ppt - Washington State Board of Education

AMAOs for Washington State
Recommendations to the State Board of Education
May 8, 2013
Gil Mendoza, Assistant Superintendent
Migrant, Bilingual and Native Education
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

Proposal for Changing AMAO-1
Student progress toward English proficiency

OSPI recommends
1. estimate the median time to proficiency
2. compute expected grade of proficiency
3. compute WELPA transitional scale score required to
reach transitional cut point
4. establish annual student progress required to reach
that scale score

OSPI recommends a prospective measurement of the
median time to transition
‣ by placement grade and placement level
‣ median years to transition for students successfully transitioning
‣ use 3 years of placement cohorts SY 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
- enough time has passed to minimize effect of censoring
- covers testing using all three forms of the WLPT-II

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 1
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 1
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
avg
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 2
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 2
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
avg
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 3
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Year - Level 3
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
avg
1.0
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Level and Grade (3 YR AVG)
3.5
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Level 2
Level 1
Level 3
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4.0
Years to Transition by Placement Level and Grade (3 YR AVG)
3.5
Level 1
3.0
Median Years
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Level 2
Level 3
0.5
0.0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

4
Years to Transition by Placement Level and Grade (3 YR AVG)
3.5
3
Median Years
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Grade at Placement

Preliminary Prospective Estimates
Placement
Average Years to Expected Years to
Grade
Transition
Transition
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
K 2.6 2.4 1.7 3 2 2
1 2.4 1.8 1.1 3 2 1
2 2.7 1.6 0.9 3 2 1
3 3.0 2.0 1.6 3 2 1
4 2.8 1.6 1.4 3 2 1
5 3.1 1.8 1.5 3 2 1
6 3.3 2.2 0.9 3 2 1
7 3.2 2.6 1.1 3 2 1
8 3.0 2.4 1.0 3 2 1
9 2.4 2.1 1.2 3 2 1
10 2.0 1.5 0.6 2 2 1
11 1.8 1.2 0.5 2 1 1
12 1.4 1.3 0.4 1 1 0

Placement
Grade
Expected Years to
Transition
Expected Grade of
Transition
Level 4 Cut Score of
expected grade
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
K 3 2 2 2 2 2 511 511 494
1 3 2 1 4 3 2 548 529 511
2 3 2 1 5 4 3 553 548 529
3 3 2 1 6 5 4 563 553 548
4 3 2 1 7 6 5 575 563 553
5 3 2 1 8 7 6 575 575 563
6 3 2 1 9 8 7 575 575 575
7 3 2 1 10 9 8 575 575 575
8 3 2 1 11 10 9 577 575 575
9 3 2 1 11 11 10 577 577 575
10 2 2 1 12 12 11 577 577 577
11 2 1 1 13 12 12 577 577 577
12 1 1 0 13 13 12 577 577 577

Transitional Score
WELPA Scale Score
0 1 2
3
placement
Years in TBIP

Transitional Score
WELPA Scale Score
0 1 2
3
placement
Years in TBIP

Recommended procedure to establish AMAO-1 adequate annual growth
Establish “on-track” to English proficiency
1. Compute expected transition grade given placement grade and
English proficiency level.
2. Compute Level 4 cut score needed to transition at the expected
grade.
3. Set the adequate annual growth from 1 st annual test.
Establish school/district/state targets of percent on-track
4. Compute percent of students on-track or above by
school/district.
5. Establish target percent of students on-track or above such that
85% of districts could meet that target.
6. increase targets using exponential curve over years.

Proposal for Changing AMAO-2
Set separate targets for each combination of
- Years in Program and Placement Level
Proposal for Changing AMAO-3
Set targets for math and reading scale scores below State standard for
current Level 1 to Level 3
Create an Ever ELL cell in the State Accountability Index

Making the case for “Ever ELL” cell
ELL student academic proficiency in Reading and Math
Michael Shapiro
Washington State Bilingual Education Advisory Committee

The case for “Ever ELL” cell
English language proficiency means academic performance
is no longer related to language acquisition
Current ELL subgroup
- does not consider post transitional success
- membership continuously changes
“Ever ELL” subgroup gives credit for the rapid improvement
in reading and mathematics following transition from ELL
services

90%
Percent Meeting State Standards 2012 by ELL Type
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
72%
61%
69%
61%
38%
35%
55%
50%
74%
63%
53%
46%
77%
65%
30%
20%
26%
24%
22%
21%
Reading
Math
10%
0%
All Students
Current ELL
Recent ELL
Recent&Current
Active ELL
Transition ELL
Former ELL
Ever ELL
Never ELL
T+1 & T+2
Current ELL
T+>2 Current &
Recent &
Former

100%
Math Growth and Achievement 2012
90%
80%
Percentage Meeting Standard
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Total = 61%
Never
ELL
Current ELL
Ever ELL
Recent ELLs
Former ELLs
Transitional
ELL
20%
10%
Active ELL
0%
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60
Median Student Growth Percentile

100%
Reading Growth and Achievement 2012
90%
80%
Total = 74%
Never
ELL
Former ELL
Percentage Meeting Standard
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Current ELL
Ever ELL
Recent ELL
Transitional
ELL
20%
10%
Active ELL
0%
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60
Median Student Growth Percentile

The case for “Ever ELL” cell
Recognizes developmental nature of language acquisition
Allows continual monitoring of all ESL students
Encourages better service delivery
Give schools credit for high academic growth after transition

AMAOs for Washington State
Recommendations to the State Board of Education
May 8, 2013
Gil Mendoza, Assistant Superintendent
Migrant, Bilingual and Native Education
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction