Arlington Public Schools Gifted Services Dawn Ramsay RTG Arlington Science Focus School 2011 - 2012.
Evaluation of Arlington Public Schools Programs for ...€¦ · Evaluation of Arlington Public...
Transcript of Evaluation of Arlington Public Schools Programs for ...€¦ · Evaluation of Arlington Public...
Evaluation of Arlington Public
Schools Programs for English
Language Learners
Barbara D. Acosta, Senior Research Scientist
Lottie Marzucco, Senior Research Associate
Christiane Connors, Research Assistant
Charlene Rivera, Principal Investigator
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 2
Purpose of the Evaluation
To assess the quality of programs and
services for ELLs
To assist Division leaders in making
program decisions for ELLs
Would not be appropriate to use for
purposes of decisions about effectiveness
of specific personnel or schools
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 3
Evaluation Questions
1. What are student outcomes in relation to: Time in LEP status?
Achievement gap closure in math and reading?
Enrollment and pass rates in advanced coursework?
High school completion?
2. To what extent do APS policies, practices,
and procedures support ELLs as they: Develop English language proficiency (ELP)?
Exit from the program and continue in general education
programs?
The Promoting Excellence Appraisal System (PEAS)
Instructional Program Design
Instructional Program
Implementation
Leadership
Personnel
Professional Development
Assessment & Accountability
Parent & Community
Outreach
Student Outcomes
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 5
National/State Context - ELLs
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 6
Reading Achievement (Nation and State)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
US 4th VA 4th US 8th VA 8th
ELL
not ELL
% at or above basic on 2011 NAEP
NCES, 2012
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
K 1 2 3 4 5 6
NC
Es
Grade
All students
ELLs
To close achievement gaps, ELLs must make more than
one year‟s progress each and every year for 5 – 6 years.
Achievement Gap Closure
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 8
Arlington ELLs Grades K-12
123 native countries, 97 native languages
WIDA Level N %
1-Entering
3,689 58%
2-Beginning
3-Developing
4-Expanding
5-Bridging 928 15%
6-Reaching 1,628 26%
TOTAL 6,328
Receive direct
services
Exited direct services
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 9
APS’ ELLs are diverse
Newcomer students
U.S.-born students
making good progress
struggling and/or long-term
English language learners
on grade level in their
native language and/or in
English
with interrupted or limited
formal schooling
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 10
STUDENT OUTCOMES
1. Growth over time on Math and Reading
SOLs
2. Time in LEP status
3. Participation in advanced coursework
4. High school completion rates
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 11
Summary of Findings for Student Outcomes
Doing well
Most ELLs: Progress toward closing
achievement gaps on SOLs
Secondary newcomers at
advanced ELP levels: Higher rates of enrollment in
advanced coursework
Needs improvement
ELLs/former ELLs (overall) Lower rates of high school
completion
ELLs currently in middle school 49% are long-term (>6 yrs LEP)
Level 3: stalled in reading
Students who entered APS as
LEP in elementary grades Lower rates of enrollment in
advanced coursework
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 12
Longitudinal Student Achievement:
Grades 3 - 5
Math Reading
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010 2011
Levels 1 - 2 (n = 140) Level 3 (n = 103)
Level 4 (n = 96) Level 5 (n = 58)
Former LEP (n = 22) Non-LEP (n = 819)
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010 2011
Levels 1-2 (n=17) Level 3 (n=98)
Level 4 (n=95) Level 5 (n=58)
Former (n=22) Non-LEP (n=816)
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 13
Longitudinal Student Achievement:
Grades 6 - 8
Math Reading
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010 2011
Levels 1- 2 (n = 13) Level 3 (n = 33)
Level 4 (n = 51) Level 5 (n = 150)
Former LEP (n = 22) Non-LEP (n = 847)
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010 2011
Levels 1 - 2 (n = 56) Level 3 (n = 32)
Level 4 (n = 51) Level 5 (n = 150)
Former LEP (n = 22) Non-LEP (n = 842)
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 14
Time in LEP status
Students in LEP Status > 6 yrs Years to attainment of state
exit criteria
49%
57%
N=1,839 N=558
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 15
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 TotalLEP
FormerLEP*
non-LEP
Students who entered APS in high school
N=585
2008 ELP Level
Percent Gr 6-12 Who Enrolled in Advanced Coursework
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 16
Students who entered APS in middle school
N=792
2008 ELP Level
Percent Gr 6-12 Who Enrolled in Advanced Coursework
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 17
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Total LEP FormerLEP
non-LEP
Students who entered APS in elementary school
N=8,732
2008 ELP Level
Percent Gr 6-12 Who Enrolled in Advanced Coursework)
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 18
4-Year High School Completion Rates (Comprehensive High Schools)
60%
88%
79%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Entered asLEP
Non-LEP All students
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 19
4-Year High School Completion Rates by entry school level
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
PK or K Elementary Middle High school (9or 10)
High school(11 or 12)
Entered asLEP
Non-LEP All students
APS Entry School Level (Entered as LEP)
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 20
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
PK or K Elementary Middle High school (9or 10)
High school(11 or 12)
Entered asLEP
Non-LEP All students
APS Entry School Level (Entered as LEP)
Within 4 years Within 5 years
4- and 5-Year Rates
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 21
Questions?
Instructional Program Design
Instructional Program
Implementation
Leadership
Personnel
Professional Development
Assessment & Accountability
Parent & Community
Outreach
Student Outcomes
FINDINGS FOR PEAS DIMENSIONS
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 23
FINDINGS: Overall Strengths
Division Inclusive vision, mission,
and goals
Shared responsibility
Positive climate
Dropout prevention
initiative
Continuous improvement
ESOL/HILT Program Research-based
High quality curriculum
Extending PD to broader
audience of educators
Key support positions
Parent and community
outreach
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 24
Leadership
• High expectations
• Shared responsibility
• Clear guidance
• Positive climate
The work of educating ELLs is not
always focused, sustained, &
coordinated within & across schools.
Program Design
• Effective design
• Access to grade-level
content
• Language development
• Equity
ESOL/HILT services do not adhere
to a cohesive design across APS
schools or grade levels.
FINDINGS: Areas for Improvement
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 25
Instructional Implementation
• Access to challenging
academic content
• Language development
• Collaboration
• Making instruction
comprehensible to ELLs.
• High expectations
• Explicit instruction of the
academic language of grade-
level content.
• Elementary reading
instruction for ELLs
• ESOL/HILT and general ed
teacher collaboration
FINDINGS: Areas for Improvement
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 26
Assessment and Accountability
• Identification and
placement
• Use of data
• Continuous improvement
• The Division lacks an effective
system that holds school
administrators accountable for the
quality of instructional programs for
ELLs.
• The current student data system
does not have the capacity to monitor
ELL students‟ progress in meaningful
ways.
FINDINGS: Areas for Improvement
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 27
Personnel
• Expert Teachers • prepared to address the
academic, linguistic, and
cultural needs of ELLs
• Teacher Certification
• Program Staffing
• Schools lack adequate numbers of
instructional staff to meet the needs of all
groups of ELLs.
• Some mainstream teachers who serve
ELLs do not have the expertise to
address their needs.
• Some ESOL/HILT teachers do not have
expertise in the content areas they teach.
Professional development
• Building Educator
Capacity • research-based content;
broad participation
• Quality • job-embedded, sustained,
useful
• The Division does not have a systematic
means of ensuring instructional changes
for ELLs are fully implemented.
FINDINGS: Areas for Improvement
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 28
Parent and Community Outreach
• Family and Community
Partnerships
• Supporting Parent
Involvement
• Communication
• Not all parents are aware of and can take
advantage of opportunities for training
and support.
FINDINGS: Areas for Improvement
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 29
Key Recommendations
1.Foster school-level accountability for the quality of instructional programs for ELLs.
2. Enhance program design to ensure the needs of all groups of ELLs are addressed.
3. Support implementation of ELL-responsive instructional practices through ongoing, job-embedded professional development for all educators of ELLs.
4. Improve the availability of meaningful data that can support instructional and programmatic decisions for ELLs.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 30
Recommendations
Hold school leaders accountable for the quality of instructional programs for ELLs.
Plan each school‟s service delivery tailored to the needs of diverse groups of ELLs.
Strengthen collaboration among ESOL/HILT/HILTEX and general education teachers.
1.Foster school-level accountability for the quality of instructional programs for ELLs.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 31
Recommendations
Ensure Pre-K is designed to support the needs of ELLs.
Allocate staff responsible for monitoring and supporting ELLs at ELP Level 5.
Strengthen guidance and expectations of teachers to explicitly teach academic English.
Revitalize the concept-based reading instructional approach for ELLs.
Pursue policies and practices that support secondary ELLs to enroll in and succeed in advanced coursework.
2. Enhance program design to ensure the needs of all groups of ELLs are addressed.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 32
Recommendations
Ensure professional development for all educators of ELLs is sustained and leads to desired improvements.
Enhance the system for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of professional development.
3. Support implementation of ELL-responsive instructional practices through ongoing, job-embedded professional development for all educators of ELLs.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 33
Recommendations
Continue efforts to improve the student data system so it can be used by educators to make data-based instructional decisions for ELLs.
Make demographic, English language proficiency, and achievement data on ELLs readily available.
4. Improve the availability of meaningful data that can support instructional and programmatic decisions for ELLs.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 34
Questions?
Barbara Acosta
Lottie Marzucco
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 35
What is academic language?
Different from „everyday‟ language
Specialized registers; specialized
knowledge
Students need explicit instruction in how
language works to construct knowledge in
school subjects
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 36
Food Chains The energy stored by producers
can be passed through an ecosystem along a
food chain, a series of steps in which organisms
transfer energy by eating and being eaten. For
example, in a prairie ecosystem, a food chain
might consist of a producer, such as grass, that is
fed upon by an herbivore, such as a grazing
antelope. The herbivore is in turn fed upon by a
carnivore, such as a coyote. (Miller & Levine,
2008, p. 69)
What would be difficult for ELLs?
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 37
Academic Language Example
Food Chains The energy stored by producers
can be passed through an ecosystem along a
food chain, a series of steps in which organisms
transfer energy by eating and being eaten. For
example, in a prairie ecosystem, a food chain
might consist of a producer, such as grass, that is
fed upon by an herbivore, such as a grazing
antelope. The herbivore is in turn fed upon by a
carnivore, such as a coyote. (Miller & Levine,
2008, p. 69)
Long noun phrases
Embedded
clause
Passive voice
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 38
Finding: Elementary Reading
Instruction does not consistently
address the needs of ELLs.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 39
Elementary Reading Instructional
Considerations for ELLs
Components of literacy instruction linked in cohesive units
Explicit connections to content
Academic language (more than just vocabulary)
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 40
Academic Language in Elementary
Reading Sylvester Duncan lived with his mother and father
at Acorn Road in Oatsdale. One of his hobbies was
collecting pebbles of unusual shape and color.
On a rainy Saturday during vacation, he found a
quite extraordinary one. It was flaming red, shiny,
and perfectly round, like a marble. As he was
studying this remarkable pebble, he began to shiver,
probably from excitement, and the rain felt cold on
his back. “I wish it would stop raining,” he said.
pebble
marble
shiver
flaming one he
he
he
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 41
Finding: APS does not have
strategies to ensure collaborative
teaching follows best practices for
inclusive classrooms.
The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education http://ceee.gwu.edu 42
What is effective collaboration?
Voluntary
Equal status
Teachers plan,
implement, and reflect
together
Both teachers share goals
resources
responsibility
accountability
Requires:
Time
Space
Classroom placement
Resources
Professional development
(Dufour, 2003; Friend & Cook, 2003)