Changes for a New Title III Melanie Manares, Title III Coordinator Beth O’Connell, Title III Specialist Office of English Language Acquisition and Academic Achievement (OELAAA) MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

First Let’s Review the Old… Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 2

ELL Civil Rights: Foundations Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: “[n]o person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” The Equal Protection Clause, 14 th Amendment to the US Constitution: “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 3

ELL Civil Rights: Critical Cases 1.Lau v. Nichols, 1974: “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” LEAs must help ELLs overcome linguistic barriers in order to access instruction. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 4

ELL Civil Rights: Critical Cases 2.Castañeda v. Pickard, 1981: A language instruction program must satisfy the following criteria: a)Be based on sound educational theory b)Be implemented to full effect (i.e., adequate funds, adequate teacher competency to run the program as it is intended) c)Be subject to change or replacement if it fails to achieve intended aims of language acquisition. 3.Plyler v. Doe, 1982: States are obligated to provide free public education services to all children within their jurisdiction, regardless of their citizenship status. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 5

One Critical Document May 25 Memorandum, 1970: Circulated from the Office for Civil rights; highlighted specific “common practices which have the effect of denying equality of education opportunity to [language minority] pupils” (and are therefore, violations of Title VI). These included: 1.Failure by the LEA to take “affirmative steps” to help ELs overcome language barriers or otherwise access instructional programs; 2.“Dead end” programming for ELs that has no aim to integrate them into mainstream classes; 3.Denying ELs the opportunity to participate in college prep or other advanced classes based on their language skills; 4.Failure to notify parents of ELs about issues or opportunities for which other parents do receive information. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 6

Key Legislation  Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 (EEOA).  Section 1703(f) of the EEOA requires state educational agencies (SEAs) and school districts to take action to overcome language barriers that impede English Language Learner (ELL) students from participating equally in school districts’ educational programs. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 7

EEOA continued… Although section 1703(f) of the EEOA does not require schools to adopt a particular type of language acquisition program such as an English as a Second Language (ESL) program, courts generally consider three factors to assess compliance:  whether the school’s program is based upon sound educational theory or principles;  whether the school’s program is reasonably calculated to implement the educational theory effectively; and  whether, after a period of time sufficient to give the program a legitimate trial, the results of the program show that language barriers are actually being overcome. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 8

EEOA continued… Examples of conditions that may violate the EEOA include when a school district or SEA does the following:  fails to provide a language acquisition program to its ELL students or fails to provide adequate language services to its ELL students;  fails to provide resources to implement its language acquisition program effectively (e.g., an ESL program lacks ESL teachers or ESL materials);  fails to take steps to identify students who are not proficient in English;  does not exit ELL students from a language acquisition program when the ELL students have acquired English proficiency, or exits ELL students without written parental or guardian permission before the students acquire English proficiency;  fails to communicate meaningfully with non-English-speaking or limited-English- speaking parents and guardians of ELL students by not providing such parents and guardians with written or oral translations of important notices or documents;  fails to provide language acquisition assistance to ELL students because they receive special education services, or fails to provide special education services to ELL students when they qualify for special education services;and  excludes ELL students from gifted and talented programs based on their limited English proficiency. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 9

Remember: Schools are required to ensure that the rights of students are met, whether Federal or State funding is accepted or not. Parent refusal of a language support program for their child does not release the school/district from its obligation to ensure that the child can access the curriculum. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 10

Supplement not Supplant  Title III cannot be used to fulfill these “old” obligations  Supplement not Supplant is essential to keep in mind when writing and reviewing Title III grants  Guidance here: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 11

Changes for a New Title III  WBMS  Grant documents  Accountability plans  Federal Monitoring documentation  Revised AMAO proposal  New accountability notification dates  Revised Accountability Plan  New grant line item cap  Supplemental Immigrant funds Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 12

What’s New…  Fiscal monitoring  Working at the DESE to coordinate reviews  Expectation from USED  Title III Monitoring will include some aspect of fiscal auditing at next visit Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 13

What’s New…  WBMS  Packet (Ex: Grant, Accountability, Federal Monitoring)  Components (Ex: 180 grant)  Documents (Form 5)  Questions (Ex: Has the grantee responded appropriately to all questions on Form 5 for all private schools located within the district?) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 14

What’s New… Revised AMAO Proposal (pending ED approval)  For AMAO 1, Massachusetts proposes using historic WIDA consortium ACCESS data to calculate growth targets for ELL students to reach English language proficiency (ACCESS Level 5) within six years.  Each target represents the minimum level of growth needed by an ELL student to reach proficiency within six years, given his/her prior number of years in the program and prior year’s proficiency level on the ACCESS.  An ELL is considered “on track to proficiency” if his or her current year’s growth percentile on ACCESS (SGPA) is greater than or equal to his or her growth-to-proficiency target on the matrix.  The district makes AMAO 1 when 50 percent of ELLs attain their SGPA growth-to-proficiency targets. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 15

What’s New…  For AMAO 2, Beginning in 2014, districts are held accountable for 95 percent or more of the ELL/former ELL subgroup participating in the ACCESS tests.  The AMAO 2 attainment target will vary annually in each district, based on the number of ELLs and their corresponding years of enrollment.  Districts must demonstrate ELLs’ attainment of English proficiency that meets or exceeds the targeted percentages, based on the state’s annual ACCESS results and the distribution of students by years in Massachusetts schools. The target percentages for each group of students is established and reset each year. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 16

What’s New…  For AMAO 3, each district’s four-year cumulative Progress and Performance Index scores for the ELL/Former ELL subgroup will be used to determine AMAO 3.  A cumulative PPI of 75 or higher indicates that the district is on track toward meeting its proficiency gap-narrowing goals. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 17

What’s New…  New accountability notification dates  Split notification  ACCESS results will be available in the summer  MCAS/PARCC will be available in the fall  30-day deadline to notify parents will begin when districts receive notification in the fall of all three AMAO results.  Accountability plans will be due in the fall Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 18

What’s New…  Revised Accountability Plan  Plan has been revised to accommodate revised AMAO proposal goals  Tiered based on number of AMAOs missed and degree of which the target was missed  Pending USED approval of the revised AMAO proposal Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 19

What’s New…  New grant line item cap  25% of 10% in line 6 for data analysis software Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 20

What’s New…  Supplemental Immigrant funds  Will be available in FY16  December 16, 2014 – September 30, 2017  $403K for Massachusetts Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 21

Resources  enforcement.pdf enforcement.pdf  0_and_1985.html (treatment of national origin minority students) 0_and_1985.html  1.html (school obligations) 1.html  x.html (equal education opportunity to LEPS) x.html  0.html (DHEW memo re: language minority students) 0.html Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 22

Questions? Melanie Manares Beth O’Connell