1. The ELL Critical Data Process:
A new required pre-referral process for ELL students
Introduce the new process and explain how it fits into the existing GT process at your school.

2. Rapid Growth 2005-2006 350 ELLs 33 languages 2013-2014 870 ELLs
1135 ELLs
65 languages
This shows how much our ELL population in ISD has grown over the last ten years.

3. Is it a disability?
One of the most common reasons for referrals to special education has been limited English proficiency (Maldonado-Colón, 1986). When no accommodations are made for a child's lack of language proficiency in English, children are left without a means of understanding what is being said or expressing what they need to say. Their performance then becomes similar to that of children with disabilities.
SOURCE: Barrera, Isaura (1995). To Refer Or Not to Refer: Untangling the Web of Diversity,"Deficit," and Disability. In: New York State Association for Bilingual Education Journal v10 p54-66, Summer 1995.
Explain that ELL status has often been confused for a learning disability and ELL students have been over-referred.

4. ISD figures: this shows that a higher percentage of ELL students have been qualified for SPED than the overall population. This is an indicator that we are over-referring ELL students for SPED. The percentage should be the same across both populations.

5. 2015 ISD figures. SLD (Specific Learning Disability) is an area in which ELL students are often over-referred. The School Psychologist can explain why this is the category in which we often over-refer ELL students as it is such a grey area around communication. Our district SLD numbers are way out of proportion between dual ELL and general SPED population. Again, this number should be the same among both populations.

6. This shows that our Spanish and Romanian-speaking ELL students are being over-referred for Special Education. The percentages of these languages represented in the all-ELL group versus in the Dual ELL group are disproportionate.

7. Natural Progression of Language Development
Ed deAvila
WELPA 1
ELP 1&2
WELPA 2
ELP 3
WELPA 3
ELP 4
WELPA 4
ELP 5
L 2 Ability
Listening
Speaking
Reading
Writing
Helpful context for staff around language acquisition timeline. Explain how oral language typically develops first, and then reading and writing skills develop over time. It is not necessarily a red flag if a student’s reading and writing skills have taken longer to develop—consider the language learning timeline, and remember that each student is different. You need to use the Matrix to learn more about the student’s literacy background in their native language to better understand the full picture, and why reading and writing may be delayed. They may simply need more time to develop these language skills. It can take 5-7 years for reading and writing to catch up to native level proficiency.
Time
Beginning
-0-6 months
-Silent period
-Non-verbal/ 1-word responses/ phrases
-Answer simple “who, what, where, when” and “yes/no” questions
-Follow a few simple directions
Early Intermediate
-6 months-1 year
-Can hear and repeat beg, mid, ending speech sounds
-Routine expressions
-Common vocab
-Simple sentences, incomplete sentences
-Ask and answer simple questions
Intermediate
-1-3 years
-Longer sentences
-Experimentation with sentence patterns
-Participate (haltingly) in simple academic discussions with controlled vocab and supports – visuals, demos, gestures etc…
Early Advanced
-3-5 years
-More complex sentences and details
-Can sustain conversation
-Retell a story with details and basic sentences
-Participate more fully in academic context.
Advanced
-5-7 years
-Use varied sentence structure
-Comprehend multiple meaning words, idioms and figurative language
-Initiate and negotiate conversations
-Near native-like speech
Krashen

8. Listening and Speaking Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing
Another perspective….. B I C S
Social Language
Listening and Speaking
6mo-2years
Academic Language
Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing
3-9 years C A L P
This shows that social language develops first and is most obvious to teachers and staff. Academic language can take years to fully develop. Just because a student can “speak English well” does not mean that their reading and writing skills should also be fully developed, and that if they are not, there might be a disability. We need to give the student adequate time to fully develop their academic skills before considering a learning disability.

9. The Matrix
Provides a structure for organizing information about the student which should be considered prior to referral
Visually organizes the information which supports referral and/or supports more intervention
Focuses team on “Red Flag” factors
Designed to be used by a team – at both data gathering and decision making (ELL representation at the table is required)
Makes decision making process data driven and transparent. A team approach—referral should never be based upon one person’s opinion.

10. Sample Completed Matrix1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 X ?
Data supports referral
Between Neutral and Supports Referral
Neutral
Between Neutral and More Intervention
Data Supports More Intervention
The team considers the whole picture before deciding whether to refer or not. Where do most of the marks fall, and where are the red flag areas? They carry the most weight either way.

11. ELL Matrix Red Flag Areas The ELL Critical Data Process by Steve Gill and Ushani Nanayakkara
Expected years of education in primary language (4)
Student may not have academic structures of language if they have not received expected years of education in their primary language.
Student may not have school experience and they may still be learning school norms and content at the same time, which can slow development.
Is learning the norms and the language competing with learning academics, or the reverse?
Student did not learn to read in primary language (6)
Trying to teach the process of reading while teaching a new language can slow the learning process.
Literacy in primary language is best predictor of literacy in 2nd or 3rd language education.
If a child did not learn to read in their primary language and had less expected exposure to reading, more interventions would be necessary.
Review the five red flag areas and gives some student examples

12. ELL Matrix Red Flag Areas
Years learning English (7)
A student receiving ELL services takes an average of 5-7 years to have the academic language needed to learn in an education setting at a comparable rate to non-ELL students.
This does not mean that a student with less than 5-7 years cannot be evaluated for special education.
Documentation of targeted interventions is needed to support or negate the decision to refer a student for special education evaluation.
Intervention description (11)
Team must determine what exactly the concern is.
Team will then create a targeted intervention that will be monitored with pre- testing, progress monitoring and post-testing. This should ideally be done with peers with same primary language and educational history.
Afterwards analyze targeted intervention to compare growth.

13. ELL Matrix Red Flag Areas
The parent interview (15)
Team will collect information from parents regarding student history (with interpreter):
When the student began school
The normal age students begin school where they were
The student’s performance in previous school
Retentions
Highest grade studied
Difficulties
Family history of learning
Behavioral norms for students/children
Critical to hire a professional interpreter for the parent interview.

14. What you can do now
Use GLAD strategies to provide accessible instruction (see GLAD Building Leader for support)
Important supports for ELL students:
Visuals
Lots of oral language practice
Sentence frames
Modelling
Mentor texts
Leveled texts during independent reading
Native language supports when possible for Beginners
Differentiate instruction for ELL students using the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPs) as a tool (see ELL teacher for support)
Review helpful tips for teachers to support struggling ELL students in the classroom

15. Next Steps How to implement the process
Expectations for classroom teachers or concerned staff
Explain next steps for your staff: how the process works, expectations of classroom teachers (participate in team, help collect data, provide interventions, etc.) Add time for Q & A at end.