Williams: As Florida Flouts America’s New Education Law on English Language Learners, Will the Feds Take a Stand?
Another week, another attempt by states to find loopholes in federal education law. This time, it’s Florida’s turn to take the spotlight.
The Sunshine State has a significant population of English language learners (ELLs) with over a quarter-million students. However, the graduation rate for ELLs is alarmingly low at just 56 percent, which is 20 points below the rate for non-ELLs. Despite receiving approximately $800 million in federal education funds, Florida has chosen to test the U.S. Department of Education’s vigilance by excluding ELLs’ progress towards proficiency from its school quality evaluation system.
Not only is this a terrible idea, but it’s also illegal. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) explicitly states that states must include the progress of ELLs in English proficiency in their school ratings. Civil rights groups are rightly outraged by this proposal, arguing that Florida is disregarding decades of research, personal stories of struggle, and the federal law itself instead of striving for continuous improvement and equitable education for its nearly 300,000 ELLs.
However, Florida’s education leaders may not be too concerned about the consequences. After all, other states have already received approval from the Trump administration for plans that completely disregarded the language of the law. ESSA has turned out to be a weak and ineffectual document, as many critics had predicted.
This situation brings to mind an insightful quote from American philosopher William James. He challenges us to consider the practical implications and real-life consequences of a belief or idea. Similarly, if we declare a rule to be true, such as holding schools accountable for ELLs’ progress in English using appropriate tests, does it automatically become a reality? Florida’s proposal challenges the federal government to make that determination.
If Florida’s plan is ultimately approved, it will provide further evidence that the provisions of ESSA are not being enforced and that their true meaning is subject to the whims of Republican leadership in Washington, D.C. In practical terms, the impact of ESSA is essentially nonexistent.
This situation is reflective of federal education policy as a whole. Replace an unpopular law with a weaker one that reduces federal involvement, eliminate regulations meant to clarify its intent, and so on. Fine. But let’s not be surprised when this process produces accountability systems and civil rights protections that are too weak to have any meaningful impact on actual school performance.
To illustrate this concept, consider a recent experience I had during a work trip. As is customary in American airlines, the overhead bins filled up before everyone found space for their carry-on bags. A familiar scene unfolded, complete with passive-aggressive standoffs, grumpy passengers, and onlookers eagerly observing the drama. Naturally, this led to a delay.
However, I remained unfazed. I travel with a duffel bag to avoid such scenarios and, incidentally, to incorporate some core muscle exercise while walking through the terminal. It’s a win-win situation.
Yet, I couldn’t help but wonder why airlines don’t enforce their carry-on limits. The bins were overflowing with bags that clearly exceeded the size restrictions indicated at the gate and ticket counter. Countless airline staff directed these passengers towards their seats on the plane, disregarding the rules entirely. This begs the question: Why bother having rules if they are not going to be enforced?
Of course, the issue is not as straightforward as it seems. Let’s play out a scenario where an airline sets reasonable carry-on limits that actually fit the planes. The crew and ticket agents diligently enforce these limits. What would happen then?
No airline possesses enough authority to strictly enforce carry-on baggage regulations down to the smallest detail. Instead, they rely on the available space on their planes to determine compliance. Many individuals choose to bend, or rather break, the baggage rules, resulting in some passengers unexpectedly having to check their bags. As a result, an uneasy truce settles over the entire airline industry.
This brings me to the topic of James. Rules hold significance only when they possess enough weight to alter behaviors. In the case of airlines’ baggage rules, enforcement is rather casual and ambiguous, so the true meaning lies not in the wording of the rules themselves (as seen in the sample bins at the ticket counter), but rather in the blurry reality on the ground.
The same can be said for federal education policy. However, this doesn’t discourage people from hoping that the vague and inconsistently enforced rules of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) will somehow protect disadvantaged children, inspire educators, and enhance our schools. Unfortunately, it seems that the DeVos Department of Education lacks both the interest and the resolve to effectively implement ESSA, holding states accountable to adhere to the law.
As a result, states are unlikely to comply. The disparity between the literal text of the law and its practical interpretation is why ESSA was never going to surpass the unpopular status quo set by No Child Left Behind. ESSA spared the United States’ public education system from severe consequences and relieved certain politicians from uncomfortable pressures, certainly.
However, examples like Florida demonstrate that it will not yield substantial improvements for children.
