Strategies to Accelerate Success

for English Language Learners

Dr. Carrie Doom, Vice President—Implementation, Voyager Sopris Learning

Cynthia Jones, Director of Categorical Programs

Deb Ritchhart, K–12 English Learner Facilitator

CONNECT WITH US

@VoyagerSoprisLearning

@voyagersopris

@VoyagerSoprisLearning

Participants will learn:

● Current landscape of U.S. English Language Learners

● High-Impact Strategies to impact Long-Term English Learners

▪ Everett’s journey to adopt and implement LANGUAGE! Live

▪ Steps to success in our second year

Your Presenters

Dr. Carrie Doom

• Vice President of Implementation for

Voyager Sopris Learning

• 12 years consulting with school districts

across US

• Former teacher in rural, suburban and

urban school settings

Your Presenters

Cynthia Jones

Director, Categorical Programs

Deb Ritchhart

K–12 EL Facilitator

• English Learners make up one of the fastest growing populations of

students in US schools

• 2014–2015

• 9% of student populations

• Some states like California (22.45) exceed national average

Current Landscape of English Language Learners

“English Language Learners in Public Schools.” National Center for Education

Statistics, March 2017. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp

Long-Term English Learners

• Steadily increasing population in US Schools

• Making up a majority of those students categorized as ELL

• Socially bilingual; making students hard to identify

Dr. Olsen (2014) noted in NEA booklet, Meeting the Unique Needs of Long

Term English Language Learners, that Long-Term English Language Learners

(LTELS) have distinct language issues:

“LTELs function socially in both English and their home language.

However, their language is imprecise and inadequate for deeper expression

and communication, and they lack the vocabulary, syntax, and grammar of

native speakers in both languages. Despite the fact that English tends to be the

language of preference for these students, the majority are “stuck” at

intermediate levels of English oral proficiency or below.”

Olsen, L., Ph.D. (2014). Meeting the Unique Needs of Long Term English Language Learners: A Guide for

Educators(pp. 1-37, Rep.). National Education Association. doi:https://www.rcoe.us/educational-

services/files/2012/08/NEA_Meeting_the_Unique_Needs_of_LTELs.pdf

Long-Term English Learners

“LTELs lack oral and literacy skills needed for academic success.

They struggle reading textbooks, have difficulty understanding

vocabulary, and are challenged by long, written passages. They

lack understanding of academic genres and display weak English

syntax, grammar, and vocabulary.

Observant educators often notice that LTELs have significant deficits

in writing, which LTELs approach as written-down oral language.

Because they perform below grade level in reading and writing, and

lack academic vocabulary, they struggle in all content areas that

require literacy.”

Olsen, L., Ph.D. (2014). Meeting the Unique Needs of Long Term English Language Learners: A Guide for

Educators(pp. 1-37, Rep.). National Education Association. doi:https://www.rcoe.us/educational-

services/files/2012/08/NEA_Meeting_the_Unique_Needs_of_LTELs.pdf

Long-Term English Learners

The Hanover Research (2017) report, Effective Interventions for Long-

Term English Learners reiterated the information in the NEA report and

called out the specific strategies below to ensure time spent in

intervention was impactful:

• Overview of “big ideas”

• Explicit vocabulary instruction with student integrated discussion

• Video clip as a shared experience with collegial discussion following

• Teacher led/paired student reading assignment followed by question

answering and generating

• Wrap-up activity using graphic organizer and or writing.

“Effective Interventions for Long-Term English Learners.” Hanover Research, July 2017.

https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/SDE/ESSA%20Evidence%20Guides/Effective_Interventions_for_Long-

Term_English_Learners

Long-Term English Learners

Oral Literacy Skills

• Start with a familiar topic or shared

experience

• Support dialog with sentence frames

• Explicitly teach, model and practice the

ability to state an opinion, disagree,

agree, clarify, review, etc.

Putting Research into Practice

• Explicitly teach tier two words that are

used across content areas

• Use examples and non-examples

• Teach ways to break down words into

categories (type of?) and attributes

(What does it look like, sound like,

smell like, used for?)

Vocabulary

Grammar and syntax function to support comprehension.

• Embedded in instruction and authentic text to allow for

understanding and access

• Grammar and syntax should lead with comprehension

questions (Who, What, When, Where, Why, How,

Which one, What kind, How many)

Grammar and Syntax

Don’t underestimate the power of starting simple.

• Who/What did it? What did they/he/she/it do?

Used shared writing experiences to build to a paragraph and on to

longer pieces using graphic organizers

Writing

Everett, Washington

Everett, Washington

▪ 20,000 students

▪ 5 middle schools (6–8)

▪ 3 comprehensive and one alternative high school (9–12)

Everett Public Schools

Growth in Middle and High School EL Population

489543

721789

893

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

# students

October Counts

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Growth in Number of Emerging English Learners at High School

Other = 56

different

languages

spoken by 9 or

fewer students

Total = 83

languages

Spanish

Russian Arabic

Vietnamese

Ukrainian

Marshallese

Korean

Telugu

Hindi

Cambodian

Punjabi Tagalog

Chinese-Unspecified Amharic

Chinese-Mandarin Tamil

Portugese Japanese French

Swahili Farsi Kurdish Nepali

Rumanian Chuuk/ Chuukese Hmong

Turkish Other (56)

Languages Spoken in EPS, October 2018

Achievement Gaps Persist

▪ Year-long process

▪ Representative committee

▪ Review of best practices

▪ Review, rate, and score six different curricula

▪ Publishers’ presentations

▪ Parent and teacher feedback

▪ Selection of top two

▪ Instructional Materials Committee

▪ School Board of Directors approval

Adoption Process

Purpose▪ Recommend instructional materials aligned with

o English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA CCSS)

o 21st century skills

o Evidence-based best practices

Focus on systems of support▪ Collaboration between general education, special education,

and EL program

▪ Academic interventions for SpEd and EL classes

▪ Resources for data-based problem solving

▪ Improve learning outcomes through the use of evidence-

based practices

Instructional Materials Adoption

Digging into the research and considering our

practice…

What does the research say about the needs of

secondary students who struggle in literacy

(reading, writing, listening, speaking, and

language)?

Research Base

Reading

Language

Speaking and Listening

Writing

Standards and 21st century skills▪ Alignment with and integration of ELA CCSS

o Foundational skills• Phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, word use,

sentence structure

o More complex skills• Syntax, close reading, comprehension, critical analysis of

text, language structures, writing

▪ Resources for 21st century skills: o Growth mindset, motivation, persistence, self-direction

Best Practice Design and Resources Key Criteria

Instructional design ▪ Personalized computer-adaptive instruction combined with

direct instruction for a technology-transformed, blended

classroom

▪ Engaging and systematic literacy instruction

▪ Independent and supported complex and relevant texts

Standards-aligned assessments▪ Progress monitoring and benchmark assessments

▪ A variety of data reports with actionable data to identify

growth areas and successes and determine next steps in

instruction

Best Practice Design and Resources Key Criteria

28

Research-based design▪ Design based on research

o Effective instruction in literacy

o Struggling adolescent learners

o Computer-assisted learning

▪ Program design validated as effective when used

with fidelity

Best Practice Design and Resources Key Criteria

▪ Intervention program that addressed EL & SWD needs

▪ Aligned to CCSS

▪ Reading + writing

▪ Foundational skills

▪ Small group instruction

▪ Blended instruction

▪ Sufficient and accurate monitoring data

▪ Quality assessments

▪ Teacher and student friendly and flexible

In Summary, We Were Looking For:

Year Zero: 2017–18

▪ Initial training from Voyager Sopris Learning after school was out in

June and before school started in August

▪ Meetings with middle school & high school principals

▪ Creation of differentiated pacing calendars

Implementation and Training: Year Zero

School district leadership team

▪ ELA, SpEd, EL

▪ Dr. Doom joined us several times and

helped us work through understanding

of pacing guides, data, etc.

Implementation and Training: Leadership Team

EL and SpEd facilitators

▪ Ongoing support for teachers across the year

o Evaluation goal for Deb

Implementation and Training: Facilitators’ Role

▪ Two rounds of one-on-one coaching

o Followed by round-table feedback

o Discussion and guidance for leadership team

▪ MS and HS EL teachers created a PLC

o Met once a month to unpack and thoroughly

understand the writing projects

Implementation and Training

▪ Initial set up took longer than expected

▪ Differentiating between the three tests

▪ Inconsistencies in student placement

▪ Following the pacing guide was challengingo Teachers didn’t trust that the skills and concepts taught would spiral

o Rigor and pace

▪ Lack of experience teaching two simultaneous groups

▪ Students moved independently through Word Training too

quickly

Glitches

Mid-year course correction

▪ Confirmed for teachers best practices and rationale

▪ Students were regrouped

▪ Teachers revised pacing calendars with goal of

teaching at least three units by the end of the year

▪ PLCs and EL meetings resulted in high quality

discussions

▪ Program ran much more smoothly second half of

the year

Reset

▪ Place students in the program accurately using data.

▪ Implement the program as designed.

▪ Create two Text Training groups in each class for small group explicit instruction

and focused intervention.

▪ Use student data to guide instruction and support with data from:

o Benchmark Assessments,

o Pre- and post-unit tests.

▪ Use practice and re-teaching activities.

▪ Utilize the Power Passes at the end of each unit.

▪ Work to complete three LANGUAGE! Live units by the end of the year.

▪ Work to complete all expected LANGUAGE! Live writing projects by the end of the

year.

▪ Follow LANGUAGE! Live best practices: post agendas/itineraries for Text Training

and Word Training each day and focus with students on building a growth mindset.

Planning for Student Success Guidelines

▪ Revised our understanding of which students

benefitted the most

o Students struggling with reading; not emerging

language acquisition

▪ Understood how to more accurately assess and

place students in groups

▪ Requested additional assessments to support

instruction

o Voyager created initial and final

assessments, and pre- and post-unit tests

Lessons Learned: Teacher Feedback

Year 1: 2018–19

▪ Met with principals in August to share teacher data regarding

completion of units to prompt conversation and goal setting with

teachers

▪ SpEd teachers setting IEP goals based on assessment results

Implementation: Year 1

August Principals’ Meeting

1. Review your teacher progress graphs

2. Select one teacher. What would be your conversation with this teacher?

A TPEP goal?

3. Draft a SIP goal to monitor progress toward meeting your equity targets

for EL and SpEd students

Year 1: full implementation

▪ Teachers familiar with program

▪ Two PD tracks

o Refresher for continuing teachers

o Initial training for new teachers

▪ Better understanding of what data to pull

▪ Increased expectation for number of units

completed from three to five

Implementation: Year 1

45-Minute Pacing Guide

▪ Revision of pacing guideo Trust that skills spiral

o Implementation of new

assessments and unit tests

o Time for practice and re-teaching

activities

o Initial and final assessments

o Pre- and post-unit tests

oWriting units to be completed

before state testing

▪ Created our own pacing guide

template so that teachers can

adjust for starting place of each

group

▪ Didn’t complete all three writing prompts last year

o Started late

o Teachers didn’t move quickly enough through the curriculum

o Need to complete all three to show proficiency on state assessment,

which is linked to graduation

▪ This year better set for success

o Earlier start—start-up unit first week of school

o Moving more quickly through pacing calendar

o Pacing calendar revised to move writing assignments earlier

o Added time for practice activities

Inclusion of Writing

▪ Students walked away with reading and

writing skills that I see them using:

annotating, asking questions, writing topic

sentences

▪ Far more competent about accurately

placing students in groups

▪ Like the pre- and post-tests—they give us

good information

Teacher Feedback

▪ Confident and positive

▪ Trust that the program will meet student needs

▪ Ready to implement independently

▪ Connections from LANGUAGE! Live practices to best

practices, state assessment skills, and students’ other

content classes

▪ Love the small groups

Teacher Feedback

▪ Two facilitators are now LANGUAGE! Live trainers

▪ Ongoing, differentiated professional development

▪ Monthly reports to teachers to share student data and have

conversations regarding implementation

Next Steps

Board director: “What has your

school done that has really

helped you?”

Student: LANGUAGE! Live

Student Feedback