The closure of OELA has impacted programs all across the United States. Read on to learn how state and local leadership can work together to help continue the mission and keep our students moving forward towards reaching their personal Summit.
.png)
"When federal leadership steps back, local leadership must step forward. This is a defining moment to shape the multilingual learner future at the state and local levels." -Dr. Miguel Cardona, ALAS Conference 2025
Across the United States, approximately five million K–12 students are identified as English language learners. ¹ This rapidly growing and diverse group brings a wealth of cultural and linguistic strengths that, when recognized and supported, can enrich the learning environment for all students. However, realizing this potential demands strategic clarity about desired outcomes for multilingual learners and systematic, linguistically responsive approaches to measuring impact—ensuring that language development, content mastery, and cross-linguistic assets are all valued and visible. When school systems intentionally select and implement high-quality instructional materials with multilingual learners in mind, they foster classrooms that are more inclusive, intellectually engaging, and academically rigorous.
Despite this promise, U.S. schools have not fully tapped into the academic potential of multilingual learners. Persistent disparities in achievement and access to educational opportunities remain. ² These gaps often stem from lack of representative adoption committees, adoption criteria, and failure to establish meaningful metrics for measuring educational impact. Organizations like the English Learners Success Forum and the National Committee for Effective Literacy emphasize that these gaps can be narrowed when districts equip educators with strong, evidence-based curricula and the right supports—ensuring that multilingual learners can thrive academically and pursue their future goals.
The closure of the federal Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) marks a historic leadership shift in responsibility for multilingual learner education. For decades, OELA provided national guidance, resources, and oversight to ensure multilingual learners (MLLs) in K-12 schools had equitable access to language and literacy instruction.
With its closure, the responsibility for ensuring access to opportunities and quality now rests squarely on state and local leaders. This transition requires leaders to establish clear strategic frameworks that define success, communicate expectations effectively across all stakeholder groups, and measure impact. This moment presents both a leadership and a strategic opportunity to lead, rather than follow, multilingual learner success:
Part I of this article focuses on how states and districts can use adoption criteria to embed multilingual learner equity into the materials selection process itself — setting clear expectations for publishers and ensuring materials meet high-quality language and literacy standards.
Part II highlights how leaders can build adoption committees that reflect and represent multilingual learners — ensuring these criteria are applied with fidelity, expertise, and equity.
Together, these two initiatives form the core levers of leadership in this new era of decentralized, multilingual learner responsibility: adoption criteria define what quality looks like while representative committees ensure that quality reaches classrooms.
A 2022 survey showed that 80 percent of teachers say they often create their own materials and 90 percent of teachers mix and match, using the curriculum and a ‘bunch of other stuff’ they often find on Google or Teachers Pay Teachers. A Rand survey showed that 50 percent of teachers were not at all prepared to teach multilingual learners; seventy percent of teachers report that their instructional materials don't adequately support multilingual learners; only ten percent of principals who served multilingual learners said they were prioritizing both professional learning for teachers that addresses the needs of these students, and instructional materials that support them. Yet, research shows that high-quality curriculum—paired with curriculum-based professional learning— can yield significant gains in student achievement, often at a lower cost than other interventions (Boser, Chingos, and Straus, 2015).
Investing in strong adoption criteria and supporting teachers with high-quality materials use can:
1. Why Criteria Matter Now
The adoption criteria used to select instructional materials can determine whether MLLs have equitable access to grade-level instruction—or get left behind. "High quality" cannot be generic; for MLLs, it involves:
With OELA stepping back, states and districts now carry the responsibility to set the standard—embedding language-affirming adoption criteria into evaluation rubrics, procurement processes, and implementation plans.
2. Integrating MLL Specific Criteria: Benchmarks of Quality
Adoption committees need research-based quality indicators to evaluate instructional materials with the needs of multilingual learners in mind. The criteria should have specificity and include language support. Alignment between strategic objectives and measurable outcomes also ensures that adoption decisions directly back student achievement goals.
Strong adoption criteria can become a de facto state academic content in conjunction with their language development standard, driving coherence and equity across classrooms Many state textbook adoption guidelines (e.g., CA, TX, NY, FL) require:
The English Learner Success Forum Benchmarks of Quality name five critical design features that ensure materials meet the needs of multilingual learners:
ELSF also encourages stakeholders to use Guidelines for Improving Designated English Language Development Materials to inform their adoption or adaptation of existing curriculum materials as well as the improvement of the teaching and learning happening in designated ELD classrooms.
These examples establish a clear, research-based foundation for evaluating instructional materials, allowing reviewers to make objective, evidence-driven judgments rather than relying on personal opinions or preferences. It serves state, district, and school-based reviewers of materials to determine whether effective supports are in place and identify areas where additional materials need to be adapted.
A Note of Code-Based Instructional Materials: As districts increase the adoption of code-based literacy programs, as part of their Science of Reading directive, it is vital that adoption committees move beyond simply ensuring that there are “no red flags” in materials.
Classrooms face a real constraint: limited instructional time. Foundational skills develop reciprocally, not in isolation. This means that integration and reciprocity are the most efficient path forward:
It is important not to rely solely on how the publisher describes the materials. Review units and lessons for integration and efficiency. Explicit, systematic, high-quality adoption criteria must ensure materials meet the needs of ML learners by addressing:
3. Publisher Accountability
Strategic communication with publishers shifts the traditional vendor-customer dynamic, positioning districts as informed partners who clearly articulate expectations and success metrics.
State and local leaders can use tools such as the Step 4: Checklist for Communication with Publishers to:
This approach reflects best practices in educational procurement, where clear communication of requirements and success criteria enables vendors to respond with targeted solutions that align with strategic objectives.
This shifts the power dynamic: districts lead with expectations rather than just react to publisher offerings.
4. State and Local Leadership Responsibilities in Criteria Setting
In the absence of OELA leadership, state and local education agencies must step into a leadership role:
Effective leadership in this new landscape demands what research identifies as core components of successful educational strategy and effective change management:
This is more than a purchasing decision — it’s a leadership commitment. Successful implementation depends on a deliberate, systematic approach to measuring impact and ensuring that adoption decisions lead to real gains in student learning. Being equipped to mobilize the right people, ask the right questions, and champion an adoption process to reflect the brilliance and needs of every learner.
While federal rollback creates a leadership gap, states and districts have the power — and responsibility — to close it through bold, language-affirming adoption policies.
Representative adoption committees shape the instructional future of every classroom — and multilingual learner expertise must be at the table. Forming these committees requires intentional planning, thoughtful selection of participants, clearly defined roles, and targeted efforts to address knowledge gaps among members. Even the strongest evaluation criteria will fall short if the adoption process itself isn’t intentionally designed to center the needs of multilingual learners.
The result? Well-meaning adoptions that overlook the realities of multilingual learners.
As OELA phases out, states and districts must ensure that representation, expertise, and accountability are built into local decision-making.
1. Why Committees Matter More Now: State and District Leadership as the New Anchor
In the absence of federal oversight, state and district committees serve as both the last line of defense and the first line of opportunity to ensure multilingual learners remain at the center of instructional decision-making.
This distributed leadership model demands representation, expertise, clear and consistent communication protocols and a shared understanding of strategic goals, policy, and success metrics across every level of the system to ensure alignment, accountability, and impact.
2. Representative Committees Drive Better Decisions
Strategic committee composition goes beyond ensuring representation. It requires selecting individuals who bring both expertise and commitment to the work, while also providing targeted professional development to bridge differences in background knowledge and build a shared foundation for decision-making.
Districts can change this by intentionally building adoption committees that reflect their student populations:
Representative committees make stronger, higher-quality decisions when members are well prepared and supported throughout the evaluation process. This transforms adoption from:
3. Adoption as Professional Learning
Strong committees don’t just select materials—they build expertise and consensus.
When educators are trained to recognize and evaluate language-focused supports, they also strengthen their ability to teach with them. This ensures that adoption is:
A comprehensive learning opportunity, not just a purchasing decision
A coherence-building moment across departments
A shared responsibility for language development
Professional learning during adoption creates distributed expertise, enabling multiple stakeholders to develop a shared understanding of quality indicators and implementation requirements.
The Step 3: Checklist for Adoption Committee and Reviewer Training outlines specific actions to ensure committees reflect linguistic and cultural diversity and are fully equipped to lead high-impact adoption processes.
4. Inclusive Review Processes
Systematic review processes depend on structured protocols that allow for comprehensive evaluation while keeping the focus on strategic priorities and measurable outcomes.
The Step 4: Checklist for Inclusive Materials Review recommends:
These structured approaches align with research showing that effective committees rely on clear processes, defined timelines, and systematic documentation to make strong, defensible decisions.
5. Superintendent & Cabinet Leadership Creating Systems of Opportunity
State and local leadership can now set the table. Sustainable change demands more than good intentions — it requires leaders who can cast a bold vision, build structured systems of support, and hold steady on measurable goals that advance language and literacy for every learner.
When superintendents build representative adoption committees, they transform what could be a routine procedural step into a powerful lever for equity. Committees are not neutral spaces — they are where access and outcomes are either advanced or denied. State and district leaders hold both the authority and the responsibility to deliver in this pivotal moment.
Effective leadership in committee governance means clear expectations, structured support, and relentless focus on impact. Superintendents and cabinet members aren’t bystanders in curriculum adoption — they are the architects who shape the blueprint for instructional equity.
To ensure committees are both representative and effective, district leaders must:
This is a defining moment. As federal oversight recedes, state and local leaders have the chance — and the charge — to lead boldly. The table has been set. Now, it’s up to superintendents and their teams to build processes worthy of the students they serve — processes that don’t just include multilingual learners but center them as the measure of success.
The closure of the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) is more than a policy shift — it’s a leadership moment. Successfully navigating this transition requires applying strategic planning principles with precision: clarity of purpose, intentional stakeholder engagement, and robust frameworks for measuring impact.
This is an opportunity to drive systemic change by ensuring that adoption committees, selection criteria, and implementation plans prioritize high-quality instructional materials that support multilingual learners.
Superintendent and cabinet leadership must step forward to bridge the gap left by the federal government and lead boldly.
Equity for multilingual learners will not be guaranteed from Washington — it will be secured at your table, through your criteria, your committees, and your leadership.
Sustaining this leadership moment means building systems, not silos, so that every multilingual learner, in every classroom, has access to rigorous, affirming instruction that unlocks both language and opportunity.
This is your table. This is your moment. Lead boldly.
¹ Office of English Language Acquisition. English Learners: Demographic Trends.
² Council of the Great City Schools. (2019). English Language Learners in America's Great City Schools: Demographics, Achievement, and Staffing.
Boser, Chingos, and Straus, 2015 The Hidden Value of Curriculum Reform Do States and Districts Receive the Most Bang for Their Curriculum Buck?
California Department of Education. (2015). English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework for California Public Schools: Kindergarten through grade twelve. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/
Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Palincsar, A. S., Afflerbach, P., & Kendeou, P. (2020). How the reading for understanding initiative’s research complicates the simple view of reading invoked in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S161–S172.
Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25–S44.
English Learners Success Forum. (2022). Benchmarks of Quality – ELA. English Learners Success Forum. (n.d.). https://www.elsuccessforum.org/
English Learners Success Forum. (n.d.). Step 3: Checklist for adoption committee and reviewer training [Checklist] In Multilingual learner curriculum adoption toolkit. English Learners Success Forum. (n.d.). https://www.elsuccessforum.org/
English Learners Success Forum. (n.d.). The Step 4: Checklist for Inclusive Materials Review In Multilingual learner curriculum adoption toolkit. https://www.elsuccessforum.org/
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Lost in Translation — Teachers Report Feeling Unprepared to Support Multilingual Learners
National Committee for Effective Literacy. (n.d.). Toward Comprehensive Effective Literacy Policy and Instruction for English Learner/Emergent Bilingual Students
House Bill 1605 guidance: Instructional materials review and adoption.
https://tea.texas.gov/academics/instructional-materials/house-bill-1605/house-bill-1605-and-imra
U.S. Department of Education. (2025). OELA transition communications [Internal communications and press statements].
WIDA Consortium. (2020). WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition. https://wida.wisc.edu/teach/standards/eld