English Language Proficiency Standards and Resource Guide

WORLD-CLASS INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT

2007 Edition SEVENTH PRINTING

PreKindergarten through Grade 12

WORLD-CLASS INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT

English Language Proficiency Standards and Resource Guide

2007 Edition SEVENTH PRINTING

PreKindergarten through Grade 12 Copyright Notice

The WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards and Resource Guide, 2007 Edition, Pre- Kindergarten through Grade 12 (“WIDA ELP Standards”) are owned by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System on behalf of the WIDA Consortium. The WIDA ELP Standards are protected by United States copyright laws and may not be reproduced, modified, or distributed, including posting, without the prior written permission of the Wisconsin Center for Education Research (WCER) and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. The WIDA ELP Standards are for your personal, noncommercial use only. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of this booklet.

Fair use of the WIDA ELP Standards includes reproduction for the purpose of teaching (including multiple copies for lesson planning). If you are not sure whether your use of this booklet and the WIDA ELP Standards falls within fair use or if you want permission to use the copyrighted WIDA ELP Standards for purposes other than personal or fair use, please contact the WIDA Consortium intellectual property manager, Jim Lyne, at [email protected] or (608) 265-2262.

Second printing, 2008 Third printing, 2009 Fourth printing, 2010 Fifth printing, 2011 Sixth printing, 2012 Seventh printing, 2013

2013 WIDA Consortium Members Alabama Nevada Alaska New Hampshire Colorado New Jersey Delaware New Mexico District of Columbia North Carolina Georgia North Dakota Hawaii Northern Mariana Islands Illinois Oklahoma Kentucky Pennsylvania Maine Rhode Island Maryland South Dakota Massachusetts Utah Michigan Vermont Minnesota Virginia Mississippi Wisconsin Missouri Wyoming Montana

ii Foreword: The WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards and Resource Guide

Over the past three decades, teachers, administrators, and researchers alike have been grappling with two related concepts that pertain to the education of English language learners (ELLs). The first involves defining the increasingly abstract and challenging language demands found within classroom environments known commonly as “academic language.” The second revolves around embedding language instruction within content instruction rather than as a separate subject or as a prerequisite to the learning of academic content. In other words, content topics can provide the context for language teaching that makes teaching language more authentic and meaningful while simultaneously targeting content area goals.

More recently, many researchers have argued for a content area or discipline-specific dimension to academic language. Ken Hyland, in his text English for Academic Purposes (2006), agrees that language is best taught through specific academic disciplines rather than attempting to identify a more general academic language that cuts across disciplines. The problem with assuming a common “core” of academic language is that it ignores the nuances and complexities of language meaning and use that vary from one subject area to the next.

Organizing academic language around specific content areas is one of the key principles that the WIDA Consortium has used to structure its English language proficiency (ELP) standards and assessments. The goal for using this organizational scheme is that educators working with ELLs are able to see more clearly how “the language of science,” for example, can be explicitly taught within science content lessons, English as a second language (ESL) support classes, or in dual language contexts.

WIDA distinguishes itself in many ways related to its products and services. The innovative, research- based design of its ELP standards is the central defining feature of the WIDA system. All of WIDA’s subsequent work has relied on the ELP Standards as its blueprint. The benefits are, in a nutshell, better tools and resources for teachers to promote the teaching, learning and assessment of content and language for our growing population of ELLs. We invite you to explore our Resource Guide to understand the versatility in using WIDA’s ELP standards.

Timothy Boals, Ph.D. Executive Director WIDA Consortium

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Introduction �� RG-5 1.1 About WIDA �� RG-5 1.2 About the WIDA English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards �� RG-6 1.3 Changes and Clarifications from the 2004 to 2007 Editions of the WIDA ELP Standards �� RG-7 Section 2: The ELP Standards and their Components �� RG-9 2.1 Organization of the ELP Standards �� RG-9 2.2 The Frameworks �� RG-9 2.3 The English Language Proficiency Standards �� RG-9 2.4 The Language Domains �� RG-11 2.5 The Language Proficiency Levels �� RG-12 Section 3: Model Performance Indicators (MPIs) and their Elements �� RG-14 3.1 Strands of MPIs �� RG-15 - An Example Topic Strand and an Example Genre Strand �� RG-15 3.2 Language Functions �� RG-16 3.3 Supports �� RG-20 - Sensory Supports �� RG-21 - Graphic Supports �� RG-22 - Interactive Supports �� RG-24 3.4 Example Topics and Genres �� RG-25 - Grade Level Cluster PreKindergarten-Kindergarten �� RG-26 - Grade Level Cluster 1-2 �� RG-27 - Grade Level Cluster 3-5 �� RG-28 - Grade Level Cluster 6-8 �� RG-29 - Grade Level Cluster 9-12 �� RG-30 3.5 Examples (e.g.,) �� RG-31 - Teacher Talk �� RG-31 - Student Speak �� RG-31 - Text Talk �� RG-32 - Specific Supports �� RG-32 - Subtopics �� RG-33 Section 4: Working with the Standards �� RG-34 4.1 Transformations: Strategies for Designing Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction �� RG-34 - Transformation of Language Functions �� RG-35 - Transformation of Supports �� RG-36 - Transformation of Topics �� RG-37 4.2 Reviewing Original Strands of MPIs �� RG-39 4.3 Collaboration among Educators Serving English Language Learners (ELLs) �� RG-39 - Ideas for Collaboration in Planning Instructional Assessment �� RG-40 - Ideas for Collaboration in Instructing and Assessing ELLs �� RG-40 - Ideas for Collaboration in Evaluating Student Results �� RG-41 Section 5: Standards-Based Resources �� RG-43 5.1 The Relationship among Performance Definitions, CAN DO Descriptors and the Levels of . English Language Proficiency �� RG-43 5.2 Performance Definitions for the Levels of English Language Proficiency �� RG-44 - Linguistic Complexity �� RG-46 - Vocabulary Usage �� RG-46 - Language Control �� RG-47 5.3 Speaking and Writing Rubrics for Classroom Assessment �� RG-54 5.4 The CAN DO Descriptors for WIDA’s Levels of English Language Proficiency �� RG-57 PreK-K Example Topics and Genres ��1 PreK-K ELP Standards �� 2-11 Grades 1-2 Example Topics and Genres ��13 Grades 1-2 ELP Standards �� 14-25 Grades 3-5 Example Topics and Genres ��27 Grades 3-5 ELP Standards �� 28-39 Grades 6-8 Example Topics and Genres ��41 Grades 6-8 ELP Standards �� 42-53 Grades 9-12 Example Topics and Genres ��55 Grades 9-12 ELP Standards �� 56-67 Appendix 1: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) ��68 Appendix 2: References and Further Readings ��70 Appendix 3: Glossary ��71

Appendix 4: Acknowledgments ��74 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1A: Differences between WIDA’s 2007 and 2004 Editions of the PreK-12 ELP Standards �� RG-8 Resource Guide Figure 2A: The English Language Proficiency Standards and their Abbreviations �� RG-10 Figure 2B: What is the language English language learners need to process or produce to... ? �� RG-11 Figure 2C: The Continuum of Second Language Acquisition �� RG-12 Figure 3A: Elements of a Model Performance Indicator (MPI) �� RG-14 Figure 3B: A Strand of Model Performance Indicators with an Example Topic �� RG-15 Figure 3C: A Strand of Model Performance Indicators with an Example Genre �� RG-16 Figure 3D: Understanding the Cognitive Complexity of Language Functions �� RG-17 Figure 3E: Repeating Language Functions within a Strand �� RG-17 Figure 3F: Some Instances of the Language Function “Describe” in MPIs from Grades 3-5 �� RG-18 Figure 3G: Examples of Sensory, Graphic and Interactive Supports �� RG-21 Figure 3H: Specific Examples of Sensory Supports �� RG-21 Figure 3J: Examples of Use of Graphic Organizers across the ELP Standards �� RG-23 Figure 3K: Native Language Support �� RG-24 Figure 3L: Example Topics and Genres ARE/ARE NOT… �� RG-25 Figure 4A: Language Function Transformation from Listening to Speaking �� RG-35 Figure 4B: Language Function Transformation from Writing to Reading �� RG-35 Figure 4C: Support Transformation from Summative to Formative Frameworks �� RG-36 Figure 4D: Support Transformation: Addition of Graphic Support �� RG-36 Figure 4E: Topic Transformation within an ELP Standard �� RG-37 Figure 4F: Topic Transformation across ELP Standards �� RG-38 Figure 4G: WIDA Checklist for Reviewing Strands of MPIs �� RG-39 Figure 5A: The Relationship among WIDA’s Strands of Model Performance Indicators, ELP Standards, CAN DO Descriptors and Performance Definitions �� RG-44 Figure 5B: Performance Definitions �� RG-45 Figure 5C: Examples of General, Specific and Technical Language across the Grade Level Clusters and ELP Standards �� RG-46 Figure 5D: Grade Level Cluster 3-5 Example Writing Prompt �� RG-48 Figure 5E: Emile’s Writing Sample from Grades 3-5: Language Proficiency Level Score of 2 �� RG-49 Figure 5F: Maxine’s Writing Sample from Grades 3-5: Language Proficiency Level Score of 6 �� RG-49 Figure 5G: Grade Level Cluster 6-8 Example Writing Prompt �� RG-51 Figure 5H: Tazak’s Writing Sample from Grades 6-8: Language Proficiency Level Score of 2 �� RG-52 Figure 5J: Felipe’s Writing Sample from Grades 6-8: Language Proficiency Level Score of 5 �� RG-53 Figure 5K: WIDA Speaking Rubric: Summary Chart of Speaking Performance Expectations �� RG-55 Figure 5L: WIDA Writing Rubric: Summary Chart of Writing Performance Expectations �� RG-56

RG-3 RG-4 Resource Guide Figure 5M:CANDODescriptors fortheLevels ofEnglish LanguageProficiency, PreK-12 Niveles delLenguajeAcadémico delInglés, PreK-12) Figure 5N:CANDODescriptors Spanish Translation, PreK-12 (Descripción delasHabilidades enlos ��

�� RG-59 RG-58 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

The WIDA English Language Proficiency Standards and Resource Guide, 2007 Edition, PreKindergarten through Grade 12, is a key component of the World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium’s assessment system. First published in 2004, the WIDA English Language Resource Guide Proficiency (ELP) Standards were developed by consortium members with funding from a U.S. Department of Education Enhanced Assessment Grant. The second edition reflects an evolving understanding of the needs of English language learners (ELLs) and their educators and of the use of the standards as the foundation for instruction and assessment.

This Resource Guide accompanies and is to be used with the 2007 Edition. It organizes and consolidates information from a variety of sources: the lists of social and academic content-based example topics are extensions of those identified in the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages’ (TESOL) 2006 PreK-12 English Language Proficiency Standards; the Speaking and Writing Rubrics come from ACCESS for ELLs®1 and W-APT™2 Administration Manuals; and the CAN DO Descriptors are taken from the ACCESS for ELLs® Interpretive Guide for Score Reports (available at www.wida.us). Other information has been updated from the 2004 Edition.

The purpose of this Resource Guide is to provide teachers and administrators with tools to aid in the design of curriculum, instruction and assessment for ELLs. It is devoted to the use and application of information contained within the standards’ frameworks. As it is not an implementation guide, there are no samples of instructional assessment strategies, examples of differentiated instruction and assessment, nor are there lesson or unit designs. We acknowledge that a handbook of this nature would be tremendously useful and our plans include creating a series of modules in the not too distant future.

1.1 About WIDA

In 2013, the WIDA Consortium includes 33 states and territories: Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Combined, the WIDA member states enroll over one million K-12 ELLs. Grounded in scientifically- based research on best educational practices in general and English as a Second Language (ESL) and bilingual education in particular, WIDA created and adopted its comprehensive ELP standards (2004, 2007) that address the need for students to become fully proficient in both social and academic English. The WIDA ELP Standards along with their strands of model performance indicators—which represent social, instructional and academic language—have been augmented by TESOL as the national model.

Based on the WIDA ELP Standards, WIDA developed a K-12 ELP test—ACCESS for ELLs®—

1 Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State to State for English Language Learners 2 WIDA-ACCESS Placement Test

RG-5 RG-6 Resource Guide section ofwww.wida.us. involved Document locatedintheELPStandards intheirgenesis,pleaseseethe2004Overview For discussionofthetheoretical further rationalebehindthe WIDA ELP Standards andtheprocess through gradetwelveELLs inKindergarten inpublicschools. mandate thatstatesadministerastandards-based English languageproficiency testannuallytoall the federalNo ChildLeftBehind Act of2001(NCLB)andcorresponding statestatutescurrently of envisioned asthefirststepinconstruction reliable and valid assessmenttoolsforELLs. Finally, blueprints, taskspecificationsandELPmeasures. Thus,thelanguage proficiency standards are Second, the WIDA ELPStandards toguide thedevelopment have oftest been designed,inpart, tostandards, contexts tiedtoschoolingingeneral,andparticularly curriculumandinstruction. expanded toencompassbothsocialcontextsassociated withlanguageacquisitionandacademic brought aboutthrough theory, research andlegislation.First, thevisionoflanguageproficiency has The development of WIDA’s ELPstandards hasbeenin response to recent educational change 3). Educational policy. standards andtoaddress educators’ needsinthree different areas: 1). Pedagogy, 2).Assessment,and hasrespondedConsortium todemandslink languagelearningwithstateacademiccontent other stakeholdersintheeducationallives ofELLs.By developing theELPstandards, the WIDA principals; program, districtandregional administrators;testdevelopers; teachereducators;and are impactedby ELLs.Theseaudiencesinclude:ELLsandtheirfamily members;teachers; The WIDAELP Standards are designedforthemanyaudiencesinfieldofeducationwho 1.2 AbouttheWIDAEnglishLanguageProficiency(ELP)Standards education ofELLs. reporting ofACCESS inthe forELLs®;andmanyotherconsultants organizationswithexpertise development; MetriTech, Inc. (www.metritech.org) fortheprinting,distributing,scoring,and with theCenterforApplied Linguistics(www.cal.org) fortest development andprofessional the homeof InWIDA Consortium. additiontoitsrelationship with WCER, WIDA partners The Wisconsin Centerfor Education (WCER)Research atthe University of Wisconsin-Madison is assessments forELLsare theothermajorcomponentsofwork ofthe WIDA Consortium. (www.wida.us). Research, alignmentstudiesandfederally-fundedprojects todevelop academic standards andassessments.In addition, WIDA hasestablishedandcontinuestoupdateaweb site Concurrently, WIDA hasprovided extensive professional development activitiesrelated toits cognitive disabilitiesisunderway. alternate strandsofMPIs alongwithalignedtaskstomeasure theprogress ofELLswithsignificant members.Furthermore,can bepurchased andnon-consortium by bothconsortium development of Grade 12assessmentsare available forbothplacementandinterimtestingpurposes.Thesetestkits to aidintheidentificationandplacementofELLs.The through WIDAMODEL™forKindergarten enhancement are ongoing.Ascreener, the W-APT™, hasalsobeencreated from theELPstandards which becamefullyoperationalinspring2005. Validation studiesalongwithitemrefreshment and 1.3 Changes and Clarifications from the 2004 to 2007 Editions of the WIDA ELP Standards

The five English language proficiency standards are identical in both editions! While the standards remain fixed, there has been some updating; changes in the features of WIDA’s ELP standards in this Resource Guide 2007 Edition are noted in Figure 1A.

The most prominent difference between the two editions is the creation of the PreK-K grade level cluster. There were several reasons for this revision. Most significantly, Kindergarten ELLs function much differently than grade levels 1-2 on the ACCESS for ELLs® test. As PreK-K children are developmentally and linguistically unique, especially in terms of literacy development, the member states of the Consortium agreed that establishing their own grade level cluster was warranted for both instructional and assessment purposes.

The second most notable difference has been the expansion of our English language proficiency levels from five to six. Again, as a result of implementing ACCESS for ELLs®, we realized that there was not a designation for those students who reached the far end of the second language continuum. Thus, we added ‘Reaching’ to both our English language proficiency test and standards. Our Performance Definitions (see Section 5.2) have also expanded to include level 6, while our strands of model performance indicators (MPIs) remain descriptive through level 5.

Some of the information within the standards’ matrices has been reformatted for ease of use. We have renamed the frameworks to specify how language proficiency information is to be used: on an ongoing, formative basis or a cumulative, summative basis. In the 2007 Edition, we provide some example topics, derived from state academic content standards, in a separate column to the left of the strand of MPIs to assist teachers in providing the context for their students’ language development. Strands of MPIs are now arranged by language domain rather than grade level cluster; in this way, teachers may more readily focus on grade-level appropriate ideas to plan instruction and assessment. By visiting www.wida.us, it is also possible to “Search the Standards” for a particular framework, grade level cluster, language domain, example genre or topic or key word.

In addition, we have expanded the number of strands of MPIs for Standard 2- the language of Language Arts. For each language domain and grade level cluster we offer an example genre and an example topic.

Finally, we have extended the availability of supports within the MPIs through ELP level 4, Expanding. Interactive supports play a prominent role, especially within the Formative Framework, as ELLs need time to practice language with their peers within an instructional setting. Figure 1A highlights these changes in the features of the standards’ matrices between the 2004 and 2007 Editions.

RG-7 RG-8 Resource Guide PreK-12 ELPStandards Figure 1A:DifferencesbetweenWIDA’s2007and2004Editionsofthe • • • • • • •

language proficiency level 4 present indicatorsthrough inmodelperformance Sensory, graphicand/orinteractive support strands inStandard 2 column ofthematrices,alternatewithtopic language domainandpresented intheleft-hand academic contentstandards, listedforeach indicators, drawnfrom stateandnational Example genre strandsofmodelperformance column ofthematrices language domainandpresented intheleft-hand academic contentstandards, listedforeach Example topics, drawnfrom stateandnational Expanding, 5.Bridging and6.Reaching Entering, 2. Beginning, 3.Developing, 4. 6 levels ofEnglish language proficiency: 1. speaking, reading andwriting Arranged by languagedomain;listeningand 9-12 5 gradelevel clusters:PreK-K, 1-2,3-5,6-8and Assessment andInstruction Formative andSummative Frameworks for 2007 • • • • • • •

indicators of modelperformance content standards, embeddedwithinthestrands Example topics, drawnfrom stateacademic Expanding and5.Bridging Entering, 2. Beginning, 3.Developing, 4. 5 levels ofEnglish language proficiency: 1. grades onthesamepage Arranged by gradelevel cluster, displayingall 4 gradelevel clusters:K-2,3-5,6-8and9-12 Frameworks Classroom andLarge-scaleState Assessment proficiency level 3 indicators no higherthanlanguage performance present and/orgraphicsupport inmodel Sensory Standard 2 Genre strandsnotsystematicallytreated in 2004 SECTION 2: THE ELP STANDARDS AND THEIR COMPONENTS

2.1 Organization of the ELP Standards Resource Guide

There are five WIDA English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards, which appear in two frameworks: Summative and Formative. The two frameworks can be used for planning curriculum, instruction and assessment of English language learners (ELLs). The common elements of the two frameworks are the 1). ELP standards, 2). language domains, 3). grade level clusters and 4). language proficiency levels. Overlaying the standards are the Performance Definitions that describe each level of language proficiency (see Section 5.2). These definitions, by describing the stages of second language acquisition, provide a guide for developing original strands of model performance indicators (MPIs).

2.2 The Frameworks

The primary focus of the Summative Framework for instruction and assessment is to identify the range of MPIs that describe the outcomes of learning. In addition, it is intended to provide students, teachers and test developers with ways for ELLs to demonstrate their developing English language proficiency over an extended period of time. The strands of MPIs in the Summative Framework, focusing on the products of learning, can be readily converted to ongoing, formative information on ELLs. For example, rather than relying on pictures or illustrations, as suggested in the Summative Framework, individual teachers may substitute real-life objects or manipulatives to use in both assessment and instruction. To learn more about transformations, see Section 4.1.

The Formative Framework for instruction and assessment, on the other hand, is geared toward guiding student learning and teacher instruction on an ongoing basis. The Formative Framework is intended to capture those aspects of instruction that are less typically measured by a test but are important to teaching and learning. For example, interactive support within the Formative Framework gives students opportunities to work as partners or in small groups, receive immediate feedback from peers or teachers, engage in self-assessment during long-term projects, and integrate technology into their assignments.

2.3 The English Language Proficiency Standards

The five ELP standards are identical for the Formative and Summative Frameworks. They reflect the social and academic language expectations of ELLs in grades PreK-12 attending schools in the United States. Each ELP standard addresses a specific context for language acquisition (Social and Instructional settings as well as Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies) and is divided into five grade level clusters: PreK-K, 1-2, 3-5, 6-8 and 9-12.

Overall, the ELP standards center on the language needed and used by ELLs to succeed in school. So not to confuse these standards with academic content standards, the abbreviations shown in Figure 2A are used.

RG-9 RG-10 Resource Guide Figure 2A:TheEnglishLanguageProficiencyStandardsandtheirAbbreviations Standard 1 Proficiency English Language Standard 2 Proficiency English Language Standard 3 Proficiency English Language Standard 4 Proficiency English Language Standard 5 Proficiency English Language and Instructional purposeswithintheschoolsetting English languagelearnerscommunicateforSocial Arts academic successinthecontentarea ofLanguage for information, ideasandconceptsnecessary English languagelearnerscommunicate academic successinthecontentarea of for information, ideasandconceptsnecessary English language learnerscommunicate academic successinthecontentarea ofScience for information, ideasandconceptsnecessary English language learnerscommunicate Studies academic successinthecontentarea ofSocial for information, ideasandconceptsnecessary English language learnerscommunicate Standard Mathematics language Instructional Social and Language Arts The languageof Mathematics The languageof Science The languageof Social Studies The languageof Abbreviation When thinking about how to represent the WIDA English language proficiency standards using the strands of model performance indicators, ask….

Figure 2B: What is the language English language learners need to process or produce to... ? Resource Guide

Describe…. Sequence… Explain…. Classify or categorize… Compare and contrast…. Predict…. Evaluate… Question… Identify… Match…

The language associated with the example functions listed above can become the language targets for assessment and instruction for ELLs. These language targets include vocabulary, multiple meanings, structures, and discourse. Furthermore, these targets should be differentiated by proficiency level and grade or grade level cluster.

2.4 The Language Domains

Each of the five English language proficiency standards encompasses four language domains that define how ELLs process and use language:

• Listening- process, understand, interpret, and evaluate spoken language in a variety of situations

• Speaking- engage in oral communication in a variety of situations for a variety of purposes and audiences

• Reading- process, understand, interpret, and evaluate written language, symbols and text with understanding and fluency

• Writing- engage in written communication in a variety of situations for a variety of purposes and audiences

The ELP standards are arranged by grade level cluster, by framework, by standard, and by language domain. The language domain is listed on the first left-hand column in the standards’ matrices.

RG-11 RG-12 Resource Guide students’: tremendously heterogenous anddiverse group ofstudents.This variability canbeattributedtothe features mustbecombinedwithpersonalcharacteristicsofeachstudent aswell. ELLsare a describe ELLs’ understandinganduseofEnglish ateachlevel oflanguageproficiency, butthese Acquiring Thesetsoffeatures anadditionallanguageisacomplexundertaking. identifiedabove as movement alongthecontinuum,from Level 1,Entering, through Level 6,Reaching. acquisition curriculum.Thecharacteristicsofeachlevel of English languageproficiency are defined Each oftheseseven setsoffeatures represents thebeginningandendpointsofsecondlanguage Figure 2C:TheContinuumofSecondLanguageAcquisition presented inFigure thedevelopmental progression. 2C,that helpuschart descriptive ofthesecondlanguageacquisitionprocess maybesuperimposedontothecontinuum,as acquisition, we begintodefinethelevels of English languageproficiency. Aseriesoffeatures By mappingthestagesofEnglish languagedevelopment ontoacontinuumofsecondlanguage what ELLscandowithineachlanguagedomainofthestandards fordesignatedgradelevel clusters. end ofthecontinuum.Thelanguageproficiency anddescribe levels delineateexpectedperformance acquisition ofEnglish asanadditionallanguage,from 1,Entering theprocess, to6,Reaching the The five language proficiency levels outlinethe progression oflanguage development inthe 2.5 TheLanguageProficiencyLevels Non-conventional Abstract ideasandconcepts Single General forms Conventional Informal words Familiar vocabulary Explicit forms registers Technical and TO Concrete ideasandconcepts situations Formal Unfamiliarmeaning vocabulary phrases Extended registers situations Implicit discourse meaning e secondlanguageacquisitionprocess involves thegradualscaﬀoldingfrom: neig() Reaching (6) Entering (1) • • • •

Differences intheirlifeandeducationalexperiences. Linguistic andculturalbackgrounds; and Diagnoses (suchaslearningdisabilities); Varying agesandgradelevel spans; WIDA’s levels ofEnglish languageproﬁciency Consider, for example, how maturational differences distinguish the academic language of PreK-K students from that of high school students. Similarly, the language development of a student with a strong educational background in his or her native language is different from that of a student who has been highly mobile or with limited formal schooling. Thus, student characteristics need to be

considered when using the information presented in the components of the standards’ frameworks. Resource Guide

This section has provided a brief overview of the ELP standards and their components for educators not familiar with their organization. It has also offered some necessary background information on the English language acquisition process which has informed the development of the MPIs across the ELP levels.

RG-13 RG-14 Resource Guide about theoptionalelementofMPIs, theexample(“e.g.”), insection3.5. proficiency level 4,asitprovides avenue forELLstoaccessmeaning. a necessary You willlearnmore there (sensory, issomeformofsupport graphicorinteractive) forELLsthrough language related oracademic,dependingonthestandard. tothetopicmaybesocial,instructional Finally, context orbackdrop forlanguageinteractionwithinschool.Thefocusthecontent process oruselanguagetocommunicateinavariety ofsituations.Theexampletopicrelates the The firstword ofan MPI isitslanguagefunction;thatis,how English languagelearners(ELLs) Section 3.2. (“e.g.”), with detailstarting whichisnotessential.Eachoftheseelementsdiscussedinfurther unit ofatopicalstrand.Figure 3Ashows thethree essentialelementsofanMPI, andan example specific level of English languageproficiency (ELP)foralanguagedomain.An MPI isthesmallest indicator(MPI)A modelperformance isasinglecellwithinthestandards’ matricesthatdescribesa AND THEIRELEMENTS SECTION 3:MODELPERFORMANCEINDICATORS(MPIS) Figure 3A:ElementsofaModelPerformanceIndicator(MPI) Example Topic: English languageproficiency level: 3-Developing Language domain:Speaking Grade level cluster:1-2 Standard 3:Thelanguageof Mathematics Framework: Summative Standards Reference Language Function objects andoraldescriptions(e.g.,“ ere are seven dogsaltogether.”) Describe representations ofbasicoperationsfrom pictures ofeveryday Basic operations Example Topic Example (e.g.) Support 3.1 Strands of MPIs

A strand of MPIs consists of the five levels of English language proficiency for a given topic and language domain, from Entering (1) through Bridging (5). The horizontal strands of MPIs illustrate the progression of language development for a given grade level cluster. Strands of MPIs Resource Guide characteristically are:

• thematically connected through common example topics or genres that have been identified from state academic content standards • scaffolded from one language proficiency level (or MPI) to the next, based on the criteria of the Performance Definitions; namely, linguistic complexity, vocabulary usage and language control • developmentally appropriate, designed for ELLs at a specified grade level cluster • academically rigorous, with the highest level of English language proficiency (Reaching) corresponding to language expectations of proficient English speakers at the highest grade level of the cluster

An Example Topic Strand and an Example Genre Strand

Strands of MPIs for Standard 2—the language of Language Arts—are unique in that both example topics and example genres are identified for each language domain. ELLs need to have the language to access the content associated with the many types of discourse they encounter in Language Arts. In state academic content standards, topics and genres are addressed; subsequently, they are both included as strands.

In Figure 3B, the example topic is introduced and scaffolded across the levels of English language proficiency. As the strand unfolds for writing, the MPIs illustrate expectations for ELLs in third through fifth grades in their use of editing and revising strategies.

Figure 3B: A Strand of Model Performance Indicators with an Example Topic

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Entering Beginning Developing Expanding Bridging

Produce personal Create phrases/ Edit and Edit and revise Self-assess to edit word/phrase lists short sentences revise guided writing (e.g., and revise writing from labeled from models writing (e.g., using word to produce final pictures and check with a for conventions processing or drafts and check with a partner for edits and structures) rubrics) based partner for edits and revision based on teacher on class or peer and revision feedback reviews

Standards Reference Framework: Formative Language domain: Writing Standard: 2- The language of Language Arts Example topic: Editing and revising Grade level cluster: 3-5

RG-15 RG-16 Resource Guide Figure 3C:AStrandofModelPerformanceIndicatorswithanExampleGenre their understandingofthelanguageassociatedwith contentby engaginginhigherlevels ofthinking. into theMPIs sothateven ELLsatlower levels ofEnglish languageproficiency candemonstrate the cognitive complexityinvolved inthecommunication.As shown inFigure isbuilt 3D,support Language functionsdescribehow studentscommunicate amessage.Theyare nottobeequatedwith andassessmentforELLs. individual elementscanbeappliedinthedesignof curriculum,instruction andexampletopic(refersupport to Figure 3A). MPIs mayalsocontainanexample(e.g.);these The following sectionsdescribeinmore detaileachelementofan MPI: thelanguagefunction, 3.2 LanguageFunctions proficiency. middle schoolstudents’ comprehension astheymove through thelevels ofEnglish language In Figure 3C,we seehow thetypeofdiscourse,asexemplified inthegenre, Adventures, influences native language(L1)orintegratingtechnologytobolsterEnglish languagedevelopment. to-day classroom usingthe includingworking practices,containsinteractive withpartners, supports most commonlyemployed inlarge-scaleassessment,theFormative Framework, beingclosesttoday- Whereas theSummative Framework relies exclusively orgraphicsupports onthetypesofsensory Frameworks. Thedifference between theexamplesintwoframeworks isintheformsofsupports. for agiven gradelevel cluster. Thesamegenre strandsappearinboththe Formative and Summative specific topics. Genre strandsmaybeusedindependentlyorinconjunctionwithexampletopics text The genresprovide from bothfictionalandexpository thebackdrop fortheintroduction of Grade level cluster:6-8 Standard: Framework: Standards Reference walls orbanks and word/phrase using visualsupport with adventures phrases associated Identify words or Entering Level 1 2-ThelanguageofLanguageArts

Formative peer and share witha ismissing?”) “Who (e.g., visual support to adventures using questions related Answer WH-

Beginning Level 2 share withapeer and visual support adventures using Sequence plotsof Developing

Level 3 Example genre: Adventures Language domain:Reading share withapeer and visual support adventures using Summarize plotsof Expanding Level 4 adventure stories on charactersin effect ofevents Identify causeand Bridging Level 5 Figure 3D: Understanding the Cognitive Complexity of Language Functions ELLs are expected to “sort or classify,” demanding a high level of cognitive engagement that requires students to analyze information. By having diagrams available as support for ELLs, students are able to exhibit this complex thinking even at the Beginning level of English language Resource Guide proficiency.

Level 2 Standards Reference Beginning Framework: Summative Standard: 4- The language of Science Sort or classify Grade level cluster: 6-8 descriptive phrases and diagrams by Language domain: Reading cycles or processes Example Topic: Cycles/Processes

The identical language functions can operate across levels of English language proficiency within a given grade level cluster. What differentiates a lower from higher level of proficiency is the amount and complexity of discourse and/or the expected vocabulary usage, as illustrated in the Performance Definitions (see Figure 5B). For instance, see the partial strand of MPIs in Figure 3E.

Figure 3E: Repeating Language Functions within a Strand In the following strand of MPIs, two instances of the language function “Produce…in response” appear. While the Entering or Level 1 ELL is to produce single words, the Beginning or Level 2 student is expected to produce phrases or short sentences, which is reflective of a higher level of language proficiency.

Level 1 Level 2 Entering Beginning Standards Reference Produce words in Produce phrases Framework: Summative response to WH- or short sentences Standard: 1- Social and Instructional language questions about in response to Grade level cluster: 3-5 self from picture personal, open- Language domain: Speaking prompts and ended questions Example Topic: Personal Information/Opinions models from picture prompts

Language functions always operate within the context of a standard and strand of MPIs. Although the identical language functions are used throughout the standards’ matrices, each function represents the language specified for the particular standard and topical strand. Charting the instances of language functions across standards gives teachers insight into how they might be used for assessment and instruction.

RG-17 RG-18 Resource Guide 3-5 appearsin: From theexamplesinFigure 3Fbelow, we seethatthelanguagefunction“describe” ingradecluster Grades 3-5 Figure 3F: Some Instances of the Language Function “Describe” in MPIs from Example Genre: Fantasies Language domain:Speaking Standard: 2-ThelanguageofLanguageArts Framework: • • • •

All 5English languageproficiency standards Primarily mid-rangelanguageproficiency levels (2- Beginning, 3- Developing, 4- Expanding) Productive languagedomains(speakingandwriting) Formative andSummative Frameworks Formative

in L1orL2 pedestrian safety) from visuals (e.g., or community school, home practices around health orsafety Describe illustrations by supported various genres elements of Describe story Beginning Beginning Level 2 Level 2 Example Topic: Health andSafety Language domain:Writing Standard: 1-Social andInstructional language Framework: Formative genres Example Topic: Story elementsandtypesof Language domain:Speaking Standard: 2-ThelanguageofLanguageArts Framework: Summative in L1orL2 situations topeers people, objectsor of imaginary Describe pictures Beginning Level 2 Level 2 Level 4 Beginning Expanding

Describe what Framework: Formative Describe strategies the fractional Standard: 3- The language of Mathematics or tips for Resource Guide parts mean from Language domain: Writing solving problems diagrams or realia Example Topic: Fractions involving fractions in phrases or short from diagrams in sentences paragraph form

Level 3 Developing Framework: Summative Describe Standard: 3- The language of Mathematics attributes of Language domain: Writing three-dimensional Example Topic: shapes from Three-dimensional shapes labeled models

Level 2 Beginning

Describe natural Framework: Formative phenomena from Standard: 4- The language of Science real-life examples Language domain: Speaking using general Example Topic: Nature vocabulary (e.g., “This leaf has five points.”) in small groups

Level 2 Beginning Framework: Summative Describe Standard: 5- The language of Social Studies communities or Language domain: Writing regions depicted Example Topic: Communities & regions in pictures or maps

RG-19 RG-20 Resource Guide for teachers to incorporate into instruction andassessment ofELLs. for teacherstoincorporateintoinstruction aresupports foundinFigures 3GandH.Althoughnotextensive, theselistsoffersomesuggestions Supports withintheMPIs maybesensory, graphicorinteractive; examplesofthesedifferent typesof needs tobepresent andassessmentonbothaformative andsummative inbothinstruction basis. withintheMPIssupport through English languageproficiency level 4. forELLs We feelthatsupport through multiplemodalities,butitisabsolutelyessentialforELLs.For thisreason, we incorporate 2006). (TESOL, We foralllearnerstogainaccessmeaning isimportant believe thatsupport meaningoforalorwrittenlanguage interacting withothersorusingtheirsensestohelpconstruct involvemodeling, feedbackorquestioning.Other typesofsupport studentsusing visualsorgraphics, classroom understandingorcommunication.Support mayincludeteachingtechniques,suchas for Support strategyortoolusedtoassist studentsinaccessingcontentnecessary isaninstructional 3.3 Supports language objectives orlessons. language functioninconjunctionwiththestandard asthebackdrop fordeveloping differentiated into thatcontent-baseddiscourse;teachersofELLsmustconsiderthelanguageassociatedwith area appropriate fortheirlevel ofEnglish languageproficiency. Thelanguagefunctions are theentrée touseandapply languagepatternsordiscourseassociatedwitheachsubjectcontent opportunities In summary, forsuccessinschool,ELLsmusthave todevelop theacademiclanguagenecessary students mightbeusingsuchexpressions as“near” or“far from here.” ELLs mightbeexpressing commands,suchas“Go out.” or“Stay in.”, inStandard 5,thesamelevel communities orregions, theexampletopicforStandard 5. Whereas inStandard 1,Beginning Standard 1’s exampletopic,healthorsafetypractices,isdistinctfrom thatfor“describing” althoughbothwithinthewritingdomain,languageassociatedwith“describing”Likewise, (e.g., 3of5;26;48)to“describe” afractionalpart. hand, thelanguagetargetmaybeforstudentsatBeginning level topracticethephrase,Xof Y shell isrough”, “the shellissmooth”. Working withpizzasasanexampleofStandard 3,ontheother Standard 4,thelanguagetargetmaybeforstudentstodescribetactileorvisualqualities,suchas“the 3, where students“describe” fractionalparts. Working withseashellcollectionsasanexampleof The languageusedto “describe” naturalphenomenafor Standard 4isquiteunlikethatof Standard Figure 3G: Examples of Sensory, Graphic and Interactive Supports

Sensory Supports Graphic Supports Interactive Supports

• Real-life objects (realia) • Charts • In pairs or partners Resource Guide • Manipulatives • Graphic organizers • In triads or small groups • Pictures & photographs • Tables • In a whole group • Illustrations, diagrams & drawings • Graphs • Using cooperative group • Magazines & newspapers • Timelines structures • Physical activities • Number lines • With the Internet (Web • Videos & Films sites) or software programs • Broadcasts • In the native language (L1) • Models & figures • With mentors

Sensory Supports

Some sensory supports are applicable across all ELP standards, as exemplified in Figure 3G. Others are specific to the language of a content area. Figure 3H expands the notion of the use of sensory support by giving specific examples for ELP standards 2 through 5. The use of these sensory supports in activities, tasks and projects helps promote the development of students’ academic language proficiency.

Figure 3H: Specific Examples of Sensory Supports

Supports related Supports related Supports related Supports related to to the language of to the language of to the language of the language of Language Arts Mathematics Science Social Studies

Illustrated word/phrase Blocks/Cubes Scientific instruments Maps walls Clocks, sundials and Measurement tools Globes Felt or magnetic figures other timekeepers Physical models Atlases of story elements Number lines Natural materials Compasses Sequence blocks Models of geometric Actual substances, Timelines Environmental print figures organisms or objects Multicultural artifacts Posters or displays Calculators of investigation Arial & satellite Bulletin boards Protractors Posters/Illustrations of photographs processes or cycles Photographs Rulers, yard/meter sticks Video clips Cartoons Geoboards Audio books Counters Songs/Chants Compasses Calendars Coins

Adopted from Gottlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

RG-21 RG-22 Resource Guide assessment activities. intranslatingthesesuggestionsintoinstructional of theirstudentsandthecurriculumisimportant proficiency standard. Asitdoesnotdelineateexamples by gradelevel cluster, teachers’ knowledge Figure 3Jprovides specificideasofhow graphicorganizers maybeusedwitheachlanguage examples oftheiruseandgive studentstimetopracticewitheachone. and automaticallyknow how graphicorganizers. Therefore, touseparticular teachersmustmodel sustained discourse.It cannotbeassumed,however, thatELLsunderstandtheconceptbehind understanding ofideasandconceptswithouthavingtodependonorproduce complexand are allowT charts, usefultoolsforELLs.Thesegraphicsupports studentstodemonstratetheir language isthegraphicorganizer. Graphic organizers, suchassemanticmaps,venn diagramsor andacademic associatedwithsocial,instructional The mostcommonlyusedgraphicsupport Graphic Supports Resource Guide Two conflicts Two forms of Two government forms of Two transportation Types of Types transportation of habitats Types in a Elections democracy of a law Passage Political movements trends Economic of human Types and civil rights of Impact economic policies Social Studies

• • • • • • • • • • • 5- The language of . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin . of Science Two body Two systems or organs animals or Two plants Forms of matter Forms of energy Forms Senses Vertebrates/ Invertebrates Scientific inquiry Life cycles cycle Water Chemical reactions Adaptation events Weather and their Foods nutritional ingredients and Types characteristics of rocks

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4- The language Two operations Two geometric Two figures forms of Two proportion Area/Perimeter Fractions/ Decimals Addition/ Subtraction in Steps problem- solving Variables in algebraic equations Geometric theorems and Types of features polygons and Types characteristics of angles

• • • • • • • • • • • of Mathematics 3- The language Two characters Two settings Two genres Two Facts/Opinions of view Points Pros/Cons lines Plot of Responses characters to events and words Root affixes idea/ Main Details

• • • • • • • • • • 2- The language of Language Arts language Two friends or Two family members traditions Two Instructional Colors objects Classroom Conflict/ Resolution School or routines classroom or Classroom school rules and safety Health at home or in school interests Personal Idiomatic expressions meanings Multiple and of words phrases 1- Social and

• • • • • • • • • • • Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement language proficiency Assessing English language learners: Bridges from Connecting ELP standard Venn Diagrams - Comparing Diagrams Venn Entities Two and Contrasting Producing a Series of a Series - Producing Cycles or a Process Connected Events a and Effect - Illustrating Cause Relationship - Webs Semantic Topics Categories to Themes or - Sorting or - Sorting T-Charts or Concepts Categorizing Objects Figure 3J: Examples of Use Graphic Organizers across the ELP Standards Adopted from Gottlieb, M. (2006). Press.

RG-23 RG-24 Resource Guide into thestrandsofMPIs. acquiring anadditionallanguage.Figure 3Killustrates how isincorporated native languagesupport in English. In thisway, tofacilitateandenrichthestudents’ native languagemayserve process of communicate witheachothertoclarify, recap orextendmeaningofideas andconceptspresented language development. In doingso,we encouragestudentswithacommonlanguageoforiginto withintheFormativeinteractive support Framework, especiallyatthefirsttwostagesof English Taking thisintoaccount,thestudent’s native language(L1)hasbeenincludedasatypeof andassessment. contributions toourmulticulturalsocietywithincurriculum,instruction development. We tohonortheculturalperspectives ofourELLsandtheir deemitimportant historical backgrounds andprioreducationalexperiencesasspringboards fortheirEnglish language not formallyrecognized acknowledges withintheframeworks, theConsortium thestudents’ andstrengthenedpreserved Although even iftheymaynotcoincidewiththelanguageofinstruction. ELLs cometoschoolwithdiverse languagesandcultures. These resources shouldbe recognized, expectations insituationsthattheyfindmeaningful. level ofEnglishnorms andbehaviorschallengestudentsatevery languageproficiency tomeet facilitatetheexchange strategiesthatincorporateinteractive supports instructional ofculturalvalues, promote comprehension andexposethemtoavariety ofcommunicationstyles. We also know that are ininteractivesupports activitiesandtaskscan especiallyusefulforELLs.Theirparticipation in pairsorgroups orby usinginteractive multimediasuchastheInternet. Theseinteractive todiscussandconfirmpriorknowledgeAll studentsbenefitfrom opportunities witheachother Interactive Supports Grade level cluster:PreK-K Standard: Framework: Standards Reference The following strandofMPIs partial suggeststheuseofnative language(L1)support. Figure 3K:NativeLanguageSupport L1 orL2 extinguisher) in girls washroom, fire school (e.g.,boys/ or safetyaround related tohygiene environmental print Identify Entering Level 1 1-Social andInstructional language Formative

sink) inL1orL2 (e.g., labelsforsoap, classroom orschool print around match environmental hygiene orsafetythat or pictures related to Find real-life objects Beginning Level 2

in L1orL2 classroom orschool or pictures around environmental print or safetyfoundin related tohygiene symbols andwords Identify icons, Developing Level 3 Example Topic: Language domain:Reading L1 orL2 illustrated booksin to teacherreading of to hygieneorsafety or pictures related environmental print Connect Hygiene &safety Expanding Level 4 3.4 Example Topics and Genres

While supports assist ELLs in gaining the language and meaning of concepts embedded in the language proficiency standards, the acquisition of academic language rests on the integration of language and content. Resource Guide

Content within a school setting is largely associated with subject matter topics (and genres within the area of Language Arts); in addition, ELLs must acquire the social and instructional language already familiar to their English-proficient peers. Thus, example topics and genres offer a backdrop within the ELP standards for ELLs’ English language development. Figure 3L further defines the example topics and genres.

Figure 3L: Example Topics and Genres…

ARE anchored in state and national academic ARE NOT academic content standards content standards ARE NOT meant to imply that language ARE intended to illustrate how language learning is automatic when content topics are lessons can be embedded in content lessons taught ARE flexible and dynamic elements, intended ARE NOT fixed or comprehensive lists of to be adapted or substituted (transformed) to topics and genres that must be mastered for meet curriculum objectives academic success ARE combined with language objectives ARE NOT accessible to ELLs without and supports to create effective performance appropriate scaffolding and support objectives for ELLs ARE used in test development as potential ARE NOT the only topics and genres that themes for assessment items appear as themes on WIDA assessments Adopted from TESOL (2006)

Example Topic and Genre Lists

The example topics that follow are representative of state academic content standards and student standards of national organizations, including Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, the National Council of Teachers of English, the International Reading Association, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the National Research Council and the National Council for the Social Studies. The following lists are common topics for each grade level cluster and English language proficiency standard. While by no means exhaustive, these example genres and topics offer ideas for contextualizing the language development of ELLs.

RG-25 RG-26 Resource Guide

PreK-K Example Topics and Genres: Content Related to WIDA’s English Language Proficiency Standards

These examples, representative of state academic content standards, provide context for the English language development described in the strands of Model Performance Indicators.

Standard 1: Standard 2: Standard 3: Standard 4: Standard 5: Social and The language of The language of The language of The language of Instructional language Language Arts Mathematics Science Social Studies

Example Topics Example Genres & Topics Example Topics Example Topics Example Topics • Classrooms • Chants & songs • Attributes • Air • Change from past to • Colors • Concepts about print • Equivalency • Animals present • Classroom/School • Feelings • Environmental print • Geometric shapes • Body parts • Clothing • Games • Fairy tales • Measurement of time • Change in self & environment • Community workers • Hygiene & safety • Forms of print • Non-standard • Colors • Families measurement tools • Music & movement • Make-believe • Forces in nature • Food • Number sense • Recreational objects & • Nursery rhymes • Living & non-living • Friends • activities • Picture books Numbers & operations things • Historical stories & • Routines • Rhyme • Patterns • Night/Day legends • School • Same & different • Quantity • Rocks • Homes in a community/ Habitats • Self & family • Sounds & symbols • Size • Safety practices • • Social behavior (Phonemic awareness) • Spatial relations • Scientific process Location of objects & places • • • • Seasons Spatial relations Story elements Temperature • Neighborhood • Senses • Weight • Seasons • Water • Shelter • Weather • Symbols & holidays • Transportation

Resource Guide Standard 5: Social Studies The language of Artifacts of the past Celebrations/Customs Citizenship Community workers heritage Cultural & responsibilities Families & leaders figures Historical & habitats Homes peoples & cultures Indigenous & careers Jobs Land forms/Bodies of water & banking Money & communities Neighborhoods in the marketplace Products of the earth Representations (maps & globes) Seasons & chronology Time & land of resources Use

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example Science Standard 4: The language of Animals Astronomy Body parts Change Chemical & physical attributes Earth & sky & motion Force Gravity Life cycles Light Living & non-living things Magnetism resources Natural & environment Organisms Plants & non- Renewable resources renewable Senses Sound cycle Water Weather & erosion Weathering

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example Standard 3: Mathematics The language of Basic operations Basic (addition & subtraction) Capacity Estimation Graphs of data Interpretation Money sense Number Patterns value Place Quantity Shapes Size & metric Standard tools measurement Symmetry (digital & analog) Time and three- Two- dimensional shapes Weight Whole numbers

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example WIDA’s English Language Proficiency Standards WIDA’s Standard 2: Grades 1-2 Example Topics and Genres: Content Related to Grades 1-2 Example Topics Language Arts Fiction (literary text) Fiction Folktales (expository Non-fiction text) books/ Pattern books Predictable Poetry Compound words of storyElements Homophones awareness Phonemic Phonics Rhyming words play Role of storySequence relations Spatial elements Story telling Story families Word The language of

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Genres Example Example Topics Example

Standard 1: Social and Classroom & school Classroom rules objects Everyday & emotions Feelings directions Following opinions & Interests, preferences activities Leisure Likes, dislikes & needs correspondence Personal information Personal personnel School areas, & activities Sharing/Cooperation

Instructional language • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example These examples, representative of state academic content standards, provide context for the English language development described in the strands of Model Performance Indicators. Performance Model described in the strands of English language development context for the provide of state academic content standards, representative These examples, RG-27 RG-28 Resource Guide

Grades 3-5 Example Topics and Genres: Content Related to WIDA’s English Language Proficiency Standards

These examples, representative of state academic content standards, provide context for the English language development described in the strands of Model Performance Indicators.

Example Topics Example Genres Example Topics Example Topics Example Topics • Assignments • Biographies & autobiographies • Angles • Body systems • Ancient civilizations • Classroom supplies/ • Fables • Area • Cells & organisms • Branches of government Resources • Fairy tales • Attributes of two- and three- • Earth history/Materials • Colonization • Following directions • Fantasies dimensional shapes • Ecology & conservation • Communities • Health & safety • Folklore • Basic operations (multiplication • Ecosystems • Cross-cultural experiences & division) • Information gathering • Informational texts • Electricity • Explorers • Legends • Cost/Money • Leisure activities • Energy sources • Goods & services • Mysteries • Data analysis • Opinions • Foods & nutrition • Historical events, figures • Myths • Personal experiences • Decimals • Forces of nature & leaders • Narratives • Personal information • Descriptive statistics • Fossils • Immigration/Migration • Prose • Rules & procedures • Fractions • Geological forms • Legends & scales • Science fiction • Large whole numbers • Heat • Maps & globes/Locations • Tall tales • Metric system • Living systems • Needs of groups, societies Example Topics • Patterns & relationships • Magnetism & cultures • Affixes & root words • Percent • Natural resources • Neighbors North & South • Comprehension strategies • Perimeter • Nature • Prehistoric animals • Conventions & mechanics • Place value • Reproduction & heredity • Resources & products • Editing & revising • Polygons • Scientific inquiry • Times long ago • Explicit & inferential information • Scale • Simple machines • Tools & artifacts • Fact or opinion • Sets • Solar system • Topography: rivers, coasts, • Fluency strategies mountains, deserts, plains • • Strategies for problem solving • States of matter Hyperbole • Trade routes • Main ideas/Details • Weather patterns • U.S. documents • Organization of texts • U.S. regions • Phonemes/Phonology • Points of view • Story elements & types of genres • Story grammar • Text structure & organization

Standard 5: Resource Guide Social Studies The language of Agriculture story America’s civilizations Ancient/Medieval of Rights Bill Civic rights & responsibilities Civil wars Colonization Countries & continents & frames perspectives Cultural of reference trends Economic & organization of Forms government & democracy Freedom resources Human zones Longitude/Latitude/Time Maps Revolution Slavery U.S. Constitution

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example

Standard 4: Atoms & molecules Atoms to plants Bacteria Body systems & organs Chemical building blocks change Climate/Temperature Climate zones Comets & meteorites Cycles & compounds Elements of energy Forms Light & force Motion disasters Natural & resources Populations, environments Processes Reproduction or Scientific inventions discoveries Scientific tools or instruments system Solar Sound and planets Stars Universe: Water The language of Science

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example Standard 3: Mathematics The language of Algebraic equations & volume Area, circumference Complex two- & three- dimensional figures & interpretation Data statistics sets & plots Data Decimals Estimation Factors Fractions relations Geometric Integers Line segments & angles of central Measures tendency (mean, median, mode, range) units & standard Metric of measurement lines Parallel Percent Perimeter Probability Ratio & proportion root Square

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example

WIDA’s English Language Proficiency Standards WIDA’s Standard 2: Grades 6-8 Example Topics and Genres: Content Related to Grades 6-8 Example Topics Language Arts The language of Adventures Ballads Editorials documents Historical interest Human Mythology verse Poetry/Free Science fiction texts Technical Alliteration purpose Author’s Biographies strategies Comprehension Dialogue Editing of speech Figures Literacy devices & similes Metaphors Multimedia meanings Multiple Personification & antonyms Synonyms strategies Test-taking origins Word

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Example Genres Example Example Topics Example

Social and Standard 1: Assignments/Research Character development Instructions/ Assignments & supplies Resources School behavior School life interaction Social of information Use of multiple Use resources of register Use

Instructional language • • • • • • • • • • Example Topics Example These examples, representative of state academic content standards, provide context for the English language development described in the strands of Model Performance Indicators. Performance Model described in the strands of English language development context for the provide of state academic content standards, representative These examples, RG-29 RG-30 Resource Guide

Grades 9-12 Example Topics and Genres: Content Related to WIDA’s English Language Proficiency Standards

These examples, representative of state academic content standards, provide context for the English language development described in the strands of Model Performance Indicators.

Standard 1: Standard 2: Standard 3: Standard 4: Standard 5: Social and The language of The language of The language of Science The language of Instructional language Language Arts Mathematics Social Studies

Example Topics Example Genres Example Topics Example Topics Example Topics • Classroom routines • Allusion • Congruence • Atoms & molecules/ • Banking and money • Personal & business • Autobiographical & • Coordinate planes, graphs Nuclear structures • Behaviors of individuals & communication biographical narratives & equations • Chemical & physical groups • Personal preferences • Comedies • Data displays & change • Conflict resolution interpretation • • Points of view • Critical commentary Conservation of energy & • Cultural diversity & • Epics • Derived attributes matter cohesion • Recommendations/ • Constellations Suggestions • Literary genres • Formulas & equations • Federal, civil & individual • Ecology & adaptation rights • School life • Monologues/soliloquy • Mathematical relations & • Multicultural/world functions • Elements & compounds • Global economy • Social & cultural traditions literature & values • Multi-dimensional shapes • Food chains • Historical figures & times • Tragedies • • Forces & motion • Human populations • Study skills & strategies Powers • Problem solving • Genetics & heredity • Individual responsibilities • Information gathering Example Topics • Analogies • Quadrilaterals • Life cycles • Interdependence among • Workplace readiness • Author’s perspective/Point • Roots • Meteorology states & nations of view • Scale & proportion • Nuclear change • International & multinational organizations • Bias • Speed & acceleration • Scientific research & • Production, consumption & • Character development • investigation Theoretic probability distribution • Convention & mechanics • • Simple organisms Trigonometric functions • Social issues & inequities • Literal & figurative (sine, cosine, tangent) • Taxonomic systems language • Supply & demand • Multiple meanings • Supreme Court cases • Note taking • Survey research • Parody • The story of the U.S. • Research • World histories/ • Satire Civilizations/Cultures • Symbolism • Word derivations (etymology) 3.5 Examples (e.g.,)

Within some MPIs there are examples, marked by “(e.g.),” to help clarify or extend the meaning of one or more of the elements. As each cell in the standards’ matrices has limited space, the full text is not often provided. The examples within the MPIs are used in five different ways. More than one type of example may appear in one strand.

Resource Guide Teacher Talk: In presenting a big idea to students, a teacher might say, “White is made up of all colors.” This statement may serve as a stimulus for ELLs who could then meet Teacher Talk the MPI’s expectations by demonstrating or pointing to a picture of white light being refracted into a rainbow by a In the listening strands, ideas prism. of what teachers might say to ELLs in either instructional Level 1 or assessment contexts in Entering Standards Reference the Formative or Summative Framework: Formative Framework are occasionally Match oral interjected within an MPI. statements about Standard: 4- The language of Science Grade level cluster: 6-8 Examples of teacher talk are light or sound bounded by quotation marks. with illustrations Language domain: Listening (e.g., “White is Example Topic: Light/Sound made up of all colors.”)

Student Speak Student Speak: There are many possible explanations for places/ locations on maps or globes. A proficient ELL might give the In the strands that address answer noted in this MPI. speaking and writing, we hear the student voice. The Level 5 examples represent what Bridging Standards Reference students at the assigned Framework: Formative language proficiency level Give explanations Standard: 5- The language of Social Studies are expected to produce for places/ Grade level cluster: 3-5 or some language patterns locations on maps Language domain: Speaking they may use orally or or globes (e.g. “I know this city Example Topic: Maps & globes/Locations in writing. Examples of is the capital student talk are bounded because there is a by quotation marks. star.”)

RG-31 RG-32 Resource Guide touch orsmell. use ofothersensessuchas they couldalsoinvolve the aresupports visual,but interactive. Most sensory MPIs: sensory, graphicand within thestrandsof areof supports present Three maincategories Specific Supports written messagesuchastheonesshown inthisMPI. Text Talk: be...”) that…,” “It could that...,” “We believe text (e.g.,“Ithink non-fiction illustrated opinion infictionor associated withfactor Sort language Developing Level 3 ELLsare abletoidentifyavisuallysupported Example Topic: Language domain:Reading Grade level cluster:3-5 Language Arts Standard: 2-Thelanguageof Framework: Formative Standards Reference especially usefulforthiskindoftask. This MPI specifiesatypeofgraphicorganizer thatwouldbe organisms by usingpictures, iconsandtextwithgraphicorganizers. Specific FirstSupports: andsecondgradersmayclassifyliving charts) organizers (e.g.,T phrases withgraphic using pictures and their attributes descriptions of according to Sort livingorganisms Beginning Level 2 Fact oropinion Example Topic: Language domain:Reading Grade level cluster:1-2 Standard: 4-ThelanguageofScience Framework: Summative Standards Reference Text Talk possible quotesfrom atext. quotation marks becausetheyare domain. They, too,are marked by are associatedwiththereading ELLs are expectedtoprocess Examples oftexttalkthat Living organisms

Subtopics: In the MPI below, the example gives a subtopic Subtopics showing how the language of Percent or Decimals may be used to “follow written instructions.” The Example Genres and Topics, Resource Guide Level 4 by being tied to academic content Expanding standards and representative of district and school curriculum, Follow written Standards Reference have broad applicability. The instructions to Framework: Formative subset of topics are further determine when and Standard: 3- The language of ideas for teachers in designing how to apply math Mathematics lessons or units of instruction in real-life situations Grade level cluster: 6-8 and assessing social or academic involving percent or Language domain: Reading language. Subtopics, by often decimals (e.g., sales Example Topic: Percent/Decimals tax, interest rates or being specific to a language level, tips) with a partner also help teachers differentiate instruction and assessment.

This section has described the various elements which make up model performance indicators and how they relate to one another. Section 4 elaborates the usability of the elements of the MPIs and shows their adaptability through transformations in designing units of study and in mapping curriculum.

RG-33 RG-34 Resource Guide language learners(ELLs)toattaintheELPstandards. the transformationsexemplify thepotentialpower ofthestrandsMPIs aspathwaysforEnglish strand ofMPIs ispossible.Examples illustratehow totransformorsubstitutetheelements. Together, element istreated independently, although,more thanonetransformationwithinasingle MPI or The role oftransformationsforeachelementanMPI isunique. In thesectionsthatfollow, each and usefulnessoftheEnglish languageproficiency (ELP)standards. curriculum andlessondesign.Ultimately, transformationsare thevehicle toincreasing theviability matrices, theywillfindthatusingtransformationsbeatremendously helpful toolinassessment, specific teachingsituation. Once teachershave gainedfamiliaritywiththeformatofstandards’ Transformations are themechanismthatenablesteacherstoadaptstrandsofMPIs totheir reflect targets(Gottlieb, localcurricularorinstructional Carnuccio, Ernst-Slavit, &Katz,2006). entail changingoneormore oftheelementsanMPI to (itslanguagefunction,topicorsupport) Transformations oftheMPIs are intendedtoaddflexibilitytheuseofstrands. Transformations capture andtopicsthatclassroom teachersexperience. therangeofsituations,supports indicators(MPIs)As informative asmodelperformance are forpractice,theydonotcompletely Instruction 4.1 Transformations:StrategiesforDesigningAssessment,Curriculumand SECTION 4:WORKINGWITHTHESTANDARDS Transformation of Language Functions

The transformation of language functions, shown in the following two diagrams, enables teachers to substitute productive language domains (speaking and writing) for receptive language domains

(listening and reading) or vice versa. This transformation also encourages teachers to introduce new Resource Guide language patterns or reinforce those previously learned for a particular level of English language proficiency. Thus, ELLs are able to enhance their repertoire of language within a specific level of English language proficiency.

iure ue ucio rsorio ro isei o ei

Identify speciﬁc geographic Describe speciﬁc geographic locations (e.g., time zones, locations (e.g., time zones, latitude, longitude) on maps latitude, longitude) on maps based on oral information and based on given information to check with a partner a partner

Standards Reference Framework: Formative Language proficiency level: 3- Developing Standard: 5- The language of Social Studies Example Topic: Maps Grade level cluster: 6-8

iure ue ucio rsorio ro rii o Redi

Match descriptive phrases Make lists of real-world of real-world examples with examples of three-dimensional labeled models of three- shapes from labeled models dimensional shapes

Standards Reference Framework: Summative Language proficiency level: 2- Beginning Standard: 3- The language of Mathematics Example Topic: Three-dimensional shapes Grade level cluster: 3-5

RG-35 RG-36 Resource Guide to meaning. transformations show how withinMPIs supports maybemodifiedoraddedtoenhanceELLs’ access graphic organizer present). (thushavingbothinteractive andgraphicsupports Thefollowing two may alsobeexchanged oraddedtotheMPIs, suchashavingstudentswork inpairstocompletea engage inactivitiesandtasksusingreal-life objectsormanipulatives. Different typesofsupport tend torely onpictures informative situations,studentscanactively orillustrationsforsupport, the Summative toFormative Framework orthereverse. Whereas insummative contexts,students Transformations (sensory, ofsupports graphicorinteractive) allow teacherstoeasilymove from Transformation ofSupports Language Domain: Standard: Framework: Standards Reference Language Domain: Grade level cluster: Standard: Standards Reference (e.g., “pineapple,” “peas”) by initialsoundsorconsonants Find labeledpictures offood 4-ThelanguageofScience 5-Thelanguageof Social Studies Formative PreK-K Reading Speaking iure uorrsorioro

uie ooriereors

Example Topic: Grade level cluster:6-8 Language proficiency level: Example Topic: Language proficiency level: 3-Developing “peas”) consonants (e.g.,“pineapple,” foods by initialsoundsor Find real-life examplesof Elements &compounds Food 3-Developing

Transformation of Topics

Transformations of topics can occur within a standard or from one standard to another. Substituting one topic for another allows teachers to develop units or lessons around a specific theme. Oftentimes,

the topics can be selected directly from the example lists or from district curriculum. By exchanging Resource Guide the example topics with others, English as a second language or bilingual teachers can more readily synchronize instruction with general education or content teachers. Two ways of transforming topics are illustrated below.

iure oic rsorio ii drd

Analyze and identify reasons Analyze and identify reasons for genetic alterations based for physical change based on on visually supported text visually supported text with a (e.g., mutation) with a partner partner

Standards Reference Framework: Formative Language Domain: Reading Standard: 4- The language of Science Language proficiency level:4- Expanding Grade level cluster: 9-12

RG-37 RG-38 Resource Guide quality oforiginalstrandsMPIs. MPIs tothetopicstheyteach.In pertaining thenextsection,we offerachecklisttohelpensure the oftransformation,theycandevelopOnce wholestrandsof educatorsbecomefamiliarwiththeart Standards: Framework: Standards Reference 2-ThelanguageofLanguageAr 4-ThelanguageofScience 3-ThelanguageofM 1-Social andInstructional language Summative

athematics ts

Language proficiency level: 1-Entering Language Domain: Speaking Grade level cluster:1-2 4.2 Reviewing Original Strands of MPIs

Figure 4G: WIDA Checklist for Reviewing Strands of MPIs The following checklist has been devised to assist in selecting content topics and developing new strands of MPIs. It may be useful for teachers or teacher committees at grade, school or district levels Resource Guide who wish to transform strands of MPIs as a step in their differentiation of language for curriculum, instruction and assessment.

Framework: ______Grade Level Cluster: ______

Standard: ______Language Domain: ______

Example Topics

1. Are aligned with or representative of those from state academic content YES NO standards?

2. Represent curricular and instructional emphases? YES NO

Strands of Model Performance Indicators (MPIs)

1. Contain sensory, graphic or interactive supports through English language YES NO proficiency level 4, Expanding?

2. Are amenable to curricular ‘big ideas’? YES NO

3. Scaffold at equal intervals across the levels of English language proficiency? YES NO

4. Are uniform in regard to their level of specificity? YES NO

5. Are representations of the language demands contained in academic YES NO content standards?

4.3 Collaboration among Educators Serving English Language Learners (ELLs)

The ELP standards are starting and ending points in the cycle of assessment, curriculum and instruction of ELLs. We suggest that all teachers and administrators who work with ELLs have opportunities to participate together as teams in sustained professional development activities. Educators with a mutual understanding of the expectations of ELLs are best able to serve the students’ individual and collective needs.

RG-39 RG-40 Resource Guide Ideas forCollaborationinImplementing Instruction andAssessmentofELLs assessmentforELLs. in theplanning,implementationandevaluation ofinstructional educational programming. Below are someideasforteachersandadministratorsworking together forELLsfromto coordinate year toyear activitiesandservices toensure strong andconsistent assessmentcycle. administratorsattheschoolanddistrict levelsinstructional Likewise, maywish teachers working withsecondlanguagelearnersmaychoosetocollaboratethroughout the To improve forELLsduringtheschoolyear, cohesionandcontinuityofservices instructional Ideas forCollaborationinPlanning Instructional Assessment Administrators onbehalfofELLs. andleadcollaborative efforts shouldencourage,support dual language,content,resource, specialeducation(ifapplicable)andgeneralteachers. students. Many teacherstouchthelives ofELLs,includingEnglish asasecondlanguage,bilingual, for the or homelanguage.Collaborationamongteachersleadstomaximumcoordination ofservices academic contentandlanguagedevelopment inEnglish and,totheextentfeasible,intheirnative It forELLstohave aconsistent,continuousandchallengingcurriculumthataddresses isimportant • • • • • • • • • • • • •

academic performance Develop acommongradingschemebasedonstudents’ English language proficiency and Collect exemplars ofstudentwork andinterpret thesampleswithcommonrubrics Co-teach activities,tasksandprojects Plan familyinvolvement andcommunityoutreach aboutEnglish languageservices Differentiate according languageinstruction tothelevels of English languageproficiency assessment for performance Design orselectcommonrubrics Plan commonformative assessmentsatgradelevels orgradelevel clusters objectives from stateacademiccontentstandards Formulate languageobjectives from theEnglish languageproficiency standards andcontent Select strandsofMPIs totargetinstruction andmodellessons Co-develop thematicunitsofinstruction Transform orcreate strandsofMPIs tomatchoraugment curriculum Cross-reference, integrateorlinkELPstandards withstateacademiccontentstandards education, ontotheELPstandards Map theschool,districtorstatecurriculum,includingcurriculumforEnglish language Ideas for Collaboration in Evaluating Student Results

• Create standards-based reporting forms or report cards • Interpret results from ACCESS for ELLs® and state assessments of academic achievement to Resource Guide improve services • Share results from ELP assessments and assessments of academic achievement with parents and other stakeholders • Participate in school and district committee activities • Use a common set of criteria for grading ELLs • Use information to develop and coordinate the language education program for ELLs

RG-41 RG-42 Resource Guide SECTION 5: STANDARDS-BASED RESOURCES

The English language proficiency (ELP) standards do not operate in isolation but are part of a comprehensive educational system designed for English language learners (ELLs). This section provides resources to use in conjunction with the WIDA ELP Standards. Resource Guide

5.1 The Relationship among Performance Definitions, CAN DO Descriptors and the Levels of English Language Proficiency

Performance Definitions, CAN DO Descriptors and the strands of model performance indicators (MPIs), each delineated by the ELP levels, are three ways of framing the ELP standards. Each of these resources build upon one another. As shown in Figure 5A, the Performance Definitions (Figure 5B) are the most global (representing the base of the pyramid) with criteria that reflect the general characteristics of ELLs from Kindergarten through grade 12 for each proficiency level.

The CAN DO Descriptors (Figure 5M) build upon the Performance Definitions by describing what students can do at each proficiency level by domain but do not distinguish among students in different grade levels. While not part of the standards’ matrices, these two resources are essential foundations to understanding and using the five proficiency levels exemplified in the MPIs.

The MPIs are the building blocks of the standards’ matrices. Like the Performance Definitions, their strands are assembled according to the progressive levels of English language proficiency. Along with the CAN DO Descriptors, they are divided into the four domains, but they are also structured around example topics and genres by grade level cluster. Thus, they are the most detailed representations of the ELP standards.

Figure 5A shows the relationship between the Performance Definitions, the CAN DO Descriptors, the ELP standards and the strands of MPIs. The resources in the lowest levels of the pyramid contain the broadest definitions of the levels of English language proficiency, narrowing to their most specific representation at the top.

RG-43 RG-44 Resource Guide namely, correspond tothecategoriesorcomponentsofSpeaking and Writing Rubrics (seeSection 5.3); proficiency. Thethree bulletswithineach proficiency level inthePerformance Definitionsalso frame theELPstandards. Theyprovide criteriathatshapeeachofthesixlevels of English language The Definitions, Performance presented in Figure ofthestandards’ 5Bandatthestart matrices, 5.2 PerformanceDefinitionsfortheLevelsofEnglishLanguageProficiency Indicators, ELPStandards,CANDODescriptorsandPerformanceDefinitions Figure 5A:TheRelationshipamongWIDA’sStrandsofModelPerformance • • •

types oferrors Language Control- thecomprehensibility ofthecommunicationbasedonamountand Vocabulary Usage- thespecificityofwords orphrasesforagiven context Linguistic Complexity-theamountandqualityofspeechorwritingfora given situation Performance Deﬁnitions CAN DODescriptors ELP Standards Performance Indicators of Model Strands Figure 5A: The Relationship among WIDA’s Strands of Model Performance Figure 5B: Performance Definitions Indicators, ELP Standards, CAN DO Descriptors and Performance Definitions At the given level of English language proficiency, English language learners will process, understand, produce or use: Resource Guide • specialized or technical language reflective of the content areas at grade level • a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in extended oral Strands 6- Reaching or written discourse as required by the specified grade level of Model • oral or written communication in English comparable to English-proficient Performance peers Indicators • specialized or technical language of the content areas • a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in extended oral 5- Bridging or written discourse, including stories, essays or reports ELP Standards • oral or written language approaching comparability to that of English- proficient peers when presented with grade level material

• specific and some technical language of the content areas • a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in oral discourse or multiple, related sentences or paragraphs CAN DO Descriptors 4- Expanding • oral or written language with minimal phonological, syntactic or semantic errors that do not impede the overall meaning of the communication when presented with oral or written connected discourse with sensory, graphic or interactive support

Performance Deﬁnitions • general and some specific language of the content areas • expanded sentences in oral interaction or written paragraphs • oral or written language with phonological, syntactic or semantic errors that 3- Developing may impede the communication, but retain much of its meaning, when presented with oral or written, narrative or expository descriptions with 5.2 Performance Definitions for the Levels of English Language Proficiency sensory, graphic or interactive support • general language related to the content areas The Performance Definitions, presented in Figure 5B and at the start of the standards’ matrices, • phrases or short sentences frame the ELP standards. They provide criteria that shape each of the six levels of English language • oral or written language with phonological, syntactic, or semantic errors that 2- Beginning proficiency. The three bullets within each proficiency level in the Performance Definitions also often impede the meaning of the communication when presented with one- to correspond to the categories or components of the Speaking and Writing Rubrics (see Section 5.3); multiple-step commands, directions, questions, or a series of statements with namely, sensory, graphic or interactive support • pictorial or graphic representation of the language of the content areas • Linguistic Complexity- the amount and quality of speech or writing for a given situation • words, phrases or chunks of language when presented with one-step • Vocabulary Usage- the specificity of words or phrases for a given context commands, directions, WH-, choice or yes/no questions, or statements with • Language Control- the comprehensibility of the communication based on the amount and 1- Entering sensory, graphic or interactive support types of errors • oral language with phonological, syntactic, or semantic errors that often impede meaning when presented with basic oral commands, direct questions, or simple statements with sensory, graphic or interactive support

RG-45 RG-46 Resource Guide Grade LevelClustersandELPStandards Figure 5C:ExamplesofGeneral,SpecificandTechnicalLanguageacrossthe variety ofcontextswhichmakethemdifficultforELLs. There are manyhigh-frequency words in English, forexample, thathave multiplemeaningsusedina McKeown, Beck, &Kucan (2002)ashighfrequency words, richwords andlow-frequency words. they are development nottobeconfusedwiththethree described by tiersofgeneralvocabulary 2-5 foragiven gradelevel cluster. TheseexamplesillustrateELLs’ secondlanguageacquisition; Figure 5Cgives examplesetsofgeneral,specificandtechnicaltermsassociatedwithELPstandards to specialized ortechnicallanguagethatisrequired inprocessing orresponding toatask. levels ofproficiency, usefrom generallanguage tospecificlanguage we witnesschangein vocabulary 2006, p.7). In thePerformance Definitions, asstudentsprogress from the Entering to Reaching academic discoursethatisdistinctfrom conversational language” (Francis, Rivera, Lesaux,&Rivera, academic success;tobesuccessfulacademically, studentsneedtodevelop thespecialized languageof In fact,“mastery determinantof ofacademic languageisarguablythesinglemostimportant hasbeendocumentedascriticalintheliteracydevelopment ofsecondlanguagelearners. instruction, The role of vocabulary, inparticular, theuseofacademiclanguageassociatedwithcontent-based Vocabulary Usage proficiency in English, theirprocessing abilitiesanduseofcomplexstructures increase accordingly. the useoflanguagetoforeshadow, argue andsummarize (Schleppegrell, 2004).AsELLsgain proficiency, theuseoftextstructures inspecificgenres. essaysofteninclude Forexample,expository grammatical structures, theorganizationandcohesionofideasand,athigherlevels oflanguage Linguistic complexityrefers totheamountofdiscourse(oralorwritten),typesandvariety of Linguistic Complexity The languageof The languageof The languageof The languageof Language Arts Social Studies Mathematics Standard Science Sample Grade Level Cluster 9-12 3-5 1-2 6-8 Language General

person people in all knee Language population Specific character kneecap total demographics Language Technical protagonist patella sum Language Control

Language control reflects the extent to which a communication is comprehensible. Comprehensibility is measured by the number and types of errors committed in oral or written

discourse that affect the meaning or intent of the message. These errors involve lapses in fluency, Resource Guide grammatical usage, phonology (the sounds used by a particular language), and semantic choice (the selection of words to convey meaning).

In the examples that follow, we analyze writing samples of students who took the ACCESS for ELLs® Writing Test—referred to here as Emile, Maxine, Tazak and Felipe. Their writing is scrutinized according to each criterion of the Performance Definitions: linguistic complexity, vocabulary usage and language control. In Figures 5E and F, note the drastic advances in all three criteria from level 2 to level 6 in sample student writing from the 3-5 grade level cluster.

RG-47 RG-48 Resource Guide multiple paragraphs. Here, studentswere given guidanceinpreparing theirwritinginto their thoughtsandstructuring suchastheone shown below story toprovokefaced withashort theirideas. Standards andthelanguageofSocial 2and5,thelanguageofLanguageArts Studies. Students are Tiers BandCoftheACCESS forELLs® Writing assessmentincludeanintegratedtaskwhichcovers Figure 5D:GradeLevelCluster3-5ExampleWritingPrompt Figure 5E: Emile’s Writing Sample from Grades 3-5: Language Proficiency Level Score of 2

Linguistic Complexity Resource Guide

Emile’s sample is too brief to exhibit cohesive organization or a range of sentence structures, but Maxine’s accomplishes both. Her use of dialogue makes her sample worthy of its high score. Also, Figure 5F: Maxine’s Writing Sample from note that Figure 5F contains Grades 3-5: Language Proficiency Level Score of 6 only a portion of Maxine’s response. The entire essay is organized around three anecdotes from her life which relate to the prompt. The use of transitions is appropriate for her age and the conclusion clearly summarizes her point of view.

Vocabulary Usage

Emile uses only general vocabulary, most of which is provided in the prompt. However, Maxine is able to produce specific language such as “guilty,” and even uses idiomatic expressions such as “silly goose” and “look before you leap.”

Note: A portion of Maxine’s writing was omitted here.

RG-49 RG-50 Resource Guide usage andlanguagecontrol from alevel 2toalevel 5sampleformiddleschoolELLs. cluster whomwe name Tazak andFelipe. Note theprogression inlinguisticcomplexity, vocabulary Next, compare thestudentwritingsamplesinFigures 5H andJforstudentsinthe6-8gradelevel

proficient peers. what istypicalofherEnglish hard work,” butnothingbeyond grammatical errors, suchas“do a also makesoccasionalminor “are” insteadof“our.” Maxine usage asin“those stuff”and include incorrect pronoun capitalization. Other mistakes lack ofpunctuationand sample isimpededby acomplete Comprehension ofEmile’s Language Control Figure 5G: Grade Level Cluster 6-8 Example Writing Prompt Resource Guide

At this point, students are given further direction on preparing their ideas for writing by creating an organizational plan such as an outline or a web.

RG-51 RG-52 Resource Guide Score of2 Figure 5H: Tazak’s Writing SamplefromGrades6-8:LanguageProficiencyLevel “divide,” and“pride.” level 5are “represent,” “unity,” used tomeetexpectationsat examples ofspecific vocabulary at thatlevel ofspecificity. Other consistently produce vocabulary 5 student,Felipe, isableto prompt, butonlythelevel “accomplishments” from the Both writerscopiedtheword Vocabulary Usage the essay. progression ofideasthroughout with amuchmore cohesive a greater quantityoflanguage on theotherhand,produces random anddisjointed.Felipe, many ofthethoughtsare sentence structure. However, which shows somevariety of paragraph with“finally,…”, thefourth is usedtostart “I do.” However, atransition phrases “Ilike,” “Iuse” and completely onthesimple Tazak’s samplerelies almost Linguistic Complexity Figure 5J: Felipe’s Writing Sample from Grades 6-8: Language Proficiency Level Score of 5

Language Control Resource Guide

Tazak’s misuse of tense as in, “my idea is taked,” and phonemic slips such as “these” for “this” could impede comprehension, particularly if spoken. It is also difficult to derive the intended meaning from phrases like “because is of the only ones in my school” and “where do I solve it from my school.” Felipe’s sample exhibits greater command of syntax and tenses with far fewer mechanical errors in general. Felipe has not altogether mastered language control, as evidenced in his atypical use of the word “aspects” and possible L1 interference causing him to stray from the correct order of verbs, nouns and adjectives in the phrase “make unhappy all the people.” Nonetheless, his sentences are much more fluid than Tazak’s.

RG-53 RG-54 Resource Guide raters forwritingsamplesonbothaformative andsummative basis. share withoneanother. tohelpteachersbecomemore consistent Theseanchorpapersmaythenserve gradelevels orgradeleveldiscuss studentsamplesofspeakingandwritingforthevarying clustersto into theirclassroom assessmentthroughout theschoolyear. We alsoencourageteacherstogatherand and writingdomainsoftheCANDODescriptors. Teachers are welcome toincorporatetheserubrics rubrics maybeusedinconjunctionwiththe These Definitions andalsothespeaking Performance comparable tothatoftheirEnglish-proficient peers. Rubric doesnotincludelevel forstudentswhoseoralEnglish 6butnotethatitisreserved is basis tointerpret ELLs’ production inEnglish onclassroom orprogram level tasks.The Speaking The Speaking and Writing Rubrics inthisguideare intendedtobeused by teachersonaformative Performance Definitions (5.2). usageand languagecontrol, arevocabulary describedintheprevious sectiondealing with the levels ofEnglish languageproficiency. Thethree criteria represented, linguisticcomplexity, rubrics, shownThese in Figures 5KandL, reflect andelaboratethe Definitionsfor Performance the W-APT™.rubrics are Thesescoring equallyusefulforclassroom use. as the W-APT™; inaddition,thetestadministratorisresponsible forscoringthe Writing sectionof (W-APT)™. Thetestadministratorscores theadaptive Speaking sectionof ACCESS forELLs®as well productive tasksinACCESS forELLs®andalsoitsscreener, the WIDA-ACCESS Placement Test student work orsamples.The Speaking and Writing Rubrics were originallycreated toscore the known Rubrics asarubric. are scoringguidesinwhichauniformsetofcriteriaare usedtointerpret canbeevaluated usingseveralperformance criteriaorganized alongaproficiency continuum The analysesofstudentwritingsamplesintheprevious sectionare anexampleofhow student 5.3 SpeakingandWritingRubricsforClassroomAssessment placement ofstudentsonthelanguageproficiency scale. proficiency. andassessmentshouldbetargeteddifferentiatedInstruction according to the more proficient in English, there isanaturalandpredictive progression across thelevels oflanguage usageandlanguagecontrol) arevocabulary developmental innature; thatis,asstudentsbecome The three criteriaorcomponentsthatcomprisethe Definitions (linguisticcomplexity,Performance Figure 5K: Summary Chart of Speaking Performance Expectations

Speaking Rubric of the WIDA™ Consortium* Resource Guide Linguistic Vocabulary Task Level Language Control Complexity Usage Single words, set Highest frequency When using memorized language, is generally phrases or chunks vocabulary from comprehensible; communication may be 1 of memorized oral school setting and significantly impeded when going beyond the Entering language content areas highly familiar

Phrases, short oral General language When using simple discourse, is generally sentences related to the comprehensible and fluent; communication content area; may be impeded by groping for language 2 groping for structures or by phonological, syntactic or Beginning vocabulary when semantic errors when going beyond phrases going beyond the and short, simple sentences highly familiar is evident

Simple and expanded General and some When communicating in sentences, is oral sentences; specific language generally comprehensible and fluent; responses show related to the communication may from time to time be 3 emerging complexity content area; may impeded by groping for language structures or Developing used to add detail grope for needed by phonological, syntactic or semantic errors, vocabulary at times especially when attempting more complex oral discourse

A variety of oral Specific and At all times generally comprehensible and sentence lengths of some technical fluent, though phonological, syntactic or varying linguistic language related to semantic errors that don’t impede the overall 4 complexity; responses the content area; meaning of the communication may appear Expanding show emerging groping for needed at times; such errors may reflect first language cohesion used to vocabulary may be interference provide detail and occasionally evident clarity

A variety of sentence Technical language Approaching comparability to that of English lengths of varying related to the proficient peers in terms of comprehensibility linguistic complexity content area; and fluency; errors don’t impede 5 in extended oral facility with needed communication and may be typical of those Bridging discourse; responses vocabulary is an English proficient peer might make show cohesion and evident organization used to support main ideas

Adapted from ACCESS for ELLs® Training Toolkit and Test Administration Manuals, Series 103 (2007-08)

*English proficiency level 6 is not included in the Speaking Rubric as it is reserved for students whose oral English is comparable to that of their English-proficient peers.

RG-55 RG-56 Resource Guide *Level 6isreservedforstudents whosewrittenEnglishiscomparabletothatoftheirEnglish-proficient peers. Adapted from Figure 5L:SummaryChartofWritingPerformanceExpectations Developing Reaching* Expanding Beginning Bridging Entering Level 6 4 5 1 2 3 ACCESS forELLs language. adapted textcontainsoriginal may becopiedoradapted; amountsoftext varying chunks ofsimplelanguage; Single words, setphrases or be evidenced. attempt atorganizationmay be copiedoradapted;some amountoftextmay varying sentences; Phrases andshort detail. complexity usedtoprovide sentences thatshow emerging Simple andexpanded detail andclarity. cohesion usedtoprovide complexity; emerging linguistic lengths ofvarying A variety ofsentence organization extended text;cohesionand organized paragraphorin complexity inasingle linguistic lengths ofvarying A variety ofsentence organization text; tightcohesionand well-organized extended organized paragraphorin complexity inasingletightly linguistic lengths ofvarying A variety of sentence Linguistic Complexity Writing RubricoftheWIDA™Consortium ® Training Toolkit Grades 1-12 and Test Administration Manuals,Series103(2007-08) setting andcontentareas. from school vocabulary Usage ofhighestfrequency evident. maybe lack ofvocabulary related tothecontentarea; Usage ofgenerallanguage evident. maybe needed vocabulary to thecontentarea; lackof specific language related Usage ofgeneralandsome occasionally evident. maybe needed vocabulary to thecontentarea; lackof technical languagerelated Usage ofspecificandsome vocabulary. evident facilitywithneeded related tothecontentarea; Usage oftechnicallanguage technical language. Usage ingeneral,specificor precise Vocabularyplace; right word injusttheright Consistent useofjustthe Vocabulary Usage original text. be significantlyimpededin text; comprehensibility may adapted from modelorsource when textiscopiedor Generally comprehensible errors. may beoftenimpededby simple text;comprehensibility original textislimitedto model orsource text,orwhen when textisadaptedfrom Generally comprehensible produce more complextext. errors whenattemptingto time tobeimpededby comprehensibility mayfrom when writinginsentences; Generally comprehensible language interference. such errors mayreflect first impede theoverall meaning; at alltimes,errors don’t Generally comprehensible comprehensibility. peers; errors don’t impede to thatofEnglish proficient Approaching comparability assessments. “proficient” level instate-wide peers functioningatthe to thatofEnglish proficient Has reached comparability Language Control

5.4 The CAN DO Descriptors for WIDA’s Levels of English Language Proficiency

For teachers unfamiliar with the ELP standards, the CAN DO Descriptors provide a starting point for working with ELLs and a collaborative tool for planning. As teachers become comfortable with Resource Guide the Descriptors, the standards’ matrices can be introduced. The CAN DO Descriptors are also general enough to be appropriate to share with students’ family members to help them understand the continuum of English language development.

The CAN DO Descriptors expand the Performance Definitions for the ELP standards by giving suggested indicators (not a definitive set) in each language domain: listening, speaking, reading and writing. More targeted than the Performance Definitions, the Descriptors have greater instructional implications; that is, the information may be used to plan differentiated lessons or unit plans. The Descriptors may also apply to ACCESS for ELLs® scores and may assist teachers and administrators in interpreting the meaning of the score reports. In addition, the Descriptors may help explain the Speaking and Writing Rubrics associated with the ELP test. A distinguishing feature of these Descriptors, although not explicitly mentioned, is the presence of sensory, graphic or interactive support, through ELP level 4, to facilitate ELLs’ access to content in order to succeed in school.

The CAN DO Descriptors offer teachers and administrators working with ELLs a range of expectations for student performance within a designated ELP level of the WIDA ELP Standards. The Descriptors are not instructional or assessment strategies, per se. They are exemplars of what ELLs may do to demonstrate comprehension in listening and reading as well as production in speaking and writing within a school setting. Unlike the strands of MPIs, the Descriptors do not scaffold from one ELP level to the next. Rather, each ELP level is to be viewed independently.

The CAN DO Descriptors included in this Resource Guide are written for the entire preK-12 spectrum. Given that they are generalized across grade spans, it is important to acknowledge the variability of students’ cognitive development due to age, grade level spans, diagnosed learning disabilities (if applicable) and their diversity of educational experiences. Due to maturation, expectations of young ELLs differ substantially from those of older students. These differences must be taken into account when using the Descriptors. In 2009, WIDA released new grade level cluster- specific CAN DO Descriptors at www.wida.us.

Presented as an oral language and literacy matrix, similar to the format of the ELP standards, the Descriptors should facilitate educators’ examination of the language domains for the five levels of English language proficiency. ELP level 6, Reaching, is reserved for those students whose oral and written English is comparable to their English-proficient peers. Figure 5M presents the CAN DO Descriptors of English oral language and literacy development across the levels of English language proficiency.

In Figure 5N, the CAN DO Descriptors for English language proficiency have been translated into Spanish. This version may be shared with parents literate in Spanish, perhaps at parent-teacher conferences, or to set goals for an individual student’s English language development.

RG-57 RG-58 Resource Guide

Figure 5M: CAN DO Descriptors for the Levels of English Language Proficiency, PreK-12 For the given level of English language proficiency, with support, English language learners can:

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Entering Beginning Developing Expanding Bridging • Point to stated pictures, • Sort pictures, objects • Locate, select, order • Compare/contrast • Draw conclusions from words, phrases according to oral information from oral functions, relationships oral information • Follow one-step oral instructions descriptions from oral information • Construct models based directions • Follow two-step oral • Follow multi-step oral • Analyze and apply oral on oral discourse • Match oral statements directions directions information • Make connections from to objects, figures or • Match information • Categorize or sequence • Identify cause and effect oral discourse LISTENING illustrations from oral descriptions to oral information using from oral discourse objects, illustrations pictures, objects

• Name objects, people, • Ask WH- questions • Formulate hypotheses, • Discuss stories, issues, • Engage in debates

pictures • Describe pictures, events, make predictions concepts • Explain phenomena, Level 6Reaching • Answer WH- (who, what, objects, people • Describe processes, • Give speeches, oral give examples and justify when, where, which) • Restate facts procedures reports responses questions • Retell stories or events • Offer creative solutions to • Express and defend SPEAKING issues, problems points of view

• Match icons and symbols • Locate and classify • Sequence pictures, events, • Interpret information or • Conduct research to to words, phrases or information processes data glean information from environmental print • Identify facts and explicit • Identify main ideas • Find details that support multiple sources • Identify concepts about messages • Use context clues to main ideas • Draw conclusions from print and text features • Select language patterns determine meaning of • Identify word families, explicit and implicit text READING associated with facts words figures of speech

• Label objects, pictures, • Make lists • Produce bare-bones • Summarize information • Apply information to diagrams • Produce drawings, expository or narrative from graphics or notes new contexts • Draw in response to a phrases, short sentences, texts • Edit and revise writing • React to multiple genres prompt notes • Compare/contrast • Create original ideas or and discourses • Produce icons, symbols, • Give information information detailed responses • Author multiple forms/

WRITING words, phrases to convey requested from oral or • Describe events, people, genres of writing messages written directions processes, procedures

Variability of students’ cognitive development due to age, grade level spans, their diversity of educational experiences and diagnosed learning disabilities (if applicable) are to be considered in using this information. Nivel 6 Alcanzando

Resource Guide Nivel 5 Conectando Sacar una conclusión Sacar de información oral Construir modelos basados en discurso oral conexiones en Hacer información oral en debates Participar fenómenos, Explicar dar ejemplos y respuestas justificar y defender Expresar puntos de vista investigaciones Realizar para reunir información de fuentes múltiples una conclusión Sacar de texto explícito e implícito información a Aplicar contextos nuevos a múltiples Reaccionar y discursos géneros varias Redactar de formas/géneros composiciones

• • • • • • • • • • • Nivel 4 Extendiendo Comparar y contrastar funciones y relaciones a de acuerdo información oral Analizar y aplicar información oral causa y Identificar efecto en discurso oral cuentos, Discutir cuestiones, y conceptos presentaciones Hacer orales soluciones Ofrecer a cuestiones o creativas problemas información Interpretar o datos detalles Encontrar las ideas que apoyan principales figuras Identificar y relaciones retóricas palabras entre información Resumir de representaciones gráficas o apuntes y revisar Corregir escritura ideas originales o Crear detalladas respuestas

• • • • • • • • • • • • Nivel 3 Desarrollando - seleccionar y orde Localizar, - nar información que provi ene de descripciones orales instrucciones verbales Seguir de paso múltiples Clasificar o secuenciar información oral usando dibujos u objetos hipótesis y hacer Formular predicciones procesos Describir cuentos o eventos Recontar dibujos, eventos Secuenciar y procesos ideas principales Identificar pistas del contexto para Usar determinar el significado de palabras textos básicos Producir o de estilo narrativo informativo Comparar y contrastar información personas, eventos, Describir procesos

• • • • • • • • • • • • Nivel 2 Empezando Clasificar dibujos u objetos siguiendo las instrucciones verbales instrucciones Seguir de dos pasos verbales declaraciones Emparejar con objetos, verbales figuras o ilustraciones Preguntar dibujos, Describir objetos y eventos, personas y decir Reformular hechos Localizar y clasificar información hechos y Identificar mensajes directos de patrones Seleccionar lenguaje asociados con hechos listas Hacer dibujos, frases, Producir oraciones cortas y apuntes información pedida Dar por instrucciones orales o escritas

• • • • • • • • • • • • Nivel 1 Entrando Señalar dibujos, palabras o Señalar frases indicados instrucciones orales Seguir de un paso declaraciones Emparejar orales con objetos, figuras o ilustraciones objetos, personas Nombrar y dibujos Contestar preguntas (quién, qué, cuándo, dónde, cuál) símbolos y Emparejar dibujos con palabras, frases o letras en la escritura el medioambiente conceptos de Identificar la organización de letras y elementos de textos objetos, dibujos, Etiquetar diagramas a respuestas Dibujar instrucciones íconos, símbolos, Producir palabras y frases para comunicar un mensaje

• • • • • • • • • •

Translated by (Traducido por) Elizabeth J. Hartung, Monona Grove, WI; revised by (revisado por) Andrea Cammilleri, Mariana Castro and Stephanie Herrera, WIDA, Wisconsin Center for Education Research por) Elizabeth J. Hartung, Monona Grove, WI; revised by (revisado by (Traducido Translated

ESCUCHAR HABLAR LEER ESCRIBIR

Figure 5N: Descripción de las Habilidades en los Niveles del Lenguaje Académico Inglés, PreK-12 , un estudiante de inglés puede hacer lo siguiente: de capacidad en el lenguaje inglés, con apoyo cada nivel En El desarrollo cognoscitivo de los estudiantes puede variar según edad, grado, diversidad las experiencias educacionales, y discapacidades aprendizaje (si existen). Esto se debe considerar al usar ésta información.

RG-59 68 Appendices 4. 3. 2. 1. Appendix 1:FrequentlyAskedQuestions(FAQs)

and instruction. standards, sothatisanotherhelpful source todrawuponforclassroom assessment, curriculum English toSpeakers ofOther Languages(TESOL’s) 2006Prek-12 English language proficiency administrators asresources. The WIDAELP Standards astheprototype for served Teachers of The setsofstrandsinboththe2004and2007 Editions are available toteachersand standards andassessments. the standards’ document.In thisway, we are abletomakeongoingimprovements tobothour and memberstates.AnalysesofACCESS forELLs® scores have helpedinformtherevisions of Furthermore, allstandards comeundercyclical review by organizations WIDA anditspartner MPIs show theadaptabilityofthesestrandsforuseby localprograms, schooldistrictsorstates. they are intendedtobefluidandflexible.Thetransformationsofthedifferent elementswithin the We emphasize thatalthoughourstandards remain constant,strandsofMPIs are notrestrictive; forELLs. instruction suggestions, examplesandideasofhow tobegindifferentiate assessment,curriculumand a defactocurriculum,norshouldtheybeusedexclusively. ThestrandsofMPIs are merely Absolutely! Remember, however, theELPstandards andthestrandsof MPIs donotconstitute to strengthen thebreadth anddepthofcoverage. Standard CombiningstrandsofMPIs 2,thelanguageofLanguageArts. from botheditionsserve is listedinsection3.4.In addition,examplegenre strandsare interspersedwithexampletopicsin implicit andtherangeoftopicsfrom stateacademiccontentstandards andnationalorganizations the firstedition,othersare new. In the2007 Edition, theexampletopicsare explicit,ratherthan strandofMPIs;academic contenttopicsasexamplesinevery someMPIs are thesameasthosein First ofall,goodforyou! Don’t fret. Care wastakeninensuringarepresentative sampleof those of2004. indicators(MPIs)performance are andtheyare allnew intendedtosupplement,notsupplant, the same.There are minorchangestotheformatofframeworks. Thestrandsofmodel The informationinthiseditionupdatesthatoftheoriginaldocument. Should we combine bothsetsofstrandsMPIs oruseonlyone? these additionalstrandsofMPIs? Should forourEnglish we languagelearners plancurriculumandinstruction (ELLs)with standards? What dowe doifwe have already alignedthe2004strandsofMPIs toouracademiccontent that of2004? Does the2007Edition of WIDA’s English LanguageProficiency (ELP)standards supersede

The standards remain If thematic units have been designed around the strands of MPIs presented in the 2004 Edition, don’t abandon them! You may want to consider revisiting them, as graphic, sensory and/or

interactive support is now present through English language proficiency level 4. The new strands Appendices of MPIs offer additional opportunities for ELLs to gain access to content through language.

5. What suggestions should we make to classroom teachers working with ELLs in regard to the use of the ELP standards?

Those teachers who have gained familiarity with using the ELP standards should welcome additional strands of MPIs to expand their potential repertoire for differentiation of language. Teachers and administrators who have not worked with the standards or who have had little opportunity for professional development should begin with the 2007 Edition as it is most up-to- date.

6. Should we concentrate our efforts on the Summative Framework as it most likely will be the source for ACCESS for ELLs® questions?

No! While each framework serves a distinct purpose, the strands of MPIs from one framework can be readily converted to the other and vice versa through transformations. Initially, ACCESS for ELLs® was grounded in the 2004 Large-scale Assessment Framework. As approximately one-third of the test items are replenished each year, the test developers now draw from both frameworks.

69 70 Appendices Overview Document availableOverview intheELPStandards section ofwww.wida.us. of WIDA’s English LanguageProficiency Standards prior tothe2007 Edition, pleaseseethe2004 For acomplete listofreferences thatcontributedtothetheoretical foundationanddevelopment Schleppegrell, M.J.(2004).Thelanguageofschooling:Afunctionallinguisticsperspective. Mahwah, Rothenberg, C.,&Fisher, D.(2007).Teaching English Adifferentiated languagelearners: approach. McKeown, M.G,Beck, I.L.,&Kucan, L.(2002).Bringing words tolife:Robust vocabulary Kagan, S.,L.,&M.(2000).Reaching standards through cooperative Providing learning: Gottlieb, M.,&Nguyen, andaccountabilityinlanguageeducationprograms: D.(2007).Assessment A Gottlieb, M.,Carnuccio,L.,Ernst-Slavit, G., &Katz,A.(2006).PreK-K English languageproficiency Gottlieb, English M.(2006).Assessing Bridges from languagelearners: languageproficiency toacademic Gibbons, P. (2002).Scaffoldinglanguage,scaffoldinglearning: inthe Teachingsecondlanguagelearners Garcia, G.(Ed.). (2003).English Reaching learners: thehighestlevel ofEnglish literacy. Newark, Francis, D.J.,Rivera, M.,Lesaux,N.,Rivera, H.(2006).Practical guidelinesfortheeducation August, D.L.,&Shanahan, T. (2006).Synthesis: Instruction andprofessional development. In Appendix 2:ReferencesandFurtherReadings NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education. Newinstruction. York, NY: Guilford Press. Resources. ingeneralfor alllearners educationclassrooms. Port Chester, NY: National Professional guide forteachersandadministrators . Philadelphia, PA: Caslon. standards. Alexandria, VA: Teachers ofEnglish toSpeakers ofOther Languages. achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press. mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann. DE: International Reading Association. University ofHouston fortheCenter onInstruction. . Houston,interventions TX: Texas Institute forMeasurement, Evaluation, andStatistics atthe of English Research-based languagelearners: recommendations andacademic forinstruction National Literacy Panel. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. D. L.August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy inasecondlanguage:Report ofthe Appendix 3: Glossary

Academic content standards- statements that define the knowledge and skills students need to

know and be able to demonstrate as proof of competency in the core content areas associated with Appendices schooling

Academic language proficiency- the use of language in acquiring academic content in formal schooling contexts, including specialized or technical language and discourse related to each content area

Analytic rubrics- scoring guides that consist of designated levels with specified components consisting of defined criteria, such as the ACCESS for ELLs® Speaking and Writing Rubrics

CAN DO Descriptors- general performance indicators that describe typical behaviors of ELLs in each language domain at each level of English language proficiency

Discourse- extended, connected language that may include explanations, descriptions and propositions

Domains- see Language domains

English language learners- linguistically and culturally diverse students who have been identified (by the W-APT™ screener and other measures) as having levels of English language proficiency that preclude them from accessing, processing and acquiring unmodified grade-level content in English

English language proficiency standards- criteria that express the language expectations of ELLs at the end of their English language acquisition journey across the language domains

Formative Framework- strands of model performance indicators descriptive of ELLs’ language development that help inform ongoing instruction and classroom assessment; that is, the process of learning

General vocabulary- words or phrases not generally associated with a specific content area (e.g., describe, book)

Genre- category used to classify discourse and literary works, usually by form, technique or content; an element of the strands of model performance indicators for Standard 2- the language of Language Arts

Holistic rubrics- scoring guides or documentation forms that have a set of general criteria for designated levels, such as the Performance Definitions

Interactive Supports- a type of scaffold to help students communicate and facilitate their access to content, such as by working in pairs or groups to confirm prior knowledge, using their native language to clarify, or incorporating technology into classroom activities

71 72 Appendices access tomeaningthrough thesenses(seeing,hearing,touching,smelling,or tasting) Supports-Sensory atypeofscaffoldthatfacilitates students’ deeperunderstanding oflanguageor the useofsupports proficiency basedonincreased linguisticcomplexity, usageandlanguagecontrol through vocabulary Scaffolding- buildingonalready acquired skillsandknowledge from level tolevel oflanguage Rubric- seeAnalyticorHolistic rubrics listening andreading Receptive language- languagethatisprocessed andinterpreted; includesthelanguage domainsof Realia- real-life languagedevelopment objectsusedforsupporting text withunderstandingandfluency Reading- theabilitytoprocess, understand,interpret andevaluate writtenlanguage,symbolsand and writing Productive language-languagethatiscommunicated;includesthedomainsofspeaking namely, linguisticcomplexity, usageandlanguagecontrol vocabulary Performance Definitions- criteriathatshapeeachofthesixlevels ofEnglish languageproficiency; domain standards’ matricesthatisdescriptive ofaspecificlevel of English languageproficiency foralanguage Model performance indicator(MPI)- asinglecellwithintheEnglish languageproficiency situations Listening- theabilitytoprocess, understand,interpret andevaluate spokenlanguageinavariety of Linguistic complexity-theamountandqualityofspeechorwritingforagiven situation proficiency: 1- Entering, 2- Beginning, 3- Developing, 4- Expanding, 5- Bridging and6- Reaching continuum intostagesoflanguagedevelopment; the WIDA ELPStandards have 6levels oflanguage Levels divisionofthesecondlanguageacquisition ofEnglish languageproficiency- thearbitrary how ELLsare toprocess oruselanguagetodemonstratetheirEnglish languageproficiency Language functions-thefirstofthree indicatorsthatindicates elementsinmodelperformance Language domains-thefourmainsubdivisionsoflanguage:listening,speaking,reading andwriting errors Language control- thecomprehensibility ofthecommunicationbasedonamountandtypes Social language proficiency-the use of language for daily interaction and communication

Speaking- oral communication used in a variety of situations for a variety of purposes and audiences Appendices Specialized vocabulary- academic terms or phrases associated with the content areas of Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies

Strand of model performance indicators (MPIs)- the five sequential or scaffolded levels of English language proficiency for a given topic or genre and language domain

Summative Framework- strands of model performance indicators descriptive of English language learners’ cumulative language development or outcomes of acquiring English; that is, the products of learning

Supports- instructional strategies or tools used to assist students in accessing content necessary for classroom understanding or communication; may include teachers employing techniques (such as modeling, feedback or questioning), or students using visuals or graphics, interacting with others, or using their senses to help construct meaning of oral or written language

Technical vocabulary- the most scientific or precise terminology associated with topics within the content areas of Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies

Topic- a particular theme or concept derived from state and national content standards that provides a social or academic content-related context for language development; an element of model performance indicators

Transformations- manipulations of the elements of model performance indicators, such as changing the example topics or types of support, to personalize the representation of the English language proficiency standards for teachers and classrooms

Visually Supported- print or text that is accompanied by pictures, illustrations, photographs, charts, tables, graphs, graphic organizers, or reproductions thereby offering English language learners opportunities to access meaning from multiple sources

Vocabulary usage- the specificity of words or phrases for a given context

Writing- written communication used in a variety of forms for a variety of purposes and audiences

73 74 Appendices the ELPStandards section ofwww.wida.us. Language Proficiency Standards, 2004 Document availableEdition, pleaseseethe2004Overview in For acompletelistofindividuals who contributedtothedevelopment ofthe WIDA English Many thankstothefollowing individualsfor: edition. Members included: indicatorsandprovidingthe proposed strandsofmodelperformance new excellent feedbackforthis WIDA wouldliketoextenditsappreciation tothe2007Standards Review Committeeforanalyzing Appendix 4:Acknowledgments Robin Rivas, Milwaukee Public Schools,Milwaukee, WI , NewLori Ramella Jersey ofEducation, Department Trenton, NJ Mark Nigolian, Burlington Public Schools,Burlington, VT Robin M.Lisboa,Illinois State Board ofEducation, Chicago,IL Dr. M.Elizabeth Cranley , WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research, Madison, WI Jennifer Christenson,CenterforApplied Linguistics, Washington, DC The Authors’ Contributions Production Contributions, Reviews andEditing Laura DeZeeuw, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research (draftformatting) Andrea Cammilleri, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research (coordination) Beth Atkinson, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research (designandlayout) Robert F. Kohl, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research Dr. Margo Gottlieb , WIDA, ArlingtonHeights, IL David Gabel, CenterforApplied Linguistics Dr. M.Elizabeth Cranley, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research Jennifer Christenson,CenterforApplied Linguistics Mariana Castro, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research Andrea Cammilleri, WIDA, Wisconsin CenterforEducation Research Dr. Jim Bauman, CenterforApplied Linguistics Resource Guide. revisions andtheproduction process aswell asdesignedandauthored ofthe portions this project. Andrea Cammilleri, WIDA’s Public Relations Manager, coordinated editing, invaluable indicatorsand inshapingthisGuide, strands of modelperformance thenew The insightandwork ofDr. M.Elizabeth Cranley, AssociateDirector of WIDA, hasbeen for thisproject aswell asauthoringthestandards’ matricesandmuchofthe Resource Guide. Dr. Margo Gottlieb, WIDA’s LeadDeveloper, fullcredit forproviding deserves thevision