Title III District Improvement Plan Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 1

Transcription

1 Title III District Improvement Plan Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 1

2 Title III District Improvement Plan Title III, Sec (b) (2) If a State educational agency determines, based on the annual measurable achievement objectives described in subsection (a), that an eligible entity has failed to make progress toward meeting such objectives for 2 consecutive years, the agency shall require the entity to develop an improvement plan that will ensure that the entity meets such objectives. The improvement plan shall specifically address the factors that prevented the entity from achieving such objectives. Directions: Address the topic matter requested for each cell in the outline. How does this information support your District s ELL Plan, and site where this data is located in your ELL Plan. An additional narrative description may be included, but is not required for submission. 1. Identify and describe the factors that prevented the District from achieving the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) AMAO 1 & 2 In order to determine if Orange County English Language Learners (ELLs) are meeting the newly-established Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) under Title III, Part A, the Title III Progress Monitoring Consultant conducted an analysis of state summary data provided by the district for the fall 2006, spring 2007, and spring 2008 CELLA results. For the analysis, average scores were used to determine growth attained by ELLs in each domain (listening/speaking, reading, and writing) at each one of the three school levels: Elementary (grades k through 5), Middle (grades 6 through 8), and High (grades 9 through 12). Anchor points outlined in the 2006 CELLA Interpretive Guide were used to determine progress made by ELLs in each domain. AMAO 1 determines student progress in English language proficiency, AMAO 2 determines student proficiency, and AMAO 3 determines if ELLs are meeting the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) targets in Reading and Math. Based on NCLB, a district must make each AMAO target at the end of each fiscal year. If a district does not meet each target, they must comply with the established U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) requirements to continue to receive Title III funding. Overall, results from the May 2008 administration show that students at the elementary level were able to increase their scores in all four domains, demonstrating a 3.6% increase in listening/speaking, a 9% increase in reading, and a 4.9% in writing over the fall 2006 CELLA baseline data. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 2

3 A composite score shows that on average, students at the elementary level increased their scores by 5.8%. Therefore, Objective 1.1 was met since at the end of the academic school year; there was at least a 5% increase in English language acquisition over the baseline data established at the beginning of FY with the CELLA test. Overall, may 2008 results show that students at the middle school level were able to increase their scores in all four language skills, demonstrating a 2.4% increase in listening/speaking, a 1.4% increase in reading, and a 1.5% in writing over the 2006 baseline data. A composite score indicates that on average, students increased their scores by 1.8% from the baseline data established in the beginning of FY Therefore, the objective was not met. A thorough review will be conducted to determine the cause for not meeting the expected gains for the middle school students. Overall, students at the high school level were able to increase their scores in all four language skills, demonstrating a 2.9% increase in listening/speaking, a 0.7% increase in reading, and a 1% in writing over the baseline data established in 2006 for an average of 1.6%. A comparison of 2006 and 2008 scores shows that the objective was not met. A thorough review will be conducted to determine the cause for not meeting the expected gains for the high school students. The overall data analysis for K-12 CELLA average scale scores for students demonstrated a significant increase in their language proficiency as demonstrated by the 2008 CELLA scores in listening, speaking, reading, and writing, reaching a 3.1% increase in English language acquisition over the 2006 baseline data. Based on state calculations, the percentage of ELLs K-12 from OCPS making gains in each of the CELLA domains (listening/speaking, reading, and writing), surpassed the proposed targets set to meet AMAO 1 in In addition, OCPS ELLs met the AMAO 2 targets since the percentage of students in each grade cluster (k-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-12) who scored proficient in all of the CELLA domains surpassed the proposed targets for FY Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 3

4 AMAO 3 FCAT Reading Results: Elementary School Level In order to determine if there was a statistically significant reduction of at least 4% on the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 on the FCAT Reading at the elementary level, an analysis of students scoring at level 1 was made from 2005 to The following table shows the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 in grades 3 through 5: Table 1: Percentage of Elementary School Students Scoring at Level 1 on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade % 34% 46% % 37% 36% % 38% 28% % 34% 36% Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ) Florida Department of Education From 2005 to 2008 the percentage of third and fifth graders scoring at Level 1 decreased by five and ten percentage points respectively. It is important to know that although the percentage of fourth grade ELLs scoring at Level 1 decreased by four points between 2007 to 2008, they remained at the same level as in Therefore, special attention must be provided to these students to improve their academic skills in reading. Another area of concern is the fact that in 2008 the percentage of fifth graders scoring at Level 1 increased by eight percentage points as compared to Therefore, these students need additional assistance with linguistic modifications by teachers in reading and math classes to ensure that their language proficiency increases at the same pace as those of their peers. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 4

5 Taking into account average scores from 2005 and 2008 of all participating ELLs in the elementary grades, there was a reduction of 5% (from 38% to 33%) on the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 on FCAT reading. Therefore, the objective was met. Middle School Level In order to determine if there was a statistically significant reduction of at least 4% on the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 on the FCAT Reading at the middle school level, an analysis of students scoring at Level 1 was made for The following table shows the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 in grades 6 through 8: Table 2: Percentage of Middle School Students Scoring at Level 1 on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Sixth Grade Seventh Grade Eighth Grade % 58% 64% % 46% 58% % 43% 48% % 39% 36% Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ) Florida Department of Education The percentage of sixth, seventh and eighth graders scoring at Level 1 decreased significantly from 2005 to 2008: at grade 6, the percentage of ELLs at Level 1 decreased by 14 percentage points, at grade 7, by 19 percentage points and at grade 8, by 28 percentage points. It is important to note that from 2007 to 2008, the percentage of sixth graders scoring at Level 1 remained the same. Seventh graders showed an improvement of four percentage points. The highest improvements were obtained by eighth graders with a decrease of twelve percentage points in the number of students scoring at Level 1. Average scores from 2005 and 2008 of all ELLs from middle school reflect a significant reduction in the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 in reading, from an average of 59% to 39%. Therefore, at the middle school level, the objective was met since ELLs scores on average indicate a statistically significant reduction of more than 4% in the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 on the FCAT reading. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 5

6 High School Level In order to determine if there was a statistically significant reduction of at least 4% on the number of ELLs scoring at Level 1 on the FCAT Reading at the high school level, an analysis of students scoring at Level 1 was made from 2005 to The following table shows the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 in grades 9 through 10: Table 3: Percentage of High School Students Scoring at Level 1 on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Ninth Grade Tenth Grade % 84% % 81% % 80% % 80% Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education The percentage of ninth and tenth graders scoring at Level 1 diminished significantly from 2005 to At the ninth grade level, it decreased by 15 percentage points (from 75% to 60%) and at the tenth grade level by four percentage points (from 84% to 80%). In 2008, ninth graders were able to show some gains, reducing the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 by three percentage points. However, a comparison of 2007 and 2008 scores shows that at the tenth grade level, students did not experience any gains. Special attention must be provided to these students to improve their academic achievement in reading. A comparison of average scores from 2005 and 2008 shows for high school ELL students there was an average reduction of ten percentage points in the number of ELL students scoring at Level 1 in reading. Overall, at the high school level, ELL students showed on average a statistically significant reduction of more than 4% in the number of ELL students scoring at Level 1 on the FCAT reading from 2005 and Therefore, the objective was met. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 6

7 AYP Performance Objective: Using AYP data from FY , the percentage of ELL students reading below grade level will show a 3% overall improvement in reading as measured by FCAT. It is expected that individual students show at least 3% improvement from the previous FCAT Reading scores. Elementary School Level Based on the FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), the percentage of ELL students in grades 3-5 scoring at Level 3 or higher on the FCAT Reading was as follows: Table 4: Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 3 or Higher on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade % 46% 33% % 42% 42% % 44% 49% % + 48% + 42% - Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education A comparison of scores from 2005 to 2008 shows that the number of ELL students scoring at Level 3 or above increased in grades 3 and 5 by seven and nine percentage points respectively. Although from 2006 to 2007, the percentage of ELL students at the third grade level who attained Level 3 or above decreased by five percentage points, by 2008 they were able to increase their scores by three percentage points. Fourth graders were able to improve their scores by 2008, on average, 48% were able to attain Level 3 or above on the FCAT Reading. At the fifth grade level, in 2007, 49% reached Level 3 or above, an increase of seven percentage points from 2006 levels. However, in 2008, only 42% reached this level, a decrease of seven percentage points. Therefore, special attention must be provided to these students to improve their academic achievement in reading. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 7

8 Overall, at the elementary level, between 2005 and 2008 ELL students showed an increase of 14.2% in reading. These figures show that the objective was met since there was a significant increase on the number of ELL students reading at or above grade level and meeting Sunshine State Standards as demonstrated on the FCAT Reading test. Middle School Level Based on the FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), the percentage of ELL students in grades 6-8 scoring at Level 3 or higher on the FCAT Reading was as follows: Table 5: Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Level 3 or Higher on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Sixth Grade Seventh Grade Eighth Grade % 20% 10% % 26% 14% % 30% 16% % 34% + 17% + Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education A comparison of FCAT Reading from 2005 to 2008 scores shows that the number of ELL students scoring at Level 3 or above increased their average scores in grades 6 through 8 above the proposed 3%: At the sixth grade level, the number of ELL students scoring at or above grade level increased by 12 percentage points. At the seventh grade level, the number of ELL students scoring at or above grade level increased by 14 percentage points. At the eighth grade level, the number of ELL students scoring at or above grade level increased by 7 percentage points. It is important to point out that based on FCAT scores from 2007 to 2008, sixth graders did not experience any gains in reading, while eighth graders only increased their scores by one percentage point. The highest gains were achieved by seventh graders. Special assistance has been provided to students who did not improve their reading scores in a one-year span, in this case the sixth and eighth graders, as recommended by the Title III Progress Monitoring Consultant. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 8

9 Based on these outcomes, when comparing 2005 to 2008 scores on the FCAT Reading, the objective was met by middle school students since they demonstrated an increase of 11 percentage points in reading. These results show that there was a significant increase in the number of ELL students reading at or above grade level and meeting Sunshine State Standards as demonstrated on the FCAT Reading test. High School Level Based on the FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), the percentage of ELL students in grades 9/10 scoring at level 3 or higher on the FCAT Reading was as follows: Table 6: Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 3 or Higher on FCAT Reading ( ) Academic Year Ninth Grade Tenth Grade % 3% % 4% % 5% % + 4% - Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education A comparison of 2005 to 2008 scores show that the number of ELLs scoring at Level 3 or above increased by three percentage points at the ninth grade level. However, tenth graders experienced a decrease of one percentage point from 2007 to This is an area of concern since these students need to pass the FCAT in order to graduate from high school. Overall, at the high school level, from 2005 to 2008 the percentage of ELLs scoring at Level 3 and above increased from 5% to 7%, which represents a 40% rate of improvement. Therefore, the objective was met since there was a significant increase on the number of ELLs reading at or above grade level and meeting Sunshine State Standards as demonstrated on the FCAT Reading test. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 9

10 A comparison of average results for ELLs on the FCAT Reading in Orange County vs. the Florida ELL population shows that (except at the tenth grade level) ELLs in OCPS outperformed their peer s statewide. Table 7 below summarizes these findings. Table 7: State Comparison of 2008 FCAT Reading Results: Percentage of English Language Learners Scoring at Level 3 and Above Grade Level Orange State Third Grade 54% 44% Fourth Grade 48% 36% Fifth Grade 42% 32% Sixth Grade 33% 23% Seventh Grade 34% 22% Eighth Grade 17% 10% Ninth Grade 10% 7% Tenth Grade 4% 5% ELL Students on the FCAT Reading in Orange County vs. the Florida ELL Student Population Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 10

11 FCAT Writing Results The results on the FCAT Writing assessment during FY were analyzed for ELLs enrolled in OCPS and statewide at grades 4, 8, and 10. The following table shows the percentage that attained level 3 and higher: FCAT Writing Table 8: Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 3 or Above on FCAT Writing ( ) OCPS ELL Students Levels 3 and Above State ELL Students Levels 3 and Above Grade 4 44% 42% Grade 8 17% 14% Grade 10 14% 12% Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education In FY , at the fourth grade level, on average, a high proportion of ELLs scored at or above 3.0 on the FCAT Writing, two percentage points higher than ELLs statewide. At the eighth grade level, 17% scored at Level 3 and above, three percentage points higher than their counterparts statewide. At grade 10, the number of ELLs scoring 3 or above reached 14%, two percentage points higher than their counterparts statewide. These findings demonstrate that Goal 2, Indicator 2.4 was attained by having English language learners participate in appropriate services and assessment consistent with high standards. Longitudinal Analysis The Annual Measurable Assessment Objectives (AMAO) established in Florida in 2006 indicates an annual growth rate of 5% in the number of students attaining proficiency. An analysis of OCPS results for ELLs indicate that these students have demonstrated higher levels of proficiency in a five year-span than the projected annual growth. Based on the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reports, from to , the percentage of ELLs scoring at or above grade level in Reading increased from 4% to 43% (See Figure 1 on the next page): Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 11

12 Figure 1: Reading Results: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for LY (ELL Students) FCAT Reading Results for LEP Students % 13% 6% 4% 43% 40% 33% 26% -10% 10% 30% 50% 70% Source: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reports: Florida Department of Education, However, in spite of all improvements achieved, ELLs in OCPS were not able to meet the state established target for AMAO 3, which requires that at least 58% of this subgroup obtain proficiency in reading based on AYP data. Figure 2 below provides the expectations set for Florida students for AYP. Figure 2: Florida Annual Objectives for Reading to Florida AYP for Reading Expected Percent of Proficiency % 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% % 100% 86% 79% 72% 65% 58% 51% 44% 37% 31% 31% 31% Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 12

13 Figure 3 on the trajectory for ELLs clearly indicates that these students have made very little progress to meet the expectations set by the State of Florida for achieving proficiency for all students by the year Figure 3: Florida Annual Objectives for Reading Trajectory for ELL Students 120 AYP Trajectory for Reading ELL Students Target Trajectory Actual Source: Trajectory for ELL Students (Reading) , Florida Department of Education An analysis of the AYP Reports ( ) demonstrates that ELLs in OCPS have made outstanding progress in narrowing the achievement gap among subgroups of the total OCPS student population. In order to track improvement in closing the achievement gap, AYP results on FCAT Reading of all groups vs. the ELL subgroup were compared. Figure 4 on the next page shows that the achievement gap between ELLs and non-ells has decreased from 35 percentage points to 16 percentage points. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 13

14 Figure 4: FCAT Reading Results: FY AYP Results: A Comparison of All OCPS Students vs. LEP Students 70% 60% 59% 56% 50% 52% 55% 48% 49% 43% 40% 38% 40% 30% 27% 25% 20% 13% 10% 0% OCPS (ALL) OCPS (ELL) Source: Projection of AYP Results (Reading) , Florida Department of Education A comparison of OCPS results with other districts of similar student population shows that during FY , OCPS ELLs attained higher gains than their counterparts as demonstrated on Figure 5 that appears on the next page. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 14

15 Figure 5: 2008 FCAT Reading Results: A Comparison of ELL Students Average Scores with Similar School Districts FCAT Reading Level 3 and Above by LEP Students: A Comparison with Similar Size Districts and Neighboring School Districts Seminole Palm Beach Osceola Orange Hillsborough Duval Dade Broward 37% 36% 30% 43% 36% 33% 40% 36% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Trajectory for ELL Students (Reading) , Florida Department of Education These findings show that on average, ELLs at OCPS are outperforming their counterparts in districts of similar size and population. FCAT Math Results An analysis of results attained by ELLs on the FCAT Math indicates that these students have demonstrated higher levels of proficiency in a five year-span than the projected annual growth. Based on the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reports, from 2003 to 2008, the percentage of ELLs scoring at or above grade level in math increased from 21% to 48%. See Figure 6 on the next page. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 15

16 Figure 6: Math Results: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for English Language Learners ( ) FCAT Math Results: A Comparison of Scores Attained by LEP Students 2002 to % 50% 40% 30% 20% 21% 31% 32% 38% 44% 48% 10% 0% Source: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reports ( ), Florida Department of Education At the end of FY , the percentage of ELLs scoring at performance Level 3 or above on FCAT Math increased by 4 percentage points from the baseline data established in FY Although ELLs in OCPS demonstrated a greater increase in math, the district was not able to meet the state established target for AMAO 3 (AYP), which requires at least 62% of this subgroup reaching proficiency in math. Table 9 shows the targets set by the State for ELL students in Florida. A summary of these targets appears on the next page. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 16

17 Table 9: Florida Established Targets for AMAO 3 ( ) % % % % % % % % % % % % % Source: Florida Department of Education An analysis of the AYP Reports ( ) also demonstrates that ELLs in OCPS have made outstanding progress in narrowing the achievement gap in Math. Figure 5 on the next page shows how the achievement gap is closing among all OCPS students and ELLs: from 30 to 16 percentage points: Figure 7: FCAT Math Results: FY % 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% FCAT Math Results: A Comparison of All OCPS Students vs. LEP Students FY to FY % 21% % 57% 59% 61% 31% 32% % % 44% 48% OCPS (ALL) OCPS (ELL) Source: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reports ( ), Florida Department of Education Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 17

18 An analysis of statewide FCAT results shows that OCPS ELLs performed at a higher level than their counterparts statewide in grades 3 through 9 as demonstrated on Table 10 below. FCAT Math Table 10: Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 3 or Above on FCAT Math OCPS ELL Students Source: FCAT Student Performance Results ( ), Florida Department of Education The outcomes demonstrate that the percentage of ELLs scoring at performance Level 3 or above on FCAT Math were higher than their counterparts statewide at all grade levels with the exception of the 10 th grade. State ELL Students Grade 3 57% 55% Grade 4 51% 45% Grade 5 37% 33% Grade 6 23% 19% Grade 7 33% 28% Grade 8 35% 29% Grade 9 31% 28% Grade 10 30% 34% FACTORS PREVENTING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM ACHIEVING ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES As demonstrated by the analysis of the progress monitoring data, OCPS has met AMAO 1 for language acquisition growth and AMAO 2 for second language proficiency attainment in English. In spite of the outstanding progress of ELLs in OCPS for reading and math, the students have not been able to meet the targets set by the State for ELLs in these two areas. There is a misconception that all ELLs will progress at the same pace and be ready to exit the program in three years or less. However, since these students are not alike, it is not surprising that their school performances differ significantly. Researchers, Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 18

19 including Olsen and Jaramillo (1999) and Ruiz de Velasco et al. (2000), have identified three types of ELLs: long-term English learners, recent arrivals with limited or interrupted formal schooling, and recent arrivals with adequate schooling. These three groups of students are all classified as limited English proficient; however, the literacy skills and the academic content knowledge they bring to their classes differ considerably. It is important for teachers to recognize the differing needs of their English language learners so that they can instruct them effectively and begin to help close the achievement gap between non ELLs and ELLs. In addition, there is a significant difference between the language these students acquire in social interaction and the language they need to succeed academically. Experts such as Jim Cummins differentiate between social and Academic Language Acquisition. Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) are language skills needed in social situations. Cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) refers to formal academic learning. This includes listening, speaking, reading, and writing about subject area content material. This level of language learning is essential for students to succeed in school. Students need time and support to become proficient in academic areas. According to Cummins, ELLs generally develop conversational fluency (BICS) within two years of studying a second language; whereas, developing fluency in more technical, grade-appropriate academic language (CALP) can take from five to seven years depending on the student s age and level of native language literacy. Failure to understand the distinction between these two types of language proficiency can lead to false assumptions about a student s language ability (Cummins, 1984). For example, ELLs may be exited prematurely from direct English instructional programs because they appear fluent in conversational English; however, they lack the necessary academic language and reading and writing skills to succeed in mainstream content classes. Several more years of direct English instruction are required before the students are fluent in all four skill areas (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) necessary for academic success. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 19

20 Educational activities to improve English proficiency and academic achievement Personnel Responsible Timeline Funding Source 2. Describe scientifically based research strategies to improve English-language proficiency (AMAOs 1 and 2- CELLA) As documented in Section 1, OCPS has met AMAO 1 and AMAO 2. The school district will continue to offer supplementary Title III research-based training in second language acquisition and learning in a second language to maintain the attainment track for AMAO 1 and AMAO 2. The school district offers the ESOL training required by the META Consent Decree for all educators three times during the school year (Fall-Winter/Spring-Summer). A total of 90 training sessions are offered throughout the school year. In January 2009 all ESOL Endorsement classes will also be offered on-line by CaseNex. Tomasita Ortiz 9/2008 TO 6/2009 District & Title III Supplementary Funds The school district will continue to train ESOL teachers and administrators in implementing exemplary practices for content-based ESOL to achieve a balanced curriculum that reflects the research based Prism Model to ensure attainment of language skills tested on CELLA and to achieve AMAO 1 and AMAO 2. The model has four non-negotiable components: 1. Language Development Component 2. Academic Development Component 3. Cognitive Development Component 4. Social/Cultural Processes Component 3. Describe scientifically based research strategies to improve academic achievement in reading/language arts. (AMAO 3- FCAT) In the year 2001 the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act became the educational law of our national for all students. Title III under the Act, delineates the performance expectations for ELLs. In 2001, the Superintendent requested that a review of the research providing evidence of well implemented instructional programs proven to narrow the achievement gap for ELLs be conducted by the Multilingual Student Education Services Department. A review was done of longitudinal research in the educational field of second language acquisition and learning. Tomasita Ortiz Implemented Strategies described in this section (pages 21-23). 8/2008 TO 6/2009 District & Title III Supplementary Funds To ensure that our ELLs are provided the tools and resources to meet the mandates of NCLB, the research conducted by Dr. Wayne Thomas and Dr. Virginia Collier (2001) was thoroughly reviewed. A communication action plan was developed and implemented. It was shared with administrators, educators, parents and community leaders. This plan calls for the Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 20

21 implementation of instructional program models that are research-based and proven to narrow and close the achievement gap of ELLs. The following section provides an overview of the additional Title III mandates that were implemented along with the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), et al. v State Board of education, et al. Florida Consent Decree of 1990 that we were currently working under in the state of Florida that were added to the implementation of the educational reform: 1. Parents must thoroughly understand how all program options offered in the school district will assist students to acquire the English language and academic grade level curriculum New Temporary Placement Notification Letter New Placement Form Describing OCPS Instructional Program Options (DOE Approved) An orientation video was developed by OCPS in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Haitian Creole, Portuguese, and French on the instructional models offered in the school district. 2. All placement decisions must occur within 30 school days from initial entry to school and parents must be informed 3. Annual assessment to show progress in: Language Acquisition skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) Tests: o Language Assessment Scales (English Language Acquisition) o CELLA ( ) Academic Achievement Tests: o FCAT (Academic Achievement) o DIBELS (K-3) o IDEL (K-5) Spanish Bilingual Education Schools o Aprenda Test (Stanford 9) Spanish Bilingual Education Schools Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 21

22 4. If students fail to show annual progress in acquiring the English language or in academic performance, parents must be notified within 30 school days of such failure. 5. Districts that provide One Way Developmental or Two Way Developmental Bilingual Education Programs must administer an academic achievement test in the language of instruction. Test(s) were selected and purchased Test (s) began to be administered in the school year The goal and expectation of the educational reform in Orange County Public Schools has been to offer quality educational programs to English language learners (ELLs). For this reason only research-based programs with the following instructional approaches have been be offered since 2001: Instruction in the basic subject areas using the students native language Instruction in basic subject areas using ESOL Strategies Instruction in basic subject areas using both ESOL Strategies and the native language of students, as feasible to the school district Strategies Implemented: Strategy #1: The expectation in OCPS has been that the curriculum in instructional program models be aligned with research-based practices proven to be effective with ELLs. These practices include: Collier & Thomas Research Cummins Proficiency Model Stephen Krashen Research on L2 CALLA Approach (Anna Chamot) Content-Based ESOL Approach (Deborah Short) Sunshine State Standards National ESL Proficiency Standards Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 22

23 Current Best Practices in Teaching o Marzano s High Yield Strategies for ELLs o Differentiated Instruction Strategies Aligned to L2 Acquisition Levels o Thinking Maps Aligned to L2 Acquisition Levels o Building Academic Language for ELLs The Multilingual Student Education Services support team has been available to assist teachers and administrators with the implementation of exemplary practices for ELLs in the classroom. A Teacher Self-Assessment Tool: Classroom Application Practices document on research-based instructional practices was developed and implemented to mentor and coach teachers. A copy of the document is being provided to FDOE with this Title III Improvement Plan in Appendix A. Strategy #2: Title III Federal Grant Activities (language acquisition, reading, math and family literacy programs, instructional coaches and student advocates), as approved by FDOE (FDOE files). Strategy #3: (FDOE files). Refugee Grant Activities (Science Focus) as approved by FDOE Strategy #4: Immigrant Federal Grant Activities (Literacy Camps- Science Literacy- Family Literacy Camps, and Citizenship Literacy) as approved by FDOE (FDOE files). Strategy #5: In partnership with the Reading Department in OCPS, a K-12 placement reading document was developed and is being implemented to place students correctly by second language proficiency level, time in English instruction and FCAT level. Strategy #6: Training for District Literacy Coaches, Title III Instruction Coaches, and school staff on implementing the reading placement charts to ensure that the reading process in English is not delayed by ineffective practices that are not research-based for ELLs. Strategy #7: Training for Title III Student Advocates/Parent Liaisons on researchbased practices to mentor/coach secondary students and their parents. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 23

24 Strategy #8: Application Training for Educators in OCPS in the following areas: Differentiated Instruction by Second Language Acquisition Stages What is Different About Teaching Reading to ELLs Building Academic Language In Core Content Classes Identifying the Linguistic Demands in Core Content Classes Meeting the Linguistic, Cognitive and Academic Needs of Students with Disabilities/ELLs Using Strategies to Ensure Comprehensible Instruction (A+RISE) Implementing Research-Based Instructional Programs to Achieve Linguistic and Academic Success o Scheduling the 50/50 Bilingual Approach One-Way Bilingual Two-Way Bilingual o Implementing the Pre-View/View/Re-view Approach for A balanced Bilingual Curriculum o Teaching for Transfer From L1 to L2 o o Content Based ESOL (Integrating Language & Content) Sheltered Instruction SIOP Strategy #9: Training the Multilingual Resource Teachers and Title III Resource Teachers on the Response To Intervention Model Strategy #10: The District Multilingual Student Education Services Resource Teachers and the Title III Resource Teachers are an integral member of the district team to accomplish academic performance expectations for the initiative to support schools identified as: Partnership Schools Plan of Involvement Schools District, Learning Community and school staff develop and implement a support instructional plan to increase student achievement in the areas identified as needing support by educational experts. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 24

25 4. Describe scientifically based research strategies to improve academic achievement in mathematics. (AMAO 3; FCAT) Focus is provided on training for teachers that deals with: Identifying the linguistic demands of mathematics for ELLs Building academic math vocabulary and concepts based on L2 acquisition level to ensure comprehension and learning Using FCAT math data to plan and implement effective instructional practices for ELLs Tomasita Ortiz 9/2008 TO 6/2009 District & Title III Supplementary Funds In addition to the main focus for math, please refer to number 3 since the strategies and activities enumerated on that section are also applied to mathematics. 5. Describe scientifically based research professional development strategies and activities, including coordination efforts with other No Child Left Behind (NCLB) programs. Research shows that the proportion of well-qualified teachers is by far the most important determinant of student achievement at all grade levels, even after taking into consideration the special needs of ELLs and students (Darling-Hammond, 2000). According to a 2000 U.S. Department of Education report, "Eliminating Barriers to Improving Teaching," teacher quality is one of the most significant school factors that influence student academic achievement. Teachers, like other professionals, must stay abreast of the latest developments in their fields to continually increase their effectiveness. For schools and districts considering ways to improve student achievement, providing high-quality professional development is a necessity. The school district offers the ESOL training required by the META Consent Decree for all educators three times during the school year (Fall-Winter/Spring-Summer). A total of 90 training sessions are offered throughout the school year. In January 2009 all ESOL Endorsement classes will also be offered on-line by CaseNex. In addition to the training activities sponsored by the school district, training strategies one through nine explained in Section 3 of this document are being implemented to improve linguistic and academic achievement of ELLs in the district. Tomasita Ortiz 9/2008 TO 6/2009 District & Title III Supplementary Funds The Multilingual Student Education Services (MSES) Department collaborates with the curriculum department to present during the annual pre-planning teacher conference on research-based practices for ELLs. Collaboration has also been achieved with the ESE Department to coordinate and present training sessions for educators on addressing the linguistic, cognitive and academic needs of ESE/ELLs. School level training sessions are coordinated and implemented by the Title III Resource Teachers who also coach and mentor teachers at their assigned schools. Training topics are based on school and teacher needs as documented on the Teacher Self-Assessment Tool: Classroom Application Practices. Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 25

26 6. Describe parent involvement and outreach strategies to help parents become active participants in the education of their children, including coordination efforts with other NCLB programs. Research has shown a positive correlation between student achievement and strong parental involvement. Parents can influence students positive attitude about school, persistence in learning tasks, improved knowledge and use of effective learning strategies, and strong belief that effort is important to learning success (Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994; Hoover-Dempsey 2001) Therefore, Orange County Schools will make an intensified effort to involve all ELL parents through a variety of means available. Increased district/school/home communication and parent involvement will foster better ELL student attendance, higher grades and scores on standardized tests such as FCAT. The school district has an active Parent Leadership Council (PLC) based on requirements set forth by the META Consent Decree. A parent institute is offered to assist parents with leadership skills and collaborating with schools on the implementation of the district ELL Plan. School PLC Chairs in collaboration with school staff, plan and implement at least four PLC meetings during the school year. William Bonh 11/2008 District Funds In addition to the training activities sponsored by the school district, training strategies two, three, four and seven explained in Section 3 of this document are being implemented to improve parent outreach and involvement in the district. Collaboration with Title I in planning, implementing and participating in parent training activities is an integral component of the action plan for parent training. Tomasita Ortiz 9/2008 TO 6/2009 District & Title III Supplementary Funds The Title III Secondary Resource Teachers in collaboration with school staff plan and implement school level training activities at their assigned schools. With Title III supplementary funds, the Family Leadership Institute is offered during five Saturdays. Parents complete 10 training modules. To encourage family participation, MSES staff attends the training sessions and plan activities for the children, as applicable. Juanita Munera 10/20098 TO 3/2009 Title III Supplementary Funds 7. If applicable, identify any changes to the Title III Immigrant Education Program. NA NA NA NA Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 26

27 APPENDIX A Teacher Self-Assessment Tool: Classroom Application Practices Ortiz/My Passport/ /Accountability Page 27