1. Long-Term English Language Learners and Strategies for Engaging Them with the Common Core Kenji Hakuta Stanford University 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

2. WestEd.org Purposes of this Session Set some key points for understanding long-term EL issue Explore some data analyses on definitions and characteristics Discuss how state and district systems and practices can be more responsive to current LTELs: prevention, acceleration, caution

3. Educators Have a Dual Obligation to English Learners 1.Provide meaningful access to grade-level academic content via appropriate instruction 2.Develop students’ academic English language proficiency (Lau v. Nichols; Castañeda v. Pickard; NCLB) Interconnected, not separate! Simultaneous, not sequential! 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

4. Common Core Standards: Major Shifts 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

5. The New Paradigm: Language Uses within Content Practices 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

6. Definitions and Characteristics 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

7. CA ELs and former ELs (RFEP) by grade Source: CDE DataQuest, 2010-11 CELDT & CST Ever-ELK-56-12Total EL86%43% 1,435,734 RFEP14%57% 794,467 Courtesy: Robert Linquanti (WestEd) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

8. District A ELs, Long-Term ELs and Former ELs (RFEP) by grade LTEL:EL Ratio  2:13:1 3.5:13:12:1 3.5:1 Long-term EL: 6 or more years in LEA Ever EL 45% 18% 37% Current EL 33% 67% Courtesy: Robert Linquanti (WestEd) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

9. Longitudinal Attainment of Language and Content Criteria (Thompson, 2012) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

10. Initial L1 and English Proficiency as Strong Predictors of Reclassification (Thompson, 2012) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

11. Legislated Definition of “EL at Risk of Becoming LTEL” (AB 2193) “English learner at risk of becoming a long-term English learner” means an English learner who is enrolled in any of grades 5 to 11, inclusive, in schools in the United States for four years, scores at the intermediate level or below on the English language development test identified or developed pursuant to Section 60810, or any successor test, and scores in the fourth year at the below basic or far below basic level on the English language arts standards-based achievement test administered pursuant to Section 60640, or any successor test. (Cal. Ed. Code § 313.1, 2012) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

12. Students meeting various criteria for California’s Long-Term English Learner Definition (SY 2010-11) Source: CEPA at Stanford University (Thompson et al., 2013) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

13. Strategizing: Prevention Know your students – Initial ELP and L1 level – Entry grade/time in the district Focus on time: Set clear expectations for linguistic and academic progress Monitor every student’s progress relative to expectations 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

14. (Olsen 2010) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

15. Some characteristics (Olsen 2010) High functioning in social situations in both their home language and in English Weak in academic uses of language, with gaps in literacy skills Progress stopped on key reclass criteria Developed habits of non-engagement, learned passivity and invisibility 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

16. Some characteristics Unaware that academic skills, record and courses place them in academic jeopardy Significant gaps in academic background knowledge (Olsen 2010) More likely to be US-born Much more likely to be classified Special Ed – Speech or language impairment (SLI) – Specific learning disability (SLD) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

17. Long-Term Special Ed ELs: Peel Back the Layers…. When identified for Special Ed? Were early reading difficulties misinterpreted as second-language features? Does later special ed referral reflect earlier lack of RTI and/or rigorous content instruction, ELD? Other hypotheses to investigate? ? 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

18. In classes with newcomer and normatively developing English Learners – by CELDT level Unprepared teachers No electives – and limited access to the full curriculum Over-assigned and inadequately served in intervention and reading support classes Typical placement/services …. (Olsen 2010) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

19. Guiding principles Urgency, acceleration and focus Address distinct needs – Oral language and literacy development – Academic gaps Invitation and support Integration into school community and access to rigorous core curriculum (Olsen 2010) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

20. Some program elements Specialized English Language Development course (ALD) Clustered placement in heterogeneous, rigorous grade- level content classes mixed with English-proficient students, with differentiated instructional strategies Explicit language and literacy development across the curriculum (CCSS) Dynamic placement for accelerated progress and maximum rigor Formal systems for monitoring progress (Olsen 2010) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

21. LAUSD 2012 EL Master Plan Courtesy: Robert Linquanti (WestEd) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

22. Don’t ignore needs of Reclassified Students: CA’s Former ELs (RFEPs) needing academic support after exiting RFEPs in CA: CST-ELA, 2010-11 79% of all former ELs tested are in grades 6-11 37% of former ELs score below grade level on CST-ELA exam Source: CDE 2011 Courtesy: Robert Linquanti (WestEd) 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta

23. WestEd.org CAUTION: Consciously avoid cultivating a “double stigma” in our language and thinking “The only thing worse than being an EL is being a long- term EL.” “You’re a long-term English learner.” “You’re at risk of becoming LTEL.” They’re lifers. Courtesy: Robert Linquanti (WestEd)

24. Take-Away’s Leverage language shifts related to Common Core to engage all teachers and leaders with LTELs. Work on integrating policies and practices with early childhood and special education sectors. Cultivate a research base on program effectiveness. Be aware of unintended consequences of LTEL label. 2/8/2013CCSSO ICCS SCASS / Atlanta