Quality Indicators

Quality Indicators

for Schools Serving English Language Learners

February 2002

Minnesota Department of Children, Families & Learning

LEP Education

1500 Highway 36 West

Roseville, MN 55113

651-582-8594

http://cfl.state.mn.us/lep

Contributors

Judy Auger, Rochester Public Schools

Ibrahim Ayeh, Minneapolis Public Schools

Joan Bachman, Rochester Public Schools

Joyce Biagini, Department of Children, Families & Learning

Martha Bigelow, Ph.D., University of Minnesota

Michael Bradley, Minneapolis Public Schools

Sharon Cormany, Minneapolis Public Schools

Tina Edstam, Ph.D., University of Minnesota at Mankato

Scott Endo, Hopkins Public Schools

Tara Fortune, Ph.D., Hamline University

Terry Fritz, Minneapolis Public Schools

Denise Harlos, Shakopee Public Schools

Julie Henderson, Department of Children, Families & Learning

Raquel Johnson, Rochester Public Schools

Leigh Schleicher, St. Paul Public Schools

Karla Stone, University of Minnesota

Tsehai Wodajo, Department of Children, Families & Learning

Connie Walker, Ph.D., University of Minnesota

Editor

Paul Magnuson, Department of Children, Families & Learning

Upon request, this manual can be made available in alternative formats including Braille, audio tape, computer disk and large print.

Permission is granted to Minnesota school districts to duplicate this publication for nonprofit educational uses. All other uses require written permission from the Minnesota Department of Children, Families & Learning. Inquiries should be sent to: Learner Options Division, LEP Education, 1500 Hwy 36 West, Roseville, Minnesota 55101.

Introduction

Quality Indicators for Schools Serving English Language Learners is a set of rubrics designed to help educational personnel reflect about the educational experience of English Language Learners (ELL) in their school. They are based on the eight quality indicators in the document Quality Indicators: Successful Minnesota Schools (Minnesota Department of Children, Families & Learning, 2001), which is currently used by support teams working with Title I schools. The eight areas of the quality indicators are:

Curriculum

Instruction

Assessment

Staff Development

Family and Community Involvement

Leadership

Governance

Resources

English Language Learners (ELL) likely spend only a portion of their school day in ESL or bilingual education programs. Therefore, the questions for discussion and the accompanying rubrics are not limited to English as a second language (ESL) or bilingual education programs. Nor are the questions and rubrics directed only to ESL and bilingual teachers. Instead, the questions for discussion encompass the entire educational experience of the individual ELL.

No matter how you use the rubrics to frame your discussion of the educational experiences of ELL in your school, we encourage you to include administrators, teachers, paraprofessionals, parents, and other staff. ELL are everyone’s students.

Terminology

Contributors to this project included teachers and administrators from several districts, professors from three of Minnesota’s institutions of higher education which prepare students for initial licensure in ESL, and personnel at the Department of Children, Families & Learning. Agreeing on terminology was not easy, nor unanimously reached. The terms used in the rubrics reflect our compromises. Each term is defined here for clarity – not because the particular terms we chose are better or worse than the terms you have chosen to use in your district.

English Language Learner (ELL)

We use ELL to refer to all students who are non-native speakers of English and who have trouble accessing the school’s curriculum in English. In Minnesota, ELL are those students who are non-native speakers of English and score significantly below the average of their peers on a nationally normed standardized test for English. Other frequently used terminology includes limited English proficient (LEP) student, English as a second language (ESL) student, and language minority student.

English as a Second Language (ESL)

We use the term ESL to refer to all programs specifically designed for ELL, including pull-out models, newcomer models, team-teaching, sheltered instruction, and bilingual education. This is for the sake of clarity and space – it is not a slight to any specific program model. We have also used ESL as an adjective for those teachers who are certified in teaching ELL and working in any type of program specifically designed for ELL. You will therefore see references to ESL classes and ESL teachers.

Mainstream classes

Mainstream classes are those classes which are not ESL classes; in other words, they weren’t designed primarily with the ELL in mind.

Other frequently used terminology includes subject-area classes, content classes, and grade level classes.

Stakeholders

Stakeholders refer to all individuals who have a stake in public education and the children which public education serves.

Minnesota Department of Children, Families & Learning (DCFL)

The state education agency in Minnesota.

Background

There are many indicators of quality in public schools. We recognize that our eight categories may not be exhaustive – and that the discussion questions and rubrics under each of the eight categories do not entirely cover all that is important in public education.

We do feel, however, that the discussion questions and rubrics under each quality indicator will usefully guide conversations, and ultimately decisions, about the educational experience of ELL in Minnesota schools. School support teams began using the quality indicators in 2000 to assist school personnel in the development of school improvement plans. School personnel find that the conversations, guided by the rubrics, provide a useful framework for self-analysis and that they suggest concrete areas in which to focus improvement efforts.

The original set of rubrics, in Quality Indicators: Successful Minnesota Schools, include all students in the school, whether mainstream, ELL, or other. This version, Quality Indicators for English Language Learners, is designed to specifically address the challenges of supporting quality education for ELL. The format of both documents is similar, and we have tried to maintain the categories and questions of the former document as much as possible. Schools working on a school improvement plan may choose to use both documents. Schools which are specifically examining their school-wide programming for ELL may decide to use only Quality Indicators for English Language Learners.

Suggestions for use

This document is comprehensive, and therefore large. When designing staff development which uses the document, you will have to make some decisions beforehand about how you will use it.

Preceding each rubric are three to five Guiding Questions. These Guiding Questions are repeated, one indicator per page, at the end of this document. If there is not sufficient time to use the rubrics, or if you would like to introduce the rubrics during an initial staff development activity, use the Guiding Questions alone. (They are pre-formatted for use with an overhead projector.) The rubrics, however, will lead to greater depth and breadth of discussion.

Each discussion question under a particular quality indicator has a rubric with a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high). The rubrics will be most effective if you use the entire range of 1 to 10. While it is tempting to rate your school high, remember that the purpose of the rubric is to identify potential areas for improvement. You are in no way comparing your school to another school. You are merely considering elements of the educational experience of ELL.

The following table poses some possible staff development activities and how the Quality Indicators for English Language Learners might be used. There are many more uses. Please use the document in the manner which works best in your setting. Your success does not hinge on whether or not you use the document correctly, but whether or not your use of the document positively affects the educational experiences of ELL.

Thank you for your interest in serving our newest Minnesotans.

Possible Staff Development Activities

	Who	How
Scenario #1	Team of teachers, parents, and administrators	Schedule multiple meeting dates, each several weeks apart. Ask group members to individually read one or two sets of rubrics (e.g. Instruction, or Governance and Leadership), marking the rubric according to their perceptions. In the meetings, come to a group consensus regarding the individual ratings. Ask the individuals and the group to explain their ratings.

	Who	How
Scenario #2	Team of teachers, parents, and administrators	Schedule multiple meeting dates. As a group, discuss the rubrics under each quality indicator in turn. Come to a group consensus rating for each rubric. Examine the ratings within a particular quality indicator for potential areas you might like to improve. Compare the set of ratings for one quality indicator to another quality indicator for a broad assessment of areas you might like to improve.

	Who	How
Scenario #3	All school staff	Use the Guiding Questions only. Divide the large group into smaller groups. Ask each group to discuss the Guiding Questions of one quality indicator. Remind them to write down their thoughts and opinions as a group. Reconvene and ask each group to present their thoughts. This activity is perhaps best used as a precursor to further work with the quality indicators.

	Who	How
Scenario #4	ESL Coordinator	Work through the rubrics by yourself. Use the results to choose two or three particular areas for further discussion. Discuss these areas with other administrators, your ESL teachers, and mainstream teachers. Include those areas in your on going development of ESL programming.

	Who	How
Scenario #5	ESL teaching staff	Work through the rubrics together. Decide which of the areas you as a group find the most important. Write a one or two page summary of how your school can address the areas you have identified. Attach a completed set of rubrics to your summary and distribute your ideas to others at school.

	Who	How
Scenario #6	Administrator	Ask teachers in many different subjects to complete the rubrics. Ask them to keep track of the questions that surprised them most, or the questions for which they didn’t feel they had enough information to use the rubric. Discuss the results of their work with your ESL coordinator.

To download a copy of this document online, please visit:

http://cfl.state.mn.us/lep

Curriculum

Guiding Questions

Is there an ESL curriculum in the school? How well does it complement the mainstream curriculum?

How does the curriculum balance high expectations for ELL with their limited facility in English?

How does the school ensure that every ESL student has access to the standards-based curriculum (both in mainstream and ESL courses)?

How is academic content integrated with language learning throughout the curriculum (both in mainstream and ESL classes)?


CURRICULUM			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
ALIGNMENT Curriculum is aligned to local, state, and the national TESOL standards.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents Standards placement charts Curriculum mapping documents National curriculum standards State curriculum frameworks TESOL standards for K-12 students Staff interviews Classroom observations Other	Standards Integration TESOL is the international organization for ESL professionals. It stands for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages			How have local and state standards, as well as the national TESOL standards, been integrated into the curriculum for ELL?
	1 2 Very few standards are integrated.	3 4 5 Some standards are integrated, but not from local, state and national levels.		6 7 8 Most standards are integrated from local and state levels.	9 10 All standards are integrated, including local, state, and national levels.
	Alignment of Curriculum to Standards			Are standards for mainstream courses aligned to the curriculum for ELL? Give examples.
	1 2 No examples found.	3 4 5 A few examples found.		6 7 8 Several examples found.	9 10 Many examples found.

CURRICULUM

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

ALIGNMENT

Curriculum is aligned to local, state, and the national TESOL standards.

Evidence

Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation.

Local curriculum documents

Standards placement charts

Curriculum mapping documents

National curriculum standards

State curriculum frameworks

ESL standards for K-12 students

Staff interviews

Classroom observations

Supporting references used in the documents

Other

Developmental Needs

ELL are faced with a number of issues, not merely the necessity to learn English. Cultural differences also affect student performance.

To what extent does the curriculum address the developmental needs (sociocultural, academic, linguistic) of all ELL?

1 2

Little attention is paid to developmentally appropriate curriculum.

3 4 5

Some developmental gaps in curriculum.

6 7 8

Curriculum is generally developmentally appropriate.

9 10

Curriculum is consistently developmentally appropriate.

Clarity of Scope and Sequence

Graduation standards are usually embedded across the curriculum, in both mainstream and ESL courses.

Is there a workable plan that ensures that all standards and graduation requirements are met for each ELL?

1 2

Standards-based scope and sequence do not exist or exist but are workable only for a few ELL.

3 4 5

Standards-based scope and sequence marginally exist and are workable for some ELL.

6 7 8

Clear scope and sequence exist and are workable for most ELL

9 10

Clear and comprehensive scope and sequence exist and are workable for all ELL.


CURRICULUM			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
ACADEMIC RIGOR A rigorous, developmentally appropriate scope and sequence defines high expectations for all ELL.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents Standards placement charts Curriculum mapping documents National curriculum standards State curriculum frameworks ESL standards for K-12 students Staff interviews Classroom observations Student Work IGP process	Assessment of Curriculum			Is there a systematic curriculum review process in place, based on a variety of sources, to examine mainstream and ESL curriculum from the point of view of an ELL?
	1 2 No systematic review process is in place.	3 4 5 Little systematic review process is in place.		6 7 8 Some efforts towards systematic review process are in place.	9 10 A systematic and effective review process is in place.
	High Expectations for all ELL			To what extent are high expectations maintained among all ELL, including those from less commonly represented languages and cultures?
	1 2 Few ELL are held to the same high expectations.	3 4 5 Some ELL are held to the same high expectations.		6 7 8 Most ELL are held to the same high expectations.	9 10 All ELL are held to the same high expectations.


CURRICULUM			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
EXPECTATIONS All stakeholders (administrators, teachers, students, parents, and community members) are aware of clear expectations for content and language learning.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents Standards placement charts Curriculum mapping documents National curriculum standards State curriculum frameworks TESOL standards for K-12 students Staff interviews Stakeholder interviews Classroom observations Parent meetings Other	Clarity of Expectations			To what extent do administrators, teachers, students, parents and community members understand the standards-based curriculum expectations for ELL?
	1 2 Stakeholders have little understanding of expectations for standards-based curriculum.	3 4 5 Stakeholders have some understanding of expectations for standards-based curriculum.		6 7 8 Most stakeholders understand expectations for standards-based curriculum.	9 10 All stakeholders understand expectations for standards-based curriculum.
	Sequence Across Levels			To what extent are mainstream and ESL staff members aware of the curricular sequence for both content and language learning?
	1 2 Staff members are unaware of requirements for other levels.	3 4 5 Staff members are somewhat aware of requirements for other levels.		6 7 8 Staff members are generally aware of requirements for other levels.	9 10 Staff members are highly aware of requirements for other levels.


CURRICULUM			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
EXPECTATIONS All stakeholders (administrators, teachers, students, parents, and community members) are aware of clear expectations for content and language learning.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents Standards placement charts Curriculum mapping documents National curriculum standards State curriculum frameworks TESOL standards for K-12 students Staff interviews Stakeholder interviews Classroom observations Student work Mid-year registration process Other	Comparability of Experiences ELL need to be working on the same challenging mainstream content while they learn English.			How does the school strive to ensure that ELL are offered experiences comparable to their peers in mainstream classes?
	1 2 No effort is made to ensure that ESL students have comparable experiences.	3 4 5 Some effort is made to ensure that ESL students have comparable experiences.		6 7 8 Effort is made to ensure that ESL students have comparable experiences.	9 10 Great effort is made to ensure that ESL students have comparable experiences.
	Student Mobility			To what extent are the needs of ELL entering the school in the middle of the academic year identified and addressed?
	1 2 No process exists to evaluate and address incoming students’ needs.	3 4 5 An unstructured informal process exists to evaluate and address incoming students’ needs.		6 7 8 A somewhat structured process exists to evaluate and address incoming students’ needs.	9 10 A clear and consistent process exists to evaluate and address incoming students’ needs.

Instruction

Guiding Questions

How adequately are mainstream teachers prepared to teach ELL?

How adequately are ESL teachers prepared to teach ELL?

How often do teachers collaborate to adjust instruction for ESL students?

How does instruction develop academic language and learning strategies?


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DECISIONS Teachers select effective instructional strategies to guide and improve student performance.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Curriculum mapping documents Alignment studies Action plans for improving instruction Teacher certification information Teacher interviews Individual graduation plans Modified objectives and assessments for ELL Pathway for completing standards Other	A. Access to Challenging Content Adjustments do not necessarily mean that the curriculum is less rigorous; rather, adjustments make the instruction more readily understandable.			To what extent do mainstream teachers make the adjustments necessary to provide access to challenging content and curriculum for all ELL?
	1 2 Few ELL are provided access to challenging content or expected to achieve high standards; adjustments rarely made.	3 4 5 Some ELL are provided access to challenging content or expected to achieve high standards; adjustments occasionally made.		6 7 8 Most ELL are provided access to challenging content and expected to achieve high standards; adjustments often made.	9 10 All ELL are provided access to challenging content and expected to achieve high standards; adjustments frequently made.
	B. Teachers’ Instructional Strategies			To what extent are mainstream teachers knowledgeable about instructional strategies for ELL which develop academic language?
	1 2 Few teachers have sufficient knowledge about instructional strategies.	3 4 5 Some teachers have sufficient knowledge about instructional strategies.		6 7 8 Most teachers have sufficient knowledge about instructional strategies.	9 10 All teachers have sufficient knowledge about instructional strategies and some may be exceptional.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DECISIONS Teachers select effective instructional strategies to guide and improve student performance.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Curriculum mapping documents Alignment studies Action plans for improving instruction Teacher certification information Teacher interviews Availability of common planning time Funding for ESL lead teacher ESL teacher included in teams Other	C. Instructional Practices are Based on Research			To what extent do teachers use research to inform instructional practices for ELL?
	1 2 Instructional practices do not appear to be based on research	3 4 5 Few instructional practices are based on research.		6 7 8 Some instructional practices are based on research.	9 10 Most instructional practices are based on research.
	D. Collaboration			To what extent do mainstream and ESL teachers collaborate to address instructional issues for ELL?
	1 2 Teachers mostly work in isolation.	3 4 5 Some teachers work collaboratively to solve problems related to instruction.		6 7 8 Many teachers work collaboratively to solve problems related to instruction.	9 10 Most teachers work collaboratively to solve problems related to instruction.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DECISIONS Teachers select effective instructional strategies to guide and improve student performance.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Curriculum mapping documents Alignment studies Action plans for improving instruction Teacher certification information Teacher interviews Testing results Other	E. Collaboration with Special Education			To what extent do ESL teachers and special education teachers collaborate to provide instruction for ELL who are also served by special education?
	1 2 No collaboration exists between teachers and special education staff.	3 4 5 Limited collaboration exists between teachers and special education staff.		6 7 8 Collaboration generally occurs between teachers and special education staff.	9 10 Systematic, comprehensive collaboration occurs between teachers and special education staff.
	F. Student Work Guides Instruction			To what extent do teachers use student work to guide instructional practices?
	1 2 Teachers do not analyze student work.	3 4 5 Teachers occasionally analyze student work, but results do not always inform instruction.		6 7 8 Teachers regularly analyze student work and results may be used to inform instruction.	9 10 Teachers work collaboratively with other staff to analyze unique aspects of ELL work and use results to inform instruction.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
STRATEGIES Instructional strategies are based on the needs of ELL.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Classroom observations Lesson plans that address various teaching strategies, learning styles, multiple intelligences, visual aids, demonstrations, cooperative learning, opportunities to produce language Student/teacher interviews In-services offered to staff on cultures and histories of ELL Other	G. Connections to Real-life Experience			To what extent is instruction related to the prior and current life experiences of ELL?
	1 2 Instruction has neither connection nor application to real-life experiences.	3 4 5 Little instruction allows students to connect and apply learning to real-life experiences.		6 7 8 Some instruction allows students to connect and apply learning to real-life experiences.	9 10 Most instruction allows students to connect and apply learning to real-life experiences.
	Variety of Instructional Strategies			To what extent are a variety of instructional strategies used to address various learning styles, language proficiency levels and developmental levels?
	1 2 No attempts are made to address various styles and levels.	3 4 5 Few attempts are made to address various styles and levels.		6 7 8 Some attempts are made to address a variety of styles and levels.	9 10 Consistent attempts are made to address a variety of styles and levels.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
STRATEGIES Instructional strategies are based on ESL student needs.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Classroom observations Lesson plans that address various teaching strategies, learning styles, multiple intelligences, visual aids, demonstrations, cooperative learning, opportunities to produce language Student/teacher interviews Routes to graduation for ELL (pathways) Staff development plans Other	Support for Content and Language Objectives Both mainstream teachers and ESL teachers strive to support students learning English and mainstream content.			To what extent are objectives for content and language learning supported by instruction?
	1 2 Content and language objectives are not supported.	3 4 5 Content and language objectives are minimally supported.		6 7 8 Content and language objectives are generally supported.	9 10 Content and language objectives are clearly supported.
	J. Strategies for Diverse Populations of ELL			How well are mainstream and ESL teachers prepared to accommodate ELL from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds?
	1 2 Few teachers have the preparation and skill to meet the needs of all ELL.	3 4 5 Some teachers have the preparation and skill to meet the needs of all ELL.		6 7 8 Most teachers have the preparation and skill to meet the needs of all ELL	9 10 All teachers have the preparation and skill to meet the needs of all ELL

*Refer to the following for more detailed guidelines on instructional strategies: Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2000). The sheltered instruction observation protocol (SIOP). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
ENVIRONMENT Staff collaborate to create, establish, and maintain an effective learning environment for all students.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Master schedules Lesson plans Classroom observations Instructional resources purchasing plan Student/teacher interviews Translations/interpre-tations of school rules and regulations School discipline log (in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, expulsions) Other	K. Instructional Climate			How does the school climate lead to a respectful, welcoming environment for ELL?
	1 2 The school climate does not lead to a good learning atmosphere.	3 4 5 The school climate leads to a good learning atmosphere for some students and teachers.		6 7 8 The school climate leads to a good learning atmosphere for most students and teachers.	9 10 The school climate leads to a good learning atmosphere for all students and teachers.
	L. Use of Resources Resources include textbooks, electronic media, computer access, manipulatives, etc.			To what extent are a variety of resources made available for use in the ELL classroom?
	1 2 No textbook is available and the teacher has access to very limited resources.	3 4 5 Textbooks and some limited resources are used in most classrooms.		6 7 8 A variety of current instructional resources are used in most classrooms.	9 10 A wide variety of current instructional resources are used in all classrooms.


INSTRUCTION			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
ENVIRONMENT Staff collaborate to create, establish, and maintain an effective learning environment for all students.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Master schedules Number of students in space at one time Other	M. Learning Space			To what extent is adequate space given to ESL teachers and ELL?
	1 2 Learning space is entirely inadequate.	3 4 5 Learning space is minimally adequate.		6 7 8 Learning space is functional.	9 10 Learning space is ample and entirely functional and accommodates learning needs of teachers and students.

Assessment

Guiding Questions

To what extent are ELL and mainstream assessment practices coordinated?

Is there a clear written policy for assessing ELL? How do stakeholders have access to the policy?

To what extent are assessments for ELL derived from individual student needs?

How are assessments adapted for ELL? Are alternative assessments offered for ELL?

How is guidance provided to mainstream staff in the use of alternative assessments?

ASSESSMENT

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

STATE LEVEL ASSESSMENTS

State assessments for ELL include the Test of Emerging Academic English, Minnesota Comprehensive

Assessments, Basic Skills Test and the PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS of the high standards.

Evidence

Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation.

Roster of students taking the TEAE

State guidelines for accommodations and modifications

Communications with parents regarding assessment

District guidelines for assessing ELL

District plan for administration of all state tests

Individual Graduation Plans

Other

TEAE

The Test of Emerging Academic English(TEAE) was administered statewide for the first time in 2001.

Is the TEAE administered in a manner that includes all potential ELL? Are parents and teachers well-informed regarding the purpose of the TEAE?

1 2

Administration of the TEAE is uneven; little is known about the TEAE outside of the ESL program.

3 4 5

All potential ELL take the TEAE, some mainstream teachers are aware of its purpose.

6 7 8

All potential ELL take the TEAE, most mainstream teachers are aware of its purpose, some parents are aware of its purpose.

9 10

All ELL and potential ELL take the TEAE; all stakeholders are aware of its purpose; test administration ensures accurate results.

Availability of accommodations

An accommodation is a change to the testing conditions (e.g. extended time) that doesn’t alter the test’s validity.

Are accommodations on the

MCA,

BST, and

high standards

available to those ELL who would benefit from them?

1 2

Accommodations not generally known and not generally available.

3 4 5

Some accommodations are available and used for some ELL.

6 7 8

Many accommodations are available, but not used by all ELL who might benefit from them.

9 10

Accommodations are available and offered to all ELL.

ASSESSMENT

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

STATE LEVEL ASSESSMENTS

State assessments for ELL include TEAE, MCA, BST

and the PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS of the high standards.

Evidence

Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation.

Roster of students taking the TEAE

State guidelines for accommodations and modifications

Communications with parents regarding assessment

District guidelines for assessing ELL

District plan for administration of all state tests

Individual Graduation Plans

Pathways to graduation

Other

Availability of modifications

A modification is a change to the testing conditions (e.g. using a translated test) that alters the test’s validity.

Are modifications on the

MCA,

BST, and

high standards

available to those ELL who would benefit from them?

1 2

Modifications are not generally known and not generally available.

3 4 5

Some modifications are available and used for some ELL.

1 2

Modifications are not generally known and not generally available.

3 4 5

Some modifications are available and used for some ELL.

Placement/assessment

Are high standards placed in courses in such a manner that ELL have the opportunity to complete standards in a timely and logical manner?

1 2

It is clear where standards are assessed, but not necessarily for ELL; significant scheduling difficulties exist for ELL that preclude their opportunity to meet standards.

3 4 5

It is clear where ELL are assessed, but the system is only workable for some ELL; scheduling is difficult.

6 7 8

It is clear where ELL are assessed, and most ELL receive a schedule which allows them to make timely progress.

9 10

It is clear where ELL are assessed and all but the occasional student receive a logical schedule.


ASSESSMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
STATE LEVEL ASSESSMENTS State assessments for ELL include TEAE, MCA, BST and the PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS of the high standards.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. State guidelines for accommodations and modifications Communications with parents regarding assessment District guidelines for assessing ELL District plan for administration of all state tests Individual Graduation Plans Pathways to graduation Other	Individual Graduation Plan (IGP) 9-12 grade only: ELL completing modified high standards at the high school level must have a completed Individual Graduation Plan (IGP) on file.			Does the school use the IGP process for assuring that modifications made to high standards for ELL are appropriate?
	1 2 No plan for the use of the IGP is in place; little is known about the IGP and its role in ESL programs.	3 4 5 ELL teachers have developed an IGP; little is known about the IGP outside of ESL.		1 2 An IGP has been developed by ELL teachers and others; counselors and others are aware of it; few if any explanations available in translation.	9 10 An IGP has been collaboratively developed and implemented; all stakeholders are familiar with it, including parents; translations are available.
	Scoring of high standards			To what extent do teachers and other staff make use of the district policy for scoring high standards for ELL?
	1 2 No written district policy exists. Little is known about how to score high standards for ELL.	3 4 5 No written district policy exists. There is a general agreement in the district regarding scoring high standards for ELL.		6 7 8 A written district policy exists and is used by ESL staff. Few other stakeholders are aware of the policy.	9 10 All stakeholders use the written district policy; parents know of the policy; translations are available.


ASSESSMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
STATE LEVEL ASSESSMENTS State assessments for ELL include TEAE, MCA, BST and the PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS of the high standards.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. State guidelines for accommodations and modifications Communications with parents regarding assessment District guidelines for assessing ELL Individual Graduation Plans Other	Articulated policy of High Standards The graduation standards policies and procedures of each district must consider ELL.			Can all stakeholders access an understandable written policy concerning performance assessments of the high standards and ELL?
	1 2 Policy doesn’t exist; is not generally known; or not generally available.	3 4 5 Policy is available, but not detailed; some stakeholders are aware of the policy.		6 7 8 Detailed policy is available to all ESL staff; most stakeholders are aware of the policy.	9 10 Detailed policy is available to all stakeholders, including parents.

ASSESSMENT

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

CLASSROOM ASSESSMENTS

Daily, weekly and unit assessments across the four modalities (reading, writing, listening, and speaking)

in ESL and content areas.

Evidence

Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation.

Local curriculum documents

District/School grading policy

Sample of classroom assessments

Teacher developed tests with scoring criteria

Lesson plans

Staff interviews

Classroom observations

Other

Variety of Assessments

Do assessments offer ELL a variety

of ways to demonstrate their language and content knowledge?

1 2

Assessments generally conform to one type and address only one modality.

3 4 5

Some assessments indicate a variety of ways for students to demonstrate knowledge and address one or two modalities.

6 7 8

Most assessments indicate a variety of ways for students to demonstrate knowledge and address two to three modalities.

9 10

Assessments consistently indicate a variety of ways for students to demonstrate knowledge and address three to four modalities.

Grading

It is often difficult to decide whether it is best to grade an ELL in comparison to all students or in comparison to other ELL.

Are staff members clear on the grading policy for ELL?

1 2

No clear ELL grading policy exists.

3 4 5

ELL grading policy exists, but is not uniformly applied to all subjects and/or students.

6 7 8

ELL grading policy exists and is applied to most subjects and students.

9 10

A clear ELL grading policy is articulated and used by all staff.

ASSESSMENT

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

CLASSROOM ASSESSMENTS

Daily, weekly and unit assessments across the four modalities (reading, writing, listening, and speaking)

in ESL and mainstream classes.

Evidence

Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation.

Local curriculum documents

District/School grading policy

Sample of classroom assessments

Teacher developed tests with scoring criteria

Lesson plans

Staff interviews

Classroom observations

Parent-teacher meetings

Translated documents

Number of interpreters on call

Process through which interpreters are accessed

Other

Grade Reporting

A translator is someone who translates written documents. An interpreter is someone who translates spoken interaction.

Do parents have access to translators and translations and do staff have access to interpreters?

1 2

Translators and/or interpreters are not accessible. Few documents translated in any language.

3 4 5

Translators and/or interpreters are available on a limited basis. Some documents translated in a few languages.

6 7 8

Translators and/or interpreters are often available. Many documents translated in a few languages.

Translators and/or interpreters are readily available. Many documents translated in many languages.

Assessments informing instruction

Formative assessments are those used during units to inform further instruction. Summative assessments are those that evaluate learning to date.

Are assessments given to ELL both formative and summative?

1 2

Assessments do not include formative or summative measures.

3 4 5

Assessments address both formative and summative measures on a limited basis.

6 7 8

Assessments include

both formative and summative measures on a regular basis, but not consistently.

9 10

Assessments include

both formative and summative measures on a regular, consistent basis.


ASSESSMENT				BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DISTRICT/SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS District and school level assessments facilitate placement into appropriate programs, exit from services, and integration of ELL in the school experience.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents District ESL manual ESL entrance and exit policies ESL entrance and exit assessments Community involvement documents Staff interviews Observations Other	Eligibility Stakeholders include district and school administrators, secretaries, school staff, students, families and community members.					Are stakeholders aware of eligibility criteria for ESL services?
	1 2 A few ESL staff are aware of and can articulate the criteria for ESL services.		3 4 5 All ESL staff are aware of and can articulate the criteria for ESL services.			6 7 8 All ESL, some general education staff and families are aware of and can articulate the criteria for ESL services.	9 10 All ESL and general education staff, families and administrators are aware of and can articulate the criteria for ESL services.
	Student Background and Experiences					How are factors such as previous school experience, background knowledge, and transcripts addressed when placement decisions are made?
	1 2 No policy exists to address factors during placement.	3 4 5 Policy exists. Few factors are consistently addressed.			6 7 8 Policy exists. Some factors are addressed regularly.		9 10 A placement policy clearly addresses all of these factors when making student placement decisions.


ASSESSMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DISTRICT/SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS District and school level assessments facilitate placement into appropriate programs, exit from services, and integration of ELL in the school experience.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents District LEP manual LEP entrance and exit policies LEP entrance and exit assessments Community involvement documents Staff interviews Observations Other	N. Coordination of Special Education Services IEP/504 and ELL			To what extent does the policy for assessing ELL for special education services best serve the interests of ELL?
	1 2 No policy exists to assess ELL for special education services.	3 4 5 A policy exists. Issues are not consistently addressed on a child-by-child basis.		6 7 8 A policy exists. Some pertinent issues are addressed regularly on a child-by-child basis.	9 10 A clear policy addresses issues involved in assessing ELL for special education. It is consistently used on a child-by-child basis.
	O. Exit Decisions			What criteria are used to exit ELL from ESL programs?
	1 2 No policy exists to exit ELL from programming. No consistent criteria are used.	3 4 5 A policy exists. A few criteria are used in decision-making.		6 7 8 A policy exists. Some criteria are regularly and consistently used in decision-making.	9 10 A district policy on ELL exiting is consistently used. Multiple criteria are consistently used.


ASSESSMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DISTRICT/SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS District and school level assessments facilitate placement into appropriate programs, exit from services, and integration of ELL in the school experience.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Local curriculum documents District LEP manual LEP entrance and exit policies LEP entrance and exit assessments Staff interviews Observations Other	P. Monitoring ELL Students			How well are ELL monitored in their mainstream classes after they are exited from ESL programming?
	1 2 ELL are not generally monitored.	3 4 5 Few ELL are monitored, or most ELL are only rarely monitored.		6 7 8 Most ELL are monitored, or all ELL are only occasionally monitored.	9 10 All ELL are consistently monitored on a regular basis.

Staff Development

Guiding Questions

To what extent does the school support effective staff development for educational personnel (administrators, teachers, paraprofessionals and staff) who work with ELL?

To what extent is there a school-wide effort to have ESL and mainstream teachers work together and learn from each other in order to support the academic achievement of ELL?

How are questions and concerns of teachers addressed through staff development?

How often are ESL and Bilingual Education teachers in the school sought out as experts for staff development on programming for ELL?

How often do administrators help provide the necessary time for staff development?


STAFF DEVELOPMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
CONTEXT The school organization provides an environment that supports staff development initiatives.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Study groups Action research groups Observation Peer coaching Previous staff development initiatives Assessment of current practices	Collaborative Learning Communities Staff development initiatives should promote collaboration between ESL/Bilingual and mainstream staff.			How are staff development opportunities related to second language development and appropriate instruction for ELL?
	1 2 Opportunities in this area are minimally provided. They do not promote collaboration among staff.	3 4 5 Opportunities in this area are somewhat available, and promote limited collaboration among staff.		6 7 8 Opportunities in this area are available, and promote collaboration among staff.	9 10 Many opportunities in this area are available, and promote significant collaboration among staff.
	Instructional Leadership			To what extent do staff development initiatives incorporate the knowledge and skills of ESL teachers?
	1 2 ESL/bilingual staff rarely incorporate their knowledge and skills in staff development initiatives.	3 4 5 ESL/bilingual staff sometimes incorporate their knowledge and skills in staff development initiatives.		6 7 8 ESL/bilingual staff often incorporate their knowledge and skills in staff development initiatives; they often help construct staff development initiatives.	9 10 ESL/bilingual staff consistently incorporate their knowledge and skills in staff development initiatives; they consistently construct staff development initiatives.


STAFF DEVELOPMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
CONTEXT The school organization provides an environment that supports staff development initiatives.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Study groups Action research groups Observation Peer coaching Previous staff development initiatives Assessment of current practices	Job-Embedded Initiatives Are there opportunities for observation and consultation across classes and schools?			Describe how staff development activities for ESL/bilingual and mainstream staff are integrated into the school day.
	1 2 Staff development activities mainly provide information; little opportunity for practice or performance during the school day.	3 4 5 Staff development activities provide information and some opportunity for practice or performance during the school day.		6 7 8 Staff development activities provide information and ample opportunity for practice or performance during the school day.	9 10 Staff development activities provide information and opportunity for supported practice or performance during the school day.
	Alignment			How well do staff development initiatives align with the most immediate needs of staff working with ELL?
	1 2 Staff development rarely focuses on the most pressing needs.	3 4 5 Staff development sometimes focuses on the most pressing needs.		6 7 8 Staff development usually focuses on the most pressing needs.	9 10 Staff development always focuses on the most pressing needs.


STAFF DEVELOPMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
CONTEXT The school organization provides an environment that supports staff development initiatives.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Study groups Action research groups Observation Peer coaching Previous staff development initiatives Assessment of current practices	Resources Staff development for educators working with ELL might include the linguistic, cultural, social, and academic development of ELL.			Are adequate financial resources and time allotted to support staff development activities?
	1 2 Adequate time and financial resources are not allocated. Few if any opportunities exist for staff development.	3 4 5 Limited time and financial resources are available. Limited opportunities exist for staff development.		6 7 8 Adequate time and financial resources are available. Staff have opportunities to engage in staff development.	9 10 Staff routinely have adequate time to engage in staff development initiatives that are fully funded.


STAFF DEVELOPMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
PROCESS Staff development opportunities support the acquisition of new knowledge about second language learners and the transference of this knowledge and skills to more effective classroom practice.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Study groups Action research groups Observation Peer coaching Assessment of current practices Previous staff development initiatives Levels of use surveys	Use of Data			To what extent are data used to determine staff development initiatives and to evaluate their effectiveness?
	1 2 Staff development initiatives are rarely determined by data which show the academic progress of ELL.	3 4 5 Staff development initiatives are sometimes determined by data which show the academic progress of ELL.		6 7 8 Staff development initiatives are often determined by data which show the academic progress of ELL.	9 10 Staff development initiatives are always determined by data which show the academic progress of ELL.
	Evaluation of Effectiveness			What evidence is there that staff development initiatives result in improved practice for staff and improved academic learning for ELL?
	1 2 No evidence exists to indicate transfer of skills to classroom practices or changes in student learning.	3 4 5 Little evidence exists to indicate transfer of skills to classroom practices or changes in student learning.		6 7 8 There is clear evidence of skills transferred to classroom practices and changes in student learning.	9 10 There is clear evidence of sustained changes in classroom practices and student learning.


STAFF DEVELOPMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
PROCESS Staff development opportunities support the acquisition of new knowledge about second language learners and the transference of this knowledge and skills to more effective classroom practice.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Classroom observations Physical set-up of classroom Lesson plans that address various strategies, learning styles, multiple intelligences Peer coaching Student/teacher interviews Units of study	Focus on Learning			Are all teachers provided the opportunity to practice new skills and receive feedback on their performance?
	1 2 Teachers are not provided opportunities to practice and/or receive feedback on new skills that mirror expectations for student learning.	3 4 5 Teachers are sometimes provided opportunities to practice and/or receive feedback on new skills that mirror expectations for student learning.		6 7 8 Teachers are provided opportunities to practice and/or receive feedback on new skills that mirror expectations for student learning.	9 10 Teachers are provided systematic opportunities to practice and/or receive feedback on new skills that mirror expectations for student learning.
	Support for Changed Practices			Describe how follow-up activities and strategies are used to sustain new initiatives or major changes at the school for ELL.
	1 2 Little or no follow-up or support exists for new initiatives or required changes at the site.	3 4 5 Limited follow-up or support exists for new initiatives or required changes at the site.		6 7 8 Specific activities or strategies are used to support new initiatives or required changes at the site.	9 10 Consistent and sustained follow-up activities and strategies are used to support new initiatives and required changes at the site.

Family and Community Involvement

Family and Community Involvement

How are members from the communities of ELL included in school activities?

How well does the school achieve effective two-way communication with ELL families and their communities?

How do school administrators support the efforts of educational personnel in their efforts to address the needs of ELL families and their communities?


FAMILY AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION The school site works to establish partnerships with the families and communities of ELL to facilitate understanding and collaboration
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Program agendas Interpreters or Bilingual Staff Translated documents Parent interviews by bilingual and bicultural staff or interpreters Schedules for community-based learning activities Observations Community surveys Other	A. Family and Community Participation of ELL			How does the school help families and communities of ELL feel welcomed and invited?
	1 2 The school has few strategies in place to create an inviting atmosphere for families of ELL.	3 4 5 The school has some strategies in place to create an inviting atmosphere for families of ELL.		6 7 8 The school has many strategies in place to create an inviting atmosphere for families of ELL.	9 10 The school has many strategies in place to create an inviting atmosphere for families of ELL; initiatives are periodically evaluated and changed as needed.
	Learning Environment			How does the school support family members of ELL to be active partners in their children’s learning?
	1 2 There are few proactive connections between school and home for family members of ELL.	3 4 5 There are some proactive connections between school and home for family members of ELL.		6 7 8 There are many proactive connections between school and home for family members of ELL.	9 10 Connections between school and home are actively cultivated and periodically evaluated as to their effectiveness.


FAMILY/COMMUNITY			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
PRACTICE AND STRUCTURE Practice and structures support Family and Community Involvement of ELL.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Parent or family interviews/surveys with the help of interpreters or translations Alternative meeting sites and schedules (community, school and other) ELL parent meeting or training attendance log Staff interviews/surveys Parent, family and community workshop schedule Meeting minutes Result of community surveys Other	Effective Communication			How are potential barriers to communication between the school and family members of ELL addressed?
	1 2 Few or no opportunities exist to support communication among schools, families and community members; communication is overwhelmingly in English.	3 4 5 Some opportunities exist to support communication among schools, families and community members; most communication is in English.		6 7 8 Many opportunities exist to promote and maintain communication among schools, families and community members; interpreters and translations are used.	9 10 Multiple opportunities exist to promote and maintain communication among schools, families and community members; interpreters and translations consistently used.
	D. Cultural Sensitivity Schoolwide practice is meant to include the physical environment of the school, the actions of teachers, the programs available, the nature of the overall school atmosphere.			How does schoolwide practice convey respect for the cultural backgrounds of ELL and their families?
	1 2 Schoolwide practices lack sensitivity to the cultural backgrounds of ELL.	3 4 5 Some schoolwide practices lack sensitivity to the cultural backgrounds of some of ELL.		6 7 8 Schoolwide practices are generally respectful of and sensitive to the cultural backgrounds of ELL.	9 10 Schoolwide practices are always respectful of and sensitive to the cultural backgrounds of ELL.

Leadership

Guiding Questions

Is there a vision or mission for the school of which teachers are aware?

To what extent are decisions about the academic achievement of ELL made on the basis of school data?

To what extent does school leadership reflect the concern for achievement of all learners?

To what extent does school leadership reflect the input of various stakeholders (students, parents, community, mainstream staff, ESL staff)?

What sort of effort do school personnel make to include ELL, their families, and community-based organizations as active participants in the school’s decision-making process?


LEADERSHIP			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
VISION Leadership has developed a shared and sustained vision.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Visual displays of mission and vision Policies, procedures, process School/district publications Minutes of meetings Staff surveys or interviews Parent surveys or interviews Student achievement goals Decision-making structure Mentorship opportunities Qualitative and quantitative data Other	A. Shared Vision The mission of the school may be contained in a formal mission statement or informal motto.			Does the mission of the school include ELL?
	1 2 The mission does not encompass the unique perspective of ELL.	3 4 5 The mission encompasses the unique perspective of some ELL.		6 7 8 The mission encompasses the unique perspective of most ELL.	9 10 The mission encompasses the unique perspective of all ELL.
	B. Guides Decisions			Do the vision and mission guide decisions made at various levels of the organization (classroom, site committees, administration)?
	1 2 The vision and mission are not supported among stakeholders or not used to guide decisions made in classrooms, by site teams or by administrators.	3 4 5 The vision and mission are supported verbally among stakeholders but do not appear to guide decisions made in classrooms, by site teams or by administrators.		6 7 8 The vision and mission generally guide decisions made in classrooms, by site teams or by administrators.	9 10 The vision and mission consistently guide decisions made in classrooms, by site teams or by administrators.


LEADERSHIP			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Decisions are focused on student achievement, are data-driven and collaborative.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Visual displays of mission and vision Policies, procedures, process School/district publications Minutes of meetings Staff surveys or interviews Student achievement goals Decision-making structure Other	C. Clear structure			To what extent does the process for making decisions regarding ESL programs, ESL staff and ELL result in better academic achievement for ELL?
	1 2 The decision-making structure is unclear and not understood by all stakeholders; decisions are seldom made on the basis of ELL academic achievement.	3 4 5 The decision-making structure is clear but not well understood by all stakeholders; decisions are sometimes made on the basis of ELL academic achievement.		6 7 8 The decision-making structure is clear and well understood by many stakeholders; decisions are usually made on the basis of ELL academic achievement.	9 10 The decision-making structure is clear and well understood by all stakeholders; decisions are consistently made on the basis of ELL academic achievement.
	Use of data			To what extent does school leadership use a variety of assessment measures to inform decisions related to ELL?
	1 2 Information is seldom used to evaluate ESL/Bilingual programs and to make important decisions related to ELL.	3 4 5 Information from very few sources is used to evaluate ESL/Bilingual programs and to make important decisions related to ELL.		6 7 8 Information from several sources is used to evaluate ESL/Bilingual programs and to make important decisions related to ELL.	9 10 Information from several varied sources is used to evaluate ESL/Bilingual programs and to make important decisions related to ELL.


LEADERSHIP			BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Decisions are focused on student achievement, are data-drive and collaborative.
Evidence Gather this information by survey, interview, observation and/or additional documentation. Visual displays of mission and vision Policies, procedures, process School/district publications Minutes of meetings Staff surveys or interviews Student achievement goals Decision-making structure Other	E. Collaborative Decision-Making Stakeholders include students, parents, community members, ESL/Bilingual staff, mainstream staff, and administrators.			To what extent does the school leadership collaborate with stakeholders in ESL programs to make effective decisions for ELL?
	1 2 Important decisions are made in isolation.	3 4 5 Some important decisions are made with input from stakeholders.		6 7 8 Important decisions are usually made with input from stakeholders.	9 10 Important de

ELL - ResourcesLearning Support :

About This Program

English Language Learners

Stay up to Date