1. ESEA Title III AMAOs Ensuring Academic Success for English Learners Dr. Shereen Tabrizi, Education Consultant Manager and Maria Silva, EL Consultant Special Populations Unit Office of Field Services Michigan Department of Education

2. Preparation for the Webinar Please mute your phones by pressing “mute” button or *6 on your telephone. Include the Title III contact person on the Education Entity Master (EEM) and MEGS+ in order to receive our communications. We will post the Title III Improvement plan document on the MDE-OFS website http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7- 140-6530_30334_40078---,00.html scroll down to Resource Materials http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7- 140-6530_30334_40078---,00.html

3. Purpose of the Workshop: Review the federal and state Title III Accountability Systems. Discuss the consequences for LEAs not meeting AMAOs for 2 or more years. Describe the development and submission of the Title III Improvement Plan.

4. Title III Requires States to: Define two annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs) for increasing the development and attainment of English proficiency. Include the Accountability Score Card Target in Reading and Mathematics for the EL subgroup.

5. Title III Requires States to: Hold Title III LEAs accountable for meeting all AMAOs annually. Provide technical assistance to LEAs not meeting AMAOs for 2 or more consecutive years.

6. AMAO 1- Annual Progress in Learning English Each EL has an annual growth target based on previous ELP assessment score and expectation toward full proficiency. Annual Growth Target: For 2013-14, 50% of ELs must make progress For 2014-15, the method will differentiate student targets based on expected growth. Method is pending USED’s approval.

7. AMAO 2 - Attain English Proficiency Definition of English proficient level on ELP assessment: Proficient or Advanced Overall on ELPA. Bridging or Reaching on WIDA. Note: English proficient on an ELP assessment is not the same as being classified FLEP.

8. AMAO 2 Targets for LEAs The target for 2013-14 was 21% of ELs in the cohort attaining the English proficient level. For 2014-15 the target is 22%. Target will increase 1% annually

9. AMAO 3 Academic Achievement EL Subgroup must meet the Accountability Scorecard Targets in: Reading Participation rate Percent Proficient or above Mathematics Participation rate Percent Proficient or above Graduation Rate Target of 80% LEAs may request EL subgroup data to include FLEP students, for up to two years after exiting the EL program.

10. Consequences: Title III Requirements for not meeting AMAOs for 1 year  Send letter to parents of Title III- funded LEP students:  Notification must be provided within 30 days of public data release (final determination of AMAO results).  Sample parent notification letters in  English, Spanish and Arabic available athttp://www.michigan.gov/mde/ 0,1607,7 -140-6530_30334_40078---,00.htmlhttp://www.michigan.gov/mde/ 0,1607,7 -140-6530_30334_40078---,00.html  Review and determine adjustments to Title III plan within DIP. 

11. Consequences: Title III Requirements for not meeting AMAOs for 2 consecutive years  Send letter to parents of Title III- funded LEP students  Revise and implement the plan developed in Year 1 to incorporate strategies/methodologies that improve the program and instructional delivery  Receive technical support from regarding implementation of the improvement plan.

12. Title III Requirements for not meeting AMAOs for 3 consecutive years … Send letter to parents (same as year 2) Revise and submit the Title III Improvement Plan Continue to monitor and implement the action steps of the Title III Plan with fidelity  Receive technical support from regarding implementation of the improvement plan

13. Title III Requirements for not meeting AMAOs for 4 or more consecutive years If an LEA does not meet one or more of the AMAO targets for the fourth consecutive year, it will be subject to the following federal requirements: (ESEA Section 3122 [b][4]):

14. Title III Requirements for not meeting AMAOs for 4 or more consecutive years, Cont’d (A)Notify parents of ELs that LEA did not meet AMAOs & share a plan of improvement. (B)Modify the district's curriculum, program, and method of instruction. (C)MDE will determine if funding should continue and require the district to replace educational personnel. ESEA Section 3122 [b][4]

15. Title III Improvement Plan Sequence : Conduct data analysis Identify reasons for not meeting AMAOs Investigate solutions Develop strategies to meet AMAOs Implement, progress monitor with fidelity, and evaluate annually

16. Using multiple sources of data, identify and describe the possible reasons for not meeting the AMAOs: Analysis Results: Instructional Program Design and Strategies Teacher Quality/Professional Development: Parent Engagement: Program Evaluation/Accountability:

17. Step 1: Plan for Data Analysis What are the sources of data? WIDA – multiple reports MEAP, M-STEP/MME (state assessments) WIDA Local data sources What are the questions that need to be answered? Which data sources will provide the answers?

18. Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis, cont’d. QuestionReports Used Answer AMAO 1 and 2 (WIDA) 4a. Which language domains ( e.g. listening, speaking, reading, Writing) had the lowest level of proficiency score (districtwide)? Why? 4b. Which buildings and grades had the highest and lowest domain scores in reading and writing? Why? 4c. How are the language domain scores ( L,S, R, W) utilized in English language development and content area classroom instruction districtwide/ by school? 4d. How do teachers use language domain scores alongside the Can Do Descriptors & MPIs to set expectations for students’ Individual Learning Plans? District Frequency School Frequency Student Roster Teacher

19. Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis, cont’d. QuestionReports UsedAnswer AMAO 1, 2 & 3 (Two years of WIDA) 5a. What does the cross-sectional data (grade 2 during year 1 and year2) show? Why? 5b. How does same group of students (e.g. placed in a specific intervention program) perform over two consecutive years? Why? 5c. How do same students (if school/district can match students) perform over two consecutive years? Why? 5d. How do ELs compare to FLEPs and English speakers in general education classrooms on content local/state assessments. Why? 5e. What is the number/percent of students by teacher and by grade that has demonstrated growth? Why? School Frequency D istrict Frequency School Frequency D istrict Frequency School Frequency District Frequency School Frequency District Frequency Student Roster Teacher

20. Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis QuestionAnswer AMAO 3 1a. For the most recent years, which grade spans of LEP/EL students, did not make AMAO 3 in reading? 1b. Has this been a pattern over the past three years? District: Elementary: Middle: High School: Pattern: YesNo 2a. For the most recent years, which grade spans of LEP/EL students did not make AMAO 3 in math? 2b. Has this been a pattern over the past three years? District: Elementary: Middle: High School: Pattern: YesNo Trend 3a. How does the trend of achievement of ELs statewide compare with the trend in your district? 3b. Are the teachers and administrators aware of this trend? 3c. What are the implications of the trend? District: Schools: b. YesNo

21. Step 3: Use Data Analysis to Identify Potential Reasons for Not Meeting AMAOs Data AnalysisPossible Reasons According to the WIDA District Frequency Report, we have a 2 year trend of lack of growth. We are below the state trend. This is across grade levels and schools. “We have been using English immersion program with focus only on English language.“ Lack of infusing language and content instruction WIDA school reports indicate ELs are making significant improvement only in two schools. “Having examined our professional development and other data, we see that our most skilled teachers are in these two schools.” Student roster reports show that scores of the ESL teacher, Ms. Nice, are highest in listening, lower in literacy with great disparity between highest and lowest scores in speaking. Ms. Nice knows productive language takes longer, and that speaking develops more rapidly than reading and writing. She has four newcomers placed in general ed. where classroom teachers don’t engage these students in speaking tasks.

22. Step 4: Using the Data Analysis to write/Improve the Plan  Instructional Program Design and Strategies  Teacher Quality and Professional Development  Parent Engagement  Evaluation/Accountability- impact of the above on student outcomes Critical: Implementation is done as intended and with fidelity-Progress monitoring and adjusting plan without compromising the objectives/outcomes.

23. Program Modifications (use chart below) Action Steps to Improve English Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Timeline Person Responsible Funding Sources and Estimated funds used Monitoring Reports/Evidence (Completed periodically through [insert date]) 1. Instructional Design Describe the scientifically based research strategies to improve English-Language Acquisition. (AMAO 1 and 2: WIDA & Local Assessments; AMAO # 3 state & local assessments). ) Indicate whether the approach will impact Elementary, Secondary level or both.

24. Program Modifications (use chart below) Action Steps to Improve English Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Timeline Person Responsible Funding Sources and Estimated funds used Monitoring Reports/Evidence (Completed periodically through [insert date]) 2. Teacher Quality/Professional Development Describe teacher quality, scientifically based research professional development strategies and activities, resources used including coordination efforts with other Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs. Indicate whether the approach will impact Elementary, Secondary level or both.

25. Program Modifications (use chart below) Action Steps to Improve English Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Timeline Person Responsible Funding Sources and Estimated funds used Monitoring Reports/Evidence (Completed periodically through [insert date]) 3. Parent Engagement Describe parent engagement plans and outreach strategies including coordination efforts with other ESEA programs and whether the approach will impact Elementary, Secondary level or both.

26. Program Modifications (use chart below) Action Steps to Improve English Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Timeline Person Responsible Funding Sources and Estimated funds used Monitoring Reports/Evidence (Completed periodically through [insert date]) 4. Program Evaluation//Student outcomes Describe how multiple sets of data impacted your decision to restructure, reform and improve the program and whether the approach will impact Elementary, Secondary level or both.

27. Program Modifications (use chart below) Action Steps to Improve English Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Timeline Person Responsible Funding Sources and Estimated funds used Monitoring Reports/Evidence (Completed periodically through [insert date]) 5. Title III Immigrant If applicable, identify any changes to the Title III Immigrant Education Program and whether the approach will impact Elementary, Secondary level or both.

28. Plan submission For LEAs that did not meet AMAOs for 2+ years, a copy of the Title III Improvement Plan must be submitted electronically to the Title III Office at ofsspecialpops@michigan.gov by January 30, 2016.ofsspecialpops@michigan.gov Contact the Title III Office representative if technical assistance is needed in completing the document. You may keep a copy of the Title III Improvement Plan with all original signatures on file in the LEA office.

29. Questions

30. Technical Assistance with the Improvement Plan, contact: Dr. Shereen Tabrizi at: TabriziS@michigan.gov Maria Silva at: SilvaM@michigan.gov