LOOKING FORWARD:
NEXT GENERATION ELD STANDARDS
&
ELP ASSESSMENT FOR WASHINGTON
STATE
WABE
April 19, 2013
Margaret Ho, Ed. D.
WELPA Coordinator, OSPI
Helen Malagón
Director, Migrant and Bilingual Education, OSPI
Transitioning to the CCSS Next Generation ELD Standards
Requirement for states to have ELD/P Standards in place that
have
 Correspondence to the CCSS and Next Generation Science
Standards
 Guided by the Framework for English Language Proficiency
Development Standards Corresponding to the Common Core
State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards
(2012).
Transitioning to the CCSS Next Generation ELD Standards
 Development currently underway by WestEd
 With management support from CCSSO, and
 Funding support from Understanding Language (Stanford
University), the Assessment and Accountability
Comprehensive Center (WestEd and CRESST), and others
Next Generation ELD Standards:
Design Goals
 Correspond with and to be used in tandem with CCSS for
ELA & Literacy in History/Social studies, Science and
Technical Subjects as well as for Mathematics
 Highlight and amplify the critical language, knowledge
about language, and skills using language in the CCSS
necessary for ELLs to be successful in school
 Provide fewer, clearer, higher standards to teachers can
focus on what’s most important
ELD Standards: Design Principles*
 Principle 1: ELLs need opportunities to interact in meaningful
ways
 Principle 2: ELLs need opportunities to learn about how English
works
 Principle 3: ELLs need opportunities to learn foundational
literacy skills (if not already learned)
* The information on this slide and following slides about ELD standards and proficiency
level descriptors comes from a Supporting Packet for Work on Next Generation ELD
Standards Development, prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers by Edynn
Sato, Ph.D. & Lynne Shafer Willner, Ph.D., 2013, WestEd
ELD Standards: Principle 1
ELLS need opportunities to interact in meaningful
ways
Table 1: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 1
From. . .
To . . .
Language development focused on
accuracy and grammatical correctness
→
Language development focused on interaction,
collaboration, comprehension, and
communication with strategic scaffolding to guide
appropriate linguistic choices
→
Instruction that artfully integrates reading, writing,
speaking and listening, and language
→
Three ELP levels; emerging, expanding, bridging
(each with Entry/Progress through Exit)
Instruction that treats reading, writing,
listening, and speaking as isolated and
separate skills
Five* English Language Proficiency
(ELP) levels
Principle 1
 Take 3 minutes at your seats to identify key ideas
ELD Standards: Principle 2
ELLS need opportunities to learn about how English
works
Table 2: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 2
From . . .
To . . .
Simplified texts and activities,
often separate from content
knowledge
→
Complex texts and intellectually
challenging activities with
content integral to language
learning
→
ELA Standards working in
tandem with ELA and other
content standards and seen as
the “diamond lane/HOV lane”
for acceleration
→
Dedicated instruction in ELD
that builds into and from
instruction in ELA and literacy in
the content areas
ELD Standards as “junior” ELA
Standards or as an “onramp”
to the ELA Standards
Instruction in ELD that is
separate from and isolated
from instruction in ELA or that
is indistinguishable from ELA
Principle 2
 Take 3 minutes at your seats to identify key ideas
ELD Standards: Principle 3
ELLS need opportunities to learn foundational
literacy skills (if not already learned)
Table 3: Key Shifts Associated with Principle 3
From . . .
To . . .
Early literacy skills embedded
in the ELD Standards
Foundational Literacy Skills
→ applied appropriately
depending on individual student
needs
Little acknowledgement of
ongoing reading difficulties
experienced by some ELLs,
especially Long-term ELLs
Focus on the need to develop
→ reading fluency in order to
ensure college and career
readiness
Principles 1, 2, and 3:
1. ELLs need opportunities to interact in meaningful
ways;
2. ELLs need opportunities to learn about how
English works;
3. ELLs need opportunities to learn foundational
literacy skills (if not already learned).
 Take 3 minutes at your seats to reflect on the three design
principles. To what extent do you agree with these
principles?
CCSS Implications for ELLs and the
Development of the Next Generation ELD
Standards
 Students will need to uncover and delineate language uses in
CCSS:
 Teachers will need to address social, general and discipline-specific
academic language, including the abilities to
 Demonstrate understanding, confirm being understood
 Build on others’ ideas & articulate own ideas
 Construct explanation, engage in arguments
 Students will need to express increasingly more complex
language as they advance in ELD
 Teachers will need to appropriately scaffold & support language used for
content knowledge and action
 ELD assessment developers will need to design appropriate tasks to
measure growth
Next Generation ELD Standards:
Design Specifications
1. Based on theory, research, and best practice
2. Understandable, usable and easily transferrable to
classroom curriculum and instruction for ELD
3. Meaningful and coherent
4. Include an appropriate level of specificity/granularity and
examples
5. Rigorous
6. Concise and measurable
7. Reflect horizontal and vertical alignment
Proficiency Descriptors
Proficiency Level Descriptors (PLDs) provide an overview of
stages of English language development that English learners
are expected to progress through as they gain increasing
proficiency in English. The PLDs describe student knowledge,
skills, and abilities across a continuum, identifying what ELLs
know and can do at early stages and at exit from each of three
proficiency levels: Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging.
The descriptors are intended to be used as a guide for
teachers and curriculum developers to provide ELLs with
targeted instruction in English language development as well
as differentiated instruction in academic content areas.
Proficiency Descriptors
The organization of the PLDs represents a continuum of
increasing proficiency in language learning and use, starting
with native language competencies students possess when
they enter school, and concluding (though not ending) with
lifelong language learning in which all language users are
engaged.
Although the PLDs describe an aligned set of knowledge,
skills, and abilities at each proficiency level that reflect a linear
progression across the levels, this is done for purposes of
presentation and understanding: Actual second language
acquisition does not necessarily occur in a linear fashion within
or across proficiency levels.
Proficiency Level Descriptors
 Emerging: Students at this level typically progress very quickly,
learning to use English for immediate needs as well as beginning to
understand and use academic vocabulary and other features of
academic language.
 Expanding: Students at this level are challenged to increase their
English skills in core contexts, and learn a greater variety of vocabulary
and linguistic structures, applying their growing language skills in more
sophisticated ways appropriate to their age and grade level.
 Bridging: Students at this level continue to learn and apply a range of
high-level English language skills in a wide variety of contexts, including
comprehension and production of highly technical texts. The ‘bridge’
alluded to is the transition to full engagement in grade-level tasks and
activities in a variety of content areas without the need for specialized
ELD instruction. However, ELLs at all levels of English language
proficiency fully participate in grade level tasks in all content areas with
varying degrees of scaffolding in order to develop both content
knowledge and English.
PLDs
 Describe student knowledge, skills, and abilities across a
continuum, identifying what ELLs know and can do
 Provide three proficiency levels: Emerging, Expanding, and
Bridging – at early and exit stages
 Guide targeted instruction in ELD, as well as differentiated
instruction in academic content areas
I. Interacting in Meaningful Ways
Modes of Communication
A. Collaborative (engagement in dialogue with others)
B. Interpretative (comprehension and analysis of written and
spoken texts)
C. Productive (creation of oral presentations and written texts)
Modalities: Collaborative
1. Exchanging information and ideas with others through oral
dialogue on a range of social and academic topics
2. Interacting with others in written English in various
communicative forms (print, communicative technology,
and multimedia)
3. Offering and supporting opinions and negotiating with
others in communicative exchanges
4. Adapting language choices to various contexts (based on
purpose, interlocutors, and modality)
Modalities: Interpretive
5. Listening actively to spoken English in a range of social
and academic contexts
6. Reading closely literary and informational texts and
viewing multimedia to determine how meaning is conveyed
explicitly and implicitly through language
7. Evaluating how well writers use language to support ideas
& opinions with details or reasons depending on modality,
text type, purpose, audience, topic, and content area
8. Analyzing how writers use vocabulary and other language
resources for specific purposes (to explain, persuade,
entertain, etc.) depending on modality, text type, purpose,
audience, topic and content area
Modalities: Productive
8. Expressing information and ideas in formal oral
presentations on academic topics
9. Composing literary and informational texts to present,
describe, and explain ideas and information, using
appropriate technology
10. Supporting own opinions and evaluating others’ opinions in
writing
11. Selecting and applying varied and precise vocabulary and
language structures to effectively convey ideas
II. Language Processes: Learning
About How English Works
Structuring Cohesive Texts
1. Text structure
2. Cohesion
Expanding & Enriching Ideas
3. Verbs and verb groups (phrases, tense, aspect, modals, etc.)
4. Nouns and noun groups
5. Modification (relative clauses, prepositional phrases, etc.)
Connecting & Condensing Ideas
6. Connecting ideas
7. Condensing ideas
III. Using Foundational Literacy
Skills
Literacy in an Alphabetic Writing System
 Print concepts
 Phonological awareness
 Phonics & word recognition
 Fluency
PLDs Include
Descriptors for early stages of and exit from each proficiency level,
using ELD standard structure:
 Three Modes of Communication:
 Collaborative (engagement in dialogue with others)
 Interpretative (comprehension and analysis of written and spoken
texts)
 Productive (creation of oral presentations and written texts)
 Two dimensions of Knowledge of Language:
 Metalinguistic Awareness (language awareness & selfmonitoring)
 Accuracy of Production (acknowledging variation)
Next Generation
English Language
Development Standards
Review and Adoption Process
Washington State’s Process
1. Involve ELD practitioners from across the state to review and
provide comments on the draft ELDs.
Selection of two review teams:
a. One team with content expertise in English Language Arts
(ELA) and ELD.
b. One team with content expertise in Mathematics and ELD.
c. Teams will include representatives from IHE and interested
stakeholders/advocacy groups.
2. Identified reviewers will be brought on site to provide
structured feedback to the ELDs.
3. Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with reviewers’
annotations for public review for 30 days.
Timeline for Standards Development
May 20, 2013
Draft ELP Standards for ELA provided
to ELPA21 states.
 Convene a team with content expertise in
English Language Arts (ELA) and ELD to review
and provide structured feedback to the ELDs.
 Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with
reviewers’ annotations for public review for
30 days.
Summer 2013
Final ELP Standards for ELA available to
states.

 Development of training of ELD
standards if not provided by WestEd.
 Develop a calendar of training for the
New ELD Standards.
Summer 2013
Draft ELP Standards for Mathematics provided to
ELPA21 states
 Convene a team with content expertise in
English Mathematics and ELD to review and
provide structured feedback to the ESDs.
 Feedback to the ELDs will be posted with
reviewers’ annotations for public review for 30
days.
 Challenge: Do not have the date for when
comments are due.
Immediate Need
 Identify practitioners with expertise in both ELAs and ELDs.
 Identify practitioners with expertise in both math and ELDs.
 Identify practitioners with expertise in both science and ELDs.
 If you are interested in applying to participate in the review access:
http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1128161/New-ELD-Standard-Reviewer-application
Contact charisse.sonnier@k12.wa.us with questions or to request the link electronically.
By applying, you are not committing to be available on the date of the review. You are
only agreeing to be part of our talent pool.
ELPA21 Goal
* slides adapted from Oregon DOE
Build an English Language Proficiency Assessment
 Based on a common set of English language
proficiency/development (ELP/D) standards that
 Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards in
English Language Arts and Mathematics and the Next
Generation Science Standards
 And reflect The Framework for English Language
Proficiency Development Standards Corresponding to
the Common Core State Standards and the Next
Generation Science Standards
ELPA21Design Principles
 Electronically-delivered
 Employ technology to optimize the testing experience for the
student and response time on reporting results
ELPA21
Products
 Diagnostic Screener
 Available for districts to assess baseline English language
proficiency of incoming ELL students
 Inform placement and instructional decisions
 Fixed-Form Summative Assessment
ELPA21 Governance Overview
Consortium
Council
Executive
Board
TMTs
Accommod.
&
Accessibility
Item
Acquisition &
Development
Performance
Standard
Setting
Field Testing
Assessment
Design
Technology
Utilization
Communicati
ons &
Outreach
Data System
& Reporting
Professional
Development
Support
ELPA21 Governance Cont’d.
Member States Partners
Oregon (Lead State)
Arkansas
Florida
Iowa
Kansas
Louisiana
Nebraska
Ohio
South Carolina
Washington
West Virginia
• Council of Chief State
School Officers
(CCSSO)
• Understanding
Language, Stanford
University
• National Center for
Research and
Evaluation,
Standards, and
Student Testing
(CRESST)
ELPA21 Participating States
ELPA21 Timeline - Overview
 September 2012: U.S. Department of Education awarded
grant to ELPA21
 2012-13: ELPA21 Governing Structure convened
 December 2013: States adopt common set of ELP standards
 2013-14: Test development
 2014-16: Pilot test, field test, item calibration
 2016-17: Deploy operational assessment system
ELPA21 Timeline
 SY 2012-2013




Kickoff and convene teams
Approve ELPA21 scope, requirements, timeline and budget
Draft and execute RFPs and Item Sharing Agreements
Begin item collection and development
 SY 2013-2014




Develop assessment blueprints and field test forms
Identify field test sites and conduct technical pilot test
Create ELPA21 Scoring Course
Develop Professional Development modules and
Accommodations guide
ELPA21 Timeline
 SY 2014-2015
 Conduct year-long field test






Diagnostic and Screener test forms
ELPA21 Scoring Course
Administration Manual
Accommodations Guide
Professional Development
Reports and Data
 Prepare for Rollout:
 Create turnkey RFPs for assessment delivery vendors
 Execute ELPA21 licensure agreements
 Specify data management protocols
ELPA21 Timeline
 SY 2015-2016






Analyze field tests data
Refine test forms
Determine cut scores
Finalize ELPA21 Scoring course
Release technical reports
Finalize support materials
 SY 2016-2017
 Deliver test forms and support materials
 Publish project findings
 Report to US DOE
ELP Standards Corresponding with
CCSS
 Under development by West Ed, with support from CCSSO
and financial support from Stanford University Understanding
Language.
 Developed using the Framework for English Language
Proficiency Development Standards
Corresponding to the Common Core State Standards and the
Next Generation Science Standards (2012).
 Expect draft soon.
Common definition of an ELL?
 Requested by the USDOE of the two assessment consortia
measuring the CCSS, SBAC and PARCC
 Joined by two ELD/P consortia, WIDA and ELPA 21
 Work currently underway by Robert Linquanti (WestEd) and Gary
Cook (WIDA)
 Includes a review of the home language survey
Thank you!
Margaret Ho
Margaret.ho@k12.wa.us
Helen Malagón
Helen.malagon@k12.wa.us