1. ACCESS for ELLs® Interpreting the Results Developed by the WIDA Consortium

2. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 2 Overview Description of ACCESS for ELL® Scores-2007 Changes to Reporting for the 2007 Administration Use of Grade Level Cut Scores Score Reports: Description and Uses Q&A

3. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 3 ACCESS for ELLs® Overview Secure, large-scale test Anchored in WIDA’s ELP Standards Assesses academic language Three overlapping tiers for each grade level cluster  Tier A: Proficiency levels 1-3  Tier B: Proficiency levels 2-4  Tier C: Proficiency levels 3-5 One third of test items replaced annually Administered once per year as required by No Child Left Behind Indicator of student’s ability to perform on state content test

4. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 4 Tier Structure of ACCESS for ELLs® ENTERINGBEGINNINGDEVELOPINGEXPANDINGBRIDGING 12345 Tier A Tier B Tier C

5. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 5 Structure of ACCESS for ELLs® Grade Levels and Tiers K 1-2 3-5 6-8 9-12 Adaptive (no tiers) A B C 101 (roll-out Winter 2006) 102 (roll-out Winter 2007) 103 (roll-out Winter 2008) Listening —group administered, machine scored Reading —group administered, machine scored Speaking —individual administered, TA scored Writing —group administered, rater scored Domains Series

6. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 6 ACCESS for ELLs®: Types of Scores ACCESS for ELLs® Scores RawScale ELP Levels

7. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 7 ACCESS for ELLs® Scores Listening Speaking Reading Writing Composite Scores Oral Literacy Comprehension Overall

8. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 8 Composite Scores Oral Score Literacy Score Comprehension Score Overall Composite Score Listening (50%) Reading (50%) Listening (30%) Listening (15%) Speaking (50%) Writing (50%) Reading (70%) Reading (35%) Speaking (15%) Writing (35%) = = = = + + + +

9. Important Changes to Reporting for 2007 Administration

10. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 10 Scoring Caps Kindergarten form of ACCESS for ELLs® maximum overall English language proficiency level that a student taking the can receive is 3.7 Tier A or Tier B scores for the language domains of Listening and Reading (and the Comprehension composite) are capped. Students cannot receive an ELP level above 4.0 for Tier A and above 5.0 for Tier B.

11. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 11 Teacher Report Format Writing raw scores are presented by standard next to the maximum number of points for the given standard(s) and scoring category reported

12. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 12 Proficiency Grade Level Cut Scores Scale scores have not changed Cut scores have been adjusted to show progress by grade level rather than by cluster level for each language domain Changes in proficiency level cut scores from year to year now account for both maturational and language proficiency growth of English language learners

13. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 13 Composite Scores interpreted using Grade Vs Cluster Cut Scores

14. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 14 Use of Grade Level Cut Scores Provides a more precise measurement of ELLs’ annual progress in English language proficiency Eases the creation of a trajectory of estimated student growth, in any one or combination of language domains, from year to year Facilitates articulation from grade to grade, and teacher to teacher, of the status of ELLs Helps in the calculation of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs). States with at least three consecutive years of data have trend data.

15. ACCESS for ELLs® Reports- 2007

16. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 16 Considerations on the use of ACCESS for ELLs ® Reports 1. Target certain reports to specific stakeholders 2. Offer Professional Development on how to understand and use the information on the reports 3. Consider summarizing or consolidating the suggestions for using the information from each score report according to target audience 4. Look at different configurations of data in the reports for individual and group placement or to develop a plan for organizing services for English Language Learners for the coming school year 5. Archive copies of the interpretive guide along with copies of the score reports so that new personnel for the 2007-08 academic year can become acclimated with data from ACCESS for ELLs®

17. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 17 Score Reports Available Score ReportAudience or StakeholderTypes of Information 1. Parent/ Guardian  Students  Parents/ Guardians  Teachers  School Teams Proficiency levels for each language domain Overall Score Comprehension Available in multiple languages on the WIDA website 2. Teacher  Teachers  Administrators  School Teams Individual student’s scale scores and language proficiency levels for each language domain, and four composites Raw scores for Comprehension Tasks, Speaking, and Writing Tasks by English language proficiency standard 3. Student Roster  Teachers  Program Coordinators/ Directors  Administrators Scale scores and language proficiency levels for each language domain and four composites by school, grade, student, Tier, and grade level cluster 4. School Frequency  Program Coordinators/ Directors  Administrators Number of students and percent of total tested at each proficiency level for each language domain and four composites within a school 5. District Frequency  Program Coordinators/ Directors  Administrators  Boards of Education Number of students and percent of total tested at each proficiency level for each language domain and four composites by proficiency levels for grades within a district

18. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 18 Parent Report Student’s parent or guardian gets the report Provided in English and 18 additional languages (visit www.wida.us) www.wida.us A letter to accompany the report in parents’ primary language is suggested Other stakeholders – student, teachers, school teams

19. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 19 Demographic Information About the Student Description of the ELP Levels Student’s ELP Level by Domain Comprehension Score Overall Score

20. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 20 Teacher Report Teachers and other stakeholders, such as administrators, have access to this report The Overall Score summarizes student’s global language proficiency and allows examination of strengths and weakness by domain Individual report components offer a starting point for informing the areas of curriculum, instruction and assessment of ELL’s. Suggestions for the differentiation across levels of language proficiency can be found in the strands of the model performance indicators Rubrics in Interpretative Guide –Writing and Speaking –scaffold across levels of language proficiency and may be used in classroom instruction and assessment throughout the year

21. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 21 Demographic Information About the Student Description of the ELP Levels Student’s ELP Level by Domain Student’s Composite Scores Student’s Scale Score by Domain Student’s Scale Composite Scores Student’s Comprehension by Standard Student’s Speaking Performance by Standard Student’s Writing Performance by Standard

22. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 22 Communication of Data from the Report No single score or language proficiency level should be used as the sole criteria for making decisions regarding a student’s English language proficiency. Sharing student information from score reports is encouraged for all educators who work with English language learners. Data in the reports need to be contextualized to be meaningful; include both historical and demographic information on the students when presenting the results. When disseminating information on the students’ productive language, refer to criteria in the speaking and writing rubrics. CAN DO Descriptors may help further explain student expectations at each level of English language proficiency.

23. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 23 Each language domain has its own scale; one cannot compare scale scores across Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. Proficiency Levels (as scale score interpretations) may be used to make comparisons between independent or combinations of language domains. Scale scores for Oral Language, Literacy, Comprehension, and the Overall Score are weighted. Reading and Writing (Literacy) are emphasized over Listening and Speaking (Oral Language) to reflect the stress of these domains stressed in instruction and assessment. Comprehension Tasks, Speaking Tasks, and Writing Tasks is based on a small number of tasks and the results should not be generalized. Model performance indicators associated with the ELP standards of the specific grade level cluster as well as additional student work samples may be helpful in targeting instruction and classroom assessment. A student’s progress or growth in English language proficiency can only be determined when two consecutive years of data are available. Three years of data can help project a trend.

24. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 24 Student Roster Report Audience includes Teachers, Program Coordinators, and Administrators District administrators may examine scores from each language domain within a Tier and grade level cluster to detect any patterns. To what extent are there differences in student performance between the language domains and are these differences attributed to second language development or delivery of instructional services? Development of school and district improvement plans for ELL’s A starting point for grouping students for support services according to their Overall Score or by their profiles according to language domains (ex: homogeneous groupings for reading in elementary schools).

25. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 25 Student Roster Report Scale Score and ELP Level by Domain Scale Score and ELP Level by Composite: Oral Language, Literacy, Comprehension and Overall Cluster Tier

26. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 26 School Frequency Report Indicates number of students and percent of total tested for language domains (including range of scaled scores). Comprehension, Oral Language, and Literacy by proficiency levels for grade levels within a school Results should not be generalized and needs to be contextualized in order to provide meaningful information on curricular, instructional or assessment decisions School Frequency Reports for two consecutive years provide cross-sectional data In communicating results of this report, use both the numbers and their corresponding percents. If numbers are low, the percent may appear distorted if shown in isolation Use the information contained in the report to gain a sense of the school-wide effort in educating English language learners

27. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 27 Highest & Lowest Scores Total Tested Number of Students Tested who scored at each ELP level by Domain and Composite % of Total Students Tested who scored at each ELP level by Domain and Composite

28. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 28 District Frequency Report Audience includes Program Coordinators, Boards of Education, and Administrators Indicates number of students and percent of total tested for language domains (including the range of scale scores), Comprehension, Oral Language, and Literacy by proficiency levels for grade levels within a district. Data can be graphically displayed in various forms Information will be useful in planning, designing, or restructuring program services. Based on an individual state’s criteria for “attainment” of English language proficiency and its definition of cohort groups this report may serve as a district’s estimate of the number and/or percent of students who have met that criterion for Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAO’s).

29. Interpreting ACCESS for ELLs® Scores 29 Highest & Lowest Scores Total Tested Number of Students Tested who scored at each ELP level by Domain and Composite % of Total Students Tested who scored at each ELP level by Domain and Composite

30. For more information, please contact the WIDA Hotline: 1-866-276-7735 or www.wida.us/helpformwww.wida.us/helpform World Class Instructional Design and Assessment, www.wida.us Center for Applied Linguistics, www.cal.org Metritech, Inc., www.metritech.com Questions or Comments?