Elementary Principals February 20, 2014

1. ESL: Making Connections Elementary Principals February 20, 2014 Glenda Harrell, ESL Director Alesha McCauley, ESL Senior Administrator Amanda Miller, ESL Coordinating Teacher

2. Acronyms Student • LEP – Limited English Proficient • ELL – English language learner LEP = ELL Instructional Program • ESL – English as a Second Language

3. Expectations of WCPSS ESL

4. 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

5. 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

6. Language Objectives

7. ALL ELLs Are Served Appropriately

8. Three Categories of LIEP Services Transitional Services Comprehensive Services Moderate Services

9. 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

10. How do WCPSS ESL teachers describe quality teaching for ELLs? ESL Class 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 • 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 Source: LEP Contacts, LEP Advisory Committee

11. Implementation of LIEP Successful? • 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

12. What do ESL teachers think about their time commitments? Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

13. Collaboration: Ownership of ELLs Where are English learners during the school day? Where are ESL teachers during the school day?

14. What do WCPSS ESL teachers think about the value of collaboration? Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

15. When do WCPSS ESL teachers collaborate? Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013

16. What do WCPSS ESL teachers report as their greatest challenge? Source: Elementary ESL Teacher Survey Results: WCPSS, Duke Center for Child and Family Policy, October 2013 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.”

17. Research: Types of ESL DeliveryBenefits for ELLs Push-in/Co-Teaching 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 • 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

18. Push-in 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 learning • ELLs have good language models • ESL teachers learns about mainstream expectations • ELLs may gain content information • ESL Teacher supports content teacher • 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 • 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

19. 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.

20. Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives AMAO 1 – Progress AMAO 2 – Proficiency AMAO 3 – AYP/AMO for LEP subgroup

21. AMAO 1: Progress