2002
DOI: 10.1207/s1532771xjle0101_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Caught in a Policy Web: The Impact of Education Reform on Latino Education

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These officialized discourses pressure schools toward conformity with the monolingual norm of (standard) English proficiency and International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 17 permeate policy discourses constructed at the state, district, school, and program level (de Jong and Howard 2009;Freeman 1998;Palmer 2007;Ricento and Hornberger 1996). The negative impact of English-only policies on DL programs has been well documented (e.g., Alamillo and Viramontes 2000;Arce 2004;Gutierrez 2001;Mora 2002;Stritikus 2003;Valdez 2001). Accountability under No Child Left Behind, the Reading First mandate, and English-only laws such as Proposition 227 (California) and Proposition 203 (Arizona) has placed significant pressure on DL programs to increase instruction in English (Combs et al 2005;de Jong, Gort, and Cobb 2005;Linton and Franklin 2010).…”
Section: Programs Within Schoolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These officialized discourses pressure schools toward conformity with the monolingual norm of (standard) English proficiency and International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 17 permeate policy discourses constructed at the state, district, school, and program level (de Jong and Howard 2009;Freeman 1998;Palmer 2007;Ricento and Hornberger 1996). The negative impact of English-only policies on DL programs has been well documented (e.g., Alamillo and Viramontes 2000;Arce 2004;Gutierrez 2001;Mora 2002;Stritikus 2003;Valdez 2001). Accountability under No Child Left Behind, the Reading First mandate, and English-only laws such as Proposition 227 (California) and Proposition 203 (Arizona) has placed significant pressure on DL programs to increase instruction in English (Combs et al 2005;de Jong, Gort, and Cobb 2005;Linton and Franklin 2010).…”
Section: Programs Within Schoolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These articles collectively highlight the chaotic nature of the initial implementation process in the absence of clear guidelines and the lack of sufficient professional development, collaboration, and resources (including access to native language resources) (Arellano-Houchin et al 2001;Gándara et al 2005;Gándara et al 2003). They also point out that the English-only laws are closely intertwined with other educational reform efforts, such as reading reforms and accountability mandates under the federal No Child Left Behind Act (Mora 2002;Stritikus 2002). They note that, combined with English-only laws, these reform efforts have led to a reduction in native language instruction in many bilingual programs (Black 2005;Garcia and Curry-Rodriguez 2000) and an approach to literacy that focuses on isolated skills rather than meaningful communication (Gutierrez 2001;Gutierrez et al 2002;Valdez 2001).…”
Section: Teachers and Language Policymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently in education, it is a common practice to narrowly define learning through standardized test scores (Mora, 2002;Nieto, 1999). Many educational assumptions about non-Euro-American middle-class learners are based on stereotypes that perpetuate the marginalization of certain cultures, especially those who have traditionally had low status in U.S. society (Nieto, 2002).…”
Section: Sociocultural and Historical Contexts Of Findingsmentioning
confidence: 99%