Funding
English learner education is funded through a variety of federal programs, such as Title I and III of ESSA. The Biden administration has proposed tripling Title I funding in order to help close gaps between low-income and high-income school districts.1 An influx of funding would no doubt benefit ELs, but states and districts would require guidance to ensure funds were being used to support these students.
The only federal appropriation targeted at English learners is Title III, which provides supplementary funding for a variety of services with the goal of helping ELs acquire English proficiency and increase their academic achievement. Title III funding has long been inadequate to meet the need,2 and since 2008, has remained relatively flat despite increases in the EL student population.3 In truth, Title III is stretched thin, as it is intended to cover a large number of activities—from teacher preparation and professional development to improving instructional programs to family engagement and outreach efforts. Moreover, Title III does not cover the ongoing costs of monitoring former ELs.
While there is general consensus that the current Title III funding allocation is insufficient, the amount necessary to fully fund EL education remains understudied. A review in 2012 by Oscar Jimenez-Castellanos, a leading scholar on EL funding, and Amelia Topper revealed that only a handful of studies have examined the cost of providing ELs with an equitable education, and they offer limited insight, given differences in methodology.4 As highlighted by Irina Okhremtchouk, an expert in school finance for ELs, that the prescriptive nature of Title III and its focus on accountability has meant that “the programs serving ELs are often designed to compensate for perceived student deficits, inabilities or inadequacies (e.g., selecting curricula that focus on remedial education) as compared to offering adequate services that would, indeed, address students’ actual educational needs.”5 In addition, we lack information regarding the cost associated with different types of language instruction programs for ELs. More research is needed to determine both the cost of educating ELs and the cost of individual program models and school initiatives designed to meet their needs.
The federal government could help strengthen funding for English learners in the following ways:
1) Increase Title III funding to $2.5 billion. This funding level is based on an analysis of estimates from research and advocacy organizations and an additional calculation of the increased need for EL supports and services to address the educational impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.6
2) Issue guidance to clarify how Title I funding could and should be used to serve ELs. Guidance should include examples of how existing Title I and Title III funding streams can be directed to meet specific EL needs and services.7
3) Evaluate the Title III funding formula to assess whether states are receiving the resources necessary to meet ELs’ needs. Currently, a state’s Title III funding allocation is determined by data from the American Community Survey, state data on the number of students being assessed for English language proficiency, or a combination of both. The data source used can result in significant differences in EL counts, as well as funding allocations.
4) Offer guidance that clearly defines the supplemental scope of Title III and stipulates and identifies states’ funding responsibilities.
5) Invest in the development of a study to help policymakers at all levels better understand the cost of providing English learners with an adequate and equitable education. The cost study should examine funding frameworks for different EL instruction models. We currently do not have enough information to understand funding variables of different EL program models, and this information is needed to understand what “adequate funding” for ELs looks like in different contexts.
Funding Considerations and Recommendations for DLLs
Early childhood education is funded through a variety of federal and state sources and mechanisms. According to the 2018 report Transforming the Financing of Early Care and Education, “the financing for early care and education in the United States is a layering of separate programs, with different funding streams, constituencies, eligibility requirements, and quality standards.”8 As a result, families face disparate access to early childhood programs and they have to navigate costs based on where they live, the type of care, the level of subsidies provided, and other factors. Studies suggest that DLLs and children of immigrants have lower participation rates and that they must be targeted and prioritized in publicly funded early childhood programs.9
The Biden administration has signaled interest in supporting the expansion of public early education programs, including partnering with states to offer universal access for three- and four-year-old children.10 In order for DLLs to thrive, they must have access to early education programs, including two-generation models such as Head Start and home visiting, and dual language immersion programs.11 The federal government can play a key role in providing the funding necessary for these programs and the early education system as a whole:
- Ensure that existing funding to support early care and education expansion includes dollars allocated to support DLLs, including the expansion of dual language immersion programs that prioritize DLLs.
- Provide incentives for carving out classroom space at adult education facilities for on-site child care for enrolled students and employees, to help facilitate the development and expansion of two-generation models that support parents and children.
- Increase funding for home visiting programs. DLLs are underserved by home visiting; data indicate that overall, home visiting programs are not reaching enough of the eligible population. Home visiting screening and referrals can help immigrant and DLL families access and navigate social and mental health services, and learn strategies for promoting their child’s home language development.12
- Fully fund Head Start and Early Head Start to ensure that all eligible children have access to the program. At present, only 36 percent of eligible three-to-five-year-olds, 11 percent of children under age three, and 15 percent of migrant children under the age of five have access to Head Start.13
Citations
- Title I funding is provided to schools that serve high proportions of low-income students and recent research shows that ELs are overrepresented in high-poverty schools. For more information about this correlation, see Diana Quintero and Michael Hansen, “As We Tackle School Segregation: Don’t Forget About English Learner Students,” Brown Center Chalkboard (blog), Brookings Institution, January 14, 2021, source
- Courtney Tanenbaum, Andrea Boyle, Kay Soga, Kerstin Carlson Le Floch, Laura Golden, Megan Petroccia, Michele Toplitz, James Taylor, and Jennifer O’Day, National Evaluation of Title III Implementation: Report on State and Local Implementation (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2012), xxiii, source
- U.S. Department of Education, “Education Department Budget History Table: FY 1980–FY 2019 President's Budget,” October 26, 2018, source
- Oscar Jimenez-Castellanos and Amelia M. Topper, “The Cost of Providing an Adequate Education to English Language Learners: A Review of the Literature,” Review of Educational Research 82, no. 2 (2012): 179–232,source
- Irina S. Okhremtchouk, “The Politics of Schools and Money: Building Awareness about Channeling Practices for Supplemental Resource Allocations to Serve English Language Learners,” Education Policy Analysis Archives 25, no. 17 (2017): 1–25, 10, source
- The First 100 Days: Latino Inclusion in the Biden Administration’s First Steps (Washington, DC: UnidosUS, December 16, 2020), 6, source; and Conor P. Williams, “The Case for Expanding Federal Funding for English Learners,” The Century Foundation, March 31, 2020, source
- For an example of how individual states have done this, see page 63 in Rebecca Vonderlack-Navarro and Karen Garibay-Mulattieri, Illinois English Learner Handbook (Chicago, IL: Latino Policy Forum, June 2020), source
- La Rue Allen and Emily P. Backes, eds., Transforming the Financing of Early Care and Education (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2018), 2, source
- Hannah Matthews and Danielle Ewen, “Early Education Programs and Children of Immigrants:Learning Each Other’s Language” (paper prepared for Young Children in Immigrant Families and the Path to Educational Success roundtable meeting at the Urban Institute, June 28, 2010), source; Milagros Nores, Allison Friedman Krauss, and Ellen Frede, Opportunities and Policies for Young Dual Language Learners (New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, 2018), source
- Aaron Loewenberg and Abbie Lieberman, “Universal Access to Pre-K Should Be Part of Our Economic Recovery,” Ed Central (blog), New America, January 14, 2021, source
- For more on these approaches, see “Promising and Effective Early Care and Education Practices and Home Visiting Programs for Dual Language Learners,” in Promoting the Educational Success of Children and Youth Learning English: Promising Futures, ed. Ruby Takanishi and Suzanne Le Menestrel (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2017), source; Ascend, The Aspen Institute (website), “What is 2Gen?” source; and Kelly Edyburn, Shantel Meek, Conor Williams, Eugene Garcia, Ruby Takanishi, Oscar Jiminez-Castellanos, and Ryan Pontier, “Inequitable Access to High-Quality Learning Opportunities for Dual Language and English Learners,” in Start with Equity: From the Early Years to the Early Grades (Tempe, AZ: Children’s Equity Project and Washington, DC: Bipartisan Policy Center, July 2020), pages 84-107, source
- Maki Park and Caitlin Kastsiaficas, Leveraging the Potential of Home Visiting to Serve Immigrant and Dual Language Learner Families (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2019), source
- National Head Start Association, “National Head Start Fact Sheets,” source; and National Head Start Association, “2020 Migrant and Seasonal Head Start Profile,” source