english language proficiency indicator - isbe.net .progress in achieving english language...

Download English Language Proficiency Indicator - isbe.net .progress in achieving English language proficiency,

Post on 24-Jul-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • EnglishLanguageProficiencyIndicator

    ILAccountabilityTAC,April2,2018

  • ESSARequirements

    Annuallymeasure.forallpublicschoolsintheState,progressinachievingEnglishlanguageproficiency,asdefinedbytheStateandmeasuredbythe[statesELPassessment]withinaState-determinedtimelineforallEnglishlearners ineachofthegrades3through8;and inthegradeforwhichsuchEnglishlearnersareotherwiseassessedduringthegrade9throughgrade12period

    ILTACApril2018ELP 2

  • PrimaryConsiderations

    UnderESSA,theELPindicatormaytakeindividualstudentcharacteristicsintoaccount.

    Twoimportantcharacteristicsthatinfluencewhetherastudentisreclassified: StudentsinitiallevelofEnglishproficiency, TimeinthesystemasanEL

    Growthconsiderations Growthtrajectoriesarerarelylinear

    Fastergrowthearly;slowsdownovertime Growthisoftenconsistentacrossgradesamonginitiallevels StudentsenteringinthelatergradestendtoscoresimilarlyanddisplaysimilargrowthtrajectoriestostudentswiththesameELDlevelwhohavebeenintheschoolsystemlonger

    ILTACApril2018ELP

    Goldschmidt,P.&Hakuta,K.(2017).IncorporatingEnglishLearnerProgressintoStateAccountabilitySystems.WashingtonDC:CouncilofChiefStateSchoolOfficers

    3

  • ILStatePlan

    IllinoisproposesatargetedmaximumtimelineoffiveyearsforEnglishLearnerstoachieveELP

    Proficiencyhasbeenestablishedasacompositeproficiencylevelscoreof4.8orabove

    ELsmustmakeannualprogresstowardsthecompositescoreof4.8oraboveonACCESS2.0withinfiveyears.Studentsmeasuretowardproficiencyisindividuallybasedonentrylevelperformance.Astudentismakingprogressprovidedthattheyscoreatorabovetheircalculatedinterimtarget

    ILTACApril2018ELP 4

  • ILStatePlan

    ILTACApril2018ELP

    TheinterimtargetiscalculatedbyinterpolatingbetweenthestudentsentrylevelACCESS2.0scoreandtheminimumexitscoreof4.8.

    Allstudentsareprovided5yearstoexitregardlessoftheircompositeproficiencylevelinyear1.

    5

  • ThoughtsfromtheDecembermeeting

    Needadditionalinformationtohelpevaluatethereasonablenessofthismodelandproposeadditionaloptionsforconsideration: TechnicalcharacteristicsoftheACCESS2.0 SummaryofwhatotherWIDAstatesaredoing/planning CharacteristicsofthepopulationofELLtesttakersinIL PotentialimpactofproposedELPindicatorfordifferenttypesofschoolsinIL

    ILTACApril2018ELP 6

  • WIDAStates

    ILTACApril2018ELP 7

    Graphicfromwww.wida.us

  • ACCESSforELLs2.0

    Purpose:meetstateandfederalrequirementsfortheannualassessmentofEnglishlearnersto Identifytheappropriatelanguageinstructioneducationalprogram(LIEP)placement

    DetermineifstudentsaremakingacceptableprogressinEnglishlanguageproficiency

    DetermineifstudentshaveattainedsufficientEnglishlanguageproficiencytobereclassified

    SupporttheevaluationofLIEPprograms

    8ILTACApril2018ELP

    TakenfromWIDAInterpretiveGuide

  • Listening

    Speaking

    Reading

    Writing

    Process, understand, interpret and evaluate spoken language in a variety of situations

    Process, understand, interpret and evaluate written language, symbols and text with understanding and fluency

    Engage in written communication in a variety of situations for a variety of purposes and audiences

    Engage in oral communication in a variety of situations for a variety of purposes and audiences

    Language Domains

    SlidedevelopedbyWIDAConsortium

  • AssessedGrades

    ILTACApril2018ELP

    Online-StagedAdaptiveDesign

    10

    SlidedevelopedbyWIDAConsortium

  • OnlinevsPaper

    ILTACApril2018ELP

    FromWIDAInterpretiveGuide

    11

  • DomainScores

    ScaleScores:Withineachdomainscoresarereportedonaverticalscalethatrangesfrom100-600. appropriateformakingcomparisonsacrossgradeswithinadomain confidenceintervalsbasedonCSEMs.

    ProficiencylevelscoresgradespecificinterpretationsofstudentperformanceinacontentdomainbaseduponthePLsintheELDStandards. Proficiencylevelscoresarepresentedaswholenumbersfollowedbya

    decimal.Thewholenumberindicatesthestudentslanguageproficiencylevel(from1-6)basedontheWIDAELDStandards.Thedecimalindicatestheproportionwithintheproficiencylevelrangethatthestudentsscalescorerepresents,roundedtothenearesttenth.(SeeAppendixDintheInterpretiveGuide)

    Thesamescaledscoreisassociatedwithadifferentproficiencylevelacrossgrades.AReadingscalescoreof355forafifthgradestudentisinterpretedasLevel4.0.ThesamescalescoreforafourthgraderresultsinLevel4.6,andforathirdgradestudentthatscalescoreresultsinLevel5.2.

    Appropriateforcomparisonsacrossdomainswithinagrade.ILTACApril2018ELP 12

  • ProficiencyLevels

    Level1:Entering Level2:Beginning Level3:Developing Level4:Expanding Level5:Bridging Level6:ReachingLevelDefinitionsestablishedinconsiderationof:

    LinguisticComplexity:Extentoffunctionallanguage(textordiscourse) VocabularyUsage:Comprehensionanduseofthetechnicalvocabularyofthecontentareas

    LanguageControl:Comprehensionanduseofphonological,syntactic,andsemanticstructure&rules

    ILTACApril2018ELP 13

    FromWIDAInterpretiveGuide

  • CompositeScoreCategories

    ILTACApril2018ELP14

    SlidedevelopedbyWIDAConsortium

  • CompositeScores&ProficiencyLevels

    CompositeScaleScores:Weightedsumacrossdomainscaledscores(compensatory) ConfidenceintervalsbasedonclassicaltesttheorySEMs

    CompositeProficiencyLevelScores:derivedfromthedomainscaledscores,notthedomainproficiencylevels(i.e.,baseduponthecompositescaledscore).

    CautionsfromWIDA: TheOverallScoreishelpfulasasummaryofotherscoresandbecause

    sometimesyoumayneedasinglenumberforreference.However,itsimportanttoalwaysrememberthatitiscompensatory;aparticularlyhighscoreinonedomainmayeffectivelyraisealowscoreinanother.Similaroverallscorescanmaskverydifferentperformancesonthetest.

    Nosinglescoreorlanguageproficiencylevel,includingtheOverallScore(Composite),shouldbeusedasthesoledeterminerformakingdecisionsregardingastudentsEnglishlanguageproficiency.

    ILTACApril2018ELP 15

  • FactorstoConsiderinDefiningELPIndicator(Reviewed12approvedplansforWIDAstates)

    HowisEnglishLanguageProficiencyDefinedontheACCESS2.0? 5.0PL-9states; 4.6-1state;4.51state;4.8IL

    Whatisthemaximumnumberofyearsastudenthastoachieveproficiency?

    5year:4states 6years:8states

    Whatfactorsinfluencethenumberofyearsastudenthastoreachproficiency?

    Baselineproficiencylevel(11states) Baselinegradelevel(3)

    Howisannualprogressevaluated? ComparegaininPLscoretothatdeemednecessarytoachieveproficiencyinafixed

    numberofyears:8states EvaluatewhetherobservedSGPisontrackwiththatneededtobeproficientinadefined

    numberofyears(adequategrowthpercentile):3states ComparegaininPLscoreagainstacommonfixedcriterionforallstudents-1state(HI)

    requires1.0PLgainperyear

    ILTACApril2018ELP 16

  • FactorstoConsiderinDefiningELIndicator

    Aretargetsforperformancereseteachyear? Yes:redistributethegapnecessarytoachieveproficiencyinthedefinedamountof

    timeeachyear(3states) Yes:throughannualrecalculationofAGPs(3states) No:mustachievetargetsestablishedinbaselineyear1tomakeadequateprogress

    (6states) HowisschoolperformancequantifiedwithintheELPindicator?

    Percentageofstudentsachieving/exceedingtheannualtargetstowardproficiencyintheschool(i.e.,scoreorAGP):8states

    MAalsoconsidersthepercentageofstudentsthatachievedproficiencyontheACCESS2.0

    Assignpointstoeachstudentbasedondegreetowhichprogresstargetismetusingavaluetableapproach:4states

    Establishaweightedrateoftargetattainment:2states(DE,PA) Createanindexscorefortheschoolbasedonsumofpointsearnedbyeachstudent:1state(SD)

    ConsideraggregateresidualdifferencebetweenobservedPLscoreandtargetPLscoreoverstudentsandassignagrade(A-F)tothisresidualforreporting:(NM)

    ILTACApril2018ELP 17

  • WYELPProgress

    ILTACApril2018ELP 18

  • Delaware/PennsylvaniaApproach GrowthisbasedontheverticalscaleofACCESS2.0 Studentshavebetween3-6yearstoexit(composite5.0or

    higher)dependingoninitialaccesslevel Thestateproducesanindexthatmeasurespercentof

    annualtargetachievedandallowsabonusofupto10%ifthetargetisexceeded E.g.ifthetargetgrowthis20pointsandthestudentearns15pointsthe

    studentreceives.75

    Studentswhodonotexitinthedesignatedattainmentyearareeligibleforpartialpointswhentheyexit .75,.5,or.25foreachof1,2,or3+yearsoflateexit

    Totalschoolindexscoreistheaverageofeachstudentsscore(essentiallyaweightedattainmentindex)

    ILTACApril2018ELP 19

  • Delaware

    ILTACApril2018ELP 20

  • DEGrowthIndex

    ILTACApril2018ELP 21

  • SDGrowthIndex

    ILTACApril2018ELP

    Astudentisexpectedtomake20%progresstowardproficiencyeachyear.

    22

  • MichiganAdequateGrowthPercentiles

    Eachstudentsattainmentgrowthtargetisthescalescore(SS)ataPL4.5atthegradelevelfortheyearthattheyareexpectedtoreachattainment

    Eachstudentsinterimgrowthtargetsarecalculatedannuallyusingtheadequategrowthpercentile(AGP)AnAGPisaquantitativedescriptionofthegrowthnecessarytobeconsistentlyachievedtoreachproficiencyinasetnumberofyears

    TheannualresetallowsforavariablegrowthtrajectorydependingoneachstudentsprogressovertimewhilestillrequiringthattheATbereachedwithintherequirednumberofyears.Thisyearlyresetrecognizesthenonlineargrowththatstudentsatvaryingproficiencylevelsmakewithinayearstime.

    ILTACApril2018ELP 23

  • NewMexicoELPIndicator AllELstudentsELPscoresare

    comparedtotheirpersonalizedannualtargets.TheresidualsareaccumulatedforallELPstudentsintheschool.Apositivevalueindicatesthatstudentsare,onaverage,exceedingtargetsandanegativevalueindicatesthattheyarenotmeetingtargets.

    Schoolsearnagradeontheindicatorbasedontheresidualscoreobtained.(Cut-scores

Recommended

View more >