Download
1 / 22
220 likes | 226 Views
The Effects of Misidentifying Students’ English Proficiency. Perris Union High School District 2010-11. The Onion Report.
E N D
The Effects of Misidentifying Students’ English Proficiency Perris Union High School District 2010-11
The Onion Report • “Onions are complex vegetables that require peeling back multiple layers to get to the core. Student data in terms of assessment and accountability requires peeling back multiple levels of documentation to ensure accuracy. Both have the potential to bring concerned individuals to tears.” (Unknown Poet, 2010)
Objectives • Staff will correctly identify students’ English Proficiency status and accurately input data in Infinite Campus • Teachers will increase student achievement by using accurate English Proficiency data to inform instruction and meet student needs • The English Learner (EL) subgroup Academic Performance Index (API) will increase due to accurate English Proficiency data • The EL subgroup % proficient for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) will increase due to accurate English Proficiency data • The Perris Union High School District will receive funding for all eligible EL’s
Challenges • Parents not filling out the Home Language Survey (HLS) accurately • Misinterpretation of HLS by parents and staff • PUHSD HLS= EO but student was EL/RFEP in previous district • Delay in receiving CUM after enrollment • Lack of process for reviewing CUMs for students listed as EO • Student mobility and misidentification in multiple districts • ABC’s and incorrect IFEP (see next slide)
Why is this important? • Compliance with State and Federal law • Affects teachers’ ability to address the language needs of their students • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) subgroups and reports • Similar School Rankings in the Base API report • Academic Performance Index (API) subgroups and reports • Title 3 Accountability Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAO’s) • Title 3 funding and apportionment from the California English Language Development Test (CELDT)
Compliance with State and Federal Law • Districts and schools are required to “determine the primary language of each pupil enrolled in the school district.” (Education Code Section 52164.1[a]) • Primary language is the language first learned by the pupil, most frequently used at home, or most frequently spoken by the parents or other adults in the home when speaking with the pupil. (5 CCR 7.5 11510) • The Home Language Survey (HLS) is the tool that schools in California use to determine student’s primary language • If HLS indicates a language other than English, the student must be given the CELDT within 30 days of initial enrollment in a California school in order to determine the students English proficiency (Education Code Section 52164.1[a]) • If the CELDT scores indicate that the student is an English Learner they are assessed with the CELDT annually until being Redesignated Fluent English Proficient (RFEP)
EL Process for students enrolling for the first time in a California school
Enrollment process for students previously enrolled in a California school
Student Performance by English Proficiency StatusPUHSD 2009 Base API and 2010 Growth API
2010 AYP % Proficient for State Defined EL SubgroupWhat do you think the breakdown of this group is? (ie % EL vs % RFEP)
Title 3 funding and CELDT Apportionment • $5 per completed CELDT answer document • $102.60 per EL student for ESEA Title 3 Funding • $318.76 for each EL (or SED) student for EIA funding So, how much does misidentification cost us? If we had 100 students who are really EL but they were incorrectly Identified as EO/IFEP in IC it could cost $10,260 to $42,136
Addressing Inconsistencies with Data Audits • “clean” data vs. accurate data Contact prev district, pull CUM (if available, research CUM, look up RFEP dates, add CST scores, possibly CELDT Update one of the fields in SIS
Insert Excel to sites • Sample spreadsheet given to sites • Database used by Ed Services
