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?