What I Have Learned
Part 2 Identification and Placement
and is able to follow directions in class. Many times, Mariana even explains or repeats
instructions to her peers who misunderstand. She is often very verbal and eagerly speaks to other students and to teachers. Again, because of missing information about her background, it is hard to say whether Mariana has academic language in her L1. She still has at least 50% in this category, despite her strengths, and therefore needs further work in this category.
Discussion
This student needs definite improvement in acculturation, culture and language, and sociolinguistic development. This student did not appear to need improvement in cognitive learning style and experiential background, but that may be due to lack of information and a significant language barrier. More information must be acquired and the student’s progress must be tracked as this student’s language abilities advance.
Part 2
My student, Mariana, was given the TELPA, which was the entrance exam in effect at the time of her enrollment. These scores (0’s in every category) were recorded and placed in the online system for her teachers to view. However, the other information that was gathered that day by the ELD center was not given to the teachers and left blank in the online system.
Although Mariana’s L1 proficiency as well as educational background information was probably gathered that day, and we can easily assume it was, none of that information is given to the teachers that teach her so we have no record of that.
The student’s needs were met as far as taking an English language proficiency test that placed her in the classes that she is in today. However, it is unknown whether she was given the home language survey, although we can assume that she was because she was referred to the ELD center and given the TELPA. We can therefore assume, despite the lack of data, that Mariana’s needs were met in this category.
Monitoring Progress/Accountability for English
According to No Child Left Behind, “Title III requires SEAs to hold LEAs accountable for meeting annual measurable achievement objectives that relate to LEP children's development and attainment of English proficiency and academic development” (U.S. Department of
Education, 2003). Schools “must assess LEP children in the five domains of speaking, reading, writing, listening, and comprehension” (U.S. Department of Education, 2003) which is achieved through ACCESS, W-APT/TELPA, and TCAP/ELSA testing in the state of Tennessee. Mariana was enrolled in the Metro-Nashville Schools on May 13, 2014, so she arrived after the ACCESS and the TCAP were given to students for that year. This year, she was tested using ELSA and ACCESS during the month of February. Although these scores will not be available until May or later, this fulfills both the Monitoring Progress and Accountability for English categories.
Reclassification
As stated earlier, Mariana was tested using ACCESS this year, which fulfills this
requirement of reclassification. There are two other aspects of reclassification: student portfolios and teacher recommendation. Mariana is far from being able to be reclassified as ineligible for ELL services. However, when that time comes, Mariana’s current teacher will be well aware of it because she has great mental awareness of the language abilities of the students. She
differentiates her students based on mental notes that she takes and places them and advances them from three categories of proficiency within this one proficiency-based classroom.
As far as having a student portfolio, there is one on file for Mariana that holds her academic records including all of her testing scores as well as any information gathered by the ELD center. The Tennessee State Department of Education specifies, “that the HLS document be maintained” (Tennessee State Board of Education, 2011). However, since teachers do not have immediate access to these files, they do not contain classwork samples. The teacher herself does not acquire classwork samples into a portfolio on each individual student. Therefore, Mariana’s portfolio contains only the most basic of information while still meeting the requirements of this category.
Program Evaluation
There are four aspects of evaluation of a program that will be addressed with Overton High School, the school in which Mariana is enrolled: dropout percentage, TCAP scores, ACCESS scores, and endorsed teacher percentage. According to statistics from the 2012-2013 school year, the on-time graduation rate for all students is 78.8%. The dropout rate for that year was 3% of the student body, but 5.3% of LEP students (Department of Research, Assessment, and Evaluation, 2012).
The TCAP scores for the 2012-2013 school year were also included in that statistical information. The percentage of LEP students who scored proficiently on the various segments of the TCAP are as follows; 14.3% on Algebra, 5.9% on Biology I, and 14.3% on English II. A majority of LEP students scored basic or below basic on these tests and very few if any showed advanced achievement. These scores show a decrease in proficiency in comparison to other years (Department of Research, Assessment, and Evaluation, 2012).
As mentioned earlier, students are also tested using the ACCESS assessment that is based on WIDA standards. Additionally, many of the teachers at Overton High School are endorsed and highly educated, and all of them have had SIOP training. Because of these factors, Overton’s ELL program is being appropriately evaluated, however, the results may indicate that change is necessary for improvement.
Discussion
Because of Mariana’s identification and placement into an ELL program based on TELPA test scores, we can assume that she was given an initial home language survey that sent her to Metro-Nashville’s ELD center. Therefore, all government requirements were met for her identification and placement. Mariana not only took the TELPA when admitted, but also the ACCESS and ELSA tests in February of this year. Government requirements are being met in monitoring her progress and accountability of her English. Although Mariana is not ready for reclassification, there is a student portfolio with test scores available and the teachers are knowledgeable enough about her to recommend her when applicable. The ELL program at Mariana’s school has seen a drop in TCAP scores in the recent past. However, the state has recently adopted a new form of testing which may alter our perception of this program in the future. ELL students at this school tend to have a slightly higher dropout rate than other students,
though this percentage has not seen a drastic increase in recent years. Also, teachers are qualified and highly educated at this school, and have even had professional development in the form of SIOP training.
Despite the decrease in test scores and the missing information in various areas of Mariana’s documentation as a student, it is fair to conclude that her school is meeting the needs of its students in many if not all of the areas indicated. That is not to say that improvement is not needed to have an exceptional program. The areas in need of the most improvement would be the state test scores, the dropout rate, and especially the student portfolios and the teacher access to those documents.
Part 3