Module One: Transcript

Table of Contents

Screencast 1: Freedom to Talk............................................................................................ 2

Screencast 2: Guiding Questions and Objectives..........................................................2Slide 1.................................................................................................................................................... 2Slide 2.................................................................................................................................................... 3Slide 3.................................................................................................................................................... 3

Screencast 2: Rationale, History, and Goals....................................................................3Slide 1.................................................................................................................................................... 3Slide 2.................................................................................................................................................... 4Slide 3.................................................................................................................................................... 4Slide 4.................................................................................................................................................... 5Slide 5.................................................................................................................................................... 5Slide 6.................................................................................................................................................... 5Slide 7.................................................................................................................................................... 6Slide 8.................................................................................................................................................... 6Slide 9.................................................................................................................................................... 6Slide 10.................................................................................................................................................. 7Slide 11.................................................................................................................................................. 7Slide 12.................................................................................................................................................. 7Slide 13.................................................................................................................................................. 7Slide 14.................................................................................................................................................. 8Slide 15.................................................................................................................................................. 8Slide 16.................................................................................................................................................. 8Slide 17.................................................................................................................................................. 9Slide 18.................................................................................................................................................. 9Slide 19.................................................................................................................................................. 9Slide 20.................................................................................................................................................. 9Slide 21............................................................................................................................................... 10

Screencast 4: Guiding Principles.....................................................................................10Slide 1.................................................................................................................................................. 10Slide 2.................................................................................................................................................. 10Slide 3.................................................................................................................................................. 11Slide 4.................................................................................................................................................. 11Slide 5.................................................................................................................................................. 11Slide 6.................................................................................................................................................. 12Slide 7.................................................................................................................................................. 12Slide 8.................................................................................................................................................. 12Slide 9.................................................................................................................................................. 12Slide 10............................................................................................................................................... 13Slide 11............................................................................................................................................... 13

Screencast 5: Organization and Correspondences....................................................13Slide 1.................................................................................................................................................. 13Slide 2.................................................................................................................................................. 13

1

Slide 3.................................................................................................................................................. 14Slide 4.................................................................................................................................................. 14Slide 5.................................................................................................................................................. 15Slide 6.................................................................................................................................................. 15Slide 7.................................................................................................................................................. 16Slide 8.................................................................................................................................................. 16Slide 9.................................................................................................................................................. 17Slide 10............................................................................................................................................... 17Slide 11............................................................................................................................................... 18Slide 12............................................................................................................................................... 18Slide 13............................................................................................................................................... 18Slide 14............................................................................................................................................... 19Slide 15............................................................................................................................................... 19Slide 16............................................................................................................................................... 19Slide 17............................................................................................................................................... 20Slide 18............................................................................................................................................... 20Slide 19............................................................................................................................................... 20Slide 20............................................................................................................................................... 20Slide 21............................................................................................................................................... 20Slide 22............................................................................................................................................... 21

Screencast 6: Overview of Modules................................................................................21Slide 1.................................................................................................................................................. 21Slide 2.................................................................................................................................................. 21Slide 3.................................................................................................................................................. 22Slide 4.................................................................................................................................................. 22Slide 5.................................................................................................................................................. 22Slide 6.................................................................................................................................................. 22

Screencast 1: Freedom to TalkWelcome to the new English Language Proficiency Standards modules. These modules were developed as professional development supports to help you interpret and use the new ELP standards, which align with and support the development of the language needed to access the new college- and career-ready content standards. Before we get started, let’s take a look at this video entitled “Freedom to Talk”, created by Kenji and Luis Hakuta. It will introduce you to the historical decisions and policies that have led to the standards we now know today.

Screencast 2: Guiding Questions and Objectives

Slide 1Module One: English Language Proficiency Standards Introduction:Guiding Question & Objectives

2

This module is the first of six professional development modules that address how to interpret and use the new English Language Proficiency or ELP Standards that were launched by the Council of Chief State School Officers, WestEd and the ELPA21 consortium in 2013. These ELP standards are the basis for the ELPA21 assessment system.

The main purpose of this first module is to introduce educators to the standards and provide a context for their creation, organization and use.

Slide 2There is one guiding question to consider as you work through this introductory module.• What should every educator working with students who are learning English, often

referred to as English Language Learners or ELLs, know about the new ELP standards?

There are also several, more specific sub-questions about the ELP Standards that will be addressed throughout the module. These include:

• Why were they created? Who created them? • How were they developed? Who is their audience? • What do they entail and why? • How do they correspond to content standards? • How do educators begin to use them?

Slide 3There are also four objectives for users of this module. At the end of the module, educators should expect to:

• Understand the rationale and history behind the creation of the new ELP standards• Recognize how the new ELP standards are related to other college-and career-ready

standards and how they are different from previous standards• Identify the goals, guiding principles, essential components, and language used in

the ELP standards• Navigate the ELP standards document(s) and the subsequent modules

Screencast 2: Rationale, History, and Goals

Slide 1English Language Proficiency Standards: Rationale, History & Goals

Slide 2In this video we will introduce the new English Language Proficiency – or ELP – Standards, proving a rationale for their creation, some history about how they came about and articulating their goals.

3

There are, however, a few key points we want to make clear about the new standards before moving forward with their rationale.

First, they were developed for all grades levels, Kindergarten through Grade 12.

Second, the standards highlight a strategic set of language functions (What students do with language to accomplish content-specific tasks) and language forms (vocabulary, grammar, and discourse) that are applicable across all content areas and grade levels.

It’s also important to note that they are meant to guide both English language development and content teachers to fuel English Language Learners’ academic and language development. In other words, the standards are meant to be used by both ELD/ESL teachers AND content area teachers.

And finally, these standards were designed to support ELLs as they develop competence in the practices associated with English language arts (ELA) & literacy, mathematics, and science. So they are not separate from content area learning, but are instead designed to complement and support that work.

Slide 3So now, let’s talk a bit about the rationale for creating these new ELP standards.

The ELP standards were prompted by a shift in our country’s overall standards landscape. Said differently, in recent years the nation has shifted from focusing on discrete, disconnected, content-specific standards towards what are being called “college- and career-ready standards,” which emphasize analytical thinking, communicating, doing, applying, and using language for different audiences and purposes.

So whether your state uses the Common Core State Standards, the Next Generation Science Standards, or a more contextualized set of state-specific content area standards – chances are that these standards are somewhat new and can be categorized as “College- and Career-Ready.”

Slide 4And all of these new content-area standards signal a fundamental upward shift in the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students must develop in order to be college- and career-ready in the 21st century.

4

Also, they carry increased language demands across content areas. Meaning what students are expected to understand and do in the content areas is indelibly linked to the communication and articulation of their learning.

It’s important to note, however, that these new standards are not changing the essence of mathematics or science or even English Language Arts with respect to language.

These content areas have always been linguistically demanding. But while previous standards were largely silent on the kinds of language and analytical practices students need to perform in academic subject areas, the new standards make language demands and practices more visible and rigorous.

In other words, while language has always been integral to core content, now it is transparently so.

Slide 5Consider this description, which details what students should be able to do when meeting the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards:

Students can, without significant scaffolding, comprehend and evaluate complex texts across a range of types and disciplines, and they can construct effective arguments and convey intricate or multifaceted information. Likewise, students are able independently to discern a speaker’s key points, request clarification, and ask relevant questions. They build on others’ ideas, articulate their own ideas, and confirm they have been understood.

All the underlined practices here carry a high linguistic demand.

Slide 6 Now consider this description of what students should be able to do when meeting the Common Core Standards for Mathematical Practice.

Mathematically proficient students understand and use stated assumptions, definitions, and previously established results in constructing arguments...They justify their conclusions, communicate them to others, and respond to the arguments of others.

The story here is similar. Nearly all of the academic practices detailed in this description require students to comprehend and use specific types of language– and this is in math, which has traditionally been thought of as a “language-free” discipline.

5

Slide 7 This Venn diagram, created by Tina Cheuk from the Understanding Language Initiative at Stanford University helps illuminate how linguistically demanding the new standards really are.

To create the graphic, Tina looked at the key practices in the Common Core math and English language arts standards, as well as the key practices in the Next Generation Science Standards, and mapped where they overlapped.

And while there’s a lot of information to be gleaned from this graphic, the main idea is that nearly all of the core analytical practices that go across content areas – the high leverage practices - such as argumentation, analyzing complex texts, supporting ideas with evidence are linguistically demanding.

Slide 8 It’s also important to note that in the past, there's been a great deal of division between content and language teachers.

This made sense and was exacerbated by a standards paradigm that mostly kept language – with the exception of vocabulary – out of the realm of content standards.

Slide 9 The new content standards, however, are very explicit that all teachers are teachers of language and literacy and that in order to be successful in disciplines, students need to be able to engage in rich language practices.

For example, students need to understand the discourse of specific disciplines and be able to read and comprehend complex text across those content disciplines.

Students also need to be able to explain their thinking, and to argue their point of view or their method for solving their problem. They also need to modify their language choices, depending on the purpose and the audience.

Students must also understand the typical text structure in different disciplines as well as be able to use complex sentence structures and to understand not just content area vocabulary, but general academic vocabulary that cuts across disciplines.

Slide 10But these changes reflect not only a fundamental shift in how content area learning is conceptualized and enacted in practice. They also reflect a shift in how language

6

development and English language proficiency are depicted in standards and assessments in relation to content area learning.

Previously, English language development and content learning were framed as being in a sequential relationship. In other words, English language proficiency was something that students had to demonstrate before digging into deep content learning. ELP standards and instruction provided a foundation from which to approach content standards.

But now, the development of language and content instruction are more commonly portrayed as being in a parallel relationship. In other words, students develop their language skills while engaged in rigors content learning. Thus students identified as English Language Learners should no longer be foreclosed from content learning. Moreover, learning the language of the content is part and parcel of learning the content – for all students.

Slide 11But if the recently implemented college- and career-ready content standards are already linguistically demanding, why did we need new ELP standards as well?

Well, first off – while college- and career-ready standards carry rigorous language demands and identify necessary linguistic practices, they do not provide clear expectations of student language use, progressions, or competencies.

Slide 12Furthermore, previous ELP assessments, which were usually created on a state-by-state basis and hopefully based on corresponding ELP or ELD standards – had poor predictive validity for student performance in ELA and mathematics. Meaning there was little correlation between doing well – or doing poorly – on an ELP assessment and doing well – or doing poorly – in English language arts or math.

And finally, there was interest – particularly from states applying for waivers from No Child Left Behind requirements – in using ELP standards and linked assessments to measure the academic language proficiency needed for the content areas.

Slide 13 And so the new ELP standards were envisioned with these goals in mind:

1. Create fewer, clearer standards with strategic correspondences to: • CCSS ELA & Literacy• CCSS for Mathematics• NGSS

7

2. Specify key language functions that students must be able to carry out in discipline-appropriate ways3. Express target language uses in clear and meaningful progressions4. Enable collaborative use by both ELD/ESL and content-area teachers

Slide 14 The result was 10 core English Language Proficiency Standards that were applicable across grade levels.

These 10 core ELP standards were then differentiated and broken down into progressions according to grade level bands, something that will be discussed in more detailed later on in this module.

Slide 15 And by maintaining tight, strategic correspondence to the college-and career-ready content standards as well as specifying key, cross-cutting language functions, these 10 new ELP standards shift the focus from, “What language does a student have?” to “What is a student able to do with language within content areas?”

Slide 16 This pictorial further highlights the changes between previous or older versions of ELD or ELP standards – which were typically created and implemented by individual states – and the new inter-state standards.

While old standards promoted using simplified texts and activities, the new standards advocate for intellectually challenging activities that include language scaffolds to promote access to grade-level texts and deeper learning.

In a similar vein, while old ELP standards adhered to a conception of language development that emphasized accuracy, vocabulary and correct grammar, the new standards focus on comprehension, production, and interaction.

Finally, old ELP standards were often seen as a precursor or “junior” to English language arts or literacy standards. In fact, some states didn’t even have ELP or ELD standards at all!

But these new standards – which are intended to be used by all ELPA21 member states – are not precursors, but on equal footing with content standards. As noted, they were in fact designed to correspond with college- and career-ready standards across all content areas to support ELLs’ academic language development and engagement in disciplinary learning.

8

Slide 17So now we know why the new ELP standards were developed and what they entail. But who developed them, when, and under what conditions?

In the Spring of 2013, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the same group that managed the development of the Common Core State Standards, commissioned the standards work to be done by WestEd and educators who are part of the ELPA21 consortium.

The Understanding Language Initiative at Stanford University was a significant thought partner in this creation process, as were other educators, who are part of the CCSSO ELL SCASS, which stands for the State Collaboratives on Assessment and Student Standards. The National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards & Student Testing (CRESST) at UCLA and the National Center for Educational Outcomes also contributed to the process.

Slide 18 With input and guidance from Understanding language Initiative, participating authors began developing the ELP standards in the summer of 2013.  The 2012 California English Language Development Standards were used as a launching point. Others also applied the correspondence methods found in the 2012 CCSSO ELPD framework, which was created as a guidance document for states to use when they are creating ELP standards, to correspond with the Common Core and the Next Generation Science Standards. The final ELP standards were released in Fall 2013.

Slide 19 The ELPA 21 consortium was formed in 2012 in partnership with CCSSO (the Council of Chief State School Officers). The consortium is responsible for facilitating the adoption of the new ELP standards for all 11 member states. States participating in the ELPA21 consortium represent multiple regions of the United States and are also diverse politically and demographically.

Slide 20 ELPA 21 is working toward developing a common English language proficiency assessment to measure students’ progress toward the new standards. The ELPA21 assessment system measures and reports on proficiency of the English language overall, as well as in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and comprehension. What’s exciting about the ELPA21 assessment system is that it was developed to access students’ proficiencies in relation to the ELP standards, which were created first. This often has not been the case with previous ELP standards and assessments.

9

Slide 21 So now that you’ve had the opportunity to hear about the rationale, history and goals of the new ELP standards, let’s take a minute to apply your learning and compare a set of older English Language proficiency standards to the new ELP standards. Click on the boxes below to enlarge both sets of standards, then download the worksheet to compare the two sets.

The goal is to assess how each set of standards appears to reflect the academic language demands needed for college- and career-readiness.

Screencast 4: Guiding Principles

Slide 1Module One. English Language Proficiency Standards: Guiding Principles.

The main purpose of this section is to introduce educators to the eight guiding principles that underpin the English Language Proficiency standards.

Slide 2There are eight guiding principles that inform the ELP standards. In this section we will guide you through each of these principles. Briefly, these principles address:

1. The Potential of English Language Learners2. ELLs’ Funds of Knowledge3. Diversity in language proficiency acquisition4. Scaffolding5. Supporting students with limited or interrupted formal education6. English learners with special needs7. Access-supports and accommodations for assessments 8. The use of multimedia, technology, and new literacies in ELL instruction and

assessments

Slide 3The first principle discusses the potential of English learners. The standards were designed around the notion that ELLs have the same potential as native speakers of English to engage in cognitively complex tasks.

Regardless of English Language Proficiency level, all ELLs need access to challenging, grade-appropriate curriculum, instruction, and assessment. And all ELLs will benefit from activities that require them to use language. Moreover, even though ELLs may produce language that is distinguishable or slightly different from their native-English-

10

speaking peers, it is certainly possible for ELLs to achieve the standards for college- and-career readiness.

Slide 4Principle 2 addresses English Language Learners’ “funds of knowledge”. This term, funds of knowledge, was coined by Luis Moll and his colleagues, and it refers to the primary languages of students as well as other social, cultural, and linguistic knowledge and resources that ELLs bring to help them navigate back and forth among their schools and their communities. In other words, funds of knowledge are valuable resources that can help students as they work to develop effective communication skills in English.

To make sure they are drawing from and building off of students’ funds of knowledge, teachers should be aware of the cultural assumptions that are embedded in curriculum, instruction, and assessment provided to ELLs.

They should also discuss these culturally embedded influences and assumptions with students themselves, so that they can more easily negotiate them and interpret nuances of texts written in English.

Slide 5Principle 3 discusses diversity in language proficiency acquisitionA student’s ability to acquire and demonstrate English language proficiency will depend on many factors such as the context of communication, the content-area focus, and other developmental factors. Thus, a student’s designated English Language Proficiency (ELP) level represents a current performance level, not a fixed status. An English language proficiency level does not identify a student but rather identifies what a student knows and can do at a particular stage of English language development. Therefore, no student should ever be labeled a “Level 1 student”. Instead educators may refer to a particular student as “someone whose listening performance is at Level 1” OR “a student who is demonstrating evidence of Level 1 proficiency for ELP standard 4.” Progress in acquiring English may vary depending on many factors such as the type of program the student is in, the age at which the student entered the program, the student’s initial English proficiency level, the student’s native language literacy, and other factors. These ELP standards, assume that students will be simultaneously developing language and content-area knowledge, skills, and abilities. Language learners SHOULD NOT WAIT until their English is sufficiently developed to participate in content area instruction and assessment. Research has shown that students can simultaneously acquire literacy in the content areas and oral language proficiency.

11

Slide 6Principle 4 informs educators that students at all levels of English Language Proficiency should be provided with scaffolding in order to reach the next reasonable proficiency level. Scaffolding is especially important as students develop grade-appropriate language capacities, particularly those that involve the vocabulary and registers appropriate for the content area.The type and intensity of the scaffolding provided will depend on each student’s ability to do a particular task independently while making sure that the task retains a complexity that is appropriate for the student.

Slide 7Some English Language Learners’ come into U.S. schools with limited or interrupted schooling. Principle 5 asserts that these students must be provided access to targeted supports that allow them to develop foundational literacy skills in an accelerated time frame.

Slide 8Principle 6 addresses English learners with special needs. When determining the individualized educational plans of these students, English language development goals should be included.

However, these students may take slightly different paths toward English language proficiency than other language learners.

Slide 9According to Principle 7, English Language Learners, including those with disabilities, should be provided access to supports and accommodations for assessments, so that their assessment results are valid and reflect what they know and can do.

When thinking about which supports and accommodations should be used, educators must think about ELLs’ productive, receptive, and interactive language needs. Framed differently, what are their current listening, speaking, reading, and writing capacities?

Slide 10Principle 8 addresses multimedia, technology, and new literacies. Relevant, strategic, and appropriate multimedia tools and technology, aligned to the ELP Standards, should be integrated into the design of curriculum, instruction, and assessment for ELLs.

12

Slide 11Now that you have had an introduction to the guiding principles, you will have an opportunity to reflect on and/or discuss these ideas in greater depth with colleagues. You may work individually, with a partner, or in small groups using the jigsaw method. After reading through the Guiding Principles, which are on pages 1, 2 and 3 of the Complete ELP standards document on the Elpa21 website, work individually or together to develop a list of what each guiding principle does not state, or its antithesis. After discussing with partners or small groups, return to the whole group to share your results. Remember to keep track of any questions that arise. Click on the button at the bottom of the screen to download the worksheet.

Screencast 5: Organization and Correspondences

Slide 1 ELP Standards: Organization and Correspondences

The next section addresses the organization of the ELP standards and their correspondences to Common Core ELA & Literacy Standards as well as to the Common Core Practices for Mathematics and English Language Arts and the Next Generation Science Practices.

Slide 2The 10 ELP Standards are designed for collaborative use by English language development or English as a second language teachers and content area teachers. They also can and should be used both to support content-area instruction and in English language development classes.

Explicit recognition that language acquisition takes place across the content areas fosters collaboration among educators and improves students’ learning experiences.

The ELP Standards are as follows. Standard 1: construct meaning from oral presentations and literary and informational text through

grade-appropriate listening, reading, and viewing Standard 2: participate in grade-appropriate oral and written exchanges of information, ideas, and

analyses, responding to peer, audience, or reader comments and questions Standard 3: speak and write about grade-appropriate complex literary and informational texts and

topics Standard 4: construct grade-appropriate oral and written claims and support them with reasoning

and evidence Standard 5: conduct research and evaluate and communicate findings to answer questions or solve

problems Standard 6: analyze and critique the arguments of others orally and in writing

13

Standard 7: adapt language choices to purpose, task, and audience when speaking and writing Standard 8: determine the meaning of words and phrases in oral presentations and literary and

informational text Standard 9: create clear and coherent grade-appropriate speech and text Standard 10: make accurate use of standard English to communicate in grade-appropriate speech

and writing

Now we’ll take a more detailed look at the organization of these standards.

Slide 3 But first, let’s look back at the second of the four goals of the new ELP standards that were first presented to you in the previous screencast. This second goal reads: “Specify key language functions that students must be able to carry out in discipline-appropriate ways.”

What this means, according to Aida Walqui, is that the new ELP standards should align with and support the development of the language functions needed to access the new content standards. Specifically she says that they must focus on “the discipline-specific language needed to access college- and career-ready standards in English Language Arts and Literacy, Mathematics, and Science rather than supporting ELLs’ development of English language proficiency in a manner that is decontextualized from the general education curriculum.”

In other words, the standards are designed to support English learners and give them ample opportunities to make meaning through language in each of the disciplines, with a secondary concern with linguistic accuracy and correctness.

Slide 4Designed with this in mind, the standards thus can be broken down into those that focus on language functions, and those that focus on language forms.

Standards 1 – 7, for example, involve the language necessary for ELLs to engage in the central content-specific practices associated with ELA & Literacy, mathematics and science. (In other words, they focus on linguistic and analytical functions.)

Moreover, they begin with a focus on extraction of meaning and then progress to engagement in the content-specific practices.

Standards 8 through 10 hone in on some of the more micro-level linguistic features or language forms that are important to focus on, but only in the service of the other seven standards.

14

Slide 5While this is the original and most straightforward organization of the ELP standards, there is an alternative organization that groups the standards by modality. But before we present this organization, let’s address what modality means in this case and how it differs from domains.

Other ELP Standards were typically framed in relation to four basic domains of language: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. While this framing was useful in certain ways, it also had the effect of narrowing educators’ focus to individual domains of language in isolation, which does not reflect the way that language actually functions.

Thus the new ELP standards are framed slightly differently, in relation to broader receptive, productive, and interactive modalities.

The receptive modality refers to the language students must understand in order to complete a task. The productive modality refers to the language students must use to complete the task. The interactive modality, which is a specific type of productive modality, refers to communication that requires two-way interaction and negotiation of meaning.

These modalities can also be thought of in terms of the types of language demands placed on students during any particular instructional task. To clarify, any portion of the task that includes listening or reading will involve receptive language demands and any portion of the task that involves writing or speaking involves productive language demands.

The interactive modality category emphasizes how essential it is that ELLs meaningfully engage with their peers during all academic activity– both during content area instruction as well as during designated English Language Development periods.

Slide 6Each of the ELP standards corresponds to at least one of the language modalities and to one or more of the language domains. For instance, standards 1 and 8 correspond to the receptive language modality and involve either the listening or the reading domain. (Although it could also be argued that Standard 8 also corresponds to the interactive modality.)

Standards 3, 4, and 7 correspond to the productive modality, and involve either the speaking or writing domain. Standards 2, 5, and 6 correspond to the interactive modality and involve some or all of the domains.

15

ELP standard 9 and 10 are not covered under the modalities matrix presented on the ELPA21 website, but they typically correspond to the productive or interactive modalities.

Slide 7 The next component of the standards’ organizational framework is consistent with the goal that the ELP standards express target language-uses in clear and meaningful progressions. Discipline-specific academic language demands – as well as social and general language demands – are embedded within the new standards. These specify the functions – or actions – that students must be able to carry out within the disciplines. Some of these functions include obtaining information, demonstrating understanding, constructing explanations, and engaging in arguments, among others.

These language functions must be scaffolded and students must be supported in continually building the capacities needed to develop disciplinary knowledge, skills and abilities. These instructional actions are facilitated by clear and meaningful progressions that lay out target language-uses at each level of progress.

The next section will illustrate how these progressions are addressed by both grade-level bands and proficiency levels.

Slide 8An essential feature of the new ELP standards is that the ten core standards, which were just described, are applicable to every grade level, and will thus be referred to in every standards document.

However, the standards are also organized by grade-level bands and within each grade-level band 5 different proficiency levels are detailed.

Grade-level bands include: Kindergarten 1st Grade 2nd – 3rd Grades 4th – 5th Grades 6th – 8th Grades 9th – 12th Grades

Keep in mind that while the ten core standards are the same at each grade-level band, the 5 proficiency levels will be slightly different across grade level bands according to the developmental capacities of the typical student at that grade level band.

16

Slide 9For example, take a look at the matrix showing the ELP standards and proficiency levels for kindergarten.

The standards are listed on the left hand side and are the same as the ten core standards we initially discussed. For example, the text for K.1 is exactly the same as the text for core standard 1.

Across the top of the matrix there are 5 proficiency levels for each standard, Levels 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. And in each box below these level headings is a proficiency level descriptor, which describes what a student should be able to do by the end of each English language proficiency level for each standard.

For instance, in kindergarten for standard 1, which is about constructing meaning from texts, students at level 1 language proficiency should be able to, “with prompting and support, use a very limited set of strategies to identify a few key words from read-alouds and oral presentations of information or stories.”

By level 5, however, they should be able to – with prompting and support – use a wide range of strategies to identify main topics, answer questions about key details, retell familiar stories from read-alouds, picture books, and oral presentations.”

Note that although the standard of constructing meaning from different kinds of texts is the same, the proficiencies described at each level are quite different.

Now let’s compare this kindergarten standards matrix to another one at a different grade-level band.

Slide 10Here’s the matrix for grade level band 6 through 8. Notice that the ELP standards on the left side are again the same as the core standards, regardless of the grade level band. And there are also five proficiency levels listed across the top.

But it’s the proficiency level descriptors – the description of what students can do – that change, according to both proficiency level and grade level-band.

Slide 11 Next, let’s review the information we just learned about the ten core standards and the proficiency levels:

First, the ten core standards are applicable for EVERY grade level.

17

Second, detailed grade-level bands further explicate each core standard by describing what an ELL at each grade-level band should be able to do with regards to each standard according to proficiency level.

Third, there are five proficiency levels.

And finally, the proficiency level descriptors vary according to standard and grade-level band.

Slide 12Please remember, however, that a student’s designated ELP proficiency level represents a current performance level, not a fixed status. Furthermore, an English language proficiency level should not be treated as a permanent or semi-permanent label for any English Language Learner as it identifies what a student knows and can do at a particular stage of English language development.

In addition, while ELPA21 assessments may “assign” a proficiency level to ELLs by domain (i.e. listening, speaking, reading, writing.), the proficiency level descriptors in the ELP standards are organized by standard, not domain.

And students may demonstrate different levels of proficiency for different standards. For example, a student may have a level 3 proficiency for standard 5, but demonstrate a level 5 proficiency for standard 1.

These proficiency level descriptors are then useful tools for formative assessment, as students’ proficiency levels are in constant flux. In other words, they should inform the teaching strategies that a teacher uses to scaffold the student to the next level of proficiency for any given standard.

Slide 13Now let’s refer back to the four goals for the new standards. Again, the new ELP standards are fewer, clearer, and are strategically designed to correspond to the Common Core practices and standards for ELA and literacy, math, and the Next Generation Science Standards.

Thus they identify the language needed to access college- and career-ready standards in the disciplines, rather than focus on decontextualized language that is removed from the general education curriculum.

Slide 14 So let’s return to the Venn diagram created by Tina Cheuk that depicts the relationships and convergences among the core practices of the different disciplines.

Remember, this graphic illuminates how linguistically demanding the new standards really are as well as how much the core practices actually overlap.

18

The main idea is that there are several high leverage practices – such as argumentation, analyzing complex texts, supporting ideas with evidence and they are linguistically demanding and relevant across the different areas.

And the ELP Standards then act as a support to these high-leverage practices – addressing the types of language proficiency that ELLs need to engage in them.

Slide 15So it makes sense that the ELP standards document explicitly lays out how ELA, mathematics, and science practices correspond to the new ELP standards.

In fact, to help educators easily identify these correspondences, a K-12 practices matrix has been developed.

Slide 16 Here is that K-12 practices matrix, which is on page 34 in the complete ELP standards document.

The purpose of the K-12 Practices Matrix is to help teachers design lesson plans which leverage the strongest correspondences between the ELP Standards and the content area practices.

The discipline-specific practices are depicted on the left side of the matrix. The corresponding ELP standards are identified on the right side of the matrix.

For example, ELA practice 1, which states, “Support analyses of a range of grade-level complex texts with evidence” corresponds to ELP standards 1, 2, 3, 5, and 8 identified on the right side of the matrix.

Yet depending on the instructional activity, and as educators’ familiarity with the standards develops, educators may identify other correspondences that also make sense.

Remember that this matrix does not contain a fixed set of correspondences. In other words, educators should use the matrix as a resource, keeping in mind the relevant correspondences will change depending on the task and context.

Slide 17Now let’s turn to another set of matrices which depict the ELP correspondences to ELA and literacy standards at every grade-level band.

19

These matrices can be useful tools when focusing on a particular ELP standard and when collaborating with colleagues.

Slide 18For example, on page 35 in the ELP standards document you will find the kindergarten ELA standards matrix. You can use this matrix to identify a CCSS ELA standard with its corresponding ELP Standard.

Additionally, if you click on the blue ELP standard number to the left of the matrix, in the ELAP21 document, NOT THIS REPRODUCTION OF IT, it will take you to the ELP standard.

Slide 19 And finally, all of the ELP correspondences – for both the disciplinary practices and the ELA standards – are listed for each core standard at each grade-level band.

These are provided in the complete ELP standards document as quick and complete resources for educators looking to understand what each ELP standard corresponds with at each grade level band.

Slide 20For example, you can find a complete correspondence list for ELP standard 1 for kindergarten on page 36 of the ELP standards document.

Note that this matrix also depicts the proficiency levels for Standard 1 at the Kindergarten grade level band, as well as the content-specific practices and the standards that may correspond.

Slide 21 And finally, let’s return one last time to the 4 goals for the ELP standards.

One of the most exciting things about both the ELP standards themselves, and the correspondences’ matrices, is that they enable both ELD/ESL teacher and content-area teachers to collaborate in supporting the academic and language development needs of ELLs.

In the past, language development erroneously has been thought of as being the sole responsibility of ESL/ELD teachers, while content development has primarily been handled by subject area teachers.

20

However, now that students are held to rigorous college- and career-ready standards that span multiple subjects, teachers must collaborate more closely to support ELLs.

Content area teachers need the tools to fuel the academic performance of English Language Learners, while ESL or ELD teachers must have command of the language used in subject areas so that students can succeed.

The ELP Standards offer a common language for ESL/ELD teachers and content teachers to best support ELLs.

Slide 22Now please take a minute to reflect on what you have learned during this section of the module, pausing to answer the following reflection questions:

You may reflect and answer these questions on your own of course. But, if at all possible, we encourage you to explore them with colleagues, preferably within the context of a professional learning opportunity or as part of a professional learning community.

Screencast 6: Overview of Modules

Slide 1 Overview of Modules. This short screencast gives you an overview of all the professional development modules created for the new ELP standards.

Slide 2All the learning modules were developed by educators for educators. The goals of these materials include:

Helping educators to understand the new ELP standards and their connection to content-area college- and career-ready practices and standards

• Providing organized resources to help educators use the new ELP standards to better support English language learners

• Facilitating communication and collaboration between ELD/ESL and content-area teachers

Slide 3There are six modules in total. They cover ELP-standards-related topics in sequential order. The first module, which is the one you are watching now, provides the audience with background knowledge about the ELP standards. The second module will introduce the task analysis process and the task analysis tool. This will

21

be expanded upon in the third module in order to more deeply understand the new ELP standards.

In module 4, we will continue to example the ELP standards, looking more closely at the proficiency level descriptors. Module 5 will focus on how the formative assessment process can be used to understand where students are in relation to the proficiency level descriptors and how to use that information to support their language development.

Finally, in module 6, the last module, you will have the opportunity to reflect upon what you have learned and how to apply it in your education context.

Slide 4Modules 2 through 5 follow the structure outlined here: Motivate, Engage, and Apply.

The Motivate section begins with one or more guiding questions and objectives. It also introduces the main concept of the module.

In the Engage section, the main concept will be elaborated on and demonstrated by expert educators.

Examples for practice are presented in the Apply section.

Additionally, all the modules, include the first and the last, have a Resources section that provides materials for viewers to download.

Slide 5There are two use-scenarios for these learning modules. You can either study the content on your own at your own pace, or work with colleagues in a collaborative setting, such as a professional learning community (PLC). We do recommend that you work with others to make the most of these materials; however, if this is not possible, you can still get the full value of these modules by working individually.

Slide 6These modules have been produced by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the ELPA21 Consortium, educator teams from Oregon, Iowa, and Washington, and the Understanding Language Initiative at Stanford University.

We hope you find these modules valuable!

22