Immigrant Education Immigrant Education and Integration Trendsand Integration Trends

The Annie E. Casey Foundation June 23, 2008

Michael Fix & Margie McHughNCIIP Co-Directors

National Center onImmigrant Integration Policy

Demographic Change: Almost Half Metro Metro Areas Areas

withwith 1 Million+ Immigrants Are in the US

Children of immigrants are ...• 23% All children

• 30% All low-income children

-- 84% Are US citizens

Demographic ImpactsDemographic Impacts

Immigrants are ...• 1 in 8 US residents

• 1 in 2 new workers in 90s

Source: MPI’s tabulations of 2000 Census and 2006 American Community Survey.

More States Feel the Impact of Immigration:More States Feel the Impact of Immigration:Largest and Fastest Growing Immigrant StatesLargest and Fastest Growing Immigrant States

37 Million Foreign Born in 2005

Legal permanentresidents (LPRs)

28%

Legal temporary residents

3%

Naturalized citizens31%

Refugees7%

Unauthorized migrants30%

One in Three Immigrants are Unauthorized

Source: Urban Institute’s estimations

Basic Stats: Basic Stats: Children in Undocumented FamiliesChildren in Undocumented Families

• 4.6 million children, who constitute:• 27 percent children of immigrants• 5 percent all kids• Two-thirds (3 million) are US citizens• One-third (1.6 million) are undocumented• About 65,000 undocumented children

annually graduate from US high schools• But many undocumented drop out

Source: Urban Institute estimations, 2003

Year-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06

United States LEP Enrollment

Total Enrollment

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2007.

Rate of Total and LEP Enrollment Growth:Rate of Total and LEP Enrollment Growth:From 1996 to 2006From 1996 to 2006

Year-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

CaliforniaLEP Enrollment

Total Enrollment

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2006

Rate of Total and LEP Enrollment Growth:From 1995 to 2005

Year

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

North Carolina LEP Enrollment

Total Enrollment

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2006

Rate of Total Pk-12 and LEP Enrollment Rate of Total Pk-12 and LEP Enrollment Growth: 1995 to 2005Growth: 1995 to 2005

Year

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

NevadaLEP Enrollment

Total Enrollment

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2006

Rate of Total Pk-12 and LEP Enrollment Rate of Total Pk-12 and LEP Enrollment Growth: 1995 to 2005Growth: 1995 to 2005

LEP Students Attend LEP Students Attend Linguistically-Segregated SchoolsLinguistically-Segregated Schools

4%1%

16%

30%29%

10%

57%53%

Less than 1% 1% to 10% 11% to 30% 31% or More

Pct. LEP in Child's School

English proficient children

LEP Children

Source: Schools and Staffing Survey, 1999

25%

43%

57%

75%

K to 5th Grade 6th to 12th Grade

1st generation

2nd and higher generation

More LEP Children are Native More LEP Children are Native than Foreign Born, than Foreign Born, United States United States

Source: US Census, 2000.The figures refer to LEP students, ages 5 to 18, currently enrolled in school.

Recent arrivals: 42%

Recent arrivals: 52%

Average Scores of 8Average Scores of 8thth Graders in Graders in Math Math by English Proficiency: NAEP, 1996-2007by English Proficiency: NAEP, 1996-2007

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

1996 2000 2003 2005 2007 2007

Non-LEP

LEP

Non-LEP

Former LEP

LEP

8th Graders

Source: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007 Math Assessments

New York City

* 26% of ELLs in the 2006 class graduated on time vs. 61% of English Proficient Students.

Massachusetts

* 55% of ELLs graduate within four years vs. 80% of all students (2006-2007).

North Carolina

* 52% of ELLs graduate with a regular diploma within four years vs. 70% of all students (2006-2007).

Low Graduation Rates of ELLs

LEP Children Ages 5 to 17 by Generation LEP Children Ages 5 to 17 by Generation Projected Growth: 2000 to 2025Projected Growth: 2000 to 2025

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

2000 2005* 2010 2015 2020 2025

Pct. growth from 2000

58%

83%

36%

All LEP

2nd gen

3rd gen

1st gen

Source: Jeffrey Passel, Pew Hispanic tabulations from Census 2000 5% PUMS. Proportions of children who are LEP computed from Census 2000 data for each generation group. These proportions are held constant and applied to data for (*) 2005 from the March Current Population Survey (CPS) and to (#) projections for 2010 through 2025 done by Passel (2006 forthcoming).

ELL Students in US SchoolsELL Students in US Schools

ELL Students in US SchoolsELL Students in US Schools

2/3 of ELL Students Are in 10 States;2/3 of ELL Students Are in 10 States;1/3 are in California1/3 are in California

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2006

ELL enrollment

Percent ELLs in the state's

total K-12 enrollment

State share (%) of the

national ELL enrollment

United States 5,113,636 10.4

California 1,591,525 25.7 31.1Texas 684,007 15.5 13.4Florida 299,346 11.3 5.9New York 203,583 7.1 4.0Illinois 192,764 9.2 3.8Arizona 155,789 15.1 3.0Colorado 90,391 11.8 1.8Washington 75,678 7.4 1.5Nevada 72,117 18.1 1.4New Mexico 70,926 22.4 1.4

Top 10 states 3,436,126 67.2

ELL Enrollment (2004-2005): ELL Enrollment (2004-2005): Top 10 School DistrictsTop 10 School Districts

Number of ELLsPercent ELLs*

United States 5,113,636 10.4

Los Angeles, CA 328,684 44.0New York City, NY 122,840 12.0Chicago, IL 82,540 19.0Miami-Dade, FL 62,767 17.0Houston, TX 61,319 29.0Clark County, NV 53,517 20.0Dallas, TX 51,328 32.0San Diego, CA 38,629 28.0Santa Ana, CA 36,807 62.1Broward County, FL 29,909 11.0

Top 10 districts 868,340Percentage of all ELLs 17.0%

Source: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 2006*Percent ELLs in the district’s total K-12 enrollment.

• Nature and Quality of English Instruction Services

-alignment of ELL and mainstream curricula-native language instruction and testing policies-use of valid and reliable assessments-teacher recruitment/retention-pre-service and in-service training-alignment of afterschool/SES services-time on task

• Barriers to Parent Involvement-language -unwelcoming school environment-systems/knowledge gap

Key K-12 Issues

• Lack of targeted federal, state and local funding to meet immigrant/ELL needs

-decline in federal support

Key K-12 Issues (cont)

$669

$770

$600$620$640$660$680$700$720$740$760$780$800

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 (est.)

Mil

lio

ns

(200

7 D

oll

ars)

Source: US Department of Education, “Funds for State Formula-Allocated and Selected Student Aid Programs.”

Total Language Acquisition Grants to Total Language Acquisition Grants to US States and Territories, 2002-2007US States and Territories, 2002-2007

Change 2002 to 2007: -13.1%

• Lack of targeted federal, state and local funding to meet immigrant/ELL needs

-decline in federal support -continuing reluctance at state and district levels to use Title I

funds to meet ELL needs-few strong state or local level efforts to address ELL funding

needs-difficulties in establishing accountability for funds even when

they have been designated for ELLs

Key K-12 Issues (cont)

• Advocacy-policy/legislation: collection of longitudinal data; state and

local funding formulas; expanded PreK and afterschool programs.

-administrative: ELL assessment and placement practices; instructional program offerings; alignment of ELL and mainstream curricula AND tests; relevance and sufficiency of teacher training.

-litigation: e.g. CFE lawsuit in New York

• Parent Engagement-language access initiatives-language and literacy programs-personal and family leadership programs-education advocacy and organizing efforts

Strategies for Funders

• Research-policy impacts: NCLB effects on high ELL schools-instructional programs: trials to compare success of different

instructional approaches-curriculum and testing: state testing consortia data will yield

treasure trove of data-funding: learn lessons from areas of new investment,

particularly New York

Strategies for Funders (cont)

Find data, reports and other analysisby state and for the nation at

www.migrationpolicy.org

… 2006 ACS data and newdatabases coming online soon!

Michael Fix and Margie McHughmfix@migrationpolicy.org

mmchugh@migrationpolicy.org

For More InformationFor More Information