What happens when academic achievement is used to determine English proficiency?

One in five public school children in the United States speaks a language other than English at home.

美国五分之一的公立学校学生在家里说英语以外的语言。

Upon entering school, about half of these students are classified as Multilingual/English Learners (ML-ELs).

入学后，这些学生中约有一半被归类为多语言/英语学习者 (ML-EL)。

This label indicates that they require specialized language support services, which include qualified teachers , direct instruction in English language development, and language supports in core content classes.

该标签表明他们需要专门的语言支持服务，其中包括合格的教师、英语语言发展的直接指导以及核心内容课程的语言支持。

These scaffolds are intended to be temporary.

这些脚手架是临时的。

Schools are required to help ML-ELs develop the English language proficiency they need to thrive in the classroom without any additional language support and ultimately exit EL status.

学校需要帮助 ML-EL 培养他们在课堂上茁壮成长所需的英语语言能力，而无需任何额外的语言支持，并最终退出 EL 身份。

But what determines when a student is ready to reclassify as “fully English proficient”?

但是，什么决定了学生何时准备好重新归类为“完全精通英语”？

The answer is not straightforward.

答案并不简单。

Part of the complexity stems from the fact that each state sets its own reclassification policy.

部分复杂性源于每个州制定自己的重新分类政策。

Federal statute requires states to assess English language proficiency (ELP) in speaking, listening, reading, and writing to make reclassification decisions.

联邦法规要求各州评估英语口语、听力、阅读和写作能力 (ELP)，以做出重新分类决定。

Beyond thes e, states are also free to include additional criteria, s uch as grades, teacher evaluations, or academic content knowledge as measured by standardized tests

除此之外，各州还可以自由纳入额外的标准，例如成绩、教师评估或通过标准化测试衡量的学术内容知识

This policy choice can be consequential for students, as reclassifying students inappropriately carries real risks .

这种政策选择可能对学生产生重大影响，因为不恰当地对学生进行重新分类会带来真正的风险。

Criteria that result in ML-ELs reclassifying too early can cut students off from critical supports they still need to be successful in the classroom, leading to poorer outcomes over time.

导致 ML-EL 过早重新分类的标准可能会导致学生无法获得他们在课堂上取得成功所需的关键支持，随着时间的推移，结果会变得更差。

But holding students in EL status for too long can prevent students from accessing opportunities provided to mainstream students including core academic classes , advanced and upper-level content , and career and college readiness courses like career and technical education , especially in high school .

但是，让学生处于 EL 状态的时间过长可能会阻止学生获得为主流学生提供的机会，包括核心学术课程、高级和高级内容以及职业和大学准备课程（如职业和技术教育），尤其是在高中。

In our recent study , we explored what happens to secondary school ML-ELs when a state brings academic content knowledge into the reclassification process.

在我们最近的研究中，我们探讨了当州将学术内容知识纳入重新分类过程时，中学 ML-EL 会发生什么。

Our findings paint a nuanced picture of how academic criteria can limit opportunity for some while simultaneously failing to shield others from the negative consequences of premature program exit.

我们的研究结果描绘了一幅细致入微的图景：学术标准如何限制某些人的机会，同时又无法保护其他人免受过早退出项目的负面影响。

As of 2023, 18 states include non-ELP assessments in the reclassification process.

截至 2023 年，18 个州将非 ELP 评估纳入重新分类过程。

Among them, California, Texas, Florida, and New York—four of the states serving the largest number of ML-ELs—require students to meet minimum scores on English language arts (ELA) content exams in addition to ELP criteria to reclassify.

其中，加利福尼亚州、得克萨斯州、佛罗里达州和纽约州（ML-EL 数量最多的四个州）除了 ELP 标准外，还要求学生达到英语语言艺术 (ELA) 内容考试的最低分数才能重新分类。

Why should non-ELP criteria like academic achievement be incorporated into a process meant to assess English proficiency?

为什么应将学术成绩等非 ELP 标准纳入评估英语水平的流程中？

A large body of research estimates the effects of reclassification on students’ subsequent outcomes, but few studies tease out the implications of using specific criteria.

大量研究估计了重新分类对学生后续结果的影响，但很少有研究阐明使用特定标准的影响。

More empirical evidence can help states weigh the pros and cons of their policy designs.

更多的经验证据可以帮助各国权衡其政策设计的利弊。

In our recent study, we looked at Texas, one of the states that uses academic performance on state ELA tests to make reclassification decisions.

在我们最近的研究中，我们以德克萨斯州为研究对象，该州是利用州 ELA 测试中的学业成绩来做出重新分类决定的州之一。

During our study period (2013-2017), Texas reclassified ML-ELs based on three criteria:

在我们的研究期间（2013-2017 年），德克萨斯州根据三个标准对 ML-EL 进行了重新分类：

Research shows that it typically takes students who enter U.S. schools in early grades four to seven years to reclassify as fully English proficient.

研究表明，进入美国学校低年级的学生通常需要四到七年的时间才能重新归类为完全精通英语。

We focus our analysis on eighth grade reclassification, right before the critical transition to high school when academic English demands increase substantially and courseloads become more differentiated.

我们的分析重点是八年级的重新分类，即在向高中的关键过渡之前，此时学术英语需求大幅增加，课程负担变得更加多样化。

Looking at eighth grade allows us to estimate the effect of starting high school as a reclassified student on key outcomes for longer-term success, including advanced course completion, academic achievement in core content classes and end-of-course (EOC) tests, and high school graduation.

通过观察八年级，我们可以估计作为重新分类的学生开始高中学习对长期成功的关键成果的影响，包括高级课程完成、核心内容课程和课程结束 (EOC) 测试的学业成绩以及高中毕业。

Like other causal studies on the effects of reclassification, we use a regression discontinuity (RD) design.

与其他关于重新分类影响的因果研究一样，我们使用断点回归 (RD) 设计。

We start by limiting our sample to ML-ELs who met the ELP criteria in speaking, listening, and writing.

我们首先将样本限制为在口语、听力和写作方面符合 ELP 标准的 ML-EL。

For these students, reclassification decisions were based on whether they passed the STAAR reading test.

对于这些学生，重新分类的决定取决于他们是否通过 STAAR 阅读测试。

We then compare outcomes for students who scored just above the passing threshold, and thus were eligible to be reclassified as English proficient, to outcomes for students who scored just below that threshold and presumptively continued as “EL.” This method takes advantage of the fact that students just above and just below the threshold are, on average, very similar.

然后，我们将分数略高于及格阈值（因此有资格重新分类为英语熟练）的学生的结果与分数略低于该阈值并推定继续为“EL”的学生的结果进行比较。这种方法利用了这样一个事实：平均而言，高于和低于阈值的学生非常相似。

By comparing outcomes for these two groups, we can isolate the effect of reclassification from unobservable student differences.

通过比较这两组的结果，我们可以将重新分类的影响与不可观察的学生差异分开。

It is important to note that Texas also uses teachers’ subjective evaluations in the reclassification process; research shows that teacher input, idiosyncratic administrative error, and variation in policy implementation across schools mean that not all students who meet the test-based criteria are reclassified, and vice versa.

值得注意的是，德克萨斯州在重新分类过程中也使用了教师的主观评价；研究表明，教师的投入、特殊的管理错误以及学校之间政策实施的差异意味着并非所有符合考试标准的学生都会被重新分类，反之亦然。

In our study, 6% of ML-ELs who narrowly missed the cutoff were still reclassified.

在我们的研究中，6% 的 ML-EL 勉强达到截止值，但仍被重新分类。

At the same time, 49% of ML-ELs who narrowly passed the test were not reclassified.

与此同时，49% 的勉强通过测试的 ML-EL 没有被重新分类。

Because STAAR reading scores did not perfectly predict reclassification, we used a fuzzy RD approach in which we measure the effects of reclassification for students who exited EL status solely because they met the STAAR criteria.

由于 STAAR 阅读分数不能完美预测重新分类，因此我们使用了模糊 RD 方法，在该方法中，我们测量了重新分类对仅因为满足 STAAR 标准而退出 EL 状态的学生的影响。

Using administrative data from Texas public schools, we tracked five cohorts of approximately 21,000 students from the 2012-13 to 2016-17 school years who were classified as ELs in eighth grade and expected to graduate between 2017 and 2021.

我们利用德克萨斯州公立学校的管理数据，对 2012-13 学年至 2016-17 学年的 5 组约 21,000 名学生进行了跟踪，这些学生在八年级时被归类为 EL，预计将于 2017 年至 2021 年毕业。

Our findings paint a mixed picture of the impact of using academic content criteria to reclassify students.

我们的研究结果描绘了使用学术内容标准对学生重新分类的影响的复杂情况。

Reclassification based on academic ELA criteria increased the likelihood of successfully completing an advanced course (e.g., Advanced Placement, dual enrollment) in high school by about 7 percentage points for the marginal student.

根据学术 ELA 标准进行重新分类，边缘学生在高中成功完成高级课程（例如大学先修课程、双录取）的可能性提高了约 7 个百分点。

Given that only 6% of eighth grade ML-ELs ever earn advanced course credit, this is an important change.

鉴于只有 6% 的八年级 ML-EL 获得高级课程学分，这是一个重要的变化。

These results suggest that the academic ELA criterion partially acts as an unnecessary barrier to opportunity.

这些结果表明，学术 ELA 标准在一定程度上对机会构成了不必要的障碍。

At the same time, some students who reclassified in eighth grade struggled academically in their core high school classes.

与此同时，一些在八年级重新分类的学生在高中核心课程中的学业成绩很困难。

Marginally reclassified students were 8-10 percentage points more likely than peers who remained EL to fail core courses in science, social studies, and English (for reference, about half of peers who barely missed the STAAR cutoff to reclassify fail these courses).

稍微重新分类的学生比保留 EL 的同龄人在科学、社会研究和英语核心课程上不及格的可能性高出 8-10 个百分点（作为参考，几乎一半的同龄人几乎没有错过重新分类的 STAAR 截止时间而未能通过这些课程）。

Reclassified students also scored 0.13 SD lower on the Algebra I end-of-course exam (students who marginally remained EL scored about 0.52 SD below the overall mean on average).

重新分类的学生在代数 I 期末考试中的得分也低了 0.13 个标准差（勉强保持 EL 水平的学生平均得分比总体平均值低约 0.52 个标准差）。