Oklahoma Education and You

In my last blog post, I wrote about Oklahoma’s funding formula and specifically the economically disadvantaged weight, and the fact that Oklahoma school districts are not required to document how the funding tied to those weights addresses the needs of economically disadvantaged students.

Oklahoma’s school funding formula also gives extra weight to students classified as bilingual, on the premise that students with language-related needs may require additional support, and that districts serving them may face additional costs.

However, like the economically disadvantaged, how dollars generated by the bilingual weight are spent is not tracked.In FY25, 99,095 students were counted as bilingual, generating over $105 million for Oklahoma school districts.

The premise behind the bilingual weight is that students influenced by another language may require additional academic, language development, communication, and family support services, and that districts serving larger numbers of these students may incur additional costs. Some of the possible services that should be funded with this weight include: bilingual teachers, English Language interventionists, translators and interpreters, professional development for classroom teachers serving multilingual students, and bilingual paraprofessionals. Because of the method used to identify students as bilingual, the needs of students in this category can range from no support needed to very intensive support.

In Oklahoma, students are identified for bilingual weighting through the Home Language Survey. In Oklahoma, the three primary Home Language Survey questions used for bilingual/EL identification are:

1. What is the dominant language most often spoken by the student?
2. What is the language routinely spoken in the home, regardless of the language spoken by the student?
3. What language was first learned by the student?

If two or more of the three primary Home Language Survey responses indicate a language other than English, the student qualifies for bilingual status, even if the student demonstrates English proficiency on the screener. If any of the answers are in a language other than English, the student is given a screening test to determine if they are identified as an English Language Learner. All students identified as English Language Learners through the screening test are identified as bilingual.

This is important because Oklahoma is choosing to weight both ELL students and bilingual students who tested high enough to avoid being classified as ELL the same. Of the 99,095 bilingual students counted in FY25, roughly three-quarters appear to have been identified as English Learners, based on state report-card/EL data. The metrics used on the Oklahoma School Report Card are troubling. In the 2024–25 school year, more than half of the tested English Learners scored Below Basic on several state assessments. Oklahoma’s state report card shows 53% in Reading, 51% in Math, 55% in Science, and 69% in US History in the Below Basic category. Additionally,only one-third of ELL students met their growth targets toward English Proficiency.

The question is not whether bilingual students deserve support. They do. The question is whether Oklahoma can show that the more than $105 million generated by the bilingual weight is being used to improve access, instruction, language development, and academic outcomes for the students who generated the funding. If state leaders are serious about studying school finance, the bilingual weight should be part of that review. Oklahoma should be asking whether the formula is adequate, whether the dollars are targeted, and whether districts are expected to explain how those dollars are helping students.