...

Next Generation Standards English Language Development (ELD)

by user

on
Category:

education

37

views

Report

Comments

Transcript

Next Generation Standards English Language Development (ELD)
State Board of Education meeting
September 19, 2013
ODE Office of Education Equity
David Bautista, Assistant Superintendent
Martha I. Martinez, Education Specialist
1






English Learners in Oregon
ELPA21 and New ELP Standards Connection
Overview of ELP Standards Review Process
Evolution of the ELP Standards
New ELP Standards Overview*
Stakeholder Feedback and Next Steps
*Several slides adapted from Shafer Willner, L. (2013). Initial
tour of the 2013 English language proficiency standards.
2
Description
Count
Total number of English Learners
58,580
Number of English Learners receiving
service
Number of English Learners waiving
service
Number of Elementary English
Learners (K-5)
Number of Middle School English
Learners (6-8)
Number of High School English
Learners (9-12)
55,477
3,103
42,355
8,068
8,157
Source: 2011-12 LEP collection and Oregon State Report Card
Number of
Limited
Number of Enrolled
English
Students by
Proficient
Language of Origin Language of Origin Students
Spanish
Russian
Vietnamese
Chinese
Somali
Arabic
Ukrainian
Korean
76,698
4,900
4,447
2,880
914
894
1,155
1,167
45,157
2,222
1,834
953
760
571
541
453
Percent of
Limited English
Proficient
Enrollment
77.09%
3.79%
3.13%
1.63%
1.30%
0.97%
0.92%
0.77%
Source: 2011-12 Oregon State Report Card

ELPA21 is Oregon’s new English language
proficiency assessment based on new
English Language Proficiency standards
that correspond to the CCSS (ELA and Math)
and NGSS

Planned operational year: 2016-17

11 state consortium

Oregon is lead state
5
6
8
Benefits




Correspondence with new
expectations inherent in
new content standards
Common ELP standards tied
to common ELP assessment
Shared expertise across
states
Common expectations for
ELLs across states
Challenges



Multiple parties involved
(11 states, CCSSO, WestEd,
and Understanding
Language)
States’ deadlines for
adopting new ELP Standards
(ESEA waivers and ELPA21
assurance) – fall 2013
Funding new ELP standards
development
9
March 2013: State Board of Education presentation
on Guiding Principles
April through August, 2013: State feedback sought
via
Document reviews on a monthly basis
Periodic webinars/phone conversations with state
leads
June meeting (in person) with most ELPA21 state
leads and other interested states (e.g. CA, TN)
Feedback typically due in one week or less
10

Emailed review documents to ELP Standards Focus
Group for April, May and June reviews (a subset of
the June documents were sent out)
◦ April feedback response: 3 emails, but one represented 13
ELL directors and teachers.
◦ May feedback response: 1 teacher


Convened an ELP Review Panel for June, July, and
August reviews
Broad stakeholder feedback for August 1 draft.
Online survey open 8/2 – 8/11 at:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=36
11


Short review timeline
Meaningful feedback that directly influenced
subsequent drafts
Selection based on:
1.
Expertise
2.
Participation in earlier ELP standards draft reviews
3.
Participation in other statewide ELL work
4.
Geographic distribution
5.
Availability and Willingness to Participate

12
Draft ELP Standards Review
August 5-6, 2013
o
Participating Districts
Partners (university, community)
Amity
Centennial
Corvallis
David Douglas
Eugene 4-J
Four Rivers
Charter
• Gresham Barlow
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Hillsboro
•
• Hood River
•
County
•
• InterMountain ESD•
• Klamath County •
• Lincoln County
• McMinnville
•
• Medford
Newberg
Nyssa
Salem-Keizer
Tigard Tualatin
West Linn
Wilsonville
Woodburn
14

CCSSO “Framework” – Oct. 2012(Framework for
English Language Proficiency Development Standards
corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the
Next Generation Science Standards)


California ELD Standards – Oct. 2012
Understanding Language – “Relationships and
Convergences” Venn Diagram - March 2012
15
March 2012: Framework Committee convened:
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Susan Pimentel, Chair (Lead CCSS ELA/Literacy Writer)
Gary Cook (Wisconsin Center for Education Research)
Guadalupe Valdés (Stanford)
Aída Walqui (WestEd)
and 5 others
April 2012: Rapid Response Expert Feedback group formed
◦
◦
◦
◦

Tim Boals (WIDA)
Phil Daro (lead CCSS math writer)
Kenji Hakuta (Stanford)
and at least 8 others
June and July 2012: Feedback solicited from CCSSO’s ELL
State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards
(SCASS) and other stakeholders (e.g., NASBE, NCLR, MALDEF)
16

What it Does:
◦ Outline the underlying English language practices and
uses found in the CCSS and the NGSS.
◦ Sketch out a procedure by which to evaluate the degree
of alignment present between the framework (that
corresponds to the language demands of the CCSS and
NGSS) and the ELP standards under consideration or
adopted by states.

What it Does Not Do: Offer a specific set of ELP
standards
17
Appealing Aspects




They are done!
Correspondence to
CCSS (ELA)
Informed by the
expertise/thinking
behind the Framework
ELPA21 grant funds
cannot fund ELP
standards development
Unappealing Aspects





Do not address CCSS
(Math) and NGSS
(Too) Many Standards
Organization not clear
3 proficiency levels
with entry/exit
Drafted for one specific
state
18
*Several slides adapted from Shafer Willner, L. (2013). Initial tour
of the 2013 English language proficiency standards.
20



Fewer ELP standards (10 total) than California
uses; Some from California, others new
Collective feedback from ELPA21 states with
input from project partners and national EL
and standards experts
Strategic and Referential Correspondence to
CCSS and NGSS
21
Our overarching focus addresses the
following question:

What does it look like when English
language learners (ELLs) use language
effectively as they progress toward
independent participation in gradeappropriate activities?
See Understanding Language video of Aída Walqui:
Language and the Common Core State Standards
“language as action”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3YJx8ujoto
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Potential
Funds of Knowledge
Diversity in ELL Progress in Acquiring English
Language Proficiency
Scaffolding
Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal
Education
Special Needs
Access Supports and Accommodations
Multimedia, Technology, and New Literacies
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
construct meaning from oral presentations and literary and informational text
through grade-appropriate listening, reading, and viewing
participate in grade-appropriate oral and written exchanges of information, ideas,
and analyses, responding to peer, audience, or reader comments and questions
speak and write about grade-appropriate complex literary and informational texts
and topics
construct grade-appropriate oral and written claims and support them with
reasoning and evidence
conduct research and evaluate and communicate findings to answer questions or
solve problems
analyze and critique the arguments of others orally and in writing
adapt language choices to purpose, task, and audience when speaking and writing
determine the meaning of words and phrases in oral presentations and literary
and informational text
create clear and coherent grade-appropriate speech and text
make accurate use of standard English to communicate in grade-appropriate
speech and writing
Receptive modalities*:
Ways in which students receive
communications from others (e.g.,
listening, reading, viewing). Instruction
and assessment of receptive modalities
focus on students’ communication of
their understanding of the meaning of
communications from others.
Interactive modalities:
Collaborative use of receptive
and productive modalities as
“students engage in
conversations, provide and
obtain information, express
feelings and emotions, and
exchange opinions” (Phillips,
2008, p. 3).
8
determine the meaning of words and phrases in oral
presentations and literary and informational text
Listening
and
reading
Productive modalities*:
Ways in which students
communicate to others (e.g.,
speaking, writing, drawing).
Instruction and assessment of
productive modalities focus on
students’ communication of their
own understanding or
interpretation.
1
construct meaning from oral presentations and literary and
informational text through grade-appropriate listening,
reading, and viewing
4
speak and write about grade-appropriate complex literary
and informational texts and topics
construct grade-appropriate oral and written claims and
support them with reasoning and evidence
7
adapt language choices to purpose, task, and audience
when speaking and writing
3
Speaking
and
writing
Listening,
speaking,
reading,
and
writing
5
participate in grade-appropriate oral and written exchanges
of information, ideas, and analyses, responding to peer,
audience, or reader comments and questions
conduct research and evaluate and communicate findings
to answer questions or solve problems
6
analyze and critique the arguments of others orally and in
writing
2

The levels 1–5 descriptors describe targets
for student performance by the end of each
ELP level at a particular point in time.
◦ Students may demonstrate a range of abilities
within each ELP level.
◦ The linear progressions are done for purposes of
presentation and understanding; actual second
language acquisition does not necessarily occur in a
linear fashion within or across proficiency levels.

ELPA21 States

WestEd: Lynn Shafer Willner, Project Director and Lead Author

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)
 Scott Norton, Strategic Initiative Director, Standards,
Assessment, and Accountability
 Fen Chou, Program Director, Assessment, Standards,
Assessment, and Accountability
 Carrie Heath-Phillips, Program Director

Understanding Language Initiative (Stanford University)
 Kenji Hakuta, Co-Chair and Lee L. Jacks Professor of
Education
 Martha Castellon, Executive Director
29
How do you feel that the draft English Language Proficiency Standards
will affect students, schools, and/or districts?
8%
4%
The new standards will be a POSITIVE change
16%
The new standards will be a NEGATIVE
change
The new standards will have NO EFFECT
72%
N = 25
No opinion
Martha I. Martinez, Education Specialist
Office of Education Equity
(503) 947-5778
[email protected]
David Bautista, Assistant Superintendent
Office of Education Equity
(503) 947-5750
[email protected]
32
Fly UP