Data Collection for ELLsMaking ELL students condition visible
What English language learners know and
can doMay 21, 2012
Shifting the paradigm: from deficit to excellence
2
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
Shifting the paradigm: from the old to the new
3
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
OELL Process: a three pronged approach
4
DATA
Content Expertise
Project & Process Mapping
Intervention
Tested process for addressing capacity challenges
5
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
Process in action
6
Challenge Intervention1. Creating a more accurate, data driven
understanding of ELL academic achievement.
2. Finalizing a Settlement Agreement that could be implemented successfully in the BPS.
3. Connecting families new to Boston to a network of supports.
4. Providing more targeted and high quality supports for schools.
5. Designing a more efficient and effective organization.
With external researchers aligned the English language development levels with MCAS results to inform programming & practices.
Strengthened collaboration with USDOJ/OCR to include extensive discussions of BPS structures, policies and procedures.
Hired parent liaisons dedicated to connecting families with CBOs services and supports.
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.
Introduced project planning and process mapping to improve quality and productivity.
Outline of Presentation
7
1. Descriptive data: knowing our English English Language Learners
2. Academic achievement data: creating a more accurate, data driven understanding of ELL academic achievement
8
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
What is the BPS linguistic diversity?
9
What is the distribution of ELLs - by language?
57%
10%
7%
6%
5%
2%
2%1%
1%
9%
Spanish
Haitian
Cape Verdean
Chinese
Vietnamese
Portuguese
Somali
French
Arabic
Other
Language
# %
Spanish* 9,777 57%
Haitian* 1,636 10%
Cape Verdean*
1,259 7%
Vietnamese* 965 6%
Chinese* 948 5%
Somali 316 2%
Portuguese 305 2%
Arabic 187 1%
French 182 1%
Other 1550 9%
Total17,12
5100%Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs
What is the distribution of ELLs - by program?
10
ProgramNumbe
r of ELLs
Percent of all ELLs
Percent in
Programs
SEI Language Program 5,767 34%
41%Two-Way Bilingual 909 5%
TBE (HILT for SIFE) 281 2%
SEI General Ed. 10,168 59% 59%
Total 17,125 100% 100%
Data as of April 17, 2012 from MyBPS > ELD Level tabs
11
Level Total ELLPercent 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
What is the distribution of ELLs – by grade?
How many BPS students need ELL services?
12
Total ELL students 17,125 30%
40%22,975
Subtotal Pre K 1,169
Subtotal K-12 15,956
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 3/24/2012FLEP = Formerly Limited English Proficient
How many BPS students are ELL with disabilities?
13
Data source: MyBPS/ELD Tab as of 04/09/2012
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%
What is the distribution of ELLs with disabilities by language?
14
How do SY2011 and SY2012 compare in terms of ELD levels?
15
ELD leve
l
Spring 2011 Spring 2012
# %% by ESL
need# %
% by ESL need
1 2,983 18%
61%
3,206 18%
56%2 2,725 16% 2,429 14%
3 4,492 27% 4,098 24%
4 4,218 25%39%
4,832 28%44%
5 2,294 14% 2,560 15%
Total16,71
2100%
100%17,12
5100%
100%
16
How many ELLs at the elementary Level (Grades K-2 to 5) are receiving
services?
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
*
DateTotal 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
17
How many ELLs at the secondary level (Grades 6 to 12) are receiving services?
Date
Total count of ELLs(Gr.6-12)
Total ELLs
in ESL
class
Total ELLs in
ESL class with a
certified teacher
*
Total count
of ELLs in SEI core
courses
Total core
content
courses w/ ELLs
Total SEI core
classes with
qualified
teacher‡
Spring SY 2009-10
4,847
2,824
2,449 4,83618,52
94,166
Winter SY 2011-12
5,471
2,960
2,745 5,32621,59
013,466
Improvement
+624
+136
+305 +490+3,061
+9,300
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
* Count by unique student ID
‡ Count by core content classes on ELL students schedules
What are the drop out rates of ELLs - by program?
18
ELL StatusDropout 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
Total (Grades 9-
12)1,170 6.0% 18,345 94.0% 19,515
Data from Research, Assessment Evaluation
What is the enrollment process for English language learners?
19
How many students were tested at intake – by language group?
20
Distribution of Non-Spanish First LanguagesSpanish: 1628
* Haitian Creole: 332 * Cape Verdean Creole: 243 * Chinese: 136 * Portuguese: 79 * Vietnamese: 79 * Somali: 64 * Arabic: 49 * Other: 249
TOTAL TESTED: 2859 STUDENTS
21
How many students were tested - by English language development level?
Outline of Presentation
22
1. Descriptive Data: Knowing our English English Language Learners
2. Academic achievement data: Creating a more accurate, data driven understanding of ELL academic achievement
Process for analyzing data and conducting research
23
• 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
BPS Commissions Two Studies (Spring 2010-Fall 2011)
24
• 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
Academic
Language
25
What do ELLs need in terms of instruction?
26
What do the ELA & Math MCAS data tell us when disaggregated by MEPA Level?
English Language Arts Mathematics
MCAS Performance LevelsMCAS Performance
LevelsTotal W or F NI P or A Total W or F NI P or A
# % % % # % % %
Only students tested in both 2011 MCAS and MEPA
Total 7,205 25% 49% 25% 7,246 32% 39% 29%
MEPA Level 1 72 97% 3% 0% 93 88% 11% 1%
MEPA Level 2 320 86% 14% 0% 344 78% 16% 6%
MEPA Level 3 1,452 55% 41% 4% 1,454 54% 33% 13%
MEPA Level 4 3,171 20% 61% 20% 3,172 27% 45% 28%
MEPA Level 5 2,190 3% 45% 52% 2,183 15% 39% 46%
All 2011 MCAS tested students ELL 7,291 29% 49% 22% 7,381 36% 38% 27%
FLEP 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.
27
Commissioned research on BPS ELL's test results yields similar findings
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%
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.
28
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
29
Questions?
Top Related