California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and

ReclassificationPalm Middle School 2012-2013

CELDT Laws and Regulations

Local education agencies (LEAs) administer test of English proficiency in modalities of listening, speaking, reading, writing to:

1. new students whose primary language is not English

2. students who are English learners based on annual assessments

Primary Home Language Determinations

LEAs make a primary home language determination for all students in kindergarten through grade twelve upon first enrollment in California public schools

Once established, primary language can only be re-determined if results disputed by parent/guardian only

Determined by home language survey

Purposes of the CELDT

Identify pupils who are ELs

Determine the level of English language proficiency of pupils who are ELs

Assess the progress of EL pupils in acquiring the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing

Uses of CELDT Results

Initial Assessment Annual Assessment Accountability: Calculate

annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs 1 and 2) which classifies ELs into three categories: English Learners, Initial Fluent Proficient, RFEP (Initially identified as ELs, but later meet English proficiency requirements)

Accountability

AMAOs for EL students are as follows:

AMAO 1- Annual progress in learning English based on CELDT performance

AMAO 2: Attaining English proficiency on CELDT

Accountability (cont.)

AMAO 3: Meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for the EL subgroup at the LEA level on the California Standards Test (CST), California Modified Assessment (CMA), California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA); California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE)

Reclassification

Multiple Measures are used to reclassify students:

Assessment of English proficiency (CELDT)

Evaluation of performance in basic skills (CST, CMA)

Teacher evaluation Parental opinion and

consultation

Guide to the 2012-2013 Performance Report

There are five performance levels for measuring a student’s proficiency in English, based on CELDT scores: Advanced (5) Early Advanced (4) Intermediate (3) Early Intermediate (2) Beginning (1)

How To Read Report: Overall and Domains

The CELDT results report the performance level and score for the student’s overall performance in column 1. The overall score is the average of all domains. Columns 2 through 5 show the performance level(s) of the four domains tested: Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing

More than 50% of our English Learners speak Spanish Samoan Rumanian Filipino (Pilipino or Tagalog) French Khmer (Cambodian) Arabic Japanese Urdu Other non-English Language (Severely disabled students)

What languages do the students at Palm Middle School speak?

115 students are on either year one or two of monitoring after being Reclassified

123 students are currently designated as English Learners

49 students have Reclassified this year; 2 are pending

How are our students progressing?

CELDT Performance Level Report 2012-2013

CELDT Performance Level2012-2013 vs. 2011-2012

CELDT Overall 2012-2013

ADVANCED: 11.4% EARLY ADVANCED: 35.6% INTERMEDIATE: 34.9% EARLY INTERMEDIATE:

8.1% BEGINNING: 10.1%

CELDT Overall2011-2012

ADVANCED: 8.3% EARLY ADVANCED: 45.6% INTERMEDIATE: 34.4% EARLY INTERMEDIATE:

6.1% BEGINNING: 5.6%

ADVANCED: 8.93% EARLY ADVANCED: 26.79% INTERMEDIATE: 41.07% EARLY INTERMEDIATE: 8.93% BEGINNER: 14.29%

2012-2013 6th Grade (Incoming 5th Grade Students)

ADVANCED: 2.56% EARLY ADVANCED: 51.28% INTERMEDIATE: 33.33% EARLY INTERMEDIATE: 10.26% BEGINNING: 2.56%

2012-2013 7TH Grade(Coming from 6th Grade)

Advanced: 20.37% Early Advanced: 33.33% Intermediate: 29.63% Early Intermediate: 5.56% Beginning: 11.11%

2012-2013 8th Grade(Incoming from 7th Grade)

55.3% of English Learners increased at least one level on CELDT. This fell short of the goal by 2.3%

This goal was not met.

AMAO 1: 2011-2012

Students with less than 5 years of EL instruction was 20.1% which did not meet the target goal

Students with more than 5 years of EL instruction was 45.1% which did not meet the target

AMAO 2: 2011-2012

ELA AYP was 36.5% which did not meet the NCLB target of 78.4%

Math AYP was 31.6% which did not meet the NCLB target of 79.0%

English Learners met participation rates

AMAO 3: 2011-2012

Reclassification rate was 39% This did not meet the district goal of

attaining a 10% increase from a 44% baseline. The difference was -1.5%.

Reclassification Results: 2011-2012

Thank you!