PRINCIPALS’ MEETINGMARCH 19, 2015

Agenda on Wiki at hsprograms.pbworks.com

Welcome!

Teresa BunnerCoordinating Literacy Teacher for HS

Updates

Teresa Pierrie David Wehbie Glenda Harrell

IMPROVING THEWCPSS LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM (LIEP) FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

English As a Second Language (ESL) Program Update

March 19, 2015

Glenda Harrell, ESL Director

Session Objectives

Review student data related to students learning English as a second (or third) language. State tests and retention Measures of English language proficiency

Review WCPSS Language Instruction Educational Program (LIEP). Evidence-based components ESL courses Step-Up!

LEP = ELL = EL

ELL English Language Learner EL English Learner LEP Limited English Proficient

Terminology used by US ED prior to Jan 2015

Exited LEP/EL = Former LEP/EL

ESL English as a Second Language An instructional program supported by theories of

Second Language Acquisition

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA)Elementary and Secondary Education Act

(ESEA)

January, 2015

“…joint guidance for meeting legal obligations to ensure that English Learner students can participate meaningfully and equally in educational programs and services

Issued by: Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)

Language Instruction Educational Program (LIEP) Requirements

Language support services for ELLs must

1. Be based on a sound educational

theory, 2. Implemented effectively with

sufficient resources and personnel, and

3. Be evaluated annually to determine whether they are effective in helping students overcome language barriers (and achieve academic success).

WCPSS Reading Results: Predictable outcomes without change in practice

All Stu

dent

s

Fem

ale

Male

Native

Am

erica

nAsia

n

Black

Hispan

ic/La

tino

Two

or M

ore

Races

White LE

PSW

D ED0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

4 Yr Grad Rate (2013) G3 Reading (2004) G8 Reading (2009) G3 Reading (2012)

Source: WCPSS Graduation Rate Update – September 2013, WCPSS D& A

Source: Achievement Gap Update Focus on Literacy WCPSS, D&A February, 2014

WCPSS: Grade 9 Students, 2014-15

Never LEP 11,280 83.8%

Retained in Gr 9 878 7.8%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

152 1.3%

LEP or Former LEP

2,166 16.1%

Retained in Gr 9 375 17.0%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

74 3.4%

2014-15 Grade 9 Total % of Total

All Students 13,446 100%

Retained in Gr 9 1253 9.3%

Retained 2x in Gr 9 226 1.7%

2014-15 Grade 9 Total % of Total

LEP & Former LEP 2,166

Retained in Gr 9 375 17.3%

Retained 2x in Gr 9 75 3.5%

WCPSS: Grade 9 LEP & Former LEP, 2014-15

LEP 910

Retained in Gr 9 231 25.4%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

51 5.6%

Former LEP 1256

Retained in Gr 9144

11.5%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

24 1.9%

2014-15 Grade 9 Total % of Total

LEP & Former 1532

Retained in Gr 9 223 14.6%

Retained 2x in Gr 9 34 2.2%

WCPSS: Grade 9 LEP and Former LEP, 2014-15 (Who also have Grade 3 EOG Math Results)

LEP 395

Retained in Gr 997

24.6%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

17 4.3%

Former LEP 1137

Retained in Gr 9126

11.1%

Retained 2x in Gr 9

17 1.5%

ELLs 2014-15 Nov, 2014 (n=12,009)

PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Born Outside USBorn in US

English Learner Specific Data

AMAO 1 Progress of English Language Development Includes all LEP students with at least two data points (two years of test results). Progress is met by 1) increase to next overall ELP level, 2) increase the previous overall score by .5, or 3) meet exit criteria.

AMAO 2 Proficiency in English Includes all LEP students. Students exit LEP designation when reaching an overall composite score of 4.8 or higher, with at least a 4.0 on the reading and the writing subtests.

AMAO 3 LEP Subgroup Is based upon the same decision rules used for AMOs for Title I.

WCPSS AMAOs

  2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

# LEP Students (K-12) 11,183 11,589 12,019

AMAO 1 Progress Target: 57.1%

Met59.1%

Target: 58.1% Met

58.8%Target: 59.1% TBD

AMAO 2 Proficiency (Exited LEP identification)

Target: 13.5%

Met17.5%

Target: 14.0%

Met16.5%

Target: 14.6% TBD 

AMAO 3AMO Reading and Math for LEP Subgroup

Met all proficiency AMOs for LEP subgroup;

Missed HS Math Participation

Met all proficiency AMOs for LEP subgroup;

Missed HS Reading & Math Participation

TBD

How Long Does it Take?

At least 5 to 7 years

ELLs can reach parity with English-speaking peers in 5 years when they make at least 1.5 years of academic

growth each year.

Thomas, W. P., Collier, V. P., & Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students' long-term academic achievement :

Language Instruction Educational ProgramWCPSS Continuum of Services (LIEP)

School/ District

Content/Subject

Area

ESL

• Graduation Rate• MTSS• R2A• Language of the

content• Scaffolding for

access • Schedules/

Placement• Academic Language of the content areas

• Interaction – 4 domains

Evidence Base: Academic Language

Language IS the means of instruction. Students demonstrate conceptual understandings

through language. Students of other languages and non-standard English

bring knowledge and experiences that are valuable. They are bright and capable.

Decisions about students’ abilities are based upon their use of standard academic language.

Teachers modeling of academic language is critical. Oral language is a bridge to literacy.

Vocabulary is one aspect of academic language. Words are useful only when put together to convey meaning.

Evidenced-Based LIEPWhole School Approach

ESL Instruction ESL Course ESL Co-Teacher

Content Instruction All Courses Sheltered Courses Spanish for Native Spkrs

Collaboration Academic Progress

Collaboration: LEP Plan

When content teachers know: Students’ English proficiency

levels (by domain), Years in U.S. schools, English proficiency ≠ Cognitive

ability, and that Students bring valuable learning

experiences

Then effective scaffolding can occur. Comprehensible lessons Manageable assignments Feasible assessments Supportive formative feedback

When ESL teachers know: Linguistic complexity needed

for success How to accelerate

development of academic language

Then rigorous ESL instruction can occur: Acceleration of language

learning Documentation and sharing of

language progression

2015-16 ESL Course Change

Formerly known as ESL Resource Tutoring• Re-Focus the course to address the academic

language and skills needed for success in the content classes rather than a time to re-teach content/tutor.

*ELLs = English Language Learners

*

ESL Course Transformation

ESL Resource Tutoring

Goal: Additional academic and organizational support Assistance for content, study

time, extended testing, instructional assistance, study skills

Students work independently Student profile – Student would

benefit from academic support, ESL Teacher provides one-on-one

support ESL Teacher conferences with

students ESL teacher communicates with

content teachers (about what to reteach)

ESL Tchr assists implementation of instructional mods and accommodations

Access to computers and supplies.

Advanced Language Support

Goal: Expansion of academic language development Deepen word knowledge and expand

working vocabulary needed to fully participate

Combination of whole and small group work

Student profile – student is not more appropriately placed in ESL I, II, or III and/or ESL IV is not offered

ESL Teacher creates interactive lessons focused on academic language that benefits the entire group

ESL teacher conferences with students ESL teacher communicates with

content teachers (to collaborate academic language taught and share evidences of student language growth)

ESL Tchr supports content-teacher modification of instruction and assessment

Access to computers and supplies.

Key Scheduling Information

ESL Course Offerings Maintain course fidelity

ESL I, II, III, IV Advanced Language Support for ELs Sheltered Instruction ESL Co-Teaching

Student Placement Should be made based upon individual student need. Proficiency level of the students for placement in each course

is a general guideline Revised course descriptions will assist in appropriate

placement of ELs

International Transcripts

Award English I credit for international students only when one year of high school literature AND English as a world language appear on school records.

Award English II credit for international students only when two years of high school literature AND English as a world language appear on school records.

Award elective English credit for each year of high school English as a world language.

Consider W-APT reading and writing results (administer the entire W-APT, don’t observe ceiling).

Step-Up!

What: Collaborative meeting where elementary, middle and high school ESL teachers will exchange student information in an effort to improve the transition for ELs.

When: May 4, 2015 (8:30-4:30) Where: Crossroads II, Room 1400 Who: Middle School ESL Teachers – All Day

Elementary ESL Teachers – A.M. High School ESL Teachers – P.M.

District Priorities for Teaching ELs

• Fully implement the Language Instruction Educational

Program (LIEP).

• Minimize students’ academic gaps.

• Empower ELs by providing access to language of school.

• Prevent long-term ELs.

• Ensure credit accrual and guide program completions

(e.g. CTE).

• Provide rigorous ESL instruction.

• Provide accessible, grade-level teaching and learning.

Vision 20/20

Strategic Leadership

Strategic LeadershipVision 20/20

A Closer LookChart it out

What do schools own?

What do we (HS Programs) own? What do we

BOTH own?

K-12 Aligned Literacy

Instructional Leadership

Writing Focus Group

Sherri Miller, K-12 DirectorSara Overby, HS ELA

Melissa Hurst, MS ELAShanta Lightfoot, MS ELASharon Collins, ES ELA Barbara Sorensen, ES ELAWalter Harris, ES ELA

The Heart of Writing

Argument TrainingDay 1

Day 2– March 2, 2015CR2 1400

• Send the same team for Day 2.

• HS Programs pays for subs.

• Day 4—Writing in the Content Areas• Day 5—Performance Tasks/Integrated Units

http://tinyurl.com/Growing-Writers-Video

Designing Aligned K-12 Writing Rubrics

• 24 Teachers• Across District• Across Grades K-12• Across Content

Areas

David Balmer, SocSt, HeritageTammy King, SocSt, Holly SpringsKristen Larsen, SocSt, SandersonLaura Stiles, Sci, WakefieldMolly Bostic, Sci, HeritageMary Cate Larocca, ELA, Southeast RaleighJenni Greene, ELA, Holly SpringsLauren Genesky, ELA, MillbrookCarrie Horton, ELA, Vernon Malone

ArgumentInformative

Narrative

Aligned Rubrics for Quality

K through 12

Cross-CurricularImplementation

http://map.mathshell.org/materials/_map/_map/pics/map_teachers_1.jpg

2. Look across: one skill criterion• What do you notice about growth within and across

grade spans?• How might these rubrics support a call to rigor in

content-area learning?

1. Look down • What do you notice about skills and

criteria?• How might these fit all content areas?

Apply It: Choose a skill criterion. Read the student response. What subskill feedback would you give this student? How can the quality continuum be used to support qualitative student growth, rather than quantitative grades?

Table Talk

http://tinyurl.com/k9cgu3c

We Need Some Bright Ideas!

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/light-bulb-idea-821688.jpg

Google Response Formhttp://goo.gl/forms/Io07BqGRMD

One per group? Per pair?

What ideas do you have for implementation in a high-school culture and climate?

http://map.mathshell.org/materials/_map/_map/pics/map_teachers_1.jpg

http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/06/0925/m/02-IMG_7678.jpg

Teacher Professional Development

Fidelity of Cross-Curricular Implementation

http://www.onlinecolleges.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Writerfolio.jpg

Interactive Digital Rubrics

K-12 Digital Portfolios

Cary High SchoolNolan Bryant

Summer IMP-stitute

Ruth Steidinger

ETF Update

Sonia DupreeAnna Jackson

Mid-Year Data Review

Sara OverbyTeresa Bunner

Planning for Literacy Coaches