Left Behind

Immigrant children are the losers as Virginia bickers with Washington over testing.

VIRGINIA'S showdown with the federal government over the No Child Left Behind Act has no real heroes or even villains, just victims. Children from immigrant families who are struggling to learn a new language while trying to keep pace in school have the most to lose from an impasse.

The dispute centers on how to test students with limited proficiency in English. The U.S. Education Department rightfully insists that these children be tested with rigor on core subject matter as well as on their English skills. Virginia, with Fairfax County in the lead, counters that it is unfair to give the same test to students just learning English as is given to fluent English speakers. Fairfax school officials feel so strongly about the issue that they have decided to defy federal rules if, as is likely, the Education Department doesn't accede to Virginia's request for continued use of a proxy test until a better assessment tool is developed.

Virginia officials are right that students who are still learning English shouldn't be expected to display subject mastery in English. But their rhetoric glosses over their own failure to come up with a solution and instead takes an uncalled-for swipe at No Child Left Behind.

Holding students with limited English to the same standards as their English-speaking counterparts is a worthy goal and has been part of federal law since 1994, before No Child Left Behind. School districts simply didn't give it any regard until the No Child law ushered in an era of accountability and forced schools to figure out how to improve teaching for students still learning English. The law is more flexible than Virginia officials imply. Students new to American schools are exempt from testing for the first year, and states can devise different tests, allow such accommodations as the use of foreign-language dictionaries and even administer content tests in other languages (something Virginia won't consider).

Virginia sat on its hands while every other state was able to satisfy the federal regulations. For reasons we can't fathom, federal officials enabled Virginia's inaction, allowing until now the use of a test both sides agreed was inadequate. The federal officials then barred the test without a good alternative in place. Even more troubling is the failure of the federal government to provide sufficient help to states struggling with the complex issue of how best to test the growing population of students with limited English. Educators tell persuasive and painful stories of the harm caused by making these children sit for tests that are inappropriate. Only recently has that been acknowledged, with Education Secretary Margaret Spellings announcing a partnership with states to come up with better tests.

Virginia's high-profile challenge, coming as congressional debate over reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act begins, at least may focus attention on an issue that has been overlooked for too long.