ESL: Making Connections Elementary Principals February 20, 2014 Glenda Harrell, ESL Director Alesha McCauley, ESL Senior Administrator Amanda Miller, ESL Coordinating Teacher 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 W-APT & ACCESS for ELLs Review home language surveys and identify LEP students 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! Teacher Schedules 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. 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 Services Comprehensive ServicesServicesTransitional Services Moderate 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 Source: LEP Contacts, LEP Advisory Committee
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 Implementation of LIEP Successful? N= 101 LEP Contacts Not at all
Somewhat Good Excellent 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) 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) Student testing 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 ESL Pull-Out Integration with peers may decrease marginalized status in school Increase social language by interacting with peers ELLs dont miss valuable instruction Provides good language models during lessons Caution! 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 Requires clustering of ELLs Common planning is critical Serves fewer ELLs Does not protect time to learn language 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 Challenges 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 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 learning 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. ELLs are forced to think and learn at an artificially lower cognitive level when language is not comprehensible. Literacy instruction is based upon learners of English as their first language. The process of learning a second language is different. 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
