Decentralization, Teacher Quality, and the Education of English Learners: Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 26/01/2020 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 03/06/2020 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 19/11/2020 education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 29 Number 100 July 26, 2021 ISSN 1068-2341 Decentralization, Teacher Quality, and the Education of English Learners: Do State Education Agencies Effectively Prepare Teachers of ELs? Christine Montecillo Leider Boston University Michaela W. Colombo University of Massachusetts Lowell & Erin Nerlino Boston University United States Citation: Leider, C. M, Colombo, M. W., & Nerlino, E. (2021). Decentralization, teacher quality, and the education of English learners: Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of Els? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29(100). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5279 Abstract: English learners are entitled to participate meaningfully and equally in educational programs. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) includes provisions to ensure success for all students, including English learners. However, the federal government does not prescribe specifically how states should meet these provisions; instead, it is the responsibility of states to develop respective plans of action. This decentralization means that states play a primary role in setting policy for teacher credentialing. In this paper, we address the following question: Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? We reviewed the teacher credentialing requirements to teach classified English learners in bilingual education, English language development, and sheltered http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5279 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 2 English immersion settings, as well as the professional teaching standards for reference to culturally and linguistically diverse learners across the 50 states and the District of Columbia. We found inconsistencies across the US with regard to the education of classified English learners and document wide variation in teacher certification for working with English learners. We highlight implications for policy and teacher preparation. Keywords: Teacher Preparation; Teacher Credentials; Teacher Training; Civil Rights; ELs; Highly Effective Teachers Descentralización, calidad de los maestros y la educación de los estudiantes de inglés: ¿Las agencias estatales de educación preparan efectivamente a los maestros de los estudiantes de inglés? Resumen: Los estudiantes de inglés tienen derecho a participar de manera significativa e igualitaria en programas educativos. La ley Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) incluye disposiciones para garantizar el éxito de todos los estudiantes, incluidos los estudiantes de inglés. Sin embargo, el gobierno federal no prescribe específicamente cómo los estados deben cumplir con estas disposiciones; en cambio, es responsabilidad de los estados desarrollar planes de acción respectivos. Esta descentralización significa que los estados juegan un papel principal en el establecimiento de políticas para la acreditación de maestros. En este documento, abordamos la siguiente pregunta: ¿Las agencias estatales de educación A = preparan eficazmente a los maestros de estudiantes EL? Revisamos los requisitos de acreditación de maestros para enseñar a los estudiantes de inglés clasificado s en educación bilingüe, desarrollo del idioma inglés y entornos de inmersión protegida en inglés, así como los estándares de enseñanza profesional para referencia a estudiantes cultural y lingüísticamente diversos en los 50 estados y el Distrito de Columb ia. Encontramos inconsistencias en los EE. UU. Con respecto a la educación de los estudiantes de inglés clasificados y documentamos una amplia variación en la certificación de maestros para trabajar con estudiantes de inglés. Destacamos las implicaciones p ara las políticas y la preparación docente. Keywords: Formación docente; Credenciales de maestros; Formación de profesores; Derechos civiles; EL; Maestros muy efectivos Descentralização, qualidade do professor e educação de alunos de inglês: As agências estaduais de educação preparam efetivamente os professores de E ls? Resumo: Os alunos de inglês têm o direito de participar de forma significativa e igualitária em programas educacionais. O Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) inclui disposições para garantir o sucesso de todos os alunos, incluindo os alunos de inglês. No entanto, o governo federal não prescreve especificamente como os estados devem cumprir essas disposições; em vez disso, é responsabilidade dos Estados desenvolver os respectivos planos de ação. Essa descentralização significa que os estados desempenham um papel primordial na definição de políticas para credenciamento de professores. Neste artigo, abordamos a seguinte questão: As agências A = de educação estadual preparam efetivamente os professores de LEs? Revisamos os requisitos de credenciamento de professores para ensinar alunos classificados de inglês em educação bilíngüe, desenvolvimento da língua inglesa e configurações protegidas de imersão em inglês, bem como os padrões de ensino profissional para referência a alunos com diversidade cultural e lingüística nos 50 estados e no Distrito de Columbia. Encontramos inconsistências nos Estados Unidos com relação à educação de alunos classificados de inglês e documentamos Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 3 uma ampla variação na certificação de professores para trabalhar com alunos de inglês. Destacamos as implicações para políticas e preparação de professores. Palavras-chave: Preparação de Professores; Credenciais do professor; Formação de professores; Direitos civis; ELs; professores muito eficazes Decentralization, Teacher Quality, and the Education of English Learners: Do State Education Agencies Effectively Prepare Teachers of ELs? The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015) includes provisions to ensure success for all students and schools. Under this federal commitment to equal opportunity, equity and access is particularly important for historically marginalized students such as English Learners (ELs)1, who, under Title VI (Civil Rights Act, 1964), are entitled to participate meaningfully and equitably in educational programs. Federal regulations governing the equitable education of ELs are based on case law (e.g., Castaňeda v. Pickard, 1981; Lau v. Nichols, 1974; United States v. Texas, 1971, 1981). The Office of Civil Rights (OCR, 1970) is also clear that a student’s English language status cannot interfere with effective participation or lead to an inappropriate special education placement and requires any program for ELs to include adequate resources. States play a primary organizational role in all aspects of education, including policy, curriculum, the allocation of funds (e.g., Title III for improving the education of ELs), as well as in setting academic standards and standards for teacher credentialing (Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 2019). Specifically, State Education Agencies (SEAs) assume responsibility for ensuring that public school teachers receive training that at least minimally complies with federal law. Although the federal government requires SEA and Local Education Agencies (LEAs; e.g., school districts) to comply with OCR (1970) mandates, SEAs have flexibility in determining how they will comply. Under ESSA (2015), individual SEAs develop and submit plans of action to meet OCR (1970) requirements, which the federal government must then approve. SEA plans have been shown to differ widely (Villegas & Pompa, 2020). In this paper, we explore the following question: Do State Education Agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? This question is critical because the opportunity gap for ELs presents a persistent and seemingly intractable educational problem. Despite policy spelled out in ESSA, civil rights and case law, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data indicate that a pervasive gap remains between ELs and their non-EL peers (NCES, 2020)2. These achievement disparities represent an opportunity gap, which is unsurprising given empirical research documenting that ELs are often in classrooms where teachers water down content or lower expectations (Dabach, 2014), are tracked into less rigorous academic coursework (Kanno & Kangas, 2014; Morita-Mullaney et al., 2019, 2020), are over- and under-represented in special education services (Counts et al., 2018; Umansky et al., 2017) and underrepresented in gifted and talented programs (Grissom & Redding, 2015). While teacher preparedness is only one factor contributing to student access and outcomes, clearly it is an important one (see e.g., Chetty et al., 2014; Cloftfelter et al., 2010; Darling-Hammond et al., 2005; Easton-Brooks & Davis, 2009; Lavery et al., 2018; Lee, 2018; Wilson et al., 2001). Presumably requirements spelled out by SEAs dictate the 1 Throughout this paper, we use the term ELs for the purpose of clarity to refer only to students who are classified ELs. In general, we advocate for the use of the asset-focused term multilingual learners to refer to both students who are classified and not classified as ELs, however given our specific policy focus in this paper we use the term ELs to refer to classified ELs (i.e., students who are legally entitled to EL services). 2 Recent data from 2019 NAEP results, for example demonstrate differences in Grade 4 and Grade 8 math performance such that non-ELs score 23 and 42 points higher, respectively, than their EL peers. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 4 preparation teachers will receive. Thus, in this study we use SEA requirements for teacher certification as a proxy for teaching preparation, with the assumption that teacher preparedness is correlated with teacher effectiveness (Darling-Hammond et al., 2005). In order to meet the requirements of Casteñeda v Pickard (1981) teachers in bilingual education, English Language Development (ELD)3, Sheltered English Instruction (SEI) and any mainstream setting in which ELs are educated, must be adequately trained to meet students’ needs. Through an analysis of the documents that SEAs have included on their official web pages, we explore preparation requirements for teachers of ELs in various settings (bilingual education, ELD, SEI, and mainstream classrooms).4 Theoretical Framework This paper is based on the argument that teachers are an important resource in providing educational opportunities to ELs, and that establishing specific requirements for teacher credentialing falls squarely on SEAs. As the leading educational organizations in their states, SEAs convey educational priorities and commitments to populations of learners, including ELs. Thus, the theoretical framework that guides this paper is grounded in the importance of effective teachers as an educational resource for ELs (see, e.g., Faltis & Valdes, 2016; López et al., 2013; López & Santibaňez, 2018; Lucas et al., 2008), the federal laws and policies that govern the education of ELs (EEOA, 1974; ESSA, 2015; NCLB, 2001, 2012; OCR, 1964, 1970), which include that ELs have access to effective teachers (Casteñeda v Pickard, 1981), and the reality that the federal government has decentralized the interpretation of federal laws to the states (ESSA, 2015; NCLB, 2012), resulting in inconsistent implementation (Villegas & Pompa, 2020). Review of Literature Indoctrination into the teaching profession requires mastery of core content and development of pedagogical skills (Darling-Hammond et al., 2005). Effective teaching is an important factor in student achievement (Darling-Hammond, et al., 2005; Goodson, et al., 2019) and in providing equitable educational opportunities to ELs regardless of their program placement (see e.g., Faltis & Valdés, 2016; López et al., 2013; López & Santibañez, 2018; Lucas et al., 2008). For teachers of ELs this includes a depth of knowledge including, but not limited to, linguistics, an understanding of first and second language acquisition, a firm foundation in curricular standards, and a solid collection of research-based and culturally-relevant instructional tools for teaching ELs (Valdés et al., 2013). Most recently, pedagogy for ELs has focused on linguistically and culturally responsive pedagogical practices (Faltis & Valdés, 2016; Lucas & Grinberg, 2008; Lucas et al., 2018) including translanguaging (Daniel & Pacheco, 2015; García et al., 2017; Menken, 2013), 3 Henceforth in the paper we use ELD to refer to English Language Development and English as Second Language (ESL) instruction. While we recognize that the majority of states continue to use “ESL” to refer to English language instruction for designated ELs, we believe that ELD is a more accurate label as ESL assumes English is the second language a student is learning and it also does not account for the experience of simultaneous bilinguals. Thus, with the exception of citing state documents or credentials that explicitly use “ESL”, ELD will be used moving forward. 4 Although research suggests that bilingual education is the most effective program (Collier & Thomas, 2017; Wright, 2019, etc.), it is beyond the scope of this paper to argue for any particular program. Instead we analyze states’ requirements for teacher certification for each language program. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 5 representation in the curriculum (Clark et al., 2016), anti-racist TESOL practices (Motha, 2014), and general recognition of students’ bilingualism as an asset (Souto-Manning, 2016). In addition to strong content and pedagogical foundations, educators of ELs benefit from teacher preparation that includes field-based experience with ELs (Bollin, 2007; Fitts & Gross, 2012; Pappamihiel, 2007). Field experiences can further help teachers recognize and capitalize on students’ cultural and linguistic capital (González et al., 1995; Smolcic & Martin, 2019). Indeed, teachers’ beliefs about language and their students’ experiences affect their practice (Brousseau et al., 1988; Costa et al., 2005; Meskill, 2005). Unfortunately, research has documented that teachers hold deficit- based misconceptions on ELs' knowledge and ability to learn (Faltis & Valdés, 2016; Harper & de Jong, 2004). As a group, US teachers remain underprepared to teach ELs (Gándara et al., 2005; Karabenick & Noda, 2004; Reeves, 2006) and it stands to reason that teacher preparation is a space to address teacher dispositions, knowledge, and practice. Yet only 20 SEAs currently require EL teachers to hold special certification (López & Santibañez, 2018). Educational Programs for ELs As illustrated in Table 1, ELs are typically taught in one or a combination of the following language instruction educational programs: bilingual education5, English Language Development (ELD) Sheltered English Instruction (SEI), and mainstream. In this section, we introduce each language instruction educational program along with its requisite teacher preparation. For clarity, we begin with what all teachers, including mainstream teachers,6 should know and then discuss the additional requirements for bilingual education and ELD specializations. Contemporary scholars have stressed the importance of preparing all teachers to be able to make content understandable to ELs and support ELs’ linguistic development throughout the content areas (Bunch, 2013; Coady et al., 2016; de Jong & Harper, 2005; Faltis & Valdés, 2016; Haas et al., 2016: Turkan et al., 2014). Faltis and Valdés (2016) state that all teachers must have the “knowledge, skills and inclination” to teach ELs (p. 686). Consistent with this, Galguera (2011) asserts that teachers must have pedagogical language knowledge and skills to teach the growing number of ELs in US schools. Including ELs in state teaching standards for all teachers may be one way to ensure at least minimal preparation. Implementing SEI credentials for all teachers is another way to ensure teachers have at least the minimum pedagogical expertise necessary to teach ELs. SEI teachers are considered content-area (e.g., ELA, mathematics, science) specialists, who help ELs develop the English language in specific content areas. This suggests that SEI teachers will have additional training beyond the general education or content knowledge and pedagogy, which will include strategies for supporting ELs (Short et al., 2011). 5 Wright (2019) identifies five basic programs that fit under this umbrella: heritage language, bilingual immersion, dual language, and developmental bilingual programs all aim to support the continued development of bilingualism and biliteracy. Heritage programs enable students who have acquired English to maintain proficiency in their heritage languages, bilingual immersion programs are designed for English proficient students and develop bilingualism and biliteracy in the target language (i.e., French, Spanish, etc.). Dual language programs combine ELs from one language group and fully English proficient students with the goal that each group will become bilingual and biliterate. Similarly, the goal of developmental bilingual programs with groups of ELs who speak the same heritage language is bilingualism and biliteracy. 6 A general elementary education or middle/secondary content teacher in a classroom where the language of instruction is English. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 6 Table 1 Language Instruction Educational Programs Program Aim Structure Instructional Delivery Teacher Qualifications Developmental Bilingual Education (DBE) and Dual Language Bilingual Education (DLBE) Mastery of the heritage language and English with the goal of bilingualism and biliteracy Program of instruction that develops both English and heritage language Provides instruction in the content areas in English and the heritage language Pedagogical knowledge and skills to foster the development of English and the heritage language along with respective content-area expertise Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) Mastery of social and academic English, transition into mainstream education classes within three or fewer years Program of instruction that uses the heritage language as a vehicle for developing English proficiency Provides instruction in the content areas in both English and the heritage language with a focus on transitioning to mainstream English classes Proficiency in English and the heritage language, pedagogical knowledge and skills to foster the development of English and respective content-area expertise English Language Development (ELD) also referred to as English as a Second Language (ESL) Mastery of social and academic English Program of instruction to develop English with ELD content standards Provides specialized instruction outside or within the mainstream classroom Specialized pedagogical knowledge and skills in the area of second language (English) development (i.e., linguistics, cultural components of learning, first and second language development, developing literacy in another language) Sheltered English Instruction Mastery of content areas and academic English Program of instruction that focuses on content- area mastery, providing comprehensible input for ELs Provides supports (in English) to make content- area language and concepts understandable SEI endorsement (required for all teachers in AZ, CA, MA, and NV) Mainstream Education Mastery of content areas and academic English Program of instruction that focuses on academic success across content areas without explicit supports for ELs Provides instruction for all students (generally thought of as sink or swim instruction for ELs) Respective content-area expertise Note: Information from Wright, 2019, pp. 93-124 Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 7 While it is important to prepare all teachers with knowledge and skills to make content understandable and promote language development in the content areas, research has shown that simply preparing all teachers with this knowledge and skill set is insufficient (e.g., see López et al., 2013). In fact, ELs’ achievement is optimized when all teachers are trained and ELs receive services from teachers who hold specializations in bilingual education and/or ELD (López & Santibañez, 2018). These specializations provide teachers with a depth of knowledge and skills to teach ELs beyond what is expected of mainstream teachers (Faltis & Valdés, 2016; Menken & Antuñez, 2001). ELD teachers must understand the connections between first and second language teaching and learning and have the pedagogical expertise to implement an ELD curriculum that supports the development of the English language. Additionally, bilingual education teachers must have this extensive knowledge and pedagogical expertise in English and the heritage language, as well as in translanguaging/multi-languaging and multiliteracies (Aquino-Sterling & Rodríguez-Valls, 2016; Garcia & Wei, 2014; Lavadenz, 2019; Menken & Antuñez, 2001). Although research has shown that instruction by specialists combined with the preparation of all teachers has resulted in positive outcomes for ELs, problematically, only 20 states require specialist certification for teachers of ELs (López & Santibañez, 2018). The lack of requirements for specialist certifications is highly questionable given federal laws and policies that purport to protect the rights of ELs to resources necessary for educational success. Decentralization of Federal Policies to Protect Equitable Education of ELs Under ESEA Flexibility (2012-2015) and ESSA (2015-present) the federal government ceded the implementation of policies that protect ELs’ rights to an equitable education to SEAs and LEAs, which has resulted in a highly problematic, uneven implementation of federal policy (López & Santibañez, 2018; Morita-Mullaney & Singh, 2019). For example, states with established EL populations are likely to have more expertise than states in which the population of ELs have only begun to grow (Arias & Markos, 2016; López et al., 2013). SEAs also may differ in their “institutional will” (Garcia et al., 2009, p. 12). For example, three states (AZ, CA, and MA) effectively banned most forms of bilingual education and became English only states in the early 2000s. California and Massachusetts eventually overturned their English only policies via Proposition 58 (2016) and the Look Act (2017). Florida, Arkansas, and Virginia attempted to bypass ESSA’s provision that “states make every effort” to develop first language assessments (Mitchell, 2017). Villegas and Pompa (2020) found such inconsistencies from state to state that it was impossible to fully interpret the progress of ELs or to compare EL progress between states. Obscuring the progress of ELs serves to shroud SEA and LEA progress on an important ESSA requirement: that all students are taught by qualified teachers (Casteñeda v Pickard, 1981; ESSA, 2015). The Present Study Our overarching question was, Do State Education Agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? To address this question, we operationalized teacher licensure as a proxy for teacher preparation and engaged in a document analysis (Bowen, 2009) that was guided by each of the following research questions: 1. Does the SEA have certification requirements (i.e., ELD, bilingual education, or SEI) specific to working with ELs and, if so, what are the requirements? 2. Does the SEA address ELs in their professional teaching standards for all teachers, and, if so, how? Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 8 We examined certification7 requirements to teach in bilingual education, ELD, and SEI classroom settings in all 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.). We specifically selected these certifications as these are the classroom settings where by definition classified ELs are legally entitled to instruction that is designed with their cultural and linguistic strengths and needs in mind. Because ELs are often placed in mainstream classrooms (Lucas et al., 2018; Villegas, et al., 2018), we included Research Question 2 as a means of examining if mainstream teachers are required to be at least minimally trained to support ELs. Methods Given our interest in how states are meeting federal mandates, our primary data sources were the documents that states have made public on official SEA web pages. Specifically, we conducted a document analysis (Bowen, 2009) of documents that detailed whether SEAs mandated an approved program for certification in bilingual education, ELD, or SEI, or in the event that an approved program was not required, the specific components (i.e., coursework, practicum, exam, language proficiency) for the credential. We also conducted a document analysis of each SEA’s professional teaching standards for all teachers to understand, how if at all, the SEA’s published teaching standards relate to teaching ELs. It is beyond the scope of this study to verify program quality or the degree to which the states meet standards. Data Sources We restricted our sample to documents and information publicly available on respective SEA websites. Our decision to analyze this information stems from documentary research which suggests that documents are “socially constructed” (McCulloch, 2004, p. 40). We posit that a SEA’s priorities are conceptualized in its credentialing policies and, by extension, what information is readily available regarding such policies. We assessed the original purpose of each document to determine the reason it was initially produced (Bowen, 2009), selected documents that specified certifications available in the state, laws and regulations regarding teacher certification, and Professional Teaching Standards. If necessary, we also examined additional publicly available documents (described in procedures). We downloaded all documents as PDFs between October and December 2019. See Appendix A for a complete list of all DOE websites as well as respective documents and information examined. Procedures Once our data set was assembled, we used a systematic process, document analysis (Bowen, 2009), to evaluate our selected documents and generate empirical knowledge (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) on SEA credential policies. Our document analysis followed a multi-step review process where we would classify the credential(s) available in a SEA (e.g., bilingual education, ELD, SEI; see Table 1) and then determined whether the credential(s) was mandatory for working with ELs and the respective requirements to earn the credential(s). During this multi-review analytic process, we followed Tight’s (2019) record keeping procedures: record details of document reviewed; log the primary document contents and details of other relevant documents included in analysis; and record respective opinions of the documents. First, we randomly assigned each of the authors a group of SEA documents to review independently. During this first round of document analysis, an author independently coded for 7 Some states refer to a teaching license as a certificate, while others refer to it as a license. In this paper, we use certification/certificate to refer to both certification and licensure. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 9 credential classification, whether the credential was mandatory (yes or no), and then detailed the respective requirements. This process was then repeated for each SEA document, independently, by a second author. We held multiple two-hour meetings to compare findings and note any questions or discrepancies. Discrepancies were reviewed independently by a third author. Following this third review, we met again as a group to validate documents and findings. If there was confusion about data from a state website (e.g., a lack of clarity of documents or inability to find documents) we could not resolve, we consulted additional web sources (e.g., ELD Program Guidance or other SEA regulations), and documented each of these occurrences8. In line with Tight (2019), we documented all independent reviews and group discussions in a dedicated recordkeeping spreadsheet. We established a procedural protocol to determine a) if the credential was available as standalone certification; b) if there was also an option to add the credential as an add-on endorsement; and c) the requirements for the credential based on the following main criteria: completion of an approved program, passing of a content exam, completion of coursework, completion of a practicum, language proficiency.9 The procedural protocol guiding our document analysis is illustrated in Appendix B; this protocol was followed during each round of the review process. To address Research Question 2, following the same four-step protocol, we analyzed each SEA’s professional teaching standards and evaluation rubrics for reference to the instruction and assessment of culturally and linguistically diverse students. We searched each document using the following keywords and phrases: diverse / diversity10, cultural / culture, language / linguistic and for specific reference to ELs (ELs)11 and English language. Specific examples of keywords and phrases we included and omitted are listed in Appendix C. During a third round of document analysis, we searched for references to all, each, and every student, which we included in the diverse / diversity category. Findings Within the context of understanding teacher preparation for ELs, it is important to acknowledge that teacher preparation, as a whole, remains relatively inconsistent across the United States (Goodson et al., 2019; Sampson & Collins, 2012). For example, while most SEA sanctioned pathways to a teaching certification require that teachers complete a state-approved program, some SEAs offer alternative pathways. Regardless of the pathway, receipt of a certification requires teachers to have earned a bachelor’s degree, have demonstrated mastery of content to be taught (generally through a standardized test), and have undergone some pedagogical training. Our analysis 8 A major challenge in this study was identifying the correct and most up-to-date state requirements regarding teaching credentials and professional teaching standards; relatedly, some states did not have certification or standards information easily available and in some cases, correctly interpreting the information was also challenging. For example, some states had conflicting information regarding certification, several documents were not dated, and some states required us to examine multiple documents in order to determine credential requirements. 9 We finalized these criteria based on our initial reviews, which indicated that most states required a combination of these criteria. 10 We were interested in keywords or phrases that addressed instruction and/or assessment instruction of culturally and linguistically diverse learners, so we did not include standards where diverse referred to “teaching diverse perspectives”. Similarly, we did not include when culture was used to describe creating “classroom culture” nor did we include reference to “academic language”, or “appropriate language of the discipline” under linguistic/language. 11 We also included terms that have been more widely used historically, including English Language Learner (ELL), English as a Second Language (ESL), and Limited English Proficient (LEP). Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 10 of credential requirements12 and professional teaching standards across all SEAs illustrates great variation with regard to the preparation of teachers to educate ELs. For example, only 24 SEAs offer a bilingual education credential and within 45 SEAs ELD credentials can be earned as either a standalone certificate or an add-on endorsement. These findings highlight a number of issues in the variability between SEA teacher credentialing requirements that stem from decentralization of teacher quality standards. Our findings are presented below, disaggregated by classification (bilingual education, ELD, SEI). First, we examined the credential availability across SEAs. Second, we described the credential requirements. Finally, we detailed alternative pathways and/or unique requirements offered by some SEAs. Bilingual Education Credential Bilingual education is a broad umbrella for a variety of language instruction education programs and there is clear variation among these programs (Wright, 2019). Bilingual education credentials are only available in 25 SEAs. Eight of the 10 SEAs with 10% or more ELs offer this credential (with Florida and Kansas as exceptions). In contrast the bilingual education credential is noticeably absent from states with fewer than 6% ELs (with Vermont as an exception). Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of bilingual education credential availability by EL population density. Figure 1 Bilingual Education Credential Availability by EL Population Density 12 Henceforth in the discussion we use credential requirements as an umbrella term to refer to both standalone certification and add-on endorsement. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 11 Given the wide variation in bilingual education program models (Wright, 2019), it is interesting that our analysis suggests that only Oregon includes both a bilingual education endorsement and a dual language endorsement specific to native language instruction and dual language settings, respectively. Regardless of the bilingual education program model, both content (ELA, mathematics, science, social studies, etc.) and English language development are integral to the bilingual education classroom. Thus, it is unsurprising that we found 19 of the 24 SEAs offer an add-on bilingual education credential requiring teachers to hold a primary certification in elementary education, early childhood education, or a middle/secondary content area; only three SEAs (Alaska, Idaho, and New Mexico) offer the bilingual education credential as both a standalone certificate and add-on endorsement. Table 2 displays the distribution of standalone and add-on availability across SEAs. . Table 2 Bilingual and ELD Credential Availability Disaggregated by SEA State % ELs Bilingual Certification Bilingual Add-On Endorsement ELD Certification ELD Standalone Certification ELD Add-On Endors. Alabama 3.5 ✓ ✓ ✓ Alaska 12.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Arizona 8.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Arkansas 8.3 ✓ ✓ California 19.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Colorado 11.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ Connecticut 7.4 ✓ ✓ ✓ Delaware 9.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ D.C. 10.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Florida 10.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Georgia 6.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ Hawaii 8.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Idaho 6.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Illinois 11.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Indiana 5.4 ✓ ✓ Iowa 6.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Kansas 10.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ Kentucky .9 ✓ ✓ Louisiana 3.6 ✓ ✓ Maine 3.3 ✓ ✓ Maryland 9.2 ✓ ✓ Massachusetts 10.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Michigan 6.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Minnesota 8.5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ - Mississippi 2.7 ✓ ✓ Missouri 3.8 ✓ ✓ Montana 2.2 ✓ - ✓ Nebraska 7.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Nevada 17.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 12 Table 2 (cont’d.) Bilingual and ELD Credential Availability Disaggregated by SEA State % ELs Bilingual Certification Bilingual Add-On Endorsement ELD Certification ELD Standalone Certification ELD Add-On Endors. New Hampshire 2.8 ✓ ✓ - New Jersey 5.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ New Mexico 16.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ New York 9.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ North Carolina 6.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ North Dakota 3.4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Ohio 3.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Oklahoma 8.0 ✓ - - Oregon 8.8 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Pennsylvania 3.6 ✓ ✓ Rhode Island 9.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ South Carolina 6.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ South Dakota 4.1 ✓ ✓ Tennessee 4.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ Texas 18.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Utah 7.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Vermont 2.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Virginia 9.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Washington 11.7 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ West Virginia 0.8 ✓ ✓ - Wisconsin 6.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Wyoming 3.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ Note: The – symbol indicates missing data Of the SEAs that offer an add-on bilingual endorsement, eight (Alaska, Idaho, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin) require completion of an approved program. The remaining 15 SEAs include one, a combination, or all of the following: state bilingual education assessment, TESOL Praxis, coursework, practicum, demonstration of additional language proficiency and/or demonstration of English language proficiency. These requirements are displayed in Table 3. When coursework or a practicum is required, semester credits and field experience hours vary from 12-20 and 45-100, respectively. Variations for credentialing in these SEAs is problematic considering research that suggests the importance of a rigorous specialist program (López & Santibañez, 2018; Menken, 2001), which includes fieldwork (Fitts & Gross, 2012). Some SEAs have unique requirements. For example, although Iowa does not have a bilingual education credential, it requires that teachers hold an “authorization” to teach in a language other than English. Other SEAs have interesting stipulations attached to the bilingual education endorsement. For example, in Nebraska an ELD certification/endorsement is required before being able to add a bilingual endorsement and in New Mexico teachers with an ELD credential Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 13 (standalone certification or add-on endorsement) only need to complete six credit hours of coursework (non-ELD credentialed teachers must complete 12 credit hours) in order to earn the bilingual education add-on endorsement. Although North Carolina offers a bilingual education certificate, it is limited to grades Kindergarten through six. Utah offers two pathways to earn bilingual education certification: completion of a state approved program or a combination of university courses and attending the annual Utah Dual Language Instruction Institute. It is worth mentioning that some SEAs have additional or designated bilingual education endorsements for Native American and Indigenous languages. Specifically, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Washington hold bilingual education endorsements in Native American/Indigenous languages and, while not endorsements, Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota require courses specific to Native American and/or multicultural education in their approved teacher certification programs. ELD Credential ELD classrooms provide ELs with curricular and instructional practices that focus specifically on the English language. All 51 SEAs offer an ELD credential. This is where uniformity ends. For example, while the ELD certificate was most often referred to as an ESL Certificate/License, some SEAs used Cultural and Linguistic Diverse (Colorado) or English as a New Language (Illinois, New York) as the name of the certificate. We also found that only 30 SEAs offer ELD as a standalone certification (where the ELD teacher does not need another primary certificate) and 19 SEAs require teachers to hold a primary certificate in elementary education, early childhood education, or a middle/secondary content area to which they can add an ELD endorsement13; this distribution is illustrated in Table 2 and also by EL population density in Figure 3. Arguably, a standalone certification is a more specialized license as the sole focus in this pathway is ELD content and, because it is a standalone certification completion of a full program, it is necessary to earn the certification. In contrast, an add-on ELD endorsement is earned on top of general education content, and as illustrated in Table 4, has a wide range of requirements across SEAs to earn said endorsement. We initially suspected that perhaps the availability of the standalone certification vs. add-on endorsement might be related to geographic concentration of ELs: on one hand, SEAs with large concentrations of ELs might only offer the add-on endorsement as a way to make the certification more accessible to more teachers and, on the other hand, SEAs with large concentrations of ELs might have the standalone as a way to maintain integrity with the certification via more robust training. When examining the availability of standalone certification and the add-on ELD endorsement in Figure 2, however, there does not seem to be a geographic or demographic pattern for the distribution. 13 We were unable to find information regarding the requirements for ELD certification for two states (Montana and Oklahoma). Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 14 Figure 2 ELD Standalone Certification Availablity by EL population density Further, 45 SEAs allow teachers to become ELD credentialled with only an add-on endorsement, 10 of which only require passing a test to earn the endorsement14. When coursework or a practicum is required, semester credits and field experience hours vary from 12-30 and 25-150, respectively. The information regarding tandalone certification and ELD add-on endorsement, as well as distribution of the ELD add-on endorsement requirements are displayed in Table 2 and Table 3. The wide variation in requirements is worrisome, yet unsurprising given that research has demonstrated that majority of teachers who work with ELs have insufficient preparation (Ballantyne et al., 2008; Gándara et al., 2005; Karabenick & Noda, 2004; Herrera & Murray, 2006; Turkan et al., 2014). This wide variation in requirements is particularly problematic given that research suggests that access to consistent and quality ELD instruction is necessary in order for ELs to be effectively supported (Hass et al., 2016). Some SEAs also include additional regulations. For example, Delaware and New Jersey explicitly state that teachers must meet an English proficiency requirement to earn an ELD certification (standalone or add-on). Some SEAs offer multiple pathways for the add-on ELD endorsement. For example, in Hawaii an add-on ELD endorsement can be earned by either meeting 14 We were unable to find information on the requirements for earning an add-on ELD endorsement for Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, and West Virginia. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 15 coursework requirements or by passing the Praxis, and in Kansas a teacher can either complete an approved program or pass a test. Similarly, New Mexico allows teachers to complete 24-36 credits or complete 12 credits and pass the subject matter test; regardless of the pathway, New Mexico requires that at least six of the credits are taken in a non-English language. South Carolina explicitly states that earning an ELD add-on endorsement by exam is not an option; however, the practicum can be waived if a teacher has one year documented of “successful teaching”. In addition to the traditional routes to certification/endorsement, it is worth mentioning that a few SEAs have emergency pathways leading to ELD credentialing. Five SEAs have “emergency pathways” to earn an ELD certification, however this certification is non-renewable. For instance, Ohio offers a “supplemental ESL licensure option” which is valid for one year and requires only a test, and Virginia has an alternative route where teachers can teach ELD provided they have a bachelor degree and 24 credits of relevant coursework. Finally, Illinois is unique in that it distinguishes between an English as a New Language (ENL) certificate and an ESL certificate; the former is an ELD certificate for an English only setting and the latter authorizes teachers to use a student’s native language. It is also worth noting that Kentucky and Louisiana SEA websites had limited information available and so add-on information was gathered by examining university websites to determine the credit requirement information. Table 3 Bilingual Add-On Licensure Requirements Disaggregated by SEA % ELs Bilingual License Add-On Requirement Program1 Coursework2 Practicum Test Language Alabama 3.5 Alaska 12.1 ✓ ✓ - Arizona 8.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Arkansas 8.3 California 19.2 Colorado 11.9 Connecticut 7.4 Delaware 9.1 ✓ ✓ D.C. 10.9 ✓ Florida 10.1 Georgia 6.6 Hawaii 8.2 Idaho 6.0 ✓ ✓ Illinois 11.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ Indiana 5.4 Iowa 6.1 Kansas 10.3 Kentucky+ .9 Louisiana+ 3.6 Maine 3.3 Maryland 9.2 Massachusetts 10.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ Michigan 6.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 16 Table 3 (cont’d.) Bilingual Add-On Licensure Requirements Disaggregated by SEA % ELs Bilingual License Add-On Requirement Program1 Coursework2 Practicum Test Language Minnesota 8.5 ✓ ✓ Mississippi 2.7 Missouri 3.8 Montana 2.2 Nebraska 7.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ Nevada 17.1 ✓ ✓ New Hampshire 2.8 New Jersey 5.9 ✓ ✓ New Mexico 16.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ New York 9.2 ✓ ✓ North Carolina 6.9 - - - - - North Dakota 3.4 - ✓ ✓ - - Ohio 3.2 ✓ Oklahoma 8.0 Oregon 8.8 ✓ Pennsylvania 3.6 Rhode Island 9.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ South Carolina 6.1 South Dakota 4.1 Tennessee 4.6 Texas 18.0 ✓ Utah 7.1 ✓ ✓ Vermont 2.2 ✓ - ✓ Virginia 9.1 Washington 11.7 ✓ ✓ ✓ West Virginia 0.8 Wisconsin 6.2 ✓ ✓ Wyoming 3.0 Note: 1Program refers to completion of a state approved program that includes coursework and, typically, fieldwork; 2Coursework refers to courses taken independent of completing a program or being a matriculating student; +Kentucky and Louisiana DOE websites had limited information available and so add-on information was gathered by examining university websites to determine the credit requirement information. The - symbol indicates to missing data. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 17 Table 4 ELD Add-On Licensure Requirements Disaggregated by SEA %ELs ELD Add-On Requirement Program1 Coursework2 Practicum Test Alabama 3.5 ✓ Alaska 12.1 ✓ ✓ Arizona 8.1 ✓ ✓ Arkansas 8.3 ✓ California 19.2 ✓ Colorado 11.9 ✓ ✓ Connecticut 7.4 ✓ Delaware 9.1 ✓ ✓ D.C. 10.9 ✓ Florida 10.1 ✓ Georgia 6.6 ✓ Hawaii 8.2 ✓ ✓ Idaho 6.0 ✓ ✓ Illinois 11.3 ✓ ✓ Iowa 6.1 ✓ - Kansas 10.3 ✓ Kentucky+ .9 ✓ Louisiana+ 3.6 ✓ Maine 3.3 ✓ ✓ Maryland 9.2 ✓ Massachusetts 10.0 ✓ ✓ Michigan 6.6 ✓ Minnesota 8.5 - - - - Mississippi 2.7 ✓ Missouri 3.8 ✓ ✓ Montana 2.2 - - - - Nebraska 7.6 ✓ ✓ Nevada 17.1 ✓ ✓ New Hampshire 2.8 - - - - New Jersey 5.9 ✓ ✓ New Mexico 16.3 ✓ ✓ New York 9.2 ✓ ✓ North Carolina 6.9 ✓ - ✓ North Dakota 3.4 ✓ ✓ Ohio 3.2 ✓ ✓ Oklahoma 8.0 - - - ✓ Oregon 8.8 ✓ ✓ Pennsylvania 3.6 ✓ Rhode Island 9.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ South Carolina 6.1 ✓ South Dakota 4.1 ✓ ✓ Tennessee 4.6 ✓ ✓ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 18 Table 4 ELD Add-On Licensure Requirements Disaggregated by SEA %Els ELD Add-On Requirement Program1 Coursework2 Practicum Test Texas 18.0 ✓ Utah 7.1 ✓ Vermont 2.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Virginia 9.1 ✓ Washington 11.7 ✓ ✓ West Virginia 0.8 - - - - Wisconsin 6.2 Wyoming 3.0 ✓ Note: 1Program refers to completion of a state approved program which includes coursework and, typically, fieldwork; 2Coursework refers to courses taken independent of completing a program or being a matriculating student; +Kentucky and Louisiana DOE websites had limited information available and so add-on information was gathered by examining university websites to determine the credit requirement information. The - symbol indicates to missing data. SEI Credential The SEI model employs pedagogical practices intentionally designed to support ELs’ access to “core” curriculum (i.e., English, mathematics, the sciences, and the social studies) and the development of content-area English. Student composition in SEI classrooms can vary from all ELs to a combination of ELs and students who are proficient in English. Due to the restrictive language policies that banned bilingual education, a mandated SEI endorsement is required as part of the state approved general education program for all content-area teachers (e.g., early childhood education, elementary education, middle/secondary content, special education) in Arizona, California, and Massachusetts. Likely due to geographic proximity, Nevada has also begun to phase in an SEI- equivalent endorsement requirement for early childhood education and elementary education (2020) and for middle/secondary content teachers (2021). In Arizona and California, the SEI endorsement is earned by successful completion of one course; teachers in Massachusetts can earn SEI endorsement by taking a course or by passing a state SEI subject test. Arguably, one separate course focused on ELs does not provide teachers with the requisite knowledge to meet the needs of this growing population of students (de Jong et al., 2013; Flynn & Hill, 2005). Given that the SEI credential is limited to just four states, we focused our final analysis on documents that might impact teacher preparation of mainstream teachers. Professional Teaching Standards According to recent data, ELD and bilingual education teachers make up only 2% of elementary and secondary teachers (NCES, 2016), only 20 states actually require ELs to be taught by teachers with either of these endorsements (López & Santibañez, 2018), and only four SEAs require SEI endorsement. Thus, the majority of ELs experience a good portion of their education in a mainstream classroom. Arguably, even ELs who are placed in bilingual education and SEI program models will be in mainstream classrooms at some point as they become increasingly proficient in English. Indeed, under Title VI (OCR, 1964, 1970) ELs should not be segregated from their fully English proficient peers. Thus, while mainstream teachers are not expected to be specialists in bilingual education or ELD, they must be able to provide access to the full curriculum and support Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 19 content-area literacy development for ELs. In order to understand how SEAs hold mainstream teachers accountable for educating ELs, we examined professional teacher standards for references to language suggesting attention to ELs. All 51 SEAs have some form of professional teacher standards, typically referred to as “professional teaching standards” or “teaching performance standards”. We analyzed the professional standards for references to diverse / diversity / all, cultural / culture, language / linguistic, and ELs / English language. We found that all 51 SEAs reference diverse / diversity / all, 44 SEAs reference culture / cultural, 36 SEAs reference language / linguistic, yet only 21 SEAs explicitly reference ELs / English language. Of the diversity / diverse / all category, 10 SEAs use all, each or every instead of diverse. Generally, reference to these terms appear in a hierarchical trend such that if a document referenced ELs / English language, then language / linguistic, cultural / culture, and diverse / diversity / all were also referenced. Similarly, if explicit reference to ELs / English language is not included, but language / linguistic is referenced then generally cultural / culture and diverse / diversity is also included. When neither ELs / English language nor language / linguistic is referenced, if cultural / culture is referenced then typically diverse / diversity / all is also referenced; finally, there are a number of SEA standards that address the diverse / diversity / all category, but do not reference any of the other categories. This information is displayed in Table 5. New Mexico is unique in that it prefaces each standard with the statement that “These standards refer repeatedly to all students. These references really do mean all students and the multiple strengths, challenges and backgrounds that each student brings to the classroom. All students include, but is by no means limited, to English Language Learners, students with special learning needs, and students of all races, ethnicities, cultures and socioeconomic circumstances.” There is clear variation in language used and how needs of ELs are referenced across SEA professional teaching standards. Table 5 Professional Teaching Standards Disaggregated by SEA % ELs Diverse / Diversity / All Culturally Diverse Language or Linguistic ELs Alabama 3.5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Alaska 12.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Arizona 8.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Arkansas 8.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ California 19.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Colorado 11.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ Connecticut 7.4 ✓ ✓ ✓ Delaware 9.1 ✓ ✓ D.C. 10.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Florida 10.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Georgia 6.6 ✓ Hawaii 8.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Idaho 6.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Illinois 11.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Indiana 5.4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Iowa 6.1 ✓ Kansas 10.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Kentucky .9 ✓ ✓ ✓ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 20 Table 5 (cont’d.) Professional Teaching Standards Disaggregated by SEA % ELs Diverse / Diversity / All Culturally Diverse Language or Linguistic ELs Louisiana 3.6 ✓ ✓ Maine 3.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ Maryland 9.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Massachusetts 10.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Michigan 6.6 ✓ ✓ Minnesota 8.5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Mississippi 2.7 ✓ Missouri 3.8 ✓ ✓ ✓ Montana 2.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Nebraska 7.6 ✓ ✓ Nevada 17.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ New Hampshire 2.8 ✓ New Jersey 5.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ New Mexico 16.3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ New York 9.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ North Carolina 6.9 ✓ ✓ ✓ North Dakota 3.4 ✓ ✓ Ohio 3.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Oklahoma 8.0 ✓ Oregon 8.8 ✓ ✓ ✓ Pennsylvania 3.6 ✓ ✓ Rhode Island 9.0 ✓ South Carolina 6.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ South Dakota 4.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Tennessee 4.6 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Texas 18.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Utah 7.1 ✓ Vermont 2.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Virginia 9.1 ✓ ✓ ✓ Washington 11.7 ✓ ✓ West Virginia 0.8 ✓ ✓ ✓ Wisconsin 6.2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Wyoming 3.0 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 21 Discussion According to federal policy (ESEA, 1965; ESSA, 2015; OCR, 1970) all students are entitled to quality and appropriate instruction. One essential element in providing this type of instruction is a well-prepared teacher (e.g., Cloftfelter et al., 2010; Darling-Hammond et al., 2005; Lavery et al., 2018; Lee, 2018). Our findings suggest that the current shortages of bilingual and ELD teachers (only 2% of all elementary and secondary teachers) will likely continue with only 24 SEAs even offering a bilingual education credential and 19 SEAs requiring teachers to hold a primary certificate before being eligible to earn an ELD credential. Research has also demonstrated that the large majority of teachers who work with ELs have insufficient preparation (Ballantyne et al., 2008; Herrera & Murray, 2006; Karabenick & Noda, 2004). This lack of preparedness makes sense given our analyses which illustrate that only eight states require the completion of an approved program for bilingual education credentialing. And, in 10 SEAs an ELD credential can be earned by merely passing a test. Consistent with Villegas and Pompa (2020), our analysis of SEA documents for type of teacher preparation provides evidence of wide variation of teacher preparation across state programs. It further highlights a distinct disconnect between federal policies, which themselves are problematic in that they do not specify minimal teacher preparation working with ELs, and individual states’ implementations of these policies. We discuss these issues below by framing our discussion around the research questions within the context of policy decentralization that leaves the interpretation and implementation of federal laws protecting ELs to the states. How Do Federal Laws/Policy Impact Teacher Preparation? Federal laws (OCR, 1964; 1970) and subsequent case law (e.g., Casteñeda v Pickard, 1981; Lau v Nichols, 1974) protect the rights of ELs, yet laws and policies governing the education of ELs have always been shaped by the political times and political will (Crawford, 2004; Gándara & Escamilla, 2017; Ovando et al., 2011). The language of Bilingual Education Act itself (1974) was grounded in language remediation for ELs, rather than on bilingualism and biliteracy, and subsequent authorizations became increasingly fixed on the development of English as quickly as possible. Even as research has shown that bilingual education programs hold the most promise for English learners, federal laws and policies promote programs that focus solely on English development rather than bilingualism. For example, the discontinuation of Title VII that competitively funded bilingual programs, and the transfer of funding to Title III, which is firmly situated in the development of English has negatively impacted the development of bilingual education programs. NCLB and ESSA regulations that require accountability measured in English have also had consequences for bilingual education programs and teachers. The lack of bilingual education programs and teachers places the opportunity to become a bilingual education teacher in a downward spiral. Without high quality bilingual programs that foster bilingualism and biliteracy, the potential pool of teaching candidates is reduced. As Gándara and Escamilla (2017) explain, if the federal government promoted bilingual programs, then there would be funding for bilingual education teachers. The Casteñeda (1981) decision specifies that ELs must receive instruction within programs that are supported by research, sufficiently resourced (including effectively prepared teachers), and evaluated to show effectiveness. ESSA (2015) requires SEAs and LEAs to report academic scores disaggregated by subgroups, which would presumably show ELs’ progress and needs. ESSA (2015) also transferred accountability for ELs’ progress in developing English proficiency from Title III to Title I, thus holding SEAs, LEAs and individual schools accountable for this progress. ESSA, Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 22 however, also transferred the responsibility of meeting the civil rights of ELs to individual states, which has resulted in vast inconsistencies across and within states (Villegas & Pompa, 2020). How Does State Interpretation of Federal Mandates Impact Teacher Preparation? In this study, we used teacher credentialing as a proxy for preparedness. We discuss the state interpretations of federal mandates with regard to specialists (bilingual education, ELD, and SEI) (research question 1) as well as with regard to all teachers (research question 2). In both these areas SEAs vary widely in their teacher credentialing requirements. Although scholarship details the complexity of content and pedagogical expertise necessary for teaching ELs (Brousseau et al., 1988; Clark et al., 2016; Costa et al., 2005; Daniel & Pacheco, 2015; Faltis & Valdés, 2016; ; García et al., 2017; González et al., 1995; Harper & de Jong, 2004; Lucas & Grinberg, 2008; Lucas et al., 2018; Menken, 2013; Motha, 2014; Souto-Manning, 2016; Smolcic & Martin, 2019; Valdés et al., 2013), not all states even require the completion of an approved program for either bilingual education or ELD credentialing. It is highly problematic that with the potential of bilingual education teachers to help close the gap between ELs and their fully proficient peers (August & Shanahan, 2006; Collier & Thomas, 2017; Goldenberg, 2013; Thomas & Collier, 1997), only some SEAs offer bilingual credentialing and within these SEAs, credentialing requirements vary substantially. Further for most of these SEAs, bilingual education is an add-on license and only eight states require that bilingual education teachers complete an approved program. The remaining states require variable preparation, which can consist of no more than successfully passing a test (see Table 3). Only 13 states require demonstration of proficiency in a non-English language even though bilingual education credentials allow teachers to deliver instruction in a language other than English, and thus it would seem logical that a required component of earning this credential should include demonstration of language proficiency in both English and the non-English language. Arguably, a language proficiency requirement adds additional rigor to a bilingual education credential, whether it be standalone or add-on. Considering that research suggests the role of the ELD specialist is critical for educating ELs (López & Saltibanez, 2018), our findings showing the variability of the preparation of ELD teachers is concerning. All 51 SEAs offer a credential for ELD instruction, yet here is where similarity essentially ends. For example, the lack of clarity regarding ELD endorsement requirements in 19 SEAs clouds the effectiveness of the preparation of teachers in ELD content and pedagogy. Only 30 SEAs offer the ELD credential as a standalone certificate, and each of these also accept an add-on endorsement. In 10 states teachers can earn an ELD endorsement simply by passing a test, which is inconsistent with research on teacher preparation (Lucas & Grinberg, 2008; Valdés et al., 2013), is unlikely to result in teachers who can meet the needs of ELs (de Jong & Harper, 2005; de Jong et al., 2013; Harper & de Jong, 2004), and is in direct conflict with OCR (1970) and ESSA (2015) requirements that teachers have sufficient pedagogical expertise to successfully meet the educational needs of ELs. Only 12 of the SEAs who accept the add-on endorsement require the completion of an approved program. This requirement presents a double-edged sword for SEAs and teachers. ELD is a content-based credential, and is thus similar to English language arts, mathematics, and so on, suggesting the need for a rigorous specialized program for ELD teachers (see e.g., Faltis et al., 2016; Goldenberg, 2013; Valdés et al., 2013). Yet, completion of a state-approved program creates a financial burden on the ELD teacher who must complete two programs (primary certification and ELD endorsement). This double financial burden also likely contributes to the shortage of ELD teachers. Thus, SEAs seem to be forced to choose between rigor and practicality. However, these SEAs and SEAs may find themselves without sufficient numbers of prepared ELD teachers. It makes sense that the practical problem of ELD teacher shortages may result in ‘fast-track’ options to Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 23 meet the demand. Interestingly, of the 12 SEAs that have the option to earn an add-on ELD endorsement via a test, only four of these states currently have a teacher shortage for ELD teachers (Cross, 2017). Of the nine states with over 10% ELs, four currently have an ELD Teacher shortage and three have a bilingual education teacher shortage; none of these states have an “emergency” or “fast-track” option to earn endorsement. Additionally, as illustrated in Figure 3, we did not find any demographic patterns corresponding to availability of the standalone certification vs. add-on ELD endorsement. Clearly as states grapple to meet the needs of growing numbers of ELs and their responsibility to ensure effective teacher preparation, SEAs will need to establish long-term solutions to adequately prepare specialists to work with ELs. It remains highly problematic that SEAs do not differentiate between teachers who have earned a credential (standalone certification or add-on) by completing an approved program and those that have earned an endorsement by other less rigorous means. The inconsistencies in teacher preparation and accountability reporting make it impossible to compare ELs progress from state to state, and thus shroud program and teacher effectiveness for ELs, which is highly inconsistent with the second and third prongs of Casteñeda. SEI endorsement is one way to ensure that teachers receive at least some preparation to teach ELs. However, SEI is mandated in only four states only (Arizona, California, Massachusetts, and Nevada) and the required training to earn an SEI endorsement is limited. In Arizona, California, and Massachusetts, the SEI mandated credential is likely a result of long-standing English Only instruction policies (Gándara & Hopkins, 2010). As such, these states have required mainstream teachers to receive specific training to teach ELs (Casteñeda v Pickard, 1981; Echevarria et al., 2013). These restrictive (and racist) language policies, which are still in place in Arizona, were only lifted in in California (Proposition 58) in 2016 and in Massachusetts (LOOK Act) in 2017. How are SEAs preparing all teachers to teach ELs? (research question 2). Presumably, SEA professional teaching standards are the guiding documents for teacher expectations, including how both pre-service and in-service teachers are evaluated. Although research is clear that ELs benefit when all teachers have been prepared to teach them (López & Santibañez, 2018), for the most part SEA professional teaching standards remain murky with the regard to the preparation of mainstream teachers. Alarmingly, only 21 SEAs explicitly reference ELs or English language in their standards and only 36 SEAs have any reference to language or linguistic. While the professional teaching standards in nearly all SEAs acknowledge the needs of diverse students or all students in some way, the robustness and specificity of these standards is variable. That is, diverse students or all students may be threaded throughout state standards and accompanying rubrics, or they may be only mentioned once. Additionally, although referencing all or diverse students may be a step in considering the wide range of student needs, we question the teachers’ preparedness to meet the specific cultural and linguistic needs of ELs if this language is not explicitly included in the professional teaching standards. Lack of explicit standards for teaching ELs devalues the educational needs of ELs across all classroom spaces. It also raises concerns about the quality of instruction ELs receive when they are in mainstream classrooms in which they are frequently placed (Harper & de Jong, 2004; Lucas et al., 2018; Villegas et al., 2018). Further, ELs cannot be denied access to advanced and gifted and talented courses solely because of language barriers (ESSA, 2015; Lau v. Nichols, 1974), and it is insufficient to simply place ELs in these courses without language supports (Lau v. Nichols, 1974). Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 24 Implications for Policy During the time of our study, 10 SEAs had EL populations at 10% or greater and historically homogeneous states continue to experience a rapid growth in the EL population (Sugarman & Geary, 2018). With these large numbers of ELs, are states ensuring that teacher specialists and mainstream teachers are prepared to teach ELs? If teacher credentialing is a proxy for quality, then our findings have implications for policies at the national, state, and local levels. Our findings suggest that teachers of ELs complete vastly different types of preparation and, by extension are likely have vastly different levels of pedagogical content knowledge and expertise for working with ELs. We argue that earning an ELD or bilingual education credential without coursework or mentored field experiences focused on ELs limits a teacher’s ability to provide appropriate instruction, which violates ESSA (2015) and OCR (1970) mandates. Variability in teacher preparation would be reduced if the federal government required more explicit guidelines for the credentialing of all teachers to teach ELs (bilingual education, ELD, SEI, and mainstream). While SEAs should have the right to implement mandates as they deem appropriate for their populations, a minimal set of expectations related to rigor for teacher education should be set for all SEAs. Compounding the problem of variation in teacher preparation is the fact that accountability for ELs has been decentralized to the states, making it impossible to explore correlations in teacher preparation and EL’s outcomes. Clearly the centralization of accountability measures for academic and language growth, which would allow for comparisons across states. To our best knowledge, SEAs do not differentiate between credentials resulting from the completion of an approved program (certification or endorsement) and those earned by less rigorous methods. As researchers and policy makers continue to seek understanding about how best to prepare teachers of ELs, they will need to tease out the qualifications of the ELD teachers within those states to explore possible correlations between the preparation of EL specialists and mainstream teachers and educational outcomes of ELs. Although research shows the positive impacts of bilingual education on the educational outcomes of ELs (Collier & Thomas, 2017; Gándara & Escamilla, 2017), only 24 SEAs offer bilingual education credentialing. We view this as highly problematic and recommend that federal funding be authorized to incentivize the training and credentialing of more bilingual education teachers. This federal effort will capitalize on the bilingual abilities of ELs, which will increase the number of ELs who can become bilingual education teachers, and thus promote a growth cycle in the number of qualified bilingual education teachers. Finally, given the teacher shortage particularly with regard to teachers of ELs (Cross, 2019), it would be beneficial to have credentialing information more readily available and easily navigable on SEA websites. For instance, New Hampshire’s website explicitly named ELD as an area of critical shortage. While we could find information for a ‘fast track’ path for temporary licensure, we could not find information on how to earn the full standalone certificate or add-on endorsement. The inability to readily find credentialing information is important from a civil rights perspective: teachers (and administrators) need to know what their legal responsibilities are to ELs. Further, parents also have a right to know what education services their children are legally entitled to receive. Thus, we suggest that SEAs consider more streamlined ways to both publicize and catalog this information. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 25 Implications for Research: Limitations and Future Directions In our attempt to understand how SEAs are preparing teachers of ELs, we reviewed teacher credentialing requirements and professional teaching standards. Our work leads us to several implications for future research. First, our review of SEA credential requirements did not examine the specifics of state approved program requirements. Thus, it was not our intention to draw conclusions supporting an argument that completion of an approved program is indeed more robust than one, or a combination of, the following: coursework, practicum, subject matter test, language proficiency. We suggest that analyzing SEA requirements for their respective approved programs is another important area of inquiry with regard to the preparedness of teachers of ELs. Additionally, our analysis did not look at the differences between standalone licensure requirements and add-on endorsement requirements; arguably, add-on pathways that mandate 20 or more credit hours might be as comprehensive as a standalone program. Further, our current work was limited to traditional pathways to certification and endorsement and we did not examine alternative pathways such as district residency programs or Teach for America, both of which are widely popular routes to teaching as a profession (Darling-Hammond et al., 2005; Laczko-Kerr & Berliner, 2002). Our review of SEA credential requirements did not examine specific coursework content for bilingual education and ELD specialists; future research examining coursework could be beneficial in understanding if this teacher preparation adequately meets the professional expertise required to teach ELs (e.g., see Brisk & Kaveh, 2019; Faltis et al., 2010; Valdés et al., 2013). Additionally, an analysis of coursework requirements across licensure pathways (e.g., standalone vs. add-on) would also be informative. Relatedly, an examination of practicum requirements for both specialists and mainstream teachers, including number of hours, type of mentorship or supervision, and setting are an important area of focus for future work. We limited our analysis of the professional teaching standards to binary reference to culturally and linguistically diverse students. Yet, our review of state professional teaching standards exposed wide variation in both language and the length of each document. Future research employing a full content analysis approach will be useful to the field. Finally, it was not within the scope of this project to draw connections between teacher credentialing and SEA achievement data. Thus, we cannot currently suggest what might be the best preparation, or combination of experiences, for educators with regard to teaching ELs. Thus, future directions might also include examining the relationship between robustness of certification requirements and/or teaching professional standards expectations with state student outcome data; this of course, however, would require centralization of EL accountability measures. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Grace Melo and Emily Lyons for their support in compiling the data for this project. References Aquino-Sterling, C. R., & Rodríguez-Valls, F. (2016). Developing teaching-specific Spanish competencies in bilingual teacher education: Toward a culturally, linguistically, and professionally relevant approach. Multicultural Perspectives, 18(2), 73-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/15210960.2016.1152894 Arias, M. B., & Markos, A. M. (2016). Characteristics of the workforce who are educating and supporting children who are English language learners. Unpublished manuscript commissioned by the https://doi.org/10.1080/15210960.2016.1152894 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 26 Committee on Fostering School Success for ELs: Toward New Directions in Policy, Practice, and Research. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/fostering-school- success-for-english-learners-toward-new-directions-in-policy-practice-and-research August, D. E., & Shanahan, T. E. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://www.standardsinstitutes.org/sites/default/files/material/developing-literacy-in- second-language-learners-executive-summary_2.pdf Ballantyne, K. G., Sanderman, A. R., & Levy, J. (2008). Educating English language learners: Building teacher capacity. Roundtable report. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs. https://ncela.ed.gov/files/rcd/BE024215/EducatingELLsBuildingTeacherCa.pdf Bollin, G. G. (2007). Preparing teachers for Hispanic immigrant children: A service learning approach. Journal of Latinos and Education, 6(2), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348430701305028 Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations (6th ed.) Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119281856 Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 Brisk, M. E., & Kaveh, Y. M. (2019). Teacher education for bi/multilingual students. In Oxford research encyclopedia of education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.280 Brousseau, B. A., Book, C., & Byers, J. L. (1988). Teacher beliefs and the cultures of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248718803900607 Bunch, G. C. (2013). Pedagogical language knowledge: Preparing mainstream teachers for English learners in the new standards era. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 298-341. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X12461772 Cadiero-Kaplan, K., & Rodríguez, J. L. (2008). The preparation of highly qualified teachers for English language learners: Educational responsiveness for unmet needs. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41(3), 372-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680802179444 California Proposition 58: Non-English Languages Allowed in Public Education (2016). Castaňeda v. Pickard, 648 F.2d 989 (1981). Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633-79. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633 Clark, E. R., Flores, B. B., Smith, H. L., & Gonzalez, D. A. (2015). Multicultural literature for Latino bilingual children: Their words, their worlds. Rowman & Littlefield. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2016.1231610 Clotfelter, C.T., Ladd, H.F., Vigdor, J.L. (2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school: A cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. Journal of Human Resources 45(3), 655-681. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2010.0023 Coady, M. R., Harper, C., & De Jong, E. J. (2016). Aiming for equity: Preparing mainstream teachers for inclusion or inclusive classrooms? TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 340- 368. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.223 Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2017). Validating the power of bilingual schooling: Thirty-two years of large-scale, longitudinal research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 203-217. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annual-review-of-applied- linguistics/article/abs/validating-the-power-of-bilingual-schooling-thirtytwo-years-of- largescale-longitudinal-research/909F284BFF9C327124AD08987143E677 https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/fostering-school-success-for-english-learners-toward-new-directions-in-policy-practice-and-research https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/fostering-school-success-for-english-learners-toward-new-directions-in-policy-practice-and-research https://www.standardsinstitutes.org/sites/default/files/material/developing-literacy-in-second-language-learners-executive-summary_2.pdf https://www.standardsinstitutes.org/sites/default/files/material/developing-literacy-in-second-language-learners-executive-summary_2.pdf https://ncela.ed.gov/files/rcd/BE024215/EducatingELLsBuildingTeacherCa.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/15348430701305028 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119281856 https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.280 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002248718803900607 https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0091732X12461772 https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633 https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2016.1231610 https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2010.0023 https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.223 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annual-review-of-applied-linguistics/article/abs/validating-the-power-of-bilingual-schooling-thirtytwo-years-of-largescale-longitudinal-research/909F284BFF9C327124AD08987143E677 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annual-review-of-applied-linguistics/article/abs/validating-the-power-of-bilingual-schooling-thirtytwo-years-of-largescale-longitudinal-research/909F284BFF9C327124AD08987143E677 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annual-review-of-applied-linguistics/article/abs/validating-the-power-of-bilingual-schooling-thirtytwo-years-of-largescale-longitudinal-research/909F284BFF9C327124AD08987143E677 Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 27 Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. In Basics of Qualitative Research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153.n4 Costa, J., McPhail, G., Smith, J., & Brisk, M. E. (2005). Faculty first: The challenge of infusing the teacher education curriculum with scholarship on English language learners. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(2), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487104274119 Counts, J., Katsiyannis, A., & Whitford, D. K. (2018). Culturally and linguistically diverse learners in special education: ELs. NASSP Bulletin, 102(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636518755945 Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English learners: Language diversity in the classroom. Bilingual Education Services. Cross, F. (2019). Teacher Shortage Areas Nationwide Listing 1990–1991 through 2017–2018. US Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.pdf Dabach, D. B. (2014). “I am not a shelter!”: Stigma and social boundaries in teachers’ accounts of students’ experience in separate “sheltered” EL classrooms. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 19(2), 98-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2014.954044 Daniel, S. M., & Pacheco, M. B. (2016). Translanguaging practices and perspectives of four multilingual teens. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(6), 653-663. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.500 Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America, and teacher effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v13n42.2005 de Jong, E. J., & Harper, C. A. (2005). Preparing mainstream teachers for English-language learners: Is being a good teacher good enough?. Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(2), 01-124. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23478724 de Jong, E. J., Harper, C. A., & Coady, M. R. (2013). Enhanced knowledge and skills for elementary mainstream teachers of English language learners. Theory into Practice, 52(2), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.770326 Easton-Brooks, D., & Davis, A. (2009). Teacher qualification and the achievement gap in early primary grades. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 17(15). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v17n15.2009 Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E, & Short, D. J. (2013). Making content comprehensible for ELs: The SIOP model (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon. Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA, 1974) Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), § 1703f (2015). Faltis, C., Arias, M. B., & Ramírez-Marín, F. (2010). Identifying relevant competencies for secondary teachers of ELs. Bilingual Research Journal, 33(3), 307-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2010.529350 Faltis, C. J., & Valdés, G. (2016). Preparing teachers for teaching in and advocating for linguistically diverse classrooms: A vade mecum for teacher educators. In Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 549-592). http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6 Fitts, S., & Gross, L. A. (2012). Teacher candidates learning from English learners: Constructing concepts of language and culture in Tuesday's tutors after-school program. Teacher Education Quarterly, 39(4), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487119877373 Flynn, K., & Hill, J. (2005). English language learners: A growing population. [Policy brief]. Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. http://inet- migrant.org/resources/2013/educational/policyBrief_ELL.pdf https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153.n4 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022487104274119 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0192636518755945 https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2014.954044 https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.500 https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v13n42.2005 https://www.jstor.org/stable/23478724 https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.770326 https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2010.529350 http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022487119877373 http://inet-migrant.org/resources/2013/educational/policyBrief_ELL.pdf http://inet-migrant.org/resources/2013/educational/policyBrief_ELL.pdf Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 28 Galguera, T. (2011). Participant structures as professional learning tasks and the development of pedagogical language knowledge among preservice teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1), 85-106. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23479643 Gándara, P., & Escamilla, K. (2017). Bilingual education in the United States. Bilingual and Multilingual Education, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_33 Gándara, P., & Hopkins, M. (2010). ELs and restrictive language policies. Columbia University, Teachers College. Gándara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Driscoll, A. (2005). Listening to teachers of English language learners: A survey of California teachers’ challenges, experiences, and professional development need. WestEd. https://www.wested.org/resources/listening-to-teachers-of-english-language-learners-a- survey-of-california-teachers-challenges-experiences-and-professional-development-needs/ García, E., Jenson, B.T. & Scribner, K.P. (2009). The demographic imperative. Educational Leadership, 66(7), 8-13. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational- leadership/apr09/vol66/num07/The-Demographic-Imperative.aspx García, O., Johnson, S. I., & Seltzer, K. (2017). The translanguaging classroom: Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Caslon. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Language, bilingualism and education. In Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education (pp. 46-62). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765 Goldenberg, C. (2013). Unlocking the research on ELs: What we know--and don't yet know--about effective instruction. American Educator, 37(2), 4. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/English_Learners.pdf Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., Tenery, M. F., Rivera, A., Rendon, P., Gonzales, R., & Amanti, C. (1995). Funds of knowledge for teaching in Latino households. Urban Education, 29(4), 443-470. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085995029004005 Goodson, B., Caswell, L., Dynarski, M., Price, C., Litwok, D., Crowe, E., Meyer, R., & Rice, A. (2019). Teacher preparation experiences and early teaching effectiveness (NCEE 2019-4007). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED598665.pdf Grissom, J. A., & Redding, C. (2015). Discretion and disproportionality: Explaining the underrepresentation of high-achieving students of color in gifted programs. Aera Open, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415622175 Gudmundsdottir, S., & Shulman, L. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge in social studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 31(2), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383870310201 Haas, E., Huang, M., Tran, L., & Yu, A. (2016). The achievement progress of EL students in Nevada (REL 2016–154). Regional Educational Laboratory Program. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs Harper, C., & De Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching English‐language learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(2), 152-162. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.48.2.6 Herrera, S. G., & Murry, K. G. (2006). Accountability by assumption: Implications of reform agendas for teacher preparation. Journal of Latinos and Education, 5(3), 189-207. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532771xjle0503_3 Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. E. (2014). “I’m not going to be, like, for the AP” English language learners’ limited access to advanced college-preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848-878. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214544716 https://www.jstor.org/stable/23479643 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_33 https://www.wested.org/resources/listening-to-teachers-of-english-language-learners-a-survey-of-california-teachers-challenges-experiences-and-professional-development-needs/ https://www.wested.org/resources/listening-to-teachers-of-english-language-learners-a-survey-of-california-teachers-challenges-experiences-and-professional-development-needs/ http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/apr09/vol66/num07/The-Demographic-Imperative.aspx http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/apr09/vol66/num07/The-Demographic-Imperative.aspx https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/English_Learners.pdf https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0042085995029004005 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED598665.pdf https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2332858415622175 https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383870310201 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.48.2.6 https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532771xjle0503_3 https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0002831214544716 Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 29 Karabenick, S. A., & Noda, P. A. C. (2004). Professional development implications of teachers' beliefs and attitudes toward English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2004.10162612 Laczko-Kerr, I., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). The effectiveness of" Teach for America" and other under-certified teachers. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(37). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v10n37.2002 Language Opportunity for Our Kids (LOOK Act), H.4032 (2017). Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974). Lau v. Nichols, No. 201, (U.S. District Court Northern District of California, 2015). Lavery, M. R., Nutta, J., & Youngblood, A. (2018). Analyzing student learning gains to evaluation differentiated teacher preparation for fostering ELs’ achievement in linguistically diverse classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(4), 371-387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117751400 Lavadenz, M. (2019). Preparing and supporting bilingual teachers for equity in two way dual language immersion programs: A bilingual epistemological framework for teaching, research, and policy. The Civil Rights Project. https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/language- minority-students Lee, S.W. (2018). “Pulling Back the Curtain: Revealing the Cumulative Importance of High- Performing, Highly Qualified Teachers of Students’ Educational Outcome.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(3), 359-381. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373718769379 López , F., & Santibanez, L. (2018). Teacher preparation for emergent bilingual students: Implications of evidence for policy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(36), 1-41. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.2866 López, F., Scanlan, M., & Gundrum, B. (2013). Preparing teachers of English language learners: Empirical evidence and policy implications. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(20), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v21n20.2013 Lucas, T., Strom, K., Bratkovich, M., & Wnuk, J. (2018, April). Inservice preparation for mainstream teachers of English language learners: A review of the empirical literature. In The Educational Forum (Vol. 82, No. 2, pp. 156-173). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1420852 Lucas, T., Villegas, A. M., & Freedson-Gonzalez, M. (2008). Linguistically responsive teacher education: Preparing classroom teachers to teach English language learners. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 361-373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108322110 McCulloch, G. (2004). Documentary research: In education, history and the social sciences. Routledge. Menken, K. (2013). Emergent bilingual students in secondary school: Along the academic language and literacy continuum. Language Teaching, 46(4), 438-476. https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S0261444813000281 Menken, K., & Antunez, B. (2001). An overview of the preparation and certification of teachers working with limited English proficient (LEP) students. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED455231.pdf Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass. Meskill, C. (2005). Infusing English language learner issues throughout professional educator curricula: The training all teachers project. Teachers College Record, 107(4), 739-756. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00492 Morita‐Mullaney, T., Renn, J., & Chiu, M. M. (2020). Obscuring equity in dual language bilingual education: A longitudinal study of emergent bilingual achievement, course placements, and grades. TESOL Quarterly, 54(3), 685-718. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.592 https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2004.10162612 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022487117751400 https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/language-minority-students https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0162373718769379 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1420852 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022487108322110 https://doi.org/%2010.1017/S0261444813000281 https://doi.org/%2010.1017/S0261444813000281 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED455231.pdf https://doi.org/%2010.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00492 https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.592 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 30 Morita Mullaney, T., Renn, J., Chiu, M. M., & Wright, W. E. (2019, April). A longitudinal study of Indiana dual-language bilingual education: Aspirations for equity. [Paper presentation]. 2019 American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting: Leveraging Education Research in a “Post-Truth” Era: Multimodal Narratives to Democratize Evidence, Metro Toronto Convention Centre, Toronto, Canada. Morita-Mullaney, T., & Singh, M. (2019). Obscuring English learners from state accountability: The case of Indiana’s language blind policies. Educational Policy. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818823751 Motha, S. (2014). Race, empire, and English language teaching: Creating responsible and ethical anti-racist practice. Teachers College Press. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2013). English language learners. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2020). English language learners in public schools. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp Office of Civil Rights. (1970). Memo regarding language minority children. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/Indicator_CGF/coe_cgf_2013_05.pdf Ovando, C. J., Combs, M. C., & Collier, V. P. (2011). Bilingual and ESL classrooms. McGraw-Hill Publishing. Pappamihiel, E. (2007). Helping preservice content-area teachers relate to English language learners: An investigation of attitudes and beliefs. TESL Canada Journal, 42-60. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v24i2.138 Reeves, J. R. (2006). Secondary teacher attitudes toward including English-language learners in mainstream classrooms. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(3), 131-143. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.3.131-143 Samson, J. F., & Collins, B. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers to meet the needs of English language learners: Applying research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k- 12/reports/2012/04/30/11372/preparing-all-teachers-to-meet-the-needs-of-english- language-learners/ Scott, B., & Murray, P. (2017). Letter to Secretary DeVos. US Education and Labor Committee. https://edlabor.house.gov/imo/media/doc/ESSA%20DeVos%20Letter.pdf Short, D. J., Echevarria, J., & Richards-Tutor, C. (2011). Research on academic literacy development in sheltered instruction classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 363-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811401155 Shulman, L. S. (1983). Autonomy and obligation: The remote control of teaching. In Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 484-504). Longman. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300302 Smolcic, E., & Martin, D. (2019). Cultural/linguistic immersion in teacher preparation for emergent bilingual learners: Defining a new space for asset-based pedagogies. In Redefining teaching competence through immersive programs (pp. 1-36). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24788-1_1 Souto‐Manning, M. (2016). Honoring and building on the rich literacy practices of young bilingual and multilingual learners. The Reading Teacher, 70(3), 263-271. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1518 Sugarman, J., & Geary, C. (2018). ELs in Kansas: Demographics, outcomes, and state accountability policies. Migration Policy Institute Fact Sheet. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/english- learners-demographics-outcomes-state-accountability-policies https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818823751 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/Indicator_CGF/coe_cgf_2013_05.pdf https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v24i2.138 https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.3.131-143 https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2012/04/30/11372/preparing-all-teachers-to-meet-the-needs-of-english-language-learners/ https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2012/04/30/11372/preparing-all-teachers-to-meet-the-needs-of-english-language-learners/ https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2012/04/30/11372/preparing-all-teachers-to-meet-the-needs-of-english-language-learners/ https://edlabor.house.gov/imo/media/doc/ESSA%20DeVos%20Letter.pdf https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168811401155 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002205741319300302 https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1518 https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/english-learners-demographics-outcomes-state-accountability-policies https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/english-learners-demographics-outcomes-state-accountability-policies Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 31 Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. NCBE Resource Collection Series, No. 9. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED436087.pdf Tight, M. (2019). Documentary research in the social sciences. SAGE. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529716559 Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Desegregation of Public Education (1964). Turkan, S., De Oliveira, L. C., Lee, O., & Phelps, G. (2014). Proposing a knowledge base for teaching academic content to English language learners: Disciplinary linguistic knowledge. Teachers College Record, 116(3), 1-30. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1020240 Umansky, I. M., Thompson, K. D., & Díaz, G. (2017). Using an ever–EL framework to examine disproportionality in special education. Exceptional Children, 84(1), 76-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917707470 United States Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. (1999). Programs for English language learners. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/index.html United States v. Texas, 321 F. Supp. 1043 (1970). United States v. State of Tex., 506 F. Supp. 405 (1981). Valdés, G., Kibler, A., & Walqui, A. (2014). Changes in the expertise of ESL professionals: Knowledge and action in an era of new standards. [Paper presentation]. TESOL. https://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/papers-and-briefs/professional-paper-26- march-2014.pdf Villegas, A. M., SaizdeLaMora, K., Martin, A. D., & Mills, T. (2018, April). Preparing future mainstream teachers to teach English language learners: A review of the empirical literature. In The Educational Forum (Vol. 82, No. 2, pp. 138-155). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1420850 Villegas, L., & Pompa, D. (2020). The patchy landscape of state English learner policies under ESSA. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/state-english-learner- policies-essa Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001, February). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations: A research report prepared for the US department of education and the office for educational research and improvement. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. https://www.education.uw.edu/ctp/content/teacher-preparation-research-current- knowledge-gaps-and-recommendations Wright, W. E. (2019). Foundations for teaching English language learners: Research, theory, policy, and practice (3rd ed.). Caslon. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED436087.pdf https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529716559 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1020240 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0014402917707470 https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/index.html https://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/papers-and-briefs/professional-paper-26-march-2014.pdf https://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/papers-and-briefs/professional-paper-26-march-2014.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1420850 https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/state-english-learner-policies-essa https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/state-english-learner-policies-essa https://www.education.uw.edu/ctp/content/teacher-preparation-research-current-knowledge-gaps-and-recommendations https://www.education.uw.edu/ctp/content/teacher-preparation-research-current-knowledge-gaps-and-recommendations Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 32 Appendix A Table 1 SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Alabama https://www.alsde.edu Department of Education Certification Pathways Department of Education Educator Certification Section Department of Education Alabama Quality Teaching Standards Alaska https://education.alaska.gov/TeacherCertification Department of Education and Early Development Additional Teaching Endorsement Educator Content and Performance Standards Arizona https://www.azed.gov Department of Education Bilingual Education PreK-12 Endorsements Department of Education English as a Second Language PreK-12 Endorsements Department of Education Structured English Immersion PreK-12 Endorsements Arizona Professional Teacher Standards Arkansas http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/ Arkansas Teaching Standards Department of Education Rules Governing Educator Licensure Levels and Area of Licensure Department of Education Arkansas Teaching Standards California https://www.cde.ca.gov Commission on Teaching Credentialing Bilingual Authorizations Commission on Teacher Credentialing EL Authorization/CLAD Certificate Commission on Teaching Credentialing Serving ELs Commission on Teacher Credentialing California Standards for the Teaching Profession Colorado https://www.cde.state.co.us Department of Education Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Education (Grades K-12) Added Endorsement Content Evaluation Worksheet Department of Education Clarifying CLD and LDE Code of Colorado Regulations 4.22 Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Education (Grades K-12) Code of Colorado Regulations 4.23 Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Bilingual Education Specialist (Grades K-12) Department of Education Culturally and Linguistically (CLD) Bilingual Education (Grades K-12) Added Endorsement Content Evaluation Worksheet Teacher Quality Standards and Elements.docx https://education.alaska.gov/TeacherCertification https://www.azed.gov/ http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/ https://www.cde.ca.gov/ https://www.cde.state.co.us/ Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 33 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Connecticut https://portal.ct.gov/SDE State Department of Education Bilingual Cross Endorsements State Department of Education Special Subject Cross Endorsements State Department of Education Assignment and Endorsement Codes Guide Regulations of the Connecticut State Board of Education – Regulations Concerning State Educator Certificates, Permits & Authorizations The Connecticut Common Core of Teaching Rubric for Effective Service Delivery 2017 Delaware https://www.doe.k12.de.us Title 14 Education Delaware Administrative Code Professional Standards Board (Licensure, Certification and Professional Development) 1561 Bilingual Teacher Delaware Performance Appraisal System II and the Delaware Framework for Teachers District of Columbia https://osse.dc.gov/service/educator-credentialing- and-certification Division of Teaching and Learning Directory of State-Approved Educator Preparation Programs Office of the State Superintendent of Education Educator Credentialing Exams Educator Licensure and Accreditation Educator Licensure Exams Office of the State Superintendent of Education Standard Teacher Credential Washington DC Model Teacher Evaluation System Rubric Florida http://www.fldoe.org/teaching/certification/pathwa ys-routes/teacher-edu-program-graduates.stml Title 14 Education Delaware Administrative Code Professional Standards Board (Licensure, Certification and Professional Development) 1562 Teacher of ELs Florida Department of Education Professional Development System Evaluation Protocol Georgia https://www.gadoe.org/Pages/Home.aspx Georgia Professional Standards Commission 505-2.97 English to Speakers of Other Languages Georgia Department of Education TAPS Performance Standards and Rubrics.pdf Hawaii http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/Pages/Home.as px Hawaii Teacher Standards Board: How to Add a New Field to Your Existing Hawaii License Hawaii Teacher Standards Board: License Fields Hawaii Teacher Standards Board: Requirements for a Provisional License Hawaii Teacher Standards Board: Standard License Requirements Hawaii Teacher Standards Board: Licensure Tests Hawaii Teacher Performance Standards https://portal.ct.gov/SDE https://www.doe.k12.de.us/ https://osse.dc.gov/service/educator-credentialing-and-certification https://osse.dc.gov/service/educator-credentialing-and-certification http://www.fldoe.org/teaching/certification/pathways-routes/teacher-edu-program-graduates.stml http://www.fldoe.org/teaching/certification/pathways-routes/teacher-edu-program-graduates.stml https://www.gadoe.org/Pages/Home.aspx http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/Pages/Home.aspx http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/Pages/Home.aspx Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 34 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Idaho http://www.sde.idaho.gov Idaho State Department of Education: Test Requirements Idaho Educator Certification Application Idaho State Department of Education: Revision of an Idaho Certificate Idaho Department of Education Standards for Initial Certification of Professional School Personnel Idaho State Board of Education Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching Illinois https://www.isbe.net/Pages/Home.aspx Illinois State Board of Education: English as a Second Language, Bilingual Education, English as a New Language, Transitional Bilingual and Visiting International Teachers 42nd Annual Statewide Conference for Teachers Serving Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Students Illinois - Professional Teaching Standards 2013.pdf Indiana https://www.doe.in.gov Department of Education Licensing: Renew and Add Content Areas Indiana CORE Assessments for Educator License: Required Tests by Licensure Content Area Indiana Content Standards for Educators Elementary Generalist Department of Education Developmental Standards for Educators P-12 Department of Education Developmental Standards for Educators Early Education Department of Education Developmental Standards for Educators Early Education Department of Education Developmental Standards for Educators Early Education Iowa https://educateiowa.gov Iowa Administrative Code: ESL K-12 Endorsement Worksheet Iowa Administrative Code: Add an Endorsement to a License Department of Education Teaching Standards and Criteria.pdf Kansas https://www.ksde.org Department of Education License Application ETS.org Teaching and Leading in Kansas Department of Education Routes to the Classroom Department of Education Regulations and Standards for Kansas Educators Educator Preparation Program Standards for Professional Education Kentucky https://education.ky.gov/Pages/default.aspx Kentucky Division of Educator Preparation, Assessment and Internship Kentucky Teacher Performance Standards Louisiana https://www.louisianabelieves.com Department of Education: Louisiana Teacher Preparation Competencies Louisiana Teacher – Performance Evaluation Rubric http://www.sde.idaho.gov/ https://www.isbe.net/Pages/Home.aspx https://www.doe.in.gov/ https://educateiowa.gov/ https://www.ksde.org/ https://education.ky.gov/Pages/default.aspx https://www.louisianabelieves.com/ Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 35 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Maine https://www.maine.gov/doe/home Requirements for the English as a Second Language Endorsement K-12 (660) Common Core Teaching Standards Maine 2012 Maryland http://marylandpublicschools.org/Pages/default.asp x Department of Education Educator Certification Areas Add an Endorsement Department of Education Approved Program Graduates Department of Education Educator Certification Areas InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards.pdf Massachusetts http://www.doe.mass.edu Office of Educator Licensure How to Become an Educator in MA Massachusetts - Office of Educator Licensure Teacher Fields and Grade Levels - Office of Educator Licensure Office of Educator Licensure Sheltered English Immersion Endorsements (SEI) - Office of Educator Licensure Massachusetts Guidelines for the Professional Standards for Teachers Professional Standards for Teachers Matrix Michigan https://www.michigan.gov/mde/ Department of Education: Adding an Endorsement to a Michigan Teaching Certificate Department of Education: How Can I Become a Teacher in Michigan? Department of Education: Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a Second Language Department of Education: Adding an Endorsement to a Michigan Teaching Certificate Department of Education Introduction to the Standards for Preparation of Teachers of Upper Elementary (3-6) Education.pdf Michigan Professional Standards for Michigan Teachers.doc Board of Education Minutes Approval of ESL & Bilingual Standards.pdf Department of Education Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of Lower Elementary (PK-2) Minnesota https://education.mn.gov/MDE/index.html Department of Education: Critical Elements for EL Program Compliance 8710.2000 Standards of Effective Practice for Teachers https://www.maine.gov/doe/home http://marylandpublicschools.org/Pages/default.aspx http://marylandpublicschools.org/Pages/default.aspx http://www.doe.mass.edu/ https://www.michigan.gov/mde/ https://education.mn.gov/MDE/index.html Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 36 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Mississippi https://www.mdek12.org Department of Education Guidelines for Mississippi Educator Licensure K-12 Department of Education Educator Licensure FAQ Department of Education How to Add an Endorsement to Your License | The Mississippi Department of Education Department of Education Approved-Programs-List-Revised-August-2018 Teacher Growth Rubric Observation and Feedback Guidebook Missouri https://dese.mo.gov Rules of Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: Division 20 – Division of Learning Services Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: Educating Linguistically Diverse Students Requirements & Practices Introduction to the Literature Review of the Missouri Teacher Professional Practice Standards Standards for the Preparation of Educators Montana https://opi.mt.gov Office of Public Instruction EL Guidance for School Districts Office of Public Instruction Montana’s English Language Learners: Guidance for School Districts Office of Public Instruction: EL Program Placement Educator Performance Appraisal System: A State Model for Ongoing Professional Growth Nebraska https://www.education.ne.gov Department of Education Rule 24 Regulations for Certificate Endorsements Title 92, Nebraska Administrative Code, Chapter 24 Department of Education Rule 21 Regulations for the Issuance of Certificates and Permits to Teach, Provide Special Services, and Administer in Nebraska Schools Title 92, Nebraska Administrative Code, Chapter 21 Department of Education Guidelines Recommended for Use with Rule 24 (Endorsements) Department of Education Rule 15: A Guide for Implementation Department of Education Nebraska Performance Framework for Teachers Nevada http://www.doe.nv.gov Chapter 391 Educational Personnel General Provisions Governing Licensure Department of Education: Special-Specific to the Grade Level of the Base Teaching License English Language Acquisition and Development (ELAD) Endorsement Teacher Professional Responsibilities Standards and Indicators https://www.mdek12.org/ https://dese.mo.gov/ https://opi.mt.gov/ https://www.education.ne.gov/ http://www.doe.nv.gov/ Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 37 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed New Hampshire https://www.education.nh.gov New Hampshire Education Credentialing Endorsement List Administrative Rules Chapter Ed 500 Ed. 612.06 English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) Department of Education Bureau of Credentialing Application Instruction Sheet Department of Education List of Professional Educator Preparation Programs and the Institutes of Higher Education that Offer Them Department of Education Chapter Ed 500 Certification Standards for Educational Personnel New Hampshire Task force on Effective Teaching: Phase II Chapter Ed 500 Certification Standards For Educational Personnel New Jersey https://www.nj.gov/education/ Department of Education Bilingual/Bicultural Education Standard Certificate (Endorsement Code: 1480) Department of Education English as a Second Language Standard (Endorsement Code: 1475) New Jersey Professional Standards for Teachers (N.J.A.C 6A: 9C-3.3): Foundations of Effective Practice New Jersey - N.J.A.C 6A:9, Professional Standards New Mexico https://webnew.ped.state.nm.us Professional License Bureau Application for Initial License Public Education Department Bilingual Education 67 Licensure Code New Mexico Public Education Department Standards New York http://www.nysed.gov Office of Teaching Initiatives: Pathway – Approved Teacher Preparation Program 05/01/2014 ESOL Office of Teaching Initiatives: Pathway – Approved Teacher Preparation Program 05/01/2014 Bilingual Education Office of Teaching Initiatives: Pathway – Additional Classroom Teaching Certificate New York State Union of Teachers: Requirements for Supplementary Certificates for Teaching English Language Learners in NYS The New York Teaching Standards https://www.education.nh.gov/ https://www.nj.gov/education/ https://webnew.ped.state.nm.us/ http://www.nysed.gov/ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 38 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed North Carolina http://www.ncpublicschools.org Department of Public Instruction Teacher Licensure and Certification Procedures Department of Public Instruction Add-On Licensure Key to North Carolina Licensure Areas & Program Codes Board of Education North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board License Codes/K-12 Courses https://www.nd.gov/dpi/ North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board Program Approval Standards North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board Content Area Minor Equivalency Endorsement North Dakota Department of Public Instruction 2019-2020 Instructional Manual for Completing MIS03 Personnel Forms for Positions Requiring a ND Teaching License North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board Record of Education North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board Teacher Education Program of Study North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board English Language Learner Endorsement (ELL) Model Code of Ethics for Educators Ohio Department of Education Educator Licensure Testing Requirements http://education.ohio.gov Department of Education Qualification for Teachers Providing Language Instruction Educational Programs for ELs Standards for the Teaching Profession Oklahoma Department of Education Application for Adding Areas to Existing Certificate https://sde.ok.gov Department of Education Traditional Path for Oklahoma Teacher Certification | Oklahoma State Department of Education Department of Education Standards of Performance and Conduct for Teachers Oregon Teacher Standards and Practices Commission Bilingual Specialization https://www.oregon.gov/ode/Pages/default.aspx Teacher Standards and Practices Commission English for Speakers of Other Languages Endorsement (ESOL): Program Standards Educator Effectiveness Model Core Teaching Standards.pdf http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ https://www.nd.gov/dpi/ http://education.ohio.gov/ https://sde.ok.gov/ https://www.oregon.gov/ode/Pages/default.aspx Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 39 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Pennsylvania https://www.education.pa.gov/Pages/default.aspx Department of Education English as a Second Language Frequently Asked Question Department of Education Guidance on the Implementation of English Language Development Within Language Instruction Educational Programs Department of Education Pennsylvania Certificates Types and Codes Department of Education Teaching English As a Second Language (ESL) in PA Model Code of Ethics for Educators Rhode Island https://www.ride.ri.gov Department of Education: The Rhode Island Certification Regulations English as a Second Language and Bilingual and Dual Language Certifications Department of Education Elementary Bilingual and Dual Language Education Certificate (11291) Grades 1-6 Department of Education English as a Second Language Specialist/Consultant (13013) Department of Education Requirements for Full Certification – All Grades Department of Education Requirements for Full Certification – Elementary Grades Department of Education Requirements for Full Certification – Middle Grades Department of Education Requirements for Full Certification – Secondary Grades Department of Education Middle Grades English as a Second Language Education Certificate Grades 5-8 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Educator Certification General Application Form and Instructions Department of Education RI Program Model Components Department of Education: The Rhode Island Professional Teacher Standards South Carolina https://ed.sc.gov Department of Education Guidelines and Requirements for Adding Certification Fields and Endorsements South Carolina Educator Certification Assessment Program Required Assessments for the 2019-20 Academic Year Department of Education Guide for Establishing and Maintaining Programs and Services for ELs South Carolina Department of Education Teaching Standards 4.0 Rubric https://www.education.pa.gov/Pages/default.aspx https://www.ride.ri.gov/ https://ed.sc.gov/ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 40 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed South Dakota https://doe.sd.gov Department of Education Elementary English as a New Language Endorsement Department of Education Initial Educator Certification Based on Program Completion in South Dakota Department of Education Secondary English as a New Language Endorsement South Dakota Standards: Charlotte Danielson's Framework for Teaching South Dakota Code of Ethics 24:08:03:01 Tennessee ETS.org Tennessee Assessment Requirements https://www.tn.gov/education.html Department of Education Educator Licensure and Preparation Operating Procedures Department of Education Supporting All ELs across Tennessee: A Framework for ELs Department of Education District and School Endorsement Flexibility Professional Education Standards, INTASC Stands, NCATE Standards, and TTU Conceptual Framework Alignment Table Tennessee Professional Teaching Standards Texas Texas Education Agency Additional Certification by Exam Information https://tea.texas.gov Texas Education Agency Becoming a Certified Texas Educator through an Alternative Certification Program State Board for Educator Certification English as Second Language (ESL) Standards Texas Administrative Code Title 19 Education Part 2 Texas Education Agency Chapter 149 Commissioner's Rules Concerning Educator Standards Utah Application for the Utah State Board of Education Dual Language Immersion Endorsement https://www.schools.utah.gov State Board of Education Licensure Test Requirements Application for the Utah State Board of Education English as a Second Language Endorsement Board of Education Effective Teaching Standards Utah Effective Teaching Standards and Indicators https://doe.sd.gov/ https://www.tn.gov/education.html https://tea.texas.gov/ https://www.schools.utah.gov/ Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 41 Table 1 (Cont’d.) SEA Documents and Information Reviewed State and Department of Education Website Information and Documents Reviewed Vermont https://education.vermont.gov Agency of Education Vermont Approved Educator Endorsement Codes Agency of Education Vermont Testing Requirements for Educator License Agency of Education Initial Level I License Application Traditional Route Agency of Education Transcript Review Worksheet Endorsement #39 Bilingual Education Agency of Education Transcript Review Worksheet Endorsement #40 – English Learners Agency of Education Apply for an Initial Vermont Educator’s License Agency of Education Core Teaching and Leadership Standards for Vermont Educators Agency of Education Transcript Review for Initial Licensure Rules Governing the Licensing of Educators and the Preparation of Educational Professionals Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Adding an Endorsement https://www.k12.wa.us Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction In State Program Completer Applicants Professional Educator Standards Board: Find an Endorsement Offering Washington Teacher Benchmarks West Virginia West Virginia Licensure Testing Directory https://wvde.us Board of Education Approved Programs Leading to Educator Licensure: By Program West Virginia Secretary of State Administrative Law Division Form 5 Department of Education Professional Teaching Standards Global21 West Virginia Professional Teaching Standards Wisconsin https://dpi.wi.gov Teacher Education, Professional Development and Licensing: Wisconsin Content Guidelines for Bilingual/Bicultural Education (23) Licensure Programs Supplemental Teaching Category Department of Public Instruction What Can I Teach with my License Guidance – ESL, Bilingual/Bicultural, and World Languages Department of Public Instruction Wisconsin Content Guidelines for Bilingual/Bicultural Education (23) Licensure Programs Supplemental Teaching Category Wisconsin Department of Instruction Teacher Standards Professional Teaching Standards Board: Becoming Licensed in Wyoming Wyoming Professional Teaching Standards Board: Individual EL Plan (IEL Plan) hhttps://edu.wyoming.gov Professional Teaching Standards Board: Endorsement List Professional Teaching Standards Board: Code of Conduct Reference Guide to Endorsement Assignment Matches https://education.vermont.gov/ https://www.k12.wa.us/ https://wvde.us/ https://dpi.wi.gov/ https://dpi.wi.gov/ https://edu.wyoming.gov/ Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 42 Appendix B Figure 1 Procedural protocol for determining state credential offering and identifying subsequent requirements. Do state education agencies effectively prepare teachers of ELs? 43 Appendix C Table 1 Examples of Language Referenced in Standards Keywords Examples of how keywords were referenced in standards Examples of keywords referenced in standards that were excluded culture The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards. Fosters a classroom culture where students give unsolicited praise or encouragement to their peers. culturally The teacher knows how to integrate culturally relevant content to build on learners’ background knowledge. diverse Knows how to access information about the values and norms of diverse cultures and communities and how to incorporate students' experiences, cultures, and community resources into instruction. Teachers demonstrate their knowledge of the history of diverse cultures and their role in shaping global issues. Facilitates learners’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems. diversity Understands learning theory, human development, cultural diversity, and individual differences and how these impact on-going planning. English / English Learners identifying and using a variety of instructional strategies and resources that are appropriate to the individual and special needs of students, including students with disabilities, limited English proficient students, and gifted students Addressing the needs of ELs and students with special needs to provide equitable access to the content Language / language acquisition The teacher values diverse languages and dialects and seeks to integrate them into his/her instructional practice to engage students in learning. Supports students in learning and using academic language accurately and meaningfully. Design instruction that accommodates individual differences (e.g., stage of development, learning style, English language acquisition, cultural background, learning disability) in approaches to learning. linguistic The teacher knows how to apply a range of developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to achieve learning goals. The teacher understands that each learner’s cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical development influences learning and knows how to make instructional decisions that build on learners’ strengths and needs. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 29 No. 100 44 About the Authors Christine Montecillo Leider Boston University montecil@bu.edu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1617-8527 Christine Montecillo Leider is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Language Education and Program Director of Bilingual Education and TESOL -Licensure at the Wheelock College of Education and Human Development at Boston University. Michaela W. Colombo University of Massachussets Lowell michaela_colombo@uml.edu Michaela Colombo is Professor Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. Erin Nerlino Boston University enerlino@bu.edu Erin Nerlino is a Doctoral Student in Curriculum & Teaching at the Wheelock College of Education and Human Development at Boston University. education policy analysis archives Volume 29 Number 100 July 26, 2021 ISSN 1068-2341 Readers are free to copy, display, distribute, and adapt this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, the changes are identified, and the same license applies to the derivative work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/. EPAA is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate School of Education at Arizona State University Articles are indexed in CIRC (Clasificación Integrada de Revistas Científicas, Spain), DIALNET (Spain), Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCO Education Research Complete, ERIC, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), QUALIS A1 (Brazil), SCImago Journal Rank, SCOPUS, SOCOLAR (China). About the EPAA/AAPE Editorial Team: https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeam Please send errata notes to Audrey Amrein-Beardsley at audrey.beardsley@asu.edu Join EPAA’s Facebook community at https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE and Twitter feed @epaa_aape. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ http://www.doaj.org/ https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeam mailto:audrey.beardsley@asu.edu https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE