English as a Second Language

1. English as a Second Language Westerville City Schools October, 2011

2. Prior to 1990 in Ohio: -There were few, if any, guidelines or policy from Federal and State.-Most districts had no formal process for identifying ELL students.-Most programs relied on bilingual personnel with minimal training in language acquisition.-Over identification of Special Education for ELL.-Complaints filed with the Office of Civil Rights initiated change in Ohio.

3. Civil Rights Act Title VI 1964 No discrimination on the basis of race, creed, or national origin. Historical Perspective Elementary and Secondary Education Act 1965 Services to individual, disadvantaged students. Identification of Discrimination and Denial of Services on Basis of National Origin 1970 School district’s responsibility to provide equal education opportunity to language Minority children. Lau vs. Nichols 1974 There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, and curriculum. Students who do not under- stand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful Education.” Supreme Court Office of Civil Rights Title VI Language Minority Compliance Procedures 1985 Resulted in the outline of the Office of Civil Rights policy concerning the education of language-minority students.

4. Policy update on schools’ obligation toward national origin minority students with limited English Proficiency (LEP students) 1991 Update of 1985 compliance procedures Historical Perspective continued No Child Left Behind 2001 Reauthorization of ESEA with accountability measures for LEP students and consolidation of federal funds for LEP education into Title III.

5. Purpose: “Assists school districts in teaching English to limited English proficient children and helping these students meet the same challenging standards required of all students.” Establishes: -Annual English language acquisition goals and assessment. -Participation in state annual assessment. -Notification of parents concerning program placement and progress. -A requirement of high-quality professional development for teachers. -Program eval. and update based on data. Title III LEP Language Instruction

6. By the Numbers USA K-12 population in the 21st century • Between 1979 and 2003, the overall number of school-age children between the ages of 5 and 17 increased by 19%. • During that same time, the number of children who spoke a language other than English at home increased by 161%. • 2015 1/3 Ohio K-12 students will speak a language other than English. • 2035 33% of the population with an ethnic minority background will constitute a numeric majority. Villegas, Ana and Lucas,Tamara. Educating Culturally Responsive Teachers, State University Press, Albany, NY, 2002.

7. October, 2011 enrollment: 1,199 (7.3%) 66 languages LanguagePercentage Somali 34% Spanish 22% Twi 11% English 9% Arabic 7% District Stats Enrollment and Languages

8. 77 Countries RepresentedTop Percentages

9. ESL Enrollment Growth

10. ESL Staff Growth

11. Student Academic Improvement • No Child Left Behind mandates annual testing in English proficiency for all ESL students. The Ohio Test of English Language Acquisition (OTELA) is administered to meet this mandate.

12. OTELA 2011Emergent Level (Non-English Speakers)

13. OTELA 2011Beginner Level (Limited Understanding of English)

14. OTELA 2011Intermediate Level (Understands complex speech)

15. OTELA 2011Advanced Level (English skills are adequate for most communication)

16. OTELA 2011 Proficient Level (English skills are native-like)

17. ESL Units

20. ESL Service Levels ESL Unit.A TESOL-endorsed teacher works daily with small groups of non-English speaking students pulled from theirclassroom. ESL Tutoring.A highly qualified paraprofessional works a couple of times week with small groups of limited English speakers. Sheltered Classes.These classes, typically at the high school in content areas, are to be taught by a licensed (in the content area) TESOL endorsed teacher.

21. ESL Identification Process Home Language Survey (questions on enrollment form) Questions on enrollment trigger Identification testing Check birth certificate (born in US or not; citizenship is not an issue) Questions initiate Primary Home Language Other Than English (PHLOTE) identification Student speaks a language other than English Student may or may NOT receive LEP services

22. District Testing for ESL Service High School Elementary School Middle School Brigance Listening IPT Speaking Brigance Listening IPT Speaking Brigance Listening IPT Speaking DRA Or QRI Writing Sample Brigance Reading/ Vocabulary Writing Sample Brigance Reading/ Vocabulary Writing Sample

23. ESL Parent Communication Process . Parent notified of options after testing Parent contacted Student is a fluent English speaker Student is a non-English or limited English speaker Remains on PHLOTE LIST Receives no Service Student is Identified LEP Student receives Services from ESL staff Is not identified as LEP and does not qualify forState and ESEA accountability Qualifies for State and ESEA Services and assessment accountability

24. NCLB: Title III Parental Notification District must: • Implement an effective means of outreach to parents of LEP students to inform them of how they can be involved in the education of their children. • Notify parents of students participating in Title III programs within 30 days of start of school year or within two weeks of placement if not identified prior to the beginning of the school year.

25. ESL Service Levels Defined PROFICIENT EMERGENT EMERGENT BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE ADVANCED English language skills are adequate for most communication needs. Non-English speakers Limited understanding of English Understands more complex speech. Still requires repetition. Has acquired native-like English language proficiency.

26. ESL Exit Process ESL Service continues until student meets criteria of exit. Student is a proficient English speaker. (OTELA) Monitored by ESL staff for 1 year. Remains on PHLOTE list. Student is successful in all classes for 1 year. Proficient on all State tests. Exited from program.

27. More the Same than Different “…ELLs seem to need much of the same instructional support that is effective for all students and that is characteristic of good literacy programs. They may just need a lot more of it – more time to learn, more support, and more practice.” -New Standards (2002). From Spanish to English: Reading and Writing for ELLs. www.ncee.org