1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

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

5. 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

6. 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 ACCESS data was not available at the time of the study
WIDA Consortium

7. WIDA Consortium

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

9. Findings
WIDA Consortium

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

11. 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

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

13. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

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

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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

23. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

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

30. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

31. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

32. Supporting Data
WIDA Consortium

33. 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

34. 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

35. Potential Areas of Further Inquiry
WIDA Consortium

36. 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

37. 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

38. Questions or Comments?
For more information, please contact the WIDA Help Desk: or
© 2010 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, on behalf of the WIDA Consortium