ELL Assessment

1. ELL Assessment District Testing Coordinator Update November 10, 2010

2. Topics • ELL student demographics • Update ESC and district personnel on information for assessment of ELLs this year • Provide information about new STAAR program, which will replace TAKS in 2011–2012 • State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness • Reinforce integral alignment between curriculum, instruction, and assessment of ELLs • ELPS TEKS TELPAS LAT TAKS/STAAR

3. Texas ELLs As Reported to PEIMS in Fall 2009 • ELLs – 817,671 (up from about 570,000 in 2000) • In bilingual education programs – 440,540 • In ESL programs – 307,827 • Over 120 languages represented • Over 90% Spanish speakers – 744,949 • Prominent languages other than Spanish: • 15,493 Vietnamese (1.90%) • 4,791 Arabic (0.59%) • 3,985 Urdu (0.49%) • 2,906 Korean (0.36%) • ELLs make up about 17% of total students (about 1 in 6)

4. Released TAKS and TELPAS Materials TAKS & TAKS–MRepresentative items now available on TEA website • Notification sent to ESC and district testing coordinators on Aug 26 TELPASAll spring 2010 TELPAS reading tests for grades 2–12 now available on website • Notification sent to ESC/district testing coordinators and bilingual/ESL coordinators on Sept 1 • Updated student tutorials also provided • Both released tests and tutorials require new ePAT launcher

5. TELPAS News 2010–2011

6. Changes to TELPAS Holistic Rating Training Changes announced in April 21, 2010 communication to districts: • No more online training and qualification of new raters in fall; instead, best-practice foundational (awareness) training in fall • No more teams of state-authorized holistic rating trainers from 55 state training entities; no longer required that new raters have expert support in conjunction with initial online training • Streamlining of K–12 rater training terminology, processes, website, and reports to make requirements easier to understand and oversee • New system of targeted supplemental support for new and returning raters who have difficulty applying the rating rubrics during online training

8. Fall Foundational (Awareness) Training 8 • Training resources: • Fall training PowerPoint modules • Making the ELPS-TELPAS Connection: K–12 Introduction • Introductory Training on the PLDs (separate modules for K–1 and 2–12) • Grades 2–12 Writing Collection Overview • New Educator Guide to TELPAS • Notification about resources sent to ESCs and districts Aug 2 • Experienced TELPAS personnel may provide training New Resource: A PowerPoint (2010–2011 Holistic Rating Training Requirements) to help administrators understand the holistic rating training requirements will be available soon on the ELL Assessment webpage at www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/ell/.

9. New and Returning Rater Definitions for K–1 and 2–12

10. Training of Supplemental Support Providers • TEA to train ESCs and districts through WebEx between January 18 and February 1 • Districts to train a sufficient number of district and campus support providers to meet their needs • Goal is to enable raters unsuccessful on set 2 to receive supplemental support at the district or campus level prior to their 3rd and final calibration set

11. Supplemental Support Providers • A supplemental support provider must be a 2009–2010 • state-authorized trainer, • fully trained and refreshed K–1 rater, or • fully trained, qualified, and refreshed 2–12 rater. • The individual must attend a TEA WebEx training or turnaround training session. • The individual must calibrate annually by the end of set 2. Goal is to help supplemental support providers become holistic rating training experts

12. Supplemental Support TOT Sessions • For each day and time, a separate WebEx will be conducted for each grade cluster: K–1, 2–5, 6–12. • Registration will occur later this fall.

13. Providing Raters with Supplemental Support Two models: 1. Rater attends required individual or group session Raters attend a one-on-one or group session with the trainer before completing final calibration set. 2. Brief meeting followed by additional consultation at rater’s request Rater meets briefly with the trainer to receive instructions on resources to review. After the review, the rater schedules time to get additional clarification, if needed, before completing the final calibration set.

14. TELPAS Spring Dates

15. TELPAS Online Reading Test Information • Flash-based interface (interface A) introduced last spring to be used • Same student tutorials as made available with released tests • As mentioned earlier, tutorials require use of new scorable ePAT launcher (version 2.13) • Districts that used interface B last year should remember that their students will not be familiar with this year’s interface

16. TELPAS Online System Enhancements • Improved process for handling students who move during TELPAS administration • Functionality enhanced to help districts avoid testing students in wrong grade cluster • System better accommodates holistic rating component • K–1 students don’t have to be placed in online reading test sessions; personnel entering K–1 ratings no longer have to stop a “reading test” that doesn’t exist • Holistic rating screen is tailored to needs of TELPAS and is separate from Student Test Details screen for online test • Students can be grouped one way for online test sessions and another way for entry of holistic ratings

17. Years in U.S. Schools Data Collection 17 • Slight change to be made to way data collected • In past: 5 or more school years category • This year: 5 school years and 6 or more school years • Data collection occurs in conjunction with TELPAS • Notification sent to ESC/district testing coordinators and bilingual/ESL coordinators on Sept 15

18. Listening and Speaking Audit • A small audit to be conducted for grades 3–5 this spring • To occur during the 5-week live administration window • Trained audit raters will conduct student observations in classrooms in selected districts • Districts to receive notification of selection for the audit in February 2011

19. LAT Survey and Other Input Informing ELL Inclusion Policies and Assessments for STAAR

20. ELL Inclusion Policies and Assessments for STAAR • Work is underway to examine whether ELL inclusion and accommodation policies should change for STAAR • Work has involved • examining what other states do • surveying research on linguistic accommodations • evaluating feasibility related to logistics and costs • getting input from practitioners and national experts

21. Process for Developing STAAR ELL Assessment Policies • Input from ELL assessment focus group • Input from other stakeholders and advisory groups • Statewide educator survey (spring 2010 LAT survey) • Input from national consultants • Agency review • STAAR transition plan to legislature • Final plans established

22. LAT Survey Results - Highlights (Draft) • Survey purpose: find out how well LAT process is working and whether educators have suggestions for changes in ELL testing policies or TAKS testing methods for ELLs. Survey was voluntary. • 797 responses • All 20 ESCs represented • About 200 LAT test administrators responded; about 600 others • Top respondent groups: • Teachers (50%) • Campus testing coordinators (20%) • Campus bilingual/ESL coordinators (10%) • District coordinators (7%) • District bilingual/ESL coordinators (4%) Note: All percentages are approximate

23. Respondents Who Were Not LAT Test Administrators • These respondents (about 75% - 600) were asked to comment about any changes they would like to see in LAT requirements or materials for STAAR program in areas below. • Average of about 5% of the 600 made suggestions: • General method of testing (7% of 600) • Most suggestions related to variety of ways to provide more language support and better measure of skills • Student eligibility, grades 3–8 (7% of 600) • Most suggestions proposed not testing new immigrants and allowing more time to test with accommodations before regular STAAR if needed • Student eligibility, end-of-course tests (5% of 600) • Most suggestions proposed providing LAT-like or adapted tests and taking into consideration how long it takes for new ELLs to participate meaningfully in state assessments

24. Respondents Who Were Not LAT Test Administrators • Training of testing personnel (7% of 600) • Suggestions mostly about need for more in-depth training by knowledgeable personnel; training early in year to emphasize instructional accommodations • Test scheduling (10% of 600) • Suggestions mostly about desire to test on same day as other students or to test later in year • Allowable linguistic accommodations for language arts (reading, writing, ELA) (4% of 600) • Suggestions mostly about providing more language support on tests (reading aloud test to ELLs with disabilities, native language tests, translators) • Allowable linguistic accommodations for math, science, and social studies (4% of 600) • Suggestions for more native language tests, external translators, more pictures, and for glossary and dictionary guidance

25. LAT Test Administrators • About 25% of total respondents (about 200) administered LAT this spring • About 80% used an LSG (linguistic simplification guide) Note: Percentages exceed 100 because survey takers were asked to select all that apply.

26. LAT Test Administrator Responses Accommodations in Instruction vs. Testing • Survey Q: Were the accommodations provided during LAT consistent with those used in the students’ instruction?

27. LAT Test Administrator Responses Need for Other Linguistic Accommodations • Survey Q: Are there linguistic accommodations other than those listed in the LAT manual that should be added to help ELLs understand unfamiliar language (that is not content terminology) on the tests? • Few suggestions were made about adding other types of accommodations. No trends.

28. LAT Test Administrator Responses Views on Effectiveness of LAT • Survey Q: Overall, how effective do you think the LAT process is in enabling the following ELLs to understand unfamiliar English so they can demonstrate whether they have learned the skills assessed? Effectiveness Scale: Very, Generally, Somewhat, Generally Not, Not sure • Beginning -- Generally not effective (50%) • Intermediate -- Somewhat (40%) to generally effective (30%) • Advanced -- Generally effective (50%) • Reasons when “Generally not effective” selected: • English too limited (50%) • Too reluctant to ask for help (30%) • Lack of familiarity with accommodation (13%) • Accommodation not appropriate for proficiency level (15%)

29. LAT Test Administrator Responses Suggestions for Change in Testing Approaches • Survey Q: Are there testing approaches (other than providing linguistic accommodations) that should be considered for including ELLs in state assessments? • About 30 responses, mostly relating to: • Shorter tests, especially reading tests • Methods that allow recent immigrants to better show what they have learned (more native language tests, oral testing methods, removing as much language as possible from tests, etc.)

30. LAT Test Administrator ResponsesSuggestions for Change in Testing Rules • Survey Q: Do you have any suggestions for changing rules about which ELLs in grades 3–8 and high school may qualify for linguistic accommodations when STAAR is implemented? • About 30 responses for grades 3–8, mostly: • Extend years of exemption and/or possibility for linguistic accommodations • Do not test first-year immigrants in any subject if they know little or no English

31. LAT Test Administrator ResponsesSuggestions for Changes in Testing Rules • About 20 responses for high school, mostly: • Make linguistically accommodated tests available at all grades in high school • Allow accommodations for all ELLs • For immigrant ELLs who lack language to understand high school tests – give more time to learn English before testing; give LAT-like accommodations • Extend amount of time an ELL can be eligible for LAT-like accommodations

32. General Findings (Draft) and Tips for Interpretation • Survey was voluntary – results may or may not be representative • Quantitative results do not reveal much discontent with current LAT process • LAT was viewed as being less effective in removing language barrier at lower proficiency levels than at higher proficiency levels • Suggestions for change were generally provided by less than 10% of respondents • While different minor suggestions were made; there were no strong trends for any one type of change • Suggestions about test eligibility revolved around inability to assess new English learners meaningfully and desire to extend period of time ELLs can be provided linguistic accommodations

33. Framework for Considering STAAR ELL Assessment Approaches and Policies Guiding Principles from National Experts • Students who are learning the English language should have access to a meaningful, valid, and reliable assessment of their academic knowledge and skills. • The level of linguistic support provided during testing should • uphold high expectations for learning content and language • acknowledge the gradually diminishing need ELLs have for linguistic support as they learn English • not significantly alter the test constructs (what the test items purport to measure) • not significantly improve the scores of non-ELLs

34. Framework for Considering STAAR ELL Assessment Approaches and Policies Guiding Principles from Texas Stakeholders • Use English language proficiency (ELP) levels to guide decisions about linguistic accommodations • More substantial accommodations for students with lower ELP • More minimal accommodations for students with higher ELP • To uphold high expectations, set limits on how long substantial accommodations can be provided, but allow additional time for immigrant ELLs who • entered the U.S. with little or no prior schooling • move back and forth between U.S. and home country • have partial years of enrollment in U.S. schools • have disabilities that slow second language acquisition processes

35. Other Input Received 35 • Continue to provide Spanish versions of STAAR in elementary • Eliminate LEP exemptions to the extent possible, and include more immigrant ELLs through linguistically accommodated testing methods • Allow linguistic accommodations such as bilingual or other dictionaries for any ELL based on the student’s needs and whether the accommodation is routinely used in instruction • Build in “click-on” online linguistic accommodations for immigrant ELLs who take end-of-course tests and are at lower proficiency levels; also consider this online linguistic accommodation approach for ELLs at grades 3–8

36. Other Input Received • Develop a “STAAR–M” in Spanish for grades 3–5 for qualifying ELLs with disabilities who receive most instruction in Spanish. If this is not feasible, allow other types of linguistic accommodations that provide native language support • Try to make assessment program and inclusion of special populations less complex to administer, but not to the exclusion of meaningful and fair assessment practices • Include results in accountability systems in a way that appropriately accounts for immigrant ELLs entering U.S. schools with little or no English and those with interrupted or little prior schooling

37. Other Input Received • High school: Carefully consider assessment methods and policies for ELLs who have had little time to acquire a high school level of academic English. Discuss possible unintended negative consequences of EOC requirements on recent immigrants and investigate solutions. • Keep ESOL I and II courses for beginning and intermediate students in mind. Consider policies that might allow for a greater degree of linguistic accommodation on the English I and II EOCs than on English III. • Consider policies that might allow new immigrant ELLs at lower proficiency levels to postpone taking EOCs during their first 12 months in U.S. schools.

38. Connecting Standards and Assessment The ELPS, as measured by TELPAS, support better learning of the TEKS, as measured by TAKS … soon to be STAAR TELPAS ELPS TAKS/STAAR TEKS

39. Texas English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) • The ELPS outline instruction districts are to provide in order for ELLs to have full opportunity to learn English and succeed academically. • Core ELPS components: • Second language learning SEs incorporated in content area instruction • Using PLDs to monitor progress in learning English • Linguistically accommodated instruction informed by PLDs

40. Linguistically Accommodating Instruction and LAT • When implemented effectively in instruction, linguistic accommodations • accelerate learning of academic content and English • reduce the length of time and the degree to which linguistic accommodations are needed • LAT includes immigrant ELLs in assessment program during time in which they need substantial linguistic accommodations

41. Common Linguistic Accommodations

42. Teacher and Administrator Use of TELPAS Results and Formative Assessments Using PLDs 42 At beginning of new school year:Use TELPAS results to evaluate whether students are making steady progress in learning English • TELPAS confidential campus student rosters include • 2 years of test scores • how long student has been in U.S. schools LPAC meetings during school year: Use previous spring’s TELPAS results and current year’s formative assessments by teachers to gauge progress in English proficiency, review and adjust linguistic accommodations, and plan for instructional interventions and LAT as needed

43. So now is a good time to be thinking about… 43 • Ensuring that district and campus testing personnel • have a working knowledge of TELPAS • understand the role the ELPS play in supporting academic success of ELLs • making sure teachers know each ELL’s proficiency levels • sending future raters to ELPS-TELPAS awareness training if they lack this foundation – it’s a good way to get them to use the PLDs in instruction and provide effective linguistic accommodations

44. Advanced High Advanced Intermediate Beginning Linguistic accommodations are most effective when… • teachers use them routinely throughout the school year • teachers review and adjust them periodically as students learn more English

45. Linguistic accommodations are most effective when… 45 • they are aligned to English language proficiency levels • teachers provide ELLs with plenty of opportunities to use language at current proficiency level, as well as to develop language of increasing complexity • teachers integrate academic language instruction into content area instruction and provide multiple opportunities to use academic language in meaningful and accessible contexts

46. Got the Connection? The ELPS, as measured by TELPAS, support better learning of the TEKS, as measured by TAKS … soon to be STAAR TELPAS ELPS TAKS/STAAR TEKS

47. Future TETNswith ELL Assessment Info • January 7, 2011 ● 9:00-12:00 ● event # 8302 TELPAS Spring Online Training • January 21, 2011 ● 1:00-3:30 ● event # 8304 TELPAS Electronic Submission System • February 11, 2011 ● 9:00-12:00 ● event # 8237 LAT Procedures

48. Texas Assessment ConferenceNovember 30 – December 3, 2010 ELL Assessment Sessions • ELL Student Assessment Update • TELPAS Online Testing and Data Collection • Streamlined TELPAS Holistic Rating Training System for Spring 2011

49. Recommendations for Educator Review Committees • As part of test development process for the state assessments, TEA convenes committees of educators each year to review test items and passages • Committees assembled from database of recommended educators • Need recommendations for educators who have experience working with ELLs Recommendation forms available at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/develop/recform.pdf 49

50. Contact Information Go to www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessmentand click on ELL Assessment Information Call the TEA Student Assessment Division at (512) 463-9536 Email us at ELL.tests@tea.state.tx.us Thank you!