Laura Hill Public Policy Institute of California hillppicorg Todays discussion Motivation Data and Methods Research Questions How do reclassified RFEP students fare over time How do Californias English Learner EL students get reclassified ID: 382040
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Reclassification of English Learner Stud..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Reclassification of English Learner Students in California
Laura Hill
Public Policy Institute of California
hill@ppic.orgSlide2
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data and Methods
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
2Slide3
Motivation
Persistent achievement gap for ELs and other students
ELs are 25% of K-12 student population
Districts get extra $$ for EL studentsMore per student with LCFF Because RFEP do better than EL students, interest in reclassifying more ELsWill lowering reclassification criteria narrow the achievement gap?Are reclassification policies linked toReclassification rates?Student outcomes?
3Slide4
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? (CALPADs data)How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? (Reclassification survey)Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
4Slide5
Reclassification policy data: district survey
Reclassification survey developed with help of EL experts, field tested
Emailed to district Title III contacts or superintendent
June – July 2013Classify responses by at or exceeding SBE guidelinesCurrent policies2008-09 policies – target year5Slide6
Student data: linked CALPADs
All districts
Follow students within district for 6
years2007-08 – 2012-20134 cohorts, n=500k studentsStudents must be ELs at kindergartenNo late arriversNo Special Ed
Compare outcomes across language groups
Still EL
Reclassified (RFEP)
English only (EO)
IFEP
6Slide7
Four student cohorts
EL Kinder.
year
First
year CALPADs
2007-08
Target
reclass
year
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Final year CALPADs
2012-13
Grade 2 cohort
K in
‘052nd3rd6thGrade 4 cohortK in ‘034th5th7thGrade 7 cohortK in ‘007th8th12thGrade 8 cohortK in ‘998th9th12th +
7Slide8
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? (CALPADs data)How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? (Reclassification survey)Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
8Slide9
RFEP students have better scores than EO students
9
% of students scoring Basic or higher on CST ELA, grade 2 cohortSlide10
RFEP students make on time progress
10Slide11
Reclassified students have strong end-of-high school outcomes
11Slide12
Results persist when add complexity
When we control for district characteristics and student characteristics, same basic findings
Those reclassified early (by 4
th grade) perform better than or as well as EO, IFEP, vastly outperform ELThose reclassified later (5th grade and later)Still vastly outperform ELsMore on par with EOsDo not do as well as IFEPsNo evidence that RFEP students’ performance falters
12Slide13
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? (CALPADs data)How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? (Reclassification survey)Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
13Slide14
Reclassification Policies
SBE guidelines, but CDE doesn’t know what districts do
An example of local control, but with unknown efficacy
Just one important policy lever, but one on the table now: SB 1108 (Sen. Padilla)What are districts doing?What are recommendations for improving reclassification policies?Survey asks about 4 criteria and a variety of other reclassification issues14Slide15
Survey respondents are broadly representative
15
Responded
Did
Not Respond
Elementary districts
139
397
Share elm.
students (%)
36
64
Average enrollment
3,037
1,744
High
School districts
33
46
Share of high school students (%)
41
59
Average enrollment
7,439
6,245
Unified districts
131
208
Share of students (%)
54
46
Average enrollment
19,492
6,789Slide16
Survey respondents are broadly representative (
con’t
)
Responded
Did
Not Respond
Share
of state’s students (%)
54
46
Share of Spanish-speaking ELs
58
42
Share of
all other language ELs
62
38
API (average)
780
772
Low-income
(average)
60
56
English
Learners (average)
23
21
Reclassification
rate (average)
12
10
16Slide17
More than half of respondents had “EL” in job title
17Slide18
Most districts use more rigorous reclassification policies
Fewer than 10% use SBE guidelines only
Majority have more than one criteria that is more rigorous that SBE guidelines
More than one third use at least 3 or more rigorous criteria18Slide19
What did we learn – English proficiency?
All districts use the CELDT
OPL requirements
10% districts require “Advanced”Remainder require “Early Advanced” (SBE guideline)Subtest requirements40% do not allow “Intermediate” subtestsRemainder allow some “Intermediate” (SBE guideline)19Slide20
What did we learn – basic skills?
Basic Skills CST ELA
More than 70% require “Mid Basic” or higher on CST ELA
About 30% require “Proficient”About 30% just require Basic (SBE guideline)Over 45% also require CST MathMore in elementary districtsOver 8% History/Social Science CSTMore in HS districts
20Slide21
What did we learn – teacher evaluation?
Teacher evaluation
Hard to say what SBE guideline is
We find65% require specific grades/GPA45% require assessmentsFew “consider” assessments and grades without specific cutoffs.Subjective teacher evaluationAttendance, behavior, discipline considered in a substantial minority of districts
21Slide22
Respondents believe basic skills are most challenging criteria
22Slide23
In your opinion, how important are each criteria in reclassification decisions?
23Slide24
Reclassification timing and policy change
Most districts do not assess students for reclassification until 2
nd
grade (~50%)Few districts (2%) reclassify year-roundAbout 30% reclassify in just one seasonMost district reclassification policies have remained the same since 20085% changed English proficiency15% changed basic skills8% changed teacher evaluation standards
24Slide25
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data and Methods
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
25Slide26
Most districts use more rigorous reclassification policies …
… are they connected to district reclassification rates?
Classify policies from surveys
Link to district reclassification ratesWe find more rigorous policies are associated with lower reclassification rates26Slide27
More rigorous reclassification policies are linked to lower reclassification rates
27Slide28
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data and Methods
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
28Slide29
Does it help RFEPs if reclassification policies are more rigorous?
Tested each of the more rigorous criteria in comparison to SBE guidelines
CELDT
OPL of Early AdvancedSubtests can be IntermediateCST ELA of BasicConsider grades/GPA and/or assessments29Slide30
Main findings
More rigorous policies are often, but not always, positively associated with student outcomes
Size of improvement is small
What works for early elementary may not work for middle or high school (and vice-versa)30Slide31
Proficient ELA requirement gets a district…
3 percentage point decline in reclassification rate
12% to 9%
PerformanceIncrease in 6th grade CST ELA Proficient scores 82% from 78%Increase in 8th grade CST ELA Proficient scores66% from 61%Increase in 11
th
grade CST ELA Proficient scores
17% from 14%
Increase in on time 10
th
grade progress
95% from 90%
Decrease in share earning diploma (5%)
31Slide32
More rigorous teacher evaluation requirement gets a district…
3 percentage point decline in reclassification rate
12% to 9%
PerformanceIncrease in 6th grade CST ELA Proficient scores 82% from 78%Increase in 8th grade CST ELA Proficient scores65% from 61%Decrease in 11
th
grade CST ELA Proficient scores
9% from 14%
No change in on time 10
th
grade progress
Increase share earning diploma (3%), decrease in share meeting a-g (10%)
32Slide33
Today’s discussion
Motivation
Data and Methods
Research QuestionsHow do reclassified (RFEP) students fare over time? How do California’s English Learner (EL) students get reclassified? Is there a link between district reclassification rates and policies?Do reclassification policies matter for student outcomes? Conclusions/recommendations
33Slide34
Conclusions and recommendations
RFEP students do not falter
Those reclassified earlier do better
RFEP students do VERY wellTime to reconsider EL classification?Setting higher standards makes EL and RFEP students look better, but reclassifies fewerHow will this play out with new LCFF and LCAP?
34Slide35
Without standard reclassification policy, can’t compare districts
CST Score
100
200
300
400
500
Number ELs
1
1
1
1
1
Mean EL score
Mean RFEP score
District A:
CST
reclass
requirement is 300150400District B: CST reclass requirement is 40020045035Example: Two districts with equal performance among ELs, different reclassification policies:Slide36
Conclusions and recommendations
Trading slightly improved outcomes against lower reclassification rates is not worth it
What is the right standard?
Is it the SBE guidelines?This research could only test against thoseOpinions of respondents suggest balance might not be right
Smarter Balanced and new English proficiency tests are
coming
Time for more examination
36Slide37
Thanks for your interest!
Please contact Laura Hill (
hill@ppic.org
, 415-291-4424) for questions about the use of these slides.37Slide38
RFEP students perform as well as EO students on CST ELA
38Slide39
On time or better
39Slide40
End of high school outcomes, grade 8 cohort
40