Fact Sheet

October 2017

Dual Language Learners A Demographic and Policy Profile for By Maki Park, Anna O’Toole, and Caitlin Katsiaficas

This fact sheet provides demographic information for the young Dual Language Learner (DLL) population in Massachusetts, based on Migration Policy Institute (MPI) analysis of U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) data pooled over the 2011–15 period.

DLLs, defined as children ages 8 and under with at least one parent who speaks a language otherfact sheet than also English provides at home, information are less likelyregarding than Englishtheir peers Learner to access (EL)1 high-quality early child- hood programs, although they stand to benefit disproportionately from such services. The experienced by DLLs later in their academic trajectories that may be dueand innon-EL part to academic gaps in outcomes at the fourth-grade level as a means of estimating potential lags in achievement

servicesAnalysis asof thesewell as data other offers risk a factors snapshot outlined of young in this DLLs sociodemographic in Massachusetts profile. and some of the

port DLLs in early childhood education and care (ECEC) programs in an effort to provide risks to their academic success. This is followed by a checklist of state policies that can sup- to provide a basic understanding of the characteristics of the substantial DLL population in equitableMassachusetts services and and the closeresponsiveness later gaps inof achievement.the state’s policies Taken to together, their needs. this analysisThis fact aims sheet, part of a series available for 30 states, is accompanied by a national analysis of trends and 2 a c t s key policies affecting DLLs across the . I. Demographic Overview of DLLs in Massachusetts D L L F DLLs comprise 36 percent of the young child population (ages 0 to 8) in Massachusetts. Since 2000, Massachusetts has experienced a 303 percent growth in its young DLL population, as compared to a 24 percent increase nationally. As shown in Table 1, 48 percent of DLLs in Massachusetts live in low-income families, as compared with 23 percent of non-DLLs. Of parentstables in of this DLL section children, provide 15 percent information have less about than the a substantialhigh school number education, and compared share of young with 3 percent of parents of non-DLLs, indicating significant risk factors for this population. The

DLLs in Massachusetts, and other key demographic characteristics for this population and their non-DLL peers. 1

2 English Learners (ELs) are defined as elementaryDual and Languagesecondary Learners: students Awhose National first Demographic language is not Profile Eng - (Washington,lish and who have DC: Migration not yet attained Policy EnglishInstitute, proficiency. 2017), Maki Park, Anna O’Toole, and Caitlin Katsiaficas, . 3 www.migrationpolicy.org/research/dual-language- learners-national-demographic-and-policy-profile Families with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level are considered low-income. Table 1. Key Characteristics of DLLs, Non-DLLs, and their Parents in Massachusetts, 2011–15 Dual Language Non-DLL Population in Learners in Massachusetts Massachusetts Number Share (%) Number Share (%) Total young child population (ages 0–8) 240,000 100.0 423,000 100.0 Age 0–2 81,000 33.5 130,000 30.8 3–4 57,000 23.7 95,000 22.5 5–8 103,000 42.7 198,000 46.7 Race/Ethnicity Hispanic 94,000 39.1 22,000 5.3 White/other 69,000 28.7 350,000 82.7 Asian 45,000 18.6 12,000 2.9 Black 32,000 13.3 36,000 8.6 American Indian - - 2,000 0.5 Income and Poverty Below 100% of FPL 63,000 26.0 52,000 12.4 100–199% of FPL 52,000 21.8 46,000 10.8 At or above 200% of FPL 125,000 52.1 325,000 76.8 Parental English Proficiency Total parent population 279,000 100.0 488,000 100.0 LEP 99,000 35.6 N/A N/A Parental Educational Attainment Total parent population (ages 25 and older) 264,000 100.0 470,000 100.0 Less than high school 39,000 14.8 15,000 3.2 High school diploma or equivalent 59,000 22.4 79,000 16.9 Some college 59,000 22.5 116,000 24.8 Bachelor’s degree or higher 106,000 40.3 260,000 55.2 FPL = Federal poverty level; LEP = Limited English Proficient. Notes: Poverty level refers to the poverty thresholds used by the Census Bureau to measure the share of the population living in poverty. English proficiency is self-reported. LEP refers to American Community Survey (ACS) respondents who indicated that they speak English less than “very well.” “-” indicates a sample size too small to generate result. Source: Migration Policy Institute (MPI) analysis of U.S. Census Bureau pooled 2011–15 ACS data.

childhood and other social services. Table 2 lists the top five home languages particular difficulties in gaining access to early spoken by parents of DLLs in Massachusetts, Extensive research has demonstrated the indicating significant linguistic diversity within this population. Families with speakers of lower-incidenceTable 2. Top Five minority Home Languages languages Spokenmay face by Parentsimportance of DLLs of in high-quality Massachusetts, early 2011–15 learning op- French Spanish Portuguese Chinese French Creole Number of DLL parents 96,000 32,000 18,000 13,000 8,000 Share of DLL parents (%) 34.6 11.5 6.4 4.7 2.9 Notes: The table excludes parents of DLLs who speak English only. Chinese includes Cantonese, Mandarin, and other Chinese languages. French includes French and Patois. Source: MPI analysis of U.S. Census Bureau pooled 2011–15 ACS data. 2 Dual Language Learners: A Demographic and Policy Profile for Massachusetts Fact Sheet

Table 3. Pre-K Enrollment of Children (ages 3 to 4) in Massachusetts, by DLL Status, 2011-15 DLL Share Non-DLL Non-DLL Share DLL Number (%) Number (%) Total population 54,000 100.0 94,000 100.0 Enrolled in pre-K 26,000 48.3 59,000 62.7 Note: These numbers exclude children ages 3 to 4 who were enrolled in . Source: MPI analysis of U.S. Census Bureau pooled 2011–15 ACS data. portunities in building a foundation for future success and healthy development. DLLs espe As children are expected to be relatively compe outcomes of ELs and non-ELs in Massachusetts. - , academic success beyond this point- cially stand to benefit from participation in high- tentis highly in written dependent language on students by the time having they devel reach quality pre-K. However, DLLs in Massachusetts are enrolling in pre-K programs at lower rates period, underscoring the critical importance - thanfor this their population. non-DLL peers (see Table 3), which opedof the foundational early years to language future academic skills prior success. to this may contribute to lags in kindergarten readiness from the National Assessment of Educational FourthProgress grade (NAEP), reading provide and maththe earliest scores, available taken II. Looking Beyond Early

Childhood: Achievement Gaps indication of cross-state student performance Between ELs and Non-ELs in anddemically are widely across used the asUnited a national States. report In Massachu card to demonstrate how students are performing aca- Massachusetts - setts,peers ELsin fourth have substantiallygrade (see Figure lower 1). scores This disparin both The achievement gaps young DLLs may experi readingity in outcomes and math points compared to the withimportance their native of early ence later in their academic trajectories can be - - childhood interventions that seek to place all Figureseen in 1.the Fourth discrepancy Grade Readingbetween andthe academicMath NAEP Scoresyoung in children Massachusetts, on equal byfooting EL Status, academically. 2015

300 239 253 223 200 200 Non-EL Students

Score 100 EL Students

0 Reading Math

NAEP = National Assessment of Educational Progress. Source: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, “NAEP Data Explorer—Math and Reading Assessments, 2015,” accessed March 8, 2017, https://nces.ed.gov/na- tionsreportcard/naepdata/.

3 Migration Policy Institute Table 4. System-Level DLL-Related Policies in Massachusetts, 2017 Bilingual education (mandatory, prohibited, or no law) Prohibited* State Quality Rating and Improvement System (if any) includes criteria specific to  supporting DLLs State has specific policies or guidelines pertaining to DLLs/ELs for the N/A** administration of Kindergarten Entry or Readiness Assessments (if any) * While it is currently required that all children in Massachusetts public schools be taught in English only, state policymakers are debating the repeal of this mandate. ** Massachusetts does not administer a state Kindergarten Entry or Readiness Assessment. Sources: Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, “Full Text of 2002 Ballot Questions—Question 2: Education in Public Schools,” accessed September 14, 2017, www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/ele02/elebq02/bq- 02full.htm#q2anc; Survey of state early learning agencies administered by MPI researchers in April 2017.

III. Early Childhood Education and can affect services and outcomes for DLLs and Care Policies Affecting DLLs in Massachusetts their families by influencing multiple aspects of theeducation field. For in earlyexample, childhood while mostclassrooms, states do some not have laws governing bilingual approaches to can undermine support for DLLs across state Thesupports, checklists and informationof ECEC policies that canin this be sectionmade explicitly prohibit bilingual education, which show many—though not all—of the resources, ECECeducation systems. in schools On the that other enroll end aof substantial the spectrum, available at the state level to provide equitable, several states have laws mandating bilingual high-quality ECEC services and programs for learning strengths and needs. Similarly, Quality DLLs and their families. In the tables, a check number of DLLs, promoting awareness of DLLs’ mark indicates the presence of a policy. states increasingly use to create an overarching Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS), which A. System-Level Policies definitionand cultural of needsquality are for valued all early across childhood ECEC pro- While state ECEC systems across the United grams, can determine whether diverse linguistic - grams. The list in Table 4, while not intended to States are highly complex, with disparate betions exhaustive, for DLLs inincludes early childhood. some of the key policies programs often working in relative isolation in Massachusetts that have system-level implica- from one another, a few system-level policies

Table 5. Massachusetts Services for LEP Families Seeking Child-Care Assistance, 2016 Application in non-English languages  Informational materials in non-English languages  Training and technical assistance in non-English languages  Website in non-English languages No Lead agency accepts applications at community-based locations  Bilingual caseworkers or translators  Bilingual outreach workers  Partnerships with community-based organizations  Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Care, “Massachusetts Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) Plan with Conditional Approval Letter for FY 2016- 2018,” June 27, 2016, www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/occ/Massachusetts_stplan_pdf_2016.pdf.

4 Dual Language Learners: A Demographic and Policy Profile for Massachusetts Fact Sheet

Table 6. Massachusetts Services for LEP Child-Care Providers, 2016 Informational materials in non-English languages  Training and technical assistance in non-English languages  CCDF health and safety requirements in non-English languages  Provider contracts in non-English languages  Website in non-English languages No Bilingual caseworkers or translators  Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Care, “Massachusetts Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) Plan with Conditional Approval Letter for FY 2016- 2018.”

B. Child Care and Development Fund ports grants to all 50 states and the District of Usage in Massachusetts

Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) re Columbia,regular home offering visits crucial and access assistance to health, to low- social sources are allocated by the federal government incomeservice, familiesand child with development young children professionals. through - These supports can be particularly effective for immigrant and LEP parents of young children toincome states families. with the Each intention state’s of CCDF improving plan includes access toinformation high-quality regarding child-care supports services for for Limited low- whodata areon the relatively participation isolated of and different are not subgroups access- providers. Strong language access and outreach ing other public services. Collecting state-level Englishpolicies Proficientare critical (LEP) supports families that andenable child-care LEP understand potential gaps in services and barri iners the to accessMIECHV for program minority is populations, critical in order includ to Table 5). ing young DLLs and their families (see Table - parents to access high-quality child care (see - possible to identify disparities in participation can also use CCDF funds to offer linguistic and 7).and Data to improve collection programs at the state in order level to makes promote it Beyondcultural seekingsupport toand reach targeted LEP families, technical states assis

By providing these services, states can increase- equitable access. tancetheir supply for LEP of child-care culturally providers and linguistically (see Table re 6). D. Pre-K and Early Learning in - Massachusetts sponsive care and bolster diversity in the child- care workforce. have publicly funded preschool programs. Re C. Home Visiting in Massachusetts Forty-three states and the District of Columbia - The federal Maternal, Infant, and Early Child search has consistently shown that DLLs stand to benefit disproportionately from attending - high-quality preschool. As such, it is important Tablehood 7.Home Massachusetts Visiting (MIECHV) Home Visiting program Data sup Collection,- to understand 2016 how state policies might support Massachusetts MIECHV program collects the following information about participating families: Race/ethnicity  Home language spoken  Limited English Proficient (LEP) status No MIECHV = Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting. Source: Survey of state home visiting agencies administered by MPI researchers in April 2017.

5 Migration Policy Institute Table 8. Early Learning Policies that Support DLLs in Massachusetts, 2015 Number of States* The state: that follow this policy Uses home language as eligibility criteria for publicly funded pre-K No 12 out of 51 Tracks enrollment of DLLs in state pre-K program  22 out of 51 Can report DLL enrollment by home language No 14 out of 51 Provides recruitment and enrollment materials in non-English  17 out of 51 languages Requires DLLs in state pre-K program to be assessed in their home No 6 out of 51 language Requires pre-K teachers to have qualifications related to DLLs  5 out of 51 Allocates extra state pre-K program resources to serve DLLs No 9 out of 51 * Data in this column include the District of Columbia. Source: W. Steven Barnett et al., The State of Preschool 2015: State Preschool Yearbook (New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, 2016), http://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Yearbook_2015_ rev1.pdf.

a language other than English at home and are learning English as a second or third language or impede DLLs’ access to high-quality pre-K (see Table 8). that support cultural and linguistic diversity stantial proportion of the young child popula continues to grow, early childhood policies tionDual in Language most states, Learners including now Massachusetts.comprise a sub - - and meet the unique learning needs of DLLs are crucial to ensuring equal access to high- As the population of young children who speak quality programs for all.

6 Dual Language Learners: A Demographic and Policy Profile for Massachusetts Fact Sheet

About the Authors Maki Park

on domestic is and a Policy comparative Analyst issuesand Program affecting Coordinator children of with immigrants the Migration and Dual Policy InstituteLanguage (MPI) Learners National in early Center childhood. on Immigrant Integration Policy, where she works

Anna O’Toole is a Program Assistant at the MPI National Center on Immigrant In

- tegration Policy, where she provides program support on immigrant education and workforce policy.

Caitlin Katsiaficas

practices that support is a the Research successful Assistant integration at MPI, of where immigrant she works and refugee with the families, Na- tionalparticularly Center Dual on Immigrant Language LearnersIntegration and Policy. the young Her research children focuses of refugees. on policies and

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Alliance for Early Success for its support of this work. They also acknowl- edge the contributions of their MPI colleagues, including Michelle Mittelstadt, Lauren Shaw, Margie McHugh, Jeanne Batalova, Jie Zong, and Lauren Hodges.

© 2017 Migration Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Design: April Siruno, MPI Layout: Liz Heimann

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Migration Policy Institute. A full-text PDF of this document is available for free download from www.migrationpolicy.org.

Information for reproducing excerpts from this publication can be found at www.migrationpolicy.org/about/copy- right-policy. Inquiries can also be directed to [email protected].

Suggested citation: Park, Maki, Anna O’Toole, and Caitlin Katsiaficas. 2017. Dual Language Learners: A Demographic and Policy Profile for Massachusetts.Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

7 Migration Policy Institute

The Migration Policy Institute (MPI) is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit think tank dedicated to the study of the movement of people worldwide. The Institute provides analysis, development, and evaluation of migration and refugee policies at the lo- cal, national, and international levels. It aims to meet the rising demand for pragmatic responses to the challenges and opportunities that migration presents in an ever more integrated world.

w w w .M i g r a t i o n P o l i c y . o r g

1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20036 202-266-1940 (t) | 202-266-1900 (f)