Effects of the Implementation of Proposition 227 on the Education of English Learners, K-12: Findings from a Five-Year Evaluation. Final Report for AB 56 and AB 1116.

By T. Parrish, Amy Merickel, M. Pérez, Robert Linquanti, Miguel Socías, Angeline K Spain, C. Speroni, Phil Esra, Leslie Brock, Danielle Delancey. 2006

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4104e98f971c653fbc41a746fd3b6ac193a0c339

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Effective Reading Programs for Spanish-Dominant English Language Learners (ELLs) in the Elementary Grades (2012, background): “No sizable effect of Proposition 227 (in either direction) was found on ELL students’ academic achievement in English (Parrish et al., 2006).”
Con Cariño: Teacher Caring, Math Self-Efficacy, and Math Achievement among Hispanic English Learners (2012, background): “…it is more cost-effective to train and employ bilingual teachers than to use monolingual teachers and then have to augment classroom instruction by relying on bilingual teacher aides and other support personnel (Carpenter-Huffman & Samulon, 1981; Gándara & Rumberger, 2006; Parrish et al., 2006).”
Classification System for English Language Learners: Issues and Recommendations (2008, background): “Parrish et al. (2006) found that some districts are using alternative, lower reclassification criteria for ELL students in higher grades.”
The Gap That Can’t Go Away (2013, methodology): “Parrish et al. (2006) calculated an annual standardized (reported in standard deviation units) gap size for RFEPs and EOs, ELs and EOs, and IELs (EL + RFEP) and EOs averaged across Grades 2 through 11 for each of several years of data based on both norm-referenced tests (SAT-9 and CAT6: language…”
Performance of English Language Learners as a Subgroup in Large-Scale Assessment: Interaction of Research and Policy (2007, background): “…gap between English language learners and English speakers has intensified, debates have ensued about the appropriate level of proficiency as measured by the CELDT at which to place students into the regular English-only curriculum (“basic”, “early advanced”, or “advanced”) (Parrish et al., 2006).”
Is a Good Teacher a Good Teacher for All? Comparing Value-Added of Teachers With Their English Learners and Non-English Learners (2014, background): “ELs enter school with lower rates of math and English proficiency, and these gaps persist well into their schooling (Parrish et al., 2006; Reardon & Galindo, 2009; Rumberger & Gandara, 2004).”
Achievement in predominantly low SES/Hispanic dual language schools (2010, background): “…been effective as statewide studies of California ELL students show that even after 10 years of mostly mainstream English classrooms, the probability of being designated as fluent English proficient (EP) and ready for mainstream English classrooms and coursework is only 40% (Parrish et al. 2006).”
The Effectiveness of Reading Interventions for English Learners (2016, background): “Moreover, it may be that students who are technically exited from English learner status (often called former English learners; e.g., Parrish et al., 2006), but may not have developed the necessary academic English to be successful in school, are noticeably absent from the intervention studies in…”