This report relies on a set of analytic criteria to identify states in which multilingual learners of English (MLEs) demonstrate relatively strong performance on indicators such as academic achievement and high school graduation, resulting in Texas and Indiana as policy-relevant comparison contexts for California. Drawing on an updated, research-based framework of teacher knowledge, the report examines how state language education policies, licensure requirements, and certification structures align with evidence on effective instruction for MLEs. We then examine the potential ways in which funding level policy and resource use might contribute to the outcomes for MLEs.
Findings indicate that Texas and Indiana operationalize MLE-specific pedagogical, linguistic, assessment, and policy knowledge through distinct specialist certification pathways and externally verified competency requirements, whereas California relies primarily on universal authorizations embedded within general teaching credentials. In Texas and Indiana, clearer role differentiation, formal licensure examinations, and defined expectations for teachers of record serving MLEs contribute to more coherent preparation systems and more predictable access to bilingual or English language development services. The evidence suggests that MLE instruction is most effective when specialized linguistic and pedagogical expertise is treated as a core domain of professional competence rather than a supplemental skill expected of all teachers without verification.
Texas and Indiana also offer California important lessons about both MLE funding policy and resource use, though not as simple models to replicate. On funding policy, Texas demonstrates valuable structural innovations, including formula-based incentives for dual language programs, additional funding for non-MLE students in two-way programs, and tiered weights based on program type. Indiana illustrates the principle of proficiency-differentiated funding, recognizing that students at different stages of language acquisition have different resource needs. However, both states also illustrate the critical importance of adequate funding levels. On resource use, Texas provides models for both accountability and infrastructure but also demonstrates that funding incentives cannot overcome chronic teacher shortages, with bilingual educators identified as a shortage field every year since 1990. Indiana's experience shows what happens when resource use accountability is not outlined in funding policy; for example, districts redirect targeted funds to cover shortfalls elsewhere, with 16% of complexity grant dollars statewide backfilling special education and MLE costs.
The report concludes that California’s policy framework articulates a strong vision for multilingual education but lacks mechanisms to ensure consistent instructional capacity statewide. To strengthen policy coherence, the report recommends that California establish clearer specialist roles for MLE instruction, implement formal verification of MLE-specific teacher competencies, while maintaining shared responsibility across the teaching workforce. The report also recommends replacing the unduplicated pupil counts for funding with dual funding; increase the supplemental grant weight; incentivize dual language programs with supplemental funding; and differentiate funding level by English proficiency level.
