Data Collection for ELLS

Report
Data Collection for ELLs
Making ELL students condition visible
What English language learners know and can do
May 21, 2012
Shifting the paradigm: from deficit to
excellence
The function of deficit ideology…is to justify existing social
conditions by identifying the problem of inequality as located
within, rather than as pressing upon, disenfranchised communities
so that efforts to redress inequalities focus on “fixing”
disenfranchised people rather than the conditions which
disenfranchise them (Weiner, 2003; Yosso, 2005).
Paul C. Gorski, 2010
Students need to come to understand that the reason for
learning is to nurture their intellectual talents for the construction
of our society into a more democratic just and caring place to
live. Citizens must be well informed and have the educational
abilities and sensitivities needed to critically examine the world in
which we live.
Maxine Greene, 1995
2
Shifting the paradigm: from the old to the new
A scientific revolution is a noncumulative
developmental episode in which an older paradigm is
replaced in whole or in part by an incompatible new
one. But the new paradigm cannot build on the
preceding one. Rather, it can only supplant it, for "the
normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a
scientific revolution is not only incompatible but
actually incommensurable with that which has gone
before."
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhnsnap.html
3
OELL Process: a three pronged approach
DATA
Intervention
Project & Process Content
Mapping
Expertise
4
Tested process for addressing capacity
challenges
 Determine what generates the problem
 Reduce the problem to a level that we can resolve
 Determine unit for intervention
 Take quantum leaps and calculated risks
 Produce a plan of action
 Learning cycle: reflection, action, public dialogue
5
Process in action
Challenge
Intervention
1.
Creating a more accurate, data driven
understanding of ELL academic achievement.
With external researchers aligned the English
language development levels with MCAS results
to inform programming & practices.
2.
Finalizing a Settlement Agreement that could
be implemented successfully in the BPS.
Strengthened collaboration with USDOJ/OCR to
include extensive discussions of BPS structures,
policies and procedures.
3.
Connecting families new to Boston to a
network of supports.
Hired parent liaisons dedicated to connecting
families with CBOs services and supports.
4.
Providing more targeted and high quality
supports for schools.
Created an OELL Principals’ Board and an OELL
Student Council.
Assigned Academic Design Specialists that
provide technical assistance to schools.
Improved quality of after school and summer
programming.
5.
Designing a more efficient and effective
organization.
Introduced project planning and process
mapping to improve quality and productivity.
6
Outline of Presentation
1. Descriptive data: knowing our English English
Language Learners
2. Academic achievement data: creating a more
accurate, data driven understanding of ELL
academic achievement
7
What is the BPS linguistic diversity?




46% of BPS students speak a language other than
English as their first language
BPS students’ families are from over 100 countries
BPS students speak over 80 different first
languages
40% of BPS students are either currently learning
English or mastered academic English while
attending BPS schools
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs & May 24, 2012 “AllBPSwithTests.xls” file generated by BPS OIIT
8
What is the distribution of ELLs - by language?
Language
#
%
Spanish*
9,777
57%
Haitian*
1,636
10%
Cape
Verdean*
Vietnamese*
1,259
965
7%
6%
2%
1%
1%
9%
2%
5%
Spanish
57%
Haitian
Cape Verdean
Chinese
Vietnamese
6%
Chinese*
948
5%
Somali
316
2%
Portuguese
305
2%
Arabic
187
1%
French
182
1%
Arabic
Other
1550
9%
Other
Total
17,125
100%
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs
7%
10%
Portuguese
Somali
French
9
What is the distribution of ELLs - by program?
Program
SEI Language Program
Two-Way Bilingual
TBE (HILT for SIFE)
Number Percent Percent in
of ELLs of all ELLs Programs
5,767
34%
909
281
5%
41%
59%
100%
SEI General Ed.
10,168
2%
59%
Total
17,125
100%
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs
10
What is the distribution of ELLs – by grade?
Level
Total ELL
Percent of ELL
Pre-K
1,169
7%
Elementary
9,281
54%
Middle
3,097
18%
High
3,578
21%
Total
17,125
100%
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs
11
How many BPS students need ELL services?
Total ELL students
17,125
Subtotal Pre K
1,169
Subtotal K-12
15,956
30%
40%
22,975
Total FLEP students
5,850
10%
Total non-ELL students
33,719
60%
Total BPS students
56,694
100%
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs and FLEP data from “all with tests form 3/24/2012
FLEP = Formerly Limited English Proficient
12
How many BPS students are ELL with disabilities?
K2-12
BPS
%
SWD
%
BPS Students
53,996
100%
10,378
100%
ELL Students
16,047
30%
3,076
30%
K2-12
BPS
%
ELL
%
Total
Students
53,996
100%
16,047
100%
Students
without
Disabilities
43,618
81%
12,971
81%
Students with
Disabilities
10,378
19%
3,076
19%
Data source: MyBPS/ELD Tab as of 04/09/2012
13
What is the distribution of ELLs with disabilities by
language?
14
How do SY2011 and SY2012 compare in terms of
ELD levels?
Spring 2011
ELD
level
#
%
1
2,983
18%
2
2,725
16%
3
4,492
4
5
Total
% by
ESL
need
Spring 2012
#
%
3,206
18%
2,429
14%
27%
4,098
24%
4,218
25%
4,832
28%
2,294
14%
2,560
15%
17,125
100%
16,712 100%
61%
39%
100%
% by ESL
need
56%
44%
100%
15
How many ELLs at the elementary Level
(Grades K-2 to 5) are receiving services?
Date
Total
ELLs
(K2-5)
Total ELLs
receiving
ESL from a
qualified
hmr
teacher
Total ELLs
receiving
SEI from
qualified
hmr teacher
Total ELLs
not
receiving SEI
or ESL from
qualified
hmr teacher
Spring
SY 2009-10
6,088
1,902
3,088
3,000
Winter
SY 2011-12
9,200
4,396
7,570
1,606
Improvement
+3,112
+2,494
+ 4,482
-1,394
*BPS course schedule, OIIT’s allwithtesta.xls file, and HR Category training file were periodically analyzed by BPS OELL
over the past two school years to compile this data
16
How many ELLs at the secondary level
(Grades 6 to 12) are receiving services?
Date
Total SEI
Total
Total ELLs
Total
Total
core
count Total
in ESL
count of
core
of ELLs ELLs in class with ELLs in content classes
ESL
with
a
certified
SEI
core
courses
(Gr.6- class
qualified
teacher
*
courses
w/
ELLs
12)
teacher‡
Spring
SY 2009-10
4,847 2,824
2,449
4,836
18,529
Winter
SY 2011-12
5,471 2,960
2,745
5,326
21,590 13,466
Improvement
+624 +136
+305
+490
+3,061 +9,300
* Count by unique student ID
‡ Count by core content classes on ELL students schedules
4,166
BPS course schedule, OIIT’s allwithtesta.xls file, and HR
Category training file were periodically analyzed by BPS
OELL over the past two school years to compile this data
17
What are the drop out rates of ELLs - by program?
Dropout
Non-Dropout
#
%
#
%
Total
students
ELL
173
5.1%
3,189
94.1
3,362
FLEP
58
4.0%
1,404
96.0%
1,462
Non-ELL or
blank
939
6.4%
13,761
93.6%
14,700
6.0%
18,345
94.0%
19,515
ELL Status
Total
1,170
(Grades 9-12)
Data from Research, Assessment
Evaluation
18
What is the enrollment process for English
language learners?
FRC
NACC
EPS
•Collect and verify documents (medical forms, residency, birth date)
•Administer Home Language Survey (HLS) to all families to identify potential ELLs
•Score HLS and inform families of the results
•Schedule an appointment at NACC if the HLS score is 1.25 or greater
•Assign an initial case number to the student
•Interview families and collect information about students academic background
•Assess K-12 in English and determine the initial ELD Level
•Administer native language test to grades 3-12 if the students have had interrupted
learning or limited formal education
•Use test results to counsel families and recommend program placements and services
•Inform EPS of program recommendations
•Approve case for assignment
•Assign a BPS identification number to the case
•Review the school choices and use the NACC placement recommendations to
assign the student to a school
•Maintain student assignment data
•Notifies families by letter of their final assignments
19
How many students were tested at intake –
by language group?
Distribution of Non-Spanish First
Languages
Spanish: 1628
Other
* Haitian Creole: 332
20%
* Cape Verdean Creole: 243
* Chinese: 136
* Portuguese: 79
Arabic
* Vietnamese: 79
4%
* Somali: 64
Somali
* Arabic: 49
5%
* Other: 249
TOTAL TESTED: 2859
STUDENTS
Haitian
Creole
27%
Vietnamese
7%
Portuguese
7%
Chinese
11%
Cape
Verdean
Creole
19%
20
How many students were tested - by English
language development level?
Levels
Level 1
#
1351
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
301
273
390
Level 5
171
LEVEL 5-PRE 126
LAS
PROFICIENT 247
LEVEL 5-PRE
PROFICIENT
LAS
9%
4%
LEVEL 5
6%
LEVEL 1
47%
LEVEL 4
14%
LEVEL 3
10%
LEVEL 2
10%
21
Outline of Presentation
1. Descriptive Data: Knowing our English English
Language Learners
2. Academic achievement data: Creating a more
accurate, data driven understanding of ELL
academic achievement
22
Process for analyzing data and conducting
research
• Make the problem manageable: Look for patters and
focus in on a problem that we can address
• Clarify your question: What do we need to know and for
what purpose?
• The process to answer the question
• Can we answer our question with data that is available?
• What data do we have and what conclusions can we
draw?
• How does it relate to other available data?
• How can we triangulate/verify the results of our analysis?
• Keep in mind action at multiple levels: district, grade
level (E, K-8, M, H), school, program strand, classroom
23
BPS Commissions Two Studies
(Spring 2010-Fall 2011)
• Uriarte, Miren; Karp, Faye; Gagnon, Laurie; Tung, Rosann;
Rustan, Sarah; Chen, Jie; Berardino, Michael; Stazesky, Pamela;
de los Reyes, Eileen; and Bolomey, Antonieta, "Improving
Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools
and Programs in Boston Public Schools" (2011). Gastón Institute
Publications. Paper 154.
http://scholarworks.umb.edu/gaston_pubs/154.
• Tung, Rosann; Diez, Virginia; Gagnon, Laurie; Uriarte, Miren;
Stazesky, Pamela; de los Reyes, Eileen; and Bolomey, Antonieta,
"Learning from Consistently High Performing and Improving
Schools for English Language Learners in Boston Public Schools"
(2011). Gastón Institute Publications. Paper 155.
http://scholarworks.umb.edu/gaston_pubs/155
24
What do ELLs need in terms of instruction?
Language
instruction
through
content
Academic
Language
Content
instruction
through
language
25
What do the ELA & Math MCAS data tell us when
disaggregated by MEPA Level?
English Language Arts
MCAS Performance Levels
Total
W or F
NI
P or A
#
%
%
%
Mathematics
MCAS Performance Levels
Total W or F NI P or A
#
%
%
%
Only students tested in both 2011 MCAS and MEPA
Total
MEPA Level 1
MEPA Level 2
MEPA Level 3
MEPA Level 4
MEPA Level 5
7,205
25%
49%
25%
7,246
32%
39%
29%
72
97%
3%
0%
93
88%
11%
1%
320
86%
14%
0%
344
78%
16%
6%
1,452
55%
41%
4%
1,454
54%
33%
13%
3,171
20%
61%
20%
3,172
27%
45%
28%
2,190
3%
45%
52%
2,183
15%
39%
46%
All 2011 MCAS tested students
ELL
FLEP
7,291
29%
49%
22%
7,381
36%
38%
27%
1,899
2%
25%
74%
1,904
7%
29%
64%
Non-ELL, Non FLEP
17,202
14%
31%
55%
17,225
26%
32%
42%
All Students
26,392
17%
36%
47%
26,510
28%
33%
39%
Data from 2011 MADESE DART for ELLs.
26
Commissioned research on BPS ELL's test results
yields similar findings
The Mauricio Gaston Institute
for Latino Community
Development and Public
Policy (2011) found that: “the
command of English
required to pass
standardized tests designed
for English proficient
students, such as the MCAS,
far exceeds the levels of
English proficiency
represented by MEPA Levels
1–3, and to some extent 4.
BPS SY 2009 Elementary
School (grades 3-5) Findings
English
Proficiency
Level
MCAS ELA
Pass Rate
(NI+P+A)
MEPA Level 1
0.0%
MEPA Level 2
15.6%
MEPA Level 3
31.2%
MEPA Level 4
74.8%
MEPA Level 5
95.3%
English
Proficient
84.0%
27
What are the key findings?
FACT:

MCAS testing relies strongly on academic English and reading
comprehension.
CONCLUSIONS:
The English mastery necessary to pass MCAS exceeds the level of
academic English understood by ELLs with MEPA levels 1,2, and
3.


MCAS only measures content knowledge of ELLs at MEPA levels 4&5.


MEPA level 4 confirms that a student has acquired some academic
English and can score Needs Improvement on MCAS
MEPA level 5 confirms that the student has mastered the academic
English necessary to demonstrate content knowledge, and
can score Proficient or Advanced on MCAS
28
Questions?
29

similar documents