data driven decisions for effective eld programsidahotc.com/portals/33/trainings 2011-12/lep...

ELD Boot Camp: Data Driven Decisions for Effective ELD Programs

Sarah Seamount Vallivue School District LEP Coach/Consultant

sarah.seamount@ vallivue.org

208-880-5398

Agenda:

Data that is used to make decisions on a regular basis in terms of what services will be provided to individual LEP students.

Annual data that is compiled and analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of the district programs.

Question and answer

Everyday Data

Questions

Annual Data

Data is used to drive every decision about how to serve English learners .

Everyday Data – starts at registration

HLS • Home Language Survey given at

registration to every new student

IELA • ELL Placement Assessment given

within two weeks

Classes • Placement in classes or groups

based on assessment scores

New Students • Beginner on the placement test

(newcomer): Student should receive the most intensive English Language Development (ELD) services.

Placements decisions

• Advanced: Student may be placed in core ELD program or may be monitored for progress for a time.

• Intermediate: Student should receive core ELD program in addition to mainstream classes.

Placement test scoring

• You can use the Entry/Exit Profile in ELLis. This contains:

• Test data history- IELA/ISAT/IRI • Services history-ELD or other • Grade history • LEP Status history

• Or use some other method to gather data such as Milepost or other.

Looking at returning students in the fall

• Now you have your data, assemble a team in the school who will be responsible for ELL placements decisions.

• Team members: • ELD Teacher or paraprofessional • Principal • Mainstream teacher(s) • Other, such as coach or counselor

ELL Placement Decision Team

Possible form for decision making This form provides a place to gather data for a team decision about where the student will be placed. All of the demographic data can be merged from ELLis or a spreadsheet if you have one.

• The team should expect a lengthy meeting in the late summer or very early fall to make decisions.

• Secondary schools will have to meet much earlier in order to adjust student schedules before school starts.

• Elementary schools may wait a week or two into the school year to let students settle into their classrooms.

Team decisions

• Future meetings will be much shorter and more informal as only one or two students may be considered.

• Some very high students may not be immediately placed, but be monitored for a time.

• These students should be very successful in the mainstream • They should not be a sizable percentage of the population • They should be near exiting • The team should meet to consider how these student are

doing based on monitoring results.

What to do with mostly advanced students

A form for those being monitored

This is not LEPX monitoring. It is for very high students who are not immediately placed in ELD.

• Progress Monitoring is a good way to keep track of the progress students are making throughout the year.

• Aimsweb- fluency and MAZE (comprehension) will assess reading progress. Three minute writing prompts will help assess writing and language skills.

• Easy CBM from the University of Oregon has reading assessments and is free! (easycbm.com)

• District written writing prompts with rubrics. These can be created using Rubistar a free site for easily writing rubrics funded by the US Dept of Ed. (http://rubistar.4teachers.org/)

Ongoing data collection

• Placement decisions can be changed during the year. • Elementary: flexible grouping can be done using data

gathered in the mainstream or ELD classroom. Using district assessments such as unit tests, district benchmarks, or other data, students may be moved in or out of ELD groups. Documentation of services should be maintained in the student LEP file and electronic records such as in ELLis.

Placement changes during the year

• Placement decisions can be changed during the year. • Secondary: A few students may be placed in classes that are

too easy or two hard based on data from spring testing. A placement test can be given at the end of the semester to decide if the student can be moved. It should never be used to exit students from the program, but can be used to determine if the student’s schedule can be changed.

Placement changes during the year

Annual Data Analysis – IELA Data

School Names on the bottom

4.07

4.35 4.16

4.33 4.08

3.88 3.83 4.04

4.26

3.45

4.75

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Average 2011 IELA Proficiency Start by analyzing IELA Data

I have deleted school names.


0.00

0.56

0.38

0.45

0.24

0.36

0.07

0.32

0.07 0.00

0.75

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

Average 2011 IELA Level Gain



2% 4% 2% 3% 2%

33% 29%

25%

15%

25%

65% 67% 73% 83% 73%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

S L R W C

2011 IELA Subtest Score Analysis

EF+

AB+

B


31%

51%

35%

49%

30%

26%

40% 37%

25%

0%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Percent Potentially Eligible to Exit for Fall 2011



1s, 2%

2s, 3%

3s, 18%

4s, 44%

5s, 33%

2011 IELA Levels Result

1s 2s 3s 4s 5s


4s Y, 16%

5s Y, 38%

4s N, 41%

5s N, 5%

2011 IELA Proficient (Y/N) for 4s and 5s

Overall Proficiency 41%

4s & 5s Proficiency 54%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2011 AMAO's by School

Gain % Proficient %

AMAO 1-Goal 27% 1 level gain

AMAO 2-Goal 15% Proficient

School names on the bottom.

Annual Data Analysis – IELA with ISAT

90

144 150

22

38

117

202

37

55

107

183

49

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

BB B P A

2011 LEP ISAT All

Math

Reading

Language

Start with a look at how LEP students did on ISATs.

Annual Data Analysis – IELA with IRI

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

IRI 1 IRI 2 IRI 3

IRI 2011 ALL

Continue by looking at IRI scores for LEP students.

0%

100%

71%

24%

5% 0%

0%

21%

45%

38%

0%

0% 6%

30%

51%

0%

0% 1% 1% 5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 IELA Level

2011 Language ISAT by IELA Level

A

P

B

BB


0%

38% 41%

14%

0% 0%

63% 47%

40%

18%

0%

11%

45%

73%

0%

1% 2% 9%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


2011 Reading ISAT by IELA Level

A

P

B

BB



0%

90%

42%

19%

9% 0%

10%

42%

39%

18%

0%

0%

15%

38%

56%

0%

0% 1% 3%

17%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


2011 Math ISAT by IELA Level

A

P

B

BB

Annual Data Analysis – IELA with IRI

0%

100%

0% 0% 6%

0%

0%

40%

25% 22%

0%

0% 60% 75% 72%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%


2011 Spring IRI by IELA

3

2

1

Multi-Annual Data Analysis – IELA Data

3.71

3.59

3.84

3.89

4.04

4.13

3.30

3.40

3.50

3.60

3.70

3.80

3.90

4.00

4.10

4.20

S2006 S2007 S2008 S2009 S2010 S2011

IELA Overall Scores


3.63 3.62 3.65 3.76 3.73 3.75

3.39 3.46 3.60

3.71 3.63 3.74 3.69

3.43

3.68 3.74 3.76 3.84 3.69

3.39

3.72 3.83

4.05 4.02

3.71 3.59

3.84 3.89 4.04 4.13

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

S2006 S2007 S2008 S2009 S2010 S2011

IELA Average Scores

Listening

Speaking

Reading

Writing

Overall

77

96

141

130

189

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

F2007 F2008 F2009 F2010 F2011

LEP Exited Each Year

Anomaly


Thank you for participating!

Questions?

data driven decisions for effective eld programsidahotc.com/portals/33/trainings 2011-12/lep...

Documents