Title III-LEP Bootcamp Session 5: Title III Program Basics

Transcription

1 Title III-LEP Bootcamp Session 5: Title III Program Basics FERNANDA BRENDEFUR, ED.D. IDAHO STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

2 Definition of Limited English Proficiency (A.) who is aged 3 through 21; (B.) who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school or secondary school; (C.) (i.) who was not born in the United States or whose native language is a language other than English; and who comes from an environment where a language other than English is dominant; AND (D.) whose difficulties speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the individual (i.) the ability to meet the State s proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3); (ii.) the ability to achieve successfully in classrooms where the language of instruction is English; or (iii.) the opportunity to participate fully in society. [P.L , Title IX, Part A, Sec. 9101, (25)]

3 Identification of LEP Students Home Language Survey -Survey is provided to all students in a district to be filled out by the families. If a survey indicates a language other than English is the dominant language of the student, the child must be given the ELL Placement Test. English Language Learner (ELL) Placement Test -Districts download this screener from the SDE website. Copies of these tests must be kept in the student s file whether or not they test eligible for the LEP program.

4 Office of Civil Rights Requirements Lau vs. Nichols, 1974 (equal is not equitable) Castaneda vs. Pickard, 1981 (program must be appropriate ) 1. the program must be based on sound educational theory. 2. the education system/agency implementing the program must do so to full effect (i.e., supply sufficient personnel, time and resources for it to work as intended). 3. if the program fails to overcome linguistic barriers for students after enough time to be considered a fair trial period, it should be discontinued in favor of another theory. ONGOING EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS IS ESSENTIAL!!!!!

5 Idaho State Law The 1995 Legislature created the limited English proficiency appropriation with the intent to support the programs for students with non-english or limited English proficiency. This action followed a legal suit brought against the Idaho State Board of Education by the Idaho Migrant Council. The 1983 Consent Decree Civil No sought equitable and appropriate education for limited English proficient (LEP) students. Idaho Statute followed in 2004 to ensure that statewide achievement objectives and goals were developed and district LEP Plans were implemented.

6 Idaho Program Mission To provide assistance to school districts in meeting Federal and State regulations in regards to the education of English language learners. To assist school districts in creating, implementing and maintaining English language development programs that provide academically rigorous and equitable learning opportunities for English language learners. To promote culturally relevant and responsive curricula and pedagogies that embrace the unique identities of English language learners. To help break down social and academic barriers that prevent English language learners from succeeding in schools.

7 LEP Students in Idaho As reported in SY 1011: Total LEP students reported in grades K-12 16,280 Total LEP students reported in grades K-12 whose first language is Spanish 13,464 (83%) Total LEP students reported in grades K-12 who are also Migrant 1,419 (9%). [Idaho has roughly 4,000 migrant students in total]

8 State LEP Funding Fiscal Year STATE LEP FUNDING Total Allocation 1997 $1,500, $2,250, $3,000, $3,750, $4,000, $4,475, $4,500, $4,500,000 # of LEP Students Per Pupil Amount 11,267 $ ,188 $ ,251 $ ,338 $ ,733 $ ,168 $ ,746 $ ,649 $ $4,850,000 20,816 $ $5,060,000 20,936 $ $5,290,000 18,198 $ $6, * 18,057 $ $6,040,000* 18,623 $ $6,040,000* 18,377 $ $4,000,000* 17,358 $201.64

9 State Funding $3,500,000 is allocated directly to districts on a per pupil basis. $450,000 is allocated on three-year cycle competitive grants known as the LEP Enhancement Grants. $50,000 stays at the state department to administer and evaluate the grant program.

10 Federal Title III: Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students Goal 1. This program is designed to improve the education of limited English proficient (LEP) children and youths by helping them learn English and meet challenging state academic content and student academic achievement standards. The program provides enhanced instructional opportunities for immigrant children and youths. Goal 2. To develop high-quality language instruction educational programs. Goal 3. To provide high-quality professional development specific to meeting the needs of LEP and Immigrant students. Goal 4. To promote meaningful and inclusive parental and community involvement among LEP families and communities. Goal 5. Supplement not Supplant. [show document]

11 Title III Funding $2,237,000 total Idaho allocation. $175,000 for state administration of the Title III program. $1,929,000 directly allocated to districts with enough students to incur a minimum $10,000 allocation. $103,000 is competitive Emergency Immigrant grant. $30,000 is competitive Consortia grants ($10,000 each).

12 Title III Program Requirements District LEP Plans linguistic, academic, cultural needs. High quality supplemental English Language Development (ELD) Programs. English Language Development (ELD) Standards Language Arts, Math, Science. Professional Development (i.e., SIOP, Project GLAD). Educational Learning Plans (ELPs). District Monitoring onsite or desk review.

13 Idaho English Language Assessment (IELA) The IELA is intended to measure a student s progress and proficiency in the English language. The IELA scores will tell a district whether students are progressing forward. If students are not progressing sufficiently, then the district must take measures to change its instruction for those students. If the students continue to not progress sufficiently, the district must take measures to change its practices for the school and district.

14 Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) AMAO #1 progress Progress is defined as advancing one level or more of language proficiency per year Target was 26% Target is 27% Annually increasing by approx. 1 point. Ending year will be spring 2018 with a target of 35%. * Only students who have tested for 2 years (e.g. students who have 2 data points) are included in AMAO #1 for growth.

15 Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) AMAO #2 proficiency Proficiency is defined as an EF+ on all sub-domains. This results in some students with a 4 overall to be deemed proficient Target was 14% Target is 15% Annually increasing by approx. 1 point. Ending year will be spring 2018 with a Target of 20%. * Every LEP student is calculated in AMAO #2 proficiency determinations

16 Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) AMAO #3 AYP for LEP subgroup / Targets: -Reading 90.40% -Mathematics 88.70% -Language Usage 83.40% Do LEP students have an Educational Learning Plan (ELP)? (LEP Manual page 46+) Are LEP students given accommodations? (LEP Manual page 30+)

17 Title III Accountability Districts not meeting AMAOs for two consecutive years are in District Improvement and must write an improvement plan that addresses the specific areas they are in improvement for. Districts not meeting AMAOs for four or more consecutive years are in Title III Corrective Action and must make major changes to their LEP program.

18 Idaho English Language Assessments Use IELA reports to help inform instruction and make necessary changes. -District growth reports -District summary by grade -School growth reports -School summary by grade -Individual student reports School Net coming this spring!

19 LEP Program Models in Idaho ESL pullout (most widely implemented) ESL courses Sheltered instruction in content areas Dual-immersion bilingual Transitional bilingual Newcomer centers

20 Characteristics of Effective District LEP Programs Strong and actively involved leadership. Supportive district-wide climate. Strong effort is made to hire highly qualified teachers endorsed in ESL and/or bilingual education. Customized learning environments at each school site. Collaboration and common goals between schools. Systematic student assessment across the district. Specific and appropriate professional development for all teachers who work with LEP/ELL students.

21 Characteristics of Effective School LEP Programs Parental Involvement goes beyond the informative level. Strong and actively involved school leaders. Culturally responsive school climate. Shared sense of responsibility for LEP student success. Developmentally appropriate and challenging curriculum. High expectations for LEP students.

22 Characteristics of Effective School LEP Programs Instruction builds on LEP students prior knowledge and experiences. Active engagement and interest in native language and culture. Instructional strategies that enhance understanding. Integration of content teaching with English language teaching. Valid and appropriate assessments that take into account the language acquisition stages and cultural backgrounds of LEP students.

23 PREGUNTAS????? QUESTIONS?????