While you are waiting, please do the following: Welcome to the RTI for ELLs in Georgia: Research to Practice A professional learning webinar series Spring 2011 While you are waiting, please do the following: Enter/edit your profile information by going to: Tools - Preferences - My Profile… Fill out the info on the “Identity” tab and click “OK” To view the profile of another use, hover your mouse over his or her name in the Participants window   Configure your microphone and speakers by going to: Tools – Audio – Audio setup wizard Confirm your connection speed by going to: Tools – Preferences – Connection speed

Participants Window

There is one options for asking questions: Questions and Answers There is one options for asking questions: Type your question in the chat section. Make sure you send it to “this room” so that all participants can see your question. GaDOE personnel will respond to your question.

Downloading Transferred Files Click the File Transfer button to save any transferred files.

RTI for ELLs in Georgia: Research to Practice A professional learning webinar series Session 3 March 15, 2011, 3-4:30pm RTI for ELLs: How Research on Literacy, English Language Instruction, and Reading Intervention Can Inform Practice

Welcome and Introductions Dr. Kimberly Anderson, REL-SE at SERVE Center at UNCG Carol Johnson, GaDOE LaShaun Odom, GaDOE Dr. Sylvia Linan-Thompson, UT Austin Participants

Counting ALL Participants To officially “sign in” to this webinar: Go to the Chat Window Type your district name and school name or organization name Type your name and the names of every person in attendance with you Send it to “This Room”

Who are our participants? Teachers Pk-5 Teachers 6-8 Teachers 9-12 ESOL/Title III coordinators, RTI/SST coordinators, or counselors Building administrators LEA Office, RESAs, or GaDOE Post-secondary IHE Other?

REGIONAL EDUCATION LABORATORY- SOUTHEAST (REL-SE) Operated by SERVE Center at UNCG Serving AL, GA, FL, MS, NC, SC, 2006 – 2011 Executive Director, Dr. Ludwig van Broekhuizen Toll Free: 800-755-3277 www.serve.org Georgia liaison: Dr. Kim Anderson 10

The Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) System

REL-SE’s MISSION To serve the educational needs of the Southeast, using applied research, development, dissemination, and training and technical assistance to bring the best available evidence and proven practices into local, district, state, and regional school improvement efforts

REL-SE Services Outreach and Dissemination of Research, Evaluation, and Policy Info. = today’s “Bridge Event” Technical Assistance to SEAs and LEAs “Issues & Answers” publications Experimental Studies on interventions of relevance to our region Quick Turnaround Data Analysis

Overview of the Series Goal is to provide GA educators with increased knowledge of research and practice that can improve RTI for ELLs Co-hosted by REL-SE and GaDOE, with support from USED Institute of Education Sciences (IES) The 7 sessions build on trainings that GaDOE and REL-SE have been offering since 2008 Addresses the GA RTI Guidance Manual and research-based practices for ELL instruction, intervention, assessment, and RTI Sessions archived at GaDOE website

Application & Implications SERIES OVERVIEW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Date Topics All Sessions 3-4:30 pm Wed. 2/16/11 Introduction Intro to series RTI in GA, and where ELL services fit in the GA POI Challenges, successes so far Wed. 2/23/11 Instruction What the research says about effective instruction for ELLs in standards-based classrooms (Tier 1), across grade levels and content areas Tues. 3/15/11 Intervention Effective strategies for RTI in reading, literacy and English language instruction for ELLs Thurs. 3/31/11 A culturally and linguistically responsive RTI framework Wed. 4/13/11 Assessment-- Summative Content area and ELP summative assessment data: How can these two types of data inform RTI? Thurs. 4/28/11 Formative Key formative assessment practices for ELLs and application to RTI Wed. 5/11/11 Application & Implications Processing the series Next steps for professional learning Presenters GaDOE Title III staff REL-SE staff Dr. Claude Goldenberg, Stanford U Dr. Sylvia Linan-Thompson, UT Austin Dr. Janette Klingner, U of Colorado at Boulder Dr. Carrie Parker, REL-NE & I Adrienne Walker, GaDOE Dr. Rebecca Kopriva, WCER

series overview session 1 session 2 session 3 session 4 2/16/11 Intro to series RTI in GA, and where ELL services fit in the GA POI Resources Challenges, successes so far INTRODUCTION 2/23/11 Effective instruction for ELLs K-12 across content areas (RTI Tier 1) INSTRUCTION 3/15/11 Effective strategies for RTI in reading, literacy and English language instruction for ELLs INTERVENTION 3/31/11 A culturally and linguistically responsive RTI framework 16

SERIES OVERVIEW SESSION 5 SESSION 6 SESSION 7 4/13/11 Content area and ELP summative assessment data: How can these two types of data inform RTI? SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT 4/28/11 Key formative assessment practices for ELLs and application to RTI FORMATIVE 5/11/11 Processing the series Next steps for professional learning APPLICATION IMPLICATIONS SHARING

Where the series fitS in the EBDM Cycle (Evidence-Based Decision Making) This Series focuses on Step 2, basing our decisions in a knowledge of current, rigorous research. 18

Session Goals Gain an understanding of the recommendations in the 2 IES Practice Guides— Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades (2007) and Assisting students struggling with reading: RtI and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades (2008) Engage in conversation with the researcher and each other about how to utilize the recommendations in the implementation of RTI for ELLs

AGENDA Welcome and introductions Overview and agenda Research presentation Reflection and Q&A Concluding thoughts Looking ahead to Session 4 Evaluation survey RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PORTIONS OF AGENDA: Welcome and introductions: LaShaun/Carol/Kim Overview and agenda: Kim Research presentation: Dr. Linan-Thompson Reflection and Q&A: Kim facilitates, All participate Concluding thoughts: Carol, Kim Looking ahead to Session 3: Kim Evaluation survey: LaShaun

WARM-UP DISCUSSION 2 min. chat And utilize chat box Re: our knowledge of reading/language arts and English language development instruction and intervention… What do we feel most knowledgeable about? What do we have the most questions about? 21

Welcome Dr. Linan-Thompson, University of Texas at Austin!

Sylvia Linan-Thompson, Ph.D. RtI for ELLs: How research on literacy, English language instruction, and reading intervention can inform practice Sylvia Linan-Thompson, Ph.D.

Purpose Examine and reflect on the research in literacy, ESL, and accountability and the implications. Three areas: Assessment Instruction Differentiation

Recent Changes Attention to reading instruction Attention to instruction for ELLs Attention to accountability

How are we doing? What percentage of ELLs who enter school in kindergarten fail to develop sufficient proficiency in English to be reclassified before they complete high school or drop out? A. 15% B. 37% C. 56% D. 78%

Additionally, 9% of ELLs are retained in grades 7 to 12. ELLs tend to be over or under represented in special education, particularly in learning disabilities.

The Promise: RtI Preventive Addresses the socio-cultural and instructional pieces of the exclusionary clause cultural, social, and economic conditions; and inadequate instructional opportunities. Multiple tasks and opportunities to reach benchmark

Practice Guides Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Response to Intervention and Multi-Tier Intervention in the Primary Grades

RtI and ESL Programs English as a Second Language For students who have limited English proficiency. Response to Instruction For students who are experiencing learning difficulties. These are pap

ESL RtI Parallel Programs Qualification criteria, Prescriptive instruction Exit criteria ESL RtI

Practice guide recommendations (ELLs) Level of Scientific Evidence Conduct formative assessments with ELs in key areas of reading. Strong Provide intense small-group reading interventions for ELs at risk for reading problems. Provide high-quality vocabulary instruction throughout the day. Ensure that the development of academic English is a key instructional goal for all ELs. Low Have peers work together to practice and extend material already taught.

Practice guide recommendations (RtI) Level of Scientific Evidence Screen all students for potential reading problems at the beginning of the year and then again in the middle of the year.. Moderate Provide time for differentiated reading instruction for all students based on assessments of students; current reading level. Low Provide intensive, systematic instruction on up to three foundational reading skills in small groups to students who score below the benchmark on universal screening. Strong Monitor the progress of tier 2 students at least once a month. Provide intensive instruction on a daily basis of the various components of reading proficiency to students who show minimal progress after reasonable time in tier 2 small group instruction (tier 3).

Assessment

RtI and ELL Practice Guide Recommendations: Assessment 1.Conduct formative assessments with ELs in key areas of reading. 1.Screen all students for potential reading problems at the beginning of the year and then again in the middle of the year. 4.Monitor the progress of tier 2 students at least once a month.

Recommendation 1: ELL Universal screening and formative assessments with ELs using English language measures of phonological awareness, letter knowledge, and word and text reading. Use data to identify ELs who need additional instructional support Scientific evidence base: Strong.

Recommendation 1: RtI Screen students for potential reading problems at the beginning of the year and again in the middle of the year. Regularly monitor the progress of students who are at elevated risk for developing reading disabilities. Level of Evidence: Moderate 37

Screening Select a set of efficient screening measures that identify children at risk for poor reading outcomes with reasonable accuracy. Students’ oral language proficiency alone is not a valid predictor of reading success or failure but it is important to take it into account. Examine students’ scores in relationship to established goals and language program. Use the Screening Tool Chart at rti4success http://www.rti4success.org

Benchmarks Benchmarks are necessary to set a goals for students. Use benchmarks or growth rates (or a combination of the two) to identify children at low, moderate, or high risk for developing reading difficulties. ELLs can meet benchmarks when provided appropriate instruction that supports language and literacy development.

Recommendation 4: RtI Monitor the progress of tier 2 students at least once a month. Use these data to determine whether students still require intervention. For those still making insufficient progress, school-wide teams should design a tier 3 intervention plan. Level of Evidence: Low 40

Progress Monitoring Monitor progress of tier 2 students on a regular basis using grade appropriate measures. While providing tier 2 instruction, use progress monitoring data to identify students needing additional instruction and the effectiveness of the program. Ensure the the measures are appropriate for the population. http://www.rti4success.org/chart/progressMonitoring/progressmonitoringtoolschart.htm

Check-in Currently, you use assessment to: to identify students who would benefit from a supplemental intervention B. determine students’ response to that intervention C. determine the effectiveness of instruction D. determine eligibility for special education services E. All of the above.

Integrate RTI and the identification of ELLs Rather than have 2 parallel systems determine how the two will work together. Consider data in light of students language proficiency and their opportunities to learn. the norming sample of assessments used. with whom interventions have been validated.

Instruction

RtI and ELL Practice Guide Recommendations: Instruction 2.Provide intense small-group reading interventions for ELs at risk for reading problems. . 3.Provide intensive, systematic instruction on up to three foundational reading skills in small groups to students who score below the benchmark on universal screening.. 5.Provide intensive instruction on a daily basis of the various components of reading proficiency to students who show minimal progress after reasonable time in tier 2 small group instruction (tier 3).

Recommendation 2: ELL Provide focused, intensive small-group interventions for ELs. Interventions should focus on several of the five core elements – phonological awareness, phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary, comprehension and/or writing. Explicit instruction should be the primary means of instructional delivery. Scientific evidence base: Strong.

Recommendation 3: RtI Level of Evidence: Strong Provide intensive, systematic instruction on up to three foundational reading skills in small groups to students who score below the benchmark on universal screening. Typically these groups meet between three to five times a week for 20-40 minutes (tier 2). Level of Evidence: Strong 47

Tier 2 interventions are effective, if they provide additional, focused instruction. include the essential components for the students age/grade level. are provided in small groups. use assessments to plan instruction.

Effective Tier 2 Instruction Effective instruction goes well beyond program specifications. Pacing, interactive teaching, feedback are essential for ELs regardless of program.

Effective reading instruction for ELs There is evidence that ELs can make as much early reading progress as non-ELs, when provided with effective instruction. Recent longitudinal studies suggest that effects of 1st grade interventions are maintained.

School Level 1. Align instruction across tiers in terms of language of instruction. For example if students are receiving home language literacy instruction at Tier 1 then Tier 2 instruction should also be in the home language. 2. Include assessments in the students’ home language. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

School Level 3. Before making placement decisions, including Tier 2 placement, evaluate data considering, language of instruction, length of time students has received instruction in the target language, and students’ opportunity to learn. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Classroom Level 1. Group students homogenously for instruction using scores on literacy assessments not language. ELLs benefit from language models. 2. Provide instruction that teaches all reading components systematically, that is, they provide a foundation and build skills and knowledge gradually. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Recommendation 5: RtI Provide intensive instruction daily that promotes the development of various components of reading proficiency to students who show minimal progress after reasonable time in tier 2 small group instruction (tier 3). Level of Evidence: Low 54

Effective Practices Implement concentrated instruction that is focused on a small but targeted set of reading skills. Schedule multiple and extended instructional sessions daily. Include opportunities for extensive practice and high quality feedback with one-on-one instruction. Plan and individualize tier 3 instruction using input from a school-based RtI team. Ensure that tier 3 students master a reading skill or strategy before moving on. Ensure that ELLs are developing English proficiency.

Differentiation

RtI and ELL Practice Guide Recommendations: Differentiation 2.Provide time for differentiated reading instruction for all students based on assessments of students; current reading level.. 4.Ensure that the development of academic English is a key instructional goal for all ELs. 3.Provide high-quality vocabulary instruction throughout the day. 5.Have peers work together to practice and extend material already taught.

Recommendation 3: ELL Provide high-quality vocabulary instruction throughout the day. Teach essential content words in depth. Also, use instructional time to address common words, phrases, and expressions ELs do not know. Scientific evidence base: Strong.

Recommendation 3: Practice Use evidence-based approaches to teach vocabulary. An percentage of this instruction should be explicit—particularly for words ELLs should use in different forms of communication and across content. Gersten’s rule of thumb: multiple days, multiple media (print, oral, writing) Multiple times during the day Multiple means “about 3” here..

Recommendation 3: Practice Vocabulary instruction for ELLs should also emphasize learning everyday words that native English speakers know so therefore, are not in the Teacher Edition. Vocabulary instruction should not be limited to the reading block or ESL. Effective practices for teaching vocabulary should be part of all instruction.

Recommendation 3: Materials Core reading programs and other sources should be used to identify words. But you need to pick out the right words. Teachers working together in study groups (Dimino & Taylor, 2009) and district initiatives can be effective for planning and delivering effective instruction. Don’t necessarily trust core reading series….

Recommendation 3: Suggestions Districts should play a lead role in producing target vocabulary words for instruction. Do not rely on core programs and other sources to do this particularly well. District lists can be supplemented by schools and teachers as needed. Good sources include Bringing Words to Life by Beck, McKeown and Kucan and Vocabulary Book by Michael Graves

Recommendation 4:ELL Ensure that the development of academic English is a key instructional goal for all ELs. Academic English is the “language of the classroom . . . of academic disciplines . . . of texts and literature, and of extended, reasoned discourse.” Scientific evidence base: Low

Aspects of Academic Language Vocabulary Knowledge Language of Instruction Words to teach & learn the lesson content (strategies, pre-writing, context clues) Language of Text Words related to Unit/Theme/Selection (habitats, camouflage, voyagers) Word Complexity Multi-syllabic words with prefixes, suffixes, Greek & Latin roots (informational, hopelessness, psychology) 64

Recommendation 4: Practice it is recommended that there be a specific time each day when the primary instructional focus is on English language development. Some of that time should be devoted to academic English. Increase the time ELs have to learn English. The focus can be clearly on language.

Recommendation 4: Materials Many features of academic English are not intuitive. Therefore, the best way to teach academic English is through a curriculum with a defined scope and sequence. However, there are few curriculum materials that have solid evidence of effectiveness. Consequently, materials should be selected carefully and implementation should be planned thoughtfully. Some educators may cushion their English learners, believing that: academic English is too hard for them to develop expectations are too demanding Not enough time to provide sufficient instruction Teachers fail to link vocabulary instruction to instruction on proper language usage.

Check-in How much time should be devoted to the explicit teaching of English to ELLs? A. None, they will pick-it on their own. B. Incidentally, all day long. C. 30 minutes a day D. More than thirty minutes a day.

Recommendation 5: ELL Peer assisted learning ELs should get at least 90 minutes a week of instructional activities in which pairs of students work together on academic tasks. The focus of these activities should be practice and extension of material already taught. Scientific evidence base: Strong

Recommendation 5: Practices Peer-assisted learning activities should be planned and organized carefully. Instruction should address both the social and academic aspects of working with a peer. Activities can begin as early as kindergarten, focusing on simple routines. Older students can learn routines targeting reading practice, vocabulary, and comprehension skills.

Recommendation 5: Practices Peer-assisted learning may be useful for English language development practice. This could be valuable during part of the day reserved for academic English. For example, ELs could read connected text and discuss with a partner in a structured way.

Check-in Do you use peer-assisted activities for anything other than partner reading?

Recommendation 2: RtI Provide differentiated reading instruction for all students based on assessments of students’ current reading levels (tier 1). Level of Evidence: Low 72

Suggestions Provide training for teachers on how to collect and interpret student data on reading efficiently and reliably. Develop data-driven decision rules for providing differentiated instruction to students at varied reading proficiency levels for part of the day.

Examine students’ scores in relationship to established goals and language experience

Jessica Received Spanish instruction in pre-k and k and is transitioning to English is 1st. On Spanish measures, she is in the established range. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Jose Received Spanish instruction in pre-k and k and is transitioning to English is 1st. On Spanish measures, she is in the emerging range. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Angela Is an ELL who has received English instruction since pre-k. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

The key in an RtI approach is response. Are students learning? Are they able to learn?

Suggestions Differentiate instruction - including varying time, content, and degree of support and scaffolding - based on students’ assessed skills. This includes their language proficiency.

Core reading instruction that builds decoding skills, increases opportunities to develop vocabulary knowledge, teaches strategies and knowledge needed to comprehend and analyze text, and focuses on fluency instruction that includes increased exposure to vocabulary and print is effective in improving student outcomes.

However, ELLs are more different than alike There are greater differences in academic achievement between high and low performing ELLs than between ELLs and non-ELLs on NAEP scores (Center for Public Education, 2007).

For example, 130 cwpm at 3rd grade 130 cwpm at 5th grade High English proficiency 68% Low English proficiency 29% 130 cwpm at 5th grade High English proficiency 58% Low English proficiency 19%

Causes of Difficulties The majority of ELLs that struggle with reading, have difficulty with fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Only a small percentage of ELLs have difficulty acquiring the foundational skills needed for accurate and automatic word reading.

Why? Language skills play a significant role in reading fluency; familiarity with syntax, morphology, and words and their meanings impact students’ reading fluency and in turn comprehension. For ELLs, working memory may be further taxed by the fact that they may also be translating words read to their home language to access meaning.

If ELLs are to succeed in school, they need explicit opportunities to hear, use, and practice using English in interactive, content-rich settings. Think about language and content not vocabulary.

Instruction Needs to move beyond foundational skills Needs to move beyond vocabulary instruction Needs to focus on building concepts Needs to give students opportunities to convey ideas, understanding, and knowledge orally and in writing

Instruction To develop high levels of cognitive skills as well as the language associated with it, students need language models that are comprehensible, and opportunities to use language in the context of specific instructional activities.

Instruction Oral language skills provide students the opportunity to communicate ideas, knowledge, and understanding.

Instruction Reading and writing contribute to the development of disciplinary thinking when students can use linguistic skills to interpret and infer meaning from oral and written language and they can discern precise meaning and information from text.

Flexible grouping Increases opportunities for engagement in structured, academic talk. Provides independent reading opportunities that is purposeful. Provides peer-assisted learning opportunities.

Causes of Difficulties Can decode but are not fluent Lack language Lack automaticity Have not had enough opportunity to practice Can decode and is fluent but does not comprehend Lack content and background knowledge Lack comprehension strategies

For example, 130 cwpm at 3rd grade 130 cwpm at 5th grade 61% ELL 75% Non-ELL & Low SES 90% Non-ELL 130 cwpm at 5th grade 48% ELL 62% Non-ELL & Low SES 82% Non-ELL

Language Considerations 1. Include opportunities to use language in the context of instruction. For example, ask students to discuss an answer with a partner prior to sharing with the class. 2. Read books to students to expose them to higher levels of language. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Language Considerations 3. Teach vocabulary at different levels-for example, show pictures of common objects, demonstrate actions. Teach academic vocabulary deeply. For example, give students the definition, examples and non-examples, and opportunities to use the words. (Linan-Thompson & Ortiz, 2009)

Integrated Process Screening Literacy level Language proficiency Instruction Literacy skills Academic language Progress monitoring Exit English proficient Grade level decoding and fluency Grade level comprehension

Benefits Preventive approach Assessment is used to inform instruction Instruction is focused on critical components Serves as a means for gauging efficacy of instruction

The Challenges: RtI and ELLs There are no clear guidelines in the transition from one language to another Does not address the time needed to develop language skills Lack of definitive answers practical significance of benchmarks Getting adequate data

Reflection Questions 5 min. to reflect/discuss + use chat box What role does language proficiency play in an RtI model? Who has responsibility for tracking student progress across programs? What one thing would make meeting the needs of ELLs more effective? From a systems perspective, where is the biggest gap? What needs to change to address it? What other questions remain? >> Q& A w/ Dr. Linan-Thompson

Concluding thoughts and evaluation Carol: Implications of today for… practice in GA future professional learning topics Kim, LaShaun:Evaluation survey— takes approx. 5 min. https://uncg.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_eWqlgqa65LGcj7S

Looking Ahead to Session 4 Thurs. 3/31/11 3-4:30pm Focus: Culturally responsive intervention (RTI) Presenter: Dr. Janette Klingner, University of Colorado-Boulder Accessing the webinar: same URL as today

Questions? Contact Info: Cori Alston, GaDOE calston@doe.k12.ga.us 404-656-2067 Carol Johnson, GaDOE cjohnson@doe.k12.ga.us 404-463-1858 LaShaun Odom, GaDOE lodom@doe.k12.ga.us 404-463-0505 Dr. Kim Anderson, SERVE Center kanderson@serve.org 404-657-6174