“Meeting the needs of Long Term
English Learners in the Secondary
School Grades:
research, tools, lessons learned and
practical examples”
Laurie Olsen, Ph.D.
lolaurieo@gmail.com
January 26, 2013
English Learner Typologies
• Newly arrived with adequate schooling
(including literacy in L1)
• Newly arrived with interrupted formal
schooling - “Underschooled” - “SIFE”
• English Learners developing normatively (1-5
years)
• Long Term English Learner
Definition
• Six or more years (cumulatively or
continuously) in U.S. schools
• Not yet reclassified
• Stuck in progressing towards English
proficiency
• Tend to be orally fluent in social English
• Reading and writing below grade level
• Insufficient development of primary language
• Struggling academically
Resulting in typical profile
•
•
•
•
•
High functioning socially with weak language
Often English dominant – think they are fluent
Discouraged and struggling in classes
Don’t ask for help
Either stay under the radar, invisible and silent
or act out
• Non-engaged and non-participants in class
Typical program placements
for English Learners
Intensive or strategic interventions!
SDAIE
Still English Learner, but in Mainstream
1 –
3 years





_______________________________________________________________________
No English
I
II
Oral,
social
English
CELDT
Proficient
III
IV
CST Basic
V
Proficient
for
Academic
work
Placements NOT designed for
them…..
• Placed/kept in classes with newcomer and
normatively developing English Learners – by
CELDT level
• Unprepared teachers
• No electives – and limited access to the full
curriculum
• Over-assigned and inadequately served in
intervention and reading support classes
Review: Key elements
• Urgency, acceleration and focus on distinct needs
• Language development is more than literacy
development – LTELs need both
• Language development + Academic gaps
• Crucial role of home language
• Rigor, relevance, relationships
• Active engagement
• Oral language and Academic language
• Writing
• Integration
Echoing Common Core
• More focus on structured, rich oral language
• More focus on writing
• More emphasis on language in and through
social studies and science – a full academic
curriculum
• More focus on interaction, collaboration,
discussion
• More focus on academic vocabulary and
discourse
Recommendations
• Specialized ELD or LTEL language class
• Clustered in heterogeneous classes
mainstream academic classes with
differentiated SDAIE strategies used
• Explicit language/literacy development across
the curriculum
• Emphasis on engagement, oral language and
academic language, study skills, rigor
• Native speakers classes (through AP)
The “LTEL” Course
• 38 districts have created/adopted some kind
course for LTELs in middle school and/or high
school
• Variety of “buckets” and intentions: ELD for
LTELs; English support classes; academic
language; academic intervention/support; SDAIE
English for LTELs
• Range of materials, programs, approaches drawn
upon – and diverse combinations of components
Four case studies
• Tracy Unified School District: “ALAS” class
paired with regular English class
• Arroyo Valley High School (San Bernardino):
schoolwide approach
• Anaheim Union High School District: High
school special ELD IV class; middle school
support class
• Ventura Unified School District: Multiple
placement options
Essential components
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Oral language
Student Engagement
Academic Language
Expository text (reading and writing) plus other
genres
Consistent routines
Goal Setting
Empowering pedagogy
Rigor
Community and Relationships
Study Skills
Materials/Curriculum
• Major challenge
• Drawn from existing materials, added
supplementary and created additional materials
• Needs to be relevant, high interest, age
appropriate
• Needs to incorporate whole books
• Curriculum explicitly provides opportunities for
active engagement
• Curriculum should touch on all essential
components
• Materials should align and connect to core
academic courses
New resources
• English 3D
• AVID Excel for Long Term English Learners
(middle school)
Structural Considerations
•
•
•
•
Smaller class size
More fluid pacing guide
Dedicated LTEL class just for LTELs
Attention to maximizing graduation credits
and fulfillment of the A-G
• Same teacher for dedicated LTEL class as for
core English class (?)
• Careful teacher selection/assignment
Challenges and Lessons Learned
• It’s complex, requires time, collaborative effort
and resources
• MUST address motivation and re-engaging
• Everyone has to understand purpose of class
• Begin with and keep data in forefront
• Provide professional development and support
for teachers
• Build leadership and infrastructure at the site and
district
Impacts
• No consistent data across sites or across years
• Intended outcomes: success in ELA
curriculum, active participation and success in
academic classes, redesignation, scoring
Proficient or above on CST, preparation for
college
• In general, reports are positive
• Piloting districts are proceeding with
refinements and course offerings, and
expanding to other sites
Language development across the
curriculum
• Attention to the language demands of
academic subjects
• Use of language objectives to focus instruction
for ELs
• Use of “scaffolds” to bolster comprehension
and access to content (e.g., visuals, primary
language resources, graphic organizers)
• SIOP, Constructing Meaning, GLAD, ELLA,
SDAIE strategies
Does introducing native language instruction in
secondary schools have benefit?
The case for Native Language classes
• Activates the language system facilitating
meta-linguistic benefits
• Bolsters English
• Can increase college preparation and collegegoing rates
• Develops skill with personal, family, labor
market and societal benefits
• Addresses identity and culture
The SEAL of Biliteracy
An award granted to high school seniors
(by a school, district and/or the state)
upon graduation certifying attainment of
mastery of two or more languages (one of
which is English)……
(includes American Sign Language)
State Seal of Biliteracy
• Assembly Bill 815 (Brownley, Chapter 618,
Statues of 2011) took effect January 1, 2012
• Purpose:
To recognize high school graduates who have
attained a high level of proficiency in reading,
writing, speaking and listening in one or
more languages in addition to English
Criteria
• Complete English requirements for graduation
with overall GPA of 2.0 or above
• Pass CST in ELA at grade 11 at “proficient”
• Pass Advanced Placement Exam with 3+ or IB
exam with 4+ or successful completion of 4-year
high school course of student in world language
with 3.0 in those courses or SAT II test at 600+ or
a school district exam equivalent
• English Learners must be “CELDT Proficient”
Purpose - Why might your school or
district want a Seal of Biliteracy?
Recognize achievement and hard work
Encourage students to study languages
Affirm and encourage developing home language
Establish the value of bilingualism
Protect and/or build language programs
Build more respectful inter-group relationships
Develop job/career skills
Other…….
Ventura: A District Action Plan
• Title III Improvement Plan “Operation
Prevent LTELs”
• ELD/ELL course sequence rewritten
• Clear placement criteria for all courses
• Appropriate curriculum and technology
• Pacing guides and assessment routines
• Common sequence of language functions for
ELD K-5
Investment in
•
•
•
•
•
•
Intensive professional development
PLCs across academic content areas
Bilingual Opportunities Pathway Program
Multilingual Recognition Awards
Student Pep Talks
Administrative and leadership structures to
keep issue on table and to maintain
accountability
Ventura Unified School District
Results so far….
• Substantial increase in reclassification rates at
pilot high schools (from 14% to 20.9% compared to district average 9.1% - 9.5%)
• Improved growth on CELDT (from 44.9%
moving 1 level to 60.9%; from 22.2% achieving
proficiency to 26.8%)
Increase in LTEL scoring “Proficient”
2007
2008
2008
-
2009
Language Arts
Math
Language Arts
Math
8.7%
17.4%
25%
32.7%
Pilot
11.3%
School B
33.3%
17.5%
33.3%
Pilot
School A
Modesto City Schools
• K-8 and 9-12 Districts
Title I and Title III Program Improvement Status
Year 5
• Established a Working Group (representative)
• One year to “study” and develop
recommendations
• Investment in implementing plan
29
Who are our English Learners?
# Years in
US School
2008 - 2009
Grades 7-12
Language Institute
Tier I
Tier II
1
2
(92)
3%
Tier III
Tier IV
3
4
(178)
7%
5+ Program
5
Or more
(2,344) 90%
30
5+ Program
9th Grade
Period
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Course
ELA
READ 180
OR READ 180
ALD
Spanish for Spanish Speakers
Math
Earth Science
PE
Elective (A-G) : Visual
Performing Arts, Support, or
AVID
NOTE:
World Religions/Health
classes in summer
school or senior year.
Computers in any four
years, summer school,
or test out
31
Differentiated placement in 9th gr.
• 2 period block of Read 180, using L book by
Kate Kinsella (accepted as ELD) with a bilingual
paraprofessional (for students who are really
intensive and struggling at all levels
academically) – for Freshman year only
• High end of Below Basic/low Basic 
ELA + ALD
• Advanced or Proficient on ELA-CST 
opt out of ALD and are monitored
Anaheim Union High School District
• Commitment to a broad, full 21st century
curriculum (decrease placements in support
classes, CAHSEE prep classes, etc.; no more
double blocking; institute 2 science/social
studies at junior h.s.; build career technical
education – industry pathways)
• Literacy and language across curriculum
• Biliteracy as a 21st century skill
In two years….
“Takes a 3-5 year commitment”
• API has gone up 31 points
• Reclassification has increased
• Higher English Learner 10th grade CAHSEE
passage rates
El Monte districts
• 2 elementary districts + 1 high school district
• “Expectations” and commitment in common
• Summer programs – thematic instruction, science
and social studies based, intensive language
development
• Mentoring
• Investment in professional development for
content area teachers
• ELA/ELD Articulation across the districts
• New ELD/ALD courses and materials
Action Steps

• Fact finding
• District EL Master Plan describes research-based
program models for different typologies of EL
students (or site)
• Specific LTEL program and placements
• Support development of new courses
• Provide materials and professional development
– as high priority for use of resources
• System of monitoring placements
• Mechanisms to change status of L1 and promote
biliteracy