TBIP, Title III, and Title I Part C: ELL and Migrant Student Funding ARRA Symposium Spokane, Washington May 19-20, 2009 OSPI Migrant and Bilingual Education

TBIP, Title III, and Title I Part C:ELL and Migrant Student Funding

ARRA SymposiumSpokane, Washington

May 19-20, 2009OSPI Migrant and Bilingual Education Program Staff

Title I Staff

Objectives Participants will:

• Understand the purposes of the different funding sources for English language learners (ELLs) and migrant students.

• Understand the parameters for applying federal stimulus funds to the needs of ELLs and migrant students.

• Have ample opportunity to ask questions and provide comments.

Fundamentals Regardless of Funds

• Definition of “fundamental”: of or relating to the foundation or base

• Basic Education is responsible for meeting the needs of ELLs and migrant students, even without supplemental funding. (Lau v. Nichols and WAC 162-28-040)

Fundamentals Regardless of Funds

Lau v. Nichols: A class action suit brought by parents of non-English-proficient Chinese students against the San Francisco Unified School District. In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that identical education does not constitute equal education under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court ruled that the district must take affirmative steps to overcome educational barriers faced by the non-English speaking Chinese students in the district. [414 U.S. 563 (1974)]

English language limitations andnational origin discrimination

It is an unfair practice for public and private schools to fail or refuse to provide equal educational opportunity to children who are deficient in English language skills because of their national origin. Schools attended by such children shall meet the following standards: (1) Where inability to speak and understand the English language excludes children based on national origin from effective participation, the district must take steps to ensure all programs and activities do not bar such students from fully participating. (2) The steps taken under part (1) shall build competency in the English language without detriment to the children's skills in other languages, and without impairing or suppressing the children's cultural identity and heritage. The steps may include bilingual education. The appropriateness of particular steps to be taken will depend in part on the number of children who require this service. (Excerpt from WAC 162-28-040)

Fundamentals Regardless of Funds RCW 28A.180.010 through 28A.180.080 shall be known and cited as "The Transitional Bilingual Instruction Act." The legislature finds that there are large numbers of children who come from homes where the primary language is other than English. The legislature finds that a transitional bilingual education program can meet the needs of these children. Pursuant to the policy of this state to insure equal educational opportunity to every child in this state, it is the purpose of RCW 28A.180.010 through 28A.180.080 to provide for the implementation of transitional bilingual education programs in the public schools, and to provide supplemental financial assistance to school districts to meet the extra costs of these programs.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=28A.180.010




State Transitional Bilingual Instruction Program (TBIP)


Allowable activities include:• Salaries for teachers and instructional support staff

providing TBIP services (cannot be used to fund teacher salaries in bilingual programs where the bilingual teacher is the student’s basic education teacher, e.g. dual language program).

• Professional development “for teachers, counselors, and other staff, who are involved in the district’s transitional bilingual program. Such training shall include appropriate instructional strategies for children of culturally different backgrounds, use of curriculum materials, and program models” RCW 28A.180.040 (5)

• Substitute costs for teachers on leave for ELL-specific professional development


Allowable activities (continued):• Instructional materials specific to English language

acquisition• Curriculum development specific to English language

acquisition• ELL parent involvement and literacy activities• Translations and interpretations specific to TBIP program

and services• Costs associated with annual program evaluation• WLPT-II Placement Test for screening potentially eligible

ELLs and costs related to the annual WLPT-II test administration

Federal Title III Funds


The first specific requirement outlined in federal Title III legislation:1)To increase the English language proficiency of limited English proficient children by providing high-quality language instruction education programs that are based on scientifically based research …

CANNOT BE USED TO SUPPLANT STATE TBIP

Federal Title III Funds – Non-Supplant Requirement

Supplement Not Supplant Provision of Title III of the ESEA Section 3115(g) of Title III of the ESEA (hereafter “Title III”) provides as follows: •SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT -- In practice, the prohibition against supplanting under Title III means that recipients may not use those funds to pay for services that, in the absence of Title III funds, would be necessary to be provided by other Federal, or State, or local funds.


States, districts, and schools are required to provide core language instruction educational programs and services for limited English proficient (LEP) students. This requirement is established based on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its implementing regulations, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States (including the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lau v. Nichols), and based on other significant case law (including Castaneda v. Pickard), the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and other Federal, State, and local laws.


Therefore, the use of State or subgrantee Title III funds to provide core language instruction educational programs, including providing for the salaries of teachers who provide those core services for LEP students, would violate the supplement not supplant provision in section 3115(g) of the Act, as such services are required to be provided by States and districts regardless of the availability of Federal Title III funds.


The second specific requirement outlined in federal Title III legislation:2)To provide high-quality professional development to classroom teachers (including teachers in classroom settings that are not the settings of language instruction educational programs), principals, administrators, and other school or community-based organization personnel

Federal Title III FundsAllowable activities include: Professional development trainer (as specified in

district’s Title III professional development plan) Salaries for teachers and instructional support staff (for

extended day and extended year only) Professional development specific to the needs of ELLs Instructional materials specific to the needs of ELLs Curriculum development specific to the needs of ELLs ELL parent involvement and literacy activities English language proficiency assessments for Title III

eligible Native American students (WLPT-II Placement Test and annual WLPT-II)

Federal Title III FundsAllowable activities (continued): WLPT-II (annual test only) costs for providing score

reports for all Title III eligible ELLs and Native American students

Substitute costs for teachers on leave for ELL-specific professional development

Stipends for teacher time, outside of contractual hours, spent on ELL-specific professional development activities

Tuition support for teachers or instructional support staff working towards ELL and/or Bilingual Ed. endorsements or teaching certificates

Costs associated with annual program evaluation

Title I Part C, Migrant Education


Provide activities and services that are a result of the Comprehensive Needs Assessment and Service Delivery Plan.•Must first use funds to meet the identified needs of migrant children that result from their migratory lifestyle to enable them to participate effectively in school.•Meet the needs of migrant children that are not addressed by services available from other federal or non-federal programs.


Clarification: The compounding risk factors for migrant students (mobility, poverty, interrupted school, language issues) sometimes are addressed in bits and pieces through Title I, ELL, other support services, and this is appropriate. A district’s migrant funds/program must also look for areas in which the compounding factors could be addressed, such as through a migrant graduation specialist, extended day or summer school programs, etc.


Required Activities:• Identification and Recruitment• Parent Advisory Council• Migrant parent inclusion in design (annual

needs assessment) and evaluation of program• Coordination with other services/agencies

including the transfer of student records


Allowable Activities:• Providing student advocacy• Facilitating access to health and social service

providers• Providing migrant families with necessary

supplies• Professional development that enhances school

personnel ability to work with migrant students and their families

• Program administration


Allowable Services that are educational or educationally related activities provided to migrant children to enable them to succeed in school. The criteria includes:1.Directly benefits migrant students.2.Is grounded in scientifically-based research or practices.3.Will increase the student’s academic skills thereby increasing their ability to meet state academic and achievement standards.

ARRA: Recommendations for Addressing the Needs of ELLs

On conference jump drive for full document, or go to: http://www.stanford.edu/~hakuta/ARRA/index.html

“The stimulus bill contains no funds targeted for ELL students specifically (e.g., no additional funding for Title III), attention to their success must be taken up through the other program allotments.”

http://www.stanford.edu/~hakuta/ARRA/ELL%20Stimulus%20Recommendations.pdf

http://www.stanford.edu/~hakuta/ARRA/index.html

Purpose of Title I Funds for ELLs and Migrant Students

“Under NCLB, Title I has been the main source of federal funding to support ELLs in attaining high levels of achievement in core academic content areas, whereas Title III has provided limitedbut important funding to ensure English language development.”


Purpose of Title I Funds for ELLs and Migrant Students

“The large infusion of ARRA funds through Title I will increase funding to schools serving ELL students, but there is very limited capacity in districts and states to use the funds effectively. Simply increasing the quantity, but not quality and types, of services will not produce the desired results for ELL children. Stimulus funds will be best invested if they are used to qualitatively improve the ways in which curriculum, instruction, assessment and accountability address the needs of ELLs.”


Recommendations for ARRA Funds

• Enhance data collection and reporting to address both English language proficiency and content knowledge of ELLs.

• Identify and develop appropriate curricula and materials that meet the content learning and English language development needs of ELLs.

• Provide professional development to enhance teacher capacity in working with and assessing ELLs.

• Provide extended learning time for ELLs.• Conduct research on how student performance on language

and content tests relate to one another and how teachers can use this data for instruction.


Recommendations for ARRA Funds

• Monitor the progress of all ELLs, especially those at risk of school failure.

• Implement family literacy programs that focus on the development of English literacy, English language, and parent-child reading activities.

• Prepare staff fluent in languages spoken in the community to act as community liaisons.

• Support programs that systematically train immigrant parents to advocate for their children in school.

Consult full document for further recommendations:


Scenario 1

We don’t feel like we have enough instructional support for our ELLs and we have had to reduce staff. Can we hire instructional support staff for our ELL program with stimulus dollars?•Allowable activity?•Improve educational outcomes?•Sustainable?•Opportunity to be innovative?•Qualitative Improvement?•Supplement vs. Supplant?

Scenario 2We want our teachers to be better equipped to meet the needs of ELLs and Migrant students. Can we use stimulus funds to greatly increase our professional development for teachers during the next two years? Can this be part of our school improvement efforts, related to AYP?•Allowable activity?•Improve educational outcomes?•Sustainable?•Opportunity to be innovative?•Qualitative Improvement?•Supplement vs. Supplant?

Scenario 3Can I use stimulus money to co-fund staff, who will otherwise face a reduction in their FTE? For example, I have an ELL teacher who had been funded out of TBIP and other state funds. Can I now fund the “other state funds” portion out of stimulus funds?•Allowable activity?•Improve educational outcomes?•Sustainable?•Opportunity to be innovative?•Qualitative Improvement?•Supplement vs. Supplant?

Scenario 4

Can I use stimulus money to purchase materials and technology to be used with our ELL and Migrant students? What about purchasing additional assessment materials beyond the WLPT-II?•Allowable activity?•Improve educational outcomes?•Sustainable?•Opportunity to be innovative?•Qualitative Improvement?•Supplement vs. Supplant?

Questions/Comments

Contact InfoMigrant and Bilingual Education Programs

Main Office: 360-725-6147Howard De Leeuw, Director

[email protected]

Transitional Bilingual Instruction Program/Title III

Title I Part C, Migrant Education Program

Alma Chacon, Program [email protected]

Lupe Ledesma, Program [email protected]

Helen Malagon, [email protected]

Sylvia Reyna, Program [email protected]

Documents

TBIP, Title III, and Title I Part C: ELL and Migrant Student Funding ARRA Symposium Spokane, Washington May 19-20, 2009 OSPI Migrant and Bilingual Education