1. Meeting the needs of Long Term English Learners:
Research and District Responses
Good morning
Been preparing for years for this day without recognizing this is where I was heading…. For forty years in education a deepening understanding of how it happens that some groups, some communities are excluded from educational opportunity… for the past twenty years, focusing on English Learners and immigrants specifically – documenting school responses to new waves of immigrants, designing and piloting demontration projects to try to show that things can be different, that schools can be designed in ways that provide access… and in all my work with secondary schools throughout California the deepening realization that we are witnessing not just students who came with gaps that aren’t be closed, but that we we are witnessing children to whom harm has been done. And now, working in the past months of this new report on Long Term English Learners has been taking place side by side with my efforts in a preK-3 pilot for Spanish speaking immigrant children, and I have to say that there has been something in that combination that has broken my heart.
Everyday now in our projects’ preschools and kindergarten classrooms I see children……
Laurie Olsen, Ph.D.
Title III Accountability Institute
December 2011

2. Lau v. Nichols, Supreme Court
English Learners
“There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers and curriculum…for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education…”
Lau v. Nichols, Supreme Court
As you know, English Learners are a class of students defined by civil rights law and court cases as a group who are foreclosed from equal educational access and opportunity because they don’t have the English skills needed to access curriculum in schools where there are not supports to help them access that curriculum and overcome the language barrier. Schools have an affirmative obligation to address those language barriers….
Now in the policy arena and in the field, the focus of doing that has been primarily on elementary schools. The research… program model development… curriculum… has been primarily elementary school with the notion that the issue would be solved for children who entered our schools in the primary grades by the time they get to secondary schools. Secondary school programs were seen as something needed for newly arrived immigrant children. 2

3. Academic standards, curriculum
Research on EL
Families, Community
State & Federal
Accountability
Reforms
Civil Rights
Capacity
Prof. development,
teacher placement,
credentialling,
Politics
Academic standards, curriculum

4. When we look closer at the EL in California schools, we see that one out of three are actually in secondary schools – and though some of these are newcomers, MOST have been in US schools since kindergarten. Many were born in the United States. The majority are students who have been in our schools for years and arrive in secondary school still without the English skills they need to access and participate fully in an English-taught curriculum.

5. The 1.5 Generation The 5 Plusers Long Term English Learner ESL Lifers
III’s Forever
Long Term English Learner
The 1.5 Generation
Protracted English Learners
The 5 Plusers
ESL Lifers
Struggling Readers

6. Secondary EL Typologies
Newly arrived with adequate schooling (including literacy in L1)
Newly arrived with interrupted formal schooling - “Underschooled” - “SIFE”
English Learners developing normatively (1-5 years)
Long Term English Learners

7. Long Term English Learners are created……..
Long Term EL
We know that LTELs are created -- across years of schooling.
Though we’ve defined this, or backed into this as a high school issue, the need to understand how LTELs are created begins back in elementary…… by middle school there is a sense of something definite going on -- is it language? Are these kids it’s just somehow taking longer to progress? Is it a motivation or identity issue? By high school, we know it’s real….

8. GAP has increased. 2002-2010. Calif
GAP has increased Calif. Standards Test ELA % Proficient and above English Only: English Learners
33.4% gap % gap

9. Percent of LEAS meeting AMAOs
Met AMAO 1
Met AMAO 2
2006 73 74
2007 82 77
2008 81
2009 78 63
2010 51 45

10. “There is no clear, easy reason revealed by data why students are remaining in the LEP category for 10+ years.”
Colorado Department of
Education 2009
“While districts were unanimous in voicing their concern for such students (“Long Term English Learners”), finding effective interventions to move these long term students along the proficiency continuum remains a challenge.”
Council of Great City Schools, 2009

11. Californians Together Survey
Data from 40 school districts
Data on 175,734 English Learners in grades
This is 31% of California’s English Learners in grades 6 – 12
Wide variation in district context

12. Data collected on English Learners 6 - 12
# of years since date of entry
Secondary ELs who enrolled in K/1
6+ by CELDT level
6+ by academic failure (Ds, Fs)
Definition
Placement

13. Across all districts 59% of secondary school ELs are long term (103,635 in sample)

14. Concentration of LTELs in districts vary

15. Definitions vary Nine of 40 have a formal definition
Length of time (years) is part of every definition
The number of years used in the definitions vary from 5 years to 7+
Six districts include “lack of progress” or evidence of academic failure along with the number of years

16. Legal framework
English Learners cannot be permitted to incur irreparable academic deficits during the time they are mastering English
School districts are obligated to address deficits as soon as possible, and to ensure that their schooling does not become a permanent deadend.

17. How long should it take?
California’s NCLB AMAO #1 (5 years to reach “CELDT proficiency”
Linguistic research (individual differences, but generally years)
Program effectiveness (5-7 years in a well-implemented program; 7-10 in weak program if at all)

18. A continuum of academic success……
Losing ground on measures of English proficiency and Academic Failure
No progress on measures of English proficiency, academically struggling
Very slow progress towards English Proficiency, doing okay (C’s)
Doing well academically, but still not reclassified
Reclassified but struggling

19. Definition: An English Learner in secondary schools who…..
Has been enrolled in U.S. schools for more than 6 years (continuous enrollment)
Is making inadequate progress in English language development
Is struggling academically

20. Step #1: Know the extent and magnitude of the LTEL issue in your schools

21. El Monte school districts
Commitment #2: Full Proficiency
English Learners will develop within six years of continuous enrollment full receptive and productive proficiencies in English in the domains of listening, speaking, reading and writing – consistent with expectations for all students.

22. Annual Expectations for English Learners
Years in US
1 year
2 years
3 years
4 years
5 years
6 years
CELDT
BEG EI
INT EA
ADV
CST ELA
FBB +
FBB+
BB+
Basic+
Prof+
CST
Math
Stand. Test in Spanish

23. Action Steps  A formal definition
Designated annual benchmark indicators/ expectations
A data system that disaggregates achievement data by # of years in U.S. schools and by English proficiency levels
Regular reviews of LTEL data to inform and trigger planning AND to trigger supports for students

24. Step #2: Investigate how English Learners became Long Term
Of little children who are open to trying new things and proud of what they can do
and I look at them and feel the shadow….
For they come to us
Little knowing that this is the start of what could be a journey of years of struggling to master content they are expected to learn but not helped to learn…. They don’t paste their pictures and trace their letters expecting this is the start of year after year of academic difficulty and falling further and further behind…….
Their mama’s, walking children to school, waiting at the gates to pick them up, do not suspect that they are handing their precious children to an institution that could be leading them to academic failure and inadequate English…..
Step #2: Investigate how English Learners became Long Term

25. District and site inquiries (2004-2011)
Student interviews retrieving schooling histories
Studies of cumulative records
Interviews and focus groups with teachers
Student voice on the experience of being LTEL
Surveys
Small research literature

26. Schooling History: weak or no language support
Three out of four spent two or more years with “no services” or mainstream
Weaker “EL Program” models

27. Comparison between EL groups over time

28. NYC Study (Menken/Kleyn 2010) “Subtractive schooling”
Vast majority receive English-only instruction resulting in limited or no literacy skills in L1 OR
Weak forms of bilingual education (early exit, transitional) resulting in limited oral and/or written proficiency in L1
L1 skills are weakened over time and eventually replaced with English
Students report programs emphasized English reading and writing (even the bilingual programs)

29. Trends in California schools 2000-2010
Large increase of students in mainstream placement (no services)
Large reduction in primary language instruction (from 12% to 5%)
Approximately one in ten with ELD only
The majority in Structured English Immersion/ ELD plus SDAIE – large increase (from 35% to 55%)

30. Other contributing factors
Inconsistent program placement (“ping-pong”)
Inconsistent implementation of programs
Narrowed curriculum with partial access
Social segregation and linguistic isolation
Transnational moves – transnational schooling

31. Transnational inconsistent schooling
!2 of 29 students attended school outside the U.S. in a language other than English for a few months and up to 8 years altogether
International moves often occur repeatedly creating a cycle of adjustment and readjustment (and new decisions about placement and program)
The schooling outside U.S. tended to be for short durations and inconsistent and did not result in L1 literacy

32. Step #3: Understand the needs and characteristics of “Long Term English Learners”

33. They have distinct language issues
High functioning in social situations in both languages – but limited vocabulary in both
Can sound like non-LTELs
Prefer English – are increasingly weak in their home language
Weak academic language – with gaps in reading and writing skills
Are stuck in progressing towards English proficiency

34. Down the rabbit hole……. “Good working knowledge of English”
Reasonable fluency in English
CELDT Proficient
Advanced level on CELDT
Basic on CST - ELA
Proficient on CST in ELA
Reclassification as Fluent English Proficient

35. Orally Proficient but not Academically Proficient
Percent English Learners attaining these benchmarks statewide

36. Language use and preferences
Majority use both languages equally in conversation - context is the factor in choice
Students overwhelmingly favor and report being more comfortable reading and writing in English

37. Academic Performance
Several grade levels below actual grade level in both English and L1
Cumulative high school GPA is very low (D+ average)
More than one in five have F averages
Grade retention frequent
Gaps in academic background

38. Behavioral profiles Learned passivity and non-engagement
Tend not to complete homework
Not readers
Typically desire to go to college
Do not know they are doing poorly academically – think they are English fluent

39. Action Steps… 
Be sure there is understanding about what constitutes sufficient English proficiency for academic access – clarify the terms
Analyze grades, English proficiency levels and growth/stagnation/loss – where are they stuck?
Shadow – check for engagement and participation

40. Step # 4: Check how LTELs are currently being served in secondary school

41. Typical program placements for English Learners
SDAIE
Intensive or strategic interventions!
Still English Learner, but in Mainstream
1 – years
    
_______________________________________________________________________
No English
Oral, social English
CELDT Proficient
Proficient for Academic work
CST Basic
I II III IV V

42. From the Californians Together survey
3 of 4 districts have no approach to serving Long Term English Learners
Majority of CA districts place their Long Term English Learners into mainstream
Three CA districts place Long Term English Learners by English proficiency level with other English Learners (in NYC, this is the common placement)

43. Placements NOT designed for them…..
Placed/kept in classes with newcomer and normatively developing English Learners – by English proficiency level
Unprepared teachers
No electives – and limited access to the full curriculum
Over-assigned and inadequately served in intervention and reading support classes

44. On the issue of interventions
CAL (“Double the Work”) - reading interventions designed for native speakers aren’t appropriate for ELLs
National Literacy Panel - good literacy and reading interventions work for both ELL and proficient students - but they work BETTER for English proficient students (gap grows) and do not address some key needs of LTELs
From the 1.5 generation research on college students, and linguistics research - appears that WRITING may be a more powerful emphasis than READING strategies for LTELs

45. Things to ask……. Where are they placed for English? ELD?
Where are they placed for academic content?
What interventions and support classes do they receive?
Are they getting access to electives?
Are they in college preparatory courses?
Are any of those placements designed for LTELs? Do they have appropriate support for EL success?

46. Step #5: Know the research and undo misconceptions that lead to harmful practices

47. Academic standards, curriculum
Research on EL
Youth Development
Families, Community
Civil Rights
State & Federal
Accountability
Reforms
Capacity
Prof. development,
teacher placement,
credentialling,
Politics
Academic standards, curriculum

48. Common belief system
Sooner and more fully immersed in English, the better
Good teaching and standards-based curriculum work for all students and are sufficient for ELLs
English is the most important subject for ELLs – the more hours, the better
Home language holds students back

49. New generation of research
National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth
California Department of Education: Research-based Practices for English Language Learners (commissioned papers)

50. Basic foundations to KNOW
Continue to need ELD and support until reach proficiency (normatively 5 -7 years)
A strong foundation in L1 is foundation for L2. Skills transfer.
Continued development of L1 in school along with English strengthens English proficiency and promotes long term academic success
Language development is more than literacy development – a focus on literacy alone is not sufficient for English Learners

51. “Academic language” is different from social language and takes longer to develop
Oral language is the foundation for literacy and is a crucial part of a strong language program for English Learners
Academic language develops in the context of learning academic subjects. A strong EL program infuses intentional language development throughout the entire curriculum.
There are social, economic and cognitive benefits to mastery of two or more languages – particularly in this 21st century.

52. Step 6: Design programs to meet LTEL needs

53. Basic Principles! Focus upon distinct needs
Language development is more than literacy development – LTELs need both
Language development + Academic gaps
Crucial role of home language
Invite, support, insist that LTELs become active participants in their own education

54. Maximum integration without sacrificing access
Rigor, relevance, active engagement and empowering pedagogy
Relationships matter
An affirming, inclusive environment
Urgency!
Mention SOB as part of affirming, inclusive environment

55. Instruction matters….. Differentiation Checks for understanding
Accountability
Active student engagement
Standards-based
Maximum language development structures and practices

56. Secondary school components
Specialized ELD – separate from other ELs
Clustered in heterogeneous classes for content
Explicit language/literacy development across the curriculum –& SDAIE strategies for access
Focus on study skills, critical thinking
If interventions/supports – designed for LTELs
Data chats, preparation, accommodations
Programs, activities, student leadership to create an affirming school climate
Native speakers classes (through AP)

57. Comparison between EL groups over time

58. Seems to be power in SNS that is both Spanish literacy AND enhances English skills
Explicitly links transferability of cognitive skills, cognitive and vocabulary development, academic language, writing structures, rigorous writing assessment
Is aligned to state English language arts standards
Solid preparation for AP language and AP literature
Focused on high level of oral, reading and writing skills - while enhancing English skills
Includes cultural focus and empowering pedagogy
Often students with low levels of both target language and English have become discouraged, frustrated learners
Foreign language teachers seldom have skills to teach to native speakers
Place speakers of a language into foreign language classes - different needs from non-native speakers
No set curriculum (not articulated)
Sequence doesn’t extend to advanced levels
Lack of professional training for teachers

59. Case Examples Ventura Unified School District Modesto City Schools
Anaheim Union High School District
El Monte School Districts

60. Ventura’s District Action Plan
Title III Improvement Plan “Operation Prevent LTELs”
ELL courses revised
ELD course sequence rewritten
ELD4 and SDAIE are UC/CSU accepted
Clear placement criteria for all courses
Two periods of instruction for ELD
Appropriate curriculum and technology
Pacing guides and assessment routines
Common sequence of language functions for ELD K-5

61. Investment in Intensive professional development
PLCs across academic content areas
LTEL student fishbowls
Bilingual Opportunities Pathway Program
Multilingual Recognition Awards
Student Pep Talks
Administrative and leadership structures to keep issue on table and to maintain accountability

62. Ventura Unified School District Results so far….
Substantial increase in reclassification rates at pilot high schools (from 14% to 20.9% - compared to district average 9.1% - 9.5%)
Improved growth on CELDT (from 44.9% moving 1 level to 60.9%; from 22.2% achieving proficiency to 26.8%)

63. Increase in LTEL scoring “Proficient”
2007 -
2008
2008 -
2009
Language Arts
Math
Pilot School A
8.7%
17.4%
25%
32.7%
Pilot School B
11.3%
33.3%
17.5%

64. Modesto City Schools K-8 and 9-12 Districts
Title I and Title III Program Improvement Status Year 5
Established a Working Group (representative)
One year to “study” and develop recommendations
Investment in implementing plan
Demographic Data and Statistics: Explain the breakdown in the next 2 slides of who we are in Modesto City Schools.

65. Who are our English Learners?
# Years in
US School
Grades 7-12
Language Institute
Tier I
Tier II 1 2
(92) 3%
Tier III
Tier IV 3 4
(178) 7%
5+ Program 5
Or more
(2,344) 90%
On our journey, we discovered that all Els are not the same. Some students have only just arrived in the United States from Iraq or India or Mexico or any number of other countries. Others were born here but were raised in primarily L1-speaking homes. Others still may have had interrupted schooling and have not been in any school for a number of years.
The breakdown of MCS’ ELs is the following: only 3% have been here 2 years or less, only 7% have been here less than 4 years. The newest students to our system are not the biggest group of ELs. The largest group of our English learning students are the students who have been in US Schools for 5 or more years. In the 7-12 arena for MCS, that equates to over 2,000 students.
The tier system roughly equates to the length of time a student has been in US schools. We created this system in order to better understand what each specific group’s needs were and to create a more effective instructional program for them.

66. 5+ Program 9th Grade OR Period Course 1 ELA READ 180 2 ALD 3
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 4
Math 5
Earth Science 6 PE 7
Elective (A-G) : Visual Performing Arts, Support, or AVID
NOTE:
World Religions/Health
classes in summer
school or senior year.
Computers in any four
years, summer school,
or test out OR
The same instructional day would occur for freshmen at the high school level. The implementation plan only includes 7th, 8th, and 9th grade for the school year so the plan may be executed successfully and the appropriate staff development and coaching may occur for the teaching staff.
While there are certain usual required courses for freshmen, such as the World religions, geography and health class and the Computers class, these may be postponed, taken in summer school or proficiency tested.
The high school path will meet all college entrance requirements for the state of California.

67. Differentiated placement in 9th gr.
2 period block of Read 180, using L book by Kate Kinsella (accepted as ELD) with a bilingual paraprofessional (for students who are really intensive and struggling at all levels academically) – for Freshman year only
High end of Below Basic/low Basic 
ELA + ALD
Advanced or Proficient on ELA-CST 
opt out of ALD and are monitored

68. Anaheim Union High School District

69. Literacy and language across curriculum
Biliteracy as a 21st century skill: Spanish for Native Speakers, Seal of Biliteracy, expansion of Dual Language program
Commitment to a broad, full 21st century curriculum (decrease placements in support classes, CAHSEE prep classes, etc.; no more double blocking; institute 2 science/social studies at junior h.s.; build career technical education – industry pathways)

70. LTEL/EL Support
ELD 4 Language Support high school; English language mainstream language support middle school; courses designed for LTELs

71. In two years…. “Takes a 3-5 year commitment”
API has gone up 31 points
Reclassification has increased
Higher English Learner 10th grade CAHSEE passage rates

72. El Monte districts 2 elementary districts + 1 high school district
“Expectations” and commitment in common
Summer programs – thematic instruction, science and social studies based, intensive language development
Mentoring
Investment in professional development for content area teachers
New ELD/ALD courses and materials

73. Action Steps  Fact finding
District EL Master Plan describes research-based program models for different typologies of EL students (or site)
Specific LTEL program and placements
Support development of new courses
Provide materials and professional development – as high priority for use of resources
System of monitoring placements
Mechanisms to change status of L1 and promote biliteracy

74. Prevent LTELs - Quick review
Need for program consistency in placement
Need for well-articulated programs
Need for English Learner services (incl. ELD)
Importance of developing L1 along with English
Need to assure access to academic content while learning English so no gaps develop
Need a full curriculum
Need to monitor and identify students lagging behind – triggering support

75. Prevent LTELs
Early foundation of rich language development (PreK-3) in English and the home language (where possible)
Alignment, articulation and transition between PreK and elementary grades
Full curriculum – with language development across all content areas
Focus on engagement and high level oral language development
Shared assessments
Parent/Family Engagement

76. Respond to “systems” issues:
Data systems that can’t identify and monitor progress
Unprepared teachers
Lack of appropriate curriculum and materials
Misunderstanding and lack of knowledge of the research
Lack of clarity about what constitutes “English Proficiency”
Contradictory or misaligned messages across the “system”

77. Proactive District Policies and Support
A definition and system for monitoring
Designated annual benchmark expectations by number of years and English proficiency
Inquiry
Research based programs –including specific responses for LTELs
Disaggregate data
Target professional development for teachers
Create needed courses
Student and parent information

78. California State level recommendations
A standard state definition
State collection of data to identify, monitor and plan
Real ELD materials!
Research-based, consistent messages as the foundation for accountability
Professional development priority
Ensure full access

79. Leadership and Advocacy
Step #8:
Leadership and Advocacy
So these children and the 1.5 million other English Learners and the 1….. Other Latinos in the state of California get the education they deserve, and have the fair opportunity to pursue their dreams.

80. English Learners cannot, in the words of the court, “be permitted to incur irreparable academic deficits” during the time they are mastering English…. We must ensure that their schooling does not become “a permanent deadend.”

81. Laurie Olsen lolaurieo@gmail.com