1. DO NOT COPY Michael Bowlus Kirsten Rewey Katherine Edwards
ACCESS Growth
Michael Bowlus
Kirsten Rewey
Katherine Edwards

2. Sample Student Portrait
Sample Student Portrait – asset-based philosophy of what students “can do” as opposed to a deficit-based approach that emphasizes perceived deficits with a focus on one language – English.
Full proficiency in English in not necessary for students to meet content area standards. However, it is a key predictor of success in school.

3. MN/WIDA ELD Framework
All components of the framework can be found in ACCESS 2.0. It is a tiered and adaptive assessment to allow ELs to show what they can do with language.

4. What is the purpose of ACCESS 2.0?
Used to make valid and reliable accountability decisions about English language proficiency and attainment.
As an annual snap shot of EL performance
Used as the main data point for EL program eligibility (entrance and exit)
Other data points should also inform high stakes decisions
Why do we give ACCESS?
It’s the annual test of English language proficiency for students identified as ELs. 38 states and territories use ACCESS to make valid and reliable accountability decisions about English language proficiency and attainment. It can also be used as a starting point for programming placement and instruction. As an annual snap shot of EL performance it should be used with other data, both formal and informal (summative and formative) when making decisions.

5. What is the purpose of ACCESS 2.0?
Used to make valid and reliable accountability decisions about English language proficiency and attainment.
As an annual snap shot of EL performance
Used as the main data point for EL program eligibility (entrance and exit)
Other data points should also inform high stakes decisions
Why do we give ACCESS?
It’s the annual test of English language proficiency for students identified as ELs. 38 states and territories use ACCESS to make valid and reliable accountability decisions about English language proficiency and attainment. It can also be used as a starting point for programming placement and instruction. As an annual snap shot of EL performance it should be used with other data, both formal and informal (summative and formative) when making decisions.

6. Domains & Grade Level Clusters
ACCESS for ELLs 2.0
Reading, Writing, Listening, and Speaking
K, 1, 2–3, 4–5,
6–8, 9–12
ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 will continue to be aligned with the WIDA English Language Development Standards and to assess the four language domains of Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing.
ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 includes six grade-level clusters rather than the previous five. In order to better measure younger students’ language development, ACCESS for ELLs 2.0 will include a separate test form for Grade 1. Grades 2 and 3 will form a new grade-level cluster, as will Grades 4 and 5. Grades 6 through 8 and 9 through 12 will continue as they are currently clustered. We would also like to note that Kindergarten will remain an interactive, paper-based test for the foreseeable future.
Anchored in ELD Standards
Correspond with college and career readiness state content standards

7. WIDA’s 6 Levels of English Language Proficiency
1 - Entering 2 - Emerging 3 - Developing 4 - Expanding 5 - Bridging 6 - Reaching

8. School Composite Scale Score Gain Ordinary Elementary School’s
The district assessment coordinator presents results below at monthly district principals’ meeting:
All three school have similar proportions of ELLs, so…
Is the elementary school growing as expected?
Is the high school growing below expectations?
How do you know what to expect?
School
Composite Scale Score Gain
Ordinary Elementary School’s
28.1
Traditional Middle School’s
20.7
Normal High School’s
16.2
Scale Scores are dependent on their tier and grade level.

9. Proficiency and Growth on ACCESS
A measure of a student’s status at a given time
Compares students to a set standard
Full proficiency in English is a critical predictor of success in K-12 and post secondary education
Growth
The amount of progress between two given points in time.
Compares student to other students starting at the same proficiency level and grade level
So, let’s have a conversation about your current data literacy practices. How are you currently using ACCESS Today we are going to talk about both proficiency and growth. Both are important and have their place in continuous school improvement process. For EL assessments profiency and growth have a little different meaning than they do for general content assessments. Proficiency is the current status of the student in relation to the set standard. While both general content and EL strive to attain a level of proficency; lower EL proficency should not have a negative connotations (which is typically the case with content perfomance that “does not meet the standard.” Learning a language is a developmental process. Students are where they are in the process and their status tells us more about what we as instructors need to do and what the next language targets need to be to move them to the next level. Also, all proficency levels are present in all grade levels. This is not about cognitive or content ability. It’s about exposure and instruction of language. EL data literacy focuses heavily on growth. If proficiency isn’t the only yearly goal, then growth must be the driver for accountabilty. Today’s session is going to ask you to describe, interpret and evaluate your ELs from that of growth. Growth is about progress made between two points. It compares a student to himself or a system to it itself.

10. Demands of Academic Language and Varied Language Growth Trajectories
What a student must be able to process and produce is much greater at the higher grade levels and proficiency levels so it is expected that students in levels 3, 4 and 5 will often need more time to move to the next proficiency level than their peers in levels 1 and 2. The language demands of content areas increase in higher grade levels.
Example about scaffolding in science (language of science can overwhelm students learning language and content at the same time). They knew the concepts but may not always understand the language of test questions are completely show what they know on tests – they may need more processing time and visual, graphic, and linguistic supports.
When we talk about a student’s Academic Language Development, we are addressing the language expectations for ELs represented within a progressive level of language proficiency and we know that this progression is a complex and long-term process.
Graphic shows: as a student progresses through the levels of language proficiency, the features of academic language a student needs to process and produce within the 3 categories (word/phrase level, sentence level, discourse level) increases and becomes more complex.
language acquisition growth varies dependent upon proficiency level and grade level (because of the amount/depth of content language students are required to know at higher grades)
lower is faster, higher is slower
lower grade levels or proficiency levels grow faster than higher grade levels or proficiency levels
growth rates will likely decrease as students progress up grades and/or proficiency levels.
Students can have different proficency levels for different domains and different content areas
Imagine pouring water into this “V” Shape: Imagine the rate at which it “fills” with water at the different levels
This is why it is essential to provide ELs with differentiated language support within their learning environment so they can succeed academically and linguistically, and with adequate rates of growth.
Performance definitions: This chart provides measurable terms and concepts, delineating features of academic language and their progression of development
This is also broken down into receptive language (necessary for comprehending content/concepts through oral or written language, listening and reading) and productive language (necessary for expressing/demonstrating understanding of content/concepts through oral or written language, speaking and writing)
A student may have different levels of language proficiency in each of the different domains, depending on amount of time and quality of opportunities to learn and practice language development; Remember, the level of proficiency in each domain is measured at the discourse level, sentence level, and word/phrase level.
The criteria used to determine the performance definitions for each proficiency level are embedded in terms of the language used in schools to communicate content area information. Issues of linguistic complexity and semantic and pragmatic knowledge are considered in formulating the definitions. At the two lower proficiency levels, it is assumed that ELLs would need extra-linguistic support via graphic and visual aids in order to carry out language functions. This requirement also motivates the use of graphics for test items at these levels. It is also criteria on the performance definitions are the basis for the Writing and Speaking rubrics.
Recent research shows:
Language mediates learning; language is the vehicle for content
Language proficiency is necessary for students to be able to do “whatever” is necessary to meet the content standard benchmark
MN Comprehensive Assessment; assess content only
ACCESS test; assesses language proficiency, but measures the specialized variations of academic language (language of math, science, social science and language arts, social and instructional language)
Have Cards with the following questions on the tables for discussion…give 5 minutes to discuss:
How can we use this image and the Performance Definitions charts to explain to our colleagues about:
students development of academic language and academic content knowledge are inter-related processes (WIDA Guiding Principal 8)
students’ access to instructional tasks requiring complex thinking is enhanced when
linguistic complexity and instructional support match their levels of language proficiency (WIDA Guiding Principal 10)
Difference in scale scores from one year to the next will likely decrease as students progress up grades and/or proficiency levels.
Proficiency levels are dependent on measurements of linguistic complexity, language forms and conventions, and vocabulary usage (performance definitions) in listening, speaking, reading and writing
Any questions or comments from the discussion?

11. Types of ACCESS Scores Raw Scores Scale Scores
Which are converted into
Scale Scores
Proficiency Level Scores
Complex statistical formulas
Proficiency scores determined by teachers and other EL professionals

12. Scale Scores
Psychometrically-derived score (accounting for all tier and grade level differences) for each language domain
Range from 100 to 600
Vertically-equated scores that are consistent across all grades and tiers (within a domain)
Useful for monitoring student growth over time
Are reported on a consistent scale. Each domain is scaled differently. A scale score of 300 in speaking is not the same as a 300 in listening.
Lower is faster, higher is slower
WIDA ACCESS for ELLs® Scale Scores are psychometrically derived measures of student proficiency
Range from 100 to 600 (above 500 is rare)
Single vertical scale applies to all grades and all test forms
Vertically equated scale scores take into account grade level differences
Scale scores are ideal for tracking student growth.
Scale scores have equal intervals!
Scale scores cannot be compare across domains or composites.

13. Proficiency Level Scores
Interpretations of grade level specific scale scores
Describe student performance in terms of WIDA language proficiency levels
Domain specific
They help educators understand proficiency of students

14. Proficiency Level Scores
Proficiency level scores are presented as whole numbers followed by a decimal
The range of scale score points for each proficiency level cut differs depending on the grade and the domain and therefore proficiency level scores do not represent interval data
The whole number indicates the number based on the ELD standards. The decimal is where the rounding happens. It shows you how close they are to the next proficiency level
Prof level scores are presented as whole numbers followed by a decimal (see text)
The range of scale score points for each proficiency level cut differs depending on the grade and the domain and therefore proficiency level scores do not represent interval data.
The whole number indicates the number based on the ELD standards. The decimal is where the rounding happens. It shows you how close they are to the next proficiency level.

15. Comparing Scale to Proficient Level
Scale Scores are dependent on their tier and grade level.
Each form has a range of different possible scale scores that fall within the 100 to 600 point range.
The proficiency level scores are interpretive scores. They are an interpretation of grade level specific, not grade level cluster scale scores.
Scale Scores are dependent on their tier and grade level. Each form has a range of different possible scale scores that fall within the 100 to 600 point range. The proficiency level scores are interpretive scores. They are an interpretation of grade level specific, not grade level cluster scale scores.

16. Interpretation of Scale Scores Across Grades
Proficiency Level 3
303
3.1 4
2.5 5
2.0
For example, a reading scale score of 303 for a fifth grade student is interpreted as a level 2.0. The same scale score for a fourth grader results in proficiency level 2.5 and level 3.1 for a third grade student.

17. Interpretation of Scale Scores Across Domains
Grade 6
Scale Score
Proficiency Level
Listening
380
5.0
Reading
5.9
Each domain reports a separate source. Therefore the same scale scores in listening and reading do not become the same proficiency level scores. For example, for a sixth grade student, in gr. Level cluster 6-8, a scale score of 380 in listening becomes a prof level score of 5.0 while a scale score of 380 in reading is translated as a 5.9.
Scale scores are grade level and domain specific.

18. Composite Scores
Four composite scores are reported based on scale scores
Overall
15% Listening
15% Speaking
35% Reading
35% Writing
Comprehension
30% Listening
70% Reading
Literacy
50% Reading
50% Writing
Oral
50% Listening
50% Speaking
Equally weighted scale scores from listening and speaking.

19. Grades 1-12 Online Test
Listening and reading scores for the online test are not capped because they are adaptive
Speaking and writing placement based on performance in receptive domains
ACCESS 2.0 Online
Listening and reading scores on for the online test are not capped because they are adaptive (meaning that the content becomes easier or more difficult based on performance on pervious items)
Speaking and writing placement based on performance in receptive domains (students will be placed into the appropriate tier for speaking and writing based on performance in listening and reading domains.
-Pre-A Tier for speaking is a special test form so those scores are capped at proficiency level 1 (students who test online may be placed into a Pre A tier for speaking. This is a special test form that has been developed for newcomers with minimal ability to produce sentences in English. It is a shortened and simplified test form and as such scores are capped at proficiency level 1.

20. Using ACCESS Scores Iterative Process
Curriculum drives instruction
Instruction drives classroom assessment
Classroom assessment drive curriculum
The overall composite score summarizes student’s global language proficiency
Domain subscale scores allow for examination of strengths and contributions to composites
-Standards-referenced
-can be used with Can Do Descriptors.

21. Scale Score Considerations
Suggested Use
Provides a way to monitor growth over time within a language domain by using percentile growth charts
Keep in Mind
Comparisons can be made within but not across domains
Percentile growth charts allow you to use scale scores to see how the language growth of your ELs compares to that of other students in the state

22. Proficiency Scores Suggested Use Keep in Mind
Individual domain scores can be used with the WIDA Can Do Descriptors to get a profile of English language performance
Informs targeted language instruction using the ELD Framework
Provides the key element used to determine program eligibility
Keep in Mind
Scores provide only one data point and should be informed by other data
The range of scale score points for each proficiency level cut differs depending on the grade and domain and therefore proficiency level scores do not represent interval data.
Student proficiency levels yield a profile of a student’s English language proficiency. The individual components of the profile may serve as the basis for differentiating instruction and assessment. There is a strong relationship between scores on ACCESS and the WIDA ELD Standards. Ideas for differentiation can be taken from the standards strand of the model performance indicators (see the 2012 WIDA ELD Standards Booklet, available for free on the WIDA website).
ACCESS 2.0 directly correlates with the common core standards.
The WIDA Minnesota page (resource tab) includes a Minnesota Standards Alignment Report showing the alignment between the Minnesota academic standards in mathematics and science, and the WIDA ELD Standards. The research study was completed by the U of Illinois in 2012.

23. State Exit Criteria for ELs
Composite Score of 5
4 or higher in each domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing)

24. Communicating Scores ACCESS data should be contextualized
Scores should be shared with all teachers who work with English Learners
Decisions should be informed by other data
To the extent possible, include both previous test scores and demographic data when presenting the results to others. Staff can refer to the speaking and writing rubrics (the performance definitions) to better understand what the scores mean at the classroom level. Also the Can Do Descriptors (Key Uses Edition) can help further explain appropriate expectations at each level of English language proficiency.
No single score, including the composite proficiency score, should be used as the sole determiner for making decisions regarding students’ English language proficiency.
-one criterion for entry and exit decisions, determining the extent and type of language services, suggesting placement in classes or curriculum planning.

25. Triangulating Data
Although the ACCESS for ELLs is a valid and reliable English Language Proficiency assessment, standardized tests are just one measure
Multiple data points that include formative assessment should always be used in making high-stakes decisions
In making your programming decisions, be sure to remember that standardized tests are just one measure. Use multiple data points in making high-stakes decisions.

26. Disseminating Score Results
Target certain reports to specific stakeholders
Offer professional development opportunities
All additional information accompanying the report should be parent friendly
Examine different configurations of the data in the reports to develop a plan
Archive copies of the guide along with copies of the score reports
Information should be presented in student-friendly and parent-friendly ways for those groups and made available with explanations in language and modes that families can understand.

27. WIDA Download Library
Link to WIDA Download Library:

28. Instructional Resources
Link to WIDA Download Library:

29. What can your ELs do at various proficiency levels and grade levels?
The WIDA Can Do Descriptors, Key Uses Edition, K-12 offers a focus on what language learners can do to participate meaningfully in teaching and learning in academic contexts.  This edition is organized around four over-arching communicative purposes, called Key Uses: Recount, Explain, Argue, and Discuss.
WIDA Can Do Descriptors:
Webinar:

30. WIDA Educator Resources

31. Dual-Identified Students
Among Students With Disabilities (SWDs) from non-English speaking homes, why are some students eligible for EL services and others are not?
How is the decision made to exit dual-identified students from EL services?
How do dual-identified students perform on the ACCESS test?

32. ELSWD vs. SWD (2015)

33. Tiers Taken

34. 2014 vs. 2015 Tiers Blank 2015 Tier A Tier B Tier C 2014 278 493 38
120
2,660
1,294 13
312
1,331

35. 2014 vs. 2015 Tiers Blank 2015 Tier A Tier B Tier C 2014 278 493 38
120
2,660
1,294 13
312
1,331

36. 2014 vs. 2015 Tiers Blank 2015 Tier A Tier B Tier C 2014 278 493 38
120
2,660
1,294 13
312
1,331

37. 2014 vs. 2015 Tiers Blank 2015 Tier A Tier B Tier C 2014 278 493 38
120
2,660
1,294 13
312
1,331

38. Performance? Scale scores vs. Proficiency 3 categories Same Improved
Declined

39. Speaking Proficiency

40. Listening Proficiency

41. All ACCESS Domains

42. WIDA Growth Tables Do NOT use 2015 tables for 2016 growth calculations
The change from ACCESS to ACCESS 2.0 saw some noticeable changes within domains
MDE will be providing growth tables for using a consistent methodology
This will allow for longitudinally looking at student growth within your school/district

43. MDE ACCESS Growth Tables
MDE growth tables will be similar to WIDA’s growth tables
Webinars to introduce the growth tables and how to use them will be scheduled in September
These tables are only planned to be produced for at this time

44. ESSA Requirements
The accountability system will include measurements of:
Academic achievement
Growth (optional)
Progress on English language development for ELs
Graduation rates
New indicator(s) of student success or school quality
The details for each of these will be worked out once the U.S. Department of Education issues guidance and regulations

45. Questions?
Questions about MDE ACCESS growth calculations:
Questions about ACCESS administration:
Questions about using ACCESS data related to programmatic decisions:
Questions about including ACCESS in ESSA: