Revised AZ English Language Proficiency ELP Standards

1. Revised AZ English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards ADE/OELAS Conference, 2010 Adapted by Mesa Public Schools, 2011 This presentation is designed to provide information regarding the revision process and revision results for the AZ English Language Proficiency Standards.This presentation is designed to provide information regarding the revision process and revision results for the AZ English Language Proficiency Standards.

2. ELPS Revision Committee Members: ADE staff facilitators Administrators (content experts) College/University faculty (content experts) Community/Business (global awareness) WestEd representatives The Revision Committee was comprised of a variety of educational and business representatives from across AZ, as well as researchers from WestEd. The Revision Committee was comprised of a variety of educational and business representatives from across AZ, as well as researchers from WestEd.

3. Background: Gap Analysis Committee External reviews conducted by: - WestEd, Committee members, ADE/OELAS staff Identified language gaps within existing ELP standards Compared the language demands between existing ELP Standards and existing ELA standards Discussed rigor necessary in meeting language demands and language complexity for ELLs – to be incorporated into the revised ELP Standards A Gap Analysis Committee was formed. These were the tasks given to the committee. Results of their committee work were used to develop objectives for the ELP Standards revision committee members. A Gap Analysis Committee was formed. These were the tasks given to the committee. Results of their committee work were used to develop objectives for the ELP Standards revision committee members.

4. Goals of the Revision Process: produce a more “user friendly” document bring clarity to the standards increase rigor (language demand and language complexity) incorporate the Discrete Skills Inventory into the main document bring alignment between ELL Stages align ELP Standards more closely to ELA Standards produce a blueprint for the next English language assessment Committees members were assigned to work on a specific ELL Stage during the entire revision process. These are the tasks given to each revision committee. Committees members were assigned to work on a specific ELL Stage during the entire revision process. These are the tasks given to each revision committee.

5. Crosswalk to the Common Core State Standards During the vertical and horizontal alignment process, the Common Core State Standards were referenced. The ELP Standards reflect the language skills of the Common Core State Standards

6. Results of the Revision Process Now you will see the results of the revision process.Now you will see the results of the revision process.

7. What remains the same? ELL Stages: I (K), II (1-2), III (3-5), IV (6-8), V (9-12) Format: - Domains/Language Strand - Proficiency Level Descriptors - Standards - Concepts/sub-concepts - English Proficiency Levels - Performance Indicators The ELP Standards are still divided into 5 ELL Stages that align with AZELLA grade clusters. The general format is essentially unchanged. The ELP Standards are still divided into 5 ELL Stages that align with AZELLA grade clusters. The general format is essentially unchanged.

8. What has changed? Each stage is all inclusive Created a Language Strand DSI is now embedded into the ELP Standards Proficiency Level labels match the AZELLA language performance levels The Intermediate Proficiency Level has been divided: Low Intermediate and High Intermediate Proficiency Level Descriptors were developed for all proficiency levels within a domain to provide a snapshot of language ability All inclusive – This means that teachers will no longer have to go back to earlier stages to find appropriate language skills for PE/E/B students. A Pre-emergent ELL in Stage IV can begin instruction at the PE level within Stage IV. A Language Strand was created. It contains two standards: English Conventions and Vocabulary. The Discrete Skills Inventory is no longer a stand alone document. All content from the DSI is found in the Language Strand of the ELP standards (within the English Conventions standard) Proficiency Levels – This will make it much easier to find a beginning point for instruction based on the student’s AZELLA score. Intermediate Level divided – Because the Intermediate Level contains such a wide range of language skills and range of student performance, this level was divided into 2 sections. ELLs usually take the longest period of time to move from the Intermediate level to the Proficient level. This division will make it easier to assess and monitor student growth. Proficiency Level descriptors were expanded to provide more specific information. All inclusive – This means that teachers will no longer have to go back to earlier stages to find appropriate language skills for PE/E/B students. A Pre-emergent ELL in Stage IV can begin instruction at the PE level within Stage IV. A Language Strand was created. It contains two standards: English Conventions and Vocabulary. The Discrete Skills Inventory is no longer a stand alone document. All content from the DSI is found in the Language Strand of the ELP standards (within the English Conventions standard) Proficiency Levels – This will make it much easier to find a beginning point for instruction based on the student’s AZELLA score. Intermediate Level divided – Because the Intermediate Level contains such a wide range of language skills and range of student performance, this level was divided into 2 sections. ELLs usually take the longest period of time to move from the Intermediate level to the Proficient level. This division will make it easier to assess and monitor student growth. Proficiency Level descriptors were expanded to provide more specific information.

9. As you can see from this outline, the ELP Standards themselves are unchanged; they have just been re-organized. Here you see the addition of the Language Strand. This outline of the Revised ELP Standards includes coding and numbering for easy reference. As you can see from this outline, the ELP Standards themselves are unchanged; they have just been re-organized. Here you see the addition of the Language Strand. This outline of the Revised ELP Standards includes coding and numbering for easy reference.

10. A DRAFT of the Revised ELP Standards can be downloaded from the ADE/OELAS (Office of English Language Acquisition Services) website. This is the OELAS homepage. The link for the DRAFT is at the very top of the homepage. A DRAFT of the Revised ELP Standards can be downloaded from the ADE/OELAS (Office of English Language Acquisition Services) website. This is the OELAS homepage. The link for the DRAFT is at the very top of the homepage.

11. This is the page you will see when you access the standards online. You can click on the links below to access a specific stage, domain, or language strand. The Guidance document contains information regarding the purpose, format, and coding of the ELP Standards. You can choose to print out standards for an entire ELL Stage or Language Strand (for self-contained ELD teachers), or you can select one particular domain within a stage (for Itinerant, Regular Classroom, Secondary teachers). Additional resources are also available for downloading.This is the page you will see when you access the standards online. You can click on the links below to access a specific stage, domain, or language strand. The Guidance document contains information regarding the purpose, format, and coding of the ELP Standards. You can choose to print out standards for an entire ELL Stage or Language Strand (for self-contained ELD teachers), or you can select one particular domain within a stage (for Itinerant, Regular Classroom, Secondary teachers). Additional resources are also available for downloading.

12. The Proficiency Level Descriptors were expanded, so now there is one descriptor for each proficiency level within a domain. The Proficiency Level Descriptors were expanded, so now there is one descriptor for each proficiency level within a domain.

13. This is the standard format of each page. At the top of each page the ELL Stage is identified. Next, the domain is identified. Under the domain you will find the standard. Under the standard, the Proficiency levels are listed. Notice they now match the AZELLA Proficiency level labels. To the left, the Concept is listed. Finally, the Performance Indicators (which contain the language skills along a developmental continuum) are found. They are coded for use in lesson planning and ILLP development. This is the standard format of each page. At the top of each page the ELL Stage is identified. Next, the domain is identified. Under the domain you will find the standard. Under the standard, the Proficiency levels are listed. Notice they now match the AZELLA Proficiency level labels. To the left, the Concept is listed. Finally, the Performance Indicators (which contain the language skills along a developmental continuum) are found. They are coded for use in lesson planning and ILLP development.

14. Each stage begins its Language Strand section with this cover page, which describes the purpose and content of the skills contained within this strand. Each stage begins its Language Strand section with this cover page, which describes the purpose and content of the skills contained within this strand.

15. Format of Standards Pages: Language Strand The format of the pages within the Language Strand contains a sub-concept box, next to the concept column. On this page, which addresses the standard English conventions standard, Nouns is identified as the sub-concept. You can also find sub-concepts in the Reading and Writing domain.The format of the pages within the Language Strand contains a sub-concept box, next to the concept column. On this page, which addresses the standard English conventions standard, Nouns is identified as the sub-concept. You can also find sub-concepts in the Reading and Writing domain.

16. Coding for Domains The state recommends this coding system be used for identifying ELP standards targeted for lesson planning and ILLP development.The state recommends this coding system be used for identifying ELP standards targeted for lesson planning and ILLP development.

17. Coding for Language Strand Within the Language Strand, the coding changes slightly when targeting standards. It is suggested that the sub-concept also be identified for more specificity.Within the Language Strand, the coding changes slightly when targeting standards. It is suggested that the sub-concept also be identified for more specificity.

18. Elementary Implementation This chart provides guidance in determining where to locate ELP standards for each required instructional language area. For example, to select language skills for grammar instruction, you would look within the Language Strand, under the Conventions standard.This chart provides guidance in determining where to locate ELP standards for each required instructional language area. For example, to select language skills for grammar instruction, you would look within the Language Strand, under the Conventions standard.

19. Secondary Implementation This is the chart used for secondary grades. At the secondary level, Conversational and Academic English are taught along with Vocabulary within one class period. Standards for instruction will be found in the Listening and Speaking domain as well as the Language Strand.This is the chart used for secondary grades. At the secondary level, Conversational and Academic English are taught along with Vocabulary within one class period. Standards for instruction will be found in the Listening and Speaking domain as well as the Language Strand.

20. English and Content Access The ELP standards are designed to help ELLs become more proficient in English. The AZ Revised ELP Standards present a linguistic foundation in English that will provide English language learners with the skills, abilities, and knowledge to access content information in math, science, and social studies. The intent of the revision was to better prepare our ELLs for transition to the mainstream content. Secondarily, the document is now more user-friendly for teachers. The intent of the revision was to better prepare our ELLs for transition to the mainstream content. Secondarily, the document is now more user-friendly for teachers.

21. What’s Next?