4/23/13  

1  

Click  to  edit  title  style  Reparable  Harm:    How  do  we  Assess  Systems  as  well  as  

Children?  EDUC  5535  April  2013  

Click  to  edit  title  style  

*  Standards  Based  Education  *  Content  *  Performance  (assessment)  *  Opportunities  to  Learn  

*  Who  do  we  assess?  *  Students  *  Teachers/Principals  *  Schools  (we  give  them  grades)  *  We  compare    schools/student  *  Systems  –  IS  THE  SYSTEM  PROVIDING  AN  OPPORTUNITY  TO  

LEARN????  

A  Review    

4/23/13  

2  

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  Less  often  systems  (districts)  are  assessed  regarding  the  

“Opportunities  to  Learn”  however  there  is  growing  concern  that  we  need  to  do  this;  

*  Systems  assessments  generally  involve  use  of  checklists  around  criteria  (e.g.  do  all  schools  have  technology,  adequate  heat  etc.)  

*  Checklists  include  bricks  &  motor;    personnel  (e.g.  prepared  teachers,  materials  and  supports)  

*  Checklists  may  include  various  stakeholders  &  triangulation  *  Administrators  *  Teachers  *  Parents  *  “Outside  experts”  *  Monitors  

*  Today  we  will  look  at  one  checklist  to  assess  a  system’s  shortcomings  as  well  as  recommendations  for  improvement.  

Systems  Assessment  

Click  to  edit  title  style  

*  Research  Question:  *  What  are  the  systemic  issues  that  create  ‘Long-­‐term  ELLs’  *  Methods:  *  Long-­‐term  ELLs  –students  still  labeled  as  ELL  after  7-­‐8  years  

in  U.S.  Schools  *  Survey  of  40  California  school  districts  (175,734  students)  in  

grades  6-­‐12  *  1/3  of  all  Ca.  secondary  school  ELLs  *  Findings  *  Implications:    New  Checklist  for  Serving  Long-­‐term  ELLs  

Reparable  Harm:    A  Systems  (Statewide)  Assessment  

4/23/13  

3  

Click  to  edit  title  style  Long-­‐term  ELLs  (Olsen,  2010)  –  have  been  in  U.S.  6+  yrs.    56%-­‐75%  of  ELLs  in  CA  study  had  been  in  U.S.  6+  yrs.  

   In  CO  23.6%  of  students  are  long-­‐term  ELLs  *  U.S.  born  simultaneous  bilinguals  (Urban  Institute,  2005)  *  77%  of  Elementary  ELLs  (K-­‐5)  *  56%  of  Secondary  ELLs  (6-­‐12  *  Sequential  bilinguals  (in  the  minority)  *  New  arrivals  *  With  formal  schooling  in  L1  *  Without  formal  schooling  in  L1  

Findings:  Who  are  adolescent  ELLs?  

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  Stuck  at  intermediate  levels  of  English  proficiency  (fossilized)  *  Have  had  little  or  no  opportunity  to  learn  L1  *  May  or  may  not  have  had  ELD.  *  Had  weak  or  subtractive  language  programs  *  May  not  understand  academic  genres  and  may  be  weak  in  basic  

English  syntax,  grammar  and  vocabulary.  *  Possibly  have  NEVER  had  social  studies  or  science  instruction.  *  Likely  DID  have  remedial  literacy  instruction  which  was  designed  for  

native  English  speaking  struggling  readers  or  sped  students  (interventions)  (narrowed  curriculum)  *  Had  little  opportunity  to  acquire  academic  literacy  however  we  

define  it.  

Findings:    How  did  children  become  long-­‐term  ELLs?  

4/23/13  

4  

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  Long-­‐term  ELLs  live  in  segregated  communities  *  School  climates  may  be  hostile  for  ELLs    (covert)  *  Transnational  moves  *  Students  have  developed  habits  of  non-­‐engagement  and  do  not  have  habits  associated  with  school  success  –  “doing  school”  *  Might  be  discouraged  *  Want  to  go  to  college  but  do  not  know  HOW  *  Secondary  school  programs  do  not  meet  there  need.  *  IS  DENVER  DIFFERENT?  

Findings  (cont.)  

Click  to  edit  title  style  Manuel  

4th  Grader;    2008-­‐2009;  born  in  the  U.S.;  attended    same  school  since    Kindergarten;    in  and  out  of    bilingual  classrooms.    

In  2009,  his  CELA  score  was  a  4;  Spanish  his  home  language  

Spring  2009  EDL=  4  DRA=  12  Low  in  both  Languages  

Writing  sample  =  unreadable  (next  slide)  

Deficit  Orientation  

Manuel  lacks    “academic  language”  

School’s  Assessment  

Intervention;  intensive  phonemic  awareness,      phonics  &  site  words  

Needs  help  with  spelling;  word  families,  and    phonological  awareness  

Drop  Spanish,  it  is    interfering  with  English  

Accelerated  reading  (AR)  -­‐Struggling  readers;  Sped;  ELL  

Writers’  Workshop  

Intervention  

Profile  

4/23/13  

5  

Click  to  edit  title  style  Manuel:    Unreadable  

Click  to  edit  title  style  Manuel’s  School  and  District  Vernon  School  

*420  Children  *75%  Latino  *70%  ELL  *87%  FRL  

Downtown  Public  Schools  

School  Rating:  *  Low  for  2008-­‐2009  *Orange  *Celebration-­‐    

   “we  are  not  red”  

*70,000  students  *58%  Latino  *40%  ELL  *85%  ELL/Spanish  *75%  FRL  

District  Rating:    *1/3  of  all  unsatisfactory  schools    in  state  are  in  downtown:  *  Annual  report:  

 -­‐Unacceptable    -­‐  “we  will  do  better”  

ELLs  lack  of  Academic  Literacy  

Deficit  Orientation  

4/23/13  

6  

Click  to  edit  title  style  4th  graders  of  2009  are  now  8th  graders:    What  has  been  their  opportunity  to  learn  academic  language?  

Born  in  U.S.  Inconsistent  Ed  Program  All  English  since  4th  grade  

4th  and  5th  Grade  Reading  intervention  No  science  or  social  studies  

School  and  community    socially  and  linguistically  segregated  

Hates  school  Frequently  absent  No  motivation  

CELA  score=  4  Same  as  4th  grade  

Manuel  lacks    “academic  English”  

Deficit  Orientation  

Profile  fits  Urban  Institute  2005  and  Olsen  2010  

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  Long-­‐term  ELLs  have  no  special  program  *  Mainstream  (no  program)  *  Programs  with  newcomers  

*  Unprepared  teachers  *  Have  too  many  interventions  that  are  disconnected  from  the  main  curriculum  *  Get  ELD  instead  of  electives  in  secondary  school  *  Will  likely  not  be  prepared  to  meet  Common  Core  Standards  

Conclusions:    Lack  of  Opportunities  to  Learn  

4/23/13  

7  

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  An  important  focus  of  the  speaking  and  listening  standards  is  academic  

discussion  in  one-­‐on-­‐one,  small-­‐group,  and  whole-­‐class  settings.  Formal  presentations  are  one  important  way  such  talk  occurs,  but  so  is  the  more  informal  discussion  that  takes  place  as  students  collaborate  to  answer  questions,  build  understanding,  and  solve  problems.  

*  The  ability  to  write  logical  arguments  based  on  substantive  claims,  sound  reasoning,  and  relevant  evidence  is  a  cornerstone  of  the  writing  standards,  with  opinion  writing—a  basic  form  of  argument—extending  down  into  the  earliest  grades.  

*  The  standards  expect  that  students  will  grow  their  vocabularies  through  a  mix  of  conversations,  direct  instruction,  and  reading.  The  standards  will  help  students  determine  word  meanings,  appreciate  the  nuances  of  words,  and  steadily  expand  their  repertoire  of  words  and  phrases.  

*  Academic  language  Manuel  &  students  like  him  have  never  had  an  opportunity  to  learn  

 Common  CORE  Standards    

Click  to  edit  title  style  *  Report  concluded  with  a  checklist  for  systems  (an  assessment)  to  

see  check  readiness  to  meet  needs  of  Long-­‐term  ELLs  (pg.  55-­‐56)  *  There  are  23  items  on  the  check-­‐list  *  You  are  a  stake-­‐holder  group  –  who  else  should  we  include?  *  20  minutes  at  your  table  *  Scale  of  1-­‐5  on  each  item  (1=low;    5=high)  *  Star  2  you  think  DPS  does  well  *  Star  2  you  think  most  need  improvement  

*  Share  out  (1  positive/1  concern)  *  Turn  in  your  papers  *  We  need  to  assess  systems!  

District  Checklist  for  Assessing  the  Needs  of  Long-­‐Term  ELLs