, it probably reflects the complexity of academic language skills themselves. In addition, it could reflect a lack of systematic and explicit focus on instruction of academic English in classes with EL students. It undoubtedly also reflects the fact that native speakers of English are advancing in their level of proficiency in English for academic purposes from grade to grade.

As result, ELs must make more yearly progress in English if they are to achieve parity with native speakers. Evidence indicates that progress toward proficiency in English among ELs as measured by reclassification tests occurs more rapidly during the first year after school entry and thus, presumably, during the early stages of English development in school and declines in subsequent elementary grades.

To address the question of time to reclassification, Conger analyzed data from four cohorts of ELs with different ages of entry to New York City schools between and The majority of the students were eligible for free lunch, foreign-born, and from Spanish-speaking homes. A criterion of the 40th percentile on the Language Assessment Battery LAB was used to determine proficiency in English, which resulted in reclassification. The author also reports that students who were older at school entry were less likely than those who were younger to be reclassified within the first year.

However, the decline in reclassification in subsequent grades was lower for ELs who were older at school entry than for those who were younger, suggesting that while older ELs make a relatively slow start in learning English, they show relatively better progress than their younger peers in subsequent grades.

While this finding pertains to ELs regardless of the age at school entry, it most commonly applies to students who enter school in kindergarten. The finding that younger ELs make relatively fast progress on reclassification tests initially may reflect the fact that the target for them is relatively low compared with that for ELs who are older at school entry.

In other words, the language skills to be learned at older ages and in higher grades are more complex and thus more difficult to learn. In any case, the initial advantage of younger learners may have fueled the notion that they are better and faster second language learners overall relative to their older peers.

Consistent with these possibilities, Lindholm-Leary and Borsato report that ELs in the United States who participated in dual language programs that provided instruction in L1 along with English in the primary grades K-2 often attained the same or higher levels of proficiency in English, especially in domains related to academic literacy and oral language development, relative to students in all-English programs.

This was true despite the fact that students in the dual language programs had had less instruction and a later start in learning English in school. Again, this finding may reflect the transfer of language, including literacy and cognitively based language skills, acquired in L1 to English.

Evidence that dual language learning can be an additive process comes from studies showing that ELs who develop high levels of proficiency in both L1 and English relative to those with low levels of bilingual proficiency are more successful at closing the achievement gap in reading with their native English-speaking peers e. Thompson found that ELs who entered kindergarten with high levels of academic proficiency in both L1 and English were 24 percent more likely to be reclassified than students who entered kindergarten with low levels of academic proficiency in both languages.

Likewise, bilingual Hispanic students have been found to have higher achievement scores, grade point averages, and educational expectations relative to their monolingual English-speaking Hispanic peers e.

Thus, the highest EL achievers were those who maintained and continued to develop their Spanish, while relatively low-achieving ELs tended to have poor Spanish language skills. In contrast, studies of ELs who enter kindergarten with relatively low levels of proficiency in English show that, while they make progress over the following grades, they usually continue to lag behind their native English-speaking peers:. These students began kindergarten with English receptive vocabulary scores 2 standard deviations below those of monolingual native speakers of English.

They made significant progress by grade 2 and narrowed the gap, although they were still below their English-speaking peers.

Their scores in Spanish vocabulary were initially at grade-level expectations, although more than half scored below grade-level expectations by grade 2. Of interest, their Spanish scores predicted their rate of English vocabulary growth; that is, students with low Spanish scores showed slower growth in English relative to students with average or higher Spanish scores. These findings are important for a number of reasons. First, they indicate that, indeed, students who begin school in kindergarten with relatively limited proficiency in English are at risk of not achieving proficiency during the early grades of schooling.

Viewed differently, these findings run counter to the notion that such students are necessarily quick language learners. It would be useful to know in what other respects, if any, these two groups of ELs—those with low and those with relatively high levels of English pro-.

The bilingual advantage could be linked to enhanced metalinguistic or executive functions, or both see Chapter 4. More research on these ELs would be useful. Finally, these findings reinforce the importance of conducting early assessment to identify ELs who need additional support and the kinds of support they need, since it appears that the gap between ELs and non-ELs will otherwise widen. Relative to grades K-8, much less research has focused on reclassification rates among high school ELs.

Studies of newcomer high school students are particularly rare; the committee could identify only two such studies, and they are based on the same dataset Carhill et al. Testing in the studies discussed in this section took place in grades 9 to 12; thus they are considered high school studies even though the participants may have entered their respective school systems much earlier than 9th grade.

Therefore, as was observed earlier with respect to middle school ELs who entered U. Nevertheless, these findings give some indication of time to reclassification among ELs who were often older when they started school in the United States and certainly older when assessed in comparison with the elementary and middle school students discussed above. A study by Carhill and colleagues is of particular interest because the authors used a longitudinal design to examine the relationships between English proficiency and a number of contextual and individual student factors.

The adolescent EL participants in this study were foreign-born from Central America, China, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Mexico , and all spoke a language other than English as their first language. On average, they had spent at least two-thirds of their lives in their country of birth, had been in the United States for 7 years, and were There was a significant positive correlation between length of time in the United States and ratings of proficiency.

Also of interest, the authors examined the relationship between test performance and a number of contextual vari-. They found that students from China, those who had more exposure to English in informal out-of-school contexts, and those attending schools with a low percentage of students living in poverty and a high percentage of English-proficient ELs scored relatively high on the test. A study by Umansky and Reardon is also of particular interest because it examined time to reclassification in relation to instructional program.

The study was conducted in a large school district in California with more than 50, students, half of whom were classified as ELs or reclassified as proficient in English and were from diverse backgrounds. More specifically, in contrast to many studies on reclassification, Latinos made up just 25 percent of the district population and almost 50 percent of the EL school population. The students attended four program types: traditional English immersion, a transitional Spanish bilingual program, 7 a Spanish maintenance 8 bilingual program, and a Spanish dual language immersion program see Chapter 7 for descriptions of instructional program types.

Only ELs who had entered the U. Several important findings emerged. Overall, 60 percent of the Latino students became long-term ELs. Relative to those in the other program types, Latino ELs enrolled in dual language programs were reclassified as English-proficient at a lower rate in the elementary grades but had higher overall reclassification rates; higher English language arts academic achievement scores; and higher English reading, writing, speaking, and listening test results in the long run.

The goal of these programs is to promote full proficiency in only English and not the home language.

The goal of these programs is to promote high levels of bilingual proficiency. This finding is of particular importance as ELs enter the upper grades, when academic requirements become more demanding and more dependent on language proficiency. Studies by Umansky and Reardon and Carhill and colleagues indicate further that understanding the development of proficiency in English among ELs requires a multidimensional, longitudinal approach since development is not linear but fluctuates over grades, and is influenced by multiple factors.

With regard to the latter, more attention to school-related factors, including classroom instructional practices, would be particularly useful in the future to elucidate what steps educators can take to improve the progress of ELs, especially in light of policy goals for the educational progress of ELs under ESSA.

The evidence reviewed to this point clearly shows the difficulty of achieving reclassification to English-proficient and, by implication, levels of English proficiency that are deemed sufficient for ELs to participate in classrooms where all instruction is in English.

The most common estimates of time to reclassification range from 5 to 10 years, with 5 to 7 years being one of the more frequently reported estimates. Of course, some of these estimates are an artifact of how long the studies continued or what grade levels were examined; they also reflect the influence of a myriad of other factors, such as quality of instruction, prior schooling, literacy levels in L1 and in English, and family and community factors.

Nevertheless, many ELs fail to be reclassified as English-proficient even after many years of schooling in English. Over the last 10 years, attention has begun to focus on ELs who demonstrate extraordinary difficulty in achieving proficiency in English as measured by state-mandated assessments. In addition, 1 students for whom one or more of the required testing criteria are not available are categorically determined to be LTELs; and 2 the assessment component of LTEL determination for students in grades , inclusive, is based solely on the CELDT criteria outlined above.

For more information, see Education Code It is most useful, therefore, to think of a continuum from those long term English learners who are failing and whose proficiency is actually falling to those who are stagnating at a level of English proficiency managing to get by in school with very low grades, to those who are slowly progressing and doing okay in school.

The lack of a common definition of LTELs makes it difficult to interpret and draw general conclusions from the existing, limited research on these students. LTELs have attracted increased attention recently because they represent a sizable segment of the EL population. California had the largest percentage of LTELs in grades , at 12 percent; more than 75 percent of current ELs were long-term in one of every three districts in the state. Using U. Abedi similarly cites ethnic group differences, with Hispanic LTELs spending almost 10 years in EL status and Asians and Caucasian LTELs spending about half that time, although these differences may be confounded by other variables, such as socioeconomic status.

The question arises of how to account for such group differences. LTELs often are proficient in everyday uses of oral English but have low levels of proficiency in academic language and literacy in both English and their L1. Commonly, LTEL students reach a plateau at intermediate or lower levels of language proficiency Olsen, Indeed, longitudinal studies that have followed LTEL students into middle or high school have found that their rates of growth in language and literacy slow over time and then plateau Kieffer, ; Mancilla-Martinez et al.

Umansky and Reardon , for example, report that reclassification to fully English-proficient slowed in middle school in all instructional programs they examined, including English-only and transi-. Attainment of proficiency in English in middle school can be thwarted because increased academic tracking of ELs often occurs in these grades.

As a result, ELs are often assigned to low-level academic classes Callahan, ; Callahan et al. Because they are in classrooms that lack academic rigor, it is difficult for many of these ELs to meet the academic standards in English needed for reclassification.

LTELs are to be distinguished from other struggling high school ELs who are new arrivals, and often refugees who have experienced interrupted or limited formal education Boyson and Short, ; Menken, Like LTELs, these students often exhibit low levels of English language proficiency and academic achievement compared with their peers.

However, their difficulties probably are linked to the challenge of initial adjustment to a new language and culture and of developing language and literacy in English in a relatively brief period of time Boyson and Short, ; Menken, In contrast, LTELs are not newcomers to the United States, and their difficulties cannot be attributed in any simple fashion to adjustment or personal issues.

Menken and colleagues , for example, note that by definition, LTELs have often been in the United States for 7 or more years and in fact often were born here see also Freeman et al. They also often have experienced weak, no, or inappropriate language education programs; curriculum and learning materials that are not designed to meet their linguistic needs; and limited access to the full curriculum.

LTEL status may be linked as well to the characteristics of the schools they attend. Specifically, several studies have found that ELs tend to be enrolled disproportionately in schools in urban areas with a high percentage of ethnic minority and economically disadvantaged students Callahan et al.

A study conducted by the Urban Institute Clewell et al. Taken together, evidence on the family and educational histories of LTELs indicates that an explanation for the failure of LTELs to achieve English proficiency and to succeed academically is likely to be complex.

In brief, explanations for the fate of LTELs can be linked to multiple dimensions of their education, including the quality and consistency of academic programming, the provision of appropriate and timely additional support services, and other characteristics of their schools Callahan, ; Callahan et al.

Unfortunately, however, few studies have examined alternative support strategies for LTELs and their effectiveness. In one such study, Callahan and colleagues examined the impact of English as a second language ESL placement on the academic achievement and course taking of ELs in high school.

ESL placement also fails to provide ELs with opportunities to complete upper-level science and social science coursework or to take electives. Several studies have documented the potential adverse consequences of the long-term designation as EL:.

Thus far, little attention has been paid to differences among individual ELs and subgroups of ELs whose backgrounds differ. Research has examined a variety of individual, family, school, and contextual differences among ELs alluded to earlier in this chapter, including gender, socioeconomic status, place of birth U.

Unfortunately, relatively little research has examined the influence of these factors on reclassification rates among ELs, and most studies address only one or two of these factors. In this regard, it is worth noting that, according to Lindholm-Leary , achievement among ELs is lower the more risk factors individual students experience.

The existing research in this area has limitations. The samples in most of the studies reviewed by the committee comprised exclusively or largely low-income Hispanic Spanish-speaking ELs.

Further, most studies included students who entered at kindergarten, or possibly first grade, and did not include students who were receiving special education services. Nevertheless, the available evidence is fairly consistent in showing that student characteristics influence time to reclassification, although the quality and quantity of evidence with respect to specific factors varies. Clearly, much more research in this area is needed.

Findings from the available studies on gender are inconsistent. However, four studies Abedi, ; Conger, ; Conger et al. ELs whose native language is Asian tend to be reclassified sooner and to achieve at higher levels relative to Spanish-speaking ELs Abedi, ; Carhill et al. The reason for this difference is unclear, but it could be due to multiple factors, such as prior schooling,. Seven of the eight studies on socioeconomic status reviewed by the committee found that ELs from relatively high socioeconomic backgrounds achieve proficiency in English more quickly than ELs from relatively low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Monolingual English-speaking students from high socioeconomic backgrounds have similarly been found to score significantly higher than their peers from relatively low socioeconomic backgrounds on a variety of measures Reardon et al. Although not specific to oral language proficiency, research findings from Kieffer and Lesaux and colleagues indicate that differences in English reading ability between ELs and non-ELs are eliminated if differences in socioeconomic status are taken into account, illustrating the important and possibly overriding influence of this factor in many of the studies whose samples comprise largely students from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Han reports that Asian ELs from relatively high socioeconomic backgrounds outperformed all other groups, while those of low socioeconomic status performed the worst. They also call for caution in generalizing about ethnic groups.

All three of the studies reviewed that examined the influence of being U. Conger reports that a higher percentage of U. Greenberg-Motamedi similarly reports an advantage for U. Slama also found significant differences in English language proficiency favoring U. The underlying explanation for these differences is difficult to discern because of methodological issues.

All five found that English proficiency scores at program entry had a positive influence on later English proficiency scores and reclassification rates. One might argue that competence in other languages is unnecessary given the global status of English. However, evidence shows that second language speakers of English outnumber native speakers Crystal, This fact speaks to the importance of not only learning English but also knowing other languages as well in order to interact effectively or compete for jobs with those who are bilingual in English and other world languages.