developing intervention framework for ells based on effective
TRANSCRIPT
Developing Intervention Framework
for ELLs Based on Effective
Consultation and Collaboration
Dr. Markay Winston – Director of Student Services
Milena Varbanova – CRP School Psychologist
Beth Martin – ESL Itinerant Support Teacher
Cincinnati Public School
Dr. Wendy Strickler – Educational Consultant
HCESC 1
English Language Learners in
CPS
• 1500 LEP students - 200% growth over 8 years
• Over 100 different countries
• Over 70 different languages
• 10 % of the ELLs are SWD
• 20% of the ELLs come with limited or no previous education
• 50% of the ELLs attend 4 schools with building-based ESL support
• 50 % attend 50 other schools with itinerant ESL support
470
615
751
920858
1042
1269
1500
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
PROJECTED
1700
Fastest Growing Group in CPS
ELLs by Grade Level
12.1%11.0%
12.4%
7.8%9.4%
8.0%6.8% 7.1%
5.5%
7.7%
4.0%3.1%
5.0%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
KG Grd02 Grd04 Grd06 Grd08 Grd10 Grd12
Grade Level
LEP Percentages Disaggregated by Grade Level
4
ESL Supports in the District
• ESL/Foreign Language Manager
• ESL Building – Based Teachers – 15 – across 4 schools (1:60 ratio)
• ESL Itinerant Teachers – 3 – across 50 schools
• (1:200 ratio)
• CRP School Psychologist
• Bilingual School Social Worker
• ESL Assistant School Community Coordinator
• OSLA Senior Support Specialist
District’s Strengths
• Students and parents committed to their learning and
success
• Competent and passionate ESL teachers
• ESL administrative leadership committed to improving
instructional practices and academic/social outcomes
• Clear and accurate understanding of academic needs of
ELLs (Formative and Summative Data)
• Knowledge of effective instructional (core and targeted)
practices for ELLs (see Intervention document)
• Increasing collaboration between Office of Second
Language Acquisition (OSLA) and school teams
• Increasing collaboration between district’s Curriculum and
Special Education leadership
District’s Challenges
• Lack of adequate knowledge of content area teachers
around second language acquisition and effective
instructional practices for ELLs
• Lack of appropriate differentiation in the delivery of
core content
• Lack of adequate targeted interventions around basic
academic skills and language development
• Lack of organizational infrastructure and resources to
provide targeted interventions
• Lack of consistent standardized intervention process
across schools
• Lack of critical understanding that effective practices
for ELLs are beneficial for ALL students at CPS
Many of our Students…
• lack prior schooling experience
• lack academic skills in their first language
• experienced traumatic events in their home
country
• are experiencing significant social-emotional
difficulties
• are entering Middle and High School with very
limited ELP
• have parents who have very limited levels of
English proficiency and acculturation and
therefore limited ability to support them
Critical Academic Skills of ELLs
in CPS
• For many ELLs, insufficiently
developed basic academic skills in
the areas of Reading and Math is a
major obstacle for accessing core
curriculum and achieving academic
success
Building the Framework
• Year 1 - 2011-2012
– Universal ELLs screenings
– List of research-based interventions
– Systematic data-based decision making
– Beginning of building level collaborative
problem solving
Tier 1
• Interdepartmental collaboration:
Curriculum managers, Student Services
and OSLA (District ESL) staff
• PD for implementation of Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) for diverse
learners
• Organizational infrastructure to support
service delivery • Various stages of implementation across targeted
buildings
Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol
(SIOP) Features in a Lesson Plan
• Preparation
– Adaptation of content
– Links to background
– Links to past learning
– Strategies incorporated
• Integration of processes
– Reading
– Writing
– Speaking
– Listening
• Scaffolding
– Modeling
– Guided practice
– Independent practice
– Comprehensible input
• Application
– Hands-on
– Meaningful
– Linked to objectives
– Promotes engagement
• Grouping Options
– Whole class
– Small groups
– Partners
– Independent
• Assessment
– Individual
– Group
– Written
– Oral Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2000, 2004, 2008
Tier 1
• Promote district-wide SIOP implementation
– Comprehensive professional development for administrators and teachers (Summer 2012)
– On-going SIOP coaching and support for teachers in administrators (2012-13)
Tier 1: Universal
Screening
• Ensure the collection of universal
screening and progress monitoring
data of ELLs
• AIMSweb assessments – Early Literacy and Math
– Reading Fluency and Comprehension
– Math Computation and Concepts and
Application
– Spelling and Writing
Tier 2
• Determine ELLs to target for reading
intervention, using AIMSweb and OTELA
scores
• Gather additional information at problem
solving meetings/team meetings to guide
instructional/intervention decisions
• Use a systematic and consistent decision-
making framework for ELLs
Tier 2
• Implement research-based and empirically validated targeted interventions (language development and academic) for struggling ELLs
Tier 2 Intervention Chart Program Target Skillls Grades Groupings Time Provided
by
Research Comments
PALS Comprehensive; all 5 k-6 Small group
1-3
30 min
3x/wk
Peer or
teacher
depending
on
program
WWC
Performance Index:
Alphab: 19 %ile
Fluency: 13 %ile
Compr: 13 %ile
ELL Reading Ach:
12%ile points
FCRR Review
BEE: Strong
evidence
Corrective Reading Comprehensive (weak
comprehension; strong
phonemic awareness,
phonics,fluency)
3-12 Small-
moderate
group (1-8)
45 min
per
session
(65-130
sessions)
Teacher,
IA, peer
instructor
28 independent
SRB studies
conducted;
26 found positive
results across
many
populations and
conditions
WWC
Performance Index:
Beg read/Adol.
Alph: 9 / 4
Fluen: 11 / 4
Compr: 7 / 3
Scholastic
ReadAbout
Vocabulary/comprehen
sion – non-fiction focus
3-8 Individual 2x/wk
plus
1x/wk
paper
computer FCRR Review;
New-limited
evidence;
grounded in
solid research
base
Student Tier 1 and 2 Decision Making
GROUP 1a: On track
At benchmark: fluent with reading **Each teacher completes this group for the ir homeroom**
Grade level benchmark________ or more wcpm
**Note: 1. After listing, go back to report showing accuracy and highlight any students for whom reading accuracy is not at least 93%
**Note 2: Later you will go over list of Maze scores and highlight in a different color any students for whom MAZE accuracy is a concern
Students:
OTELA 4-5:
Continue core curriculum and instruction with small group
differentiation including enrichment (SIOP recommended)
Ensure strong focus on vocabulary and comprehension
Tier 1 could include modifications for students with high error rates
(such as self-monitoring strategies or comprehension check strategies)
OTELA 1-3 (and language growth appropriate for time in country):
See above recommendations plus additional ESL support to continue
building oral literacy, as well as reading and writing skills
**Note: Screening data from AIMSweb identifies students for whom additional
discussion is warranted. Intervention decisions should not be based on one
piece of data without supporting evidence. Consider additional information
such as:
Is the student also passing OAA?
Do classroom data corroborate that the student is performing on grade
level?
Is the student performing well on benchmark or short-cycle
assessments?
Are there any behavior, socio-emotional, or health issues to consider?
Etc.
ELLs with Disabilities • Target ELLs for reading intervention, using AIMSweb
and OTELA scores to identify possible intervention
needs.
• Gather additional information at problem solving
meetings/team meetings to guide instructional/
intervention decisions
• Use a systematic and consistent decision-making
framework for ELLs
• Implement research-based and empirically validated
targeted interventions (language development and
academic) for struggling ELLs
• Request to have Intervention specialists involved in
the data meetings
Next Steps
• SIOP training and coaching
• Continue collaborative problem
solving
– Creating effective infrastructure and
resource allocation
– Involving key stakeholders
• What are your ideas for us?
• How is this looking in your district?