Seattle Public School ELL Data
description
Transcript of Seattle Public School ELL Data
1
Seattle Public School ELL Data
Veronica Maria Gallardo, Director of ELL
2
Identification and Progress Monitoring for English Language Learners Placement Test
Given to students who indicating that they speak a language other than English at home on the Home Language Survey
Annual Proficiency Exam Determines if a student is still eligible to receive services and
amount of growth in English language proficiency
Both Tests Measure student’s abilities in reading, writing, listening, and
speaking in English Identify a level of English proficiency
Level 1 – Beginning Level 2 – Intermediate Level 3 – Advanced Level 4 – Transitional (English proficient)
3
District Funding to Support English Language Learners (2011-12 School Year) State’s Transitional Bilingual Instructional
Program funds Provides $886 per student Total: $ 4.819 million
Title III English Language Learner Funds Total: $ 1.04 million
Title 1 Part C Migrant Funds Total: $ 105,641
Refugee Impact Grant School’s Out Washington oversees funds Total: $ 30,000
4
Purpose of ELL Data Analysis Understand who make up the English Language
Learner (ELL) population in Seattle;
Identify their current level of performance on a range of academic indicators: District and State Content Assessments Washington English Language Proficiency Assessment
(WELPA) Identify any schools with good outcomes for ELLs
and those really struggling to serve students
Determine which indicators are useful in determining success of ELL students for the purpose of monitoring success of Levy investments
5
ELL Demographics Data
2012-2013
6
K 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 120
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000948
832
749
566
494
405
314 318292
399
306279
350
Total Seattle ELL Enrollment by Grade
Based on 2012-2013 SY Current
61 % of K-5 ELL Student in El-ementary
16 % in Mid-dle 22 % in High School
7
K 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 SPS0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
19.3% 19.6%
16.0%
12.8%12.0%
10.9%10.3% 10.1%
9.5%10.8% 10.4%
9.7%
11.4%12.6%
English Language Learners as a Percent of
All Students by GradeBased on 2012-2013 SY
8
Spanis
h
Vietna
meseSom
ali
Chine
se
Tagalo
g
Amha
ric
Tigrin
ya (T
igrign
a)
Oromo (
Ethiop
ia)
Cambo
dian
Other
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
74% of ELL student speak one of the top
six languages.105 Other Lan-
guages Spoken by ELL Students
Top Languages Spoken in Seattle School District
2012-2013
9
0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 Greter than 5 years
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Number of Current ELL Students by Years in Program
2012-2013 SYN=5773 students
Long Term ELLs
10
ELLs Receiving Special Education Services
4720; 82%
1053; 18%
18% of ELL Students are also in Spe-cial Educa-tion N = 5773
11
ELLs Demographic Data Not Captured Current data collection does not include:
Student’s level of education in native country
Student’s native language proficiency
Student’s proficiency in content areas such as math
Student with interrupted formal education (SIFE)
Social, emotional, and health needs of students
12
Seattle ELL Performance Data
Note: Data from, WLPT 2012 etc.
13
ELL Performance DataFederal Performance Measures
Seattle Public School Performance Measure
Three Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Percent of ELLs making English
language proficiency gains
Percent of students who transition out of program
Percent of students meeting standard on state’s content assessment
Measurement of Student Progress (two times a year) Percent of ELLs
meeting or exceeding typical growth in the 12 Level 1 elementary schools (~21% of ELLs) Target: 65% of ELLs Actual (Dec.-Feb.):
61% of ELLs
14
Percent of English Language Learners Making Gains in English Proficiency
2011-2012 SY
992; 25%
2933; 75%
Seattle Public Schools
Students with no gainStudents making gains
1691626%
4814774%
Washington State Total
Students with no gainStudents making gains
Year 2010-2011
3139 78.7%
848 21.3%1158 32%
2460 68%
Year 2009-2010
15
Percent of Elementary School ELL Students Making Gains in English Language Proficiency 2011-12 SY
Northg
ate
Saca
jawea
John S
tanfor
d
Roxhil
l
Jane A
ddam
s K-8
Sand
Point
Adams
Kimba
ll
Bailey
Gatzert
Thurg
ood M
arsha
ll
Frantz
Coe
Dunlap
Broadv
iew-Th
omso
n
Hawtho
rne
Arbor H
eights
Emers
on
Olympic
View
Maple
West S
eattle
John M
uir
Beaco
n Hill
South
Shore
K-8
Dearbo
rn Pa
rk
Olympic
Hills
Wing Lu
ke
B F Day
Tops
K-8
Bryant
Graham
Hill
Conco
rd
Steve
ns
Rainier
View Alki
Martin
Luthe
r King
Jr
Van Asse
lt
Lesch
i
Gatewoo
d
Sanis
lo
Highlan
d Park
Viewlan
ds
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0% 67.2% Target
16
Percent of Middle School ELL Students Making Gains in English Language Proficiency 2011-12 SY
David
T Den
ny In
terna
tiona
l Scho
ol
McClur
e Midd
le Scho
ol
Whitman
Middle S
chool
Mercer
Middle
Schoo
l
Hamilto
n Inter
natio
nal M
iddle
Schoo
l
Eckste
in Midd
le Sch
ool
Madiso
n Midd
le Sch
ool
Washing
ton Midd
le Sch
ool
Aki K
urose
Middle
Schoo
l0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0% 67.2% Target
17
Percent and Number of High School ELLs Making Gains on Language Proficiency 2011-2012 SY
Nathan
Hale High
Scho
ol
Roose
velt H
igh Sc
hool
Ballar
d High
Scho
ol
Raini
er Bea
ch High
Scho
ol
Garfield
High Sc
hool
Ingrah
am High
Scho
ol
Frank
lin High
Scho
ol
Cleve
land H
igh Sc
hool
Chief
Sealt
h High
Scho
ol
West Se
attle H
igh Sc
hool
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0% 67.2% Target
18
Percent of ELL Students Exiting in the ELL Program in 2011-12 SY
Elementary School Middle School High School Seattle District0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
10.7%
13.6%
9.3%
10.9%
Target 7.1%
19
Meeting Standard on the 2011-12 School Year Math, Reading & Writing State Assessment (MSP-HSPE)
Reading Math Writing0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
26.0%
31.3%
36.9%
78.4%
71.2%
78.0%
Bilingual Students NON-Bilingual Students
20
English Language Learners Meeting Math and Reading Standards by Grade Levels, Year 2011-2012 (MSP-HSPE)
District Reading State Reading District Math State Math0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%03 04 10
21
Reading MAP Spring 2012
Region South East Central North East North West West Middle Schools High Schools
Students tested 1319 327 226 307 556 759 422
Met Standard 688 164 107 143 234 486 293
% Meeting Standard 52% 50% 47% 47% 42% 64% 69%Met Standard By Grade Spam
K to 1 253 54% 55 49% 37 42% 36 38% 41 28%
2 to 3 221 44% 57 49% 39 44% 55 45% 96 46%
4 to 5 203 60% 52 53% 31 65% 52 58% 86 54%
6 to 8 486 64%
9 to 12 293 69%
Math MAP Spring 2012
Region South East Central North East North West West Middle Schools High Schools
Students tested 1291 327 227 304 551 752 373
Met Standard 707 178 115 162 261 480 256
% Meeting Standard 55% 54% 51% 53% 47% 64% 69%Met Standard By Grade Spam
K to 1 223 49% 57 51% 39 43% 41 43% 56 31%
2 to 3 272 55% 59 51% 45 51% 60 50% 112 54%
4 to 5 212 63% 62 62% 31 63% 61 69% 93 58%
6 to 8 480 64%
9 to 12 256 69%
English Language Learners Results in Reading and Math on the Spring MAP by Grade Spam and Cluster. Year 2011-2012
22
Next Steps
Considerations for Next Steps
23
Current Work Common Core – Sharing major shifts in new standards
Tiered Service Model – Prioritize ELL services in 64 schools, Tier 1, 2 and 3
Roles and Responsibilities – SPS/SEA collaboration to identify roles and responsibilities for IA’s, ELL and regular education teachers, ELL coaches and principals
Communication Tools via Electronic Binder – shared with all ELL staff and school administrators
Assessment and Data Reports – MAP, ESIS, WELPA and MSP
ELL Retreat – 2 ELL teachers and 2 IA’s per region, coaches, 1 person per department. Goal is to create strategic initiatives that align with the district strategic plan
24
ELL Feedback/Survey Based on the student data and information shared
today, what do you believe is working for our ELL students?
What do you recommend we modify or change to better serve our ELL students?
How can the ELL Department partner more effectively with the our community and parents in general?
What are three goals you would like the ELL department to work on this academic year? (based on student data)