Volume 1 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership - Page 64

62 Year after year students who are labeled limited English proficient (LEP) or English language learners (ELLs) are con - sistently underperforming in classrooms and on high stakes tests as compared to their peers, with an even wider per - formance gap when compared to their white peers (Collier & Thomas, 2004; Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; National Center for Statistics, 2012a; Texas Education Agency, 2013e). To quantify the problem, the 2013-2014 Texas Academic Performance Report (TAPR) indicated that 86% of all fifth graders met the established standard on the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading as compared to 72% of ELLs who met standard. In math, 88% of all fifth grade students met the standard and 81% of ELLs met the same standard (Texas Education Agency, 2014b). The performance gaps were more alarming when examin - ing the reported achievement of all students represented in all grade levels during the same year. In reading, 76% of all students met standard on STAAR and 55% of ELLs met the standard. In math, 78% of all students met the established standard for the year as compared to 65% of ELLs (Texas Ed- ucation Agency, 2014b). The ELL student group equates to 38.2% of a large suburban district’s student population and 17.5% of the students in the state (Texas Education Agen- cy, 2014a). This perpetual crisis calls for an evaluation of current programs and best practices as educators seek more effective ways of serving this large population. Literature Review There is a plethora of research and political debate regarding the most effective program to support the specific needs of ELLs. The justifications for this research was framed around the desire to better serve the growing ELL population as well as all other children and equip them with language and cognitive skills that would give them choices in a compet - itive global society. Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, and Christian (2006) emphatically stated the critical nature for this research because so much is at stake. “ELLs who had not been in any specialized program but participated in mainstream English classes scored the lowest in comparison to students in any other program and ended their schooling with low levels of achievement” (2006, p. 181). It is evident that English immersion is not the solution for the growing population of ELLs. There are many types of programs that have been devel- oped with second language acquisition as the goal but not all programs are focused on the maintenance and development of a student’s first language. Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, and Christian (2005) examined years of empir- ical research dating back to 1980 and concluded there are many variations of support for ELLs through programs meant to develop their English language proficiency, and in many cases also develop their first language. Through the synthesis of the research, they concluded that ELLs require Shannon Cole, Ed.D. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND NON-ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS: DUAL LANGUAGE, TRADITIONAL BILINGUAL, AND ALL ENGLISH PROGRAMS Educational Leadership K-12 2017, VOL. 1, ISSUE 1 http://www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd