1. Bilingual Coordinators Network & Title III May 14 – 16, 2015 California Department of Education

2. Topics Home Language Survey Title III Program and Funding AMAO 3 ELA/ELD Framework Update CA Campaign for Biliteracy Federal Program Monitoring (FPM) Reclassification Handouts

25. http://www.californianstogether.org/

32. Reclassification in 2014-15 Criterion #4: A comparison of student performance on an objective assessment of basic skills in English Language Arts. The assessment results must have an empirically established range of performance in basic skills based on the performance of English proficient students of the same age. In the absence of a state-administered tests of student performance on basic skills in 2014 (e.g., CST, CMA), LEAs will need to select an instrument locally to measure the fourth criterion.

33. Reclassification in 2014-15 Considerations for Local Discussion: a. Implement a standardized reclassification process throughout the LEA. It may vary by grade or grade level. b. Identify an instrument/s that measures basic skills for all students and produces results that show whether a student is performing at or close to grade level. Examples: These could be curriculum-embedded assessments or district academic benchmark assessments (summative measurements of basic skills). Writing samples could be scored using standardized, grade-level rubrics and are generated by standardized prompts. c. Any instrument employed for basic skills assessments should be designed for use with all students.

34. Reclassification in 2014-15 Considerations for Local Discussion: d. The instrument should identify cut scores or a range of scores to determine skill levels. These levels should lend themselves to interpretation by grade in a manner similar to the CSTs (Far below basic, Below basic, Basic, Proficient, Advanced). e. The instrument should yield valid and reliable results that indicate when the student is sufficiently prepared to participate effectively on grade level without EL-specific supports. Note: While local instruments are not likely to have had extensive piloting and validation studies, the district should assemble some information to bolster the claim that results are valid and reliable.

35. Reclassification in 2014-15 Considerations for Local Discussion: f. Review the 2014-15 reclassification rate to determine if the locally selected criteria appear to be similar in rigor as the measures used in previous years. g. Ensure that RFEPs are monitored for two years beyond reclassification.

37. Reclassification in 2014-15 Considerations for Local Discussion: Activity: Review the Sample District Reclassification Chart with a partner or small group. What ideas to you have that might be used in your district? Record and share ideas.