evaluation of english language learner programs in red ... · evaluation of english language...

Evaluation of English Language Learner Programs

In Red Clay Consolidated School District (RCCSD)

Barbara D. Acosta, Senior Research ScientistLottie Marzucco, Senior Research Associate

Breana Bayraktar, Senior Research AssociateCharlene Rivera, Principal Investigator

The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 2

Purpose

To assess the quality of programs and services for ELLs

To assist District leaders in making future program decisions for ELLs


Evaluation Questions

1. To what extent are the ELL programs leading to the intended program outcomes?

2. What are the strengths and potential areas of improvement for the design, staffing, and implementation of the ELL program?

3. To what extent would the district need additional professional development, administrative support, and resources or assessments?


National/State Context - ELLs


RCCSD Demographics

20% Black, 20% Hispanic, 56% White, and 4% Asian

9.9% (1, 621) English language learners (ELLs)

Spanish,Korean, Arabic, Bengali, and Chinese


Three Broad Questions

1. How does the District support ELLs’ development of academic language?

2. How are ELLs provided access to academic content instruction?

3. To what extent do ELLs have equitable access to paths to college and career?

The Promoting Excellence Appraisal System (PEAS)

Instructional Program Design

Instructional Program

Implementation

Leadership

Personnel

Professional Development

Assessment & Accountability

Parent & Community Outreach

Student Outcomes


Data Collected Fall 2011-Winter 2012 Initial needs

assessment Document review Surveys 23 school

administrators 305 general

education teachers and ELL teachers

820 families of ELLs

School reviews 10 schools 79 classroom

observations Interviews 19 school staff focus

groups 2 parent focus groups 1 student focus group


Limitations

Examines quality of programs for ELLs for purposes of program improvement, not for purposes of decisions about

effectiveness of personnel or schools Quick turnaround/limited budget


FINDINGS FOR STUDENT OUTCOMES


Cross-cutting analysis for AYP

8th grade Math 8th grade Reading

• Gap increased from 18% to 42% • Gap increased from 22% to 49%

2009 2010 2011ELLs 48 20 20All Students 66 57 62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2009 2010 2011ELLs 59 44 12All Students 81 78 61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education 12

A different view: Growth over time

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

K 2 4 6 8 10 12

D

A

B

C

Effective programs for ELLs can close achievement gaps within 5 to 7 years of enrollment


Longitudinal student achievement : Middle school cohortMath Reading

• Gap increased from 9% to 24% • Gap increased from 12% to 23%

2008 DSTP 2009 DSTP 2010 DSTP 2011 DCASNonELL 80% 83% 80% 65%ELL 71% 74% 69% 47%Target 50% 58% 67% 75%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008 DSTP 2009 DSTP 2010 DSTP 2011 DCASNonELL 79% 77% 82% 61%ELL 67% 67% 76% 38%Target 68% 73% 79% 84%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PEAS DIMENSIONS


FINDINGSInstructional Program Design + Instructional Implementation

Instructional Program Design • Effective design• Access to grade-level content• Language development• EquityInstructional Implementation• Program implementation• Collaboration• Socially constructed learning• Classroom assessment

• The District’s ELL program models are not comparable and do not adequately address the academic and linguistic needs of ELLs.

• Curricular guidance and instructional resources do not support teachers to develop ELLs’ academic language and provide access to content instruction.

• Response to Intervention (RTI) is not differentiated for ELLs.




• There is little evidence that teacherssystematically use instructional practices considered effective for teaching language and content to ELLs.

• The PLC initiative creates opportunities for teachers to collaborate, but few had a focus on ELLs




• ELLs are over-represented in special education in some secondary schools.



Instructional Program Design • Effective design• Access to grade-level

content• Language development• EquityInstructional Implementation• Program implementation• Collaboration• Socially constructed learning• Classroom assessment

Lewis Dual language Program• Lewis Dual Language School does

not systematically implement practices used by successful dual language programs


RECOMMENDATIONSInstructional Program Design + Instructional ImplementationInstructional Program Design • Effective design• Access to grade-level

content• Language development• EquityInstructional Implementation• Program

implementation• Collaboration• Socially constructed

learning• Classroom assessment

Design programs for ELLs to align with students’ linguistic and academic needs.• All ELLs are provided support for

English language development from an ESL or bilingually certified teacher.

• ELLs are provided full access to the grade-level content curriculum in the core academic subjects from a teacher who has the expertise to meet needs for both language development and access to content instruction. .

• ELLs and native English speakers are given opportunities to successfully interact to learn subject-area content as equal status peers.


RECOMMENDATIONSInstructional Program Design + Instructional ImplementationInstructional Program Design • Effective design• Access to grade-level

content• Language development• EquityInstructional Implementation• Program implementation• Collaboration• Socially constructed learning• Classroom assessment

Adapt curricular guidance and instructional resources to support academic language and ensure access to content instruction.

ELA• Align with WIDA standards.• Integrate guidance for teaching

academic language of content areas.

Math, science social studies• Integrate academic language

instruction.• Guidance for making content

comprehensible to ELLs at different proficiency levels.

Create common classroom assessments


RECOMMENDATIONSInstructional Program Design + Instructional ImplementationInstructional Program Design • Effective design• Access to grade-level content• Language development• EquityInstructional Implementation• Program implementation• Collaboration• Socially constructed learning• Classroom assessment

Differentiate RTI for ELLs.• Use multiple assessments • Ensure the assessment team

understands how to use information on ELLs’ oral language development, academic language, and student background data.

• Ensure ELLs have received appropriateTier 1 interventions.

• Ensure ELLs who have learning disabilities are identified in an appropriate and timely manner, but

• ELLs who struggle for other reasons are not inappropriately identified for special education.



To effect more inclusive classrooms for ELLs, create a culture of collaboration.• Examine how PLCs are organized • Consider how PLCs are using data

to plan instruction for ELLs.• Provide support and guidance for

instructional staff to collaborate in the design and implementation of instruction for ELLs during PLC meetings.

• As staffing permits, consider using a co-teaching model for ELL and general education teachers.



Restructure the dual language program at W.C. Lewis Elementary School to align with evidence-based practices.• a shared understanding and commitment

to the goals of DL;• a curriculum that promotes bilingualism,

bi-literacy, and cross-cultural competencies;

• professional development for implementing DL instruction;

• improved coordination and scheduling;• revised eligibility guidelines; • engagement of the parents of both

Spanish-speaking students and English-speaking parents in supporting the goals of the program.


FINDINGS

Leadership• High expectations • Shared responsibility• Clear guidance • Positive climate

• The education program for ELLs is not focused, sustained, and coordinated across District offices and schools.

• Not all District educators view the languages and cultures of ELLs and their families as assets.

• Educators do not share a clear understanding of ELL programming.


RECOMMENDATIONSLeadership• High expectations

for ELLs• Shared

responsibility• Clear guidance • Positive climate

• Articulate a vision in which students’ diverse languages and cultures are viewed as assets.

• Develop a comprehensive plan and written guidance for carrying out the recommendations of this evaluation.


FINDINGSPersonnel

• Expertise• prepared to address the

academic, linguistic, and cultural needs of ELLs

• Teacher Certification• Program Staffing

• A core group of dedicated ELL professionals at District and school levels has been instrumental in carrying out ELL programming.

• The District lacks sufficient staff with the expertise to serve ELLs.

Professional development

• Building Educator Capacity

• research-based content; broad participation

• Quality• job-embedded, sustained,

useful

• The District’s professional development program is not coherent, job-embedded or ongoing, and does not adequately prepare all educators who serve ELLs.


RECOMMENDATIONSPersonnel• Expert Teachers

• prepared to address the academic, linguistic, and cultural needs of ELLs

• Teacher Certification• Program Staffing

• Institute a plan for staffing, recruiting and retaining educational personnel with expertise in working with ELLs.

Professional Development• Building Educator Capacity

• research-based content; broad participation

• Quality• job-embedded, sustained,

useful

• Implement a plan for ongoing, job-embedded professional development for all instructional staff who serve ELLs.

• Institute a system for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of ELL professional development.


FINDINGSAssessment and Accountability• Identification, placement

and exit• Use of data• Continuous improvement

• The District has made progress in establishing a culture of data-based decision-making.

• State and District content assessments are not adequate indicators of the academic progress of ELLs.

• ELL instruction is not a focus of data-based PLC meetings.

• The process for monitoring the quality of instructional programs for ELLs is unsystematic.


RECOMMENDATIONSAssessment and Accountability• Identification,

placement, and exit

• Use of data• Continuous

improvement

Adopt or develop formative assessments to measure the progress of ELLs in each of the content areas.• Utilize multiple measures and considerations

• literacy in the native language• prior schooling• Grades• Time in program

• Develop common classroom assessments appropriate for ELLs.

Include in the ELL instructional plan a system for monitoring and systematically evaluating programs and services for ELLs.• Monitor ELLs’ progress from enrollment until HS

completion


FINDINGSParent and Community Outreach• Communication

• Translation• Interpretation

• Parent Involvement• Parent training

• Family and Community Partnerships

• Engaging families and communities as partners

• An efficient system is in use for communicating with Spanish and Korean-speaking families, but is not well-implemented for speakers of low-incidence languages.

• The District does not have in place a systematic plan to address logistical barriers (transportation and childcare) to ELL parent involvement.

• District and school-wide parent involvement efforts do not adequately engage families of ELLs as partners in the education of their children.


RECOMMENDATIONSParent and Community Outreach• Communication

• Translation• Interpretation

• Parent Involvement• Parent training

• Family and Community Partnerships

• Engaging families and communities as partners

Design a parent and community outreach plan that is culturally and linguistically responsive.

• translation and interpretation for parents who speak low incidence languages;

• collaboration among schools and the District to increase parent involvement for families of ELLs;

• active partnership with parents to facilitate their children’s academic growth.


Three big ideas

Support for academic language development

Access to academic content instruction in all core content areas

ELLs and native English speakers are given opportunities to successfully interact to learn subject-area content as equal status peers


Conclusions

Develop a comprehensive ELL plan integrating recommendations from this evaluation

Create a culture of shared responsibility for learning and teaching of ELLs

Develop a process of continuous improvement for ELL programs & services ELL Leadership Team meets annually to examine data on

both outcomes and practices Establish a regular cycle of monitoring and evaluation Use findings to improve programs


Future considerations

How are ELLs with disabilities served? Quality of counseling and guidance for

ELLs in MS and HS ELLs’ participation and passing rates on

advanced coursework HS graduation disaggregated by initial

English language proficiency level and former ELLs


Questions?


Small Group Discussion

Meet in small groups – one per dimension. Reflect on the findings and

recommendations for your assigned dimension.

What does this mean for you and your colleagues (district level, school level, classroom level)?

What questions do you have?

evaluation of english language learner programs in red ... · evaluation of english language...

Documents