Literacy Development and Second Language Acquisition
3/10/2014
Literacy Development and Second Language Acquisition March 14, 2014 PaTTAN Harrisburg Ana Sainz de la Peña Connie Cochran Paula Zucker
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
PaTTAN’s Mission The Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network is an initiative of the Pennsylvania Department of Education working in partnership with families and local education agencies to support programs and services to improve student learning and achievement.
PDE’s Commitment to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
Recognizing that the placement decision is an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team decision, our goal for each child is to ensure IEP teams begin with the general education setting with the use of supplementary aids and services before considering a more restrictive environment.
1
3/10/2014
What Teachers Need to Know About Language (Wong-Fillmore & Snow, 2000) Having read the article, written in 2000, do you find the ideas still relevant in 2014? What part(s) still apply today? What would you change in this article to bring it up to date? •
Talk to your “elbow neighbor” • How can you use this information in your training sessions? • Why is it important to know the differences and not only the similarities in teaching literacy to ELLs?
Outcomes • Understand the challenges of teaching literacy to ELLs. • Substantiate the use of ACCESS for ELLs data and Sample Items as part of decision making regarding literacy development. • Empower teachers to address the linguistic challenges students face in learning to read in a second language.
2
3/10/2014
Challenges When Teaching Reading to ELLs • Most teachers lack the training, expertise, and experience to teach reading and other subjects to culturally and linguistically diverse students. • Most “evidence-based” practices have not been sufficiently validated for diverse populations. • Recommendations for assessing and teaching English language learners do not adequately account for what we know about learning to read in one’s first language and in a second language.
Many culturally and linguistically diverse students do not receive optimal instruction. There tends to be too much focus on phonological awareness and letter naming at the expense of other skills. Scripted or pre-sequenced instructional approaches are problematic because the responsibility to adjust falls on the child to match the curriculum rather than the other way around.
Many culturally and linguistically diverse students do not receive optimal instruction. We treat the child as “broken” (or “at risk”) rather than the curriculum. This may especially be true in kindergarten, where the curriculum assumes certain background experiences that may be different than the ELL’s. Teachers must have enough flexibility to differentiate
instruction to meet all children’s needs.
3
3/10/2014
• Most school-level teams charged with making special education eligibility decisions for English language learners lack training and experience in distinguishing a language difference from a learning disability and do not understand the centrality of culture in learning. • We are not doing enough to examine underlying assumptions about who can learn and who struggles: “It was as if the failure was invisible, or worse, inevitable.” (Noguera & Wing, 2006, p. 168).
• If a child does not make adequate progress with research-based instruction that is presumed “to work,” the assumption is made that the child must have a deficit of some kind. – How do we ensure that the child has received culturally and linguistically responsive, appropriate, quality instruction? – As with earlier identification criteria, this model must be based on students having received an adequate “opportunity to learn.”
Opportunity to Learn • Optimal literacy instruction for ELLs accounts for the influence of culture and experience on cognition and learning, behavior and communication, language development and motivation. • Some LD diagnoses are made not because students have internal deficits of some kind, but rather because they have not received an adequate opportunity to learn.
4
3/10/2014
Opportunity to Learn • Some children do not actually have disabilities, but have been taught in “disabling contexts.” • Many ELLs are provided with too few opportunities to develop their language and literacy skills. In Pennsylvania, 1 out of 8 ELLs has an IEP. Why?
• Shift from figuring out what is wrong with a student to looking more broadly at the instructional context and at how to provide support for all students. • Focus first on improving core instruction, with differentiation. – Use progress monitoring data to look at classroom datasets.
• Make sure someone on the team has expertise in how to distinguish between language acquisition and learning disabilities.
• When many students are not progressing, change instruction: – Has the instructional program been validated with students like those in the class? – Is instruction at an appropriate level for students’ language and learning needs? – Is the program well-implemented? – Are teachers sufficiently differentiating instruction to meet diverse student needs? – Is the environment conducive to learning?
• This will require: – observing in classrooms and supporting instruction – developing and capitalizing on local expertise.
5
3/10/2014
ESL Program
16
School personnel are confused about Tier 2 interventions and wonder whether ESL instruction "counts" as a secondary intervention. Some RtII schools (with ELL population) receiving IU RtII technical assistance have all ELLs in Tier 2 and Tier 3 What is not right in this picture? Why is this “acceptable”?
ESL instruction is core instruction in Pennsylvania and it belongs in Tier 1. • The “20%” of students receiving Tier 2 interventions should NOT be mostly just ELLs—if most ELLs are not progressing, the instruction is not sufficient. • Tier 2 interventions: – Supplement the core curriculum – Are determined by examining students’ rate of growth, including English language proficiency measures, as well as whether they meet benchmarks.
6
3/10/2014
Myth1: “Evidence-based instruction” is good instruction for everyone. culturally and linguistically diverse students who have been taught with “evidence-based interventions” have been provided with an adequate opportunity to learn.
Myth 2: Students who fail to respond to research-based instruction have some sort of learning problem or internal deficit, and perhaps even a learning disability.
Myth 3: Learning to read in one’s second language is similar to learning to read in one’s first language; therefore assessment methods and instructional approaches that have been found through research to be effective with mainstream English-speaking students are appropriate for serving ELLs.
7
3/10/2014
What does it look like when teachers lack preparation in teaching ELLs? • Note: Examples are from actual classrooms with ELLs, most at levels 1 and 2 of English proficiency.
This is What We Need to Know to Improve Literacy Instruction for ELLs
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
Six Key Principles to Support ELLs in Meeting the CCSS Understanding Language 1. Instruction focuses on providing ELLs with opportunities to engage in discipline- specific practices which are designed to build conceptual understanding and language competence in tandem. 2. Instruction leverages ELLs’ home language(s), cultural assets, and prior knowledge.
8
3/10/2014
Six Key Principles 3. Standards-aligned instruction for ELLs is rigorous, grade-level appropriate, and provides deliberate and appropriate scaffolds. 4. Instruction moves ELLs forward by taking into account their English proficiency level(s) and prior schooling experiences.
Six Key Principles 5. Instruction fosters ELLs’ autonomy by equipping them with the strategies necessary to comprehend and use language in a variety of academic settings. 6. Diagnostic tools and formative assessment practices are employed to measure students’ content knowledge, academic language competence, and participation in disciplinary practices.
Diversity of ELLs • • • • •
Long-Term ELLs Migrant ELLs Refugees Language (L1) Distance from English LFS or SIFE Students with Interrupted Formal Education • ELLs with IEPs (gifted or disabled) • Highly Schooled Newcomers • ELLs born in the USA
9
3/10/2014
Jeanette Klingner http://www.rtinetwork.org/professional/videos/p odcasts/janette-klingner-realizing-the-potential of-rti-considerations-when-implementing-rti with-english-language-learners Note what she says about • Tier 1 instruction for ELLs • phonological awareness • research-based practices • DIBELS reading fluency and ELLs
Literacy Development Sequence for ELLs
English Speakers’ Literacy Development
SOUNDS
WORDS
SENTENCES
S T O R Y
10
3/10/2014
ELLs and Literacy Development
Consider Potential Challenges for ELL in the “Five Big Ideas” of Reading • Phonological Awareness • Alphabetic Principle • Fluency • Vocabulary • Reading Comprehension
Potential Challenges for ELLs Phonological Awareness
When the student’s first language, or L1, does not include some English phonemes: o the student is not accustomed to hearing these sounds. o it can be quite difficult to distinguish between sounds. o pronouncing new sounds can be difficult. o phonological tasks in general become more challenging.
11
3/10/2014
Potential Challenges for ELLs Alphabetic Principal
Some orthographies are very different than English; even when the orthography of the student’s L1 is similar to English, such as with Spanish, differences can be quite confusing: o letters might look the same but represent different sounds. o unfamiliar English sounds and their various spellings can make decoding and spelling difficult. o not knowing the meanings of words limits the ELL reader’s ability to use context clues. o learning letters and sounds can seem very abstract.
Potential Challenges for ELLs Fluency
ELLs typically have fewer opportunities to read aloud in English and receive feedback than their English speaking peers. ELLs may read more slowly, with less understanding. ELLs can have an accent and still read fluently.
Potential Challenges for ELLs Vocabulary
Students may become good word callers but not understand what they are reading. ELLs can be confused by common words, such as o prepositions (e.g.,“on,” “above”) o pronouns (e.g.,“she,” “they”) o cohesion markers (e.g.,“therefore,” “however”) o words with multiple meanings (e.g.,“bat,” “light”) o figurative language such as similes (e.g.,“swims like a fish”) or metaphors (e.g.,“his stomach was a bottomless pit”) o idioms (e.g.,“to know something inside out”) False cognates can perplex students (e.g.,“fast” in German means “almost”; “embarasada” in Spanish means “pregnant”).
12
3/10/2014
Potential Challenges for ELLs Many factors affect comprehension, such as Reading o oral language proficiency Comprehension o word recognition skills o fluency o vocabulary knowledge o the ability to use comprehension strategies o variations in text structure o interest o cultural differences To determine what students comprehend, teachers should o provide them with alternative ways to show understanding (e.g., in their native language, using diagrams) o focus more on content than grammatical errors or accents.
http://www.rtinetwork.org/professional/videos/p odcasts/janette-klingner-realizing-the-potential of-rti-cultural-and-linguistic-diversity-in-english language-learners
What is an ESL Program?
What Do ESL Teachers Teach?
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
13
3/10/2014
ESL Program
40
CORE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE REFERENCE CHART REQUIREMENTS
LEGAL REFERENCE
PROGRAM
OCR 1970 Memo Lau v Nichols 1974 Supreme Court decision
Home language survey Train intake staff Classroom survey
2. Assess Determine need for instruction Place in appropriate program of instruction
Office of Civil Rights 1970 Memo Gomes v Illinois State Board of Education 1987 U.S. Court of Appeals, 7* Circuit
Appropriate proficiency test (W-APT) Multiple criteria for placement/exemption Identify home language proficiency Diagnose mathematics skills/literacy Investigate prior schooling experience
3. Provide Instruction Direct, appropriate, sufficient Designed for students' needs Based on current practices Appropriate staffing Appropriate materials
Castaneda v Pickard 1981 U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Equal Education Act 1974 Titles VI& VII of Civil Rights Act 1964 Rios v Read 1977 Cintron v Brentwood 1977, 1978 Gomez v Illinois State Board of Education 1987 U.S. Court of Appeals, 7lh Circuit The Provision of an Equal Education Opportunity to Limited English Proficient Students OCR, 1992
Develop Instructional Plan - Schedule Daily Instruction - Hire/Contract Qualified Teachers - Assessment plan - Research-Based ESL best practices - Identify what is taught (Planned Instruction) - Identify appropriate materials - Describe Available Opportunities (Tutoring, Afterschool, programs, etc.) - Train and support staff (Professional Development Plan)
1.
Identify
4. Ensure integration Instructional integration Social integration
Titles VI & VII of Civil Rights Act 1964 Equal Education Act 1974 Office of Civil Rights 1970 Memo Lau v Nichols 1974 Supreme Court decision
Describe access to programs and services (Gifted, Extra Curricular, Special Education, Vocational, etc.) Ensure accommodations for Language Proficiency Identify how integrated with same-age peers Communicate levels and needs to relevant staff Communicate with Parents in Preferred Mode
5. Re-Assess For progress To exit a program Monitor exited students
OCR 1970 Memo Rios v Read 1977 Cintron v Brentwood 1977,1978
Specific multi-criteria reclassification procedures PA Exit Criteria Monitoring plan/documentation
6. Document Instruction Student Achievement Program Compliance Program Effectiveness
Castañeda v Pickard 1981 U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit The Provision of an Equal Education Opportunity to Limited English Proficient Students OCR, 1992
Develop Program Guide Develop record keeping plan Appoint team to implement program evaluation Schedule Program Evaluation and periodic data review
The Pennsylvania English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) Standard 1: English language learners communicate in English for SOCIAL
and INSTRUCTIONAL purposes within the school setting.
Standard 2: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and
concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of LANGUAGE
ARTS.
Standard 3: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and
concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of
MATHEMATICS.
Standard 4: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SCIENCE. Standard 5: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SOCIAL STUDIES.
14
3/10/2014
The Levels of English Language Proficiency
5 BRIDGING
4 3
EXPANDING
DEVELOPING
2 EMERGING
1 ENTERING
6
REACHING
43
Tier Alignment with Proficiency Levels 1
2
3
4
5
ENTERING EMERGENT DEVELOPINGEXPANDING BRIDGING
Tier A Tier B Tier C
Annual ACCESS for
ELLs®
Ana Sainz de la Peña Educational
Consultant PaTTAN
ACCESS for ELLs and W-APT? • A state-mandated assessment of English Language Proficiency (language acquisition) • Required by NCLB; Title III Language Instruction for LEP and Immigrant Children and Youth for determining AMAOs • An accountability tool equal to PSSA • Tiered Test: A, B, C • WIDA Access Placement Test identifies the level of English language proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing.
15
3/10/2014
Sample items • What do you see? • What kind of language is required to move ahead? • How is this test the same or different from the reading assessments you implement in your class? • Knowing this, how would this information affect/impact instruction for ELLs?
16
3/10/2014
Think-Pair-Share Using the Teacher reports in your packet, • How would you compare this assessment to literacy assessments? • What do English Language Proficiency assessments measure? • What do literacy assessments measure?
17
3/10/2014
Rubrics from WIDA Speaking Rubric
Writing Rubric
• • • •
• • • •
Task Level Linguistic Complexity Vocabulary Usage Language Control
Task Level Linguistic Complexity Vocabulary Usage Language Control
Reflections on Rubrics • What do you see here? • How can you use these rubrics for progress monitoring? • What else do you need to know?
• What information related to the process of second language acquisition in listening, speaking, reading, and writing can be provided by assessments that only measure reading and writing?
18
3/10/2014
Collaboration between classroom teachers and ESL teachers is essential Collaboration is critical to success of ELLS. When teachers and support staff collaborate, students demonstrate: • Greater academic success • School-wide academic achievement • Grade level performance, maintain
achievement levels and graduate
55
Additional Tools www.colorincolorado.org www.understandinglanguage.org On the WIDA Website www.wida.us 1. Can Do Descriptors 2. ACCESS for ELLs Sample Items 3. ACCESS for ELLs and W-APT Speaking and Writing Rubrics 4. RtI2 Developing a Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Approach to Instruction & Intervention (RtI2) for English Language Learners
Contact Information
www.pattan.net
Ana Sainz de la Peña Educational Consultant [email protected] (717) 541-4960 Ext. 3118 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Tom Corbett, Governor Pennsylvania Department of Education Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Ed.D., Acting Secretary of Education Rita Perez Executive Deputy Secretary Pat Hozella , Director Bureau of Special Education
19
Literacy Development and Second Language Acquisition March 14, 2014 PaTTAN Harrisburg Ana Sainz de la Peña Connie Cochran Paula Zucker
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
PaTTAN’s Mission The Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network is an initiative of the Pennsylvania Department of Education working in partnership with families and local education agencies to support programs and services to improve student learning and achievement.
PDE’s Commitment to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
Recognizing that the placement decision is an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team decision, our goal for each child is to ensure IEP teams begin with the general education setting with the use of supplementary aids and services before considering a more restrictive environment.
1
3/10/2014
What Teachers Need to Know About Language (Wong-Fillmore & Snow, 2000) Having read the article, written in 2000, do you find the ideas still relevant in 2014? What part(s) still apply today? What would you change in this article to bring it up to date? •
Talk to your “elbow neighbor” • How can you use this information in your training sessions? • Why is it important to know the differences and not only the similarities in teaching literacy to ELLs?
Outcomes • Understand the challenges of teaching literacy to ELLs. • Substantiate the use of ACCESS for ELLs data and Sample Items as part of decision making regarding literacy development. • Empower teachers to address the linguistic challenges students face in learning to read in a second language.
2
3/10/2014
Challenges When Teaching Reading to ELLs • Most teachers lack the training, expertise, and experience to teach reading and other subjects to culturally and linguistically diverse students. • Most “evidence-based” practices have not been sufficiently validated for diverse populations. • Recommendations for assessing and teaching English language learners do not adequately account for what we know about learning to read in one’s first language and in a second language.
Many culturally and linguistically diverse students do not receive optimal instruction. There tends to be too much focus on phonological awareness and letter naming at the expense of other skills. Scripted or pre-sequenced instructional approaches are problematic because the responsibility to adjust falls on the child to match the curriculum rather than the other way around.
Many culturally and linguistically diverse students do not receive optimal instruction. We treat the child as “broken” (or “at risk”) rather than the curriculum. This may especially be true in kindergarten, where the curriculum assumes certain background experiences that may be different than the ELL’s. Teachers must have enough flexibility to differentiate
instruction to meet all children’s needs.
3
3/10/2014
• Most school-level teams charged with making special education eligibility decisions for English language learners lack training and experience in distinguishing a language difference from a learning disability and do not understand the centrality of culture in learning. • We are not doing enough to examine underlying assumptions about who can learn and who struggles: “It was as if the failure was invisible, or worse, inevitable.” (Noguera & Wing, 2006, p. 168).
• If a child does not make adequate progress with research-based instruction that is presumed “to work,” the assumption is made that the child must have a deficit of some kind. – How do we ensure that the child has received culturally and linguistically responsive, appropriate, quality instruction? – As with earlier identification criteria, this model must be based on students having received an adequate “opportunity to learn.”
Opportunity to Learn • Optimal literacy instruction for ELLs accounts for the influence of culture and experience on cognition and learning, behavior and communication, language development and motivation. • Some LD diagnoses are made not because students have internal deficits of some kind, but rather because they have not received an adequate opportunity to learn.
4
3/10/2014
Opportunity to Learn • Some children do not actually have disabilities, but have been taught in “disabling contexts.” • Many ELLs are provided with too few opportunities to develop their language and literacy skills. In Pennsylvania, 1 out of 8 ELLs has an IEP. Why?
• Shift from figuring out what is wrong with a student to looking more broadly at the instructional context and at how to provide support for all students. • Focus first on improving core instruction, with differentiation. – Use progress monitoring data to look at classroom datasets.
• Make sure someone on the team has expertise in how to distinguish between language acquisition and learning disabilities.
• When many students are not progressing, change instruction: – Has the instructional program been validated with students like those in the class? – Is instruction at an appropriate level for students’ language and learning needs? – Is the program well-implemented? – Are teachers sufficiently differentiating instruction to meet diverse student needs? – Is the environment conducive to learning?
• This will require: – observing in classrooms and supporting instruction – developing and capitalizing on local expertise.
5
3/10/2014
ESL Program
16
School personnel are confused about Tier 2 interventions and wonder whether ESL instruction "counts" as a secondary intervention. Some RtII schools (with ELL population) receiving IU RtII technical assistance have all ELLs in Tier 2 and Tier 3 What is not right in this picture? Why is this “acceptable”?
ESL instruction is core instruction in Pennsylvania and it belongs in Tier 1. • The “20%” of students receiving Tier 2 interventions should NOT be mostly just ELLs—if most ELLs are not progressing, the instruction is not sufficient. • Tier 2 interventions: – Supplement the core curriculum – Are determined by examining students’ rate of growth, including English language proficiency measures, as well as whether they meet benchmarks.
6
3/10/2014
Myth1: “Evidence-based instruction” is good instruction for everyone. culturally and linguistically diverse students who have been taught with “evidence-based interventions” have been provided with an adequate opportunity to learn.
Myth 2: Students who fail to respond to research-based instruction have some sort of learning problem or internal deficit, and perhaps even a learning disability.
Myth 3: Learning to read in one’s second language is similar to learning to read in one’s first language; therefore assessment methods and instructional approaches that have been found through research to be effective with mainstream English-speaking students are appropriate for serving ELLs.
7
3/10/2014
What does it look like when teachers lack preparation in teaching ELLs? • Note: Examples are from actual classrooms with ELLs, most at levels 1 and 2 of English proficiency.
This is What We Need to Know to Improve Literacy Instruction for ELLs
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
Six Key Principles to Support ELLs in Meeting the CCSS Understanding Language 1. Instruction focuses on providing ELLs with opportunities to engage in discipline- specific practices which are designed to build conceptual understanding and language competence in tandem. 2. Instruction leverages ELLs’ home language(s), cultural assets, and prior knowledge.
8
3/10/2014
Six Key Principles 3. Standards-aligned instruction for ELLs is rigorous, grade-level appropriate, and provides deliberate and appropriate scaffolds. 4. Instruction moves ELLs forward by taking into account their English proficiency level(s) and prior schooling experiences.
Six Key Principles 5. Instruction fosters ELLs’ autonomy by equipping them with the strategies necessary to comprehend and use language in a variety of academic settings. 6. Diagnostic tools and formative assessment practices are employed to measure students’ content knowledge, academic language competence, and participation in disciplinary practices.
Diversity of ELLs • • • • •
Long-Term ELLs Migrant ELLs Refugees Language (L1) Distance from English LFS or SIFE Students with Interrupted Formal Education • ELLs with IEPs (gifted or disabled) • Highly Schooled Newcomers • ELLs born in the USA
9
3/10/2014
Jeanette Klingner http://www.rtinetwork.org/professional/videos/p odcasts/janette-klingner-realizing-the-potential of-rti-considerations-when-implementing-rti with-english-language-learners Note what she says about • Tier 1 instruction for ELLs • phonological awareness • research-based practices • DIBELS reading fluency and ELLs
Literacy Development Sequence for ELLs
English Speakers’ Literacy Development
SOUNDS
WORDS
SENTENCES
S T O R Y
10
3/10/2014
ELLs and Literacy Development
Consider Potential Challenges for ELL in the “Five Big Ideas” of Reading • Phonological Awareness • Alphabetic Principle • Fluency • Vocabulary • Reading Comprehension
Potential Challenges for ELLs Phonological Awareness
When the student’s first language, or L1, does not include some English phonemes: o the student is not accustomed to hearing these sounds. o it can be quite difficult to distinguish between sounds. o pronouncing new sounds can be difficult. o phonological tasks in general become more challenging.
11
3/10/2014
Potential Challenges for ELLs Alphabetic Principal
Some orthographies are very different than English; even when the orthography of the student’s L1 is similar to English, such as with Spanish, differences can be quite confusing: o letters might look the same but represent different sounds. o unfamiliar English sounds and their various spellings can make decoding and spelling difficult. o not knowing the meanings of words limits the ELL reader’s ability to use context clues. o learning letters and sounds can seem very abstract.
Potential Challenges for ELLs Fluency
ELLs typically have fewer opportunities to read aloud in English and receive feedback than their English speaking peers. ELLs may read more slowly, with less understanding. ELLs can have an accent and still read fluently.
Potential Challenges for ELLs Vocabulary
Students may become good word callers but not understand what they are reading. ELLs can be confused by common words, such as o prepositions (e.g.,“on,” “above”) o pronouns (e.g.,“she,” “they”) o cohesion markers (e.g.,“therefore,” “however”) o words with multiple meanings (e.g.,“bat,” “light”) o figurative language such as similes (e.g.,“swims like a fish”) or metaphors (e.g.,“his stomach was a bottomless pit”) o idioms (e.g.,“to know something inside out”) False cognates can perplex students (e.g.,“fast” in German means “almost”; “embarasada” in Spanish means “pregnant”).
12
3/10/2014
Potential Challenges for ELLs Many factors affect comprehension, such as Reading o oral language proficiency Comprehension o word recognition skills o fluency o vocabulary knowledge o the ability to use comprehension strategies o variations in text structure o interest o cultural differences To determine what students comprehend, teachers should o provide them with alternative ways to show understanding (e.g., in their native language, using diagrams) o focus more on content than grammatical errors or accents.
http://www.rtinetwork.org/professional/videos/p odcasts/janette-klingner-realizing-the-potential of-rti-cultural-and-linguistic-diversity-in-english language-learners
What is an ESL Program?
What Do ESL Teachers Teach?
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
13
3/10/2014
ESL Program
40
CORE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE REFERENCE CHART REQUIREMENTS
LEGAL REFERENCE
PROGRAM
OCR 1970 Memo Lau v Nichols 1974 Supreme Court decision
Home language survey Train intake staff Classroom survey
2. Assess Determine need for instruction Place in appropriate program of instruction
Office of Civil Rights 1970 Memo Gomes v Illinois State Board of Education 1987 U.S. Court of Appeals, 7* Circuit
Appropriate proficiency test (W-APT) Multiple criteria for placement/exemption Identify home language proficiency Diagnose mathematics skills/literacy Investigate prior schooling experience
3. Provide Instruction Direct, appropriate, sufficient Designed for students' needs Based on current practices Appropriate staffing Appropriate materials
Castaneda v Pickard 1981 U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Equal Education Act 1974 Titles VI& VII of Civil Rights Act 1964 Rios v Read 1977 Cintron v Brentwood 1977, 1978 Gomez v Illinois State Board of Education 1987 U.S. Court of Appeals, 7lh Circuit The Provision of an Equal Education Opportunity to Limited English Proficient Students OCR, 1992
Develop Instructional Plan - Schedule Daily Instruction - Hire/Contract Qualified Teachers - Assessment plan - Research-Based ESL best practices - Identify what is taught (Planned Instruction) - Identify appropriate materials - Describe Available Opportunities (Tutoring, Afterschool, programs, etc.) - Train and support staff (Professional Development Plan)
1.
Identify
4. Ensure integration Instructional integration Social integration
Titles VI & VII of Civil Rights Act 1964 Equal Education Act 1974 Office of Civil Rights 1970 Memo Lau v Nichols 1974 Supreme Court decision
Describe access to programs and services (Gifted, Extra Curricular, Special Education, Vocational, etc.) Ensure accommodations for Language Proficiency Identify how integrated with same-age peers Communicate levels and needs to relevant staff Communicate with Parents in Preferred Mode
5. Re-Assess For progress To exit a program Monitor exited students
OCR 1970 Memo Rios v Read 1977 Cintron v Brentwood 1977,1978
Specific multi-criteria reclassification procedures PA Exit Criteria Monitoring plan/documentation
6. Document Instruction Student Achievement Program Compliance Program Effectiveness
Castañeda v Pickard 1981 U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit The Provision of an Equal Education Opportunity to Limited English Proficient Students OCR, 1992
Develop Program Guide Develop record keeping plan Appoint team to implement program evaluation Schedule Program Evaluation and periodic data review
The Pennsylvania English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) Standard 1: English language learners communicate in English for SOCIAL
and INSTRUCTIONAL purposes within the school setting.
Standard 2: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and
concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of LANGUAGE
ARTS.
Standard 3: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and
concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of
MATHEMATICS.
Standard 4: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SCIENCE. Standard 5: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SOCIAL STUDIES.
14
3/10/2014
The Levels of English Language Proficiency
5 BRIDGING
4 3
EXPANDING
DEVELOPING
2 EMERGING
1 ENTERING
6
REACHING
43
Tier Alignment with Proficiency Levels 1
2
3
4
5
ENTERING EMERGENT DEVELOPINGEXPANDING BRIDGING
Tier A Tier B Tier C
Annual ACCESS for
ELLs®
Ana Sainz de la Peña Educational
Consultant PaTTAN
ACCESS for ELLs and W-APT? • A state-mandated assessment of English Language Proficiency (language acquisition) • Required by NCLB; Title III Language Instruction for LEP and Immigrant Children and Youth for determining AMAOs • An accountability tool equal to PSSA • Tiered Test: A, B, C • WIDA Access Placement Test identifies the level of English language proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing.
15
3/10/2014
Sample items • What do you see? • What kind of language is required to move ahead? • How is this test the same or different from the reading assessments you implement in your class? • Knowing this, how would this information affect/impact instruction for ELLs?
16
3/10/2014
Think-Pair-Share Using the Teacher reports in your packet, • How would you compare this assessment to literacy assessments? • What do English Language Proficiency assessments measure? • What do literacy assessments measure?
17
3/10/2014
Rubrics from WIDA Speaking Rubric
Writing Rubric
• • • •
• • • •
Task Level Linguistic Complexity Vocabulary Usage Language Control
Task Level Linguistic Complexity Vocabulary Usage Language Control
Reflections on Rubrics • What do you see here? • How can you use these rubrics for progress monitoring? • What else do you need to know?
• What information related to the process of second language acquisition in listening, speaking, reading, and writing can be provided by assessments that only measure reading and writing?
18
3/10/2014
Collaboration between classroom teachers and ESL teachers is essential Collaboration is critical to success of ELLS. When teachers and support staff collaborate, students demonstrate: • Greater academic success • School-wide academic achievement • Grade level performance, maintain
achievement levels and graduate
55
Additional Tools www.colorincolorado.org www.understandinglanguage.org On the WIDA Website www.wida.us 1. Can Do Descriptors 2. ACCESS for ELLs Sample Items 3. ACCESS for ELLs and W-APT Speaking and Writing Rubrics 4. RtI2 Developing a Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Approach to Instruction & Intervention (RtI2) for English Language Learners
Contact Information
www.pattan.net
Ana Sainz de la Peña Educational Consultant [email protected] (717) 541-4960 Ext. 3118 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Tom Corbett, Governor Pennsylvania Department of Education Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Ed.D., Acting Secretary of Education Rita Perez Executive Deputy Secretary Pat Hozella , Director Bureau of Special Education
19
