Structured

1
Nuts Bolts

• Structured
• English
• Immersion
  
• Models
• Round 1

2
Welcome

• Optimize our time together
• Respect presenters
• (limit side-bar conversations)
• Monitor personal technology
• Listen and participate actively

3
Our Mission

• We are here to ensure academic excellence for all
  students

4
Goal

• Explain the new law that went into effect on
  September 21, 2006 that will substantially change
  the way ELL students are educated in Arizona

5
Objectives

• History of the law
• Model development process
• Components of the models
• English Language Development
• Compliance with the law
• SEI Incremental Cost Budget
• Form

6
Classroom Observations

• Some teachers are not fluent in English
• Some ELL students are unable to comprehend
  classroom activities
• Some ELL students in high school are failing
  content classes because they are not proficient
  in English
• Some ELL students are being improperly placed in
  bilingual classrooms

7
Classroom Observations

• At some schools the only ELD provided is by
  paraprofessionals
• Some teachers don't know which of their students
  are classified as English Language Learners or
  their English language proficiency level
• On average, only 12 of ELL students become
  proficient each year

8
ELD Survey in Arizona

• 30-60 minutes
• of ELD is the norm in Arizona
• ELL
  Program Survey, February 2007
• Presentations to the Task Force

9

• What is the history of the law?

10
Lau v. Nichols (1974) U.S. Supreme Court

• A class action suit filed on behalf of
• non-English speaking students of Chinese
  ancestry in the San Francisco school system

11
Lau v. Nichols (1974)

• Ruling
• A unanimous decision based on 601 of the Civil
  Rights Act of 1964, declared there is no
  equality of treatment merely by providing
  students with the same facilities, textbooks,
  teachers, and curriculum for students who do not
  understand English are effectively foreclosed
  from any meaningful education.

12
Lau v. Nichols (1974)

• Basic English skills are at the very core of
  what public schools teach. Imposition of a
  requirement that, before a child can effectively
  participate in the educational program, he must
  already have acquired those basic skills is to
  make a mockery of public education. We know that
  those who do not understand English are certain
  to find their classroom experiences wholly
  incomprehensible and in no way meaningful.
• English language acquisition gives students an
  equitable competitive edge in their future. (i.e.
  college, business)

13
Lau v. Nichols (1974)

• Districts must take affirmative steps to
• rectify the language deficiency in order
• to open its instructional program to
• these students
• No specific remedy is urged

14
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)U.S. Court of
Appeals, Fifth Circuit

• Parents of Mexican-American children in Texas
  charged the Raymondville Independent School
  District with instructional practices that
  violated their childrens rights.

15
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

• Ruling
• The grouping of children on the basis of language
  for a language remediation program is an
  unobjectionable practice.

16
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

• "Thus, as a general rule, school systems are free
  to employ ability grouping, even when such a
  policy has a segregative effect, so long, of
  course, as such a practice is genuinely motivated
  by educational concerns and not discriminatory
  motives."

17
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

• Formulated a Three-Prong Federal Test to
  determine district compliance with the Equal
  Education Opportunity Act (1974 Amendments)
• Compliance requires the satisfaction of three
  criteria
• Program based on sound educational theory
• Implement the program with the instructional
  practices, resources and personnel
• Must not persist in a program that fails to
  produce results

18
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

• Stated that the EEOA . . . 1703(f) leaves
  schools free to determine the sequence and manner
  in which limited English speaking students tackle
  this dual challenge so long as the schools design
  programs which are reasonably calculated to
  enable these students to attain parity of
  participation in the standard instructional
  program within a reasonable length of time after
  they enter the school system

19
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

• Described 2 options for teaching ELL students
• Sequential
• 1.) Teach English
• 2.) Teach content
• Allowed for language ability based grouping
• Simultaneous
• Teach English and content conjointly

20
Flores v. Arizona (1992)Arizona District Court

• A lawsuit was filed in Nogales, AZ alleging a
  violation of the Equal Education Opportunity Act
• (1974 Amendments)
• Final ruling is still pending

21
Flores v. AZ (August 2000) Consent Order

• Standardize methods of identifying LEP students
• Arizonas current assessment ? AZELLA ?
• Establish uniform performance standards for
• English proficiency
• Alignment of curriculum with standards
• Establish criteria for individual learning plans
  
• Compensatory Instruction
• ADE monitoring and compliance

22
Proposition 203 (November 2000)

• Repealed existing English language education
• statutes and enacted a new law that requires
• schools to teach English through Structured
• English Immersion (SEI)
• . . . resolved that all children in Arizona
  public
• schools shall be taught English as rapidly
  and
• effectively as possible
• Allowed for language ability based grouping of
• students

23
Proposition 203 (November 2000)

• All children in Arizona public schools shall be
  
• taught English by being taught in English
  and
• all children shall be placed in English
  language
• classrooms
• All instructional materials and instruction in
  
• English
• Not normally intended to exceed one year

24
House Bill 2064

• September 21, 2006
• The ELL legislation consolidated and expanded
  state laws.

25
ELL Task Force

• Nine Members
• 3 by Superintendent of Public Instruction
• 2 by Governor
• 2 by President of the Senate
• 2 by Speaker of the House of Representatives
• Four-year term

26
House Bill 2064

• Elements
• Add the results of AZELLA to AZLEARNS profile
• (A.R.S. 15-241)
• Requires the Superintendent to establish a
  process to assess English proficiency
  (A.R.S. 15-756)
• ELL Task Force creates SEI Models (A.R.S.
  15-756.01)
• SEI Models adopted September 13, 2007
• Annual review and modification of models (A.R.S.
  15-756.01)
• Requires annual AZELLA (re)assessment
• (A.R.S. 15-756.05, 15-756.06)

27
House Bill 2064

• Elements
• Created the Office of English Language
  Acquisition Services (OELAS) (A.R.S. 15-756.07)
• Requires compliance and monitoring of all aspects
  of the Federal and State laws including the SEI
  Models (A.R.S. 15-756.08)
• SEI endorsement for AZ teachers (A.R.S.
  15-756.09)
• Requires accountability reporting by ADE and LEAs
  (A.R.S. 15-756.10)

28
House Bill 2064

• Funding
• July 1, 2007 the two (2) year funding clock
  started (A.R.S. 15-756.04, 15-943)
• SEI Incremental Cost Budget Request
• (A.R.S. 15-756.03,
  15-756.04)
• Increases the support level weight for ELL
  students (conditional upon judges order)
  (A.R.S. 15-943, Sec.
  15)
• Compensatory Instruction funding (A.R.S.
  15-756.11)

29
House Bill 2064Parties that have stated
responsibilities in the law
Legislature
Auditor General
HB 2064
AZ State Board of Education
Districts Charters
ELL Task Force
OELAS
30
Feedback

• Questions or clarifications about the previous
  portion of the presentation

31
15 minute break
32

• What was the process?

33
Model Development Process
34
Model Development Process

• The Task Force testimony included over one
  hundred-thirty (130) speakers/presentations
  during the course of a year, including
• AZ educators
• Representatives from institutes of higher
  learning
• Practitioners
• Specialists

35
PolicyElements taken from the law

• Schools must teach English (A.R.S. 15-752)
• Materials and instruction in English (A.R.S.
  15-752)
• ELL students are encouraged to be grouped
• together by proficiency in a Structured
  English
• Immersion (SEI) classroom (A.R.S. 15-752)

36
PolicyElements taken from the law

• Goal is for ELL students to become fluent
• English proficient in a period not normally
• intended to exceed one year (A.R.S.
  15-756.01 C)
• Cost-efficient, research-based models
• that meet all State and Federal laws
  (A.R.S. 15-756.01 D)

37
PolicyElements taken from the law

• Minimum four (4) hours per day for first year
  ELL
• students (A.R.S. 15-756.01 C)
• The task force shall identify the minimum amount
  
• of English language development per day for
  all
• models. (A.R.S. 15-756.01 C)
• A pupil who has attained English
  proficiencyshall
• be transferred to English language
  mainstream
• classrooms. (A.R.S. 15-756.05 C)

38
Goals of Models

• Clear Direction for Teachers
• Achievable Targets
• Student Progression to Proficiency

39
Research Based Models

• The Task Force reviewed numerous school
• programs, none of which met all the legal
• criteria required of the models
• Therefore, the Task Force identified critical
• research based components on which to build
• the models

40
Principles

• English is fundamental to content area
• mastery
• Language ability based grouping facilitates
• rapid language learning
• Time on task increases academic learning
• Discrete language skills approach facilitates
• English language learning

41
Feedback

• Questions or clarifications about the previous
  portion of the presentation

42

• What are the components of the Models?

43
Outcome of Model development process

• Key Principles
• English is fundamental to content mastery
• Time on task increases academic progression

• Key Structure
• Entry exit based on AZELLA
• Class size standards
• Grouping by proficiency then grade
• Time allocations based on standards

• Key Policies
• 4 hours of ELD
• Language ability based grouping
• Instruction materials in English
• 1-year to proficiency

• Classroom Practices
• SEI classes taught in English
• Materials aligned to standards DSI

44
Misconception

• Any classroom with an SEI endorsed teacher is an
  SEI classroom

45
SEI Classroom v. Mainstream ClassroomPermeable
Membrane
Proficient on AZELLA

• SEI Classroom
• AZELLA LEVELS
• Pre-Emergent
• Emergent
• Basic
• Intermediate

• Mainstream Classroom
• Native English
  Speakers
• FEP

• Entry and exit is based on AZELLA

46
SEI Classroom

• ELL students remain in SEI classrooms until they
  reach proficient on the AZELLA.
• The purpose of the SEI classroom is to provide
  four (4) hours of daily ELD instruction.
• (SEI Models of the Arizona English Language
  Learner Task Force Definitions Structured
  English Immersion Classroom, June 15, 2007)

47
From Policy to Practice
Teachers / Students
SEI Discrete Skills Inventory
ELL Proficiency Standards
ALIGNED TOGETHER
Academic Standards
AZELLA
Program Models
Foundational Principles
Policy A.R.S. 15-751 to 755
48
Alignment

• An ELL student has a direct path to the academic
  standards by moving through the English Language
  Proficiency Standards as measured by AZELLA.

49
One (1) Year to Proficiency

• Task Force charged to produce models that will
  lead to proficiency in one (1) year
• Demands PRESCRIPTIVE models
• Prescriptive curriculum developed in DSI
• Prescriptive time allocations
• Prescriptive class content
• Prescriptive training

50
Time Allocations

• Scheduling and time allocations for four (4)
  hours of ELD based on the English Language
  Proficiency (ELP) Standards
• Oral English and conversation
• Reading
• Vocabulary
• Writing
• Grammar

51
Time Allocations

• There are 2 exceptions to the four (4) hours
• Kindergarten ½ day
• For kindergarten classes operating on a half-day
  basis, the time allocations are proportionately
  reduced.
• (SEI Models of the Arizona English Language
  Learner Task Force, September 15, 2007)
• Middle School/High School
• In their second or subsequent years as an ELL,
  such students who have scored proficient on the
• reading subtest of AZELLA may be excused from
  the one
• hour Academic English Reading class.
• writing subtest of AZELLA may be excused from
  the one
• hour Academic English Writing and Grammar
  class. (SEI Models of the Arizona
  English Language Learner Task Force, September
  15, 2007)

52
Time Allocations for Elementary School Levels 10
flexibility

• Students Testing at AZELLA Pre-Emergent and
  Emergent

Conversation 45 min.
Grammar 60 min.
Reading 60 min.
Vocabulary 60 min.
Pre-Writing 15 min.
Students Testing at AZELLA Basic
Conversation 30 min.
Grammar 60 min.
Reading 60 min.
Vocabulary 60 min.
Writing 30 min.
Students Testing at AZELLA Intermediate

Conversation 15 min.
Grammar 60 min.
Reading 60 min.
Vocabulary 60 min.
Writing 45 min.
53
Time Allocations for Middle School and High
School Levels 20 hours per week / 10 flexibility

• Students Testing at AZELLA Pre-Emergent

Conversational English and Academic Vocabulary
60 min.
English Reading 60 min.
English Writing 60 min.
English Grammar 60 min.
Students Testing at AZELLA Emergent
Conversational English and Academic Vocabulary
60 min.
English Reading 60 min.
English Writing 60 min.
English Grammar 60 min.
Students Testing at AZELLA Basic
Academic Oral English and Vocabulary 60 min.
English Reading 60 min.
English Writing 60 min.
English Grammar 60 min.
Students Testing at AZELLA Intermediate

English Language Arts (SEI) 60 min.
English Language Arts (SEI) 60 min.
Academic English Reading 60 min.
Academic English Writing and Grammar 60 min.
54
Language Ability Based Grouping

• Primary determinant of grouping is proficiency
  level
• Kindergarten students shall be grouped
• separately from students in other grades.
• (SEI Models of the Arizona English Language
  Learner Task Force, June 15, 2007)
• In Elementary Schools
• A. Overall proficiency level within grade
• B. Overall proficiency level band within grade
• C. Overall proficiency level band within grade
• band

55
Language Ability Based Grouping

• In Middle/Junior High and High Schools
• proficiency level is prioritized
• A. Proficiency sub-level within grade
• B. Proficiency sub-level within grade band
• C. Overall proficiency level within grade
• D. Overall proficiency level band within grade
• E. Overall proficiency level band within grade
  band

56
Language Ability Based Grouping

• Larger population of ELL students

Pre-Emergent
Intermediate
Basic
Emergent
Intermediate alone
Basic alone
Emergent shall be combined with Pre-Emergent
Intermediate and Basic can be combined
Basic and Emergent can be combined
Emergent alone
Pre-Emergent alone
57
Elementary Sample
Pre-Emergent (20 - 23/class) 14 students
Emergent (20 - 23/class) 5 students
Basic (25 - 28/class) 70 students
Intermediate (25 - 28 class) 93 students

• 93-28 (1 section)65
• 
  
  65-28 (1 section)37
• 
  
  37-28 (1 section)9
• 
  70 9 79
• 
  79-28 (1
  section)51
• 
  51-28 (1
  section)23
• 
  
• 
  5 23 28
• 
  28-23 (1 section)5
• 14 5 19
• 19 (1 section)

Total of 7 sections of ELD
58
Staffing Sample
Grade X has 300 students with 12 FTE
teachers. Of these 300 students, 182 are
identified as non-English proficient ELL
students and 118 students are English
proficient. 4 FTE teachers are required for the
English proficient students. 7 ELD
teachers are required for the non-English
proficient students. A total of 11 teachers are
required. 0 incremental ELD teachers are
required.
Grade X has 300 students with 10 FTE
teachers. Of these 300 students, 182 are
identified as non-English proficient ELL
students and 118 students are English
proficient. 4 FTE teachers are required for the
English proficient students. 7 ELD
teachers are required for the non-English
proficient students. A total of 11 teachers are
required. 1 incremental ELD teacher is
required.
59
High School Sample
Pre-Emergent (20 - 23/class) 3 students
Emergent (20 - 23/class) 34 students
Basic (25 - 28/class) 88 students
Intermediate (25 - 28 class) 331 students

• 331-28 (11 times)23
• 
  
  (11 sections)
• 
  
  
• 
  88 23 111
• 
  111-28 (3
  times)27
• (3 sections)
• 
  27-27 (1
  section)0 (class size is 25-28)
• 
  
• 
  34-23 (1 section)11
• 3 11 14
• 14 (1 section)

Total of 17 sections of ELD
60
Target Class Size

• Pre-Emergent and Emergent is 20
• Basic and Intermediate is 25

61
Teacher Qualifications

• Teacher qualification requirements
• Standard Elementary or Standard Secondary
• Teaching Certificate
• Middle School Language Arts
• High School - English
• Endorsements
• ESL or
• Bilingual or
• SEI
• Highly qualified
• Models require training in SEI Models and DSI

62
Model Components

• Instruction and materials in English
• AZELLA entry and exit
• Four (4) hours of ELD driven by English Language
  
• Proficiency (ELP) standards and the DSI
• Language ability based grouping
• Certified and trained teachers
• Class size
• Instructional time allocations driven by the ELP
  standards
• One (1) year exit
• Training

63
What are the SEI Program Models?

• Structured English Immersion (SEI) Program Models
  are
• M Methods
• O Of
• D Developing
• E English
• L Language
• S Skills
• to ensure an English language learners progress
  and academic success in the classroom.

64
SEI Program Models
Number of students by proficiency level drives
the grouping
HIGH ELL INCIDENCE (above 46) Placement by
prescribed AZELLA proficiency level single grade
level
Pre-Emergent / Emergent
Basic
Intermediate
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
MEDIUM ELL INCIDENCE ( above46) Placement by
prescribed AZELLA proficiency level single grade
level
Basic / Intermediate
Pre-Emergent / Emergent
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
LOW ELL INCIDENCE ( 17-46) Placement by
prescribed AZELLA proficiency level multiple
grade combined
Pre-Emergent / Emergent / Basic / Intermediate
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
Proficient and English Only
SUPER LOW ELL INCIDENCE (1-16) Placement by
prescribed AZELLA proficiency level multiple
grade combined or ILLP
Proficient English Only
Pre-Emergent / Emergent / Basic / Intermediate
Proficient English Only
Proficient English Only
Proficient English Only
65
Individual Language Learner Plan (ILLP)

• SCHOOLS with 16 or fewer ELL students
• may provide instruction through the
• development of Individual Language
• Learner Plans (ILLPs) created for each
• ELL student
• Must meet scheduling and time allocations as
  required by the models

66
Feedback

• Questions or clarifications about the previous
  portion of the presentation

67

• What is ELD?

68
ELD Components
Phonology Speech, sounds
Pragmatics How you use language
Morphology Parts of words, verb tenses
Semantics Meaning of words or sentences
Vocabulary
Syntax Grammar, sentence structure, language
rules
Lexicon Collection of words you know
69
Phonology

• Not connected to print
• Studies the SOUND patterns of a specific language
• Phonology describes the way sounds function
  within a given language or across languages
• An important part of phonology is studying which
  sounds are distinctive units within a language -
  in English, for example, /b/ and /d/ are
  distinctive units of sound
• aBove v. a Dove

70
Morphology

• Parts of words adding affixes to change base
  words
• Verb tenses
• Word families
• addend
• additive
• add addendum
• adding
• added
• addition

71
Syntax

• Focuses on the form of language not meaning
• The rules that govern the structure of sentences
• Algorithm of language
• Horizontal flow L ? R
• Sentences are like a train that has to be in
• specific order
• I like fluffy kittens.
• NOT ? Fluffy kittens I like.

72
Lexicon

• The collection of words you know
• Lexicon organizes the mental vocabulary
• in a speaker's mind
• Word list, dictionary, glossary
• blackberry
• outback
• davenport

73
Semantics

• The study of meaning in a language
• Lexicon Semantics Vocabulary
• a pull-down menu
• I like fluffy kittens.

kitties cats felines
love adore
74
Pragmatics

• The decoding of meaning in language and involves
  three major communication skills
• 1. Using language for different purposes, such as
  
• greeting (e.g.,  hello, goodbye)
• informing (e.g., I'm going to get a cookie)
• demanding (e.g., Give me a cookie)
• promising (e.g., I'm going to get you a cookie)
• requesting (e.g., I would like a cookie, please)

75
Pragmatics

• 2. Changing language according to the
• needs of a listener or situation, such as
• talking differently in a classroom with students
  than with adults in the teachers lounge
• use of appropriate intonation
• giving background information to an unfamiliar
  listener
• speaking differently in a classroom than on a
  playground

76
Pragmatics

• 3. Following rules for conversations
• and storytelling, such as
• taking turns in conversation
• introducing topics of conversation
• staying on topic
• rephrasing when misunderstood
• how to use verbal and nonverbal signals

77
ELD and ContentThe lesson objective is ELD

• Classroom materials used in an ELD class may
  reflect content from a variety of academic
  disciplines. Classroom materials must be
  appropriate for the students level of English
  language proficiency. Selection of content
  materials must be based on the materials
  effectiveness in facilitating and promoting the
  specific English language objective(s) of the
  class. Such materials must predominantly feature
  specific language constructions that align with
  the English language objectives based on the ELL
  Proficiency Standards and the DSI (SEI Models,
  September 13, 2007)

78
ELD and Content

• The lesson objective is ELD
• ELD is distinguished from other types of
  instruction, e.g., math, science, or social
  science, in that the content of ELD emphasizes
  the English language itself. (SEI Models of the
  Arizona English Language Learner Task Force, June
  15, 2007)
• ELD is not a math, science or social studies
  lesson. Content from academic subjects are the
  vehicles to help achieve the goal of developing
  English language.

79

• ELD is the driver
• Academic content is the vehicle

80
Feedback

• Questions or clarifications about the previous
  portion of the presentation

81

• How do I comply with the law?

82
LEA Requirements

• Each LEA governing board shall select
• Task Force approved model(s) on a
• school by school basis (A.R.S. 15-756.02 A)
• Implement all model components
• (A.R.S. 15-756.02)
• Identify PHLOTES (A.R.S. 15-756)
• Assess English proficiency of PHLOTES
• (A.R.S. 15-756)

83
LEA Requirements

• Place ELL students in English language
• classroom (A.R.S. 15-752)
• Reassess ELL students at least annually at the
  end of the year (A.R.S. 15-756.05)
• Reassess proficient ELL students for two (2)
  years (A.R.S. 15-756)
• Submit annual report to ADE (A.R.S. 15-756.10)
• District Superintendent or charter operator
• must sign attestation of alignment of
  materials to state standards

84
Primary Responsibility

• The primary responsibility of administrators is
  classroom configuration based on grouping
  by language proficiency and grade
• The primary responsibility of teachers is ELD,
  as defined by the model(s) and structured
• by the DSI

85
How Will This Help My School?

• Students proficiency will enable schools
• to achieve better results on
• AYP
• AMAO
• AZLEARNS

86
(No Transcript)
87

• How will we pay for this?

88
SEI Funding

• Provides funding to districts/schools/charters
• LEAs submit requests for incremental
• costs of the model(s) offset by existing
  funding
• ADE forwards requests to the Legislature for
  funding

89
Incremental Costsare for implementing SEI
program models

• Costs that are associated with a structured
  English immersion programthat are in addition
  to the normal costs of conducting programs for
  English proficient students (A.R.S.
  15-756.01 L2)
• Authorized costs are limited to elements
  required to implement the models

90
SEI Incremental Cost Budget Request
Based on DRAFT request

• Requests for incremental funding
• ADE Sample Incremental Cost Budget Worksheet
• Established Data Spreadsheet
• SEI Incremental Cost Budget Worksheet How-To
  Walk-Thru
• Incremental cost requests submitted to
  Legislature

91
SEI Incremental Cost Budget Request
Based on DRAFT request

• The maximum amount of the budget request shall
  be the incremental costs of the model selected
  offset by the following monies (A.R.S.
  15-756.01-I 1-5)
• of Title I (Federal)
• of Title II-A (Federal)
• Title III (Federal)
• of Impact Aid (Federal)
• of Desegregation Funding (State and Local)
• ELL Group B Weight (State and Local)

92
Alternate model proposals

• School Districts Proposed Programs
• A.R.S. 15-756.02 Allows school districts to
  submit proposed SEI program(s) to the Task Force
  for approval.
• The Task Force has not yet established the
  process for their review of proposed programs.

93
Proposed Program(s)

• Must meet all legal requirements
• Children taught in English using English
  materials (A.R.S. 15-751, 15-752)
• Children shall be placed in English language
  classrooms (A.R.S. 15-752)
• ELL students shall be educated through SEI
  (A.R.S. 15-752)
• The period of SEI instruction is temporary and
  not normally intended to exceed one (1) year
  (A.R.S. 15-752)

94
Proposed Program(s) cont.

• Must meet all legal requirements
• Students with the same degree of fluency may
• be grouped (A.R.S. 15-752)
• Once ELL students have achieved English
• language fluency they shall be transferred to
  an
• English language mainstream classroom (A.R.S.
  15-752)
• Students in their first year classified as an
  ELL
• student shall receive four (4) hours of ELD
  daily (A.R.S. 15-756.01)

95
Proposed Program(s) cont.

• Must meet all legal requirements
• Entry and exit from the SEI program is based on
• AZELLA score (A.R.S. 15-756)
• SEI Model(s) shall be research based (A.R.S.
  15-756.01)
• SEI Model(s) shall be cost effective (A.R.S.
  15-756.01)
• School districts shall provide supporting
• documentation of the expected outcomes of the
• program(s) (A.R.S. 15-756.02 B)

96

• Whats ahead?

97
Round 2 Training (draft)

• Who Duration
• SEI Teachers 3 days
• ELL Coordinators
• School/District Administration
• School Board Members
• What
• History Legal Aspects
• Use of assessments in the classroom
• ELL Proficiency Standards
• SEI Models
• ELD
• Discrete Skills Inventory
• Language Ability Based Grouping
• Scheduling
• Development of School and District Action Plans
• FAQs

98
Round 3 Training On Demand (draft)

• Who Duration
• - SEI Teachers
  On Demand
• ELL Coordinators What are your needs?
• School/District Administration
• School Board Members
• What
• History Legal Aspects
• Use of assessments in the classroom
• ELL Proficiency Standards
• SEI Models
• Discrete Skills Inventory
• Language Ability Based Grouping
• Scheduling
• Development of School and District Action Plans
• Data
• SAIS
• SEI Incremental Cost Budget Request
• Targeted Technical Assistance
• FAQs

99
Round 4 Training Follow-Up (draft)

• Who Duration
• SEI Teachers 2 days
• ELL Coordinators
• School/District Administration
• School Board Members
• What
• New Information
• Re-Teaching
• Best Practices which are emerging
• Use of assessments in the classroom
• ELL Proficiency Standards
• SEI Models
• Discrete Skills Inventory
• Language Ability Based Grouping
• Scheduling
• Development of School and District Action Plans
• SEI Incremental Budget Request
• FAQs

100
Round 5 Training Culmination Review (draft)

• Who Duration
• SEI Teachers 2-3 days
• ELL Coordinators
• School/District Administration
• School Board Members
• What
• New Information
• Re-Teaching
• Best Practices
• Use of assessments in the classroom
• ELL Proficiency Standards
• SEI Models
• Discrete Skills Inventory
• Language Ability Based Grouping
• Scheduling
• Development of School and District Action Plans
• SEI Incremental Cost Budget Request
• FAQs

101
Summer Institute (draft)

• Who Duration
• SEI Teachers 5 days
• ELL Coordinators
• School/District Administration
• School Board Members
• What
• Focused training sessions
• Specialized institute for language development

102
(No Transcript)
103
Ongoing Information

• http//www.ade.az.gov
• FAQs (coming soon)
• Upcoming training information
• Legal documents
• Monitoring information
• SEI Endorsement information

104
Helpful Links

• http//ELDQuestions_at_azed.gov
• Arizona English Language Learners Task Force
  http//www.ade.az.gov/ELLTaskForce/
• Office of English Language Acquisition Services
  http//www.ade.az.gov/asd/lep/
• English Language Acquisition terms
  http//www.ncela.gwu.edu/expert/glossary.htmlE

105
Contact Information

• Kelt.Cooper_at_azed.gov [phone]
• Leann.Gilbreath_at_azed.gov [phone]
• John.Stollar_at_azed.gov [phone]
• Patty Hardy (ADE - Highly Qualified)
• Patty.Hardy_at_azed.gov [phone]
• Barbara Dillard (Harcourt AZELLA)
• Barbara.Dillard_at_Harcourt.com
• (1-800-800-8305 ext. 5645)

106
(No Transcript)
107
Thank You!