Elementary Principals February 20, 2014

Elementary Principals February 20, 2014

Glenda Harrell, ESL Director Alesha McCauley, ESL Senior Administrator Amanda Miller, ESL Coordinating Teacher

ESL: Making Connections

Acronyms

Student • LEP – Limited English Proficient• ELL – English language learner

LEP = ELL

Instructional Program• ESL – English as a Second Language

Expectations of WCPSS ESL

Procedural Requirements

• EASI LEP– LEP Plans– Parent Notification Letters– ROA Forms – state testing

accommodations– LEP test scores, LEP status, and

level of service

• Seeking improvements– Spring 2014 Review Optional!

• W-APT & ACCESS for ELLs– Review home language surveys and

identify LEP students• Approx 4000 students assessed with W-

APT by CIE annually

– Annual ACCESS testing (with administrative support)

• Some ESL teachers report strong school support and minimum time loss

• Some ESL teachers report minimal school support.

• Teacher Schedules• All reviewed

• Validation of efforts• Concerns about types of services

Source: EOY ESL Teacher Survey

Instructional Requirements• Language Objectives

– Language Function + Content + Support

• All LEP students/ELLs must receive appropriate language development services– Language Instruction Educational Program (LIEP)

• LEP students/ELLs are actively engaged– Excerpt from WIDA Standards document

Language Objectives

ALL ELLs Are Served Appropriately

Three Categories of LIEP ServicesComprehensive ServicesModerate ServicesTransitional Services

Guiding Language Development

Students at all levels of English language proficiency interact with grade-level words and expressions, such as: narrate, narration, first person, third person

How do WCPSS ESL teachers describe quality teaching for ELLs?

ESL Class• Use clear language objectives• Align lessons to Common Core• Collaborate with others – teachers,

specialists and administrators• Provide deliberate, purposeful

interaction• Build background knowledge• Formatively assess language

development

General Classroom • Use clear language objectives• Align lessons to WIDA• Collaborate with ESL• Recognize that all students are

language learners, but that learning L2 is different

• Identify critical skills & knowledge in a lesson, then scaffold for comprehensibility

• Practice learned language, a lot

Source: LEP Contacts, LEP Advisory Committee

Implementation of LIEP Successful?

N= 101 Not at all Somewhat Good Excellent

LEP Contacts 6 50 33 12

Transitional Services Reported• Language objectives used by classroom teacher• Served by Title I or Spec Ed program• Conference with teacher; review of grades• Twice monthly writing workshops• Quarterly goal-setting meetings with students• Planning sessions with classroom teachers• Homework club after school• Facilitate discussions about language supports, scaffolding and overall progress for ELLs

Source: WCPSS ESL Audits, LEP Contacts

What do ESL teachers think about their time commitments?

N= 81 or 82 Too Much About Right Too Little NA

Direct Instruction to ELLs 1% (1) 48% (39) 51% (42) 0

Collaborate w classroom teachers and/or other school professionals

3% (2) 36% (29) 61% (49) 1% (1)

Outreach to parents of ELLs 2% (2) 42% (34) 55% (45) 1% (1)

Student testing 69% (56) 27% (22) 3% (2) 1% (1)

Professional development for working with ELLs 1% (1) 57% (46) 42% (34) 0

Other (administrative paperwork, interpretation/ translation, etc.)

62% 51 34% (28) 2% (2) 1% (1)

Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

Collaboration: Ownership of ELLs

• Where are English learners during the school day?

• Where are ESL teachers during the school day?

What do WCPSS ESL teachers think about the value of collaboration?

N=79 Often Sometimes Rarely Never

There is a culture of collaboration in my school. 27% (21) 60% (47) 11% (9) 3% (2)

Collaboration between classroom and ESL teachers is highly valued.

19% (15) 51% (40) 27% (21) 4% (3)

There is adequate time for collaboration among ESL and classroom teachers

5% (4) 17% (13) 56% (44) 23% (18)

Time is scheduled for collaboration between ESL and classroom teachers

5% (4) 19% (15) 54% (43) 22% (17)

Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

When do WCPSS ESL teachers collaborate?

N=79 Often Sometimes Rarely Never

Collaborate via email, Skype, Google Docs and/or shared drive with classroom teachers

52% (41) 29% (23) 6% (5) 13% (10)

Actively participate in grade level meetings 35% (28) 39% (31) 17% (13) 9% (7)

Meet w classroom teachers before or after school 41% (32) 39% (31) 19% (15) 1% (1)

Discuss issues with classroom teachers in passing 71% (56) 20% (16) 9% (7) 0

Plan lessons with classroom teachers 3% (2) 18% (14) 43% (34) 37% (29)

Modify or adapt text or materials for classroom teachers

6% (5) 29% (23) 38% (30) 27% (21)

Plan short-term goals with classroom teachers 19% (15) 47% (37) 18% (14) 15% (12)

Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

What do WCPSS ESL teachers report as their greatest challenge?

1. Insufficient time and too many responsibilities

“Being pulled from all directions to provide immediate support to teachers, and parents. Also, to complete paperwork on time. Everything is a rush with a deadline.”

“Being spread too thin – not enough time to meet individual needs of all the students on my caseload and not enough time to effectively collaborate with classroom teachers.”

Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

Research: Types of ESL Delivery Benefits for ELLs

Push-in/Co-Teaching• Integration with peers may

decrease marginalized status in school

• Increase social language by interacting with peers

• ELLs don’t miss valuable instruction

• Provides good language models during lessons

• Caution!– Requires clustering of ELLs– Common planning is critical– Serves fewer ELLs – Does not protect time to learn

language

ESL Pull-Out• More likely to feel safe, thus a lower

affective filter, leading to more risk taking and language production

• Receive instruction targeted for their English proficiency levels

• Allows for greater comprehensibility of instruction

• Promotes acclimation while preserving features of their home languages and cultures

• Caution!– Teach academic language needed

to minimize academic gaps

Push-in• ELLs have good language models• ESL teachers learns about

mainstream expectations• ELLs may gain content information• ESL Teacher supports content

teacher

Co-Teaching• ELLs included in mainstream

curriculum• Classroom teacher takes more

ownership of ELLs; both share responsibility for all students

• Target language and content goals simultaneously

• Allows for “real-time” professional learningChallenges

• ESL teacher does not know what to plan• Very limited focused second language development• Classroom teachers do not co-plan with ESL; new instructional practices unlikely to emerge • Role of ESL teacher misunderstood/ under-utilized • Class taught too quickly for lower proficient ELLs to comprehend

Challenges• Requires common planning time• May have personality conflicts• Fear of releasing control of curriculum• Fewer ELLs served• Requires substantial administrative support• Limited focused second language development

Respecting the First Language (L1)

• Reading fluency and comprehension can be predicted from proficiency in L1.

• Literacy instruction is based upon learners of English as their first language. The process of learning a second language is different.

• ELLs are forced to think and learn at an artificially lower cognitive level when language is not comprehensible.

• The cognitive ability of LEP parents is decreased when they interact with their children in English.

Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives

• AMAO 1 – Progress

• AMAO 2 – Proficiency

• AMAO 3 – AYP/AMO for LEP subgroup

AMAO 1: Progress