ESEA Title III AMAOs Ensuring Academic Success for English Learners

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
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/0,1607,7140-6530_30334_40078---,00.html scroll
down to Resource Materials
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.html
 Review and determine adjustments to Title
III plan within DIP.
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.
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
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]):
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]
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
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:
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?
Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis, cont’d.
Question
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?
Reports
Used
District
Frequency
School
Frequency
Student
Roster
Teacher
Answer
Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis, cont’d.
Question
Reports Used
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
District Frequency
School Frequency
District Frequency
School Frequency
District Frequency
School Frequency
District Frequency
Student Roster
Teacher
Answer
Step 2: Conduct Data Analysis
Question
Answer
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: Yes No
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: Yes No
Trend
District:
3a. How does the trend of achievement of ELs
Schools:
statewide compare with the trend in your district?
3b. Are the teachers and administrators aware of
this trend?
b. Yes
No
3c. What are the implications of the trend?
Step 3: Use Data Analysis to Identify
Potential Reasons for Not Meeting AMAOs
Data Analysis
Possible 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.
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.
Program Modifications (use chart below)
Action Steps to Improve English
Language Proficiency and Academic
Achievement
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.
Timeline
Person
Responsible
Funding
Sources and
Estimated
funds used
Monitoring Reports/Evidence
(Completed periodically through
[insert date])
Program Modifications (use chart below)
Action Steps to Improve English
Language Proficiency and Academic
Achievement
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.
Timeline
Person
Responsible
Funding
Sources and
Estimated
funds used
Monitoring Reports/Evidence
(Completed periodically through
[insert date])
Program Modifications (use chart below)
Action Steps to Improve English
Language Proficiency and Academic
Achievement
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.
Timeline
Person
Responsible
Funding
Sources and
Estimated
funds used
Monitoring Reports/Evidence
(Completed periodically through
[insert date])
Program Modifications (use chart below)
Action Steps to Improve English
Language Proficiency and Academic
Achievement
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.
Timeline
Person
Responsible
Funding
Sources and
Estimated
funds used
Monitoring Reports/Evidence
(Completed periodically through
[insert date])
Program Modifications (use chart below)
Action Steps to Improve English
Language Proficiency and Academic
Achievement
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.
Timeline
Person
Responsible
Funding
Sources and
Estimated
funds used
Monitoring Reports/Evidence
(Completed periodically through
[insert date])
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 [email protected] by
January 30, 2016.
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.
Questions
Technical Assistance with the
Improvement Plan, contact:
Dr. Shereen Tabrizi at:
[email protected]
Maria Silva at:
[email protected]