eei - home - centennial school districtcsd28j.org/.../2015/11/csd-ell-plan-2015-1.docx · web...

Title III LocalPlan

2015-2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS Pg1. District Demographics:

District Mission StatementSchool District DemographicsELL Program DemographicsAMAO Data

5

2. School District Information on Program Goals:Educational ApproachResearch BaseGoals

10

3. Identification of Potential English LearnersHome Language SurveyInitial Assessment ProceduresParent Notification

20

4. Program of Service for ELsEducational ApproachProgram Description (by level)Professional Development

26

5. Staffing and Professional DevelopmentStaffingInstructional MaterialsContingency Planning

30

6. Transition from English Language Development ProgramProficiency Determination and ProceduresMonitoring Services

32

7. Equal Access to Other School District ProgramsIdentification of Additional Academic NeedsEquitable Access

36

8. Parent and Community InvolvementNotificationsCommunication Procedures

40

9. Program EvaluationProgram ImplementationStudent Performance Evaluation – English LanguageStudent Performance Evaluation – Academic PerformanceProgram Improvement / Modifications

42

Appendix:A. PLC Effective PracticeB. Registration FormC. Home Language SurveyD. Title SurveyE. Parent Notification LetterF. Waiver of ServicesG. Portfolio ProceduresH. Intent to Exit NotificationI. Teacher Feedback FormJ. Equity PolicyK. IEP Procedures

2

L. Equity LensM. Procedures – Interpreting and TranslatingN. Private Schools LetterO. TIII Program Review FinalP. ELL Eligibility & PlacementQ. ELD Content Model

3

English Language Learner Program

Mission Statement

CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT MISSION:All students think, achieve and make a difference in the world.

CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ELL PROGRAM VISION:All English Language Learners simultaneously develop proficiency in the English language

and master core content subject area concepts, knowledge, and skills. Students attain linguistic proficiency in order to participate meaningfully and successfully in mainstream

classes. English language learners achieve the same high content and performance standards as the non-ELL student population.

4

SECTION 1 DISTRICT DEMOGRAPHICS

1. THE SIZE OF THE DISTRICT:Centennial School District is a suburban community that bridges the cities of Portland and Gresham in East Multnomah County. As of spring, 2015, the district consists of seven elementary buildings (K-6), one middle school (7-8), one high school (9-12) and one alternative school (7-12).

2.-3. DISTRICT ENROLLMENT AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY:

ETHNICITYOctober 1, 2015

NUMBER OF STUDENTS

PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION

TOTAL ENROLLMENT 6,178 100%WHITE 2.987 48.35%HISPANIC 1,560 25.25%ASIAN 829 13.42%BLACK 502 8.13%MULTI 11 0.18%NATIVE HAWAIIAN 127 2.06%NATIVE AMERICAN 162 2.62%

4. NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF ENGLISH LEARNERS:

LEP Enrollment Change 2014-2015

2013-2014

2012-2013

Total student enrollment -160 6,092 6,338 6,262LEP enrollment -8 1,160 1,167 1,126LEP as % of district population +0.63% 19.04% 18.41% 17.98%

ELL Count by buildingELL

ActiveELL

MonitorSchool Total % ELL

% ELL + Monitor

Lynch View Elementary 173 48 461 38% 48%Lynch Wood Elementary 135 23 532 25% 30%Butler Creek Elementary 108 48 532 20% 29%Parklane Elementary 133 25 404 33% 39%Oliver Elementary 141 19 394 36% 41%Lynch Meadows Elementary 191 58 510 37% 49%Pleasant Valley Elementary 102 44 430 24% 34%Centennial Middle School 87 69 950 9% 16%Centennial High School 87 56 1,716 5% 8%Centennial Learning Center 3 3 163 2% 4%

TOTAL 1,160 393 6,092 18.4% 25%

5. ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH ADDITIONAL ACADEMIC NEEDS:Of the total district population, 13.9% are identified as students with disabilities; 14% of the district’s ELL students are identified for Special Education services. We are equitably identifying ELL students for Special Education services.

5

ELL Students with Disabilities – by Type of Disability:# ELL STUDENTS

DISABILITY

19 Intellectual Disability4 Hearing Impaired50 Communication Disorder2 Emotionally Disturbed3 Orthopedic29 Other Health Impaired59 Learning Disability166 TOTAL

Percentage of ELL Population with Disability – by Level

ELEMENTARY SECONDARY# EL with Disabilities 131 / 974 34 / 167% of ELL Population 13.4% 20.4%

We have done several in-depth analyses of these percentages, including an analysis of types of identification by disability, break downs of years or grades in school the students were identified and percentages by building. What the analysis resulted in was the fact that ELL students who also have a learning disability exit the program at a slower rate than students who do not have a learning disability. Therefore our population at the 6th grade level and higher has a higher rate of students with disabilities. However, we are also looking into our pre-referral process to improve the process for our students who speak a language in addition to English. We have both a bilingual Speech Pathologist and Learning Specialist who are working with other Student Services and bilingual ELL personnel to review and improve the process.

6. ENGLISH LEARNERS IN THE TALENTED AND GIFTED PROGRAM:

Category PercentAll students 4.5%Active ELL > 1%Waiver 2%Monitor 4%Post Monitor 8%

7. SCHOOL TI-A IDENTIFICATION:We have, as a district, chosen to fund elementary buildings and not secondary. All of our elementary buildings are Title I buildings:

Butler Creek ElementaryLynch Meadows ElementaryLynch View ElementaryLynch Wood ElementaryOliver ElementaryParklane ElementaryPleasant Valley Elementary

6

We have one Focus, one Priority, and one Model school: Priority School: Oliver ElementaryFocus School: Parklane Elementary Model School: Butler Creek Elementary

The district has no dual-immersion or two-way immersion programs.

8 – 10: The data listed below is 2013-2014 data, given that we have not yet received our AMAO data for the 2014-2015 school year.

OFFICIAL ANNUAL MEASURABLE ACHIEVEMENT OBJECTIVES – 2013-2014

AMAO 1 AMAO 2A AMAO 2B A2 A3 DESIGNATION

School Name

AMAO1 Adjusted Percent

AMAO1 Met Status

AMAO2A Adjusted Percent

AMAO2A Met Status

AMAO2B Adjusted Percent

AMAO2B Met Status

AMAO2 Met Status

AMAO3 Met Status

AMAO Designation

Improvement Status

Target 47% 9% 27%Centennial SD 28J 52.15% Met 12.00% Met 30.77% Met Met Met MET NA

8. AMAO 1: % OF STUDENTS MEETING INDIVIDUAL GROWTH TARGETSTarget: 47% Status: Met.

CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHS0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

2013-2014 AMAO 1

T: 47% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHSAMAO 1 52.2% 50.0% 61.9% 49.3% 45.8% 47.6% 50.0% 53.0% 48.2% 61.7%

Met Growth 485 44 96 67 49 48 51 44 39 45Total 930 88 155 136 107 101 102 83 81 73

7

9. AMAO 2a: % of exits – students identified fewer than 5 years as ELLTarget: 9% Status: Met

CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHS0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%

10.00%12.00%14.00%16.00%18.00%20.00%

'13-'14 AMAO 2a

T: 9.0% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHSAMAO 2a 11.9% 9.9% 17.1% 12.2% 12.4% 8.6% 8.6% 13.5% 17.7% 6.3%

Exit 123 10 32 19 16 12 10 14 6 4

Total 1032 101 187 156 129 140 117 104 34 64

10. AMAO 2b % of exits – students identified 5 years or longer.Target: 27% Status: Met


10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

'13-'14 AMAO 2b

T: 27% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHS

AMAO2b 30.8% 35.3% 7.1% 25.0% 5.9% 23.5% 58.8% 50.0% 37.1% 40.6%

Exits 72 6 2 6 1 4 10 6 23 13

Total 234 17 28 24 17 17 17 12 62 32

11. STUDENTS IN YEAR 1 MONITORING (exited during the 2013-2014 school year): 219

12. STUDENTS IN YEAR 2 MONITORING (exited during the 2012-2013 school year): 3628

13. FORMER ELs: 602This is a new category in our Synergy data systems as of spring 2015. Students who were at some point in their academic career an active ELL student but no longer in monitor status appear to generate a ‘P’ for Post Monitor in our ELL Type field. As we are not setting this flag ourselves, we are somewhat unclear what the system is using as a basis to generate the flag and are still investigating this and verifying the data.

14. STUDENTS WHO HAVE RE-ENTERED THE ELL PROGRAM:We have no students that have re-entered the program.

15. ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO HAVE A WAIVER FOR ELD SERVICES:There are 41 students who have a waiver. If you add these 41 to our total population of 1,167 = 1,208 therefore 3% of our ELL students have a waiver for services.

16. AMAO 3 – OREGON STATE ASSESSMENT RESULTS FOR LEP SUBGROUP:Centennial Met it’s AMAO 3 for the 2013-2014 school year. For a detailed analysis of this data, please refer to Section 9 of this plan.

9

SECTION 2PROGRAM GOALS

17. EDUCATIONAL APPROACH: All instruction for ELL students is provided by a teacher with an ESOL endorsement and/or trained in the Focused Approach to Systematic English Language Development (FASELD).

District-Wide Approaches:

PLC Teams: District-wide, every teacher is a member of a Professional Learning Community (PLC). These teams meet weekly and embed the Data Teams process in their work as a PLC. Teams work together to map their curriculum, write common formative pre and post assessments, determine student instructional needs based on data analysis, plan and carry out their instruction and modify as needed based on on-going student data. (Please see Attachment A.)

Tiered Systems of Support: A tiered system of support is the practice of providing high-quality instruction and intervention matched to student need, monitoring progress frequently to make decisions about change in instruction or goals and applying child response data to important educational decisions. Centennial is working within an EBISS framework (Effective Behavioral Instructional Support Systems) to ensure that all students have both academic and behavioral supports provided which match their instructional needs. This includes using screening tools to determine which students should be considered, providing interventions, and monitoring these interventions for effectiveness and student growth.

Highly Qualified: Currently, all of Centennial’s core content teachers meet Highly Qualified status.

Math: Students in the Centennial School District experience a balanced approach to learning the rigorous Common Core Mathematics content standards with a focus on building conceptual understanding, computational fluency, and application. In addition to learning the content standards in each grade level, students become mathematically proficient by developing the habits of mind identified in the standards for mathematical practice. Formative assessments are used to make instructional decisions and involve students in their learning.

10

ED APPROACH ELD LITERACY CORE - OTHERELEMENTARY ESL: instruction is provided through a

program of techniques, methodology, and special curriculum designed to teach EL students English language skills, including listening, speaking, reading, writing, study skills, content vocabulary, and cultural orientation. ESL instruction is in English with use of native language support as appropriate and available.

Balanced Literacy:Centennial School District maintains a theoretical belief that reading is a complex process, heavily involved with writing, listening and speaking across content areas. Reading is a meaning-making process that continues through life.

Included in this is a belief that: all children can become readers and

writers reading and writing are reciprocal,

meaning-making processes the language arts (reading and

writing) develop in concert literacy is a social process our schools should have vigorous

leadership with high expectations for student learning

our teachers endeavor to continually learn and apply instructional strategies within the balanced literacy approach in order to meet the needs of their learners.

Under this model literacy is best taught within a literacy workshop. Effective instruction includes a gradual release of responsibility as well as extended time for students to practice reading and writing daily. A blend of whole group, small group and individual instruction is used according to students’ needs. Additionally, the literacy workshop includes explicit instruction for making meaning at the word, sentence and text levels.

Sheltered Instruction: Elementary teachers in the district have been trained in the GLAD approach, and use this as the primary base for their sheltered instruction. This instructional approach is used to make academic instruction in English understandable to EL students through the use of physical activities, visual aids, and an interactive environment. These strategies are used to teach vocabulary and concept development in mathematics, science, social studies and other subjects. GLAD is a designated U.S. Department of Education “Program of Excellence.”

ED APPROACH ELD LITERACY CORE - OTHERESL pull out: Students are pulled out for a minimum of 30 minutes four times a week to receive explicit language instruction based on the English Language Proficiency Standards.Content-Based ESL: During the 2015-2016 school year, Centennial will be planning for and potentially piloting a content-based ESL model. This model will include an integrated presentation of topics from the Next Generation Science Standards and English Language Proficiency Standards. The lessons will be taught by a combination of ESOL certified teachers working in collaboration with HQ classroom teachers. Details are in process and will be worked out by the Implementation Team, which includes Science Teachers, ELL Coaches, an ELD Teacher, the Director of Curriculum, ELL Supervisor and other district specialists as needed.

12

ED APPROACH ELD LITERACY CORE - OTHERSECONDARY ESL Class Period: Students receive

ELD instruction during a regular class period and receive an elective credit for the class (high school only). Students are grouped for instruction according to their level of English language proficiency and receive instruction based on the English Language Proficiency Standards. This instruction is provided by an ESOL endorsed teacher.

Sheltered Instruction: Core content secondary teachers in the district have been trained in the SIOP approach, and use this as the primary base for their sheltered instruction. This instructional approach is used to make academic instruction in English understandable to EL students through the use of physical activities, visual aids, and an interactive environment. These strategies are used to teach vocabulary and concept development in mathematics, science, social studies, Language Arts and other subjects. SIOP is based on scientific research including CALLA (Cognitive Language Learning Approach) and has been developed by top researchers in the field of language acquisition.

Literacy:Centennial's approach to literacy at the secondary level is based upon Reading Apprenticeship®, an instructional framework developed by the Strategic Literacy Initiative at WestEd. Reading Apprenticeship instructional routines and approaches are based on a framework that describes classroom life in terms of four interacting dimensions that support reading development:

Social: creating a safe environment for students to share their confusion and difficulties with textsPersonal: student’s interest in exploring new aspects of their own identities and self–awareness as readersCognitive: developing readers' mental processes, including their repertoire of specific comprehension and problem–solving strategiesKnowledge–Building: identifying and expanding the knowledge readers bring to a text and building knowledge about language and word construction, genre and text structure, and the discipline specific discourse practices

These dimensions are woven into subject area teaching through "metacognitive conversations" – conversations about the thinking processes students and teachers engage in as they read – with a focus on extensive reading.

13

17. RESEARCH BASEPLC:California Department of Education. Ed. Ong, F. 2010. Improving Education for English Learners:

Research-based approaches. Sacramento: California Department of Education Press

City, E., Elmore, R., Fiarman, S., Teitel, L. 2009. Instructional rounds in education: a network approach to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

DuFour, R., Eaker, R., 1998. Professional learning communities at work: best practices for enhancing student achievement. Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Fisher, D., Frey, N., Rothenberg, C. 2011. Implementing RTI with English Learners. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Killion, J. 2008. Teachers teaching teachers for a dynamic community of teacher leaders. National Staff Development Council. 3(8).

Marzano, R. 2003. What works in schools: translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Reeves, D. 2010. Transforming professional development into student results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

TIERED SYSTEMS OF SUPPORT:Allington, R. 2009. What really matters in response to intervention research-based designs. Boston, MA:

Pearson.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. 2011. Response to Intervention (RtI) and English Learners: Making it happen. Boston: Pearson.

Esparza-Brown, J. 2009. Questions and some answers on dual identified ELL/SPED students. Presentation to Title III Directors.


Horwitz, A.R., et al. 2009. Succeeding with English language learners: lessons learned for the great city schools. Council of the Great City Schools. October 2009

Howard, M. 2009. RTI from all sides: what every teacher needs to know. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Howell, R., Patton, S., Deiotte, M. 2008. Understanding response to intervention: a practical guide to systemic implementation.


MATH:Research from The National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report, 2008 – US Department of Educationwww. ed.gov/MathPanel

Below are five of the forty-five main findings and recommendations made by the National Mathematics Advisor Panel that support the mathematics approach in the Centennial School District:“1) A focused, coherent progression of mathematics learning, with an emphasis on proficiency with

key topics, should become the norm in elementary and middle school mathematics curricula. Any approach that continually revisits topics year after year without closure is to be avoided.” (p. xvi)

“10) To prepare students for Algebra, the curriculum must simultaneously develop conceptual understanding, computational fluency, and problem-solving skills. Debates regarding the relative importance of these aspects of mathematical knowledge are misguided. These capabilities are mutually supportive, each facilitating learning of the others. Teachers should emphasize these interrelations, taken together, conceptual understanding of mathematical operations, fluent execution of procedures, and fast access to number combinations jointly support effective and efficient problem solving.” (p. xix)

“23) All-encompassing recommendations that instruction should be entirely “student centered” or “teacher directed” are not supported by research. If such recommendations exist, they should be rescinded. If they are being considered, they should be avoided. High-quality research does not support the exclusive use of either approach.” (p. xxii)

“25) Teachers’ regular use of formative assessment improves their students’ learning, especially if teachers have additional guidance on using the assessment to design and to individualize instruction. “ (p. xxiii)

“38) Calculators should not be used on test items designed to assess computational facility.” (p. xxv)

ELD:

California Department of Education. Ed. Ong, F. 2010. Improving Education for English Learners: Research-based approaches. Sacramento: California Department of Education Press

Callan, R. 2006. The intersection of accountability and language: can reading intervention replace English language development? Bilingual Research Journal. 30(1).

Cappellini, M. 2005. Balancing reading and language learning: a resource for teaching English language learners K-5. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.




Goldenberg, C., Coleman, R. 2010. Promoting Academic Achievement Among English Learners: A guide to the research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

15

Goldenberg, C. 2008. Teaching English language learners: what the research does-and does not-say. American Educator. Summer.

Saunders, W., Foorman, B., Carlson, C. Is a separate block of time for oral English language development in programs for English learners needed? The Elementary School Journal. 107(2).

University of Portland and Northwest Evaluation Association Multnomah County Partnership for Education Research. 2014. Evidence Based Recommendations for Program Models for English Learners at the Elementary Level: Prepared for Centennial School District.

U.S. Department of Education. Ed. Faulkner-Bond, M., et al. 2012. Language Instruction Educational Programs (LIEPs): A review of the foundational literature. http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html.

SHELTERED INSTRUCTION:



Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., Short, D. 2004. Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Pearson.

Hill, J., Flynn, K. 2006. Classroom instruction that works with English language learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Honigsfeld, A., Dove, M.G. 2010. Collaboration and Co-Teaching: Strategies for English Learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.





Reeves, D. 2010. Transforming professional development into student results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

University of Portland and Northwest Evaluation Association Multnomah County Partnership for Education Research. 2014. Evidence Based Recommendations for Program Models for English Learners at the Elementary Level: Prepared for Centennial School District.

16

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html

U.S. Department of Education. Ed. Faulkner-Bond, M., et al. 2012. Language Instruction Educational Programs (LIEPs): A review of the foundational literature. http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html.

Walqui, A., van Lier. 2010. Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent English language learners. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

LITERACY:

August, D., Shanahan, T., 2006. Executive Summary - Developing literacy in second-language learners: report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates


Callan, R. 2006. The intersection of accountability and language: can reading intervention replace English language development? Bilingual Research Journal. 30(1).

Cappellini, M. 2005. Balancing reading and language learning: a resource for teaching English language learners K-5. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Hill, J., Flynn, K. 2006. Classroom instruction that works with English language learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.





18. – 23. GOALS FOR THE DISTRICT ELD PROGRAM:

GOALS 18-19. GOALS 20-21. MEASURE

22. TIMEFRAME

ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

AMAO1: The percentage of students advancing one level on ELPA will increase from 52.15% to 53.65% by June, 2015.

AMAO2a: The percentage of all students exiting ELL services will increase from 12% to 12.5% by June, 2015.

1. Common Assessments utilized during the Data Teams Process during weekly PLC meetings

1. Weekly meetings

2. Fall, Spring3. Fall, Spring4. Spring

17

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html

AMAO2b: The percentage of long term (5+ years in ELL) students exiting the ELL program will increase from 30.8% to 31.8% by June 2015.

2. ADEPT (Elem)

3. GAP Finder (Secondary)

4. ELPACORE CONTENT - ELLs

DISTRICT FIVE YEAR NON-NEGOTIABLE GOALS (from Achievement Compact, submitted to OEIB on 10/15/14): End of 3rd grade: every child at grade

level in reading, writing and math End of 8th grade: every child

academically ready for 9th grade End of 9th grade: every student has

credits necessary to graduate on time End of high school: every student

graduates ready for college and/or career

1. Common Assessments utilized during the Data Teams Process during weekly PLC meetings

2. DRA (Elem)3. Academic

credits4. Semester

grades and progress reports

5. SBAC

1. Weekly meetings

2. Fall, Spring3. Semester4. Semester and

quarterly5. Annual

LEP:3 rd Reading: 57% of all 3rd graders will meet benchmarks in reading achievement.

6 th attendance: 87% of EL students will have a daily attendance rate of 90% or higher.

9 th Grade: 80% of EL students will earn 6 credits by the end of 9th grade.

ALL:3rd Reading:57% of all 3rd graders will meet benchmarks in reading achievement.

6 th attendance: 87% of all students will have a daily attendance rate of 90% or higher.

9 th Grade: 80% of all students will earn 6 credits by the end of 9th grade.

MEASURE:3 RD Grade :SBAC Reading assessment

6 th Grade : attendance tracking

9 th Grade : number of earned credits

TIME FRAME:3 rd Grade :Summer 2015

6 th Grade : currently piloting an attendance tracking program; details are still in the planning phase.

9 th Grade : student progress is tracked weekly by teachers during PLC meetings. Additional credit tracking occurs at mid terms and final grading periods.

18

25. HOW THESE GOALS WILL PREPARE ELs TO MEET OVERALL DISTRICT GOALS:These goals are written in order to ensure that students are preparing to graduate college and career ready beginning in 3rd grade. In order to meet the 3rd grade benchmark, we are presently in the process of revising and established literacy and Math benchmarks at each primary grade level and will then work to establish them at each subsequent grade level beyond 3rd grade. If a student is not on track to graduate, these goals are aligned to alert educational staff as early as Kindergarten. The district will also be adopting and implementing a new K-12 assessment system to be implemented during the 2015-2016 school year. This system is aligned to SBAC and will be used to identify students not on target to meet grade level benchmarks in reading and math.

19

SECTION 3IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL ENGLISH LEARNERS

Primary Home Language Other Than English(PHLOTE)

26. – 28. PROCEDURES FOR IDENTIFYING ELs

The district’s registration form (see Appendix B) contains the following questions to identify a student’s home language and potential status as Native American:

1. Was the student born outside the U.S. or Puerto Rico?2. Has the student been in an ELL and/or bilingual program?3. Language first used by the student?4. Language used by the student at home? 5. Is the student, parent, or grandparent a member of a U.S. Federally recognized American Indian

Tribe?6. Parent’s primary language? Is an interpreter needed? (asked for Parent #1 and Parent #2)

As a back up measure, additional questions are also included in the registration packet on a separate Home Language Survey (Appendix C) and a separate Title Services survey (Appendix D). When parents indicate on the Home Language Survey and/or Title Survey that a language other than English is spoken at home and/or that the child is Native American or Native Alaskan, secretaries at each building will forward the information to the ELL team in that building within a 24-hour period. The ELL team will then determine if the qualifying factors have been met according to the NCLB Title IX General Provisions – Part A – Definitions – Sec. 9101(25) Limited English Proficient.

If a student needs to be tested, the ELD Teacher or designee will assess the English language proficiency and determine eligibility. Results of the assessment are used to determine eligibility and placement in the ELL program. If a student is determined to be eligible for services, a letter is sent home to parents (Please see Attachment E). This letter: a) informs parents of the eligibility status of their student; b) provides the assessment result that qualified the student; c) gives a description of the Centennial ELD program; d) informs parents of their right to refuse services. If a parent wishes to refuse services, they complete a Parent Refusal form provided by the school and submit it to their child’s school (please see Attachment F). The ELL teacher would then document the refusal in the students file and in our electronic information system.

The above procedures for eligibility determination occur on the following timeline: First month of school: within 30 calendar days of the first day of school During the school year: within 10 school days of student registration

29. NATIVE AMERICANSMany Native American families may indicate English as their primary language. However, Native American students who demonstrate linguistic interference with English language proficiency may be tested as a result of teacher referral if they are not identified as needing assessment at the time of registration. Native American students may also come to teacher’s attention via a Title Survey administered to all families at the time of registration.

30. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES:Our registration forms are available in Spanish, Russian and Vietnamese as well as English. District and building Bilingual Liaisons are available to help with Russian and Spanish. If a parent needs assistance in a

20

language other than English, Spanish and Russian the school utilizes either our on-call interpreter list or contacts IRCO or other agencies with whom we contract to provide interpretive services per OCR regulations. This list is available on the district intranet site for all to access.

When a student registers with an indication that the student is also on an IEP or has other individualized or additional academic needs, the ELL teacher works with involved specialists to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated program for that student. When possible, information will be gathered from previous schools as well as family members.

Where a student has neither receptive nor productive language the specialists from both ELD and Special Education work closely with the family to determine a) the families educational goals for their student; b) any academic background the family may have about the student, including native language literacy and/or ability to communicate in the native language; and c) when feasible, comparison information to other siblings. This information is utilized along with basic assessment information that may include developmentally appropriate response to stimuli in both native language and English, response to oral cues, and/or attempts to elicit oral production when appropriate. When a determination of Least Restrictive Environment is being made, ELL specialists work with the IEP team to determine the best educational placement and/or program for the student, and whether ELL services will be a component of that program. Given the lack of appropriate and normed formalized assessment measures for non Native English speaking students, the majority of the decisions made will be based on family interview, student observation, and informal student assessments.

(Flow charts outlining identification procedures and determination to administer language assessment are included on the following two pages.)

21

Identification of the Primary Home Language:Identifying PHLOTE students

PROCESS IS COMPLETED:

WITHIN 30 CALENDAR DAYS OF FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL-or-

WITHIN 5 SCHOOL DAYS OF REGISTRATION DATE

STUDENT REGISTERS:Age 5-19 (by 1st day of school)

Completes registration form and Home Language Survey. Language other than English indicated.

Registration form and Home Language Survey given to ELD Teacher or designee. Teacher determines if language proficiency test is needed (see flow chart on following page).

Student does not qualify; results documented in cum file.

Student qualifies; results documented in cum file.

Student documented as ELL and placed in appropriate ELD group or class. Parents are notified via Parent Notification Letter.

YES – ELD Teacher administers IPT or WM test within 30 days of first day of school or 5 days thereafter.

No

STOPNo further

action needed

NO – ELD Teacher or designee

documents decision not to test as well as reasons in the

student’s cum file.

22

Determination to Administer Language Proficiency Test

The student was not born in the US and/or their first language was not English. —OR—The student is Native American or Native Alaskan.

The student’s difficulty with English could potentially deny them access to attaining full English proficiency.—OR—The student’s difficulty with English could deny the student the opportunity to participate fully in society.

A language other than English has had a significant impact on the student’s level of English proficiency.—OR—The student is migratory and English is neither the first nor the dominant language.

DO NOT TEST

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

ELD Teacher or designee administers the language proficiency test.

23

31. STATE APPROVED ASSESSMENT FOR IDENTIFYING ELs:

Centennial uses the following assessments to identify ELs: ELPA: If a student comes to us with an ELPA score within the past year, this may be used as a

qualifying score for entry into the program. IPT as indicated below. Students who score at or below the Oral level shown are eligible for ESL

services. If the student does not qualify based on the Oral level, he/she may be deemed eligible for services based on the Reading and/or Writing score. NOTE: Kindergarten students tested in the fall are given the Oral test only.

IPT QUALIFYING SCORES

Oral Reading WritingKinder (fall)* A, B, C (IPT I) NA NAKinder(spring)*

A, B, C (IPT I) Early Literacy Reading: Pre-Reader (PR)

Early Literacy Writing: Pre-Writer (PW)

1st A, B, C, D (IPT I) Early Literacy Reading: Pre-Reader (PR)

Early Literacy Writing: Pre-Writer (PW)

2nd (fall)* A, B, C, D, E (IPT I) Early Literacy Reading: Pre-Reader (PR)/Beginning Reader (BR)

Early Literacy Writing: Pre-Writer (PW)/Beginning Writer (BW)

2nd (spring)* A, B, C, D, E (IPT I) IPT I:NERLER

IPT I (parts 2 & 3):NEWLEW

3rd A, B, C, D, E (IPT I) IPT I:NERLER

IPT I (parts 2 & 3):NEWLEW

4th – 6th A, B, C, D, E (IPT I) IPT 2:NERLER

IPT 2 (parts 2 & 3):NEWLEW

7th – 12th A, B C, D, E (IPT 2) IPT 3:NERLER

IPT 3 (parts 2 & 3):NEWLEW

* Fall = September through December; Spring = January through June

32. TRAINING TEST ADMINISTRATORS:All teachers and staff that administer the IPT have received an initial in-person training on test administration and scoring. To stay current, every three years teachers and other test administrators will complete an online training offered by Ballard-Tighe, the publishers of the IPT.

33. SHARING INFORMATION WITH TEACHERS:Once the test and eligibility process is complete, the ELL teacher will inform teachers and other specialists involved with the student via email, team meeting, or personal communication, of the qualifying status of the student as well as the students’ proficiency score. If additional information is needed regarding the student’s proficiency level, teachers may choose to administer the Express Placement exam (from FASELD), the ADEPT or Gap Finder (long term students only). If these tests are administered, this

24

information will be shared with the classroom teacher and other specialists involved with the student’s educational program.

34. ASSESSMENT DATA STORAGE:IPT and ELPA data are recorded in Synergy, regardless of qualification status. All teachers and school personnel have access to this data. ADEPT and Express Placement information is stored in a student’s working file, which travels with them when they change schools.

35. PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTERSWithin the time frame noted above, the ELL Teacher or designee provides the parent or guardian with a Parent Notification Letter. This letter: a) informs parents of the eligibility status of their student; b) provides the assessment result that qualified the student; c) gives a description of the Centennial ELD program; d) informs parents of their right to refuse services (see Appendix E). If a parent wishes to refuse services, they complete a Parent Refusal form provided by the school and submit it to their child’s school (see Appendix F). The ELL teacher would then document the refusal in the students file and in our electronic information system.

36. PROVISION OF LETTER IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGESThe letter is available in Spanish, Russian, Chinese, Romanian, Somali, and Vietnamese, which are our additionally required languages under OCR regulations. For those families speaking another language, attached to the letter is a statement in their home language that this document contains important information and a request that parents have it translated for them. A copy of this letter is placed in a student’s cum file as well.

25

SECTION 4PROGRAM OF SERVICE FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS

Educational Approach

Centennial School District employs a number of educational approaches to provide ELL students with instruction in English language development as well as meaningful access to curriculum. Schools within the district offer one or more of the following educational approaches: ESL pullout and Sheltered Instruction at elementary and ESL Class Period and Sheltered Instruction at secondary. (See specific program descriptions by grade level in Section 2, 16: Educational Approach.)

37. PROGRAM OF SERVICE FOR ELs:

Program Descriptions (by level)ElementaryThe program model for ELD used at this level is ESL Pull-Out. Elementary ELL students receive English language development (ELD) in English, with some supplemental bilingual support when possible. Instruction is grounded in the English Language Proficiency Standards. Staff responsible for ELD instruction includes ESOL endorsed ELD Teachers and/or classroom teachers who have been trained in the FASELD model. Students are provided ELD instruction for a minimum of 30 minutes a day and at a time that is not in conflict with core content teaching in their general education classroom. All of our elementary schools follow the same model.

Elementary Level – Grades K* – 6 ELD Level Methods/

ServicesWho Teaches? Where? Amount of

ServiceBeginning Pull-out ESOL Certified Teacher

or ELD trained teacher in consultation with ESOL Certified Teacher

ELD or regular classroom

120-200 min/wk min

Intermediate Pull-out “ “ ELD or regular classroom

120 min/wk min

Advanced Pull-out “ “ ELD or regular classroom

120 min/wk min

*Kindergarten students who score at the intermediate or advanced levels do not qualify for ELL services.

Middle SchoolELL students at Centennial Middle School receive equal access to the general education curriculum and instruction in the English language. Classroom teachers trained in SIOP use Sheltered Instruction strategies in core content classes to ensure comprehensible input. Students receive their ELD instruction from a Certified ESOL Teacher during an ESL Class Period, which is assigned according to ELP level.

Students at the Beginning ELP level receive English Language Development in an ESL Class Period for 118 minutes four days a week and for 98 minutes on Wednesdays. This class focuses on the beginning levels of the forms and functions of English that new arrivals to the United States need in order to function in their English language dominate culture and school, and include substantial work on speaking and listening skills. Beginners also receive assistance from an educational assistant in their core content classes (math, science, and language arts). These classes are typically in the second half of the day; materials and content are

26

adapted for English language learners. In addition, sheltered techniques (SIOP lesson design and strategies) are employed by classroom teachers.

Students in the Early Intermediate level are placed on the same teams as Beginner students. Beginning and Early Intermediate students are in an ELD class as well as a sheltered ELA class. The Early Intermediate students also have a designated educational assistant who pushes into Math classes. Intermediate to Advanced students do not have a designated team and are equally placed throughout the school. The core content teachers employ sheltered instructional techniques (SIOP lesson design and strategies). Based on their ELP level, these students are also placed into an English language development class (ESL Class Period) taught by an ELD Teacher. Advanced students are exited from the ELL program once they have met the district exit criteria as outlined in this plan.

Centennial Middle School is divided into eight inter-disciplinary teams, four at the 7th grade level and four at the 8th grade level. The ELD Teachers meet once a month with other team staff to discuss how to best serve individual student needs and to discuss techniques and strategies for effectively working with ELL populations. Students may be pulled for additional ELD intervention based on specific needs as identified by state test results and coordination with team staff. Students also have opportunities for additional help through a Schools Uniting Neighborhoods (SUN) homework club.

Middle School – Grades 7 – 8ELD Level Methods/Services Who

Teaches?Where? Amount of Service

Beginning 2 ELD Class Periods

ELD Teacher ELD Classroom 118 minutes M, T, Th, F98 minutes W

All other levels ELD Class Period ELD Teacher ELD Classroom 59 minutes M, T, Th, F49 minutes W

High School

High school students are taught using a combination of ESL Class Period and Sheltered Instruction, depending upon the level of English language proficiency of the student. ESOL-endorsed staff teach all ELD classes. Content and ELL teachers who have received SIOP training and meet HQ requirements may teach classes with specific sheltered class designation. In addition, students receive in-class support in content areas classes from a bilingual educational assistant.

An ELD teacher also has designated time to case manage students as they move through the program. This case management includes any or all of the following, depending upon the need of the student: Checking in with students on assignments, etc. Checking with teachers as to needs of particular students, materials, etc. Contacting parents regarding assignments, school activities, etc.

The following opportunities in English language development and sheltered classes are offered depending upon the level of proficiency of the students based on assessments listed previously:

ELD: Sheltered ContentBeginning Social Studies*Beginning Science & Technology*Beginning Literature & Culture*Beginning Everyday EnglishEarly Intermediate ELD

ELA 1/2 (Freshman)ELA 3/4 (Sophomore)ELA 5/6 (Junior)World StudiesLiteracy Intervention

27

Intermediate ELDEarly Advanced ELDAdvanced ELDSenior ELD

*this is the thematic content, and does not necessary address CCSS standards.

All classes are 51 minutes in length with the exception of Wednesdays when classes are 43 minutes due to late start. In addition, both literacy (including one specialized for ELL students) and math intervention courses are offered to students not meeting benchmarks in those areas. The course is taught by a teacher trained in Reading Apprenticeship and SIOP; students receive 1.0 elective credit for the class.

38. ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION:

English Language DevelopmentCentennial District instruction is based on English Language Proficiency Standards. Students are grouped for instruction based on English proficiency levels (beginning, early intermediate, intermediate, early advanced, advanced). All students identified as LEP students in the district receive ELD services. (The only exception to this is those students whose parents refuse ELD services.) Students with higher language needs (i.e. students newly arrived to the U.S. with no previous English experience) receive additional support.

39. MEANINGFUL PARTICIAPTION IN CORE INSTRUCTION AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS:Access to content is provided through the use of scaffolded instructional strategies, specifically GLAD at the elementary level (K-6) and SIOP at the secondary level (7-12). Both models are research-based and have been shown to be effective with the ELL student population. Most core content teachers have been trained in GLAD or SIOP and receive coaching both through building wide support and in an individualized as needed basis. We will continue to train those who have not yet received GLAD or SIOP training as the need arises.

GLAD is a professional development model that focuses on English language acquisition. This model trains teachers to use a specific set of strategies to allow access to the Common Core State Standards to all students, regardless of their English language proficiency. After receiving training, teachers are capable of designing instruction that is differentiated, visual, and promotes academic discourse. This research-based model enhances metacognition, cross-cultural sensitivity, and classroom community. This six-day training consists of two days of a teacher workshop centered on the research, theory, and strategies in GLAD, followed by a four-day classroom demonstration.

SIOP is an instructional framework used at the secondary level to help students learn academic content and language more effectively. The eight components of this model include lesson preparation, building background, comprehensible input, strategies, interaction, practice and application, lesson delivery, and review/ assessment. Teachers are trained in SIOP and receive professional development refreshers. In addition, they have access to individualized SIOP coaching to help increase effective use of SIOP in their classes; this includes support through lesson planning, providing resources, observing classrooms, gathering student data, and providing feedback.

40. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT FOR CORE CONTENT TEACHERSTraining and follow-up support is provided through district ELL Coaches who support teachers in a variety of ways, including assistance in planning, modeling lessons, observations, etc. All teachers are expected to implement these strategies in their classrooms. This is monitored through the use of a “walk-through” checklist conducted by both building administrators and ELL Consultants/Coaches.

28

41. DETERMINATION OF LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT SERVICESOur model in the district is an explicit English instructional model utilizing ESOL endorsed teachers to provide instruction in the English Language Proficiency Standards. This model was chosen with guidance from ODE and built upon the Focused Approach to Systematic ELD framework. We continue, as a district program, to review and refine our English Language Development program as new research becomes available. (Please see Section 2, 17: Relevant Research for a list.) Students are in the program until they can demonstrate proficiency, or unless their parents waive services.

42. PROCESS TO DETERMINE SPECIALIZED EDUCATIONAL NEEDS:When a student presents a need for a specialized educational plan that deviates from the district’s standardized educational program the process can vary greatly depending on the student’s need and circumstances. The first step in determining an appropriate educational approach is to decide the educational goals for the student and best-case scenario for the student to achieve those goals given the presenting circumstances and resources. The conversation must involve family and student when appropriate, the ELL teacher and other specialists involved with the student, as well as other personnel who may be influencing the academic plan for the student. This conversation should yield a plan for the student that would be based both on the students academic as well as his/her linguistic needs, how, when and by whom the services will be provided, specific goals for the student, and how those goals will be measured. Any plan would need to meet legal requirements and be feasible within the resources and limitations of both the district and student and family.

29

SECTION 5STAFFING AND RESOURCES

43. NUMBER AND CATEGORIES OF INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF – ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

ELL Count by buildingELL

Active

ELL Teacher

FTE

ELL Ed Assistant

FTELynch View Elementary 173 3.0 0Lynch Wood Elementary 135 2.22 .625Butler Creek Elementary 108 2.0 0Parklane Elementary 133 2.5 0.75Oliver Elementary 141 2.5 0.5625Lynch Meadows Elementary 191 3.0 8.0Pleasant Valley Elementary 102 1.6 0.625Centennial Middle School 87 2.0 0.8125Centennial High School 87 2.83 0.8125Centennial Learning Center 3 0 0District wide - Coaches NA 1.7

While the district supports an average of a 60:1 student to teacher ratio, this ratio is delegated on an equitable basis, not an equal basis. What is not reflected in the chart above, which are taken into consideration when staffing decisions are made, are the following school and/or ELL population factors: poverty, total population, newcomers, refugees, ELs with disabilities, homeless, Focus or Priority status, teacher experience, years from graduation, etc. (This is not an all inclusive list.)

44. – 45. QUALIFICATIONS FOR ELD INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

The ELL staff consists of Highly Qualified ESOL Certified Teachers and Highly Qualified Educational Assistants. The ELL Supervisor works in conjunction with the district Human Resources Department and TSPC to ensure that all staff are properly licensed and meet state and federal Highly Qualified criteria. The district recently was found in compliance during a Title I-A Desk Audit in this area.

In addition to meeting the HQ requirements, Educational Assistants (EAs) have successfully completed the district-developed training for Educational Assistants that meets ESEA requirements. This training consisted of 9 two-hour sessions in Roles/Responsibilities, Student Management, Instructional Strategies, Reading, Writing, and Math. All participants were required to attend the sessions (or watch a video of the session), complete assignments (to a specified criterion level) and pass a multiple-choice test at 80% correct or better. In addition, the district meets the HQ requirements for classified staffing for all Educational Assistants.

The district also has three part-time licensed ESOL teachers who have been hired as an ELL Consultant/Coach. One of the individuals is a GLAD Key Trainer, and one is a certified SIOP trainer. The purpose of these positions is to provide follow-up support to trained classroom teachers to ensure implementation of effective strategies in the classroom. This will ensure that our professional development in this area is of sufficient intensity and duration to have a positive and lasting impact on teachers’ performance in the classroom. This support may be in the form of demonstration lessons in classrooms, consultation with teachers, walkthroughs to gather instructional data, presentations to building and

30

administrative staff, workshops and/or trainings, classroom visitations, and/or support to teams during weekly Professional Learning Community meetings.

46. TEMPORARY STAFF CONTINGENCIESIf a substitute must be hired in an emergency situation, they may substitute for 20 days without meeting HQ requirements. All substitutes working over 20 days must meet the same HQ requirements outlined above. This holds true both for certified teachers and classified assistants.

47. INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALSThe following materials have been adopted by Centennial to serve our ELL students in the ELD program:

LEVEL ADOPTION SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALSElementary On Our Way to English (Rigby) Carousel of Ideas (Ballard-Tighe)

Language for LearningLeveled textsTeacher created materials

Middle Focus on Grammar (Longman)Shining Star (Pearson)

Leveled textsTeacher created materials

High New Interchange Focus on GrammarSummitOxford Picture DictionariesLeveled textsTeacher created materials

48. REVIEW OF DISTRICT MATERIALSDuring the 2015-2016 school year, Centennial will be undergoing an adoption process for new English Language Development materials. This will be based on the state-approved adoption list, and will include a district-wide team made up of staff representing ELL, Special Education, ELL Coaches and administrators; general education teachers may be included as well. New materials will be purchased for implementation during the 2016-2017 school year. If plans allow, the secondary team will begin the adoption process during the summer of 2015 to adopt for fall of 2015. This is contingent on the availability of funds as of the writing of this plan.

49. CONTINGENCY PLANFor each day an English Language Learner is enrolled as ELL, the district receives an additional 0.5 weighted ADM funding. Our District General Fund budget provides an annual program designed to meet the needs and requirements of the English development program. For the 2015-2016 school year, this budget is $3,105,656. In the case of an emergency the district sets aside a contingency fund line item in its annual budget. With Board Approval, these funds could be accessed to support the ELL program if an emergency were to arise. This contingency fund is $1,000,000 for the 2015-2016 school year.

31

SECTION 6TRANSITION FROM ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

50. PROCEDURES FOR EXITING, PROMOTING AND RETAINING EL STUDENTS

Centennial has a consistent procedure K-12 for the exit, promotion, and retaining of ELL students. These procedures are outlined in detail below.

51. – 52. DETERMINATION OF PROFICIENCY AND STAFF RESPONSIBILITY

English Language Learners will exit from the District’s ELL Program when they have acquired reading, writing, speaking and listening skills that enable them to participate successfully in the regular classroom without ELL program support. It is the vision of the Centennial School District’s ELL program that “students attain linguistic proficiency in order to participate meaningfully and successfully in mainstream classes. English language learners achieve the same high content and performance standards as the non-ELL student population.” The expectation, therefore, is that students do not need to attain a status of linguistic perfection but rather that they are able to equitably attain their academic goals alongside their non-ELL peers.

A demonstration of this proficiency can be achieved in one of two ways:

ELPA21All students are tested annually on the state’s English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA21 beginning in the 2015-2016 school year) to monitor English language proficiency and to determine whether students meet current exit criteria. Exit criteria for ELPA21 are based on state-determined cut-scores. Upon receipt of scores, the ELD Teacher evaluates students who achieve a level 5 on the ELPA21. If the score is demonstrative of consistent growth over time, and consistent with common assessment and ADEPT and/or Gap Finder data, as well as other assessment data the teacher has on the student, the student will be recommended for exit from the ELD program.

PORTFOLIO PROMOTION:If an ESL Teacher has evidence that a student has attained proficiency but the student does not score a 5 on ELPA21 they may pursue a portfolio promotion to exit the student from ELD services. While a level 5 on the state ELPA21 meets official exiting requirements, some students may score below level 5 yet attain proficiency that would demonstrate their ability to participate successfully in the regular education program without further ELD assistance. (Please see Appendix G for a complete Portfolio Assessment form.)

Students wishing to exit the program who have not scored a 5 on ELPA will complete a Portfolio (see Appendix F). This portfolio will include demonstration of the student’s best work in the areas of language development for all proficiency standards (reading, writing, listening and speaking). Work will be scored on a norm-referenced assessment and/or standardized rubric for each area.

Once work samples have been gathered the ELL Teacher will complete the following steps: 1. Meet with the student’s classroom teacher(s) (general education teacher[s])2. Meet with the ELL team in the school3. Contact the parent(s) to verify continuation of proposed promotion4. Meet with the district ELL Supervisor to present the portfolio and get approval of the promotion

32

If there is disagreement at any time about the proficiency of the student, the ELL teacher will either gather more evidence to support the promotion, or stop the process and continue serving the student in ELD.

Criteria in the portfolio may include, but is not limited to:ITEM CRITERIAIPT test Scores of Competent and Fluent

ADEPT or Gap Finder assessment EA level (ADEPT)21/25 (Gap Finder)

Complete Woodcock-Muñoz assessment At or above grade level

Work samples (essays, speeches, reading assessments, etc.)

Passing with standard criteria; evidence that inability to pass is not due to linguistic challenges (i.e. ideas and content versus syntax)

Common assessments Passing average

DRA At or above grade level

Daily class work Demonstrated ability to complete with normal assistance from classroom teacher

Historical OAKS/SBAC assessment data (including ELPA)

History of earning the same ELPA score multiple years in a row; history of growth on OAKS/SBAC. Meeting growth targets on OAKS/SBAC

Teacher recommendation Statement that the student does not struggle in accessing content due to linguistic difficulties

Parent input Parent approval

Grades Passing, or demonstrated evidence that non-passing grades are not due to linguistic challenges (i.e. successfully completing work when in class, but failing due to frequent absences)

ELL Teacher Narrative Description of issues that may prevent the student from passing ELPA/meeting assessment demands.

Special Education information* If the student is on an IEP, additional information will be required to demonstrate that the student is performing at expected levels given the student’s disability (please see Appendix G: Portfolio Cover Sheet for detailed information)

*We are presently working through refining this process in collaboration with our district Student Services and ELL departments. We are also working collaboration with other neighbor districts to continue to learn from our peers throughout this process.

53. DOCUMENTATIONOnce the ELL student has met the criteria listed above, the ELD Teacher or designee will complete the Intent to Exit letter (Appendix H). The letter will be filed in the student’s cum folder and a copy sent to parents notifying them of the recommendation that the student be re-classified as non-ELL and will no

33

longer receive services. Parents will be encouraged to contact the school if they disagree with the decision. Parental concerns will be considered before a final decision to exit the student is made. The ELL Teacher will then notify the district ELL secretary who will document the change in status to ‘Exited’ and ‘Monitor’ in our student database, thus changing the student’s flag in the database from ‘E’ for ELL to ‘M’ for Monitor. This will notify the student’s classroom teacher(s) of the change in status. The portfolio and working student files will be kept and maintained by the ELL Teacher for the two years the student is on monitor status. If the student moves in district, the file will follow the student.

54. MONITORING PLANExited students will be reclassified in our student database as monitor students. They will be considered non-ELL and will no longer receive services. For two years following the year of exit, the ELD Teacher will monitor each exited student’s academic progress. Monitoring shall consist of a bi-annual review of the student’s grades, performance on state or district-wide assessments, and general education teacher feedback on student performance. A Monitoring Review form (Appendix I) will be completed by the ELD Teacher and maintained in the student’s cum file.

55. RE-CLASSIFICATIONIf a monitored student begins to experience academic problems (i.e., not working academically commensurate with English L1 peers or, in the case of high school, failure in required classes), the ELD Teacher will initiate a re-evaluation of the student’s language skills to determine if the student’s difficulties might be related to difficulties with English language proficiency. The process will follow the same procedures as outlined in the Portfolio Promotion section (above). Evidence in this case, however, would demonstrate a continued need for ELD services.

When reviewing ELPA21 scores, if a student’s score is not consistent with other data the ELL teacher has for that student, the teacher may make a decision to pursue a portfolio assessment to retain the student in ELD. While a level 5 on the state ELPA meets official exiting requirements, additional evidence may indicate for some students that they do not demonstrate proficiency at this level that would allow them to participate successfully in the regular education program without further ELD assistance. The ELD teacher would follow the same requirements outlined below (Portfolio Promotion) in order to demonstrate a need for the student to remain in the ELL program.

56. MONITOR STUDENTS NOT SUCCEEDING Given the tiered interventions and PLC models implemented by the district, all students (former ELLs included) are monitored frequently on a variety of assessment measures to determine adequate progress towards growth benchmarks. If at any time it is determined that a student is not making adequate growth the student would receive intervention services. Depending on the level of the student, this would include differentiated instruction it the classroom, or additional supplemental instruction in the area of identified need via an additional pullout support or intervention course. Given the student’s former status as ELL, the language needs of the student would be taken into consideration during the planning for intervention.

If assessment data shows the student is not meeting grade level expectations and language issues were determined to be a factor in the poor performance, then the student would be eligible for reclassification, as outlined above.

57. MONITORING STUDENTS WITH WAIVER FOR SERVICEStudents whose parents have refused services are monitored under the program outlined in #56 above. If at any time a teacher feels the needs of the student are linguistically based, the ELL teacher is consulted. At that time, the ELL teacher would work with the classroom teacher to determine whether there was a need for additional accommodations to support the students linguistic needs; if they were needed the teachers

34

would work together to provide supports for the student. The ELL teacher might also communicate with the parent(s) regarding the students needs, and possibly reevaluate the need for ELL services if appropriate.

In addition, on an annual basis, ELL teachers review ELPA21 scores, including those of waiver students. When students continue to show a lack of progress, where appropriate, ELL teachers may communicate with the parent to reevaluate the potential to bring the student back into the ELL instructional program. At this time, the ELL teacher may also communicate with classroom teacher(s) regarding language accommodations for students needing additional assistance.

Parents are notified annually of their child’s progress on the ELPA21.

35

SECTION 7EQUAL ACCESS TO OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICT PROGRAMS

ELL students have equal access to a full range of district programs, including Special Education, Title I, Talented and Gifted, and non-academic and extra-curricular activities. A reference to the district’s EEO plan is included in the Employee Handbook, and all employees are given a new handbook every year. In addition, Centennial has adopted an Equity Policy that specifically outlines expectations to ensure all students have equitable access to all programs, academic and other, in the district (see Appendix J).

58. IDENTIFYING ADDITIONAL ACADEMIC NEEDSCentennial schools have problem-solving or pre-referral teams that include a small group of staff such as school counselor or school psychologist, ELL and/or Title 1 teacher, and experienced highly qualified teachers from a variety or grade or content areas. These teams serve a common purpose across schools to identify and address individualized student instructional needs. Prior to student referral to these teams, the classroom teacher, with PLC team support, identifies individual students not responding to core or targeted instruction. If an individual student is not responding to core, targeted and supplemental instruction in a particular skill or area(s) over a period of time at an expected rate or commensurate with other students receiving the same interventions they would then be referred to the problem solving team to determine additional interventions to address academic, communication and behavioral learning concerns. It is only after an inadequate response to repeated interventions that a student would be referred to the Special Education Team.

This process is the same whether a student is a native English speaker or an English Language Learner, except for the additional consideration of language learning and expected growth in relation to the student's ELL peers (considering factors such as time in an English speaking school, native language and literacy skills). It is our belief that being a second language learner makes a student neither more nor less likely to have a disability, so ELL considerations are an important part of both the pre-referral / problem solving team and special education evaluation process to address this dynamically.

Procedures for the IEP process are outlined in Appendix K IEP Procedures. This document is taken directly from Centennial’s Student Services Handbook.

59. ELL TEACHER INCLUSION IN THE IEP PROCESSThe pre-referral procedures vary by building in Centennial. For this reason, the ELL teacher’s role in the process is also varied. However, every building has some form of a pre-referral team. In some buildings an ELL teacher sits on the pre-referral team at all times; in others, an ELL teacher is present if/when an ELL student is being discussed. It is at this time that decisions are made regarding what additional steps to take, if any, in intervention and/or accommodations. If these additional supports prove to be unsuccessful, the team may make a determination to move the child forward for a referral for an evaluation for Special Education. When this determination is made, an ELL teacher is consulted during the evaluation and subsequent eligibility and IEP process, and invited to be present at all IEP meetings.

We are presently working towards a district-wide, more systematic and responsive process to address the needs of ELSWDs during the pre-referral process.

60. PROCESS TO DETERMINE THE BEST ELD PROGRAM FOR ELSWDsIf a student is identified as having both a disability under IDEA (and therefore on an IEP) and eligible for ELL services, the best academic program for the student is determined jointly by the student’s Special Education case manager, ELL teacher and classroom teacher(s). The team together makes a determination regarding the academic program for the student that will best meet the student’s academic goals as outlined

36

in the IEP, including how accommodations may be met, where services will be provided, by whom, and when. The ideal program will be in the student’s least restrictive environment, meaning the student will be included in the general academic program as much as is appropriate for that student while still attaining academic success.

61. IDENTIFYING TALENTED AND GIFTED EL STUDENTSELL students have equal access to Talented and Gifted consideration when appropriate. Parents and teachers may nominate students for TAG consideration at all grade levels. A letter is sent home to students in grades K-6 each winter in English, Spanish, and Russian notifying parents of TAG services and their ability to nominate their child. Nomination forms are available in English, Spanish, and Russian and may be completed with the help of an interpreter if needed and feasible. The district identification process at the elementary level consists of screening all second grade students with Raven's Progressive Matrices (a nonverbal cognitive assessment), parent and teacher rating scales (translated in Russian and Spanish, or completed with interpreters at conferences when needed and feasible), and standardized achievement tests. At the secondary level, the district administers individual cognitive assessments based on teacher referral and reviews statewide assessment scores each spring for possible TAG eligibility. Input from ELD Teachers is solicited at all stages of this process. The district has available the Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Tests. This test is a nonverbal cognitive assessments that can be used appropriately with students whose level of English proficiency may interfere with their performance on a verbally-based cognitive test.

62. ACCESS TO PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIESThe District has recently developed and approved an Equity Lens. This is an equity statement and questions that are used by committees, administrative bodies and teams making decisions that impact students in the district. This includes staffing, program changes, site council work, school and program improvement planning and budgeting, to name a few. Please see Appendix L.

Every attempt is made to provide translated informational materials and forms or oral communication to inform students and their families of available programs and activities in the school district. Spanish and Russian translators are consistently available to buildings and during school events. Translators are arranged in Spanish, Russian and other languages when needed for parent conferences. Phones calls are made in other languages when necessary. District staff has access to the EduPortal and TransAct.com translation library of school-related forms. This is a series of 60+ common forms used by schools across the country that have been translated into 22 languages. In addition, a master copy of all translated forms unique to Centennial School District is kept at the district office. Forms commonly used across the district are posted on the district intranet website so that all schools have access to them. During IEP meetings that involve parents, an interpreter is provided when necessary, and when feasible. Special Education documentation is also provided in a parent’s native language according to state law.

ELL students also have access to participation in all extra-curricular and non-academic activities. Program and activities are accessible to the students through translated informative literature that goes home to parents and is posted throughout the school.

In addition, a critical component of ensuring ELL access to all programs and academics is the provision of on-going training and support to teachers in working with EL student. In order to maintain a high level of on-going learning for teachers, the district employs academic coaches at all levels to support teachers.

Professional development needs are determined at the building level, based on each building’s School Improvement Plan. Staff can also avail themselves of course offerings through their district tuition reimbursement allowance. In addition to general course offerings throughout the area, the district has

37

developed partnerships with Concordia, Portland State University and Lewis & Clark College to be able to offer courses aimed at specific district needs

The district has two certified GLAD trainers, one of whom is an ELL Coach. GLAD training is offered to new elementary teachers as needed. Follow-up support is provided to staff to assist them in the successful implementation of these strategies. This may take the form of GLAD “booster” sessions with a trainer, paid time for planning, work with the district ELL Coaches, etc. GLAD is a designated U.S. Department of Education “Program of Excellence.”

The district also has one coach who is a certified SIOP trainer. SIOP training is offered to secondary teachers on an as-needed basis. The trainer/coach enables the district to continue to support teachers in their implementation of these strategies. Most core content secondary teachers have received SIOP training. Follow-up is provided in the form of paid planning time, work with the district ELL Coach through planning, modeling, coaching sessions, etc. SIOP is a program founded on scientifically based research (including the CALLA approach) and has been developed by top researchers in the field of language acquisition.

The district’s ELL Coaches provide follow-up after initial training. As part of the school improvement process, the Coaches work with the building principals to help implement the building staff development plans and to ensure that staff are making progress in the implementation of GLAD/SIOP. Implementation is monitored through the use of a “walk-through” instrument used by building administrators.

The following is a menu of coaching support provided to buildings by the district ELL Coaches. Ideally, this menus is followed in a relatively sequential order:

ELL Coach Staff Development

1. Initial training of effective ELL strategies:As new teachers are hired, and as funding allows (SIOP, GLAD, other).

2. Follow-up of initial training:Individual coaching conversation w/in the first month of completion

3. Individual visit w/ follow-up notes30 min visit w/ notes for teacher to consider

4. Individual coaching visit to classroomA pre visit that sets the purpose of visit (30 minutes)A visit of full period of classroom instructionA debrief of the visit (30 minutes)

5. E-mail follow-up of commitmentsFollowing any coaching experience or presentation, teachers make a commitment to track their

progress and email the coach. Coach responds and tracks progress.6. Peer coaching

Teacher partners are matched up. Using a protocol, Teacher A visits Teacher B, then switch roles (does not need to be on the same day, a roving sub can be used)

ELL coach attends the 30 min debrief and leads the discussion using a coaching protocol. Commitments are made and email follow up by coach.

7. Walkthrough and results shareELL coaches spend 10 min in classrooms, compile data and present at team meeting.

8. Team presentationsVarious formats based on goals of department, building, walkthrough data.Examples: Refreshers, planning support, data analysis

38

9. Book studyFormat to be decided by teams and facilitated by ELL coach

10. As needed by building

Evaluation of Staff DevelopmentThe staff development program is evaluated by:

Staff feedback on the trainings attended, including feedback on the need for follow-up support Building principal observation and evaluation of staff for the use of effective strategies with ELLs

(using the walk-through instrument) ELL Coach evaluation of walkthrough data Analysis of statewide assessment scores and growth data for the ELL subgroup Analysis of building data for LEP subgroup Side-by-side analysis of SIOP/GLAD implementation and student achievement data

Finally, in order to broaden our awareness of access to programs for students, the district is presently engaged in a series of listening sessions. Parents (and some students) have participated in a question and answer session facilitated by district staff in order to gather information and input regarding parent (and student) perception of our district, schools, and programs. This information has and will be used to develop a plan for increased equitable access specifically with regards to our students of color.

63. TITLE IA TARGETED ASSISTANCE PROGRAMSWe have no TI-A Targeted Assistance schools.

39

SECTION 8PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

64. PROGRAM PLACEMENT LETTERSWhen students are identified as eligible for ELL services, the ELD Teacher or designee sends parents notification of their child’s eligibility for and subsequent enrollment in the ELL program. This notice is sent within 30 days at the beginning of each school year or within two weeks of enrollment in the school if a child moves in during the year. Notices contain all information required by TIII law, including a description of the district’s ELD program, and have been translated into Spanish, Russian, Vietnamese, Romanian, Somali, and Chinese. Parents are notified at this time of their right to refuse services for their child in the ELL program. (See Appendix E.)

Parents receive written notification of their child’s continued enrollment each fall within 30 days of the first day of school.

65. AMAO NOTICEIf the district receives written notice that it has not met its AMAO targets the central office will, within 30 days of official receipt of AMAO data and status, disseminate to all parents and families a written notice explaining the following information:

1. Explanation of AMAO measures and targets;2. District performance on those measures;3. Steps the district is taking to improve it’s programming to meet AMAO targets in the future.

Notices are provided in English, Spanish and Russian, and any additional languages according to OCR law.

66. PARENT NOTIFICATIONS – AVAILABLE PROGRAMS AND SERVICESThe district utilizes a variety of methods in order to inform parents about the variety of programs and services available through our district. Schools and the district have the following in place in order to increase communication between family members and the schools:

District web site containing frequent updates Weekly Cmail posted to the website and disseminated to parents who wish to sign up Monthly newsletters outlining important events and information Transitional meetings/nights for families of incoming 7th and 9th graders Back to school nights Literacy nights outlining academic literacy programs in the school Instructional events that help parents learn to support their children’s academics at home Academic informational nights (especially at the secondary level) to teach parents about credits,

grades, applying for colleges, curriculum, etc Curriculum guides (secondary) Forecasting catalogues (secondary) Weekly folders sent home to parents (elementary) containing information about the student’s

academics and/or school events and opportunities SUN programs in our 5 high-poverty elementary schools and in our middle and high schools; these

programs help bring increased family involvement to the school and provide parent classes Parent Assist online access to their student’s academic records and grades Title I Parent Compacts (elementary) Counselors assigned to every building Close collaboration with the community and county agencies to inform parents of available programs.

These include, but are not limited to: El Programa Hispano, Multnomah Educational Service District Migrant Education, East County Caring Community, Human Solutions, Office of School and

40

Community Partnerships, Schools Uniting Neighborhoods, Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization (IRCO), Lutheran Family Services, Catholic Charities.

Placement of IRCO Case manager and DHS social worker in our schools to facilitate increased collaboration for families

This is also an area in which we are receiving feedback from our families during our listening sessions. We hope to improve two-way communication with families, regardless of home language spoken, in upcoming years based on this feedback.

67. COMMUNCATION IN LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH

Every attempt is made to provide translated informational materials and forms or oral communication to inform students and their families of available programs and activities in the school district. Spanish and Russian Liaisons are consistently available to buildings during the school day, and may be utilized during school events. Translators are arranged in Spanish, Russian and other languages when needed for parent conferences. Phones calls are made in other languages when necessary. District staff has access to the EduPortal and TransAct.com translation library of school-related forms. This is a series of 60+ common forms used by schools across the country that have been translated into 22 languages. In addition, a master copy of all translated forms unique to Centennial School District is kept at the district office. Forms commonly used across the district are posted on the district intranet website so that all schools have access to them. During IEP meetings that involve parents whose first language is not English, an interpreter is provided when necessary, and when feasible. Special Education documentation is also provided in a parent’s native language according to state law.

Guidelines have been established to help buildings determine what documents need to be translated (provided to families in writing) versus interpreted (recorded phone calls via our auto dialer system). (Please see Appendix M.) These guidelines are based on OCR law and further guidance from the Dear Colleague letter provided jointly by the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Department of Education, dated January 7, 2015. When in doubt, building secretaries and/or principals may consult the Federal Programs Supervisor for further guidance. Information regarding what languages need to be supported is provided by the Federal Programs Supervisor at the start of each school year, with periodic updates if there are significant changes. This information is based on the number of families indicating a need for an interpreter as recorded in our Synergy student database. The information is gathered from the Home Language Survey and district registration forms during student registration.

School personnel may access interpreters via the district website. We have both in-district interpreters as well as contracted agency interpreters available. In addition, a family may request an interpreter through any school personnel. We are in the process of installing an additional phone at each school entry point that will allow a family member and secretary to be able to have a conversation in the main office via a 3rd-party interpreter.

68. PRIVATE SCHOOL COMMUNICATIONEvery spring, Centennial’s Director of Curriculum and Student Learning sends a letter to all private schools that are located in the Centennial School District boundaries. This letter outlines services and federal funds available to private schools, including TIII (see Appendix N). Contained in this letter is a timeline to respond, and a place to indicate whether they would like to receive TIII services. To date, no school has requested TIII support.

41

SECTION 9PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION

69. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION.On December 26, 2014, Centennial was found compliant following a federal audit. (Please see Appendix O.)

Centennial’s ELL program evaluation process includes a review of the following: identification of ELLs assessment of English proficiency timely parent notification services to all eligible students appropriate use and delegation of resources procedures for exit, monitoring and retention progress towards district academic and English proficiency goals

This evaluation is conducted through: file reviews data analysis to include, but not limited to:

o ELPAo ADEPTo Gap Findero OAKS/SBACo DRAo PLC common assessment results

Review / investigation into complaints (none have been filed as of the writing of this plan) Parent surveys conducted during conferences

70. – 75. DISTRICT PROGRAM EVALUATION:Five cum files were chosen at random per building. For each of the five, 3 were active ELL, 1 was monitor, 1 was an exited student. From that file review, the following data was obtained:

70: IDENTIFICATION PROCESS: 100% of Home Language Surveys were complete and in the student’s cum file.

71. INITIAL ASSESSMENT: 86% of student files had documentation of initial IPT assessment indicating either qualification or disqualification for services.

72. PLACEMENT INTO SERVICES: 57% of student files indicated an evaluation of placement into ELL services.

However, 89% of all files included a copy of the Parent Notification Letter, indicating that the decision to place the student had been made and parents had been notified.

73. ADEQUATE STAFF AND MATERIALS: Teachers complete an annual inventory of curriculum materials in June of each year and submit it to the curriculum department. An annual review of equitable distribution of resources is conducted each year, including teacher and Educational Assistant FTE. This is based on a review of a variety of student and school data including but not limited to numbers of newcomers, refugees, status of focus/priority schools, size of school, experience of teachers, ELSWDs per building, numbers of languages, teacher experience, etc. The

42

district’s Equity Lens is also utilized when making decisions regarding materials and resources for ELLs.

74. EXITING / RECLASSIFICATION: 67% of reviewed files included a copy of the Parent Notification of Exit letter.

75. MONITORING: Monitoring documentation is kept in student working files. Review of this procedure therefore was conducted via a random request from teachers of monitor student teacher survey results. Of the 15 student monitoring forms requested, 100% were submitted within the timeline requested. Of the 15 forms, 1 student was noted as having academic difficulty but the teacher reported it was not due to language difficulties.

76. EL RATE OF ACQUIRING ENGLISH.6 years 3 months = average length of time it takes an ELL student to exit our program.

77. RATE OF LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTRICT’S OBJECTIVES

FOR ACADEMIC PROGRESS(1). 79. EL PROGRESS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS(1) TO PERFORM ACADEMIC

COURSEWORK(2). 82. ACTIVE EL STUDENT PROGRESSING ACADEMICALLY(2) RELATIVE TO PROGRAM GOALS

FOR CORE CONTENT KNOWLEDGE(3).

2013-2014

LANGUAGE ARTS MATH ELPA(1)

% MET GROWTH TARGET(2)

LEVEL(3)

% MET GROWTH TARGET(2)

LEVEL(3)

GROWTH TARGET

% GROWTH

ELEMENTARYButler ALL 63% 5 64% 5 Creek LEP 54% 3 72% 5 47% 50%Meadows ALL 44% 2 31% 1

LEP 42% 2 38% 1 47% 61.94%Oliver ALL 53% 4 50% 3

LEP 53% 3 50.5% 3 47% 47.52%Parklane ALL 51% 4 46% 3

LEP 51% 3 43.5% 2 47% 50%Pleasant ALL 56% 4 51% 4 Valley LEP 63% 5 47% 3 47% 53.01%View ALL 50% 4 44% 2

LEP 54% 3 44% 2 47% 49.26%Wood ALL 52.5% 4 42.5% 2

LEP 62% 5 47% 3 47% 45.79%CMS ALL 63% 5 60% 5 (7-8) LEP 65% 5 65% 5 47% 48.15%CHS ALL 57% 4 68% 5 (9-12) LEP 47.5% 3 57% 4 47% 61.64%

CSD* ALL 54.3% 4.33% 54.7% 3.67LEP 50% 3.67 53.2% 3.67 47% 51.15%

*average of elementary, middle and high percentiles.43

78. HOW ARE ELs PERFORMING IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS COMPARED TO THE DISTRICT’S GOALS AND STANDARDS?

AMAO 1: % OF STUDENTS MEETING INDIVIDUAL GROWTH TARGETSTarget: 47% Status: Met.


20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

2013-2014 AMAO 1

T: 47% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHSAMAO 1 52.2% 50.0% 61.9% 49.3% 45.8% 47.6% 50.0% 53.0% 48.2% 61.7%

Met Grow 485 44 96 67 49 48 51 44 39 45Total 930 88 155 136 107 101 102 83 81 73

AMAO 2a: % of exits – students identified fewer than 5 years as ELLTarget: 9% Status: Met


5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

'13-'14 AMAO 2a

T: 9.0% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHSAMAO 2a 11.9% 9.9% 17.1% 12.2% 12.4% 8.6% 8.6% 13.5% 17.7% 6.3%

Exit 123 10 32 19 16 12 10 14 6 4

Total 1032 101 187 156 129 140 117 104 34 64

AMAO 2b % of exits – students identified 5 years or longer.Target: 27% Status: Met

44


10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

'13-'14 AMAO 2b

T: 27% CSD BC ME VE WE OE PL PV CMS CHS

AMAO2b 30.8% 35.3% 7.1% 25.0% 5.9% 23.5% 58.8% 50.0% 37.1% 40.6%

Exits 72 6 2 6 1 4 10 6 23 13

Total 234 17 28 24 17 17 17 12 62 32

79 - 80. HOW DO MONITORED ELs CONTNIUE TO DEMONSTRATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS TO SUCCESSFULLY HANDLE REGULAR COURSEWORK?

Because this plan is due before end of year data is available, the following data is from the 2013-2014 school year:

Fail Rate0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

ELL Active; 15.34%

ELL Refused; 11.43%

ELL Monitor; 8.99%

Non-ELL; 6.41%Total; 7.13%

2013-14 Course Fail Rate, Grades 7-8

45

Fail Rate0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%ELL Active; 14.65%

ELL Refused; 0.00%

ELL Monitor; 13.30%

Non-ELL; 9.22%Total; 9.59%

2013-14 Course Fail Rate, Grades 9-12

ELL - Monitor ELL - No0%

20%40%60%80%

2013-14 OAKS Reading: % Intact Students Meeting Growth Target -

ELL Monitor v ELL No

ELL -

Monitor ELL - NoK-8 51% 72%

46

5th-6th 7th-8th0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

2013 -14 % Met on OAKS - 2013-2014: ELL Monitor v Non ELL

Monitor ELLNon ELL

1415 Grade 5th-6th 7th-8th

Monitor ELL 63% 47%

Non ELL 69% 72%

81. DESCRIBE HOW FORMER (NOT MONITORED NOR CURRENT) ELs CONTINUE TO DEMONSTRATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS THAT ENABLE THEM TO SUCCESSFULLY HANDLE COURSEWORK.

Given that this is the first year this student population is required, we do not have hard data to answer this question. However, these students in general are monitored in the same manner as students as outlined in the answer to question 83 (below).

83. HOW ARE EL AND MONITORED ELs DOING OVER TIME COMPARED TO ALL STUDENTS:Monitored students academic progress is reviewed bi-annually by ELL teachers. Students who are not progressing are discussed in relation to language abilities and reasons for the lack of academic progress. If there are significant linguist concerns, the student is considered for re-entry into the ELL program. Because Centennial uses the tiered system of support, every student’s progress is monitored weekly at PLC team meetings, and by building data teams that plan for and support intervention in reading and math.

With the hire this year of a 0.5 Data Systems Analysis, we have begun to build data bases that can track both monitor and post monitor students, and will thus begin to track long-term data for these students on a broader program-wide basis.

84. OVERALL PERFORMANCE MEASURES OF EL STUDENTS IN MEETING DISTRICT ELL PROGRAM GOALS:

We use the following measures to assess ELL student academic growth: ELPA – state assessment ADEPT – language assessment DRA – literacy benchmark assessment Gap Finder – for students in the program 5+ years Common formative assessments – administered by teachers and analyzed during weekly PLC time Daily classroom assessments

85 - 86. IDENTIFIED CONCERNS BASED ON THIS EVALUATION:

A. English Language Arts – LEP students are not making adequate growth in this area. In addition, their growth is not accelerated in comparison to their peers, indicating that the achievement gap is not closing.

47

We will address this on several levels, many still being worked out at this time. 1. The district-wide focus for the 2015-2016 school year is 3rd grade literacy. Building Principals are

working to focus their school improvement efforts in this area.2. The district is revising its school improvement planning process. Currently all buildings are moving

their improvement plans to the Indistar plans. This process will include a review and feedback process provided by Cabinet level Directors.

3. Assessment System. During the 2015-2016 school year the district will be implementing a new assessment system. The goal of the system is twofold:

a. Fall screener/interim assessment: provide benchmark assessments that will determine risk level and identify students in need of additional support early in the school year.

b. Winter screener/interim assessment: determine current status in relation to grade level standards and to identify gaps in student learning in time to address them before the summative assessment at the end of the year.

B. English Language Development – Implementation of the new English Language Proficiency Standards

1. Throughout 2014 we have been implementing new English Language Proficiency Standards. The focus of these standards and this implementation has been to better align our ELL instruction with the classroom, specifically in the area of ELA. Alignment has included better collaboration between classroom and ELL teachers. This work has included deconstructing the ELP Standards and aligning them to the K-6 ELA maps and writing secondary maps. We will continue this work during the 2015-2016 school year, completing the initial mapping phase and working on aligning the maps K-12.

2. During the 2015-2016 school year, the elementary program will be in a planning phase to shift the program model to a content-embedded language model that is scheduled to begin full implementation in the fall of 2016. The model will embed NGS Standards with ELP Standards and will provide the science-language content instruction to all students. Planning will continue throughout the school year, and will include training for both ELD and classroom teachers, and the revising of curriculum maps to reflect the new content. (Please see Appendix Q for a more detailed description of this program model.)

C. Data – we continue to build an effective system to track ELL student academic achievement data. While our data systems have improved, we need a better system to track data throughout the year, both for our active students and for our monitor and former ELL students. The district’s newly hired Data Analyst continues to address the need for more robust data systems for our programs. The ELL program will continue to work closely with this person to obtain more sufficient data for ELL students. Specifically, we will work to gather better data on and on-going basis on:

EL monitor students academic progress (grades, progress reports) current EL students academic progress (grades, progress reports) long term data for both active and former EL students

D. Procedures Review – The file audit revealed several areas where there were gaps in ensuring that cum files represent assessment and placement into ELD of students and the notification of families during the eligibility process. Review of these procedures will be conducted with staff to ensure student cum files represent correct procedures with 100% accuracy.

48

eei - home - centennial school districtcsd28j.org/.../2015/11/csd-ell-plan-2015-1.docx · web...

Documents