Fact Sheet

August 2018 English Learners in Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies

By Julie Sugarman and Courtney Geary

This fact sheet provides an overview of key characteristics of the foreign-born and English Learner (EL) populations in Texas. It aims to build understanding of the state demographic context, how ELs are performing in K-12 schools, and the basics of state policies for EL education under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), enacted in December 2015. The transition to ESSA is ongoing, with states slated to update their data reporting systems by December 2018. As a result, the data this fact sheet uses to describe student outcomes No Child Left Behind Act primarilyis implemented reflect will systems improve and the accountability accuracy and policies availability developed of these under data. the (NCLB, in effect from 2002 through 2015). Many of the changes expected as ESSA

TheAgency. first A section discussion examines of EL thestudent demographics outcomes asof Texasmeasured using by U.S. standardized Census Bureau tests 2016 follows, and Americanthe fact sheet Community concludes Survey with a(ACS) brief data,overview and ELof Texasstudents accountability as reported mechanisms by the Texas thatEducation affect a c t s ELs under ESSA. F

I. Demographic Overview of Foreign-Born and EL Populations in Texas

a t i o n In 2016, approximately 4,730,000 foreign-born individuals resided in Texas, accounting l population (14 percent), as seen in Table 1. Historically, Texas has been a destination for u for 17 percent of the state population—higher than the immigrant share of the overall U.S. p foreign-born population. The growth rate of the immigrant population in Texas slowed from o substantial90 percent innumbers the period of immigrants, between 1990 with and the 2000 state to home 63 percent to about between 11 percent 2000 of and the 2016.U.S.

generally, and it far outpaces the growth rate of the native-born population. Age group trends Nevertheless,in Texas mirror this broader growth national rate is highertrends, than with that disproportionately of the U.S. immigrant smaller population shares of moreforeign-

E L P born individuals in the birth-to-age-17 brackets compared to the native born.

With a large population of immigrants, it follows that the share of school-age children with

overall (26 percent), as shown in Table 2. Additionally, about 86 percent of children of one or more foreign-born parents is larger in Texas (36 percent) than in the United States children in low-income families had one or more foreign-born parents, which is higher than immigrantsthe share of inlow-income Texas were children native born, nationally equal (32 to the percent). nationwide figure. In Texas, 44 percent of Table 1. Foreign- and U.S.-Born Populations of Texas and the United States, 2016 Texas United States Foreign Born U.S. Born Foreign Born U.S. Born Number 4,729,920 23,132,676 43,739,345 279,388,170 Share of total population 17.0% 83.0% 13.5% 86.5% Population Change over Time % change: 2000-16 63.1% 28.9% 40.6% 11.6% % change: 1990-2000 90.2% 16.1% 57.4% 9.3% Age Group Share under age 5 0.8% 8.5% 0.7% 7.0% Share ages 5-17 5.6% 21.7% 5.1% 18.5% Share ages 18+ 93.5% 69.8% 94.2% 74.5% Source: Migration Policy Institute (MPI) Data Hub, “State Immigration Data Profiles: Demographics & Social,” accessed May 15, 2018, www.migrationpolicy.org/data/state-profiles/state/demographics/TX/US/.

Number of ELs. - percent of Texas children ages 5 to 17 are LEP.3 ACS data on the Limited English AtIn contrast,the state level,the most ACS recent data indicate data from that the 9 Texas Proficientcounted as (LEP) those population who speak relyEnglish on self-report less than Education Agency, from school year (SY) 2017– ing of English proficiency, with LEP individuals- 18, indicate ELs represented 19 percent of the state preK-12 student population, or 1,015,182 “veryare LEP, well.”1 while At the data national the states level, submitted ACS data to indi the students.4 catefederal that government 5 percent of put U.S. the children EL share ages of the5 to total 17 K-12 population at 10 percent in Fall 2015.2 children, they can be used to examine (with due Although ACS data seem to undercount EL

Table 2. Nativity and Low-Income Status in Texas and the United States, 2016 Texas United States Share of Share of Number Population Number Population (%) (%) Children between ages 6 and 17 with 4,635,161 100.0 47,090,847 100.0 Only native-born parents 2,989,495 64.5 34,838,528 74.0 One or more foreign-born parents 1,654,666 35.5 12,252,319 26.0 Child is native born 1,421,993 30.7 10,501,024 22.3 Child is foreign born 223,673 4.8 1,751,295 3.7 Children in low-income families 3,210,860 100.0 28,363,805 100.0 Only native-born parents 1,788,927 55.7 19,216,957 67.8 One or more foreign-born parents 1,421,933 44.3 9,146,848 32.2 Note: The definition of children in low-income families includes children under age 18 who resided with at least one parent and in families with annual incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold. Source: MPI Data Hub, “State Immigration Data Profiles: Demographics & Social.”

2 English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies Fact Sheet

Table 3. Nativity of Texas and U.S. LEP Students, 2012–16 Share of K-12 LEP Children Born in the United States (%) Grades K-5 Grades 6–12 Total Texas 87.5 65.0 78.5 United States 82.3 56.5 70.6 Note: Analysis based on Limited English Proficient (LEP) children ages 5 and older enrolled in grades K-12. Source: MPI analysis of U.S. Census Bureau pooled 2012–16 American Community Survey (ACS) data, accessed through Minnesota Population Center, University of Minnesota, “Integrated Public Use Microdata Series,” accessed April 25, 2018, https://usa.ipums.org/usa/.

caution) the nativity of ELs, a variable school data systems do not capture. Table 3 shows that language listed as English are likely living in in Texas, more than three-quarters of school- fivea home non-English where English languages. and one ELs or with more a home other aged children who were reported as LEP in languages are spoken. Altogether, more than 90 languages other than English are spoken in the a larger share among elementary school children homes of Texas ELs. censusthan older data students. were born The in share the United of native-born States, with Among Texas school districts with enrollment somewhat lower, at 71 percent. LEP children in the United States overall was the largest number of ELs in SY 2017–18 were Turning now to data collected by the Texas ofDallas, more , than 15,000 Fort ELs,Worth, the Aldine, five districts and Austin. with Education Agency, Table 4 shows the most As Table 5 shows, in the districts with the commonly spoken home languages among Texas largest numbers of ELs, these students made up ELs in SY 2017–18. Spanish leads the list at 90 54 percent (La Joya ISD) of total enrollment. between 15 percent (Cypress-Fairbanks ISD) and percent of ELs, with Vietnamese, , , and Mandarin Chinese rounding out the top

Table 4. Home Languages Spoken by Texas ELs, SY 2017–18 Share of ELs with a Home Language Number of ELs Other Than English (%) Spanish 908,131 89.5 Vietnamese 16,181 1.6 Arabic 12,605 1.2 Other (not specified) 7,460 0.7 English 7,068 0.7 Urdu 5,222 0.5 Mandarin (Chinese) 4,972 0.5 Other (85 languages) 52,561 5.2 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Note: The figures in this table were calculated based on 1,014,200 ELs for whom a language was reported. Source: Texas Education Agency, “ELL Student Reports by Language and Grade,” updated April 4, 2018, https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adleplg.html. 3 Migration Policy Institute Table 5. Number of ELs and EL Share of Students in Texas School Districts with More Than 15,000 ELs, SY 2017–18 EL Share of Students in District Number of ELs (%) ISD 69,311 44.2 Houston ISD 67,393 31.5 Fort Worth ISD 26,532 30.8 Aldine ISD 23,138 34.4 Austin ISD 22,428 27.5 Alief ISD 20,147 43.5 Cypress-Fairbanks ISD 16,925 14.5 El Paso ISD 16,345 28.0 Garland ISD 16,181 28.6 Arlington ISD 16,132 26.4 Pasadena ISD 15,644 28.6 United ISD 15,580 36.0 La Joya ISD 15,406 53.5 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year; ISD = Independent School District. Note: The figures in this table were calculated based on 1,015,102 ELs in districts with at least five ELs. Source: Texas Education Agency, “Student Program Reports—Statewide District Totals,” updated April 4, 2018, https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adspr.html.

Finally, Table 6 shows that as grade level increases, the population and share of ELs in II. EL Student Outcomes in Texas Texas preK-12 schools decrease. Whereas 38 Texas uses the Texas percent of prekindergarten and 27 percent of early-elementary students were ELs in SY annual assessment of EL students’ English 2017–18, that number dropped to 9 percent for Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) for ELs scoring at each level, by grade band. language proficiency. Table 7 shows the share of gradesthus exit 9 throughEL status) 12. over This time reflects than the immigrate trend that For SY 2016–17, students in kindergarten more students achieve English proficiency (and through 2nd grade were evenly distributed between beginning, intermediate, and the two toframe. the United States as adolescents or remain advanced levels. In contrast, among those in ELs beyond the typical five- to seven-year time

Table 6. Number of ELs and EL Share of Students in Texas, by Grade, SY 2017–18 Prekindergarten Grades K-2 Grades 3–5 Grades 6–8 Grades 9–12 EL share of students 38.3% 26.7% 23.3% 15.5% 9.2% in grade band Number of ELs 88,932 308,521 288,745 186,453 142,531 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Sources: Texas Education Agency, “ELL Student Reports by Category and Grade,” updated April 4, 2018, https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adlepcg.html; Texas Education Agency, “Student Enrollment Reports,” updated April 4, 2018, https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adste.html.

4 English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies Fact Sheet

Table 7. Share of Texas ELs at Each TELPAS Composite Rating (%), by Grade SY 2016–17 Grades K-2 Grades 3–12 (%) (%) Beginning 32 6 Intermediate 31 19 Advanced 22 41 Advanced High 14 34 EL = English Learner; TELPAS = Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System; SY = School Year. Source: Texas Education Agency, “TELPAS Statewide Summary Reports—Spring 2017,” accessed April 20, 2018, http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/ell/telpas/rpt/sum/.

grades 3 through 12, three-quarters were at one not include all Texas ELs. The rules for including of the two most advanced levels. newly arrived ELs in reports on subgroup outcomes will change as ESSA provisions go Next, the fact sheet looks at outcomes of the EL into effect in 2018 (see “Accountability for EL subgroup on state standardized assessments. Academic Achievement” below). It is important to note two things about the participation of ELs on these assessments. Texas administers the State of Texas First, compared to other student subgroups Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) based on ethnicity, poverty, gender, and special for accountability purposes. STAAR assessments education status, ELs are a much more dynamic are given in reading and math in grades 3 to 8, writing in grades 4 and 7, science in grades 5 and 8, and social studies in grade 8. End-of-course population: as students gain proficiency, they exit assessments are also given for English I, English thestudents EL subgroup who remain and newin the ELs EL are subgroup identified are as not theyperforming enter the at aU.S. level school where system. their achievementBy definition, on may take the STAAR assessments in Spanish in mainstream assessments is comparable to that II,reading, Algebra math, I, Biology, writing, and and U.S. science History. in Studentsgrades 3, 4, and 5. There are four academic performance levels for STAAR tests: did not meet, approaches, ofyears their of English-proficient learning English, concerns peers. Whereas about the this meets, and masters grade level. Students at the lag is expected for students in their first several top three levels are considered to have passed the exams.5 significant numbers of long-term ELs—those identifiedand math haveas ELs driven for six policymakers or more years—not to strengthen Table 8 shows moderate achievement gaps scoringthe ways proficient they hold in schools English accountable language arts for (ELA) EL between the share of ELs and of all students outcomes on academic assessments. on the STARR reading tests, with smaller achievement gaps in grades 3 through 5 (8 to 13 points) and larger gaps in the older grades (26 exempt newly arrived EL students from taking to 29 points). Similarly, the achievement gap in Second,the ELA undertest for NCLB, one year states and were to exclude allowed the to math writing was lower in grade 4 (10 points) than in scores of those newcomers from accountability grade 7 (29 points). reports. For that reason, the results below do

5 Migration Policy Institute Table 8. Share of Texas ELs and All Students with a Passing Score in Reading and Writing (%), by Grade, SY 2016–17 Reading Writing Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 4 Grade 7 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Share of ELs 65 58 69 40 44 60 55 41 passing Share of all 73 70 82 69 73 86 65 70 students passing EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Source: Texas Education Agency, “Texas Academic Performance Report, 2016-17 State Performance,” accessed April 20, 2018, https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/tapr/2017/state.pdf.

As in reading and writing, there are modest grade social studies test, the gap between ELs gaps between ELs and all students on the STARR and all students was 32 points. Mathematics assessment in grades 3 through 5 (3 to 6 points), which widen to between 11 and Table 11 shows gaps of more than 30 points 21 points in the older grades (See Table 9). between ELs and all students on the high school end-of-course exams for English I (35 points) In science, ELs scored on average 16 points and English II (38 points). Among these exams, lower than all students in grade 5 and 28 points the narrowest gap, at 16 points, was for lower in grade 8 (see Table 10). For the 8th Algebra I.

Table 9. Share of Texas ELs and All Students with a Passing Score in Mathematics (%), by Grade, SY 2016–17 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Share of ELs passing 75 70 81 60 49 74 Share of all students passing 78 76 87 76 70 85 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Source: Texas Education Agency, “Texas Academic Performance Report.”

Table 10. Share of Texas ELs and All Students with a Passing Score in Science and Social Studies (%), by Grade, SY 2016–17

Science Social Studies Grade 5 Grade 8 Grade 8 (%) (%) (%) Share of ELs passing 58 48 31 Share of all students passing 74 76 63 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Source: Texas Education Agency, “Texas Academic Performance Report.”

6 English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies Fact Sheet

Table 11. Share of Texas ELs and All Students Passing End-of-Course Exams (%), by Subject, SY 2016–17 English I English II Algebra I Biology U.S. History (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Share of ELs passing 29 28 67 64 72 Share of all students passing 64 66 83 86 91 EL = English Learner; SY = School Year. Source: Texas Education Agency, “Texas Academic Performance Report.”

Finally, there are wide gaps between ELs and all students in high school graduation rates in Learn More about ELs and ESSA Texas. For the class of 2017, the share of ELs For additional analysis, maps, and to graduate within four years was 71 percent, state-level data on English Learner compared to a four-year graduation rate of 89 percent for all students.6 These rates are just check out the MPI ELL Information above those at the national level for the most Centereducation and in itsthe ESSA United resources States, . recent year available (SY 2015–16), which were 67 percent for ELs and 84 percent for all students.7 A. Identification and Reclassification of ELs Following federal guidelines, all states require III. Accountability under ESSA schools to follow a two-step process for In 2017, all 50 states (plus the District of identifying students as ELs. First, parents or guardians complete a home-language survey when they enroll their child in a new school Columbiaoutline their and approach Puerto Rico) to complying submitted with plans new district. The survey generally includes one toaccountability the U.S. Department regulations of Education under ESSA. that Among to four questions to identify students whose the new requirements are provisions requiring states to standardize how they identify students households where a language other than English for and exit them from EL status, extending the firstis spoken. language is not English or who live in number of years schools can include former ELs’ scores in reporting on the outcomes If students in such circumstances do not already of the EL subgroup, and allowing states to have scores from a state-approved English indicator (replacing the three required Annual a screening test to gauge their English language develop their own English language proficiency languageability in listening,proficiency speaking, test on file,reading, they andare given Implementation of the new policies began in writing (as required by ESSA). Students scoring MeasurableSY 2017–18. Achievement However, as manyObjectives states in have NCLB). must inform parents in a timely manner of their below proficient are categorized as ELs. Schools adoptedfew years, new some or significantlyintend to wait revised to update English their of the types of support the school can provide, language proficiency assessments over the last child’sincluding English the right language to opt proficiency out of services level (but and not the right to decline EL status and subsequent Englishassessments. language proficiency benchmarks until annual testing).8 they have collected sufficient data from the new

7 Migration Policy Institute In Texas, each district convenes a language does state that about 41 percent of ELs made includes parent representatives—to review EL this baseline, the state aims to increase the proficiency assessment committee—which progressshare of ELs toward making proficiency the expected in 2016. amount Using of progress by about 5 percent with a goal of classification criteria for each student and assign reaching 46 percent by 2032. In line with ESSA a language proficiency level and placement in a guidance, Texas plans to factor in whether programthrough the of instruction. home-language For initial survey classification, are given oral schools are making relatively less progress in studentsand reading/ELA who are assessmentsidentified as potential(the latter ELs only in grades 2–12), which the district must select their criteria for identifying schools in need of from a list of approved tests that is updated each movingcomprehensive students support toward and English improvement. proficiency11 in year by the Texas Education Agency. The state agency also provides guidelines for each test on what scores should result in the designation C. Accountability for EL Academic of a student as an EL. Students may not be Achievement exited from EL status in kindergarten, but in 1st In addition to progress toward English based on their scores on a state-approved oral through 12th grade, students may be reclassified and include in their accountability systems the TELPAS), the STAAR or other state-approved proficiency,data on how ESSA well ELs,requires as a subgroup,states to report are andstandardized written language reading proficiencytest, and a teacher test (usually performing on the indicators that apply to all evaluation.9 students (including ELA, math, and science tests; graduation rates; and a school-quality or student-success indicator such as attendance).

B. Accountability for English Language identify schools for comprehensive support Proficiency Usingand improvement this information, based ESSA on the calls performance for states to of Whereas parents and teachers are primarily all students, including subgroups of students, interested in the progress of individual students and for targeted support and improvement for schools that have one or more underperforming accountability systems track whether the ELs subgroups such as ELs. towardin entire English schools language and districts proficiency, are progressing state As noted earlier, the EL subgroup is unique determined timeline. States include English in that students exit the subgroup once they to and achieving proficiency within the state- systems in two ways. First, they set a long-term is no longer keeping them from general languagegoal for increasing proficiency the in percent their accountability of students reachacademic a level achievement at which their similar English to that proficiency of their interim goals along the way), and, second, allows states to include former ELs within the makingthey include progress an annual toward indicator proficiency of progress (with English-proficientEL subgroup for up peers. to four Because years after of this, they ESSA have exited EL status. Former EL students’ calculation they use to identify schools in need of scores in math and reading can thus be used towardimprovement. English10 language proficiency in the in accountability measures as a way to give schools credit for the progress those students Texas does not provide information in its ESSA have made. Texas will include former ELs in plan about the maximum number of years their calculation of academic achievement and students are expected to take to achieve English academic progress indicators, but it is unclear from the state ESSA plan whether this will be calculated for individual students. However, it done for two or four years.12 language proficiency, nor how progress is

8 English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies Fact Sheet

2 to others based on characteristics such as their two types of exemption states may choose 13 On Unliketo apply for to other recently subgroups, arrived ELsESSA on also state provides its ESSA plan, Texas checked the box indicating standardized tests: initialit will useEnglish option language 2 for its proficiency recently arrived level. ELs.

1. that Texas intends to calculate the growth can be exempt from taking the ELA test. However,score that Appendix option 2 allows C of the in plan the secondsuggests year InThey their must first be year tested in the in math United that States, year, ELs but their scores will not be included in account- students—an approach ESSA does not offer ability calculations. Regular test-taking and forstates. an 14additional three to five years for some accountability procedures will apply there- after. As states move forward with ESSA accountability plans, policymakers are taking the opportunity 2. to revise existing regulations on funding, year, but their scores can be excluded from program requirements, teacher training, ELsaccountability take ELA and measures. math tests In the in theirsecond first year, and other aspects of school administration. outcomes on both tests are reported as a Provisions that affect EL students should be growth score from year one to year two. scrutinized closely by stakeholders at all levels, From their third year on, students are as- whether parents, teachers, or community sessed and their scores included in account- organizations. Data on EL demographics and ability measures as is done for all students. performance, such as those provided in this fact sheet, will prove an important tool in this States also have a third option: they may assign effort.15 option 1 to some recently arrived ELs and option

9 Migration Policy Institute Endnotes

April 25, 2018, . 1 Migration Policy Institute (MPI) Data Hub, “State Immigration Data Profiles: Language & Education,” accessed www.migrationpolicy.org/data/state-profiles/state/language/TX/US/ Learner (ELL) Students Enrolled in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, by State: Selected Years, Fall 2000 2 throughU.S. Department Fall 2015,” of Education,updated October National 2017, Center https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_204.20. for Education Statistics (NCES), “Table 204.20: English Language asp?current=yes.

https:// 3 MPI Data Hub, “State Immigration Data Profiles: Language & Education.” rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adlepcg.html; TEA, “Student Enrollment Reports,” updated April 4, 2018, https:// 4 rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adste.htmlTexas Education Agency (TEA), “ELL Student. Reports by Category and Grade,” updated April 4, 2018, 5 TEA, “STAAR Frequently Asked Questions,” updated April 2018, https://tea.texas.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset. aspx?id=51539620927. 6 TEA, “Texas Academic Performance Report, 2016-17 State Performance,” accessed April 20, 2018, https://rptsvr1. tea.texas.gov/perfreport/tapr/2017/state.pdf.

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/ 7 digest/d17/tables/dt17_219.46.asp?current=yesNCES, “Table 219.46. Public High School 4-Year Adjusted. Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR), by Selected Student Characteristics and State: 2010-11 through 2015-16,” updated December 2017, Tools and Resources for Identifying all English Learners - partment of Education, 2016), . 8 U.S. Department of Education, ( DC: U.S. De - www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/chap1.pdf cerning State Plan for Educating English Language Learners,” Texas Administrative Code, effective July 15, 2018, 9 State of Texas, “Chapter 89. Adaptations for Special Populations—Subchapter BB. Commissioner’s Rules Con . 10 Susan Lyons and Nathan Dadey, Considering English Language Proficiency within Systems of Educational Account- https://tea.texas.gov/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=51539623823&libID=51539623821 ability under the Every Student Succeeds Act

pdf. (Chicago: Latino Policy Forum and Center for Assessment, 2017), www.latinopolicyforum.org/publications/reports/document/Considerations-for-ELP-indicator-in-ESSA_030817. 11 TEA, “Every Student Succeeds Act—Final Submitted ESSA Plan - March 6, 2018,” accessed July 19, 2018, https://tea.texas.gov/About_TEA/Laws_and_Rules/ESSA/Every_Student_Succeeds_Act/. 12 Ibid. 13 EdTrust, “Setting New Accountability for English-Learner Outcomes in ESSA Plans,” accessed April 26, 2018, https://edtrust.org/setting-new-accountability-english-learner-outcomes-essa-plans/. 14 TEA, “Every Student Succeeds Act.” 15 For additional information on accessing and understanding state English Learner demographic and outcome data, see Julie Sugarman, A Guide to Finding and Understanding English Learner Data . (Washington, DC: MPI, 2018), www.migrationpolicy.org/research/guide-finding-understanding-english-learner-data

10 English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies Fact Sheet

About the Authors Julie Sugarman is a Senior Policy Analyst at the Migration Policy Institute (MPI)

related to immigrant and English Learner students in elementary and secondary Nationalschools. Among Center heron Immigrant areas of focus: Integration policies, Policy, funding where mechanisms, she focuses and on district- issues and school-level practices that support high-quality instructional services for these

youth, as well as the particular needs of immigrant and refugee students who first enter U.S. schools at the middle and high school levels. Dr. Sugarman earned a B.A. in anthropology and French from Bryn Mawr College, an M.A. in anthropology from the University of Virginia, and a Ph.D. in second language education and culture from the University of ,Courtney College Geary Park. Integration Policy, where she provided research assistance on a variety of projects related to Englishwas Learner an intern education at the policy. MPI National She has Center worked on as Immigrant a Title III ESL

with elementary-age Arabic speakers. Her research interests include educational Tutoraccess for and the outcomes Tuscaloosa for EnglishCounty SchoolLearners District in the in Deep Alabama South, since and 2016,educational primarily with a focus in internationaland social servicescrisis management. for refugees and victims of conflict. She is a student at the University of Alabama, where she is pursuing a B.S. in interdisciplinary studies

11 Migration Policy Institute Acknowledgments The authors thank former Migration Policy Institute (MPI) interns Kevin Lee and Abby Scott for their researchcolleagues assistance, Leslie Villegas, and colleagues Lauren Shaw, Jie Zong Margie and McHugh, Jeanne Batalova Delia Pompa, for their and compilation Michelle Mittelstadt. of the U.S. Census Bureau data used throughout this fact sheet. They also gratefully acknowledge the support of This fact sheet was developed for the National Partnership to Improve PreK-12 Success for

Immigrantprovided to Children English Learnerand Youth, (EL) a collaborationchildren and youth.of state-level Support immigrant for this series policy of organizations fact sheets was working with MPI’s National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy to improve the quality of education Walton Family Foundation supported an earlier project upon which this series builds. provided by the Carnegie Corporation of . The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the For more information on the impact of the Every Student Succeeds Act on EL and immigrant students, visit: www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/nciip-english-learners-and-every-student- succeeds-act.

© 2018 Migration Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Cover Design: April Siruno, MPI Layout: Sara Staedicke, MPI

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/copyright-policy. Inquiries can also be directed to [email protected].

Suggested citation: Sugarman, Julie and Courtney Geary. 2018. English Learners in Texas: Demographics, Outcomes, and State Accountability Policies. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

12

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 local, national, and international levels. It aims to meet the rising demand for prag- matic 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 / I n t e g r a t i o n

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