Few educational policies and Supreme Court cases have made an impact on the education of ELLs (English Language Learners). However, this essay will focus on “The No Child Left behind Act.” This Act was enacted in 2001. This law demand that all kids, including ELLs, attain high standards by indicating proficiency in mathematics and English language Arts by the end of 2014. Districts and schools must assist English Language Learners, among other subgroups, develop continuous success toward this objective, as measured by performance on serious risk consequences, or state tests. This policy has assisted in contributing to the academic achievement of English Language Learners in numerous ways.
After NCLB policy was enacted, there were few effects on the ELLs. Initially, through Title III, scholarships and grants for ELLs doubled, and all the qualified learning institutions were given money through Title III. However, this has created a gap in that, since numerous schools are eligible for Title III, the scholarship funds have become notably smaller than the learning institutions receive. Similarly, Title III fails to make any differences between non-bilingual and bilingual programs ( Behind, 2001) . Furthermore, the federal government legislation now needs English Language Learners to be placed in a school program, and institutional districts have to submit plans and ideas to the federal government to acquire the funds.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
This policy has also contributed to academic success since it demands all state to create ELP assessments and ELP standards designed to evaluate LEP learners’ progress in attaining those standards ( Behind, 2001) . Consequently, before this policy, each state had its procedures and policies on how to recognize English Language Learners and this resulted to too much of a variability range from state to state to recognize ELL learners.
Another enormous success brought by No Child Left Behind, is that the educators of English to Speakers of other dialects designed learning standards in 1997. Additionally, the development of learning and teaching standards is an essential part of working to advance English dialect teaching globally ( Hursh, 2007) . In 2008, they updated these canons that address the educational areas of mathematics, language arts, social studies, and science. According to me, this was a vast improvement that levels out the educational or academic learning for ELLs.
Other than the gap I expressed before, another gap that is out of our control are external components that influence our English Language Learners. There are very huge numbers of things that happen to our understudies outside of school, for example, the understudies' family, network, and so forth that influence an understudy's learning capacity at school. Another gap that we as a nation are having a troublesome time with the low execution and moderate enhancement of our English Language Learners ( Linn, Baker, & Betebenner, 2002) . State tests demonstrate that ELL understudies' school execution is far beneath that of different understudies. I likewise perused that notwithstanding when the test is interpreted in the understudies' language, their scores are still low contrasted with their companions.
Even with the few gaps that can be discovered after the No Child Left Behind policy, this was a vast achievement for English Language Learners. Nevertheless, maybe in future, the responsible parties will discover ways to assist in improving test scores for the English Language learners with utilizing better modifications for this students while they are per taking an assessment.
References
Behind, N. C. L. (2001). Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Public Law print of PL , 107-110.
Hursh, D. (2007). Exacerbating inequality: the failed promise of the No Child Left Behind Act. Race Ethnicity and Education , 10 (3), 295-308.
Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Betebenner, D. W. (2002). Accountability systems: Implications of requirements of the no child left behind act of 2001. Educational researcher , 31 (6), 3-16.
