District Engagement with the WIDA ELP Standards and ACCESS for ELLs®: Survey Findings and Professional Development Implications Naomi Lee, WIDA Research Daniella Molle, WIDA Professional Development & Research March 8, 2011

Goal of the Webinar Disseminate the main findings from the 2010 survey on the engagement of districts with WIDA ELD Standards and ACCESS across 20 WIDA states Provide interpretations and recommendations based on the survey results Discuss the survey results with the Research Subcommittee Give the Research Subcommittee the opportunity to voice professional development needs and provide guidance on future research related to WIDA standards and ACCESS WIDA Consortium

Focus of Survey How familiar districts are with the WIDA standards and ACCESS for ELLs Whether or not districts are using the standards and ACCESS for ELLs results What related professional development is available in districts Consortium member states wanted to know how their districts are engaging with WIDA standards and assessments. WIDA Consortium

Data Collection: Proportional Stratified Random Sample of Districts Wanted survey results to generalize as much as possible to the entire WIDA Consortium. WIDA Consortium

Participating Districts 150 districts were selected to participate. Selection based on two stratification variables (time administering ACCESS and # of ELLs in district) We asked SEAs to provide us contact information for the District ELL Coordinator (or equivalent) in the 150 districts that were randomly selected. 72% response rate (108 of 150 district contacts completed the survey) – excellent response rate! Highly representative sample! (see next slide) The distribution of districts participating in the survey matches that of the population of 2017 districts. Given our sample size, statistical probability theory allows us to have a 6% confidence interval for the survey results. WIDA Consortium

The WIDA Consortium District with ELL populations of fewer than 10 were not included in this survey. OK and DC could not be included because their 2008-2009 ACCESS data was not available at the time of the study WIDA Consortium

WIDA Consortium

District ELL Leads Throughout this webinar, we will refer to the survey respondent as the 'District ELL Lead WIDA Consortium

Findings WIDA Consortium

Dissemination of Findings Description of each finding Evidence and supporting data Possible interpretations of the data Professional development implications and recommendations WIDA Consortium

Finding #1 A majority of ELL leads do not hold ELL job titles, and few have formal training in ESL/Bilingual education Yet, a majority of District ELL leads have had some training the WIDA ELD Standards (50%) or ACCESS for ELLs (64%) WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data Other Administrator = Principal, Assistant Superintendant, etc. WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Possible Interpretations District ELL Leads may have multiple responsibilities within their district and limited time and resources to allocate to learning about working with ELLs District ELL Leads may not have the necessary knowledge or skills to maximally support their ELL populations Your interpretations? WIDA Consortium

Implications and Recommendations Advocate for additional PD opportunities for District ELL Leads Increase PD opportunities for Leads Integrate foundational information on how to work with ELLs in trainings for Leads Offer PD opportunities in a variety of formats, lengths and frequency Disseminate information and resources on how to work with parents of ELLs and their communities Provide venues for leads to network, mentor and support each other What implications or recommendations do you see? Foundational information may include understanding academic language, second language acquisition, working with diverse student WIDA Consortium

Finding #2 Districts are more engaged with assessments than with standards More teachers receive training on ACCESS for ELLs than on the WIDA ELD Standards. District ELL Leads estimate that more teachers use ACCESS for ELLs Score Reports than the Standards. WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data The ‘more than half’ bar is larger for ACCESS than for Standards. WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data Again, the ‘more than half’ bar is larger for ACCESS than for standards WIDA Consortium

Possible Interpretations Districts offer more trainings on ACCESS for ELLs and Score Interpretation than on WIDA ELD Standards Teachers are required to receive certification on ACCESS ACCESS is a high stakes test and districts and administrators are interested in the results Your interpretations? Stop to ask for additional interpretations WIDA Consortium

Implications and Recommendations Include foundational information about ELLs in ACCESS and Score Interpretation trainings Provide training on the connection between the Standards and the assessment Include case scenarios in Score Interpretation trainings to help educators see the connection to the Standards Provide examples and scenarios for administrators on the use of ACCESS reports Include more information on the Standards and on the use of rubrics in the online test administrator training Develop online modules on the Standards and require certification on them for teachers who work with ELLs Develop and revise existing WIDA trainings to include administrators as an audience Implications and recommendations from your perspective? Foundational information may include understanding academic language, second language acquisition, working with diverse student WIDA Consortium

Finding #3 ESL Staff training > General Education Staff training Far fewer General Education Staff than ESL/Bilingual Staff receive training on ACCESS for ELLs and WIDA ELD Standards District ELL Leads estimate that far fewer General Education Staff than ESL/Bilingual Staff are using the WIDA ELD Standards and ACCESS for ELLs Score Reports WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Possible Interpretations ELL programs do not have the capacity to train general education staff General education staff are required to attend other trainings Professional development offerings do not target general education staff Administrators do not offer opportunities to general education staff to attend professional development on ELL issues WIDA Consortium

Implications and Recommendations Develop and offer more trainings with general education staff as main audience Provide training on collaboration, including co-teaching Encourage administrators to attend professional development opportunities on ELLs Organize professional development in collaboration with other departments Integrate an ELL section in all other trainings in the district Participate and present at general education conferences (e.g. math, science) Develop academies that scaffold for non-ELL audiences Foundational information may include understanding academic language, second language acquisition, working with diverse student WIDA Consortium

Collaborate with regional agencies to reach general education staff Develop district capacity by training district level general education specialists Collaborate with institutions of higher education to include courses on working with ELLs for pre-service general education teachers Collaborate with regional agencies to reach general education staff Implications and recommendations from your perspective? WIDA Consortium

Finding #4 The longer a district is in WIDA… A greater percent of District ELL Leads have formal ESL/Bilingual education District ELL Leads self-report greater knowledge of and more training on ACCESS for ELLs (but not on Standards) More professional development opportunities exist for ESL/ Bilingual and general education staff on WIDA ELD Standards and ACCESS for ELLs More ESL/Bilingual staff are estimated to be using ACCESS for ELLs and WIDA ELD Standards WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data Training ELD Standards is an outlier – appears to decrease with time in WIDA WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Supporting Data WIDA Consortium

Possible Interpretations Accountability requirements have brought the education of ELLs into the limelight States are building capacity each year they belong to WIDA Number of professional development days offered to states does not change States request professional development that meets the need of their districts WIDA Consortium

Implications and Recommendations Create dissimilar PD packages for states at different stages of membership Foster closer collaboration between WIDA PD team and state representatives responsible for the coordination of PD Use input and feedback from teachers and ELL Leads from “veteran” states to develop new offerings and revise standard offerings Work with newer states to build capacity Find “model states” to highlight PD approaches Increase opportunities for mentoring and/or collaboration among Consortium states Implications and recommendations from your perspective? Foundational information may include understanding academic language, second language acquisition, working with diverse student WIDA Consortium

Potential Areas of Further Inquiry WIDA Consortium

What areas of further inquiry would you like WIDA to pursue? How can districts foster broader implementation of the WIDA ELD Standards? What guidance and support do districts need from WIDA in order to support the implementation of the Standards? What areas of further inquiry would you like WIDA to pursue? WIDA Consortium

Next Steps Disseminate Results: ECOLT, AERA, TESOL Quarterly Future Research – driven by needs of the field New PD offerings? Optional spring PD consultation? WIDA Consortium

Questions or Comments? For more information, please contact the WIDA Help Desk: 1-866-276-7735 or help@wida.us © 2010 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, on behalf of the WIDA Consortium www.wida.us