Title III Updates & AMAOs Jacqueline A. Iribarren, Title III Susan Ketchum, Office of Educational Accountability September 24, 2008

FLEP Bulletin: Summer 2008  Exit: ACCESS for ELLs TM composite score of 6.0 or by meeting reclassification criteria for (see ESEA Bulletin 7.02 : Reclassification of ELL Students as Fully English Proficient, August 2007 )  2-year monitoring requirement  Districts must have a process in place for monitoring/reviewing these decisions  ESEA Bulletin 8.01 :

ACCESS for ELLs TM Counts 2006: 33,402 took WI’s ELP Exam  57% Spanish speakers  29% Hmong speakers  14% other languages 2007: 44,812 took WI’s ELP Exam  57% Spanish speakers  26% Hmong speakers  17% other languages 2008: 47,471 took WI’s ELP Exam  61% Spanish speakers  24% Hmong speakers  15% other languages

Languages Reported on ACCESS for ELLs TM 2008

ACCESS for ELLs TM 2008 Composite Scores

Reading Achievement - WINSS 24,480 FAY Grades 3-8,10 ELL students 54.7% Proficient & Advanced in

Mathematics Achievement - WINSS 24,480 FAY Grades 3-8,10 ELL students 52.5% Proficient & Advanced in

Were we started...  Chapter PI-13 Limited-English Proficient Pupils, Wisconsin Administrative Code (1985, 2002, revised Register, June 2004, No. 582)  ESEA Act of 2001, No Child Left Behind (NCLB)  Title III Regulations  DPI & WIDA partner states create ELP Standards grade clusters: K-2, 3-5, 6-8 and 9-12; language domains: listening, speaking, reading and writing  Wisconsin’s English Language Proficiency Examination, ACCESS for ELLs TM developed

2003 Interim AMAO Targets: Stakeholders including DPI & WIDA ESL/Bilingual education professionals Cut scores set on the four ELP instruments (using performance standards as guides) Local data on past performance from districts informed the setting of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 90% of ELP Level 1 students progress one language level in one year. 90% of ELP Levels 2-4 progress by at least ½ language level in one year. 90% of ELP Level 5 students become fully proficient in one year.

School-Year  ACCESS for ELLs TM adopted as the English Language Proficiency (ELP) assessment in Wisconsin  WSLS and Individual Student Enrollment System (ISES) Implemented  Stakeholder meetings discussed AMAO target revisions

School Year  ELL Advisory Task Force and AMAO Focus Group meetings reviewed student ELP growth using two years’ scores from ACCESS for ELLs TM  Revisions of AMAO targets and cohort descriptions submitted to USED/OELA  AMAO determinations were required for SY , , and  Required LEAs to inform parents if they or their consortium had not met AMAO targets

Revised AMAO Targets and Cohort Description AMAO 1: Progress in English language acquisition  50% of the students in ELP Levels 1-4 must make the expected progress  Six Cohorts: ELP Levels 1-2 & 3-4; Grades K-2, 3-8 & 9-12

Expected Progress AMAO 1: Expected Progress Cohort Grade Range ELP ELP Grades K level 0.5 level Grades level 0.4 level Grades level 0.3 level Initial English Language Proficiency (ELP) Level

AMAO 2 Exiting or attainment of English language proficiency: 20% of ELL students with ELP Level 5 + new Level 6 (students exiting)

Title III Sanctions for missed AMAOs  First Year: parent notification began with SY &  Second Year: parent notification technical assistance develop an improvement plan

AMAO 1:Progressing in English Language Acquisition Target: 50% of the Cohort (ELP Levels 1-4) must meet ELP Progress Requirement A 0.8 ELP Level B 0.7 ELP Level C 0.6 ELP Level D 0.5 ELP Level E 0.4 ELP Level F 0.3 ELP Level

AMAO 2: Exiting or Reaching English Language Proficiency Target: 20% of ELL Students Eligible to Exit N students who achieved ELP Level 6 (divided by) N students eligible or expected to achieve ELP Level 6

AMAO 3: ELL-Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) AYP determinations are made under Title I reporting processes. They can be accessed by each District Assessment Coordinator at in the Annual Review of District Performance.

Summary Determinations Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAO) 1 Progressing in English language acquisition 2 Exiting or reaching English language proficiency 3 ELL-Adequate Yearly Progress Overall Status

District Detail A district belonging to a consortium for ELL services will see their district’s results for informational purposes only. District Detail Member districts generally do not have sufficient numbers of ELL students to calculate separate AMAO determinations. The report reflects aggregate results for the consortium as a whole. Consortia summary data are used in accountability determinations. District-only AMAO counts are provided in the District Detail table for informational purposes, and can be used for planning/evaluation within the member district.

Fall 2008  Update WSLS and ISES Year-End ELP codes by September 30 th – DPI pilot data pull  Preliminary Notice to districts & consortia that did not meet targets based on changes from 2007 to 2008 ACCESS for ELLs TM, and 3 rd Friday Count Date to Year-End ISES ELP codes  30-day appeal period –data error review  ISES Year End Data reviewed – October 27 th  Final AMAO determinations – early November  Electronic AMAO reports planned

Contact Information: Susan Ketchum, Accountability Consultant Office of Educational Accountability Jacqueline Iribarren, Title III Consultant Content and Learning Team Visit our website:

Further Information Resources, timelines, and contacts may be found on the DPI website:  Accountability for ELLs  District WSLS/ISES Contacts  Programs Serving ELLs  Provisions of ESEA Title III  Standards & Assessments for ELLs