Seattle Public School ELL Data Veronica Maria Gallardo

Seattle Public School ELL Data Veronica Maria Gallardo, Director of ELL 1

Identification and Progress Monitoring for English Language Learners � Placement � Given to students who indicating that they speak a language other than English at home on the Home Language Survey � Annual � Test Proficiency Exam Determines if a student is still eligible to receive services and amount of growth in English language proficiency � Both Tests Measure student’s abilities in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in English � Identify a level of English proficiency � � Level 1 – Beginning � Level 2 – Intermediate � Level 3 – Advanced � Level 4 – Transitional (English proficient) 2

District Funding to Support English Language Learners (2011 -12 School Year) � State’s Transitional Bilingual Instructional Program funds � Provides $886 per student � Total: $ 4. 819 million � Title III English Language Learner Funds � Total: � Title $ 1. 04 million 1 Part C Migrant Funds � Total: $ 105, 641 � Refugee Impact Grant � School’s Out Washington oversees funds � Total: $ 30, 000 3

Purpose of ELL Data Analysis � Understand who make up the English Language Learner (ELL) population in Seattle; � Identify their current level of performance on a range of academic indicators: � District and State Content Assessments � Washington English Language Proficiency Assessment (WELPA) � Identify any schools with good outcomes for ELLs and those really struggling to serve students � Determine 4 which indicators are useful in determining success of ELL students for the purpose of monitoring success of Levy investments

ELL Demographics Data 2012 -2013 5

1000 Total Seattle ELL Enrollment by Grade 948 Based on 2012 -2013 SY Current 900 832 800 749 700 600 566 494 500 405 399 400 350 314 318 300 61 % of K-5 ELL Student in 200 306 292 279 16 % in Middle 22 % in High School 100 0 K 6 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

English Language Learners as a Percent of All Students by Grade 25. 0% Based on 2012 -2013 SY 20. 0% 19. 3% 19. 6% 16. 0% 15. 0% 12. 8% 12. 6% 12. 0% 10. 9% 10. 3% 10. 1% 10. 0% 10. 8% 11. 4% 10. 4% 9. 7% 9. 5% 5. 0% 0. 0% K 7 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 SPS

30. 0% Top Languages Spoken in Seattle School District 2012 -2013 74% of ELL student speak one of the top six languages. 25. 0% 105 Other Languages Spoken by ELL Students 20. 0% 15. 0% 10. 0% 5. 0% 0. 0% Spanish 8 Vietnamese Somali Chinese Tagalog Amharic Tigrinya (Tigrigna) Oromo Cambodian (Ethiopia) Other

Number of Current ELL Students by Years in Program 2012 -2013 SY N=5773 students 1600 1400 1200 Long Term ELLs 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 to 1 9 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 Greter than 5 years

ELLs Receiving Special Education Services 18% of ELL Students are also in Special Education N = 5773 1053; 18% 4720; 82% 10

ELLs Demographic Data Not Captured � Current data collection does not include: � Student’s level of education in native country � Student’s native language proficiency � Student’s proficiency in content areas such as math � Student � Social, 11 with interrupted formal education (SIFE) emotional, and health needs of students

Seattle ELL Performance Data Note: Data from, WLPT 2012 etc. 12

ELL Performance Data Federal Performance Measures Seattle Public School Performance Measure � Three � Measurement Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) � Percent of ELLs making English language proficiency gains � Percent of students who transition out of program � 13 Percent of students meeting standard on state’s content assessment of Student Progress (two times a year) � Percent of ELLs meeting or exceeding typical growth in the 12 Level 1 elementary schools (~21% of ELLs) � Target: 65% of ELLs � Actual (Dec. -Feb. ): 61% of ELLs

Percent of English Language Learners Making Gains in English Proficiency 2011 -2012 SY Washington State Total 16, 916; 26% 48, 147; 74% 14 Seattle Public Schools 992; 25% Students with no gain Students making gains 2, 933; 75% Year 2010 -2011 848 21. 3% Year 2009 -2010 1158 32% 3139 78. 7% 2460 68%

N or Sa thg Jo ca ate hn ja St wea an Ja fo ne R Ad o rd da xh m il Sa s l nd K-8 Po Ad int am Th Bai Ki s ur ley mb go G al od at l M zer Fr ars t Br an ha oa tz ll dv C ie D oe w u -T nl ho ap H ms Ar awt on bo ho r H rn ei e g O Em hts ly e m rs pi on c Vi e W M w es a p t S le Jo eatt h le So Be n M ut ac uir h on D Sho Hi ea r ll rb e K O orn -8 ly m Pa pi rk W c. H in ills g L B uke F To Da ps y KG Br 8 ra ya ha n m t C Hi on ll co S R te rd ai ve ni M er ns ar tin Vi ew Lu th er A K lk Va ing i n J As r se L lt G esc at ew hi oo H ig Sa d hl ni an sl d o Vi Pa ew rk la nd s Percent of Elementary School ELL Students Making Gains in English Language Proficiency 2011 -12 SY 100. 0% 15 67. 2% Target 90. 0% 80. 0% 70. 0% 60. 0% 50. 0% 40. 0% 30. 0% 20. 0% 10. 0%

Percent of Middle School ELL Students Making Gains in English Language Proficiency 2011 -12 SY 90. 0% 67. 2% Target 80. 0% 70. 0% 60. 0% 50. 0% 40. 0% 30. 0% 20. 0% 10. 0% David T Mc. Clure Whitman Mercer Middle Hamilton Eckstein Madison Washington Aki Kurose Denny Middle School International Middle School International Middle School 16

Percent and Number of High School ELLs Making Gains on Language Proficiency 2011 -2012 SY 100. 0% 67. 2% Target 90. 0% 80. 0% 70. 0% 60. 0% 50. 0% 40. 0% 30. 0% 20. 0% 10. 0% Nathan Hale Roosevelt Ballard High Rainier Garfield High Ingraham Franklin High Cleveland Chief Sealth West Seattle High School Beach High School High School 17

Percent of ELL Students Exiting in the ELL Program in 2011 -12 SY 16. 0% 13. 6% 14. 0% 12. 0% 10. 9% 10. 7% 10. 0% 9. 3% 8. 0% 6. 0% 4. 0% Target 7. 1% 2. 0% 0. 0% Elementary School 18 Middle School High School Seattle District

Meeting Standard on the 2011 -12 School Year Math, Reading & Writing State Assessment (MSP-HSPE) 90. 0% Bilingual Students NON-Bilingual Students 78. 4% 80. 0% 78. 0% 71. 2% 70. 0% 60. 0% 50. 0% 40. 0% 36. 9% 31. 3% 30. 0% 26. 0% 20. 0% 10. 0% Reading 19 Math Writing

English Language Learners Meeting Math and Reading Standards by Grade Levels, Year 2011 -2012 (MSP-HSPE) 45% 03 04 10 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% District Reading 20 State Reading District Math State Math

English Language Learners Results in Reading and Math on the Spring MAP by Grade Spam and Cluster. Year 2011 -2012 Reading MAP Spring 2012 Region South East Central North East North West Middle Schools High Schools Students tested 1319 327 226 307 556 759 422 Met Standard 688 164 107 143 234 486 293 % Meeting Standard Met Standard By Grade Spam 52% 50% 47% 42% 64% 69% K to 1 253 54% 55 49% 37 42% 36 38% 41 28% 2 to 3 221 44% 57 49% 39 44% 55 45% 96 46% 4 to 5 203 60% 52 53% 31 65% 52 58% 86 54% 64% 6 to 8 9 to 12 486 293 69% Math MAP Spring 2012 Region South East Central North East North West Middle Schools High Schools Students tested 1291 327 227 304 551 752 373 Met Standard 707 178 115 162 261 480 256 % Meeting Standard Met Standard By Grade Spam 55% 54% 51% 53% 47% 64% 69% K to 1 223 49% 57 51% 39 43% 41 43% 56 31% 2 to 3 272 55% 59 51% 45 51% 60 50% 112 54% 4 to 5 212 63% 62 62% 31 63% 61 69% 93 58% 64% 6 to 8 9 to 12 21 480 256 69%

Next Steps Considerations for Next Steps 22

Current Work � Common Core – Sharing major shifts in new standards � Tiered Service Model – Prioritize ELL services in 64 schools, Tier 1, 2 and 3 � Roles and Responsibilities – SPS/SEA collaboration to identify roles and responsibilities for IA’s, ELL and regular education teachers, ELL coaches and principals � Communication Tools via Electronic Binder – shared with all ELL staff and school administrators � Assessment and Data Reports – MAP, ESIS, WELPA and MSP � ELL Retreat – 2 ELL teachers and 2 IA’s per region, coaches, 1 person per department. Goal is to create strategic initiatives that align with the district strategic plan 23

ELL Feedback/Survey � Based on the student data and information shared today, what do you believe is working for our ELL students? � What do you recommend we modify or change to better serve our ELL students? � How can the ELL Department partner more effectively with the our community and parents in general? � What are three goals you would like the ELL department to work on this academic year? (based 24