language appraisal team handbook

Language Appraisal Team Handbook

2013-2014

Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support

Multilingual and Multicultural Education Department

LANGUAGE APPRAISAL TEAM HANDBOOK

2

Table of Contents

Purpose & Functions of the LAT

LAT Membership

LAT Member Responsibilities & Roles

Academic and Linguistic Progress of English Learners

Language Differences and Language Disabilities

English Learners Struggling with Literacy and Writing in Elementary Developing Literacy in Secondary Problem English Sounds & Language Transfers EL Master Plan References

Monitoring Progress of ELs Review Progress of ELs in Meeting Reclassification Criteria Monitoring Progress of RFEPs and Recommending Interventions

Monitoring Progress of LTELs

Attachments: o 3-A EL Monitoring Roster o 3-B MyData EL Monitoring Roster o 3-C MyData Comprehensive Student Report o 3-D RFEP Follow-up Monitoring Roster- Elementary o 3-E RFEP Follow-up Monitoring Roster- Secondary o 3-F My Data At Risk Report

Pre-Referral Process

Referral Process

Initial Meeting

Follow-Up Meetings

Implement and Evaluate Further Options

LAT Documentation Procedures

Attachments: o 4-A LAT Membership Form o 4-B LAT Sign-in o 4-C LAT Referral Log o 4-D LAT Referral Form- 2 pages o 4-E LAT Initial Meeting Form

Section 3 Monitoring Progress ……….…………………..……………….……...……………. 20

Section 4 LAT Referral Process...…………………….…………….……...…………...……… 38

Section 1 What is the Language Appraisal Team?........……………………………..……….… 4

Section 2 Understanding Instruction for ELs…………………………………………………... 9


3

The Multilingual and Multicultural Education Department expresses its appreciation to the District’s English Learner Program staff and Focus Group members who contributed to the development of the Language Appraisal Team Handbook.

MMED Staff

Hilda Maldonado, Director Maricela Sanchez, Administrative Coordinator Valerie Brewington, EL Programs Coordinator Terri Bourg, Secondary Instruction Coordinator Carla Gutierrez, Elementary Instruction Coordinator

Christopher Mason, Elementary Expert Leonel Angulo, Elementary Specialist Sean Leyva, EL Programs Specialist Miguel Duenas, EL Programs Specialist Kirstin Summers, EL Programs Specialist

Principals

Carmina Nacorda, Fairfax HS Luis Rivera, Hawaiian ES Andrea Yehudian, Cohasset ES

EL Coordinators

Lupe Arteaga, SRE #10 Linda Bueno, San Jose ES Ruby Chavez, San Pedro ES Denise Crawford, Woodcrest ES Alisa Elijah, 95th ES Philip Ginter, Dayton Heights ES Raymond Grant, Fairfax HS Rosa Mena, Cohasset ES

Elizabeth Moreno, Sunrise ES Debra Rodriguez, Hillside ES Mónica Platas, Weigand ES Diana Sanchez, Cohasset ES Lisa Savage, Hawaiian ES Patricia Thompson, Flournoy ES Elizabeth Shnorhokian, Winnetka ES Norma Villalobos, Downtown Business Magnet HS

Division of Special Education

Jim Anderson, Administrator Dr. Karla Estrada, Coordinator Gabriel Arreguin, LRE Programs Specialist

Acknowledgements


4

PURPOSE OF LANGUAGE APPRAISAL TEAM

The Language Appraisal Team (LAT) is a multidisciplinary team that is charged with the responsibility of monitoring and supporting the progress of all English Learners. The LAT ensures that:

Appropriate instruction, support and intervention strategies are provided to accelerate the language progress of all English Learners (ELs), including Long Term English Learners (LTELs).

Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) students continue to make progress and achieve academic proficiency after reclassification.

ELs are monitored and meet minimum progress benchmarks as outlined in Chapter 2 of the EL Master Plan and avoid over-identification of ELs for special education services.

FUNCTIONS OF THE LANGUAGE APPRAISAL TEAM

To achieve this purpose, the LAT performs the following functions at the school site:

1. Monitor the placement and instruction of EL and RFEP students. 2. Monitor the linguistic and academic progress of ELs according to the minimum progress

expectations outlined for their instructional program in Chapter 2 of the EL Master Plan. 3. Ensures appropriate placement of Long Term English Learners (LTELs), as well as recommending

instructional strategies to support their academic and linguistic progress. 4. Review the progress of ELs in meeting the reclassification criteria in grades K-12. 5. Monitor progress of RFEPs in reaching academic proficiency in all core subject areas based on data,

grades, and state test scores. 6. Monitor individual students through the LAT referral process. 7. Review EL/RFEP student and school data (at least 3 times per year) to ensure the above is

documented and monitored accurately. As a result of performing its monitoring functions, the LAT, working closely with the principal, may recommend and monitor interventions for students, classes, or groups of students. The figure below summarizes the main functions of the LAT:

Section 1: What is LAT?


5

To support the monitoring of progress for all ELs and RFEPs, the LAT is responsible for reviewing student data on a regular basis and recommending appropriate support and/or intervention services for:

ELs at-risk of not meeting the Minimum Progress Expectations for ELs as outlined in Master Plan Chapter 2

RFEP students at-risk of not achieving grade-level proficiency These supports may take the form of changes to the instructional program, pedagogical decisions, grouping of students, or more specific supports and action steps affecting specific groups of students. The LAT must be familiar with and utilize the requirements and goals for ELs and RFEPs (AMAOs), as well as the guiding principles of Master Plan and EL Program Goals for English Learners. In addition to these requirements and goals, the District has outlined minimum progress expectations by program placement (EL Master Plan Chapter 2) and has established the following EL Program Goals:

1. Ensure steady progress toward & attainment of academic ELD per expected timeframes. 2. Ensure steady progress toward & attainment of grade level academic proficiency per expected

timeframes. 3. Decrease risks of linguistic and academic failure, grade retention, and dropping out. 4. Strengthen parent/guardian participation and engagement in students’ academic development. 5. Reduce disproportional referral to and identification of ELs for special education services.

The Language Appraisal Team’s purpose is closely related to the EL Program Goals. To ensure that the LAT can fulfill this purpose, the LAT must be established within the first six weeks of the academic year. Schools must complete the Language Appraisal Team Membership Form (Attachment 4-A) and submit a copy to the Education Service Center ELD Compliance Coordinator. The original form is kept on file at the school site for a minimum of five (5) years.

LAT MEMBERSHIP

The principal is responsible for the Language Appraisal Team and may designate the EL Coordinator as the chairperson. The core Language Appraisal Team is comprised of individuals who are knowledgeable about the District’s Instructional Program options for ELs and the English Learner Master Plan, including ELD and access to grade-level core curriculum [Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE), Primary Language Support, and Primary Language Instruction] for ELs. In the case of schools with alternative bilingual programs (Transitional Bilingual Education, Maintenance Bilingual Education, and Dual Language Program), at least one member should have authorization in the program language. The core LAT that meets to review and monitor EL data should be minimally comprised of the EL Coordinator, the principal, the Title III Coach, and the LTEL designee. When meeting about individual student progress, the LAT members include the EL Coordinator, the Principal and/or administrative designee, the student’s classroom (elementary) or English/ELD (secondary) teacher, the parent and/or guardian of the student being reviewed, and the Title III Access to Core Coach. The LAT may also include counselors, specialist teachers, instructional coaches, intervention teachers, and any other EL experts. If the student is a Long Term English Learner, the LTEL Designee must attend. Other content area teachers (e.g., science, social studies) should be invited to attend if the student is struggling in those content areas.


6

The LAT meeting may also require the expertise of support staff such as a school psychologist, resource special education teacher, school nurse, etc. (the Multidisciplinary Team) to address individual student needs and recommend modifications in instruction or placement. The LAT Chairperson must decide who must attend a given LAT meeting based on data and the topics/students to be reviewed. Schools may consider incorporating the responsibilities of the LAT into already existing multidisciplinary team structures such as Coordination of Services Teams (COST), Small Learning Communities, Academic Achievement Teams and/or Student Success Teams (SST) to eliminate the duplication of efforts by school personnel. The LAT Initial and/or Follow-up meetings may take place concurrently with the SST/COST Team.

Interlocking Roles of Key EL Personnel in the LAT and the SST/COST Teams

LAT Key Personnel SST/COST Member Administrator Member Member EL Coordinator Consulting Expert Member Title III Coach Consulting Expert Consulting Expert Counselor Member Consulting Expert School Psychologist Member Consulting Expert Instructional Coach Member Consulting Expert Intervention Teacher/Coordinator Member Member EL/ELD Teacher/Grade Level Chair Consulting Expert Member LTEL Designee (if not one of the above) Consulting Expert Participant Parent Participant To make informed recommendations for ELs, LAT members must have knowledge or receive training on the following:

LAT referral process The English Learner Master Plan and instructional program options for students (SEI, TBE, MBE,

Dual Language, and Mainstream) ELD Standards District-adopted ELD curriculum Differentiated instruction for ELs based on language proficiency level Criteria for Reclassification and Minimum Progress Expectations for ELs Collection of student work and scoring practice protocols Intervention services available to students Other training relevant to ELs Secondary: Placement guidelines for matriculating students English Learners with Special Needs Second language acquisition as related to the expected growth rate in English Language Development Differences in language learning vs. signs of possible disabilities Discipline Foundation Policy (go to www.lausd.net, click “offices”, select Discipline Foundation

Policy, Professional Development tab on right, click on ISIS Discipline Overview Module) The school-site administrator, EL Coordinator, Intervention Support Coordinator, or ESC staff may provide the above trainings. Information and resources useful to trainers and LAT members are available on the


7

MMED website by going to www.lausd.net, clicking “offices”, and selecting Multilingual and Multicultural Education Department, clicking on Master Plan, then clicking on Resources.

MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES & ROLES

The following are responsibilities of all LAT members:

Meet regularly to monitor data for progress of ELs/RFEPs by school, grade and classroom and document attendance using the Language Appraisal Team Meeting Sign-In (Attachment 4-B)

Monitor academic and linguistic progress by analyzing the SIS generated English Learner Monitoring Roster, Potential Reclassification Roster, Reclassification Eligibility Roster and the RFEP Follow-Up Monitoring Roster (Attachments 3 A-F)

Communicate the LAT referral process to staff Participate in individual student LAT meetings Examine key data for students: CELDT data, the ELD Assessment Portfolio level and documentation,

Literacy/ELA Periodic Assessment (LPA), CST/CMA assessment results, Progress Report scores, initial primary language assessment results, etc., (For Alternative Bilingual Programs, also consider: Spanish LPA, Standards-based Test in Spanish (STS), and other primary language assessments) to identify any inconsistencies that may exist for ELs referred to the LAT

Work together with teachers and other staff members on how to improve ELD and grade-level performance appropriate to the student’s ELD level

Recommend appropriate intervention services for students not making adequate progress Identify students requiring additional support in meeting the reclassification criteria Recommend and document reclassification, when appropriate Follow District confidentiality guidelines and policies Recommend changes in placement or instructional setting, as needed

Chairperson (EL Coordinator, Administrator or designee)

Set calendar of meetings, including follow-ups based on school need Notify all LAT members, including the parent, at least 10 days prior to scheduled meetings Ensure all required documentation is available for review during the LAT meeting Facilitate LAT meetings and keep the team focused/on task Appoint the timekeeper/recorder Ensure that interpretation and translation is provided, as needed Coordinate the referral process, including disseminating the LAT Referral Form Maintain documentation of meetings (LAT Meeting Binder) Ensure timely entry of information into the Online Accountability System (OLAS)


8

Recorder/Timekeeper

Document the key points from the meeting Ask for clarification when needed and record objective statements on the appropriate LAT meeting

form(s) legibly Summarize the notes for the team at the conclusion of the meeting to verify accuracy Provide copies of the LAT Initial Meeting Form or Follow-Up Meeting Form (Attachment 4-E and 4-

F) to all members present Ensure the LAT meeting begins on time and is conducted within a reasonable time frame (i.e., 30-45

minutes) Teacher

Provide input regarding in-class intervention services being provided Work together with the LAT team to design and implement the intervention support and services Provide input regarding the student’s linguistic and academic progress Provide input regarding the student’s peer interactions Gather data and student samples for follow-up meetings

Parent/Legal Guardian

Advocate on behalf of the student Provide input regarding the student’s personal background and any additional information about the

child that may assist the LAT in making informed decisions, including the student’s language history Invite additional individuals for support, if desired Work together with the team to continue to support their child’s progress

NOTE: Due to student confidentiality, the school will only invite the parent/guardian of the student

being considered. Support Staff [nurse, school psychologist, Pupil Services and Attendance (PSA) counselor, etc.]

Provide input regarding the student’s health, psychological background, attendance, etc. Provide additional information about the student, as needed Provide strategies and information commensurate with their area of specialty/expertise

Student

If school staff and parent/guardian agree that the student is mature enough to participate in the meeting, generally 10 years or older, every attempt should be made to allocate time for the student to participate in the LAT meeting


9

This chapter is intended to help frame the analysis in which the Language Appraisal Team members must engage to guide teachers and staff in identifying possible factors and obstacles that ELs face as they work to master both English proficiency and academic content. The following resources are meant to help the LAT in guiding classroom teachers and support staff to understand these challenges, and to suggest ways to address the specific language, literacy, and learning needs that the students may have. As Kylene Beers states in her book, When Kids Can’t Read –What Teachers Can Do, “There is no one answer to understanding why an adolescent struggles with reading. For there to be only one answer, there would have to be only one cause, and for there to be only one cause, all students would have to be alike, learn alike, have had the same experiences.” As the LAT members help frame the interventions for ELs, they must then consider the individual student profile and consider factors such as:

Age Grade level Native languages Language proficiency levels Literacy background in English, as well as in other languages Quality of previous schooling Instructional programs and services

ACADEMIC AND LINGUISTIC PROGRESS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

The English Learner Master Plan was developed to ensure that all ELs in LAUSD attain optimal linguistic and academic success. The EL Master Plan outlines the Guiding Principles for educating ELs, instructional services, program options, and systems for monitoring student progress. The LAT is to use the EL Master Plan as a guide and refer to it to ensure ELs are provided with the highest quality educational programs and services that are soundly based in current research evidence. As stated in the EL Master Plan:

“LAUSD recognizes that ELs have a double curricular load- they must become proficient in academic English, and they must master all the academic content required of all students in California. This means that ELs require additional services to ensure that they acquire English and have access to the full curriculum in a way that makes instruction comprehensible and meaningful. ELs are given excellent first teaching in the core content and are given services above core instruction to ensure that their linguistic and academic needs are met.”

The LAT is one aspect of an overall system for monitoring EL student progress. This monitoring begins with expectations for a student’s linguistic and academic progress organized by instructional model, the length of time as an EL and starting points for the student. The minimum progress expectations benchmarks have been defined to assist parents, educational personnel and students to understand what constitutes

Section 2: Understanding Instruction for ELs


10

appropriate progress and when students require additional support. While the benchmarks are annual, monitoring must happen much more frequently to ensure that academic deficits are not incurred. A key question that will be asked of the LAT members by parents and teachers will be, Is learning a second language the same as learning the first language? Most research would indicate the answer- yes and no. To the extent that they are the same, the LAT needs to know as much as possible about literacy, and to the extent that they are different, the LAT needs to know as much as possible about language development. The section on Miscue Analysis guides staff on ways to look in-depth at some of the ways in which students learn to read and the strategies and questions teachers can pose to help them navigate their learning. For secondary students, please see the section on Developing Literacy in Older Students, which can assist teachers in assessing and designing instructional approaches to assist upper grade students who are struggling. Lastly, there is a section addressing a common misconception that learning behaviors are the same as language learning behaviors. This is not meant to address all of the possible ways in which students’ needs are addressed, but simply to guide the approach that can be used.

ENGLISH LEARNERS STRUGGLING WITH LITERACY IN ELEMENTARY

The ability to read is fundamental to learning, and the earlier a child acquires this skill, the greater will be his or her capacity for learning in all subjects. There is a “chicken and egg” effect, while increased language competence enhances reading ability, reading certainly increases language competence. -Pauline Gibbons, Learning to Learn in a Second Language, 1991)

This information is meant to guide teachers, administrators and experts participating in Language Appraisal Teams to determine the needs of ELs who may appear to be struggling with literacy. The examination of authentic student work in reading and writing is crucial in the analysis of student need. These samples should include:

Reading samples such as running records Writing samples, such as on-demand writing and samples from the writing process over time LPA writing analyzed against ELD Standards Sample of a retell- both oral and written DIBELS DORF assessment with deep analysis of the retell

These student artifacts will ensure that the analysis of student work is evidence-based, thorough and free of bias. In assessing reading, Running Records are a powerful tool for analysis of an English Learner’s strengths and weaknesses. Running records and writing samples will help the team to determine some of the interventions that the student may need. Some sources of instruments for records include Marie Clay, Lexia, Fountas & Pinnell, Mondo, and Mondo-Text-Reading-Comprehension. Consider using a variety of levels of reading materials when giving running records to determine independent, instructional and frustration level.


11

THE THREE CUEING SYSTEMS

Proficient readers must decode and encode simultaneously. They are cognitively engaged in the act of reading by predicting and synthesizing the text. The predictions based on cues, or sources of information from the text, may be further classified into three categories:

Visual (Graphophonic) Structure (Syntactic) Meaning (Semantic)

Wh

at e

ach

CU

E m

ean

s?

Does it look right? “Sounding out” words

Breaking words into letters, sounds, syllables, prefixes, chunks

Visual cues are derived from a student’s growing knowledge of letter/sound relationships and how letters and words are formed

What letters and words look like

Does it sound right? Making sense of the words in

the sentence

Structural cues derived from the student’s knowledge of oral language structures

How language is assembled

into phrases, sentences, paragraphs, stories, and texts

Does it make sense?

Making sense of text and relaying meaningful connections

Context clues from the text and or student’s experiences

EL

Ch

alle

nge

s

If readers are to determine if a word or phrase looks right, an EL may not be able to initially analyze for that correction.

If readers need to know if a word sounds right as they read, ELs with low proficiency levels may not initially be able to determine that and thus make these errors initially unconsciously.

As readers are able to ask themselves if a text makes sense, ELs may not be able to decipher the answer to this question if not given proper scaffolds about the text they are reading.

EL

s m

ay h

ave

trou

ble

wit

h…

Proficient Readers ask: Does this look right? ELs may not have English spelling patterns internalized or may refer to structures from their home language if they have received schooling in that language.

Proficient Readers ask: Does this sound right? ELs may not have English phrasing and sentence structures internalized.

Proficient Readers ask: Does this make sense? Without scaffolding, ELs may not have sufficient vocabulary or knowledge of language forms to make meaning from the text.


12

The following are some examples of Meaning, Structural and Visual cues and errors:

Examples of MSV Cues

Example of a reader using a VISUAL cue:

smell

The small cat was sitting quietly by the window.

In this example, the substitution of smell for small shows that the reader used the beginning blend as ell as the middle consonant L, possibly recognizing the double L pattern in the word smell.

Example of a reader NOT using a visual cue: little


In this example, the substitution of little for small indicates that the cues for the letters were not used. Neither the beginning, end or chunk within the word is visually similar.

Example of a reader using a STRUCTURAL cue: standing


In this example, the substitution of standing for sitting follows the rules of language, and does not present a grammatical problem.

Example of a reader NOT using a STRUCTURAL cue: sat


In this example, the substitution of sat for sitting creates a grammatical error and does not follow the rules of the language.

Example of a reader using MEANING cue: purring


In this example, the substitution of purring for sitting made sense to the reader, especially considering her personal experience and interest in cats. The reader may have also recently read another book about cats where the cat purred.

Example of a reader NOT using a meaning cue: quetty


In this example, the substitution of quetty for quietly does not make sense. Not only is quetty not a word, but also the rest of the sentence does not make sense as a result of the error. Meaning was not used on the word or sentence level in this example.

The Language Appraisal Team must analyze student reading and writing errors to design interventions appropriate to the EL’s needs. Questions:

What types of errors is the EL student making while learning to read in a second language? Which cues might the student rely on more than others in the beginning stages of reading? How does the teacher’s approach to teaching reading impact the students’ ability to master all three

at once? A teacher of reading must use a variety of approaches to address the needs of the EL student as s/he learns to read in a second language, such as: Teach sight words as whole words while teaching phonics and phonemic awareness with a sound-by-

sound approach. A sound-by-sound approach may result in the EL student attending to the sounds of letters and not

the whole word meaning and subsequently the context. Analyze the text the student is asked to read and take measures to provide scaffolds that support the

EL during the lesson.


13

Upon analyzing the types of errors made, the teacher may use the following instructional techniques to address needs:

Instructional Ideas for Addressing the Three Cueing Systems


Inst

ruct

ion

al

Imp

lica

tion

s

Teachers need to model thinking aloud: Do the sounds and words- I am reading match the words on the page? (Phonological awareness cueing system)

Teachers need to model more complex sentence structures and sentence reconstruction with familiar stories (how language works). Behaviors that capitalize on structure: browsing, reading ahead and re-reading

Teachers need to teach genres and text forms, purpose for reading, analysis of context, use of illustrations for information, and what has occurred in the text

Str

ateg

ies/

Too

ls

Making big words Word sorts Word analogies Sounds and symbols Capitalization Punctuation Directionality Word and spaces Beginnings and endings Word families Root words, suffixes and prefixes Break word into syllables Magnetic letters

Cut up sentences and re-assemble Guess the covered word Natural language Knowledge of English

Vocabulary lists Oral predicting Story line prompts Prior knowledge Picture walks Connections Thinking Maps Graphic Organizers Context clues Reading the room KWL Anticipation guides Guided note-taking for different

comprehension skills/strategies In order for students to access the cueing system, the teacher should use the following questioning techniques:

Examples of Questions and Prompts to Promote Students’ Use of the Three Cueing Systems


Qu

esti

ons

and

Pro

mp

ts

What shape does the initial/medial/final letter of this sound have?

When I covered this word, how did you know what word would be appropriate?

When I was reading and left out a word, how did you know what word was in the text?

Have you heard that phrase/language (e.g. Once upon a time…) before?

What do we know about this topic? What do we need to know? What would help us understand this text? Why are we reading this book? What other books have we read on this topic? What will happen next? What predictions can you make about the

text? What could have happened before this story?

What could happen after? Show where the text says that. Show where

the author indicated it.

Imp

licat

ion

s If a student is relying primarily on visual cues, it will be beneficial to support reading with strategies that promote meaning and structure.

If a student is relying primarily on structure, it will be beneficial to support reading with strategies that promote meaning and visual cues.

If a student is relying primarily on meaning, it would be beneficial to support reading strategies that promote looking at letters and sounds.

Tables were developed by: Cassandra Bellwood, Kente P.S.; Kerri Denyes, Princess of Wales P.S.; Lisa Friar, Foxboro P.S.; Cassandra Windsor, Harmony P.S.; Kim Mahoney, C.O.D.E. Project Leader


14

Of course, as with all other measures of progress, the LAT must consider the students’ level of language proficiency related to minimum progress expectations as they make recommendations for interventions. For example, a 3rd grade student who has spent two years in the program, is a struggling reader and making progress, may be on target, while a student with four years in the program with similar performance is not making adequate progress and is not on target.

DEVELOPING LITERACY IN OLDER STUDENTS

Developing literacy skills for secondary students is different and more complex than developing literacy for elementary students. Not only do secondary students generally have a wider range of experiences and vocabulary than do elementary students, but the literacy skills required of older students are more closely related to the content and genres of the various subject areas (Calderon, 2007).

Educators must figure out how to ensure that every student gets beyond the basic literacy skills of the early elementary grades, to the more challenging and more rewarding literacy of the middle and secondary school years. Inevitably, this will require, for many of those students, teaching them new literacy skills: how to read purposefully, select materials that are of interest, learn from those materials, figure out the meanings of unfamiliar words, integrate new information with information previously known, resolve conflicting content in different texts, differentiate fact from opinion, and recognize the perspective of the writer—in short, they must be taught how to comprehend (Biancarosa and Snow, 2004, p.1).

This information is meant to guide teachers, administrators and experts participating in Language Appraisal Teams to determine the needs of ELs who may appear to be struggling with literacy. While diagnostic assessments such as the Scholastic Reading Inventory or the Gates MacGinitie Reading Test can serve to identify a student’s reading level, the examination of authentic student work in reading and writing is crucial in analysis of student need. These samples should include:

Reading fluency and accuracy samples Writing samples, such as on-demand writing and samples from the writing process over time Periodic Assessment writing analyzed against ELD Standards Curricular writing assessments

For secondary ELs struggling with reading, the reason for the issue may be one of basic literacy, but could also stem from a variety of other concerns, including socio-emotional issues. The following charts describe four categories of reasons why secondary readers may not be successful and suggest recommendations based on those reasons.

Students Struggling with Basic Literacy If a student…

• Stumbles through many words • Tries to sound out a lot of words • Confuses words (e.g. were & where) • Decodes the first few letters or first few syllables • Reads very slowly, a word at a time • Misspells a lot of words • Has trouble recognizing high-frequency sight words

Then… Student needs help with:

• Word recognition • Spelling • Fluency


15

Students Struggling with Reading Comprehension If a student…

• Can ‘read’ all the words • Reads at appropriate rate but has difficulty:

o Answering questions o Creating questions o Discussing the text o Says, “reading is boring” o Thinking beyond the literal level

questions o Understanding unknown Words


• Vocabulary • Making predictions • Seeing Casual relationships • Drawing conclusions • Sequencing • Visualizing • Finding the main idea • Monitoring own understanding • Summarizing • Recognizing author’s purpose

Students Struggling with Motivation and Confidence If a student…

• Does not participate in class discussions • Does not offer opinions • Is not willing to take risks in discussions • Does not believe they are a good reader • Makes fun of good readers • Is disengaged from reading activities and

many/most learning activities • Does not appear to put much effort into reading

assignments • Student disrupts class without reason


• Gaining confidence about their ability to comment on questions and/or text

• Learning how to be an active participant • Becoming comfortable with sharing ideas • Learning academic language that facilitates

literary discussions • Engaging in activities that are at the

student’s comfort level, then progressively more challenging

Students Struggling with Choosing the Right Book If a student… • Has good word recognition • Appears to understand written selections but:

o Resists reading o Says they can’t find any interesting books o Repeatedly claims that reading is boring o Cannot name any favorite author or book o Does not understand how different parts of a

textbook offer different types of information

Then… Student needs help with: • Learning how to find texts that interest them • Understanding how part of a textbook can assist

understanding • Recognizing how formatting issues can aid in

comprehension • Learning to navigate a library • Discovering resources that can help them find

reading materials • Teacher might suggest graphic novels that

include subject matter of interest to the student and include rich vocabulary

Resource: Kylene Beers, When Kids Can’t Read: What Teachers Can Do, 2003


16

While these guides help LAT members focus their analysis and conversations of student progress on factors that impact literacy and language, researchers agree that the act of reading is complex and multi-faceted and that the ultimate purpose of reading is comprehension and meaning making. In designing interventions for these students, LAT members should attempt to recognize and build on students’ strengths with an eye towards increasing comprehension to ensure access.

PROBLEM ENGLISH SOUNDS AND LANGUAGE TRANSFERS

An English Learner may have difficulty in producing or perceiving certain sounds that do not exist in their home language. The following chart gives examples of sounds that may be problematic for speakers of certain languages other than English.

Problem English Sounds for Speakers of Other Languages NATIVE LANGUAGE PROBLEM ENGLISH SOUNDS Chinese b ch d dg f g j l m n ng ō sh s th th v z l - clusters r-clusters French ā ch ē h j n goo oy s th th s schwa Greek aw b d ē g I j m n ng oo r s w y z schwa end-clusters Italian a ar dg h i ng th th v schwa l-clusters end-clusters Japanese dg f h i l th th oo r sh s v w schwa l-clusters r-clusters Korean b l ō ow p r sh t th l-clusters r-clusters Spanish b d dg h j m n ng r sh t th v w y z s-clusters end-clusters Urdu ā a d ē e f n ng s sh t th th Vietnamese ā ē k l ng p r sh s y l-clusters r-clusters From The ESL Teacher’s Book of Lists (1993) by Jacqueline Kress. The Center for Applied Research in Education. In addition, Language Transfer: The Interaction Between English and Student’s Primary Language is available on the website: http://tesoros.macmillanmh.com/national/teachers. This guide from the Treasures Language Arts program serves as a resource in understanding the grammatical errors and the variation in pronunciation of English sounds made by English Learners of different backgrounds. (Go to connect To English Resources to download Language Transfers PDF. This information can also be found in California Treasures Unit 1 Teacher’s Edition on page T18-T24. Information on grammar transfer and structure can be found T26-T33.) At the secondary level, further information about language transfer can be found in the High Point teacher’s edition (Basics level), page T337f-T341. Additional information on language structures that may prove difficult for English Learners with specific home languages can be found on pages T342-T351.

LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES AND LEARNING DELAYS

In addition to general concerns about progress in learning English or progress in core content, there may be questions about whether a student’s difficulties stem from issues related to the language acquisition process, or to more general learning delays. The LAT should take all possible steps to remove any structural and instructional obstacles that may impact their language acquisition and progression.


17

While identifying potential learning disabilities are not within the scope of the LAT, the LAT should investigate problems arising as part of the language acquisition process. Being able to distinguish between a disability and a language acquisition issue is challenging and not the role of the Language Appraisal Team. In cases where there is a question of disability, a member of the special education staff must be consulted. There are multiple language acquisition factors, such as limited proficiency in the primary language and frequency and intensity of ELD instruction, which may impact the English proficiency of an EL student. LAT ensures that problems related to language acquisition are examined and targeted. It is especially critical that the LAT confirms that ELD instruction and access to core content are provided to an EL. The following chart provides guidance in understanding the behaviors attributed to lack of language development instruction.

Learning Behaviors Reasons for Behaviors for an English Learner

Difficulty following directions May not understand: Academic language without scaffolds Multiple step directions without visuals, chunking, repetition by

student Idioms without explanation

Poor performance in primary language assessment or limited primary language proficiency

English Learner instructed mostly in English may have “language loss”--reduced competency in primary language due to lack of practice and/or instruction. Formal and explicit academic language has not been provided.

Difficulty retelling a narrative in sequence or summarizing a text

While learning English, EL’s may experience delays in listening, reading, speaking and writing. This may be due to limited vocabulary and grammatical structure knowledge. An EL may also have difficulty understanding text without appropriate scaffolds at their proficiency levels.

Difficulty with phonological awareness (Letter-sound relationships)

When ELs are taught to read using an English reading program, they may not be able to distinguish or pronounce sounds that do not exist in their home language (see PROBLEM ENGLISH SOUNDS AND LANGUAGE TRANSFERS above). For LTELs, difficulties with letter-sound relationships may become fossilized and manifest in their reading and writing.

Difficulty remembering sight words When words are not presented or taught in a meaningful context, an English Learner may experience difficulty memorizing them.

Slow to learn sound-symbol correspondence

An English Learner may have learned a differing set of sound-symbol correspondences in the home language. For example, in Spanish there are 5 sounds for a, e, i, o and u; and in English there are many more sounds for the same 5 vowels.

Confused by figurative language An English Learner may attach literal meaning to the following literary devices used in English without proper scaffolds and explicit instruction:

Idioms Shades of meaning Cultural/historical references Intonation (when listening) Precise or colorful vocabulary


18

Adapted from the work of Catherine Collier In guiding teachers of English Learners towards effective interventions, the LAT must recognize that teachers can only respond to what children are trying to do, build on their existing strategies and help them to develop other strategies that they do not yet have.

Learning Behaviors Reasons for Behaviors for an English Learners May have poor auditory memory An English Learner may require more time and effort to make meaning of

what s/he hears due to the effort required for processing and building comprehension between two languages.

May have difficulty concentrating An English Learner may experience interruptions in his/her concentration due to the additional effort needed to process information. (To minimize this, lessons should include explicit language and content objectives that are consistently referred to, multi-modal activities, and positive reinforcement for effort.)

May seem easily frustrated An English Learner’s frustration may stem from: Not understanding instructions Not receiving sufficient time to process or complete a task Being taught with materials that are beyond their individual,

instructional or frustration level without additional supports. Receiving too much information or too many parts of a sequence at a

time Receiving information through a single modality (e.g. teacher gives

instructions orally, but does not also write them) Slow to process challenging /complex language (e.g. complex sentences, high lexile level, specialized/difficult vocabulary, complex rhetorical structures, puns, irony, tone)

An English Learner may appear disengaged, withdrawn or confused. The EL may need more time to process language with strategies such as:

Chunking Wait time Repetition Visuals Opportunities to discuss meaning

Slow/limited response to instruction and intervention

An English Learner may require specific supports based on an individually identified language proficiency need that may not be present in typical instruction or intervention Additional supports may be primary language support, SDAIE strategies, and differentiation, to name a few.

English Learner appears fluent in social conversation, but has difficulty listening, speaking, reading and writing using academic language

An English Learner typically acquires social language faster than academic language, because social language is more contextualized and more often practiced.


19

EL MASTER PLAN REFERENCES

It is critical the Language Appraisal Team understands the EL Master Plan. The following information from the EL Master Plan will assist to guide and ensure understanding of EL programs, expectations and instruction:

EL Master Plan Chapter 2 (pg. 23-39,) Elementary Instructional Program Options Elementary Instructional Program Options (pg. 24) Structured English immersion (SEI) Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg. 25-

26) Mainstream English Instructional Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg. 27-28) Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg.

29-32) Maintenance Bilingual Education (MBE) Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations

(pg. 33-35) Dual Language Two-Way Immersion Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg.

36-39) Intervention for students not meeting minimum progress expectations (pg. 50)

EL Master Plan Chapter 2 (pg. 40-50,) Secondary Instructional Program Options

Secondary Instructional Program Options (pg. 40) Structured English immersion (SEI) Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg. 40-

42) Mainstream English Instructional Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg. 42-44) Dual Language Two-Way Immersion Program Option & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg.

45-46) Accelerated Learning Programs for Long Term English Learners & Minimum Progress

Expectations (pg. 46-48) English Learner Newcomer Program & Minimum Progress Expectations (pg. 48-49) Intervention for students not meeting minimum progress expectations (pg. 50)

EL Master Plan Chapter 3 (pg. 40-50), Instructional Services for English Learners English Language Development (pg. 52-56) ELD Instructional Grouping for Elementary Schools (pg. 56-59) ELD Instructional Grouping for Secondary Schools (pg. 59-75) Ensuring Access to Core Content- SDAIE (pg. 75- 77) Use of Primary Language in Instruction (pg. 77-80)

Appendix C, LAUSD Teacher Handbook

SDAIE/Sheltered Content Instruction (pg. 156-159) Differentiated Instruction (pg. 159-161)


20

MONITORING PROGRESS OF ELs

The function of the Language Appraisal Team is to ensure that English Learners receive and participate in an effective instructional program. To ensure this, the LAT must regularly assess the quality of the school’s EL program and monitor progress at least once each grading period to prevent language and academic deficits for grade levels, classes and groups, and for individual EL students. Federal and state laws require districts to establish procedures for monitoring and evaluating the academic progress of English Learners (ELs) [Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 and Education Code Sections 305, 306, 310, 313, 51101, 60810-60811, and 62002]. In accordance with Title III guidelines, ELs are required to meet three Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs):

AMAO 1: ELs progress one ELD level per year, as measured by the California English Language

Development Test (CELDT) AMAO 2: ELs attain English proficiency (Early Advanced or Advanced), as measured by the

CELDT AMAO 3: ELs make adequate yearly progress (AYP) towards meeting grade-level academic

achievement standards in English Language Arts (ELA) and Math, as measured by the California Standards Test (CST), California Modified Assessment (CMA) and the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)

Key questions to consider during monitoring include:

How do we know that we are providing an effective instructional program for English Learners? o Are ELs making adequate progress in ELD and ELA (and primary language when in a TBE,

MBE or DL program)? How do we know? o Are ELs mastering the grade-level learning standards in all areas of the curriculum? How do

we know? Are students meeting the reclassification criteria within 5 years? How can we reduce the number of Long-Term ELs (LTELS) at the school? What patterns and trends can we see in EL student data? What should our next steps be?

(See Attachment 3 A-E for more specific information on generating rosters and collecting student data.)

Key issues to consider when deciding on next steps include:

The rationale for student grouping for instruction. Is Master Plan followed? The quality and quantity of appropriate instructional materials The training and support available to teachers of ELs Differentiation, accommodations, and/or interventions and their purposes (for TBE, MBE, and DL

programs, consider the language of the intervention) Communication between school staff and families

Section 3: Monitoring Progress


21

SAMPLE LAT CALENDAR, ELEMENTARY The LAT should meet monthly to review referrals, analyze data, and measure the effectiveness of prescribed interventions. MEETING TOPIC PURPOSE 1 (SEPTEMBER) EL Progress Profiles (end of previous school year)—Contact teachers (Pre-referral) EL Monitoring-Reclassification Establish Membership Coordinate Calendar with SST/COST Team

Verify student placement-New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores 2 (OCTOBER) RFEP Monitoring LAT Meetings for individual students New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores3 (NOVEMBER) EL Progress Monitoring LTEL Monitoring EL-Monitoring-Reclassification RFEP Monitoring

Report Card Marks LPA Data 4 (DECEMBER) LAT Meetings for individual students5 (JANUARY) RFEP Monitoring LAT Meetings for individual students LPA Data6 (FEBRUARY) EL Monitoring-Reclassification New CELDT Scores 7 (MARCH) EL Progress Profiles—Contact teachers (Pre-referral) EL Progress Monitoring LTEL Progress Monitoring

Report Card Marks 8 (MAY) EL Progress Profiles (current school year)EL Monitoring-Reclassification LPA DataAnalysis of Effectiveness of LAT Goal Setting for Next Year

SAMPLE LAT CALENDAR, SECONDARY

MEETING TOPIC PURPOSE1 (SEPTEMBER) EL Progress Profiles (end of previous school year)EL Monitoring-Reclassification Verify student placement- New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores 2 (OCTOBER) RFEP Monitoring New CST/CMA and/or STS Scores3 (NOVEMBER) EL Progress Monitoring LTEL Progress Monitoring Mid-Term Marks 4 (DECEMBER) EL Monitoring-Reclassification Final Marks5 (JANUARY) RFEP Monitoring Final Marks6 (FEBRUARY) EL Monitoring-Reclassification New CELDT Scores 7 (MARCH) EL Progress Monitoring LTEL Progress Monitoring Mid-Term Marks 8 (APRIL) EL Progress Profiles (current school year)EL Monitoring-Reclassification Final MarksFinal Marks Analysis of Effectiveness of LAT Goal Setting for Next Year


22

Each Reporting Period During each reporting period, the My Data/SIS EL Monitoring Roster is generated by an assigned LAT member (EL Coordinator/administrative designee) and is compared with the Minimum Progress Expectations, as outlined in the EL Master Plan Chapter 2, to identify students who may be falling behind in language and /or core content areas. The ELD Progress Profile (forthcoming) may also be used to aid in comparing an EL student’s progress compared to Minimum Progress Expectations. The Language Appraisal Team should meet to examine the results by grade levels, classes, and groups, keeping in mind overall Tier I instruction as well as identifying individual ELs who are falling behind. For more information on Tier I instruction for ELs, refer to LAUSD Master Plan for English Learners Appendix C pg. 156-161. This document explains Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) strategies and differentiated instruction for ELs. When the progress of a specific student is much slower than the student’s “true peers” (similar language proficiencies-CELDT and ELD levels, cultural and experiential background, such as school instructional program), the student requires in class intervention and/or intervention during or outside of the school day. The achievement of the student must be compared with “true peers” to determine if s/he is progressing adequately. If several “true peers” are struggling, this indicates that the Tier I or core instruction is less than optimal for the subgroup of students. When this is occurring, frequent walkthroughs by the EL Coordinator, administrator and/or support staff for use of instructional strategies and outcomes are necessary in ELD and other core subjects. (Observation tools on MMED website) Test Scores School site administrator, EL Coordinator, and teachers should also review CST/CMA/CAHSEE scores in ELA, as well as CELDT scores, when they become available. These scores may represent opportunities for ELs to reclassify. New test scores also provide insight on the appropriateness of class placement and grouping. By Groups, Grade Levels, and Classes of Students When most ELs are making adequate progress, individual strategies and interventions may not be necessary. However, if many “true peers” (similar language proficiencies, cultural and experiential background) are struggling, instructional program and classroom strategies must be examined. Observations may be conducted using SDAIE or ELD Observation Tools (available on the MMED website). Teachers may self-assess using the SDAIE Four Critical Elements Reflection Questions or the ELD Observation Protocol. By Student When the progress of a specific student is much slower than the student’s “true peers”, the student may require in-class intervention and/or intervention during or outside of the school day. The classroom teacher, the administrator or their designee, should initiate the LAT Pre-referral process. End of Year When students fail to meet the minimum expected progress benchmarks, interventions are provided to accelerate learning. Parents are notified in writing of the student’s specific areas of need as well as the intervention(s) that are being provided.

23

The

LA

T m

eets

at l

east

onc

e ye

arly

to r

evie

w a

ll s

tude

nts

who

hav

e no

t met

min

imum

pro

gres

s ex

pect

atio

ns.

(Bef

ore

an I

ndiv

idua

l LA

T

mee

ting

occ

urs,

the

clas

sroo

m te

ache

r, th

e ad

min

istr

ator

or

thei

r de

sign

ee m

ust i

niti

ate

the

Pre-

refe

rral

pro

cess

.) T

he f

ollo

win

g ch

arts

pro

vide

gu

idan

ce in

mon

itor

ing

EL

s th

roug

h th

e ye

ar:

PR

OC

ED

UR

ES

TO

RE

CL

AS

SIF

Y A

ND

MO

NIT

OR

EL

ST

UD

EN

TS

- E

LE

ME

NT

AR

Y

A

UG

US

T

AU

GU

ST

-N

OV

EM

BE

R

NO

VE

MB

ER

D

EC

EM

BE

R-

AP

RIL

F

EB

RU

AR

Y

MA

RC

H

MA

RC

H-J

UN

E

JU

NE

DATA received:

CS

T/C

MA

re

sult

s re

ceiv

ed

EL

D M

on

ito

rin

g

Co

nfe

ren

ces

wit

h

tea

cher

s to

ta

rget

E

L n

eed

s o

f in

stru

ctio

n t

o

recl

ass

ify.

D

ata

/Rep

ort

s to

b

e u

sed

: • E

LD

Pro

gre

ss

Pro

file

• S

IS E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er

• SIS

Po

ten

tia

l R

ecla

ssif

ica

tio

n

Ro

ster

• M

yDa

ta E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er

• My

Da

ta

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Stu

den

t H

isto

ry

Rep

ort

• E

LD

Po

rtfo

lio

s • P

erio

dic

A

sses

smen

ts

• DIB

EL

S

• En

d-o

f-U

nit

a

nd

/or

Tea

cher

cr

eate

d

ass

essm

ents

• E

LD

& E

LA

S

tud

ent

Wo

rk

1st P

rog

ress

R

epo

rt C

ard

M

ark

s E

LD

Mo

nit

ori

ng

C

on

fere

nce

s w

ith

T

each

ers

to t

arg

et

EL

nee

ds

of

inst

ruct

ion

to

re

cla

ssif

y.

Da

ta/R

epo

rts

to

be

use

d:

• EL

D P

rog

ress

P

rofi

le

• SIS

EL

M

on

ito

rin

g

Ro

ster

• S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

ati

on

R

ost

er

• MyD

ata

EL

M

on

ito

rin

g

Ro

ster

• M

y D

ata

C

om

pre

hen

sive

S

tud

ent

His

tory

R

epo

rt

• EL

D P

ort

foli

os

• Per

iod

ic

Ass

essm

ents

• D

IBE

LS

• E

nd

-of-

Un

it

an

d/o

r T

each

er

crea

ted

a

sses

smen

ts

• EL

D &

EL

A

Stu

den

t W

ork

CE

LD

T s

core

s 2

nd P

rog

ress

R

epo

rt C

ard

M

ark

s E

LD

Mo

nit

ori

ng

C

on

fere

nce

s w

ith

T

each

ers

to t

arg

et

EL

nee

ds

of

inst

ruct

ion

to

re

cla

ssif

y.

Da

ta/R

epo

rts

to

be

use

d:

• EL

D P

rog

ress

P

rofi

le

• SIS

EL

M

on

ito

rin

g

Ro

ster

• S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

ati

on

R

ost

er

• MyD

ata

EL

M

on

ito

rin

g

Ro

ster

• M

y D

ata

C

om

pre

hen

sive

S

tud

ent

His

tory

R

epo

rt

• EL

D P

ort

foli

os

• Per

iod

ic

Ass

essm

ents

• D

IBE

LS

• E

nd

-of-

Un

it

an

d/o

r T

each

er

crea

ted

a

sses

smen

ts

• EL

D &

EL

A

Stu

den

t W

ork

3rd

Pro

gre

ss

Rep

ort

Ca

rd

Ma

rks

DATA/ SIS Report

needed:

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

met

cr

iter

ia-

Ru

n S

IS

Rea

dy

to

R

ecla

ssif

y R

ost

er

& R

ecla

ssif

icat

ion

L

ette

rs

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

met

cr

iter

ia-

Ru

n S

IS

Rea

dy

to

R

ecla

ssif

y R

ost

er

& R

ecla

ssif

icat

ion

L

ette

rs

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

met

cr

iter

ia-

Ru

n S

IS

Rea

dy

to

R

ecla

ssif

y R

ost

er

& R

ecla

ssif

icat

ion

L

ette

rs

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

met

cr

iter

ia-

Ru

n S

IS

Rea

dy

to

R

ecla

ssif

y R

ost

er

& R

ecla

ssif

icat

ion

L

ette

rs

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

met

cr

iter

ia-

R

un

SIS

Rea

dy

to

R

ecla

ssif

y R

ost

er

& R

ecla

ssif

icat

ion

L

ette

rs

Identify, Instruct and Monitor Potential Reclassification ELs:

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

no

t m

et

crit

eria

:

Ru

n S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n

Ro

ster

& E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er.

Iden

tify

& p

rov

ide

stra

teg

ic

inst

ruct

ion

an

d

inte

rven

tio

n i

n t

he

req

uir

emen

ts n

ot

met

:

CE

LD

T d

om

ain

sc

ore

s o

f 1

or

2

C

ST

/CM

A

sco

res

of

Bel

ow

B

asic

(B

B)

or

Far

Bel

ow

Bas

ic

(FB

B)

E

LA

Pro

gre

ss

Rep

ort

mar

ks

of

1 o

r 2

in

L,

S,

R

and

W.

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

no

t m

et

crit

eria

:

Ru

n S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n

Ro

ster

& E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er.

Pro

vid

e st

rate

gic

in

stru

ctio

n a

nd

in

terv

enti

on

to

st

ud

ents

wit

h

Pro

gre

ss R

epo

rt

mar

ks

of

1 o

r 2

an

d o

ther

cri

teri

a n

ot

met

.

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

no

t m

et

crit

eria

:

Ru

n S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n

Ro

ster

& E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er.

Iden

tify

& p

rov

ide

stra

teg

ic

inst

ruct

ion

an

d

inte

rven

tio

n i

n t

he

req

uir

emen

ts n

ot

met

:

CE

LD

T d

om

ain

sc

ore

s o

f 1

or

2

C

ST

/CM

A

sco

res

of

Bel

ow

B

asic

(B

B)

or

Far

Bel

ow

Bas

ic

(FB

B)

E

LA

Pro

gre

ss

Rep

ort

mar

ks

of

1 o

r 2

in

L,

S,

R

and

W.

Fo

r E

Ls

wh

o

ha

ve

no

t m

et

crit

eria

:

Ru

n S

IS P

ote

nti

al

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n

Ro

ster

& E

L

Mo

nit

ori

ng

R

ost

er.

Pro

vid

e st

rate

gic

in

stru

ctio

n a

nd

in

terv

enti

on

to

st

ud

ents

wit

h

Pro

gre

ss R

epo

rt

mar

ks

of

1 o

r 2

an

d o

ther

cri

teri

a n

ot

met

. F

or

EL

s w

ho

O

NL

Y n

eed

C

ST

/CM

A

req

uir

emen

t, m

eet

wit

h p

are

nt

pri

or

to C

ST

/CM

A

ad

min

istr

ati

on

to

in

form

of

pro

gre

ss

nee

ded

on

th

e C

ST

/CM

A.

Ref

er s

tud

ents

to

LA

T a

t a

ny

tim

e th

rou

gh

ou

t th

e ye

ar

wh

en n

ot

ma

kin

g a

deq

ua

te E

LD

or

gra

de

leve

l p

rog

ress

- se

e L

AT

Ha

nd

bo

ok

24

PR

OC

ED

UR

ES

TO

RE

CL

AS

SIF

Y A

ND

MO

NIT

OR

EL

ST

UD

EN

TS

- S

EC

ON

DA

RY

A

UG

US

T

AU

GU

ST

-N

OV

EM

BE

R

OC

TO

BE

R

JAN

UA

RY

-F

EB

RU

AR

Y

MA

RC

H

MA

RC

H-J

UN

E

JUN

E

DATA received:

CS

T/C

MA

res

ults

re

ceiv

ed

EL

D M

onit

orin

g co

nfer

ence

s w

ith

LT

EL

des

igne

e, E

LA

an

d E

LD

teac

hers

to

targ

et E

L/L

TE

L n

eeds

of

inst

ruct

ion

to

recl

assi

fy.

Dat

a/R

epor

ts to

be

used

: • 1

5 w

eek

prog

ress

re

port

• E

LD

Pro

gres

s P

rofi

le

• MR

27 &

MR

29

repo

rt

• SIS

EL

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

(ID

27)

• SIS

ID

99 R

oste

r • M

yDat

a E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

• My

Dat

a C

ompr

ehen

sive

St

uden

t H

isto

ry

Rep

ort

• EL

D P

ortf

olio

s • P

erio

dic

Ass

essm

ents

• E

LD

ass

essm

ents

:

EL

D 1

-4, A

dvan

ced

EL

D, L

iter

acy

and

Lan

guag

e fo

r E

Ls

• End

-of-

Uni

t and

/or

Tea

cher

cre

ated

as

sess

men

ts

• EL

D &

EL

A S

tude

nt

Wor

k

Fal

l Mid

term

gra

des

Fal

l Sem

este

r R

epor

t C

ard

CE

LD

T s

core

s

Spr

ing

Mid

term

gr

ades

E

LD

Mon

itor

ing

conf

eren

ces

wit

h L

TE

L d

esig

nee,

EL

A

and

EL

D t

each

ers

to

targ

et E

L/L

TE

L n

eeds

of

inst

ruct

ion

to

recl

assi

fy.

Dat

a/R

epor

ts to

be

used

: • 1

5 w

eek

prog

ress

re

port

• E

LD

Pro

gres

s P

rofi

le

• MR

27 &

MR

29

repo

rt

• SIS

EL

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

(ID

27)

• SIS

ID

99 R

oste

r • M

yDat

a E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

• My

Dat

a C

ompr

ehen

sive

St

uden

t H

isto

ry

Rep

ort

• EL

D P

ortf

olio

s • P

erio

dic

Ass

essm

ents

• E

LD

ass

essm

ents

:

EL

D 1

-4, A

dvan

ced

EL

D, L

iter

acy

and

Lan

guag

e fo

r E

Ls

• End

-of-

Uni

t and

/or

Tea

cher

cre

ated

as

sess

men

ts

• EL

D &

EL

A S

tude

nt

Wor

k

Spr

ing

Sem

este

r R

epor

t Car

d

DATA/ SIS Report needed:

Run

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n E

ligi

bili

ty R

oste

r &

P

rint

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

rs (

for

EL

s w

ho

have

met

cri

teri

a)

Run

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n E

ligi

bili

ty R

oste

r &

P

rint

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

rs (

for

EL

s w

ho

have

met

cri

teri

a)

Run

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n E

ligi

bili

ty R

oste

r &

P

rint

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

rs (

for

EL

s w

ho

have

met

cri

teri

a)

Run

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n E

ligi

bili

ty R

oste

r &

P

rint

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

rs (

for

EL

s w

ho

have

met

cri

teri

a)

Run

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n E

ligi

bili

ty R

oste

r &

P

rint

ID

27

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

rs (

for

EL

s w

ho

have

met

cri

teri

a)

Identify, Instruct and Monitor Potential Reclassification Students:

Run

ID

27 E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

&

MyD

ata

EL

M

onit

orin

g R

oste

r.

Iden

tify

& p

rovi

de

stra

tegi

c in

stru

ctio

n an

d in

terv

enti

on to

E

Ls

base

d on

cri

teri

a no

t m

et:

C

EL

DT

dom

ain

scor

es o

f 1

or 2

CS

T/C

MA

sco

res

of B

elow

Bas

ic

(BB

) or

Far

Bel

ow

Bas

ic (

FB

B)

OR

no

t-pa

ssin

g sc

ore

on C

AH

SE

E

E

LA

gra

des

of D

or

F f

rom

pre

viou

s sp

ring

sem

este

r

Run

ID

27 E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

&

MyD

ata

EL

M

onit

orin

g R

oste

r.

Pro

vide

str

ateg

ic

inst

ruct

ion

and

inte

rven

tion

to E

Ls

wit

h m

idte

rm

EL

A/E

LD

mar

ks o

f D

or

F a

nd o

ther

cri

teri

a no

t m

et.

Run

ID

27 E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

&

MyD

ata

EL

M

onit

orin

g R

oste

r.

Iden

tify

& p

rovi

de

stra

tegi

c in

stru

ctio

n an

d in

terv

enti

on to

E

Ls

base

d on

cri

teri

a no

t m

et:

C

EL

DT

dom

ain

scor

es o

f 1

or 2

CS

T/C

MA

sco

res

of B

elow

Bas

ic

(BB

) or

Far

Bel

ow

Bas

ic (

FB

B)

OR

no

t-pa

ssin

g sc

ore

on C

AH

SE

E

E

LA

gra

des

of D

or

F f

rom

pre

viou

s sp

ring

sem

este

r

Run

ID

27 E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

&

MyD

ata

EL

M

onit

orin

g R

oste

r.

Pro

vide

str

ateg

ic

inst

ruct

ion

and

inte

rven

tion

to E

Ls

wit

h m

idte

rm g

rade

s (1

0-w

eek)

of

D o

r F

an

d ot

her

crit

eria

not

m

et.

For

EL

s w

ho O

NL

Y

need

CST

/CM

A

requ

irem

ent,

mee

t w

ith

pare

nt p

rior

to

CST

/CM

A

adm

inis

trat

ion

to

info

rm o

f pro

gres

s ne

eded

on

the

CST

/CM

A.

Run

ID

27 E

L

Mon

itor

ing

Ros

ter

&

MyD

ata

EL

M

onit

orin

g R

oste

r R

un M

R27

& M

R 2

9 Id

enti

fy &

pro

vide

st

rate

gic

inst

ruct

ion

and

inte

rven

tion

to

EL

s re

ceiv

ing

D o

r F

in

EL

A a

nd/o

r E

LD

.

Ref

er s

tude

nts

to L

AT

at a

ny

tim

e th

rou

ghou

t th

e ye

ar w

hen

not

mak

ing

adeq

uat

e E

LD

or

grad

e le

vel p

rogr

ess-

see

LA

T H

andb

ook


25

REVIEW PROGRESS OF ELs IN MEETING RECLASSIFICATION CRITERIA

The LAT reviews the progress of students in grades K-12 in meeting the reclassification criteria and makes recommendations for reclassification in grades K-1 and 2-12, as outlined in Bulletin 5619.1 Reclassification of English Learners. The 2nd-12th grade Reclassification criteria are as follows:

CELDT overall passing score of Early Advanced (level 4) or Advanced (level 5) and Intermediate level (3) or higher in Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing

Teacher evaluation based on student grades/progress report marks of 3 or 4 in grade-level ELA

California Standards Test (CST)/California Modified Assessment (CMA) English-language Arts score of Basic or above on the most recent administration OR passing score on the CAHSEE ELA (10th-12th)

LAT is to use the Reclassification Criteria Chart to ensure a thorough understanding of the criteria and how to monitor ELs towards reclassification. LAT plays a role in recommending reclassification for the following:

Kindergarten and 1st grade students Grade 2-12 ELs that meet the requirement of CST/CMA/CAHSEE and CELDT, but do not meet the

grade/progress report mark requirements For a LAT to recommend reclassification for ELs in Grades K-1, they must demonstrate:

English proficiency on the annual CELDT by achieving an overall performance level of 4 or 5 and skill area scores of 3 or above in Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing

Proficiency on MOY and/or EOY grade-level standards-based assessments (DIBELS and Literacy Periodic Assessment-LPA/LCR)

Progress Report mark scores of 3 or above in Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing

If all criteria are met and LAT recommends reclassification, LAT submits a LAT Recommendation Form and attaches MyData Comprehensive Student Report, LPA/LCR with rubric, and faxes the documents to the Multilingual & Multicultural Education Department (MMED) at 213-241-7561. (See Bulletin 5619.1 for detailed guidelines.) For LAT to recommend reclassification for ELs in Grades 2-12, a student must meet the requirement of CST and CELDT, but does not meet the grade/progress report mark requirements. The school’s LAT must convene to analyze other student data that demonstrates grade level proficiency and determine whether to recommend reclassification or instructional supports and/or intervention supports. If LAT recommends reclassification of an EL after careful consideration of recommended data measures, complete the “LAT Recommendation Form,” attach the necessary student evidence and the MyData Comprehensive Student Report. Fax to the Multilingual Multicultural Education Department (MMED) at 213-241-7561 for final reclassification determination. (See Bulletin 5619.1 for detailed guidelines.)

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

27

LA

T is

to r

efer

to th

e fo

llow

ing

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n C

rite

ria

char

t tha

t wil

l ass

ist i

n m

onit

orin

g E

Ls

mee

ting

rec

lass

ific

atio

n cr

iter

ia:

RE

CL

AS

SIF

ICA

TIO

N C

RIT

ER

IA C

HA

RT

Kin

der

gart

en

1st g

rad

e 2n

d g

rad

e 3rd

-5 g

rad

es

6th-8

th g

rad

es

9th-1

2th g

rad

es

CE

LD

T

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

• CE

LD

T O

vera

ll

scor

e of

4 o

r 5

and

• S

core

s of

3 o

r hi

gher

in

Lis

teni

ng,

Spe

akin

g, R

eadi

ng

and

Wri

ting

Tea

cher

E

valu

atio

n

• Pro

gres

s R

epor

t C

ard

Mar

ks o

f 3

or 4

in

EL

A

• Pro

gres

s R

epor

t C

ard

Mar

ks o

f 3

or 4

in

EL

A

• Pro

gres

s R

epor

t C

ard

Mar

ks o

f 3

or 4

in

EL

A

• Pro

gres

s R

epor

t C

ard

Mar

ks o

f 3

or 4

in

EL

A

• Gra

de o

f C

or

bett

er

in g

rade

-lev

el

Eng

lish

• Gra

de o

f C

or

bett

er

in a

n E

ngli

sh c

lass

th

at c

ount

s fo

r A

-G

cred

it

CS

T/O

ther

M

easu

res

• DIB

EL

S M

OY

or

EO

Y B

ench

mar

k sc

ores

an

d

• LC

R #

2 or

#3

scor

es

of 3

or

4

• DIB

EL

S M

OY

or

EO

Y B

ench

mar

k sc

ores

an

d

• LC

R #

2 or

#3

scor

es

of 3

or

4

• Bas

ic, P

rofi

cien

t or

A

dvan

ced

on L

PA

#2

or #

3

• Bas

ic, P

rofi

cien

t or

A

dvan

ced

on E

LA

se

ctio

n of

CS

T/C

MA

• Bas

ic, P

rofi

cien

t or

A

dvan

ced

on E

LA

se

ctio

n of

CS

T/C

MA

• Bas

ic, P

rofi

cien

t or

A

dvan

ced

on E

LA

se

ctio

n of

CS

T/C

MA

or

• P

assi

ng s

core

on

CA

HS

EE

- E

LA

(1

0th-1

2th g

rade

onl

y)

Par

ent

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

Par

ent

Con

sult

atio

n an

d N

otif

icat

ion

of

Rec

lass

ific

atio

n L

ette

r

LA

T

• LA

T r

equi

red

to m

eet

to r

evie

w a

bove

cr

iter

ia m

easu

res

an

d co

mpl

ete

A

ttac

hmen

t C

.

• LA

T r

equi

red

to m

eet

to r

evie

w a

bove

cr

iter

ia m

easu

res

and

com

plet

e A

ttac

hmen

t C

.

• Whe

n C

ST a

nd

CE

LD

T c

rite

ria

are

met

but

not

the

pr

ogre

ss r

epor

t m

arks

req

uire

men

t,

LA

T m

eets

to

anal

yze

othe

r st

uden

t da

ta

that

dem

onst

rate

s gr

ade-

leve

l pr

ofic

ienc

y an

d m

akes

re

com

men

dati

on.

• Com

plet

e A

ttac

hmen

t C

.

• Whe

n C

ST a

nd

CE

LD

T c

rite

ria

are

met

but

not

the

pr

ogre

ss r

epor

t m

arks

req

uire

men

t,

LA

T m

eets

to

anal

yze

othe

r st

uden

t da

ta

that

dem

onst

rate

s gr

ade-

leve

l pr

ofic

ienc

y an

d m

akes

re

com

men

dati

on.

• Com

plet

e A

ttac

hmen

t C

.

• Whe

n C

ST a

nd

CE

LD

T c

rite

ria

are

met

but

not

the

pr

ogre

ss r

epor

t m

arks

req

uire

men

t,

LA

T m

eets

to

anal

yze

othe

r st

uden

t da

ta

that

dem

onst

rate

s gr

ade-

leve

l pr

ofic

ienc

y an

d m

akes

re

com

men

dati

on.

• Com

plet

e A

ttac

hmen

t C

.

• Whe

n C

ST a

nd

CE

LD

T c

rite

ria

are

met

but

not

the

pr

ogre

ss r

epor

t m

arks

req

uire

men

t,

LA

T m

eets

to

anal

yze

othe

r st

uden

t da

ta

that

dem

onst

rate

s gr

ade-

leve

l pr

ofic

ienc

y an

d m

akes

re

com

men

dati

on.

• Com

plet

e

Att

achm

ent

C.


28

THIRD YEAR INTERVENTION If, by the third year of instruction in a U.S. school, an EL student is not meeting the minimum benchmarks of progress for his/her particular instructional program, an in-depth diagnostic assessment must be administered to identify specific student needs and the site administrator must ensure that appropriate interventions are provided to accelerate the student’s progress. A multidisciplinary team must be convened to support the decision-making process.

MONITORING PROGRESS OF RFEPs AND RECOMMENDING INTERVENTIONS

As required by Title III (AMAO 3), students reclassified as fluent-English proficient (RFEP) are considered ELs until proficiency on the CST in ELA has been demonstrated for two years. RFEPs are to be monitored for a minimum of two years after reclassification. At least once yearly, LAT meets to review the performance and progress of RFEP students, using the RFEP Monitoring Roster. The review of students who have met reclassification criteria takes place in early fall after the release of CST/CMA scores and by teacher request for students not meeting proficiency benchmarks in core content areas. Staff will meet to analyze student assessment data and decide on next steps. In addition to meeting for progress monitoring of students not meeting proficiency benchmarks, the LAT will maintain a record of RFEP student progress that will include, but is not limited to, data on CST/CMA scores, periodic assessment results, curriculum embedded assessments and teacher evaluation reports. The site administrator/designee coordinates the monitoring of reclassified students. All RFEP students are monitored at the end of each reporting period (elementary) or semester (secondary) for a minimum of two years following reclassification. Additionally, at the high school level graduation criteria checks are monitored twice a year by the student’s counselor. If a student is not making satisfactory progress after reclassification, the LAT must meet with the classroom teacher(s) to develop an intervention instructional plan with specialized support. Appropriate intervention measures may include, but are not limited to, any of the following:

Student/teacher/parent conference After-school tutoring Specialized reading, writing or math instruction Content-based language development support class After-school academic support Intervention/intersession classes Extended day and year opportunities.

(Refer to the District’s policy for additional information on monitoring the progress of reclassified students, as well as the EL Master Plan page 22) The Notification of Annual Progress of Reclassified Students letter must be sent annually to parents informing them of their child’s academic progress. When the student is not meeting grade-level standards and requires intervention services, Section VII, Recommended Support Services, must be completed by the classroom teacher(s) prior to obtaining the Principal’s signature and being sent to the parent. Parents must receive notice of intervention services available.

29

Adequate progress of RFEP students is demonstrated by meeting or exceeding grade-level content standards in English Language Arts (ELA) and Math. Adequate progress is measured as follows:

Year after Reclassifying

Academic Marks CST – ELA & Math

Year 1 Elementary: 3 or above in ELA and Math Secondary A, B or C in ELA and Math

Proficient or Above

Proficient or Above

Year 2 Elementary: 3 or above in ELA and Math Proficient or Advanced Secondary A, B or C in ELA

and Math

Proficient or Above

Proficient or Above Note: MMED is in the process of updating policy to reflect these benchmarks. When an RFEP student fails to demonstrate adequate progress following in-class intervention, the student must be referred for participation in an intervention program beyond the regular classroom. The services provided must be documented and filed at the school and should be made available upon request. If the student still does not demonstrate adequate progress, a referral must be made to the LAT for additional recommendations. Furthermore, the LAT must consult with the parent to collaborate on how to assist the student at home. The site administrator/designee coordinates the monitoring of reclassified students. All RFEP students are monitored for a minimum of two years after reclassification:

At the end of each reporting period (elementary) or semester (secondary) in meeting the above progress.

At the high school level, the student’s counselor monitors graduation criteria checks twice a year. If a student is not making satisfactory progress after reclassification, the LAT must meet with the classroom teacher(s) to develop an intervention instructional plan with specialized support.

Please note that schools should continue to monitor the progress of RFEPs after the two-year minimum period if the students are still not making adequate progress. Recommending Interventions for English Learners In all interventions the curriculum and instruction addresses the student’s specific learning needs and progress is carefully monitored and reported. All interventions should have the following in common:

Initial meeting with LAT to discuss teacher concerns about the student’s progress. The site will invite the parent/guardian to meet with the LAT.

In-depth assessment to determine specific area(s) of need and instruction that targets those needs.

Entry and exit criteria for participation in the intervention. No intervention should continue more than 8 weeks if the student does not show significant progress. If a student is not benefitting from the intervention in that period of time, the intervention is considered ineffective and alternative instructional strategies should be identified and provided.

Frequent (weekly) progress monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of the intervention. Systematic and explicit instruction with modeling, multiple examples and feedback. Option of receiving different curriculum from the core program with increased time and

intensity of instruction.

30

If several true peers are struggling, this is an indication that the core instruction is less than optimal. Core instruction strength must be examined.

If a student is temporarily removed from core instruction, the student should be returned to core instruction as quickly and efficiently as possible. Pullout intervention must be for intensive, targeted instruction based on student need. Scheduling Regular EL and RFEP Monitoring At the beginning of the school year, the EL Coordinator/administrative designee should establish a monthly monitoring calendar, taking into account the school year calendar, the timing of key assessments and reporting periods, and the probable release dates of test scores. The previous charts serve as a resource to develop this calendars- LAT Calendar (Elementary and Secondary) and Procedures to Reclassify and Monitor EL Students (Elementary & Secondary). When the LAT determines next steps based on monitoring of ELs and RFEPs, it must also establish a timeline for implementing and reviewing the effects of those steps. These timelines should be added to the monthly LAT calendar.

31

MONITORING PROGRESS OF LTELs

In order to prevent EL students from becoming LTELs, the principal/designee should review the EL Early Warning Report found on My Data to find students “at risk” of not reclassifying. Reviewing the “EL years” column in the My Data EL Monitoring Report should be a priority for all students identified as ELs for more than 5 years. Each school site appoints an LTEL Designee whose responsibility is to monitor the progress of LTELs and share this information with all stakeholders at the school (See Master Plan for ELs, p. 63 for middle school and p. 66 for high school). The LTEL Designee:

1) Monitors each LTELs’: Language status Test results Goals for meeting grade level standards Progress towards reclassification

2) Meets with students and parents twice a year to review: Language status Program placement Test results Goals for attaining reclassification criteria and accelerate academic progress targets

As a member of the LAT, the LTEL designee should provide information to the team as needed to ensure that schoolwide monitoring is coordinated and to assist in monitoring the progress of LTELs. Provide Guidance for ELD Setting and Instructional Strategies for Long-Term English Learners (LTELs) In secondary schools, LTELs are assigned to ELD courses to be taught concurrently with their grade-level ELA courses. LTELs reading above the 3rd grade level (middle school) or the 5th grade level (high school) take Advanced ELD. LTELs reading below the 3rd grade level (middle school) or the 5th grade level (high school) take Literacy and Language for English Learners. When an LTEL student is assigned to an ELD course for which he/she does not meet the placement criteria, the LAT will identify the course which best meets the student’s language needs. Students who have completed Advanced ELD but have not met reclassification criteria will receive ELD in a setting determined by the LAT, which may include an English class. The LAT will provide guidance and support to the ELA teacher on strategies needed to provide ELD to the students.

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

32

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

3-A

E

L M

ON

ITO

RIN

G R

OS

TE

R

SIS

Scr

een

14,

Op

tion

22

33

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

3-B

M

yDat

a E

L M

ON

ITO

RIN

G R

OS

TE

R

--T

o ob

tain

: G

o to

“sc

hoo

l”

Sel

ect

“En

glis

h L

earn

ers”

S

elec

t “E

ngl

ish

Lea

rner

s M

issi

ng

Mor

e th

an O

ne

Cri

teri

a”


34

ATTACHMENT 3-C MyData Comprehensive Student History Report

To obtain, select: “classroom current list”

Click on the id number for the student. The “Comprehensive Student History Report” will appear. Click on any link within this report and corresponding data will be displayed.

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

35

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

3-D

36

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

3-E


37

Attachment 3-F The MyData Student At Risk Report may be used to assist schools in identifying those students who may be at-risk of not reclassifying as English Proficient by the conclusion of their 5th year of English Language instruction. Students are considered "at-risk" of not reclassifying if they fail to reach the minimum thresholds on the CELDT and CST. To reach this report, use the following steps:


38

Referral Process

Initial Meeting Examine the student’s response to Tier I instruction & recommend

intervention.

Student does not make progress: Recommend alternate and/or

additional interventions. Schedule additional support meetings.

Student makes progress: Continue intervention and progress

monitoring as appropriate.

Intensive Interventions and Monitoring

Follow-Up Meeting Examine student’s response to interventions

implemented after initial meeting.


Section 4: LAT Referral Process


39


The teacher, administrator, school staff, or parent may initiate the pre-referral process. The administrator or designee must meet with the teacher prior to an individual LAT meeting to ensure daily, effective ELD instruction is occurring. Elementary The following questions must be addressed at the meeting:

Is the student receiving daily ELD instruction for a sufficient amount of time (ELD 1-3/ 1 hour/

ELD 4-5/ 45 minutes, for DLP 30-45 minutes)?

What curriculum/materials are being used? Is ELD instruction exclusively for ELs, with as few ELD levels as possible within the class?

Is the student meeting the minimum progress expectations? If the student is not meeting the District’s progress expectations, classroom instruction should be modified to meet the student’s linguistic and academic needs. (The administrator should prepare, review and distribute the My Data/SIS-generated English Learners Monitoring Roster to the teacher and brainstorm strategies based on student need.) If the student is not demonstrating adequate progress by advancing one ELD level per year, then the teacher needs to ensure the student receives in-class ELD intervention within whole and small group instruction. Refer to specific standards of need on portfolio. It is suggested to use an oral retelling assessment to inform progress monitoring within ELD. The teacher may use the SDAIE Four Critical

A. Are required minutes of daily ELD instruction

provided?

B. Is student meeting ELD benchmarks?

(1 ELD level per year)

No

Yes

Yes

Provide in-class ELD intervention If student has not made adequate ELD progress after

intervention services are provided, submit a LAT Referral

No

No LAT referral at this time Provide 6-8 weeks of daily ELD instruction

prior to LAT referral See EL Program Coordinator/Designee for

ELD materials and/or support

No Referral Needed


40

Elements Reflection Questions, SDAIE / Sheltered Content and Effective Differentiation and Curriculum Compacting for possible actions based on student need. The first level of intervention begins in the classroom. The teacher documents all in-class instructional accommodations and interventions and their results. Refer to SDAIE Four Critical Elements Reflection Questions, SDAIE / Sheltered Content and Effective Differentiation and Curriculum Compacting for possible actions based on student need.

Subsequent interventions may include: before/after school services or Summer School/Intersession Programs.

Retention at grade level is the intervention of last resort. Since research evidence indicates that the educational outcomes for ELs who are retained, including students retained at grades K and 1, are generally very poor in the long term, the decision to retain should be taken only in special circumstances and with the consultation of the Language Appraisal Team. Before a student is considered for retention, the student’s progress must be compared to his true peers (students with similar educational experiences, linguistic and cultural background and ELD level) and must be given multiple intervention opportunities.

NOTE: When modifications and interventions have been implemented and the student still does not demonstrate adequate ELD progress, the teacher will complete the Language Appraisal Team Referral Form. The referral form is to be submitted to the LAT Chairperson.

Secondary

A. Is the student enrolled in a double block of ELD?

B. Is the student progressing according to minimum progress expectations?

No

Yes

Yes

Provide ELD intervention services

If student has not made adequate ELD progress after intervention services are provided, submit a LAT Referral

No

No LAT referral at this time

Provide 6-8 weeks of daily ELD instruction prior to LAT referral

See EL Program Coordinator for ELD materials and/or support

No Referral Needed


41

The following questions may be addressed at the meeting: Has the student been appropriately placed in the ELD and/or ELA curriculum? Is the student meeting the District Progress Benchmarks for English Learners by advancing a

minimum of 1 ELD level per semester?

If the student is not meeting the District’s Benchmarks, classroom instruction should be modified to meet the student’s linguistic and academic needs. The teacher should refer to the MyData or SIS-generated English Learners Monitoring Roster, to determine if the student is making adequate progress.

If the student is not demonstrating adequate progress by advancing one ELD level per semester, then the teacher needs to ensure the student receives in-class ELD intervention. Refer to SDAIE Four Critical Elements Reflection Questions, SDAIE / Sheltered Content and Effective Differentiation and Curriculum Compacting for possible actions based on student need. The first level of intervention begins in the classroom. The teacher documents all in-class instructional accommodations and interventions and their results. Refer to SDAIE Four Critical Elements Reflection Questions, SDAIE / Sheltered Content and Effective Differentiation and Curriculum Compacting for possible actions based on student need.

Subsequent interventions may include: before/during/after school services (e.g., before and after-school program-funded intervention, Support Personnel, CELDT Support, Local Design, Summer School/Intersession Programs.)

NOTE: When strategies and interventions have been implemented and the student still does not demonstrate adequate ELD progress, the teacher will complete the Language Appraisal Team Referral Form (Attachment 4-D). The referral form is to be submitted to the administrator/ LAT Chairperson.


42

REFERRAL PROCESS

For an EL/RFEP who is not meeting the minimum progress expectations in ELD and/or grade-level content standards, a completed Language Appraisal Team Referral Form must be submitted. The LAT Chairperson ensures a system is in place to coordinate and support the following:

LAT Referral Log LAT Referral Form

The following are the steps taken during the referral process: Request for LAT referral of student is communicated to LAT chairperson. LAT chairperson logs in using the LAT Referral Log: student name, teacher, grade and date LAT

Referral Form was requested. LAT Referral Form is provided to teacher of student. Teacher completes LAT Referral Form: student information (front page), concerns and evidence/data

measured used (back page). Teacher collects required documentation and checks it off on the bottom of the form. LAT Referral Form with required documentation is submitted to LAT chairperson. LAT chairperson ensures form and documentation is complete. LAT chairperson logs-in LAT Referral Form is submitted and schedules LAT Initial Meeting.


43

INITIAL INDIVIDUAL LAT MEETING

The purpose of the initial meeting is to review student work and documentation and identify additional accommodations and strategies that the teacher should implement to assist the EL student. Whenever possible, the meeting should take place in the teacher’s classroom to facilitate discussion of student work and an understanding of the classroom environment. Copies of the following documentation must be available for review during the Initial LAT meeting: Student Documents and Records

LAT Referral Form Original Home Language Survey (HLS) Student’s attendance record Progress Report Scores (current and previous year) My Data Comprehensive Student History Report-Summary Cumulative Record Disciplinary Referrals Health concerns, if applicable Intervention(s) received (SIS: Main Menu, Option 26; Intervention Services Menu, Option 1,

notations or documentation in the ELD Portfolio or the Master Plan Folder) CELDT Assessment Results (SIS: Main Menu, Option 7; Testing Menu, Option 6; CELDT Menu,

Option 1)

Student Work

Authentic assessments of the student’s oral language abilities, such as oral retell of narrative/expository text (for Elementary, the use of the ELD PA Protocol is suggested)

On-demand writing samples (for Elementary, the use of the ELD PA Protocol is suggested) Sample of ELD and ELA writing process. Additionally, for TBE, MBE, DL programs, primary

language work samples should be reviewed. LPA Assessment by Student Printout—shows strengths and weaknesses with specific standards Running Record with notation of reading errors for concerns with reading fluency and/or

comprehension Recording of child reading running record or text ELD Portfolio

During the meeting, the recorder must complete the Language Appraisal Team Initial Meeting Form (Attachment 4-E).


44

INITIAL MEETING PROTOCOL

Questions/Clarification Group member are to ask specific clarifying questions . Following are possible questions that may be asked:

Language Concerns Are there language difficulties evident in the primary language and English? How do they affect the

student’s ability to communicate? In which domains? Have the student’s parents/guardians noticed any language difficulties? What are the specific

difficulties? What is the context? Have the student’s other teachers (secondary) noticed similar difficulties? Is the student receiving primary language support to access grade-level curriculum? How is it

provided? By whom?


45

Strategies and Differentiation How is the instruction appropriately differentiated for the student, as observed by the administrator?

Refer to SDAIE Four Critical Elements Reflection Questions and Differentiation Strategies for possible actions based on student need.

Based on an examination of the student’s running record, describe the miscues the student commits. What instructional strategies should be used? (For more information see section English Learners Struggling with Literacy and Writing).

Has the student’s program placement been consistent? What programs, and for how long, has the student participated in?

What alternate strategies are used to address the individual needs of the student? Is there evidence that in-class interventions were implemented?

1. Were the interventions successful? Why or why not? 2. Did the interventions meet the student’s needs?

Has the area of concern been validated by multiple assessment sources? (e.g., ELD Assessment Portfolio, student work samples, CELDT and/or CST results, primary language assessments, content area assessment/work samples)? For students in TBE, MBE and DL programs, has the progress in English and the primary language been compared and analyzed?

Health, Attendance and Attitude How might attendance, health, or other factors in the student’s school history relate to the current

difficulty? Does the student understand the expectations and/or concerns about his/her progress

(secondary/upper elementary)? Team Recommendations and Action Plan Recommendations and the action plan are based on an examination of all information presented using the problem solving process. Team recommendations may include, but are not limited to the following:

In-class intervention Tier II support Curriculum packing/differentiation In-depth assessment to determine specific area(s) of need and instruction that targets those needs. Intervention services

o Entry and exit criteria for participation in the intervention. o Review results of intervention within 6-8 weeks to review results of intervention. o If results are not effective, alternative instructional strategies should be identified and

provided. o Weekly progress monitoring of intervention o For TBE, MBE, and DL programs, if student is struggling equally in the primary language

and English, the intervention should be provided in the primary language. Systematic and explicit instruction with modeling, multiple examples and feedback and

differentiation (See SDAIE Self Review and Instructional Strategies in Appendix). Option of receiving different curriculum from the core program with increased time and intensity of

instruction. Mentor Program


46

Additional resources and strategies for parents to support home school connection PSA referral Health referral/evaluation Primary language support Promotion to the next ELD level Secondary: Change in instructional program/setting

FOLLOW-UP INDIVIDUAL LAT MEETINGS

A follow-up meeting should be held to review and evaluate the Action Plan within the timeframe established by the LAT members and as indicated on the Initial Meeting Form (Usually within 6-8 weeks). The purpose of this meeting is to monitor student progress, conclude the LAT process, or make new recommendations. The Language Appraisal Team Follow-Up Meeting Form (Attachment 4-F) is completed by the Recorder/Timekeeper during the follow-up meeting and maintained in the LAT Meeting Binder.

Follow-Up Meeting Protocol

Step 1: Introductions and Purpose

Step 2: Review and Evaluate Action Plan

Process ends if interventions were successful; if not, continue to areas of concern

Step 3: Continued Areas of Concern

Step 4: Evaluate Instructional Program Alternatives

Step 5: New Action Plan is Developed

Step 6: Subsequent Follow-Up Meeting Within 6-8 weeks

Process ends if interventions were successful; if not, continue with intensive support and monitoring

Step 6: Continue with intensive support and monitoring and determine if progress may be the result of disability

LAT members discuss the response to the actions indicated in the Action Plan. If the recommendations were successful, the process ends. Otherwise, the evaluation process continues to STEP 3.


47

IMPLEMENT AND EVALUATE FURTHER OPTIONS

Continued Areas of Concern If the student continues to experience difficulties, possible questions to consider include:

Are the areas of concern documented across instructional settings/content areas? Have the instructional accommodations been applied with sufficient intensity and duration? Are they

appropriate for the needs of the student? Are prerequisite skills addressed and aligned with the standards?

Evaluate Instructional Program Alternatives For students in Structured English Immersion and Mainstream English, when evaluating the student’s instructional program, possible questions to consider include:

Is there evidence that the student’s current Master Plan instructional placement is appropriate? Are supplemental services available and effectively coordinated to meet the student’s needs? Are the supplemental services and interventions aligned to classroom instruction? Is there evidence that supplemental services are effective?

A Second Action Plan Is Developed If the existing action plan is not successful, an additional plan must be developed. Specific instructional strategies and interventions are decided upon by the LAT members. A subsequent follow-up meeting within 6-8 weeks is scheduled to review student progress. Subsequent Follow-Up Meeting LAT members will follow through on the commitment of the second action plan in accordance with the established timeline.

NOTE: The process ends if the subsequent action plan is successful. However, if the student continues to experience difficulties, continue to STEP 4.

Possible Referral for Assessment should only be taken if all other reasonable options have been exhausted and LAT team agrees that the learning difficulties are not associated with the language development of the student. The LAT follows the special education referral procedures that are in place at the school. For further information, please refer to the Special Education Policies and Procedures Manual (July 2007), Student Success Teams 2000 and Procedures for the Referral and Assessment of English Learners (Revised January 2012).


48

LAT DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES

School administrators must have systems in place to ensure appropriate and timely review of documentation for all students referred to the LAT. The Language Appraisal Team Referral Log (Attachment 4-B) must be utilized to record all referrals. It is the responsibility of the chairperson to make certain that LAT documents are properly stored and maintained in a secure location. Master Plan Folder The Master Plan Folder is a blue folder that contains student documents related to the English Learner Program. This folder is permanently filed in the student’s cumulative (CUM) record. LAT documentation must be filed within the student’s Master Plan Folder. LAT Meeting Binder The LAT binder contains confidential information and must be maintained in a secure location. LAT documentation must be kept on file for a minimum of five years. Funding for Initial and Follow-up LAT Meetings

EL funds may be used to pay for day-to-day substitutes to release teachers during Initial and Follow-up LAT meetings. The school must demonstrate that the LAT will be evaluating an EL student in order to identify appropriate interventions for that student’s progress. Recommendations must be documented on the LAT Referral. It is recommended that schools schedule multiple LAT meetings during the time when a substitute is paid from EL funds in order to justify the allocation of said funds. This will assure that the school is compliant. Substitute time, paid out of EL funds, may not be used to perform the duties of the SST / COST Team or for an IEP meeting. Sign-ins and schedules must be collected to document appropriate use of substitutes.

English Learner funds can be used to fund a day-to-day substitute to release teachers to participate in a LAT review to identify appropriate interventions (based on data analysis) to address the EL's academic progress.

The day-to-day substitute can be paid out of EIA-LEP or Title III funds. When LAT reviews non-progressing RFEP students in order to identify appropriate interventions to

address academic progress, the day-to-day substitute can only be paid out of EIA-LEP. Substitute teachers cannot perform the duties of LAT, SST or an IEP


49

ATTACHMENT 4-A

LAT Membership Form School The following individuals have been designated and trained to serve as members on the LAT for the school year:

NAME TITLE 1. Principal/Designee 2. EL Coordinator 3. LTEL Designee (6th-12th) 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. LAT meetings are held (specify how often): Principal’s Signature Date Submitted

Please submit a copy of this LAT Membership Form to your ESC EL Coordinator within the first six weeks of the new school year.

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

50

LA

T Si

gn-In

S

tude

nt’s

Nam

e:

Date

:

Te

ache

r:

Grad

e/Ro

om:

No

. Na

me

of P

artic

ipan

t Ti

tle/R

ole

Sign

atur

e 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

4-B

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

51

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

4-C

LAT

Refe

rral

Log

Schoo

l:

Y

ear:

ESC:

St

uden

t’s N

ame

Teac

her

Grad

e/

Trac

k/

Room

Dat

e LA

T Re

ferr

al

Form

pr

ovid

ed

to te

ache

r

Pre-

Ref

erra

l D

ate

Dat

e LA

T Re

ferr

al

Form

su

bmit

ted

Init

ial

Mee

ting

D

ate

Follo

w-u

p M

eeti

ng

Dat

e Co

mm

ents


52

Language Appraisal Team Referral Form

Attach SIS printouts, ELD Portfolio, and MyData Comprehensive Student History Report-Summary GENERAL INFORMATION

Teacher: _______________________ __

Grade: _____

Room: _____

Referral Date: _________

Student: ________________________________ DOB: _____________________________

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (Complete only those items not included in MyData/SIS printouts.) Primary Language (L1): ____________

L1 Support provided by

Teacher TA

Other: ______________________

Language Classification: EL

RFEP

Date of Current Language Classification: ___________________ ___

Master Plan Program: TBE MBE DL LTEL Program Newcomer Program SEI W EL Years: ________

ELD Level:

1

2

3

4

5

How long? ______

ACHIEVEMENT DATA (Complete only those items not included in MyData/SIS printouts.)

Overall CELDT: 1 2 3 4 5 CELDT Date: ________________

CELDT Listening: ________ CELDT Speaking: ________ CELDT Reading: ________ CELDT Writing: ________

Current CST Scores: ELA Level FBB BB B P A

Math Level FBB BB B P A

ELA Mark: _________________

Math Mark:

_________________

Current L1 Scores: Spanish STS: _____ SLPA_____ SLCR: _____ IDEL: _____Korean KLT: _____ Mandarin: MLT: _____

REASON(S) FOR REFERRAL

Reason for ELD Referral--EL is not making adequate ELD progress. Student has not:

Met minimum progress expectations for ELD (Progress Profile Results) Domain(s) of Concern: Listening Speaking Reading Writing (Note specific standards not met in Concern Box)

Other: __________________________________

Reason for Grade-level Content Referral—LEP is not making adequate academic progress in:

English Language Arts (ELA)

Target/Primary Language Arts (SLA,KLA, MLA)

Math

RFEP or EL at ELD 4-5 enrolled in a Mainstream English Program is not making adequate academic progress in:

English Language Arts (ELA)

Math

REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION (Check all items attached to referral.) ELD Referral: Grade-Level Content Referral: ELD Portfolio with assessment/work samples English and/or Spanish Language Arts Benchmark Assessment MyData Comprehensive Student History Report - Summary Math Benchmark Assessments Intervention Services Received (SIS) Progress Report Scores Suggested: ELD Periodic Assessment Protocol (elementary) or ELA Periodic Assessment (secondary), running record (elementary and secondary)

CST Results (SIS) and/or STS

Intervention Services Received (SIS)

DIBELS and/or IDEL data (elementary only)

ATTACHMENT 4-D


53

Concerns:

Evidence / Data Measures Used:

ATTACHMENT 4-D Language Appraisal Team Referral Form, continued

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

54

Lang

uage

App

rais

al T

eam

In

itia

l Mee

ting

For

m

St

uden

t: EL

D L

evel

:

Dat

e of

Bir

th:

Age:

Gr

ade:

Te

ache

r/R

oom

#/Tr

ack:

M

eeti

ng D

ate:

Stre

ngth

s(ELD and/or

grade-level co

ntent)

Area

sof

Con

cern

(Ref

erto

Refe

rral

Form

) (ELD a

nd/or grade-

level content s

tandards not

met)

Que

stio

ns

Addi

tion

al In

form

atio

n

Sugg

este

d In

stru

ctio

nal S

uppo

rts

and

Stra

tegi

es Ac

tion

Pla

n(Identify wh

at will be don

e, person resp

onsible and co

mpletion date

)Include Teach

er, Parent and

Student action

s. Use other s

ide if needed.

M

embe

rs P

rese

nt:

Administrato

r ______________

___________

Teacher _____

________________

____ Coordina

tor ____________

_____________

Parent/G

uardian ______

________________

___ Psycholo

gist ___________

______________

Nurse _______

________________

__ Ot

her ___________

________________

___

Fo

llow-UpLATMeetingDate:________________

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

4-E

LAN

GU

AGE

APPR

AISA

L TE

AM H

AND

BOO

K

55

La

ngua

ge A

ppra

isal

Tea

m

Follo

w-U

p M

eeti

ng F

orm

Stud

ent N

ame:

ELD

Lev

el:

Dat

e of

Bir

th:

Age:

Gr

ade:

Te

ache

r/R

m#/

Trac

k:

Mee

ting

Dat

e:

Mem

bers

Pre

sent

: Admin

istrator_____ T

eacher_____ C

oordinator___

__ Student’s P

arent/Guardi

an ____ Psych

ologist_____ N

urse____ RST

____ Other___

__ Ev

alua

tion

of L

AT A

ctio

n Pl

an

Were modifi

cations and st

rategies from

Action Plan su

ccessful?

Yes (Process e

nds) If no

t, then continu

e with the pro

cess. Co

ntin

ued

Area

s of

Con

cern

(ELD and/or

grade-level co

ntent)

Que

stio

ns

Eval

uati

on o

f Mas

ter

Plan

Inst

ruct

iona

lPro

gram

Plac

emen

t&Po

ssib

leM

odifi

cati

ons

New

Act

ion

Plan

(Identify wha

t will be done

, person respo

nsible and co

mpletion date

)

Follo

w-U

p LA

T M

eeti

ng D

ate

Evaluation of

New Action Pla

n: Were modi

fications and s

trategies from

New Action P

lan successful

? Yes (Pro

cess ends)

If not, then

refer student t

o COST/SST

SST

REFE

RRAL

Yes

No

Comm

ents: .

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

4-F