1. Barriers to Success: Examining Students with Disabilities who are LTEL Shannon Wells Ph.D. 1

2. Guidelines for Reclassification Assessment of language proficiency on CELDT Teacher evaluation Parent opinion and consultation Performance on a statewide assessment of basic skills in English 2

3. Reclassification Criteria Language Proficiency Early advanced or higher overall No lower than intermediate on each domain – Listening – Speaking – Reading – Writing Performance on Basic Skills Objective test of basic skills Such as CST/CMA basic or higher – Page 18 specifies “Statewide Assessment” 3

4. Reclassification of ELs with Severe Cognitive Disabilities Same opportunities to RFEP as those without disabilities IEP team may determine appropriate measure of English language proficiency and performance in basic skills – EC sections 56342 and 56345[b] When assessed with alternate, receive LOWEST OBTAINABLE SCORE (LOS) 4

5. Possible Alternate Assessments 5

6. There is no provision that allows an LEA to use “alternative criteria” to classify a student as EL even upon entry if it is deemed that the student is an English learner based on the home language survey. The IEP team may determine if the student needs an alternative assessment to CELDT and what that alternative will be (this must be an IEP team decision). 5 CCR § 11303 6

7. Research Questions 1.What are RFEP rates overall and by disability? 2.Are there any differences in RFEP rates by disability? 3.How do RFEP rates for students with disabilities compare to students who do not have a disability? 4.What are the differences in CELDT performance level and domain by disability? 5.Which domains do students with disabilities typically struggle with the most? 7

8. Research Questions cont. 6.Are there any differences in performance by domain and disability? 7.How do students with disabilities compare to students who do not have a disability, in each CELDT domain? 8.What does CELDT movement (overall and by domain) look like for students with disabilities in comparison to students who do not have a disability? 9.How do students with disabilities who have not reclassified during the seven year study period perform on the CELDT in relation to the CST ELA? 8

9. WHAT ARE RFEP RATES OVERALL AND BY DISABILITY? Research Question #1 9

10. 10 Frequency of Disability Codes in Sample DisabilityCodeCountPercentCumulative Percent Mental Retardation210903.8 Hard of Hearing220371.55.3 Deafness23030.15.4 Speech or Language Impairment24048920.425.8 Visual Impairment25070.326.1 Emotional Disturbance260210.927 Orthopedic Impairment270261.128 Other Health Impairment28071331 Specific Learning Disability290159566.597.5 Deaf-Blindness3001097.5 Multiple Disabilities31040.297.7 Autism320522.299.8 Traumatic Brain Injury33040.2100 Total2400100 The most common disability designation in the sample was specific learning disability, followed by speech or language impairment.

11. Specific Learning Disability Disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. – perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. Does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. 11

12. 12 RFEP Rates by Disability Code DisabilityCodeCountRFEPRFEP Rate (%) Mental Retardation2109066.7 Hard of Hearing22037616.2 Deafness230300.0 Speech or Language Impairment24048922646.2 Visual Impairment2507114.3 Emotional Disturbance26021419.0 Orthopedic Impairment270261142.3 Other Health Impairment280711622.5 Specific Learning Disability290159520212.7 Deaf-blindness300100.0 Multiple Disabilities3104125.0 Autism320521426.9 Traumatic Brain Injury330400.0 Total2400487 Disabled students with speech or language impairment had the highest reclassification rate (46.2%) during the study period, followed by students with orthopedic impairments (42.3%).

13. ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES IN RFEP RATES BY DISABILITY? Research Question #2 13

14. 14 n = 4* n= 52 n = 4* n = 1* n = 1595 n = 71 n = 26* n= 21* n = 7* n = 489 n= 3 * n = 37 n = 90 Students with orthopedic impairments and speech or language impairments were more likely to reclassify within the study period than students with a specific learning disability. * Caution should be taken when interpreting results of groups with less than 30 students.

15. HOW DO RFEP RATES FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES COMPARE TO STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE A DISABILITY? Research Question #3 15

16. 16 The reclassification rate for students with disabilities within the study period was much lower (20%) than for students with no disabilities (55%). On average, students with disabilities took 6.7 years to reclassify relative to 5.98 years for students with no disabilities. Table 4: RFEP Summary by Student Status Student StatusHas DisabilityNo Disability Just Speech/Language and Ortho Count240017055 515 RFEP4879386 237 RFEP Rate20.355.0 46.0 Typical Years to RFEP Mean6.75.98 5.63 Std Dev0.7461.243 1.092 Min31 3 Max77 7 Median76 6

17. 17 N = 1 As can be seen in the graph, few students with disabilities were able to reclassify in three or four years, while more than a quarter of students with no disabilities were able to do so.

18. 4. WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES IN CELDT PERFORMANCE LEVEL AND DOMAIN BY DISABILITY? 5. WHICH DOMAINS DO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES TYPICALLY STRUGGLE WITH THE MOST? 6. ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES IN PERFORMANCE BY DOMAIN AND DISABILITY? Research Question #4-6 18 * Caution should be taken when interpreting results of groups with less than 30 students.

19. 19 Students with visual impairments performed well on the listening portion of the CELDT. Students with traumatic brain injuries and autism tended to not perform as well in this domain.

20. 20

21. HOW DO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES COMPARE TO STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE A DISABILITY, IN EACH CELDT DOMAIN? Research Question #7 21

22. 22 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the CELDT overall. This is the trend for all domains, though with slight variations in some areas.

23. 23 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the CELDT Listening portion of the assessment, though presence in the top two categories is greater in this domain relative to overall performance.

24. 24 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the CELDT Speaking portion of the assessment, though a larger proportion scored in the top two performance levels, relative to the overall and listening portions.

25. 25 N No Sped = 67896 Sped = 11918 Students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the CELDT Reading, and this tended to be the most challenging portion of the assessment for them.

26. 26 N No Sped = 66046 Sped = 11673 Students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the CELDT Writing, and this domain also appeared to be a challenge.

27. WHAT DOES CELDT MOVEMENT (OVERALL AND BY DOMAIN) LOOK LIKE FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN COMPARISON TO STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE A DISABILITY? Research Question #8 27

28. 28 PL Overall F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0300674 EI 1177771555 I 34631342570 EA 376900426 A 991610 Total 9385272522511435 Total % 8.246.145.7100.0 DisabilityB 0463315 EI 111300237 I 88267116 EA 21227 A 560 Total 22510586751958 Total % 11.554.034.5100.0 PL Overall G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 096353 EI 313451162 I 10921842640 EA 2971035482 A 1342150 Total 571387546379083 Total % 6.342.751.1100.0 DisabilityB 0272304 EI 69261291 I 64353143 EA 323412 A 550 Total 1709257501845 Total % 9.250.140.7100.0 PL Overall H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 02697 EI 20185407 I 12316961599 EA 3281169469 A 1642320 Total 635330825726515 Total % 9.750.839.5100.0 DisabilityB 0186154 EI 56253230 I 95407165 EA 416012 A 670 Total 1989135611672 Total % 11.854.633.6100.0 PL Overall I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01935 EI 20125216 I 11811781013 EA 3661152344 A 1772460 Total 681272016085009 Total % 13.654.332.1100.0 DisabilityB 0125113 EI 47194183 I 118371165 EA 4810321 A 650 Total 2197984821499 Total % 14.653.232.2100.0 Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students without disabilities on the CELDT Overall.

29. 29 PL Listening F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0150629 EI 1466241367 I 83717332322 EA 805736981 A 6724330 Total 24603676529911435 Total % 21.532.146.3100.0 DisabilityB 0184263 EI 119229255 I 218215185 EA 975957 A 200 Total 4917077601958 Total % 25.136.138.8100.0 PL Listening G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 045432 EI 463361402 I 27010871881 EA 573879631 A 9085930 Total 1797294043469083 Total % 19.832.447.8100.0 DisabilityB 0125217 EI 61223328 I 117212200 EA 1038950 A 91290 Total 3726787951845 Total % 20.236.743.1100.0 PL Listening H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01895 EI 29149613 I 18410041213 EA 655965570 A 6024180 Total 1470255424916515 Total % 22.639.238.2100.0 DisabilityB 087120 EI 61131254 I 125287188 EA 15210057 A 86240 Total 4246296191672 Total % 25.437.637.0100.0 PL Listening I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01548 EI 20110260 I 194720994 EA 572866354 A 5852710 Total 1371198216565009 Total % 27.439.633.1100.0 DisabilityB 06992 EI 38121149 I 147248224 EA 14213840 A 64270 Total 3916035051499 Total % 26.140.233.70.0 Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students without disabilities in the CELDT Listening domain.

30. 30 PL Speaking F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 096347 EI 313341045 I 37117382282 EA 9041208979 A 11659350 Total 24714311465311435 Total % 21.637.740.7100.0 DisabilityB 095150 EI 33151264 I 133365248 EA 14812863 A 117630 Total 4318027251958 Total % 22.041.037.0100.0 PL Speaking G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 022136 EI 28200736 I 17610952130 EA 58112061050 A 8348890 Total 1619341240529083 Total % 17.837.644.6100.0 DisabilityB 05682 EI 30135223 I 121347285 EA 14515299 A 110600 Total 4067506891845 Total % 22.040.737.3100.0 PL Speaking H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01345 EI 574384 I 1026771142 EA 5351218735 A 8667190 Total 1508270123066515 Total % 23.141.535.4100.0 DisabilityB 04455 EI 26102177 I 97267250 EA 16820785 A 123710 Total 4146915671672 Total % 24.841.333.9100.0 PL Speaking I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0524 EI 942183 I 101471838 EA 462859864 A 4666850 Total 1038206219095009 Total % 20.741.238.1100.0 DisabilityB 03943 EI 2183135 I 80242208 EA 160200124 A 86780 Total 3476425101499 Total % 23.142.834.00.0 Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students without disabilities in the CELDT Speaking domain.

31. 31 PL Reading F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 015981866 EI 3356111709 I 31128341339 EA 139236139 A 59720 Total 8445351505311248 Total % 7.547.644.9100.0 DisabilityB 01102319 EI 907080 I 5511340 EA 773 A 210 Total 15412934421889 Total % 8.268.423.4100.0 PL Reading G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 07781292 EI 2263211245 I 36723341639 EA 168306227 A 711090 Total 832384844039083 Total % 9.242.448.5100.0 DisabilityB 0896356 EI 12267113 I 7312567 EA 8114 A 110 Total 20411005401844 Total % 11.159.729.3100.0 PL Reading H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0351677 EI 144226744 I 32616051305 EA 203418270 A 711750 Total 744277529966515 Total % 11.442.646.0100.0 DisabilityB 0613403 EI 84105134 I 8013560 EA 20239 A 240 Total 1868806061672 Total % 11.152.636.2100.0 PL Reading I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0269342 EI 134286376 I 4441675739 EA 3581230233 A 1486260 Total 1084408616906860 Total % 15.859.624.6100.0 DisabilityB 0501267 EI 120148156 I 14021763 EA 415013 A 7220 Total 3089384991745 Total % 17.753.828.60.0 Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students without disabilities in the CELDT Reading domain. The gap between groups seems to widen further with this domain in particular.

32. 32 PL Writing F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 06451126 EI 1418481952 I 35828752017 EA 280459267 A 1491310 Total 9284958536211248 Total % 8.344.147.7100.0 DisabilityB 0813321 EI 72209194 I 4515561 EA 664 A 120 Total 12411855801889 Total % 6.662.730.7100.0 PL Writing G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0255617 EI 864961353 I 25422811919 EA 419584446 A 1771960 Total 936381243359083 Total % 10.342.047.7100.0 DisabilityB 0554371 EI 67203230 I 6421978 EA 221514 A 340 Total 1569956931844 Total % 8.554.037.6100.0 PL Writing H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 097226 EI 50371623 I 29117011316 EA 382631333 A 2452490 Total 968304924986515 Total % 14.946.838.3100.0 DisabilityB 0381238 EI 63270175 I 10426197 EA 35253 A 1370 Total 2159445131672 Total % 12.956.530.7100.0 PL Writing I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 045120 EI 36207555 I 16110531079 EA 279714283 A 2402370 Total 716225620375009 Total % 14.345.040.7100.0 DisabilityB 0237191 EI 57209272 I 65252111 EA 344810 A 1120 Total 1677485841499 Total % 11.149.939.00.0 Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students without disabilities in the CELDT Writing domain. In 2007 and 2008, students with disabilities tended to demonstrate less negative movement, but this may be due to floor effects.

33. HOW DO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES WHO HAVE NOT RECLASSIFIED DURING THE SEVEN YEAR STUDY PERIOD PERFORM ON THE CELDT IN RELATION TO THE CST ELA? Research Question #9 33

34. 34 CSTPLELA2007 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallFB 69.226.04.50.30.0100.0 EI 49.832.816.70.70.0100.0 I 32.540.020.05.81.7100.0 EA 10.030.020.0 100.0 A 0.0 100.00.0100.0 60% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2007 scored Basic or Below on the CST ELA that year.

35. 35 CSTPLELA2008 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallGB 70.517.14.83.44.1100.0 EI 57.135.17.10.00.6100.0 I 31.337.528.62.70.0100.0 EA 25.0 50.00.0 100.0 A 0.0 50.0 100.0 50% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced or Advanced on the CELDT in 2008 scored Basic or Below on the CST ELA that year.

36. 36 CSTPLELA2009 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallHB 40.239.212.74.83.2100.0 EI 23.531.625.414.35.1100.0 I 13.120.429.122.514.9100.0 EA 6.321.934.421.915.6100.0 A 0.014.328.642.914.3100.0 63% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2009 scored Basic or Below on the CST that year. 43% of students with disabilities who scored Advanced on the CELDT in 2009 scored Basic or Below on the CST that year.

37. 37 CSTPLELA2010 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallIB 8.152.524.26.19.1100.0 EI 4.548.633.611.41.8100.0 I 4.519.637.023.515.4100.0 EA 5.23.434.536.220.7100.0 A 0.012.550.025.012.5100.0 43% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2010 scored Basic or Below on the CST that year. 63% of students with disabilities who scored Advanced on the CELDT in 2010 scored Basic or Below on the CST that year.

38. 38 CSTPLELA2011 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallJB 42.229.714.110.93.1100.0 EI 28.138.424.16.92.5100.0 I 11.126.334.214.913.6100.0 EA 2.112.836.220.228.7100.0 A 0.0 55.622.2 100.0 51% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2011 scored Basic or Below on the CST that year. 56% of students with disabilities who scored Advanced on the CELDT in 2011 scored Basic or below on the CST that year.

39. Summary of Findings Among students with disabilities the RFEP rate was the highest for the students with speech or language impairments (46.2%) followed closely by students with orthopedic impairment (42.3%). When looking at the percent of students who reclassify within 7 years it was found that students with orthopedic impairments (42.3%) and speech or language impairments (46.2%) were more likely to reclassify than students with a specific learning disability (12.7%). If you compare RFEP rates for students with disabilities with students who do not have a disability it was found that the reclassification rate for students with disabilities was much lower (20%) than for student with no disabilities (55%). On average, students with disabilities took 6.7 years to reclassify relative to 5.98 years for students with no disabilities. For overall CELDT scores it was found that students with visual impairments and orthopedic impairments tended to earn the highest performance. Across all domains, students with visual impairment tended to earn the highest performance. The Reading and Writing domains tended to be the most difficult domains for all students with disabilities. 39

40. Summary of Findings cont. When comparing students with disabilities to those without it was found that students with disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater frequency than students who do not have a disability, on the CEDLT overall as well as within each domain. It was found that the Reading domain was the most difficult for students with disabilities. When comparing students with disabilities CELDT movement to those students without disabilities, it was found that students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and less positive movement from year-to- year relative to students without disabilities. This trend was seen throughout the domains, but the gap between the groups seemed to widen within the Reading domain. When looking at students with disabilities CST ELA and CELDT scores it was found that in 2011 students who scored Early Advanced (51%) or Advanced (56%) on CELDT scored Basic or below on the CST ELA. 40

41. 41

42. Questions? Shannon@keydatasys.com Lorie@keydatasys.com 42