Upload
layla-manners
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Effects of Misidentifying Students’ English Proficiency
Perris Union High School District2010-11
The Onion Report
• “Onions are complex vegetables that require peeling back multiple layers to get to the core. Student data in terms of assessment and accountability requires peeling back multiple levels of documentation to ensure accuracy. Both have the potential to bring concerned individuals to tears.” (Unknown Poet, 2010)
Objectives• Staff will correctly identify students’ English Proficiency
status and accurately input data in Infinite Campus• Teachers will increase student achievement by using
accurate English Proficiency data to inform instruction and meet student needs
• The English Learner (EL) subgroup Academic Performance Index (API) will increase due to accurate English Proficiency data
• The EL subgroup % proficient for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) will increase due to accurate English Proficiency data
• The Perris Union High School District will receive funding for all eligible EL’s
Challenges
• Parents not filling out the Home Language Survey (HLS) accurately
• Misinterpretation of HLS by parents and staff• PUHSD HLS= EO but student was EL/RFEP in previous
district• Delay in receiving CUM after enrollment• Lack of process for reviewing CUMs for students listed as
EO• Student mobility and misidentification in multiple districts• ABC’s and incorrect IFEP (see next slide)
Challenges (cont)
Why is this important?
• Compliance with State and Federal law• Affects teachers’ ability to address the language needs of their
students• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) subgroups and reports• Similar School Rankings in the Base API report• Academic Performance Index (API) subgroups and reports• Title 3 Accountability Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives
(AMAO’s)• Title 3 funding and apportionment from the California English
Language Development Test (CELDT)
Compliance with State and Federal Law• Districts and schools are required to “determine the primary language of each
pupil enrolled in the school district.” (Education Code Section 52164.1[a])• Primary language is the language first learned by the pupil, most frequently used
at home, or most frequently spoken by the parents or other adults in the home when speaking with the pupil. (5 CCR 7.5 11510)
• The Home Language Survey (HLS) is the tool that schools in California use to determine student’s primary language
• If HLS indicates a language other than English, the student must be given the CELDT within 30 days of initial enrollment in a California school in order to determine the students English proficiency (Education Code Section 52164.1[a])
• If the CELDT scores indicate that the student is an English Learner they are assessed with the CELDT annually until being Redesignated Fluent English
Proficient (RFEP)
EL Process for students enrolling for the first time in a California
school
Enrollment process for students previously enrolled in a California
school
State and Federal Accountability
Student Performance by English Proficiency StatusPUHSD 2009 Base API and 2010 Growth API
Student Performance by English Proficiency status
2010 AYP % Proficient for State Defined EL Subgroup
What do you think the breakdown of this group is? (ie % EL vs % RFEP)
Title 3 funding and CELDT Apportionment
• $5 per completed CELDT answer document• $102.60 per EL student for ESEA Title 3 Funding• $318.76 for each EL (or SED) student for EIA funding So, how much does misidentification cost us? If we had 100 students who are really EL but they
were incorrectly Identified as EO/IFEP in IC it could cost $10,260 to $42,136
Addressing Inconsistencies with Data Audits• “clean” data vs. accurate data
Primary Language EngProf
Spanish EO
English RFEP
Primary Language EngProf
Spanish TBD
Spanish RFEP
Primary Language EngProf
English EO
English EO
Contact prev district, pull CUM (if available, research CUM, look up RFEP dates, add CST scores, possibly CELDT
Update one of the fields in SIS
Process to address these issues
Criteria A Critera B Notes
IFEP Multiple CELDT Scores in System 33
EO Previous CELDT Scores in System 74
IFEP or EO EngProf from Prev years = EL or RFEP 35
Primary Lang is Eng PrimLang from a previous year = Non Eng 17
EO/IFEP BirthCountry=Non Eng PrimLang Country EO-41 IFEP-50
EngProf not RFEP RFEP date is not null 16
US School Entry Date>RFEP Date 14
RFEP Date within 1 to 2 Years of US Entry Date
IFEP Grade 6,7,8 or 10 6-8-156, 10-171
CALPADS EL/RFEP- (121) (230 still being checked)
Addressing inconsistencies with data audits
What to look for in the CUM…EO IFEP EL RFEP
Home Language Survey No language other than Eng listed
At least 1 of the HLS questions has a language other than English
CELDT Scores None present Only 1 score that meets state English Proficiency criterion*
Multiple scores included
Multiple scores with most recent meeting state English Proficiency criterion*
ELD Program Not present Not Present ELD program information is present
ELD program information is present. End date is included.
IFEP Documentation Not present Documentation might include: letter to parent/guardian, CELDT scores
Not present
RFEP Documentation Not present Documentation might include: district RFEP form, letter to parent/guardian, program end date, CELDT scores, CST scores, grades
Insert Excel to sites
• Sample spreadsheet given to sites• Database used by Ed ServicesOrig EngProf
CALPADS EngProf
Site CUM search EngProf
Ed Service Audit EngProf
Data audit Criteria
NSLP, Scores etc
EO EL IFEP RFEP
Results Upon Completion of CUM Audit
EngProf Change
Number # and % 2010 CST Prof
# and Percent Prof 2010 AYP
# Prof 2011 AYP
EO To EL/RFEP
IFEP to EL/RFEP
EngPro Change
Number $ Amount
EO/IFEP to EL (6-8)
EO/IFEP to EL (9-12)