Andrew Duffy and Grace Chen explore why immigrant students who speak English as a second language face long odds in becoming high school graduates in North America in the following articles: “Why are ESL students left behind? ” and “Inclusion or Exclusion? The ESL Education Debate. ” According to a University of Calgary professor, Hetty Roessigh(1994), ninety-three percent of the ESL students who arrived as beginners in English were likely to drop out from high school. (para. )
Additionally, they face many obstacles such as dealing with the difficult language that they encounter in textbooks and cannot translate their academic ability into decent marks on written tests. (Roessigh, 1994, para. 11) In the article “Why are ESL students left behind? ” written by journalist Andrew Duffy in 2004, he examines the cause and effects of English as a second language in education. By having different perspectives of the professional researchers of ESL studies as evidence, the author discusses the disadvantages that students faced. “For every one of the ESL kids who makes it, there are hundreds who don’t. (Roessigh, 2004, para. 4)
However, in the article “Inclusion or Exclusion? The ESL Education Debate” written by Grace Chen in April 7th, 2009 for the Public School Review website, discusses how to enhance ESL students learning and at the same time the public schools are coping with reduced funding due to the economic recession. The 2001 national mandate, No Child Left Behind, required that all public schools help ESL students become proficient in English, as both native speaker and ESL students are mandated to meet State and National achievement standards.
The Multicultural Education Journal) Nevertheless, when fifty percent of school-age children will have non-English speaking backgrounds by 2020, how do such programs improve ESL students’ English? While analyzing the article “Why are ESL students left behind? ” I question the reliability because it is a secondary source that interprets and reviews the previous findings from the professional researchers. Supporting by Andrew Duffy’s proofs, it is serious that immigrant students who dissatisfy in school would not be able to please in the society. (2004).
As a country, we cannot afford continuation of current practices, at the risk of under-preparing a large segment of our workforce for the 21st century. ”(Wayne Thomas and Virginia Collier, of George Mason University, para. 48) Simultaneously, the second piece of the article “Inclusion or Exclusion? The ESL Education Debate” is also a secondary source. Grace Chen (2004) determines the effect of the “full inclusion system” in California, where students are forced to engage in fluent English classes, even if they have never been exposed to the language before.
Secondly, making connection with immigrants’ socio-economic status from the first article and the required additional funding mentioned from the second article, both of the authors have closely the same thoughts which are that the immigrants students need more additional supports. Andrew Duffy provides a strong correlation between the socio-economic status and grades discover by Professor Gunderson which shows that refugees are mainly the people that needs the funding supports. Nevertheless, Grace Chen only discusses the funding that is needed for the ESL students yet the use is unknown.
However, neither of the authors expressed their viewpoints in the articles. While Andrew Duffy found evidences supported by different sides of university-level professors, Grace Chen did not give a concrete answer for the debate. Nobody is sure how the inclusion will work out yet they have already reduced funding for the ESL students. “What is the best approach on behave of all the difficulties facing by the ESL students? ”(Grace Chen, 2009, para. 12) As a conclusion, regarding how to defend the needs of all students, I would say “Why are ESL students left behind? ” is more correct than “Inclusion or Exclusion? The ESL Education Debate. ”.
Courtney from Study Moose