LOOKING FORWARD: NEXT GENERATION ELD STANDARDS &ELP ASSESSMENT FOR WASHINGTON STATE

WABE

April 19, 2013

Margaret Ho, Ed. D.WELPA Coordinator, OSPI Helen MalagónDirector, Migrant and Bilingual Education, OSPI

Transitioning to the CCSS - Next Generation ELD StandardsRequirement for states to have ELD/P Standards in place that have

Correspondence to the CCSS and Next Generation Science Standards

Guided by the Framework for English Language Proficiency Development Standards Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards (2012).

Transitioning to the CCSS - Next Generation ELD Standards

Development currently underway by WestEd With management support from CCSSO, and Funding support from Understanding Language (Stanford

University), the Assessment and Accountability Comprehensive Center (WestEd and CRESST), and others

Next Generation ELD Standards: Design Goals

Correspond with and to be used in tandem with CCSS for ELA & Literacy in History/Social studies, Science and Technical Subjects as well as for Mathematics

Highlight and amplify the critical language, knowledge about language, and skills using language in the CCSS necessary for ELLs to be successful in school

Provide fewer, clearer, higher standards to teachers can focus on what’s most important

ELD Standards: Design Principles* Principle 1: ELLs need opportunities to interact in meaningful

ways Principle 2: ELLs need opportunities to learn about how English

works Principle 3: ELLs need opportunities to learn foundational

literacy skills (if not already learned)

* The information on this slide and following slides about ELD standards and proficiency level descriptors comes from a Supporting Packet for Work on Next Generation ELD Standards Development, prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers by Edynn Sato, Ph.D. & Lynne Shafer Willner, Ph.D., 2013, WestEd

ELD Standards: Principle 1ELLS need opportunities to interact in meaningful ways

Table 1: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 1

From. . . To . . .

Language development focused on accuracy and grammatical correctness

→

Language development focused on interaction, collaboration, comprehension, and communication with strategic scaffolding to guide appropriate linguistic choices

Instruction that treats reading, writing, listening, and speaking as isolated and separate skills

→Instruction that artfully integrates reading, writing, speaking and listening, and language

Five* English Language Proficiency (ELP) levels →

Three ELP levels; emerging, expanding, bridging (each with Entry/Progress through Exit)

Principle 1 Take 3 minutes at your seats to identify key ideas

ELD Standards: Principle 2ELLS need opportunities to learn about how English worksTable 2: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 2

From . . . To . . .

Simplified texts and activities, often separate from content knowledge

→

Complex texts and intellectually challenging activities with content integral to language learning

ELD Standards as “junior” ELA Standards or as an “onramp” to the ELA Standards →

ELA Standards working in tandem with ELA and other content standards and seen as the “diamond lane/HOV lane” for acceleration

Instruction in ELD that is separate from and isolated from instruction in ELA or that is indistinguishable from ELA

→

Dedicated instruction in ELD that builds into and from instruction in ELA and literacy in the content areas

Principle 2 Take 3 minutes at your seats to identify key ideas

ELD Standards: Principle 3ELLS need opportunities to learn foundational literacy skills (if not already learned)

Table 3: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 3

From . . . To . . .

Early literacy skills embedded in the ELD Standards

→Foundational Literacy Skills applied appropriately depending on individual student needs

Little acknowledgement of ongoing reading difficulties experienced by some ELLs, especially Long-term ELLs

→Focus on the need to develop reading fluency in order to ensure college and career readiness

Principles 1, 2, and 3:1. ELLs need opportunities to interact in meaningful ways;2. ELLs need opportunities to learn about how English works;3. ELLs need opportunities to learn foundational literacy skills (if not already learned).

Take 3 minutes at your seats to reflect on the three design principles. To what extent do you agree with these principles?

CCSS Implications for ELLs and the Development of the Next Generation ELD Standards

Students will need to uncover and delineate language uses in CCSS: Teachers will need to address social, general and discipline-specific

academic language, including the abilities toDemonstrate understanding, confirm being understoodBuild on others’ ideas & articulate own ideasConstruct explanation, engage in arguments

Students will need to express increasingly more complex language as they advance in ELD Teachers will need to appropriately scaffold & support language used for

content knowledge and action ELD assessment developers will need to design appropriate tasks to

measure growth

Next Generation ELD Standards:Design Specifications

1. Based on theory, research, and best practice

2. Understandable, usable and easily transferrable to classroom curriculum and instruction for ELD

3. Meaningful and coherent

4. Include an appropriate level of specificity/granularity and examples

5. Rigorous

6. Concise and measurable

7. Reflect horizontal and vertical alignment

Proficiency DescriptorsProficiency Level Descriptors (PLDs) provide an overview of stages of English language development that English learners are expected to progress through as they gain increasing proficiency in English. The PLDs describe student knowledge, skills, and abilities across a continuum, identifying what ELLs know and can do at early stages and at exit from each of three proficiency levels: Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging.

The descriptors are intended to be used as a guide for teachers and curriculum developers to provide ELLs with targeted instruction in English language development as well as differentiated instruction in academic content areas.

Proficiency Descriptors

The organization of the PLDs represents a continuum of increasing proficiency in language learning and use, starting with native language competencies students possess when they enter school, and concluding (though not ending) with lifelong language learning in which all language users are engaged.

Although the PLDs describe an aligned set of knowledge, skills, and abilities at each proficiency level that reflect a linear progression across the levels, this is done for purposes of presentation and understanding: Actual second language acquisition does not necessarily occur in a linear fashion within or across proficiency levels.

Proficiency Level Descriptors Emerging: Students at this level typically progress very quickly, learning

to use English for immediate needs as well as beginning to understand and use academic vocabulary and other features of academic language.

Expanding: Students at this level are challenged to increase their English skills in core contexts, and learn a greater variety of vocabulary and linguistic structures, applying their growing language skills in more sophisticated ways appropriate to their age and grade level.

Bridging: Students at this level continue to learn and apply a range of high-level English language skills in a wide variety of contexts, including comprehension and production of highly technical texts. The ‘bridge’ alluded to is the transition to full engagement in grade-level tasks and activities in a variety of content areas without the need for specialized ELD instruction. However, ELLs at all levels of English language proficiency fully participate in grade level tasks in all content areas with varying degrees of scaffolding in order to develop both content knowledge and English.

PLDs Describe student knowledge, skills, and abilities across a

continuum, identifying what ELLs know and can do

Provide three proficiency levels: Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging – at early and exit stages

Guide targeted instruction in ELD, as well as differentiated instruction in academic content areas

I. Interacting in Meaningful WaysModes of Communication

A. Collaborative (engagement in dialogue with others)

B. Interpretative (comprehension and analysis of written and spoken texts)

C. Productive (creation of oral presentations and written texts)

Modalities: Collaborative1. Exchanging information and ideas with others through oral

dialogue on a range of social and academic topics

2. Interacting with others in written English in various communicative forms (print, communicative technology, and multimedia)

3. Offering and supporting opinions and negotiating with others in communicative exchanges

4. Adapting language choices to various contexts (based on purpose, interlocutors, and modality)

Modalities: Interpretive

5. Listening actively to spoken English in a range of social and academic contexts

6. Reading closely literary and informational texts and viewing multimedia to determine how meaning is conveyed explicitly and implicitly through language

7. Evaluating how well writers use language to support ideas & opinions with details or reasons depending on modality, text type, purpose, audience, topic, and content area

8. Analyzing how writers use vocabulary and other language resources for specific purposes (to explain, persuade, entertain, etc.) depending on modality, text type, purpose, audience, topic and content area

Modalities: Productive

8. Expressing information and ideas in formal oral presentations on academic topics

9. Composing literary and informational texts to present, describe, and explain ideas and information, using appropriate technology

10. Supporting own opinions and evaluating others’ opinions in writing

11. Selecting and applying varied and precise vocabulary and language structures to effectively convey ideas

II. Language Processes: Learning About How English Works

Structuring Cohesive Texts

1. Text structure

2. Cohesion

Expanding & Enriching Ideas

3. Verbs and verb groups (phrases, tense, aspect, modals, etc.)

4. Nouns and noun groups

5. Modification (relative clauses, prepositional phrases, etc.)

Connecting & Condensing Ideas

6. Connecting ideas

7. Condensing ideas

III. Using Foundational Literacy SkillsLiteracy in an Alphabetic Writing System Print concepts Phonological awareness Phonics & word recognition Fluency

PLDs Include

Descriptors for early stages of and exit from each proficiency level, using ELD standard structure: Three Modes of Communication:

Collaborative (engagement in dialogue with others) Interpretative (comprehension and analysis of written and spoken

texts) Productive (creation of oral presentations and written texts)

Two dimensions of Knowledge of Language: Metalinguistic Awareness (language awareness & self-monitoring) Accuracy of Production (acknowledging variation)

Next Generation English Language Development StandardsReview and Adoption Process

Washington State’s Process1. Involve ELD practitioners from across the state to review and

provide comments on the draft ELDs.

Selection of two review teams:

a. One team with content expertise in English Language Arts (ELA) and ELD.

b. One team with content expertise in Mathematics and ELD. c. Teams will include representatives from IHE and interested

stakeholders/advocacy groups.

2. Identified reviewers will be brought on site to provide structured feedback to the ELDs.

3. Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with reviewers’ annotations for public review for 30 days.

Timeline for Standards Development

May 20, 2013Draft ELP Standards for ELA provided to ELPA21 states.

Convene a team with content expertise in English Language Arts (ELA) and ELD to review and provide structured feedback to the ELDs.

Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with reviewers’ annotations for public review for 30 days.

Summer 2013

Final ELP Standards for ELA available to states.Adoption of the New Standards by the

State. Development of training of ELD

standards if not provided by WestEd.

Develop a calendar of training for the New ELD Standards.

Summer 2013

Draft ELP Standards for Mathematics provided to ELPA21 states

Convene a team with content expertise in English Mathematics and ELD to review and provide structured feedback to the ESDs.

Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with reviewers’ annotations for public review for 30 days.

Challenge: Do not have the date for when comments are due.

Immediate Need Identify practitioners with expertise in both ELAs and ELDs.

Identify practitioners with expertise in both math and ELDs.

Identify practitioners with expertise in both science and ELDs.

If you are interested in applying to participate in the review access: http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1128161/New-ELD-Standard-Reviewer-application

Contact charisse.sonnier@k12.wa.us with questions or to request the link electronically.

By applying, you are not committing to be available on the date of the review. You are only agreeing to be part of our talent pool.

ELPA21 Goal* slides adapted from Oregon DOE

Build an English Language Proficiency Assessment

Based on a common set of English language

proficiency/development (ELP/D) standards that Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards in

English Language Arts and Mathematics and the Next Generation Science Standards

And reflect The Framework for English Language Proficiency Development Standards Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards

ELPA21Design Principles

Electronically-delivered

Employ technology to optimize the testing experience for the student and response time on reporting results

ELPA21 Products Diagnostic Screener

Available for districts to assess baseline English language proficiency of incoming ELL students

Inform placement and instructional decisions

Fixed-Form Summative Assessment

ELPA21 Governance OverviewConsortium Council

Executive Board

Item Acquisition & Development

Assessment

Design

Accommod. & Accessibility

Performance Standa

rd Setting

Field Testing

Technology

Utilization

Data System &

Reporting

Professional Development Suppor

t

Communications & Outrea

ch

TMTs

ELPA21 Governance Cont’d.

Member StatesOregon (Lead State)ArkansasFloridaIowaKansasLouisianaNebraskaOhioSouth CarolinaWashingtonWest Virginia

Partners• Council of Chief State

School Officers (CCSSO)

• Understanding Language, Stanford University

• National Center for Research and Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST)

ELPA21 Participating States

ELPA21 Timeline - Overview

September 2012: U.S. Department of Education awarded grant to ELPA21

2012-13: ELPA21 Governing Structure convened December 2013: States adopt common set of ELP

standards 2013-14: Test development 2014-16: Pilot test, field test, item calibration 2016-17: Deploy operational assessment system

ELPA21 Timeline

SY 2012-2013 Kickoff and convene teams Approve ELPA21 scope, requirements, timeline and budget Draft and execute RFPs and Item Sharing Agreements Begin item collection and development

SY 2013-2014 Develop assessment blueprints and field test forms Identify field test sites and conduct technical pilot test Create ELPA21 Scoring Course Develop Professional Development modules and

Accommodations guide

ELPA21 Timeline

SY 2014-2015 Conduct year-long field test

Diagnostic and Screener test forms ELPA21 Scoring Course Administration Manual Accommodations Guide Professional Development Reports and Data

Prepare for Rollout: Create turnkey RFPs for assessment delivery vendors Execute ELPA21 licensure agreements Specify data management protocols

ELPA21 Timeline SY 2015-2016

Analyze field tests data Refine test forms Determine cut scores Finalize ELPA21 Scoring course Release technical reports Finalize support materials

SY 2016-2017 Deliver test forms and support materials Publish project findings Report to US DOE

ELP Standards Corresponding with CCSS

Under development by West Ed, with support from CCSSO and financial support from Stanford University Understanding Language.

Developed using the Framework for English Language Proficiency Development Standards Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards (2012).

Expect draft soon.

Common definition of an ELL?

Requested by the USDOE of the two assessment consortia measuring the CCSS, SBAC and PARCC

Joined by two ELD/P consortia, WIDA and ELPA 21

Work currently underway by Robert Linquanti (WestEd) and Gary

Cook (WIDA) Includes a review of the home language survey

Thank you!

Margaret Ho

Margaret.ho@k12.wa.us

Helen Malagón

Helen.malagon@k12.wa.us