Mai: A Long-Term English Learner and a Push to Exit
Mai is a 17-year-old junior who was born in the United States; her parents speak Vietnamese at home and she speaks English with her younger siblings. She has been enrolled in English language development every year since kindergarten and is now in the highest ELD section for the fourth year in a row. On the state English language proficiency assessment she scored 4.9 in oral language, 3.0 in reading, 2.8 in writing, and an overall composite of 3.9. The state requires an overall composite of at least 4.5 with at least 4.0 in literacy to reclassify. Mai failed English 10 and biology last year and is passing this year partly because of a late-work grading policy. Her counselor wants to exit her from ELD now so she can fit a second science course into her schedule and stay on track for graduation. Teachers describe her as 'fluent, she just doesn't try.' Her mother, through the school's interpreter, says she will go along with whatever the school recommends.
1. Evaluate the counselor's proposal. What should the school do about the graduation-credit problem?
Read the worked answer
The proposal should be declined, and the reason should be stated in writing.
On the criteria: Mai's composite of 3.9 is below the 4.5 threshold, and her literacy scores of 3.0 and 2.8 are well below the 4.0 literacy requirement. She does not meet the state's reclassification criteria. Exiting her now would be a local override of a state standard, and it would end the language development services that are supposed to close exactly the gap those scores measure.
On the reasoning behind the request: the counselor is solving a scheduling problem with a program change. That confuses two decisions. Graduation credit should be addressed through the master schedule (a second science section, a credit-recovery option, summer coursework, or a careful look at whether the ELD course earns the credit it should), not by removing her from a service she still qualifies for.
On 'fluent, she just doesn't try': that sentence describes a student whose oral English is strong enough to mask an academic literacy problem. It also shifts responsibility onto her. If she is disengaged, the plan should ask what she has been asked to read and write across six years, and what she can actually do with an academic text.
2. What is the most likely explanation for Mai's reading and writing scores, and what assessment would you conduct next?
Read the worked answer
Her profile, fluent conversation paired with a writing score near the intermediate range, points to a breakdown in academic language rather than in everyday communication: word recognition may be adequate while academic vocabulary, complex syntax, and extended-text composition are not.
Next assessments, in order of usefulness:
- A close error analysis of two or three of her own writing samples, looking separately at vocabulary choice, sentence structure, organization, and mechanics, so the team knows which one is the bottleneck.
- A running record and retell on grade-level expository text, to see whether comprehension fails at the word, sentence, or text-structure level.
- An academic vocabulary inventory drawn from her actual science and English texts.
- A conversation with her about what she does when a text gets hard, which often reveals strategy gaps rather than effort problems.
- If a persistent, unexpected pattern emerges that does not respond to targeted intervention, a consideration of a language or learning disability, using data in both languages where possible and excluding limited schooling and language difference.
The conclusion to avoid is 'low motivation.' The conclusion to test is 'she has never been taught academic writing explicitly, and she has been passed along.'
3. Design a plan for Mai's remaining time in high school, including monitoring after she exits ELD.
Read the worked answer
Instruction now: integrated ELD inside an English course that has an explicit academic writing strand (paragraph and essay structure, sentence combining, citation, and revision), plus a sheltered or co-taught section of biology with pre-taught vocabulary and structured note-taking. Writing should be assigned and responded to across content areas, not only in English class, so she gets volume and feedback.
Language development: targeted academic vocabulary and morphology, plus scaffolded discussion that pushes her toward precise academic register rather than conversational fluency.
Scheduling: keep the ELD course and solve the science credit separately. Build a graduation audit with her counselor that shows exactly which courses and credits are missing and which assessments (including any state seal or biliteracy credential for which her Vietnamese might qualify) are available.
Family communication: a conference with a Vietnamese interpreter in which the school explains the reclassification criteria, her current scores, and the specific plan, and asks what her goals are. A signature of consent is not the same as informed agreement; the record should show that the criteria were explained.
Monitoring: once she does meet the criteria, the state's post-exit monitoring period (typically two years) should include grade and progress checks, with a documented path back into services if she struggles. Reclassification is a transition, not a finish line.