1

Seattle Public School ELL Data

Veronica Maria Gallardo, Director of ELL

English Language Learners and International Programs

Creating partnerships and pathways to ensure student success

Mission: The English Language Learners and International Programs Department works collaboratively with all stakeholders to educate, prepare, and support our diverse student population, their families, and communities to thrive in our global society.

Primary Stakeholder: Ell students, staff and community members

3

ELL Demographics Data

2012-2013

4

K 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 120

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000948

832

749

566

494

405

314 318292

399

306279

350

Total Seattle ELL Enrollment by Grade Based on 2012-2013 SY Current

61 % of K-5 ELL Student in Elementary 16 % in Mid-dle 22 % in High School

5

K 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 SPS0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

19.3% 19.6%

16.0%

12.8%12.0%

10.9%10.3% 10.1%

9.5%

10.8% 10.4%9.7%

11.4%

12.6%

English Language Learners as a Percent of All Students by Grade

Based on 2012-2013 SY

6

Span

ish

Vietn

ames

e

Som

ali

Chine

se

Taga

log

Amha

ric

Tigr

inya

(Tig

rigna

)

Orom

o (E

thio

pia)

Cambo

dian

Other

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

74% of ELL student speak one of the top six languages.

105 Other Languages Spo-ken by ELL Students

Top Languages Spoken in Seattle School District2012-2013

7

0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 Greter than 5 years

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Number of Current ELL Students by Years in Program2012-2013 SY

N=5773 students

Long Term ELLs

8

ELLs Demographic Data Not Captured Current data collection does not include:

Student’s level of education in native country

Student’s native language proficiency

Student’s proficiency in content areas such as math

Student with interrupted formal education (SIFE)

Social, emotional, and health needs of students

9

ELL/Special Education Intervention

Kent School District - Matrix

10

ELLs Receiving Special Education Services

4720; 82%

1053; 18%

18% of ELL Students are also in Special Education N = 5773

11

ELL/Special Identification ProcessCritical data required for ELL students of concernIdentification tool provided by the Kent School District

Meant to be a team process of identification

Requires various forms of data collection

Special considerations for certain questions – red flags

12

ELL/Special Ed. Data Collection Process Students Primary Language – transparent or non

transparent Other languages spoken Multiple languages spoken in the home Expected years of education in the primary language Parental education in primary language Does the student read in their primary language Years learning English Attendance history

13

ELL Data Collection Process Approach to ELL services – direct service, pull out, no

service Rate of growth on WELPA Intervention description Expectations in classroom Classroom observations Comparison student data Parent interview Developmental history

* Kent School District Tool

14 -Kent School District

FACTORS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Data supports referral

Between Neutral and Supports Referral

Neutral

Between Neutral and More Interventions

Data supports more intervention(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Red Flag Areas

Directions1. Complete the matrix by placing the marks into the appropriate squares as the

discussion occurs.2. As the team discusses each of the 16 points of data, they need to place a check

mark into the appropriate section of the matrix (e.g., if for factor one the team determined the data supports more intervention(s), place a check mark into the corresponding square).

3. Then, analyze the matrix as a whole. That is, do the majority of the check marks appear to be above or below the neutral line (above supporting a referral and below supporting more intervention(s)). If it is unclear, discuss the red flag items and use them as a “tie” breaker.

ELL/Special Education Analysis Matrix

World Language Credit for Proficiency

Road Map Project

16

World Language Proficiency Credits

Students with proficiency in a language other than English can earn world language credits by demonstrating proficiency in that language. Students who demonstrate proficiency through the assessment process may be able to receive competency-based credits on their transcript.

17

World Language –Credit for ProficiencyState Board of Education Support for Competency-based

Learning

Including a competency-based definition of a high school credit in WAC 180-51-050

Advocacy for state performance assessments

Advocacy for course-equivalency credit

18

Benefits To honor and validate students’ first language and the

languages of their families

To provide opportunities for fluent and literate speakers to receive high school credit for their knowledge of these languages

To open up opportunities for students to access core subject credits required for graduation (This is a significant opportunity for ELL students who enter the U.S. high school system mid-year or with limited core subject credits.)

19

Benefits continued To prepare bilingual students for future career

opportunities in private industry and to meet government needs for skilled bilingual speakers

To motivate students to take advanced courses in their heritage languages at their schools, in college or at ethnic community centers

20

Competency (Proficiency)-based Credit: Good Idea, Hard to ImplementRequires:

–What do students need to know?

–What do students need to do?

–How will students show what they know?

–How well do students need to perform?

21

Student Self-Assessment & PortfolioLinguaFolio (and LinguaFolio Online)

– Checklists of CanDo statements at different proficiency levels (aligned to STAMP and ACTFL

levels) Use to screen students

– Should be able to check off Novice Mid CanDos before taking external assessment

Use to support Less Commonly Taught Languages with Collection of EvidenceFor example: Tigrigna, Oromo, Polish

22

Assessments UsedSTAMP – Standards-Based Measurement of Proficiency

from Avant Assessment – Developed by CASLS (Center for Applied Second

Language Studies) at the University of Oregon – Spanish, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Chinese,

and now: ArabicACTFL Assessments from Language Testing International – OPI (or OPIc) - Oral Proficiency Interview

(computer-based) – WPT - Writing Proficiency Test

23

Determining Competency and Credits

Novice Mid – 1 credit (Carnegie Unit)

Novice High – 2 credits

Intermediate Low – 3 credits

Intermediate Mid – 4 credits

24

Website for Washington StateThe Seattle School Board adopted its

Competency-Based Credits policy and procedure in March 2011. During 2011-2012, Seattle Public Schools is partnering with the OSPI World Languages program to support students in Seattle Public Schools, especially students who are served by Seattle’s English Language Learners (ELL) and International Education Programs, to earn competency-based credits for languages that they may have learned outside the school setting. We have over 300 students who have earned 3 to 4 credits.

http://www.k12.wa.us/WorldLanguages/CompetencyBasedCredits.aspx