How ACCESS for ELLs levels work in the Classroom – Part I: Establishing the Context

1. How ACCESS for ELLs levels work in the Classroom –Part I: Establishing the Context Don Bouchard MDOE ESL Professional Development Thursday, December 3, 2009

2. Agenda • I. To provide a brief refresher on ACCESS/ELP Standards; • II. To examine immediate applications of ACCESS test data; • III. To know the general and specific implications for ESL programming and delivery of support services; and • IV. To become familiar with a framework for delivering instruction.

3. “Learning occurs when students are using language comprehensibly and with increasing cognitive demand to demonstrate knowledge and do a variety of things in new situations. “

4. I. ACCESS for ELLs & ELP Standards

5. English Language Proficiency Standards • Standard 1:English language learners communicate for SOCIAL AND INSTRUCTIONAL purposes within the school setting. • Standard 2: English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of LANGUAGE ARTS. • Standard 3:English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of MATHEMATICS. • Standard 4:English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SCIENCE. • Standard 5:English language learners communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of SOCIAL STUDIES.

6. English Language Proficiency Standards WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

7. Test Alignment with Proficiency Levels 6 1 2 3 4 5 REACHING ENTERING BEGINNING DEVELOPING EXPANDING BRIDGING Tier A Tier B Tier C Annual ACCESS for ELLs® W-APT™ WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

8. Structure of ACCESS for ELLs® Grade Levels and Tiers K 1-2 3-5 6-8 9-12 Adaptive (no tiers) A B C A B C A B C A B C Domains Listening — group administered, machine scored Reading — group administered, machine scored Speaking — individual administered, TA scored Writing — group administered, rater scored Series 102 (roll-out Winter 2007) 103 (roll-out Winter 2008) 200 (roll-out Winter 2009) WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

9. Score Reports & Stakeholders WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

10. TeacherReport Demographic Information About the Student Student’s Scale Score by Domain Student’s ELP Level by Domain Student’s Scale Composite Scores Student’s Composite Scores Student’s Speaking Performance by Standard Student’s Comprehension by Standard Student’s Writing Performance by Standard Description of the ELP Levels

11. TeacherReport Demographic Information About the Student Student’s ELP Level by Domain Student’s Scale Composite Scores Student’s Composite Scores Student’s Speaking Performance by Standard Student’s Comprehension by Standard Student’s Writing Performance by Standard Description of the ELP Levels

12. In addition to ACCESS data, keep in mind. . . Knowing Your Students Obtain information on: -age upon entry to US -home language usage -cultural differences -trauma

13. and. . . -family background -conceptual formation -discontinued schooling -L1 literacy level -family/sibling responsibilities -differences between L1 & English

14. Challenges to academic success Language Arts Math Science Academic Language Social Studies Social & Inst. Lang. Age, home language, cultural differences, trauma, family background, conceptual formation, discontinued schooling, L1 literacy, home responsibilities, L1/L2 diff.

15. In order for students to achieve academically and exhibit that learning on large scale, summative assessments, they MUST master Academic Language. The Bottom Line:

16. Pause. . .any questions. . . -regarding the ELP standards? -regarding ACCESS for ELLs? -regarding student background information?

17. II. Instructional Applications of ACCESS Test Data

18. Two notions. . . Academic Language Proficiency & Assessment

19. The continuum of second language acquisition in all aspects of language use (content as well as domain) is mapped through stages of English language development from: Concrete Abstract Explicit Implicit Familiar Unfamiliar Informal Formal General Technical Single word Extended discourse The process is time consuming, so it must be strategic.

20. Academic language development involves knowledge of discrete skills (e.g., phonological and phonemic awareness, text features) vocabulary knowledge and development (e.g., social and academic “tool kit” words), comprehension, and writing genres.

21. Notion #1: Academic Language Proficiency • Academic Language proficiency involves the language associated with the content areas. ACCESS for ELLs provides this data as a summary assessment. • Content knowledge reflects the declarative (what) and procedural knowledge (how) associated with the content. The MEAs and other measurements provides this data as summary assessments.

22. Academic Language General Characteristics of Academic Language (Schleppegrell, 2004) 1. Explicitness – Full and careful articulation of thought. 2. Complexity – Elaborate use of internal clause structure and linkages through subordination. 3. Cognitive Demand – Varied language to perform tasks and engage in higher order thinking.

23. Academic Language Proficiency Performance Criteria (WIDA, 2007) 1. Linguistic Complexity 2. Vocabulary usage 3. Language Control

24. Performance Criteria Linguistic Complexity The amount and quality of language for writing. The grammar, organization, and cohesion of ideas and text structure (recount, procedure, description, report, explanation).

25. Linguistic Complexity Level 1 – Entering Single words Level 2 – Beginning Phrases, short sentences Level 3 – Developing Series of related sentences Level 4 – Expanding Moderate discourse Level 5 – Bridging Complex discourse

26. Performance Criteria Vocabulary Usage The specialized language of academic discourse, from high frequency words to technical vocabulary.

27. Vocabulary Usage Level 1 – Entering Most common vocabulary Level 2 – Beginning High frequency vocabulary Level 3 – Developing General and some specific vocabulary Level 4 – Expanding Specialized and some technical vocabulary Level 5 – Bridging Specialized and technical vocabulary

28. . . . involves accurate, content-specific vocabulary: The Rain Cycle Instead of. . . dries up goes up makes changes into falls Using. . . evaporates rises forms condenses precipitates

29. Science Starting from. . . guess think believe wonder Ending with . . . estimate predict hypothesize surmise

30. “Cell” Spread sheet Basic unit of life Prison/jail Confusion with ‘sell’

31. . . . involves knowing multiple definitions of words: “Table” Table of contents Multiplication table Periodic Table Parliamentary procedure Mountain plateau

32. Consider these words. . . cell spring point bank board figure space chair bug ring log facility pitcher wave form

33. Performance Criteria Language Control The “communicability” of writing, i.e., error free way in which the message is conveyed; the fluency (the way we say or write it in English); grammatical accuracy, aspects of phonology; and word choice.

34. Language Control Level 1 – Entering Memorized language Level 2 – Beginning Language w/errors inhibiting communication Level 3 – Developing Meaning overrides communication errors Level 4 – Expanding Language w/minimal errors Level 5 – Bridging Language comparable to English peers

35. Performance Definitions (RG 45) At this level, English language learners process, understand, produce or use: WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

36. Notion #2: Assessment Assessment informs Curriculum informs Instruction etc. WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

37. Assessment Continuum For ELLs, there are four forms of assessment. . 1. Intake Assessment 2. Formative Assessment 3. Interim Assessment 4. Summative Assessment WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

38. Intake Assessment *L1 history and usage at home and school *Educational history *Home literacy practices *L2 diagnostic assessments *Medical history, etc. WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

39. Interim Assessments . . . are pivotal portfolios, tests and quizzes to monitor an ELL’s progress, in an independent manner, in aspects of content & language proficiency.

40. Formative assessment for ELLs . . .means teachers a) finding out what they are learning about the language they are using in studying content ; b) helping them learn content through appropriate, scaffolded uses of language in deepening their knowledge of the content. WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

41. Summative Assessment:ACCESS for ELLs. . . . . . provides yearly data on Academic Language Proficiency in Social/instructional, Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies across Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

42. Score data can lead to . . . . . . recommending to teachers what ELLs can do generally based on their language proficiency for formative assessments.

43. Can Do Descriptors - Listening Listening For the given level of English language proficiency level, English language learners can: WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

44. Can Do Descriptors - Speaking Speaking For the given level of English language proficiency level, English language learners can: WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

45. Can Do Descriptors - Reading Reading For the given level of English language proficiency level, English language learners can: WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

46. Can Do Descriptors - Writing Writing For the given level of English language proficiency level, English language learners can: WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

47. Score data report can lead to . . . . . . examining individual ELL’s academic language progress through comparable data Such as a scatter plot analysis WIDA Consortium / CAL / Metritech

48. Scatter plot graph . . . . . . Enables you to takes two years of data in the separate language domains and graph them according to the ‘mean’, or average. Growth above the mean in a particular domain is good; at or below the ‘mean’ is not and needs problem solving.

49. Individual Scatterplot Graphof Individual Language Domain Scores MEAN Speaking 2 Listening 0 Reading 0 9 Writing 2008

50. As a result. . . . Based on the individual language domain proficiency levels, instruction can be targeted to meet the needs of the ELL in a strategic manner.