Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the English Language Learners topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State ELL report: more Arkansas English learners are exiting services but districts still spend more than state categorical funding
Summary
A Department of Education report told lawmakers Arkansas had about 38,500 English‑language learners in 2018, that more students are exiting services after the switch to ELPA21, and that the state provided $338 per ELL student while districts spent an estimated $580 per ELL student when local transfers and other expenditures are included.
Nell Smith presented the committee with a statewide analysis of English‑language learner (ELL) enrollment, outcomes and funding. She told lawmakers that in 2018 roughly 38,500 students — about 8 percent of Arkansas public school enrollment — were identified as ELL; those students are geographically concentrated, with about half enrolled in five districts (Springdale, Rogers, Fort Smith, Little Rock and Dequeen).
Smith said the state replaced its prior ELL assessment with ELPA21 in 2015–16 and that the new assessment and adjusted exit criteria led to a substantial increase in students testing proficient and exiting services. ELPA21 assesses listening, speaking, reading and writing; districts also require further standardized evidence (for example, ACT Aspire benchmarks or college‑readiness indicator scores) before formally exiting students from ESL services.
On outcomes, Smith reported that Arkansas ELL students compare favorably with peers in many states on NAEP assessments and that Arkansas’s ELL graduation rate is high: "About 82 percent of ELL students graduate from high school in Arkansas, compared with the national average of just 66 percent," she said. Smith also noted persistent gaps on content assessments: ELL students scored lower than non‑ELL students on ACT Aspire (for example, roughly 30 percent of ELL students scored ready or exceeding in math versus 49 percent of non‑ELL students).
Turning to money, Smith said state ELL categorical funding in 2018 was $338 per ELL student (about $13.4 million total). Districts transferred nearly $5.5 million from NSL (now called Enhanced Student Achievement) categorical funds into ELL accounts, and when combined with district foundation and other non‑federal spending the report calculated districts spent about $580 per ELL student. Federal Title III funds were modest and targeted: roughly $3.5 million statewide in 2017–18, about $98 per eligible ELL student in districts that receive the grant.
Smith’s analysis found a weak positive correlation between district per‑student ESL expenditures and one measure of English‑language proficiency growth, but not a consistent relationship across all on‑track measures and content outcomes. She told the committee that districts receiving Title III funds showed slightly higher ELP growth on average, though the difference was small.
Tricia Kerr of ADE clarified procedural details about ELL coding: recently arrived English learners are excluded from accountability determinations in their first year, their scores begin to inform growth calculations in year two, and by year three their achievement counts toward both growth and achievement measures. Kerr also explained that ADE interprets state law as permitting limited use of students’ first languages to facilitate English instruction (for clarification and scaffolding) while instruction is delivered in English.
The committee asked for further breakdowns by district, additional evidence on program models and outcomes, and details about how transfers and local expenditures are coded. Smith and ADE staff offered to provide those materials to committee members.
