1. ELL Program Advisory Group December 1, 2015

2. TWO PHASES of WORK ELL Program Advisory Group PHASE ONE 1/1/2016As Specified in HB 3499 1. Criteria Determine school districts not meeting needs of ELL students. Take demographics and student learning challenges into account. 2. Annual report on student progress indicators Information to include in annual report on student progress indicators for ELL students. 3. Technical assistance Provided by ODE to districts. 4. Guidelines for applying funding Direct school district on how to expend monies received PHASE TWO 1/1/2017As Specified in HB 3499 1. Long-term ELL Definition 2. Best Practices Ongoing support for student no longer eligible Engaging parents Identifying students who are eligible, incl. pre-K Providing accommodations for assessments Assessing ELL students Acquiring student library books (non-English) Providing support to ELL students

3. CURRENT STATUS & UPCOMING STEPS ELL Program Advisory Group PHASE ONE 1/1/2016 STATUS / STEPS 1. Criteria 11/23 – Rule hearing 12/1 – Advisory Group input 12/10 – SB adoption 2. Annual report on student progress indicators 12/1 – Advisory Group input 3. Technical assistance 11/23 – Advisory Group input 1/20 – Advisory Group input 4. Guidelines for applying funding 12/1 – Advisory Group input Present Rules for Adoption Completed Criteria (#1) Progress on #2, #3, #4

4. Framework for Applying Criteria Data Analysis Student progress indicators District needs District matrix Produces multiple lists ranking districts OBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVE DISTRICT CONSULTATION “Transformation” Districts Tech assist, $$ and Interventions “Target” Districts Tech assist Produces list of districtsDetermines category & schools for four- year involvement Professional Judgment Geography Special education Data Trends Programs Funding

5. Public Comments CONCERNRESOLUTION/PROGRESS District Selection – required or opt in, avoid “penalty box” system Rules direct ODE to select districts, consult with districts about schools, interventions, technical assistance and progressive interventions. Rules reflect collaborative, consultative relationship between ODE and selected districts. District commitment may be used to determine transformation or target district. School selectionRules reflect more flexibility relating to number of schools, schools selected in collaboration with districts Ever ELLs, current ELLs & former ELLs Rules use both current ELLs and former ELLs to determine district selection Long-term ELL – use of dataRules define long-term ELL as 7 or more years, use number of long-term ELL ‘s as part of district selection – Workgroup will discuss

6. Public Comments CONCERNRESOLUTION/PROGRESS Percentage of students who attend college should be percentage of students who enroll in post-secondary systems or should not be used Rules use percentage of students enrolled in post- secondary institutions Labeling of districts Use of terms such as low- performing and outcomes as opposed to student progress indicators Rules use “Transformation” and “Target” Rules use “not meeting objectives and needs of ELL students” language from HB 3499 All districts eligible for support including focus and priority Rules no longer disqualify districts who are also in other state and federal improvement programs Do not use school district size or geographic location Based on workgroup advise, rules use geographic diversity as factor but have more flexibility relating to district size

7. Public Comments CONCERNRESOLUTION/PROGRESS Use of average length of time as district selection criteria Rules do not currently use, used other available data such as current, former and long-term ELL student data Student movementRules use student mobility as district selection factor Oversight Committee and stakeholder input Rules do not create new committee. Workgroup continues until 1/2/17 in HB 3499. Workgroup voted to recommend to ODE to establish Oversight Committee. It will not be specific to HB 3499. Very small district supportODE presented proposal to workgroup for regional support model. Rules reflect that these districts will receive other supports. Use of OAKS, SBAC, ELPA and ELPA 21 Rules direct use statewide standardized assessment and that data must be best available

8. Public Comments CONCERNRESOLUTION/PROGRESS District accountability and.5 weight expenditure Rules currently mention.5 weight as consequence but do not provide details This was not changed at this time because general workgroup agreement was that this is the right level of detail for now. Will have further workgroup discussions. How do we capture the needs of a district. List of learning challenges demographic information was further defined See next slide for updated list If statistical model is not used to select districts, department should use matrix Matrix of student progress indicators and district needs will be used in district selection process ODE should select districts as transformation or target Rules specify that ODE places districts in categories. Although district leadership commitment may be a factor in selecting districts as transformation or target

9. How do we capture the needs of the district? Current and former English Learners as a percent of all students in the district. District small area income and poverty estimate (SAIPE). Percent of current and former English Learners who are economically disadvantaged. Percent of current and former English Learners who are homeless. Percent of current and former English Learners who are migrant. Percent of current and former English Learners who are mobile. Percent of current and former English Learners who are recent arrivers. Count of unique home languages spoken by current and former English Learners.

10. Long Term ELL Definition Used for identification of data for district selection Used for district reporting

11. Long Term ELL Definition Rule currently defines “Long-Term ELL Student” as any ELL student in Grade 7 to 12 who has been enrolled in an ELL program for 7 or more years Suggested definition: Any ELL student in grades 6-12 who has been eligible for, and enrolled in English Language Development for six or more years, or, who has scored at the same level of English proficiency for three or more years.

12. District Annual Report Purposes: School district identification Report to legislature School district progress* Best practice dissemination* Other purposes? * Not specified in HB 3499

13. District Annual Report (money) RequirementStatus Total amount allocated to school district from SSF for ELL weight ODE has currently Total amount expended on ELL students from amounts allocated for ELL weight Uniform budget reporting will give ODE this information, rules are up for adoption Total amount by category of expenditure Uniform budget reporting will give ODE this information, rules are up for adoption

14. District Annual Report (progress) RequirementStatus Summarizes progress for school districts on meeting objectives and the needs of student eligible for and enrolled in an ELL program District selection data: (a)The cohort 5 year graduation rate for current and former ELL students; (b)The academic growth of current and former ELL students in grades 6, 7 and 8 as measured by statewide standardized assessments; (c)The academic growth of current ELL students in grades 1 through 5 as measured by the English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA); and (d)Percentage of former ELL students who enroll in a post-secondary institutions after graduation from the district. Other report elements that should be added?

15. District Annual Report (student demographics) RequirementStatus Average number of years students have been enrolled in ELL program ODE may currently calculate based on existing data Average number of years students have attended their current schools ODE may currently calculate based on existing data Percentage of students who also receive special ed and related services Used for district selection, ODE will have available

16. District Annual Report (other information) RequirementStatus Any other information required by ODE ?????????????

17. Transformation and Target District Expenditure of Monies Suggested language: For districts that have not achieved the benchmarks and goals for ELL student improvement by the end of the four year period, ODE will: (i) Conduct an audit of that district’s ELL expenditures; (ii) Complete an additional district needs assessment; (iii) Evaluate the district’s ELL program; and (iv) Use the information gathered from the audit, needs assessment and program evaluation in directing the district on how to spend their 0.5 ELL allocation.