App1.4A.1 ODE ELProgram Guide
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
User Manual:
Open the PDF directly: View PDF 
.
Page Count: 65
Appendix 1.4A.1
ENGLISH LEARNERS
PROGRAM GUIDE
Oregon Department of Education
Revised September 2015
This is a living document and subject to frequent updates. We recommend reviewing
the document online rather than printing a hard copy.
It is a policy of the State Board of Education and a priority of the Oregon Department of Education that
there will be no discrimination or harassment on the grounds of race, color, sex, marital status,
religion, national origin, age, sexual orientation, or disability in any educational programs, activities or
employment. Persons having questions about equal opportunity and nondiscrimination should contact
the Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction at the Oregon Department of Education, 255 Capitol
Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97310; phone 503-947-5740; or fax 503-378-4772.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Oregon State English Learner Program Goals ................................................................................... 1
Common Vocabulary and Frequently Used Terminology ................................................................... 2
Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... 7
Title III Program Administration Procedures and Requirements ....................................................... 11
Purpose ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Local Educational Agency (LEA) Responsibilities ...................................................................... 12
EL Plan (Local Service Plan, Local Plan, Lau Plan) ................................................................... 12
How to Develop an EL Plan ....................................................................................................... 13
Types of Program Service Models ................................................................................................... 14
Program Requirements .................................................................................................................... 16
Identifying a Student as an EL ................................................................................................... 16
Home Language Survey ............................................................................................................ 16
Teacher Referral ........................................................................................................................ 17
Notifications to Parents/Option to Waive Services ..................................................................... 18
Program Exit Criteria (Reclassification) ...................................................................................... 18
Executive Numbered Memo: Reclassification and Retention for English Learners ..................... 18
Monitored Students .................................................................................................................... 21
Allocation of Federal Title III Funds ............................................................................................ 21
Steps to Title III Allocations ........................................................................................................ 21
Sub-Grantee Allocations ............................................................................................................ 22
Carryover Budget Narratives ...................................................................................................... 22
Consortia Allocations ................................................................................................................. 22
Immigrant Sub-grant Allocation .................................................................................................. 23
Indirect/Administrative Rate ....................................................................................................... 23
Supplement, Not Supplant ......................................................................................................... 23
Monitoring .................................................................................................................................. 24
Data Collection and Analysis ........................................................................................................... 24
State Data Collections ............................................................................................................... 26
Data Collection Requirements ................................................................................................... 27
Equal Access ................................................................................................................................... 27
Private School Participation ............................................................................................................. 29
Private Schools and Title III Consortium Members ..................................................................... 30
Parent Notification Requirements .................................................................................................... 30
English Language Proficiency Standards ................................................................................... 31
Assessment and Measurement of English Learners ........................................................................ 31
English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st Century (ELPA21) ................................ 31
State Content Assessments ....................................................................................................... 32
Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAO) ............................................................. 32
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Improvement Plans .................................................................................................................... 32
Forms and Correspondence ............................................................................................................ 34
Home Language Survey (HLS) .................................................................................................. 34
Required K-12 Parent Notices ................................................................................................... 34
English Learner Students with Disabilities ....................................................................................... 35
Special Education ...................................................................................................................... 36
Additional Resources ................................................................................................................. 39
504 Accommodation Plans ........................................................................................................ 40
Talented and Gifted Identification ............................................................................................... 41
Charter Schools ............................................................................................................................... 43
Alternative Schools and Programs ................................................................................................... 45
Alternative Schools .................................................................................................................... 45
JDEP, YCEP, LCTC ................................................................................................................... 46
Oregon Diploma Requirements ....................................................................................................... 47
Essential Skills ................................................................................................................................. 47
Additional Resources ....................................................................................................................... 48
Office of Civil Rights ................................................................................................................... 48
Title III Web Page ...................................................................................................................... 48
Title III Contact List .................................................................................................................... 48
Statutes, Rules, and Memorandums: Services for English Learners ............................................... 48
Federal Law ............................................................................................................................... 48
Legal References ............................................................................................................................ 53
Overview of the Agency ............................................................................................................. 53
Oregon State Laws .................................................................................................................... 54
Case Law and Related Statutes ................................................................................................. 56
State Archiving (Retention) Requirements ................................................................................. 57
Oregon Administration Rules and Oregon Revised Statutes ............................................................ 58
Numbered Memoranda Pertaining to English Learners .............................................................. 60
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 1
INTRODUCTION
This guide is designed as a reference for district and school personnel working with English
learners (ELs). The content of the guide represents a compilation of information, examples,
and resources for your use. If you find an error, or feel this guide needs to be updated to
reflect new or additional information, please email Leslie Casebeer at
leslie.casebeer@state.or.us Please be sure to include appropriate documentation to support
your submitted recommendation, as careful review of the document will take place prior to
any changes being made.
All or any part of this document may be reproduced for educational purposes without specific
permission from the Oregon Department of Education.
This manual is distributed for informational and resource purposes, and does not represent
legal advice.
"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."
Lau v. Nichols (1974)
OREGON STATE ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM GOALS
English learner programs are expected:
To assist students in accessing core subject courses in their path toward graduation
from high school and access to post-secondary educational opportunities.
To provide resources and assistance to school districts in providing effective
instructional programs for ELs while meeting required Federal and State regulations.
To assist school districts in creating, implementing, and improving English language
development programs that provide academically rigorous and equitable learning
opportunities leading to Career and College Readiness.
To promote culturally relevant and responsive curricula and pedagogies embracing the
unique identities of those gaining proficiency in an additional languages.
To provide and ensure access to an equitable education for ELs.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 2
COMMON VOCABULARY AND FREQUENTLY USED TERMINOLOGY
BICS: Basic interpersonal communication skills: The language ability required for verbal
face-to-face communication.
CALP: Cognitive academic language proficiency: The language ability required for
academic achievement.
Castañeda v. Pickard: On June 23, 1981, the Fifth Circuit Court issued a decision that is the
seminal post-Lau decision concerning education of language minority students. The case
established a three-part test to evaluate the adequacy of a district's program for ELs:
(1) is the program based on an educational theory recognized as sound by some experts in
the field or is considered by experts as a legitimate experimental strategy; (2) are the
programs and practices, including resources and personnel, reasonably calculated to
implement this theory effectively; and (3) does the school district evaluate its programs and
make adjustments where needed to ensure language barriers are actually being overcome.
[648 F.2d 989 (5th Cir., 1981)]
Content-based English as a Second Language: This approach makes use of instructional
materials, learning tasks, and classroom techniques from academic content areas as the
vehicle for developing language, content, cognitive, and study skills. English is used as the
medium of instruction.
Dual Language Program: Also known as two-way or developmental, the goal of these
bilingual programs is for students to develop language proficiency in two languages by
receiving instruction in English and another language in a classroom usually comprised of
half native English speakers and half native speakers of the other language.
Educational Assistant: Educational assistants who work under the supervision of an
appropriately licensed teacher may provide instructional support pursuant to OAR 581-038-
0005-0025.
English Learner (EL): A national-origin-minority student who is limited-English-proficient.
This term is often preferred to limited-English-proficient (LEP) as it highlights
accomplishments rather than deficits. ELs are defined as limited English proficient (LEP),
and when used with respect to an individual, means an individual who:
is aged 3 through 21;
is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school or secondary school;
was not born in the United States or whose native language is a language other than
English;
is a Native American or Alaska Native, or a native resident of the outlying areas; and
- who comes from an environment where a language other than English has had a
significant impact on the individual's level of English language proficiency; or
- who is migratory, whose native language is a language other than English, and
- who comes from an environment where a language other than English is dominant;
and
- whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English
language may be sufficient to deny the individual the ability to meet the State's
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 3
proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section
1111(b)(3);the ability to successfully achieve in classrooms where the language of
instruction is English; or the opportunity to participate fully in society
English Language Learner (ELL): Another name for English learner.
English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st Century (ELPA21): Oregon’s
annual summative assessment for all students who have been identified as English learners.
This annual assessment is required whether the student received EL services or not. ELs
participate in this assessment each year until they are officially exited from the program by
their districts. This assessment replaces the Oregon English Language Proficiency
Assessment (ELPA) beginning in 2015-16.
English as a Second Language (ESL): As its name implies, the ESL approach focuses on
instruction in English as the primary means to help ELs acquire the language and ultimately
meet high academic standards. Students learn and are taught in English exclusively or
primarily—certain instructional materials or instructional techniques may make use of basic
L1 (first language) vocabulary, but only as a means to support the students’ use of English.
Models that follow the ESL approach may include both language instruction, wherein English
language is the instructional content itself, or content-based instruction, in which academic
content is the object of instruction, but delivered in such a way as to also support ELs’
acquisition of English.
ELSWD (English Learner Students with Disabilities): An EL who also has a disability.
These students have an Individual Education Plan (IEP).
Equal Education Opportunities Act of 1974: This civil rights statute prohibits states from
denying equal educational opportunity to an individual on account of his or her race, color,
sex, or national origin. The statute specifically prohibits states from denying equal
educational opportunity by the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to
overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional
programs. [20 U.S.C. §1203(f)]
FEP: Fluent (or fully) English proficient.
Immigrant Children (Recent Arrivers) and Youth are defined in section 3301 of ESEA-
Title III:
(a) Are aged 3 through 21
(b) Were not born in any State, and
(c) Have not been attending one or more schools in any one or more States for more than
three full academic years.
A required sub-grant is issued on an annual basis to qualifying school districts based on a
formula measuring high rates of growth in immigrant youth.
Informed Parental Consent: The permission of a parent to enroll their child in an EL
program; or, the refusal to allow their child to enroll in such a program after the parent is
provided effective notice of the educational options and the district's educational
recommendation.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 4
Instructional Assistant: See Educational Assistant
JDEP: Juvenile Detention Education Program.
LTCT: Long-Term Care and Treatment Education Programs.
Language Dominance: Refers to the measurement of the degree of bilingualism, which
implies a comparison of the proficiencies in two or more languages.
Language Instruction Educational Program (LIEP): An instruction course:
(a) in which a limited English proficient child is placed for the purpose of developing and
attaining English proficiency, while meeting challenging state academic content and
student academic achievement standards, as required by section 1111(b)(1); and
(b) that may make instructional use of both English and a child’s L1 to enable the child to
develop and attain English proficiency, and may include the participation of English
proficient children if such course is designed to enable all participating children to
become proficient in English and a second language (L2).
Language Proficiency: Refers to the degree to which the student exhibits control over the
use of language, including the measurement of expressive and receptive language skills in
the areas of phonology, syntax, vocabulary, and semantics, and including the areas of
pragmatics or language use within various domains or social circumstances. Proficiency in a
language is judged independently and does not imply a lack of proficiency in another
language.
Lau Plan: Another name for Local Plan, ELL Plan or EL Plan.
Lau v. Nichols: A class action suit brought by parents of non-English-proficient Chinese
students against the San Francisco Unified School District. In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled
that identical education does not constitute equal education under the Civil Rights Act of
1964. The court ruled that the district must take affirmative steps to overcome educational
barriers faced by the non-English speaking Chinese students in the district. [414 U.S. 563
(1974)]
LEP: Limited-English-proficient, Federal term used in ESEA.. (See ELL or EL).
Local Plan, From Federal Title III Statutes: SEC. 3116. Local Plans: Each eligible entity
desiring a subgrant from the State educational agency (SEA) under section 3114 shall submit
a plan to the State educational agency at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the SEA may require. The Office for Civil Rights uses the phrase “EL Plan”.
Local Service Plan: This phrase is sometimes used in place of “Local Plan”.
Maintenance Bilingual Education (MBE): MBE, also referred to as late-exit bilingual
education, is a program that uses two languages, the student's primary language and
English, as a means of instruction. The instruction builds upon the student's primary
language skills, and develops and expands the English language skills of each student to
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 5
enable him or her to achieve proficiency in both languages, while providing access to the
content areas.
MOU: Memorandum of Understanding.
The May 25 Memorandum: To clarify a school district's responsibilities with respect to
national-origin-minority children, the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, on
May 25, 1970, issued a policy statement stating, in part, that "where inability to speak and
understand the English language excludes national-origin-minority group children from
effective participation in the educational program offered by a school district, the district must
take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in order to open the instructional
program to the students."
NEP: Non-English-proficient.
Newcomer Program: Newcomer programs are separate, relatively self-contained
educational interventions designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly
arrived immigrants. Typically, students attend these programs before they enter more
traditional interventions (e.g., English language development programs or mainstream
classrooms with supplemental ESL instruction).
Reclassification: When a student obtains academic English proficiency, the student is
exited from ELD services. The federal term for this process is reclassification; Oregon
typically refers to this process as exiting. See Numbered Memorandum 007-2013-14 for
specific guidance.
Sheltered English Instruction: An instructional approach used to make academic
instruction in English understandable to ELs. In the sheltered classroom, teachers use
physical activities, visual aids, and the environment to teach vocabulary for concept
development in mathematics, science, social studies, and other subjects.
Specific courses: As used in ORS 336.079 mean educational units consisting of a series of
instructional periods that explicitly teach speaking, reading, and writing English in a manner
enabling ELs to benefit from regular classroom instruction in English. Since these courses
apply to students who are “unable to benefit from classes taught in English”, these classes
are not the same as general education content classes (reading, writing, speaking) taught in
English.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI prohibits discrimination on the grounds of
race, color, or national origin by recipients of federal financial assistance. The Title VI
regulatory requirements have been interpreted to prohibit denial of equal access to education
because of a language minority student's limited proficiency in English.
Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA): The Bilingual
Education Act, Title VII of the ESEA, recognizes the unique educational disadvantages faced
by non-English speaking students. Enacted in 1968, the Bilingual Education Act established
a federal policy to assist educational agencies to serve students with limited-English-
proficiency by authorizing funding to support those efforts. In addition to providing funds to
support services to LEP students, Title VII also supports professional development and
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 6
research activities. Reauthorized in 1994 as part of the Improving America's Schools Act,
Title VII was restructured to provide for an increased state role and give priority to applicants
seeking to develop bilingual proficiency. The Improving America's Schools Act also modified
eligibility requirements for services under Title I so that LEP students are eligible for services
under that program on the same basis as other students.
Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) Program: The primary goal of a Transitional
Bilingual Program is to facilitate the EL student's transition to an all-English instructional
program while receiving academic subject instruction in the native language to the extent
necessary. This program, also known as Early-Exit Bilingual Education, utilizes a student's
primary language in instruction. The program maintains and develops skills in the primary
language and culture while introducing, maintaining, and developing skills in English.
Typically, transition to all English occurs by mid- to late elementary school. These programs
are designed for ELs.
Tutor: In the context of OAR 581-023-0100, the definition of tutors are educational
assistants providing tutoring services who meet the requirements of OAR 581-037-0005 to
0025. According to ORS 342.120, educational assistant means a classified school employee
who does not require a license to teach, who is employed by a school, district, or education
service district, and whose assignment consists of and is limited to assisting a licensed
teacher in accordance with rules established by the Oregon State Board of Education.
YDEP: Youth Detention Education Program.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 7
Acronyms
Acronym
What it stands for:
What it means:
AMAO
Annual Measurement
Achievement Objectives
The accountability measures for ELs. An annual report
providing information on the progress ELs are learning
and acquiring academic English proficiency.
AMO
Annual Measureable
Objectives
Formerly known as AYP
AYP
Adequate Yearly
Progress
Used prior to Oregon’s ESEA waiver
CM
Constructing Meaning
Sheltered English instruction methodology - created by
Susanna Dutro.
DB
Developmental Bilingual
Like Two-Way Immersion programs, these programs share
the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy, and thus typically
last through elementary school or longer (preferably through
high school). Also, referred to Dual Language Immersion,
Maintenance Bilingual or Late-Exit Bilingual Education
programs, these are programs that use two languages, the
EL student's primary language and English, as a means of
instruction. The instruction builds upon the student's
primary language skills and develops and expands the
English language skills of each student to enable him or her
to achieve proficiency in both languages, while providing
access to the content areas. These programs are designed
for and typically enroll only ELs
DSA
District Security
Administrators
DSAs can delegate their duties to District Test and
Security Administrators. The only difference between
DSAs and DTSAs is that DTSAs cannot create any
other DTSA users. A district can only have one DSA.
However, DSAs can create one or more DTSA for each
district.
DTSA
District Test and Security
Administrators
District Test and Security Administrators are
responsible for creating STC, TA users within their
district. DTSAs can set student test restrictions and
access reports within their district.
EL
English Learner
An identified student who qualifies for additional
support in school in acquiring academic English
proficiency.
ELD
English Language
Development
The instruction provided to ELs to assist the students in
acquiring academic English proficiency.
ELL
English Language
Learner
Another term for English Learner.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 8
ELP
English Language
Proficiency
Typically used to describe the standards for English
language acquisition.
ELPA
English Language
Proficiency Assessment
Oregon’s former English language proficiency
assessment used from 2006-07 through 2014-15
school years.
ELPA21
English Language
Proficiency Assessment
for the 21st Century
An improved language proficiency assessment in
development by Oregon and 12 other states. This
assessment is scheduled to be used beginning with the
2015-16 school year.
ELSWD
English Learner Students
with Disabilities
An EL who also has a disability. These students have
an Individual Education Plan (IEP).
ESEA
Elementary and
Secondary Education Act
Federal Education Law
ELD
English Language
Development
A program of techniques, methodology, and special
curriculum designed to teach LEP students English
language skills, including listening, speaking, reading,
writing, study skills, content vocabulary, and cultural
orientation. ELD instruction is in English with little or no
use of native language.
GLAD
Guided Language
Acquisition Design
(Project GLAD)
Sheltered English instruction methodology.
IPT
IDEA Language
Proficiency Tests
IPT is one of four state-approved assessments
available in Oregon for the identification of ELs. Others
referenced in this table include LAS, Stanford, and
W-M (see references contained on this table).
LAS
Language Assessment
Scales
LAS is one of four state-approved assessments
available in Oregon for the identification of ELs. Others
include IPT, Stanford, and W-M (see references
contained on this table).
LEA
Local Education Agency,
Or Local Educational
Agency
LEP
Limited English Proficient
The federal term for ELs.
LIEP
Language Instruction
Educational Program
An Instructional Program:
(A) in which a limited English proficient child is placed
for the purpose of developing and attaining English
proficiency, while meeting challenging state academic
content and student academic achievement standards,
as required by section 1111(b)(1); and
(B) that may make instructional use of both English and
a child’s L1 to enable the child to develop and attain
English proficiency, and may include the participation
of English proficient children if such course is designed
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 9
to enable all participating children to become proficient
in English and a second language (L2).
PHLOTE
Primary Home Language
Other Than English
SDAIE
Specially-Designed
Academic Instruction in
English
This approach consists of strategies teachers can use
to make content concepts understandable to ELs, while
simultaneously promoting their English language
development. More specifically, sheltered instruction
refers to a model of how teachers use strategies, such
as visual aids, modeling, graphic organizers,
vocabulary previews, adapted texts, interactional
structures, and students' prior knowledge, in a
systematic way to enable students to acquire content in
their new language.
SEA
State Education Agency,
or State Educational
Agency
SI
Sheltered Instruction
An instructional approach used to make academic
instruction in English understandable to LEP students.
In the sheltered classroom, teachers use physical
activities, visual aids, and the environment to teach
vocabulary for concept development in mathematics,
science, social studies, and other subjects. Some
examples of sheltered instructional model may include
SIOP, GLAD, SDAIE, Constructing Meaning.
SIOP
Sheltered Instruction
Observation Protocol
Sheltered English instruction methodology.
SPED
Special Education
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as
amended in 2004 (IDEA 2004-PL 108-446), is a federal
law governing special education services and federal
funding for eligible infants, toddlers, children, and youth
with disabilities across the country. Children and youth
(ages 3-21) receive special education and related
services under IDEA, Part B. Infants and toddlers with
disabilities (ages birth-2) and their families receive
early intervention services under IDEA Part C. In
Oregon, IDEA funds helped support the education of
almost 83,000 children with disabilities in the past year.
For more information about IDEA see the U.S.
Department of Education website at http://idea.ed.gov.
Stanford
Stanford ELP
Stanford is one of four state-approved identification
assessments available in Oregon for the identification
of ELs. Others referenced in this table include IPT,
LAS and W-M (see references contained on this table).
The Stanford ELP evaluates the listening, reading,
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 10
comprehension, writing, and speaking skills of ELs in
Pre K–12. This assessment is developed by Pearson
Assessments, see link below.
http://education.pearsonassessments.com/HAIWEB/Cu
ltures/en-us/Productdetail.htm?Pid=015-8429-206
STC
Secure Test Coordinator
A person responsible for ensure test security.
TA
Test administrator
A person who administers the state assessments to
students.
TAG
Talented and Gifted
“Talented and Gifted children” means those children
who require educational programs or services, or both,
beyond those normally provided by the regular school
program in order to realize their contribution to self and
society, and who demonstrate outstanding ability or
potential in one or more of the following areas:
(a) General intellectual ability as commonly measured
by measures of intelligence and aptitude.
(b) Unusual academic ability in one or more academic
areas.
(c) Creative ability in using original or nontraditional
methods in thinking and producing.
(d) Leadership ability in motivating the performance of
others either in educational or non-educational
settings.
(e) Ability in the visual or performing arts, such as
dance, music, or art.
TB
Transitional Bilingual
The primary goal of a Transitional Bilingual program is
to facilitate the EL student's transition to an all-English
instructional program while receiving academic subject
instruction in the native language to the extent
necessary. This program, also known as Early-Exit
Bilingual Education, utilizes a student's primary
language in instruction. The program maintains and
develops skills in the primary language and culture
while introducing, maintaining, and developing skills in
English. Typically, transition to all English occurs by
mid- to late elementary school. These programs are
designed for ELs.
TIDE
Test Information
Distribution Engine
A system for State assessment.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 11
TITLE III PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS
Purpose
To help ensure LEP children (federal term used when citing federal law), including immigrant
children and youth, attain ELP and meet the same standards that all children are expected to
meet (section 3102, ESEA).
One of the key goals of Title III of the ESEA is to ensure LEP students attain ELP, attain high
levels of academic achievement in English, and meet the same challenging State academic
content and student academic achievement standards all children are expected to meet. To
achieve this goal, Title III grants provide States and their sub-grantees with funds to
implement language instruction educational programs to help LEP students acquire English
and achieve high levels in the core academic subjects. Title III sub-grantees are required to
use Title III funds to support:
high-quality professional development designed to improve services to LEP students,
and
high-quality language instruction educational programs that are designed to increase
the English proficiency and academic achievement of LEP students.
Title III does not require sub-grantees to use a specific or particular curriculum or approach to
language instruction, except the language instruction must be, as required in section
TWI
Two-Way Immersion
Also referred to as Dual Language Immersion, this is a
program in which the language goals are full
bilingualism and biliteracy in English and a partner
language. Students study language arts and other
academic content (math, science, social studies, arts)
in both languages over the course of the program, and
the program lasts at least through elementary school
(and many programs continue through high school).
These programs use an immersion approach
(maximizing the teacher’s use of the target language
during the target language’s instructional time) and
enroll both native English speakers and native
speakers of the partner language, with neither group
making up more than two-thirds of the student
population. Because of this student composition, these
programs also emphasize cross-cultural awareness as
a key goal of the program. If your program enrolls
primarily ELs, it should be coded as a Developmental
Bilingual program
W-M
Woodcock-Muñoz
One of four assessments available for districts to
determine if a student is an EL. Others are LAS,
Stanford, and IPT (see prior acronym descriptions).
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 12
3113(b)(6) of the ESEA, tied to scientifically-based research on teaching LEP students and
demonstrated to be effective.
Title III, like ORS 336.079, requires instructional ‘courses’, or educational units consisting
of a series of instruction periods dealing with a particular subject. The difference between
ORS 336.079 and Title III is that courses under ORS 336.079 are designed specifically to
teach English proficiency, whereas courses under Title III must, in addition to teaching
English proficiency, simultaneously ensure that ELs meet state academic content and student
achievement standards.
Also, Title III requires that student progress is rigorously assessed, students meet annual
measurable achievement objectives, and states hold districts accountable for meeting those
objectives. Title III, §3122; § 3116(3).
Local Educational Agency (LEA) Responsibilities
Provide high quality, research based, language instruction educational programs that
are effective in increasing English proficiency and academic achievement of LEP
students.
Provide high quality, researched-based professional development to teachers,
administrators, and other school/community-based organizations, of sufficient intensity
and duration.
Provide a biennial evaluation to the SEA.
Provide outreach to parents of LEP children.
EL Plan (Local Service Plan, Local Plan, Lau Plan)
Districts submit updated EL Plans the spring of each odd numbered year for the next
biennium. District plans are reviewed and feedback is provided back to districts. The ODE
Local Plan web page includes documents to assist with EL Plan development.
To be effective, an EL Plan needs to be comprehensive. It must address each aspect of the
district's program for all ELs, at all grade levels, and at all schools in the district. To ensure
its ongoing value, it needs to be viewed by district staff as containing useful information. It
should contain enough detail and specificity so each staff person can understand how the
plan is to be implemented, and contain the procedural guidance and forms the staff needs to
use to carry out his/her responsibilities under the plan. Districts have indicated to OCR they
have found their EL Plans most useful when they contain sufficient detail to inform staff fully
of each action step in the EL Plan.
Does your plan answer the following questions:
Who is responsible for the step?
When is the step expected to be completed?
What standards and criteria are to be applied to the step?
How will the district document implementation of the step?
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/plandev.html
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 13
Many districts have found it is useful, when developing or revising an EL program, to
establish a committee or work group that includes administrators, teachers (both EL program
teachers and regular classroom teachers), educational assistants, school counselors, and
other staff who work with the district's EL population. The district may also want to include
parents, students, or community representatives who work with the same students in other
settings. By working with a group that includes these stakeholders, the district can receive
more comprehensive input from those whose support and efforts may be important to the
success of the district's EL program. Inclusive approaches in program design and
development tend to promote overall community awareness and support. In addition, these
individuals will be valuable resources to draw upon during program evaluation and program
improvement activities.
The questions in the EL Plan outline are organized around key components of a
comprehensive plan:
The district's educational theory and goals for its program of services;
The district's methods for identifying and assessing the students to be included in the
district's EL program;
The specific components of the district's program of ELD and academic services for
ELs;
The specific staffing and other resources to be provided to ELs under the district's EL
program;
The district's method and procedures for transitioning and/or exiting students from its
EL program, and for monitoring their success afterward; and
The district's method for evaluating the effectiveness of its program for ELs (discussed
in Part III of the ed.gov materials).
How to Develop an EL Plan (Local Plan, Lau Plan)
Consult with stakeholders and form a work group that includes:
o Parents, teachers, building administrators, community members as well as
other people having interest in EL student success.
Describe the EL program, addressing the eight requirements for an EL program as
outlined by the USDOE OCR.
Describe activities that will be implemented with the Title III funds.
Describe how the EL program will ensure ELs develop English proficiency.
Describe how Title III funds will be used to meet AMAOs, and how schools will be
held accountable for meeting AMAOs and annually assessing ELs with ACCESS
for ELs.
Describe how parental and community participation in the EL program will be
promoted.
Consult in a timely and meaningful manner with private schools within the district (if
any) and document this collaboration with meeting agendas, etc.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 14
TYPES OF PROGRAM SERVICE MODELS
Below is a chart of the program model codes used to describe the specific ELD program for
each EL. These codes explain the types of programs provided to assist the student in
acquiring the English language. These codes are used in the LEP data collection (see data
collection section).
English Language Development Programs
Program Model
Code 1
(LEPPrgMdl
TypCd1) Valid
Values
Description
21
ELD Push-in ELD instruction is provided within the student’s mainstream or content-
area classroom.
22
ELD Pull-out ELs spend part of the day in a mainstream classroom, and are “pulled
out” for a portion of the day to receive ELD instruction. This approach is more
common in elementary school settings.
23
ELD Class Period ELs receive their ELD instruction during a regular class period and
also receive course credit for the class. This approach is more common in middle
schools and high schools.
41
Newcomer Program – ELD Separate, relatively self-contained educational
interventions designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived
immigrants. Typically, students attend these programs on a short-term basis (usually
no more than two years) before they enter more traditional programs (e.g., Bilingual,
English language development and/or Sheltered Instruction courses or programs).
ELs receive their ELD in this program.
51
Not participating in a ELD program NOTE: Used only for students in:
Category 3 – LEP Placement score excludes ELD program eligibility (3-H), or
Category 4 – ELD Program eligible but declined services (4-N, 4-O, 4-P)
60
Monitored year 1 – Exited as proficient in the prior school year.
Category 5-M
61
Monitored year 2 – Exited as proficient two school years prior.
Category 5-M
70
Former EL – Exited as proficient more than 2 school years prior.
Category 5-F
Below are the program model codes used to describe the specific sheltered content
programs for each EL. These codes are used for the LEP data collection. Districts are
required to provide the program model(s) used annually in the budget narrative with complete
explanation of the district’s selected program models included in the district’s local plan.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 15
Access to Core Content Program Models
LEPPrgMdl
TypCd2)
Program
Model Code 2
Valid Values
Description
12
Two-Way Immersion Also referred to as Dual Language Immersion, this is a
program in which the language goals are full bilingualism and biliteracy in English
and a partner language. Students study language arts and other academic content
(math, science, social studies, arts) in both languages over the course of the
program, and the program lasts at least through elementary school (and many
programs continue through high school). These programs use an immersion
approach (maximizing the teacher’s use of the target language during the target
language’s instructional time) and enroll both native English speakers and native
speakers of the partner language, with neither group making up more than two-
thirds of the student population. Because of this student composition, these
programs also emphasize cross-cultural awareness as a key goal of the program. If
your program enrolls primarily ELs, it should be coded as a Developmental Bilingual
program.
13
Transitional Bilingual (13) The primary goal of a Transitional Bilingual program is
to facilitate the EL student's transition to an all-English instructional program while
receiving academic subject instruction in the native language to the extent
necessary. This program, also known as Early-Exit Bilingual Education, utilizes a
student's primary language in instruction. The program maintains and develops
skills in the primary language and culture while introducing, maintaining, and
developing skills in English. Typically, transition to all English occurs by mid- to late
elementary school. These programs are designed for ELs.
14
Developmental Bilingual (14) Like Two-Way Immersion programs, these
programs share the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy, and thus typically last
through elementary school or longer (preferably through high school). Also referred
to Dual Language Immersion, Maintenance Bilingual or Late-Exit Bilingual
Education programs, these are programs that use two languages, the EL student's
primary language and English, as a means of instruction. The instruction builds
upon the student's primary language skills and develops and expands the English
language skills of each student to enable him or her to achieve proficiency in both
languages, while providing access to the content areas. These programs are
designed for and typically enroll only ELs
15
Other Bilingual (15) This could include Heritage language preservation or other
bilingual program models that are not easily classifiable into another program
definition. You must have prior approval to use this code and will need to include a
description of your program’s goals, instructional approach, duration of the program,
and target population when this code is used.
30
Sheltered Instruction Teacher provides instruction that simultaneously introduces
both language and content, using specialized techniques to accommodate ELs’
linguistic needs. Instruction focuses on the teaching of academic content rather
than the English language itself, even though the acquisition of English may be one
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 16
of the instructional goals. Some examples of sheltered instruction models may
include SIOP, GLAD, SDAIE, and CM. Classes using a Sheltered Instruction
approach can be designed exclusively for ELs or for a mixture of ELs and non-ELs.
31
Newcomer Program – Core Content instruction Separate, relatively self-
contained instructional program designed to meet the academic and transitional
needs of newly arrived immigrants. Typically, students attend these programs on a
short-term basis (usually no more than two years) before they enter more traditional
programs (e.g., Bilingual, English language development and/or Sheltered
Instruction courses or programs). ELs receive their core content instruction in this
program. These programs enroll ELs exclusively.
60
Monitored year 1 – Exited as proficient in the prior school year.
Category 5-M
61
Monitored year 2 – Exited as proficient two school years prior.
Category 5-M
70
Former EL – Exited as proficient more than 2 school years prior.
Category 5-F
51
Not participating in a program. NOTE: Used only for students in
Category 3 – LEP Placement score excludes ELD program eligibility (3-H) or
Category 4 – ELD Program eligible but declined services (4-N,4-O, 4-P)
Other evidence-based, researched services models can be used as determined effective at
district discretion; however, one of the codes in the charts above must be used in the LEP
data collection.
PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Identifying a Student as an EL
There are two ways to identify potentially eligible students for ELD services: HLS and
teacher referral. Both are described in this section, below.
Home Language Survey (HLS)
TransACT Communications, Inc. has created many compliance related forms, including those
required for Title III. These forms, translated into several languages, are available through
TransACT at: http://www.transact.com/
If a school chooses not to use the TransACT forms, the forms used by the school must
contain the same elements as the TransACT form in order to comply with current Federal
Regulations.
Districts must:
Identify the Primary Home Language Other than English (PHLOE) of all students.
Using Home Language Survey is the most commonly used instrument to identify
students as potentially eligible for ELD services. Templates for HLS are available
through TransACT at http://www.transact.com .
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 17
Ask questions that have to do solely with home languages of the individual students. If
a parent (guardian) gives a single affirmative answer to whether:
the child learned to speak a language other than English first;
the child currently speaks a language other than English; or
a language other than English is spoken in the home;
Then the child qualifies for initial program assessment. As such the child is classified
as a primary home language other than English PHLOTE student.
Whereas such information is helpful, inquiring exclusively about home languages can be
misleading. For instance, the child may have spent only his or her infancy in a foreign
country, foreign-born grandparents may be living in the home, or perhaps members of the
family are learning a foreign language together. Such situations may not have a negative
impact on a child’s ability to speak English and should not lead to have a child placed in a
program for ELs.
For proper placement, the survey could include questions about the child’s ability to speak
English. The following questions would be reasonable in a primary home language survey:
What language or languages are spoken in your child’s home?
What language or languages does your child speak?
In what language does your child communicate with:
adults in the home?
with friends or peers?
Finally, the HLS is administered to all students once rather than annually.
Teacher Referral
Occasionally, the HLS may indicate a student is English speaking only and no referral is
made for initial program placement assessment; however, occasionally, some students may
need to be identified as potentially eligible for ELD services (e.g., Native American students).
In these few cases, the student’s classroom teacher may complete a referral form that
highlights and provides evidence (classroom work, work samples scored with appropriate
rubric) of the student’s linguistic needs. School team reviews the referral and may make a
determination to have the student assessed for initial placement. In these cases, a notation
on HLS explaining the reason(s) the student is placed in the ELD program is good practice.
Based on the HLS, students are given an initial identification assessment. This language
proficiency assessment must assess the student’s academic English proficiency in all four
language domains (reading, writing, speaking, and listening), and needs to be given by a
trained administrator. The State has approved the following initial identification assessments:
Woodcock-Muñoz
IPT
Stanford
LAS
Districts are required to include their identification criteria in their EL Plan. These criteria
should clarify which students are identified as ELs, and which students do not qualify based
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 18
on the identification assessment showing academic English proficiency. Once a student is
identified as an EL, the district must notify parents within 30 days at the beginning of the
school year and two (2) weeks after the school year has begun (forms are available through
TransACT.com).
Notifications to Parents/Option to Waive Services
Parents can opt to not have their children enrolled in an EL program. This decision must be
an independent decision of the parent/guardian. Districts are required to provide parents with
student English proficiency level and describe what educational supports the student is
eligible to receive. When a parent declines participation, the district retains a responsibility to
ensure the student has an equal opportunity to have his or her English language and
academic needs met. Districts can meet this obligation in a variety of ways (e.g., adequate
training to classroom teachers on second language acquisition; monitoring the educational
progress of the student). http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/qa-ell.html
Students not served by district programs are required to participate in all state-required
assessments, including ELPA21, and are counted in the district’s progress towards meeting
academic and graduation outcomes.
Students with a waiver for services are reported annually to the district’s LEP Collection, and
they are coded 4-N (waiver and participated in ELPA21) or 4-O (waiver and not enrolled
during the ELPA21 testing window). The State uses these codes to review trend data for
language minority students.
Program Exit Criteria (Reclassification)
The program exit criteria must assess whether a child understands English well enough to
profit from classes conducted in English. Accordingly, the exit criteria must be the student’s
level of English language proficiency, rather than whether the student meets state academic
content standards expectations.
Please see the Numbered Memo below for how to reclassify a student as proficient.
Oregon has multiple pathways to reclassification. Additional information is included
in the district EL plan, section 6.
Executive Numbered Memo 007-2013-14 - Reclassification and Retention Procedures
for English Learners (ELs)
09/15/15 Please note that this memo is being revised for 2015-16, as all references to
the Oregon ELPA and “level 5” are outdated.
Revision to Memo# 002-2008-09 - Promoting, Retaining, and Exiting English Learners from
English Language Development Program
To: All District Superintendents, Principals, and Title III Directors
Re: Reclassifying and Retaining Students in English Language Development (ELD)
Programs
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 19
Below are the procedures for districts to use when:
• Exiting a student from the ELD program;
• Retaining a student in the ELD program after a proficient score on the ELPA is
obtained;
• Returning a former English learner to the ELD program.
Summary
These revisions are intended to clarify previous procedures to ensure that these practices
are consistently applied throughout the state. Additional language has been added to define
the team of reviewers required for exiting and retention decisions as well as limitations on
retention options. Please note: A student who receives a level 5 on the ELPA and is
retained in the English Langue Development (ELD) program due to a determination of
student need and then receives a second level 5 score on the ELPA must be exited unless
the district completes a separate retention process. See the “Retention in the ELD program”
section below for full details.
The Oregon Department of Education (ODE) has developed policies around exiting,
retaining, and returning ELs [also known as English language learners (ELLs) or Limited
English Proficient (LEP) students] from or to districts’ ELD programs. “English learner”
means all identified ELs, regardless of participation in ELD programs.
Oregon’s ELP standards are presented in steps of sequential skills called proficiency levels.
Students in the ELD instructional programs, aligned to the ELP standards, shall be expected
to move through the progressive achievement continuum at a rate that allows them to
become proficient within a reasonable and appropriate period of time, generally five years.
Some students may achieve proficiency in less than five years while others may need
additional time. Students are promoted, or exited, from the ELD program when they meet
the exit criteria as set by their districts in accordance with the guidelines set forth in this
memo. In addition, districts should consult the updated English Learners Program Guide for
guidance on proficiency timeline expectations.
The following are guidelines for school districts to follow in making decisions to exit, retain,
or return ELs from or to the ELD program.
Exiting from the ELD Program
The English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA) is Oregon’s primary measure for
determining ELs’ ELP. Students who achieve a level of 5 (Advanced) on ELPA are generally
considered to be proficient, and the vast majority of this group of students will exit the ELD
programs. Districts must enter an exit date on the Spring LEP collection for each student
who exits the program. All exited student records are submitted to the LEP collection with
an LEP exit date. The LEP exit date is the only indicator of exited students used in the
calculation of AMAOs and the AMO for the EL sub-group.
Districts have the option to exit ELs before students have achieved a level of 5 (Advanced)
on ELPA. This decision requires special consideration and evidence of the student’s
language proficiency and the student’s academic performance. A school-level team must
consider multiple factors indicating the student has already demonstrated that he or she can
profit fully from instruction in the regular education program without additional language
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 20
support from the ELD program. A school-level team must, at minimum, include a content-
area teacher, an ELD teacher familiar with the student’s language ability, a school-level
administrator, and a parent/guardian. In the event that a parent/guardian cannot attend the
school-level meeting, parental input must be obtained prior to any decision making about the
student’s promotion from the ELD program.
Retention in the ELD Program
Districts may, on a case-by-case basis, decide to retain a student who achieves a level of 5
(Advanced) on the ELPA. This decision must be based on a thorough evaluation conducted
by a school-level team of the student’s ELPA results and additional evidence of the student’s
language proficiency and academic performance. This evaluation must also indicate that the
student needs additional instruction in ELD and this instruction can only be provided within
the context of the district’s ELD program. If a previously retained student scores a 5
(Advanced) on the ELPA in a future school year, the district must exit that student using the
district exit criteria or proceed with a 2-step process in order to retain a student again. The
2-step process includes (1) specific evidence that the student is not yet able to profit from
instruction in English (ORS 336.079), and (2) documentation of how the ELD program will be
modified to address the specific linguistic needs of the student that prohibit the student from
being able to profit from instruction in English. This 2-step process must be reviewed by a
school-level team and is subject to examination by the Oregon Department of Education
upon request. The school-level team conducting the evaluation must, at minimum, include a
content-area teacher, an ELD teacher familiar with the student’s language ability, a school-
level administrator, and a parent/guardian. In the event that a parent/guardian cannot attend
the school-level meeting, parental input must be obtained prior to any decision making about
the student’s retention in the ELD program.
In order to receive additional state funding for ELs retained in the ELD program under
these circumstances, districts must comply with two laws:
ORS 327.013 (7) (a) (B) - allows an additional .5 to be added to the average daily
membership (ADM) funding calculation “for each student in average daily
membership eligible for and enrolled in an ESL program under ORS 336.079”; and
OAR 581-023-0100 - to be eligible to receive that funding, district programs must
meet the criteria set out in OAR 581-023-0100 (4) (a) (B).
Returning to the ELD Program
In rare circumstances, an EL in monitor status might qualify to re-enter the ELD program
after being exited in a previous school year. For this rare circumstance, the decision
requires a thorough evaluation by a school-level team and an examination of evidence that
clearly shows that the student’s language proficiency is a barrier to accessing instruction in
academic classes. A barrier is defined as a language issue that is beyond the average
experience of a non-EL. Specific evidence of language proficiency must be provided to the
school team and parents/guardians that clearly shows that the student has a language issue
in more than one of the four language domains (speaking, listening, reading, and writing). A
school-level team must, at minimum, include a content-area teacher, an ELD teacher familiar
with the student’s language ability, a school-level administrator, and a parent/guardian. In
the event that a parent/guardian cannot attend the school-level meeting, parental input must
be obtained prior to any decision making about the student’s return to the ELD program.
Students are coded as returning to an ELD program with a LEP Program Code of 1-D or a 4-
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 21
P (for students with a waiver for service re-entering EL status).
Parental Notification
Districts must notify parents when either (a) a student is recommended to be retained in or
returned to the ELD program even after achieving a level of 5 (Advanced) on ELPA, or (b) a
student is recommended to be promoted out of the ELD program prior to achieving a level 5
(Advanced) on ELPA. Title III law requires that districts include parents as active
participants throughout the process.
Monitored Students
A student is monitored for two years from the date the student is reclassified (exited) from the
ELD program. Monitoring consists of reviewing student academic progress in class(es).
Teacher observations, work samples, grades, and state assessment data may be reviewed
as part of monitoring. If a student is struggling academically due to academic language, it is
possible for the student to be re-entered into the ELD program. This type of determination is
made by a team of educators, who review evidence of the student’s academic English. The
team should consider if the student is in need of assistance due to academic language
needs, or if the student could benefit from core instruction interventions prior to re-entered the
student in the EL program.
Ideally students would be monitored frequently enough so that the district can address
any necessary remediation needed for the student to be successful in school.
Monitoring only on the semesters may not provide for needed support in a timely
manner.
Allocation of Federal Title III Funds
The ODE receives a formula allocation that is determined by the USDOE on an annual basis.
This annual amount requires a percentage (up to 15%) be set aside for distribution as the
Recent Arriver’s (Immigrant) sub-grant. The ODE is allowed up to 5% of the total funds to be
used for state administration of the program. The remainder is distributed to each EL
program participating in Title III, based on a per-pupil allocation.
Steps to Title III Allocations
Each spring districts are asked to provide a District Grant Intent form. This form requires the
districts to provide a list of all private schools participating in Title III, and a count of all ELs
enrolled in these private schools. The districts must also confirm their intent to participate in
Title III for the following school year. Districts must choose between one of the following
three options:
Have a district Title III sub-grant, if the district has an allocation of at least $10,000.00.
Continue to participate in the district’s current Title III consortium.
Join a Title III consortium.
Decline to participate in Title III for the following school year.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 22
District grant intents are due to the ODE in mid-June, so the State can disseminate the next
year’s allocations in a timely manner. Technical assistance is provided to districts in making
their district grant intent and consortium membership. Funding and grant information forms
are located: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2597
Sub-grantee Allocations
Sub-grantees receive allocations based on a per-pupil basis following the approval of their
budget narrative outlining how they plan to expend the available funds. Budget narratives
include questions on the program of service, AMAO status, improvement plans, parent
involvement, and private schools. Sub-grantees must respond to these questions, plus
include a budget for all activities funded by Title III. The budget narrative is a secure
application available through the ODE district secure web page
https://district.ode.state.or.us/home/
Allocations are disseminated in August of each school year at the same time as the other
Federal Title grants. School year budget narrative submissions are due in mid-September of
each school year.
Carryover Budget Narratives
Sub-grantees not expending the previous school year’s allocations may apply for a no-cost
extension for one additional year. Carryover budget narratives open in mid-November
and are due in mid-December. All carryover funds must be claimed by the following
September 30th.
Consortia Allocations
Districts serving ELs who do not qualifying for a minimum of a $10,000.00 Title III federal
grant allocation may opt to join a Title III consortium. A Title III consortium is a group of
districts working together to support ELs. Allocations generated by consortium member
districts are disseminated to the consortia lead (district or ESD). The consortium members
work together planning activities to assist all member districts with services to support ELs.
The consortium member districts develop the consortia budget narrative and submit it to the
ODE as a team with the consortium lead submitting the budget narrative on behalf of the
consortia. Like districts sub-grantees, a consortium has access to 20% of their Title III sub-
grant prior to the approval of the budget narrative.
Each consortium member district must provide a Consortium Membership Certificate that
gives ODE the authorization to transfer the Title III allocations to the consortium lead. The
certificate is available on the Title III fiscal and grant information web page
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2597
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 23
Immigrant Sub-grant Allocation
Up to 15% of the total Title III allocation is required to be distributed to the EL program
demonstrating the highest increase in immigrant student population by Title III law. Oregon
has selected to reserve .5% of the total Title III sub-grant for the Immigrant sub-grant.
Beginning with the 2014-15 Title III allocations, the State will use the Recent Arrivers data
collection to determine the districts with the greatest significant increase.
Oregon definition of significant increase: LEAs must have at least a .5% increase of
immigrant students over the prior 2 academic school years and a minimum of 10
immigrant students, as identified on the current year’s recent arrivers data collection.
LEAs meeting the above criteria will be notified and invited to participate, and will be given a
preliminary immigrant allocation amount (per student allocation and guidance on allowable
expenditures). Upon acceptance from the LEAs, the allocation amount will be divided on a
per student basis based on the number of immigrant students in the participating LEAs.
Immigrant grants will be entered into EGMS and managed through that system. Immigrant
fiscal records will be reviewed when the LEA participates in Title III monitoring or on a 3-year
cycle.
(See the Recent Arrivers in this document, under State Data Collections section for more
information on this collection.)
The districts receiving this allocation must provide a detailed narrative outlining the activities
to support the district’s recent arrivers. The narrative must include a description of each
activity and the budget for each activity. As with all Title III sub-grants, the districts must
consult with local private schools to ensure recent arrivers enrolled in private schools
participating in Title III are included in all activities.
The districts receiving this allocation must also respond to additional data submission
questions that are used in the State’s annual Immigrant EdFacts report.
Indirect/Administrative Rate
All Title III sub-grants are subject to a maximum 2% of the allocation for indirect/
administration requirements. Sub-grantees are asked to provide copies of all staffing job
descriptions as part of their budget narrative to ensure that personnel funded by Title III are
not performing activities that supplant other federal or state requirements.
Supplement, Not Supplant
Sub-grantees will be asked to provide documentation that activities funded with Title III
allocations do not supplant other state or federal-required activities in accordance with federal
law:
Section 3115(g) of Title III of the ESEA (hereafter “Title III”) provides as follows:
SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT -- Federal funds made available under this
subpart shall be used so as to supplement the level of Federal, State, and local
public funds that, in the absence of such availability, would have been expended
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 24
for programs for limited English proficient children and immigrant children and
youth, and in no case to supplant such Federal, State, and local public funds.
In practice, the prohibition against supplanting under Title III means that recipients may not
use those funds to pay for services that, in the absence of Title III funds, would be necessary
to be provided by other Federal, or State, or local funds. Districts provide this information
annually in the Budget Narrative application.
Monitoring
Program monitoring is designed to provide technical assistance to schools, districts, and
consortia, as well as ensuring compliance with federal and state laws applicable to serving
ELs. Monitoring documents and guidance is available on the web at
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2594.
Generally, all districts and consortia are monitored by the ODE every three years, as required
by USDOE program requirements. This process will begin with a desk audit, and may
include peer monitoring processes or site visits in cases where program intervention is
determined to be necessary.
Districts having a focus or priority school, as determined by the Oregon’s ESEA waiver, will
have an on-site technical assistance visit following desk monitoring. Any district having not
met AMAOs for four or more years will also have an on-site technical assistance visit
following desk monitoring. The purpose for these on-site technical assistance visits is to
assist the district in implementing their Improvement Plan(s) to improve services for the ELs.
Occasionally, districts may be selected for a targeted monitoring. Targeted monitoring allows
the State to focus attention on specific areas for careful review. Targeted monitoring includes
an on-site visit specifically designed based on the area(s) of review. Districts are notified by
official letter, required to submit documentation and coordinate the on-site visit with the State.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Several data elements should be tracked by EL program staff to meet legal requirements and
to evaluate EL programs. Many of these elements are listed in the table below. Due to the
complexity of the data process, EL program staff should work closely with their district’s
designated data personnel to ensure a comprehensive, cohesive, and accurate school and
district data plan to serve ELs. Additional information relating to data collections can be
found at the following website: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=1223
Note: Bolded names below are the codes used in the State data system. This information
may be helpful when discussing data submissions with district data personnel.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 25
Data
Element
Purpose
Included in
State Data
Collection
State Data Collection Name
and Field Name for this
Element
Recent
Arrivers
Identify the number of qualifying
recent arrivers a district has to
calculate the rate of growth.
Yes
Recent Arrivers Collection
LEP Start
Date
Represents the date on which the
student was first identified as an
EL.
Yes
LEP Collection – LEPStrtDt
EL Program
Code
Identifies the type of ELD class
instruction provided for the
student.
Yes
LEP Collection – LEPProgCd
1 (ELD class) Cd 2 (access to
core content)
Cd 3 (optional can pull from
both list 1 and 2).
EL/LEP
Identification
Assessment
Data
District-level assessment data for
the purpose of identifying students
ineligible to receive ELD services.
Yes
Students found ineligible are
reported the year the student
is assessed (LEP Record
Type code 3-H)
Students identified in the
current school year have this
data reported (LEP Record
Type 1-A, 1-E, 4-N, or 4-O)
LEP Record
Type
Identifies the specific code
defining the status of an EL.
Yes
LEP Collection –
LEPRecTypCd – identifies
the status of an EL in the
district program (first year,
continuing, exiting as
proficient, waiver for ELD
services, did not participate in
ELPA21, or not eligible for
services)
LEP Exit
Date
Specifies the date the district
determines the student has
obtained academic English
proficiency.
Yes
LEP Collection – LEPExtDt
It is recommended that the district collect and store the following data elements
annually. The district does not submit this information to the state data collections;
however, this information may be reviewed during Title III monitoring.
Data Element
Purpose
ELPA21 scores
The statewide assessment for ELP (formerly “ELPA”) – districts
should track the progress of students from year to year.
SBAC assessment
scores
The statewide assessments for English Language Arts and Math
taken by all students – districts need to track the progress of
former (monitored) ELs to ensure the students continue to make
academic progress.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 26
New guidance from DC encourages districts to track the
academic progress of all former ELs in addition to monitored
ELs.
Years identified as
EL
The number of years a student has been identified as an EL –
AMAO 2 calculations are based on the number of years an EL has
been identified.
Parent Program
Placement letters
Federal Requirement:
Districts must provide parents with an annual notice of the
placement of their student’s ELD program.
State Data Collections
There are two main data collections relating to Title III: the LEP collection and the Recent
Arriver’s collection. Districts not participating in Title III are required by OAR to submit data to
all ODE data collections.
The LEP collection is a part of the consolidated collections application located on the ODE
District Secure website (https://district.ode.state.or.us/home/). This collection represents an
annual count of all ELs enrolled at any time during the school year. This collection is also
used for districts to report any potential ELs found ineligible for services as defined by the
district’s chosen EL identification assessment.
The LEP collection opens in the spring each year and is used to determine the:
LEP sub-group used to calculate AMO;
EL count reported by each district used to determine Title III allocations;
EL count used for AMAO accountability purposes;
State report to the USDOE;
Verify the student’s EL status to confirm the district is entitled to claim the weighted
State school funding for ELs.
Additional information relating to the LEP collection can be found at the ODE District Secure
web page, schedule of due dates. On the schedule of due dates, look for the NCLB: LEP
Collection – typically opening in April. From that page, documents to assist districts are
located under the Help menu.
The Recent Arrivers Data Collection is part of the consolidated collection located on the ODE
District Secure web site (https://district.ode.state.or.us/home/). The purpose of this collection
is to gather information related to students aged 3-21 who were born outside the United
States and Puerto Rico, and who have not been enrolled in school in the U.S. for more than
three cumulative years (540 days).
The Recent Arrivers Data Collection began during the 2011-12 school year. Districts are
required to identify and report records for all recent arrivers enrolled during the academic
school year. This information is submitted to the ODE for a required calculation to distribute
a sub-grant of the Title III grant providing funds for districts experiencing a sudden influx of
students recently arriving in the U.S. The calculation includes a three-year average of the
growth of immigrants within a district. Recent Arrivers data is used to submit data to the
USDOE, as well as to determine the sub-grant for Title III.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 27
The Recent Arrivers Data Collection opens annually in the spring. This collection is a school
year level collection. All students meeting the definition of a Recent Arriver are required to be
reported to this collection, regardless if the student has withdrawn from the district during the
school year.
Data Collection Requirements
Districts are required to report initial assessment data for students identified as EL for the first
time in the current school year and data for students not qualifying as EL (proficient on initial
assessment) is reported to the LEP collection. Required data for student’s found proficient
include name of assessment, date of assessment, and student proficiency level.
Initial assessments: Please refer to the section on identifying an EL for the required
procedures. There are four state-approved initial placement assessments. These
assessments are “off the shelf” assessments.
IPT
LAS
Stanford
Woodcock-Muñoz
Districts must determine student eligibility for the ELD program using one of the four
approved assessments. Identification as an EL is required by OAR #581-023-0100, and
therefore, the purchase of these assessments in addition to the required training to
administer the assessment is a required state activity. Title III funds may not be used for the
purchase or training of these assessments. All students identified as LEP must receive
instruction in ELD. Parents may complete a waiver to refuse services if they do not wish the
student to be given ELD instruction.
EQUAL ACCESS
In 1970, the federal Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued a memo regarding school districts'
responsibilities under civil rights law to provide an equal educational opportunity to ELs. This
memorandum stated:
“Where the inability to speak and understand the English language excludes national
origin minority group children from effective participation in the educational program
offered by a school district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the language
deficiency in order to open its instructional program to these students.”
Although the memo requires school districts to take affirmative steps, it does not prescribe
the content of these steps. It does, however, explain that federal law is violated if:
Students are excluded from effective participation in school because of their inability to
speak and understand the language of instruction;
National origin minority students are inappropriately assigned to special education
classes because of their lack of English skills;
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 28
Programs for students whose English is less than proficient are not designed to teach
them English as soon as possible, or if these programs operate as a dead end track;
or
Parents whose English is limited do not receive school notices or other information in a
language they can understand.
In its 1974 decision in Lau v. Nichols, the United States Supreme Court upheld OCR's 1970
memo. The basis for the case was the claim students could not understand the language in
which they were being taught; therefore, they were not being provided with an equal
education. The Supreme Court agreed, saying that:
“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.”
The case reaffirmed that all students in the U.S., regardless of native language, have the
right to receive a quality education. It also clarified equality of opportunity does not
necessarily mean the same education for every student, but rather the same opportunity to
receive an education. An equal education is only possible if students can understand the
language of instruction.
Within weeks of the Lau v. Nichols ruling, Congress passed the Equal Educational
Opportunity Act (EEOA) mandating no state shall deny equal education opportunity to any
individual, "by the failure by an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome
language barriers that impede equal participation by students in an instructional program."
This was an important piece of legislation because it defined what constituted the denial of
education opportunities.
The USDOE’s OCR oversees school districts and has broad discretion concerning how to
ensure equal educational opportunity for ELs. This means that the OCR recognizes that
there is not one program model that works for all districts or all students and reviews each
district individually. OCR does not prescribe a specific intervention strategy or program
model a district must adopt to serve ELs.
The following guidelines have been outlined for school districts to ensure their programs are
serving ELs effectively. Districts should:
identify students as potential ELs;
assess student's need for EL services;
develop a program which, in the view of experts in the field, has a reasonable chance
for success;
ensure that necessary staff, curricular materials, and facilities are in place and used
properly;
develop appropriate evaluation standards, including program exit criteria, for
measuring the progress of students; and
assess the success of the program and modify it where needed.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 29
For additional information regarding the provision of equal education opportunity to ELs, see
additional resources or contact the Office for Civil Rights enforcement office at:
Phone: (800) 421-3481
Email: ocr@ed.gov
URL: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html
PRIVATE SCHOOL PARTICIPATION
Districts must annually consult with private schools. This consultation must include a
discussion on the needs of the enrolled private school ELs and funding to ensure that
equitable services under the law are provided. The ODE has provided a form that documents
the required consultation with private schools. The form can be found at
http://www.transact.com All school districts should store this completed form for monitoring
review and complete the required private schools sections on their budget narrative.
To ensure timely and meaningful consultation, the LEA must consult with appropriate private
school officials during the design and development of the Title III program on issues such as:
How the EL needs to be identified.
What services will be offered.
How, when, and by whom the services will be provided.
How the services will be assessed and how the results of the assessment will be used
to improve those services.
What the size and scope of the services to be provided to the private school children
and educational personnel.
What amount of funds will be available for those services.
How and when the LEA will make decisions about the delivery of services, including a
thorough consideration of the views of the private school officials on the provision of
contract services through potential third-party providers.
Title III services provided to children and educational personnel in private schools
must be equitable and timely and address their educational needs.
Funds provided for educational services for private school children and educational
personnel must be equal, taking into account the number and educational needs of
those children, to the funds provided for participating public school children.
Title III services provided to private school children and educational personnel must be
secular, neutral, and non-ideological.
LEAs may serve private school LEP children and educational personnel either directly
or through contracts with public and private agencies, organizations, and institutions.
The control of funds used to provide services and the title to materials and equipment
purchased with those funds must be retained by the LEA.
Services for private school children and educational personnel must be provided by
employees of the LEA or through a contract made by the LEA with a third party.
Providers of services to private school children and educational personnel must be
independent of the private school and of any religious organization, and the providers'
employment or contract must be under the control and supervision of the LEA.
Funds used to provide services to private school children and educational personnel
must not be commingled with non-federal funds.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 30
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the LEA and private school should be
developed as a result of initial consultation and address the items listed above. Subsequent
meetings may be necessary between the LEA and private school to assess services and
determine areas and plans for improvement. Documentation of timely and meaningful
consultation with private schools should be included in the service delivery plan, and is a
requirement on the budget narrative submission for release of Title III funds.
Once a private school student is identified as EL, the private school may request the student
continue to receive Title III services in subsequent school years until the student attains
English proficiency.
It is possible that more than one consultation a year may be required:
Spring consultation for participation the following school year.
Fall consultation regarding possible ELs.
Fall consultation regarding needs and funding limits for regular Title III allocations.
Consultation regarding potential immigrant (recent arrivers) and funding support for
immigrant (recent arrivers) enrolled in private schools, when the district is the recipient
of the Title III – Immigrant sub-grant.
Private Schools and Title III Consortium Members
All districts are required to consult with private schools within district boundaries. Districts
who are members of a Title III Consortium must inform their consortium lead if a private
school has agreed to participate in Title III. The consortium lead, member district, and private
school will need to consult on the services to be provided and the funding available for the
identified ELs enrolled in the private school.
The link to U.S. Department of Education Private School Participation, Sec. 9501 is:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg111.html
The Non-Regulatory Guidance for ESEA 9501 can be found at:
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/psguidance.doc
PARENT NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS (SECTION 3302 (A), (B), (C), (D)
Districts are required to notify parents of their student’s identification and placement in a
language instructional program (ELD program) within the timelines listed below:
Not later than 30 days after the beginning of the school year for ELs participating in an
EL program or identified at the beginning of the school year.
Within two weeks if the student enrolls after the school year has begun.
If the district has failed to meet AMAOs, parents must be notified within 30 days of
determination of failure.
All notifications must be in an understandable and uniform format, and to the extent
practicable, in a language the parent can understand. Notification letters must be dated and
signed by district or school personnel.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 31
Templates for these letters are available through TransACT.com (www.transact.com) and are
provided free of charge to Oregon schools by the ODE.
English Language Proficiency Standards
In October 2013, the Oregon State Board of Education adopted new ELP standards that
correspond to the Common Core. These standards will be assessed on the ELPA21, new
language proficiency assessment currently in development. ELP Standards web page:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=36
Definition: Academic language is different from everyday speech and informal writing. It is
the language of texts, of academic discussion, and formal writing. Without academic
language proficiency, students will not achieve long-term success in school. ELs at the
intermediate and advanced levels of ELD, who receive no formal language instruction,
demonstrate oral fluency, but generally show critical gaps in language knowledge and
vocabulary. Academic language must be continuously developed and explicitly taught across
all subject areas
ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st Century (ELPA21)
All students with a primary language other than English who qualify for EL services are
required to participate annually in English language proficiency (ELP) testing. In 2015-16,
Oregon is transitioning to the new English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st
Century (ELPA21). ELPA21 is administered as a single test that contains both the ELPA21
reading, writing, and listening segment, and the ELPA21 speaking segment. While both
segments are part of the same ELPA21 test, students will require an additional TA approval
to begin each segment.
The ELPA21 reading, writing, and listening section is the first segment presented to students.
Students should review their answers upon completing all questions in this segment, as they
will not be able to return to this portion of the test after they have been approved to start the
ELPA21 speaking segment. After reviewing his or her responses for the first ELPA21
segment, the student will await Test Administrator (TA) approval before they can start the
ELPA21 speaking segment.
Due to the nature of some students’ disability, a student’s IEP or 504 Plan might exempt the
student from responding to a particular domain of the ELPA21 (reading, writing, speaking, or
listening). Please review the final version of the Test Administration Manual (TAM) for
information on domain exemption policies for ELPA21, and the Oregon Accessibility Manual
(OAM) for information regarding available supports for ELPA21. TAs who need to administer
the ELPA21 must be officially trained for that assessment. Please see the TAM for details.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 32
State Content Assessments
Students participate in the State Mathematics and English Language Arts/Literacy (ELA) as
part of the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBAC) system beginning with the 2014-15 school
year. Science and Social Studies assessments are taken on the Oregon Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills (OAKS).
ELPA21, Test Administration Manual and Oregon Accessibility Manual websites:
www.ode.state.or.us/go/ELPA
www.ode.state.or.us/go/TAM
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?=487
Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAO)
The AMAOs are the yearly accountability report on the district’s ability to meet targets for
ELs. There are three targets:
AMAO 1 – progress in learning English;
AMAO 2 – obtaining academic English proficiency;
AMAO 3 – participation and achievement in Reading and Math assessments.
In Oregon, AMAO 2 is broken down into two sub categories:
AMAO 2A – obtaining academic English proficiency out of all identified having been
identified fewer than five years ELs;
AMAO 2B – obtaining academic English proficiency out of all identified ELs having
been identified for five or more years.
Districts can access the current year’s AMAO report and previous year’s reports from the
following web page: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3408
ODE publishes an annual AMAO policy and technical manual for districts prior to the release
of the AMAO report. This report is linked to the AMAO web page.
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3408
Improvement Plans
ODE provides formal communication for all districts not meeting AMAOs each year. This
letter outlines district requirements and timelines. Districts will enter 2-year Title III
improvement status when they do not meet the AMAO target(s) for 2 consecutive years.
Districts will remain in 2-year improvement status for a 3rd year if the district does not meet
that same AMAO target for 3 consecutive years, these districts (i.e., 2-year improvement
status) are required to:
1. Develop an improvement plan; and
2. Address the factors that prevented the district from meeting the AMAOs in the district’s
improvement plan.
Districts will enter 4-year Title III Improvement status when they do not meet the same AMAO
target(s) for 4 or more consecutive years. District will remain in 4-year Improvement status if
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 33
the district continues to not meet the same AMAO target(s) in future years. Districts MUST
fulfill 4-year improvement requirements listed.
Districts who fail to meet one or more AMAO targets for four consecutive years (i.e., 4-year
improvement status) are required to:
1. Develop an improvement plan;
2. Address the factors that prevented the district from meeting the AMAOs in the district’s
improvement plan; and
3. Review, evaluate, and revise curriculum, program, and methods of instruction that prevent
the district from meeting AMAOs.
Title III regulations require the state to:
Require the LEA to modify the curriculum, program, and methods of instruction, OR
Make a determination on the continuation of funding, AND
Require such entity to replace educational personnel relevant to the entity’s failure to
meet such objectives.
Title III 20 USC 6842(b) (4) (A) (B) (i) (ii)
Title III regulations require the state to:
Provide technical assistance to districts.
Title I regulations also require states, when applicable, to provide technical assistance
to schools served by the district that need assistance in meeting the AMAOs.
In consultation with the district, develop professional development strategies and
activities that the district will be required to use to meet AMAOs.
In consultation with the district, review, evaluate, and revise curriculum, program, and
methods of instruction that prevent the district from meeting AMAOs.
In consultation with the district, develop a plan to incorporate strategies and
methodologies to improve the specific ELD program or method of instruction
Monitor the district’s implementation of all planned improvement strategies and
activities.
What happens if districts do not meet one or more AMAOs for three consecutive
years?
Federal law is silent about any differences in district requirements between districts not
meeting for two consecutive and three consecutive years. Thus, districts not meeting for
three consecutive years are subject to the same requirements as districts who do not meet
for two consecutive years. ODE requires districts in 3-year improvement status to update
their Title III Improvement Plan.
What happens if districts do not meet one or more AMAOs for five or more
consecutive years?
Districts not meeting for five or more years are required to annually revise and submit an
updated Improvement Plan. Technical assistance will be provided to districts as they work
toward to meeting the AMAOS.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 34
The state may provide additional technical assistance and guidance while working with the
district to address barriers to not meeting the AMAO targets. ODE requires districts to update
their Title III 4-year Improvement Plan.
FORMS AND CORRESPONDENCE
Home Language Survey (HLS)
Registration cards/documents must include at least the question:
What is the primary language spoken in the home?
If a response is any language other than English, a HLS survey must be given.
The survey must be comprehensive.
If a district has Native American students, more questions should be included, such
as:
Is the student’s language influenced by the Tribal language through a parent,
grandparent, relative, or guardian?
Does the student have at least one grandparent that is part of a federally-
recognized tribe?
If the survey responses indicate a student may be an EL, the student must be tested
with an ELP test within 30 days of registration, or within two weeks of entry into the
school (if during the school year).
If the student tests less than proficient on the ELP assessment, then a letter must go
home to the parents indicating their child was identified as needing specific English
language services. The parent must be given the opportunity to waive the services, if
desired.
If the parent does not waive the limited ELD services for their child, then the student
must be placed in a program of “high quality language instruction, based on
scientifically based research” (Section 3115(c)(1)), as determined by the individual
district.
Students placed in a program can be counted for state and Federal funding purposes.
Once a student tests proficient on the annual ELP assessment, they will be exited from
the EL program and monitored for two years.
Those students, whose parents waive the services, may not be considered as “LEP”
for State and Federal funding purposes; however, they are still ELs and must still be
served according to their needs, according to the Office of Civil Rights. Waiver
students are included in the district’s accountability reports as part of the EL sub-
group.
Required K-12 Parent Notices
TransACT Communications, Inc., has created many compliance related forms, including
those required for Title III. These forms, translated into many languages, are available
through TransACT, at http://www.transact.com/ These forms are provided for the
convenience of those responsible for EL services at the district/consortia level. Actual
samples of these forms (or district forms created with the same information) are REQUIRED
to be maintained at the school and district level for compliance monitoring purposes. Failure
to save copies of the official parent notification communication as evidence of program
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 35
implementation, including the signature of a district personnel and the specific date
(mm/dd/yyyy) the communication was disseminated, will result in Title III program monitoring
findings for the district and the State of Oregon.
Forms used by school districts and accessible from this site include:
AMAO Parent Notification (completed samples to ODE required for monitoring)
Description of ELD program
EL Parent Meeting (agendas from meetings need to be retained for monitoring)
Home Language Surveys (English and translation samples to ODE required)
Parent Meeting Participation
Private School Consultation (completed forms must be submitted to ODE annually)
Program Placement Notification (completed forms must be submitted to ODE
annually)
Waiver of Services (signed, dated copies must be retained for program monitoring)
Verification of Private School Consultation (completed forms must be retained and
submitted with monitoring documentation)
Recent Arriver’s (Immigrant) Student Count required for private schools
While districts are not required to use these specific forms, the completion and submission of
forms containing this specific information is required for Federal compliance. Compliance will
be confirmed with district monitoring.
Home language surveys, as well as other personally identifiable information, are
subject to FERPA requirements. Care should be taken to ensure student
confidentiality and privacy.
ENGLISH LEARNER STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
09/15 ODE is currently reviewing this section of the EL Program Guide – this section
is subject to revisions in the 2015-16 school year. Please see the ELSWD web page for
additional guidance and support. http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=4255
If you suspect that an EL has a disability, referral and evaluation should happen in a timely
manner, as it does for all students.
Designated staff in each school/district should lead this process (whether IDEA or 504) as
there are very specific guidelines to be followed. Educators who are knowledgeable about
and familiar with the student’s language acquisition must be involved at every step
throughout the process.
All notices and consents are required to be provided in the parents’ native language, unless
the language is not written or it is clearly not feasible to do so. Qualified interpreters should
be utilized to translate all other information.
Evaluations must be conducted by professionals who are able to select and administer
procedures so that results are not biased by the child’s culture or language. Both IDEA
http://idea.ed.gov/ and Section 504 http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html provide
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 36
specific information, and answer common questions in order to assist school and district
personnel to best serve students with special academic needs.
IDEA requires that when an EL has a disability, planning for the child’s language needs and
the effect of language development on the overall educational program be considered by the
IEP team, which must include someone who is knowledgeable about the child’s second
language acquisition and level of functioning.
Once an EL has been identified with as eligible for special education, the IEP team, with
appropriate representation from those knowledgeable about the child’s background, culture,
and language acquisition should make the decisions about the relationship between the
child’s disability, language needs, participation in required assessments, and educational
program.
For a 504 plan implementation, the team should include a professional who is knowledgeable
about the child, and someone who understands the child’s language development.
It is important to maintain the perspective that if the child’s disability affects his or her
functioning in any academic area, it is likely it will affect their progress in learning English. As
such, it is not appropriate to withdraw language instruction from a child based on limited
performance consistent with their disability.
Special Education
The disproportionate representation of ethnically and linguistically diverse students in high
incidence special education programs (mental retardation, learning disabilities, and emotional
disturbance) has been a concern for over three decades (Artiles, Trent, & Palmer, 2004;
Donovan & Cross, 2002; Dunn, 1968).
The importance of this issue is evident in the fact it has been studied twice by a National
Research Council (NRC; Donovan & Cross, 2002; Heller, Holtzman, & Messick, 1982). Yet
two NRC reports, resolutions, statements, and actions from major professional organizations,
such as the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) (CEC, 1997, 2002), litigation (e.g., court
cases such as Larry P. vs. Riles and Diana vs. the California State Board of Education),
policy and advocacy efforts (e.g., new IDEA amendments, CEC Institutes on
Disproportionality), pressure from parent groups, and efforts from a relatively small group of
researchers have not been sufficient to significantly reduce this problem. The recent NRC
report concluded, “twenty years later, disproportion in special education persists” (Donovan &
Cross, 2002, p. 1). The phenomenon of disproportionate representation becomes particularly
problematic when one considers our nation’s school-aged population is becoming culturally
and linguistically diverse at an unprecedented rate (Smith, 2003; U.S. Department of
Commerce, 2000).
Blatchley and Lau report in the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
Communique May 2010, students who are learning English as a second or third language
often lag behind native English speakers in academic skills, and may display differences in
behavior or social skills compared to their native English speaking peers. These ELs are,
therefore, at risk for referral for special services including special education.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 37
Educators are encouraged to use appropriate, nonbiased approaches to screen ELs to
determine their need for support within the general education program, and to implement
culturally competent instructional strategies prior to considering referral to special education
(e.g., see Lau & Blatchley, 2009). But, when ELs make little or no progress despite additional
supports and special education services are considered, school personnel are urged to take
a broad, ecological perspective, collecting data through a multi-dimensional, multi-task
approach, and interpreting results within the context of the students’ unique cultural,
linguistic, and experiential backgrounds (Lau & Blatchley, 2010).
Using nationally standardized, norm-referenced test (NRT) scores to determine eligibility for
special education requires considerable caution with ELs. As ELs present a continuum of
English proficiency and acculturation, the appropriateness of NRTs for a given student
depends on the similarity of that student’s experience to that of the test’s standardization
population.
Tasks from standardized tests may be administered to find out what skills the learner does
and does not have; however, if the learner’s background experience is significantly different
from the group on which the test was normed, it is inappropriate to use the normative scores
to draw conclusions regarding student needs and special education eligibility. The use of
native language interpreters does not negate this principle, and in fact introduces other
complicating factors. For instance, current standardized tests do not involve the use of
interpreters as part of their standardization procedure. Moreover, some test items just cannot
be translated from English to another language without seriously distorting their original
meaning or without suggesting the correct or expected response. These extraneous factors
could seriously compromise the validity and utility of the assessment.
Impact of second language acquisition
A major complication of academic assessment of ELs is their varying stages of second
language acquisition and academic experience. Understanding the specifics of their current
and previous instructional programs is essential to accurate interpretation of ELs’ academic
performance. If a student has previously and recently received instruction in his or her native
language, it will be important to assess those skills using appropriately trained bilingual staff
to ensure these competencies are not overlooked when all current instruction is in English;
however, if a student has only received instruction in English, it is not useful to evaluate
academic skills in the native language, unless he or she has been exposed to these skills at
home or in community settings.
Using norm referenced achievement tests
The focus in academic assessment is generally on the skill areas of reading, writing, and
mathematics, and to a lesser extent, the content areas (such as science and social studies).
The more unique an individual’s educational experience and background, the more educators
must individually tailor the assessment. Norm-referenced achievement tests are often not
very useful in assessing ELs because the norms do not adequately represent EL populations.
Further, test content does not adequately reflect ELs’ instructional experience and test
formats are often unfamiliar and confusing to the student.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 38
To ensure ELs are appropriately identified with disabilities requiring special education
services, student study teams, pre-referral teams, and RTI teams must be knowledgeable
about:
Second language acquisition;
Culturally responsive instructional practices;
Appropriate multicultural assessment practices;
Linguistic and cultural challenges in using standardized test measures;
Challenges faced by children whose L1 is not English;
Effective instructional strategies for ELs; and
Working with interpreters (oral communication) and translators (written communication).
ELs can be misidentified with disabilities for a huge variety of reasons. Some students with
limited English exposure and knowledge have not received appropriate instruction, while
others have experienced academic difficulties not related to disabilities such as:
Interrupted schooling
Limited formal education
Medical problems
Attendance problems due to family mobility
Acculturation challenges
A resource guide is available on the ODE website to assist school district staff in managing
the challenges of appropriately evaluating ELs who may have disabilities that require
specialized instruction via an IEP (Special Education). The goal of the Special Education
Assessment Process for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students 2007 Revision
is to provide content, relevant to the challenge of deciding when academic learning difficulties
are influenced by second language acquisition, the acculturation process, inappropriate
instruction, or a disabling condition, as well as providing culturally responsive instructional
and assessment considerations. Included in this 2007 Revision is a discussion on emerging
practices on Response to Intervention (RTI) which has promising utility for CLD learners.
The following are a series of issues and requirements that student study teams should
consider as they work with ELs:
Informed parental consent for the evaluation.
Legal timelines to develop assessment plan.
Timeline for holding IEP team meeting.
How much exposure to English has this child experienced?
Where is this child and his/her family in the acculturation process?
Immigrant or refugee status.
The type of instruction has the student had: model of ELD or bilingual, if any.
History of access to core curriculum.
The student’s language proficiency in the four skill areas in: L1, L2.
How the student compares with his/her peers.
How the student interacts with others in the home environment.
Alfredo J. Artiles and Alba A. Ortiz (2002)
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 39
The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) strongly supports
comprehensive assessment and evaluation of students with possible learning disabilities by a
multidisciplinary team for the identification and diagnosis of students with learning disabilities.
Comprehensive assessment of individual students requires the use of multiple data sources.
These sources may include standardized tests, informal measures, observations, student
self-reports, parent reports, and progress monitoring data from RTI approaches (NJCLD,
2005). Reliance on any single criterion for assessment or evaluation is not administered the
student’s native language, nor is a group assessment, such as universal screening or state-
wide academic assessment tests, sufficient for comprehensive assessment or evaluation.
Assessment is used to refer to the collection of data through the use of multiple measures,
including standardized and informal instruments and procedures. These measures yield
comprehensive quantitative and qualitative data about an individual student. The results of
continuous progress monitoring also may be used as part of individual and classroom
assessments. Information from many of these sources of assessment data can and should
be used to help ensure that the comprehensive assessment and evaluation accurately
reflects how an individual student is performing.
Evaluation follows assessment and incorporates information from all data sources.
Evaluation refers to the process of integrating, interpreting, and summarizing the
comprehensive assessment data, including indirect and preexisting sources. The major goal
of assessment and evaluation is to enable team members to use data to create a profile of a
student’s strengths and needs. The student profile informs decisions about identification,
eligibility, services, and instruction. Comprehensive assessment and evaluation procedures
are both critical for making an accurate diagnosis of students with learning disabilities.
Procedures that are not comprehensive can result in identification of some individuals as
having learning disabilities when they do not, and conversely, exclude some individuals who
do have specific learning disabilities.
Additional Resources
Language and Reading Interventions for English Learners, and English Learners with
Disabilities:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/opportunities/grants/nclb/title_iii/lang-and-rdng-interventions-
for-ells-and-ells-with-disabilities.pdf
IEP Team
Group described in Sec. 34 CFR 300.306.
The IEP team considers whether the student’s lack of progress is consistent with the
second language acquisition process or a possible manifestation of a disability.
The team must include a representative with knowledge of second language
acquisition and ELD programs/services.
The team also includes parents/guardians, and student when appropriate.
The team considers the results of the assessment and whether instruments used are
valid and reliable for ELs.
IEP teams must review ELPA results to determine the student’s level of English
proficiency.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 40
IEP Development for ELs - Must include:
Current levels of performance (based on assessment results; include strengths and
weaknesses).
Assessment and classroom accommodations, program supports and modifications
(including the ELPA21).
Goals should be linguistically appropriate and standards based.
The need for special education services and ELD services; instruction could be
provided by both programs.
ELD standards when appropriate.
Language of instruction (can be different for different subjects).
Materials and instructional programs appropriate for ELs.
The ELPA21 should be the primary criterion to determine the student’s level of English
proficiency, unless the IEP Team decides that the student needs an alternate English
proficiency test.
Should ELPA21 be given with or without accommodations.
The need to use alternate assessment in one or more required domain.
In the IEP
Instruction needs to address both their linguistic and cultural characteristics and their
disabilities.
May include:
• Sheltered academic instruction
• Mediating scaffolds – peer support
Task scaffolds – reduce the information students must generate independently.
Material scaffolds – learning prompts.
Comprehensible input – language appropriate to the student’s ELP.
504 Accommodation Plans
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) is a federal civil rights statute
which provides:
“No otherwise qualified individual with disabilities in the United States…shall solely
by reason of his/her disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the
benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving
federal financial assistance.”
Although Section 504 protects all individuals with disabilities – students, staff, parents, and
the public – this publication addresses Section 504 as it affects students in public schools.
Since all public school districts receive federal funds, all public school districts (and public
charter schools) must comply with Section 504. Additionally, public school districts are
government entities covered by Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), a
federal law. This publication is designed to assist Oregon school districts to comply with
these nondiscrimination laws. Section 504 is an evolving area of law, and readers should
always supplement their understanding of Section 504 with current information.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 41
To be in compliance with Section 504 and state nondiscrimination requirements for schools,
school districts with more than 15 employees must do the following:
1. Designate an employee to coordinate compliance with Section 504.
2. Adopt and implement procedures to ensure interested persons can obtain information
regarding the existence and location of services, activities, and facilities accessible to and
usable by persons with disabilities.
3. Provide grievance procedures that have appropriate due process standards, and provide
for the prompt and equitable resolution of complaints of discrimination.
4. Provide notices that the district does not discriminate in violation of Section 504. The
notification must state, where appropriate, the recipient does not discriminate in admission
or access to, or treatment or employment in, its program or activity.
5. Provide notice of the designated employee, how to obtain information about access, the
grievance procedures, and the district’s statement of nondiscrimination to students,
parents, employees, unions, and professional organizations. These notices should be
included in student/parent handbooks and on the district’s website.
Taken from: http://www.ode.state.or.us/policy/federal/civilrights/sec504info.doc
Additional resource, PowerPoint presentation:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/teachlearn/conferencematerials/sped/504_presentation.ppt
Talented and Gifted (TAG) Identification
In considering the pool of candidates for identification as TAG learners, it is important to note
gifted students exist in all cultures, all races, all ethnicities, and all socio-economic groups.
According to the Belin-Blank International Center for Gifted and Talented Education (2008),
there is minimal research about the characteristics of gifted ELs. Characteristics appear in
varying degrees in ELs who are identified as gifted. The following list was compiled by the
Iowa Department of Education as possible giftedness indicators:
Acquires a second language rapidly,
Shows a high ability in mathematics;
Displays a mature sense of diverse cultures and languages;
Code switches easily (think in both languages);
Demonstrates an advanced awareness of American expressions;
Translates at an advanced level;
Navigates appropriate behaviors successfully within both cultures (Belin-Blank, pg 12).
Identifying ELs for gifted programming begins with collaboration among classroom teachers,
gifted/talented educators, and EL educators, and is supported by ORS and OAR:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2309 In identifying ELs for TAG identification,
educators need to be especially sensitive to cultural bias in testing instruments and in the
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 42
TAG nomination processes for students who are essentially caught between two languages.
(Belin-Blank, pg 16 – 17)
Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 343.395 (4) define Talented and Gifted Children as:
Those children who require special educational programs or services, or both, beyond
those normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize their
contribution to self and society and who demonstrate outstanding ability or potential in
one or more of the following areas:
General intellectual ability as commonly measured by measures of intelligence
and aptitude.
Unusual academic ability in one or more academic areas
Districts may also identify students in the follow areas:
Creative ability in using original or nontraditional methods in thinking and
producing.
Leadership ability in motivating the performance of others either in educational or
non-educational settings.
Ability in the visual or performing arts, such as dance, music, or art.
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 581-022-1310 (2)(a) requires districts to “make efforts to
identify students from ethnic minorities, students with disabilities, and students who are
culturally different or economically disadvantaged.”
Further, this rule indicates “despite a student’s failure to qualify” under the traditional methods
of identification that “districts, by local policies and procedures, shall identify students who
demonstrate the potential to perform at the 97th percentile”. Once identified, OARs described
under OAR 581-022-1330 (4) requires “the instruction provided to identify students shall be
designed to accommodate their assessed levels of learning and accelerated rates of
learning”.
Further considerations: The Oregon process for any student to be identified as TAG requires
the nomination process include a “body of evidence” which should include the results of at
least one nationally normed test and should also include convergent testing data, evidence of
classroom performance, parent and teacher recommendations, work portfolios, and
classroom observations. It is important to note the parent survey should be in the parents’
native language, if possible. No single measurement, nor the results of one test, can be used
as the sole criterion for TAG education identification in Oregon.
Once the student is identified, she or he should receive services in the area of identification.
The testing instrument used for identification defines the student’s area of identified
giftedness. It is important for parents and teachers to know the student’s area(s) of gifted
identification so the services are accurately provided.
There are complicating factors in identifying a student who are also receiving EL services.
Here are some considerations:
For example, if the student scored at the 97th percentile on a non-verbal instrument, he
or she may still be struggling with the nuances of second language acquisition. In an
attempt to improve this situation, many educators assume that testing the student in
his/her native language for gifted education might be the answer. An example of this
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 43
would be testing a native Spanish speaker for TAG on a test that is written in Spanish.
At this point, it would be extremely important to know if the student speaks and reads
Spanish. This may not be the case; the student may not read or write Spanish, and
may have verbal skills which only encompass “speaking Spanish”.
For some cultures, parents do not seek recognition for their child. Cultural values
should be considered for TAG identification. Although TAG is a needs-based
program, it may not align to the family’s cultural values to extol the abilities of one child
and not all of the children in the family.
Another consideration is the “element of expectation” once a student is identified to
receive TAG education services. It is most likely important for the student to continue
to receive EL services. In addition, gifted education identification can set an
extraordinary learning path for a student. However, when a student is identified as
gifted, both the teacher’s and the family’s expectations rise. In a outcome manner, the
student’s self-expectation also rises. While a student is still acquiring English
language skills, he or she should be afforded opportunities to check-in with teachers
on appropriate levels of expectation both from the student’s and parent’s points of view
and from the teacher’s point of view. This collaboration of expectations serves the
newly identified EL/TAG student in the best possible way.
Below are some resources to assist parents and teachers to further understand the needs of
high ability TAG students who may be culturally and linguistically diverse.
The TAG brochure has been translated into the five most frequently occurring languages in
Oregon.
http://www.ode.state.or.us/teachlearn/specialty/tag/giftedbrochure.pdf
Link to the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) position paper on Identifying
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners:
http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/PDF/Position_Statement_PDFs/Identifying%20and%2
0Serving%20Culturally%20and%20Linguistically%20Diverse%20Gifted%20Students.pdf
Recommended Reading: Cultural Competence, A Primer for Educators by Jerry V. Diller and
Jean Moule, 2005, Wadsworth, Thomson Learning, Inc.
Recommended Resource: Identifying Gifted and Talented English Language Learners,
Grades K-12, the Iowa Department of Education, published by the Belin-Blank International
Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development (2008) Click on the following link:
https://www.educateiowa.gov/sites/files/ed/documents/IdentifyGiftedTalentedELL.pdf , then
on the embedded link, under “Gifted & Talented Connections”.
CHARTER SCHOOLS
Charter schools are required to have an EL Plan, this plan could be included in the
sponsoring district’s EL Plan or a separate plan. This plan addresses the federal
requirements on services for ELs (Title VI) as well as Oregon’s ELL weighted funding
requirements. Charter schools not meeting AMAOs for 2 or more years will be required to
write a Title III Improvement Plan.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 44
Although public charter schools are exempt from ORS 336.079, applicable state and federal
anti-discrimination laws require public charter schools to identify ELs and provide them with
appropriate programs to overcome their language barriers. Whether a particular program is
appropriate under federal law depends on whether it: (1) is based on a sound educational
theory or legitimate experimental strategy; (2) implemented effectively; and (3) produces
results that demonstrate that language barriers are being overcome. Oregon requirements
are, most likely, substantially the same as federal requirements.
1. Sound educational theory or legitimate experimental strategy – Castañeda (see legal
resources) requires districts to use educational theories that are recognized as sound by
some experts in the field, or at least theories recognized as legitimate educational
strategies. Some approaches falling under this category include transitional bilingual
education, bilingual/bicultural education, structured immersion, developmental bilingual
education, and ESL. A public charter school using any of these approaches has complied
with the first requirement of Castaneda. If a district is using a different approach, it is in
compliance with Castañeda if it can show that the approach is considered sound by some
experts in the field or that it is considered a legitimate experimental strategy.
2. Implemented effectively - If a public charter school uses a program model such as ELD
or bilingual education, the public charter school should have ascertained teachers who
use those methods are effective in their implementation. This training can take the form
of in-service training, formal college coursework, or a combination of the two. In addition,
a public charter school should be able to show it has determined its teachers have
mastered the skills necessary to teach effectively in a program for LEP students. In
making this determination, the public charter school should use validated evaluative
instruments -- that is, tests that have been shown to accurately measure the skills in
question. The public charter school should also have the teacher's classroom
performance evaluated by someone familiar with the method being used.
If a public charter school has shown it has unsuccessfully tried to hire qualified teachers, it
must provide adequate training to teachers already on staff to comply with the Title VI
regulation. Such training must take place as soon as possible. For example, public
charter schools sometimes require teachers to work toward obtaining a credential as a
condition of employment in a program for EL students. This requirement is not, in itself,
sufficient to meet the public charter school's obligations under the Title VI regulation. To
ensure that EL students have access to the public charter school's programs while
teachers are completing their formal training, the public charter school must ensure those
teachers receive sufficient interim training to enable them to function adequately in the
classroom, as well as any assistance that may be necessary to carry out the public
charter school's interim program.
3. Produces results that demonstrate language barriers are being overcome.
Programs of service for ELs are required to meet three state goals measured annually by
the state assessment system: 1) demonstrate ELs have progressed one proficiency level
higher at the end of each school year; 2) demonstrate that a set number and percent of
ELs who have been enrolled in an ELD program for five years or more have achieved
proficiency; and 3) the EL sub-group have met the AYP as required by the ESEA and as
measured by OAKS reading and mathematics.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 45
OAR 581-0210-0046(8) requires public charter schools to (1) develop and implement a plan
for identifying students whose primary language is other than English, and (2) provide those
students with "appropriate programs" until they are able to effectively participate in regular
classroom instruction. OAR 581-021-0046(8) does not set out the requirements for
"appropriate programs'" nor have Oregon courts addressed that issue. Oregon courts would
likely construe the requirements of "appropriate programs'" similarly to how federal courts
construe requirements for taking "appropriate action" under federal anti-discrimination laws.
If a district is using a different approach, it is in compliance with Castaneda if it can show the
approach is considered sound by some experts in the field or it is at least, deemed a
legitimate experimental strategy.
Also, the USDOE OCR in The Provision of an Equal Education Opportunity to Limited-
English Proficient Students (2000) has provided non-formal general guidelines for districts to
ensure that they meet the needs of EL's:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/eeolep/index.html
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS
Alternative Schools
How are ELs served in alternative education settings?
Public Alternative Schools (OAR 581-022-1350)
Alternative programs may occur within a traditional school or public alternative school.
Private Alternative Schools (OAR 581-021-0072, 0074)
Same lawful requirements as traditional public schools:
Education plan and profile
Career-related learning experiences
Transportation
SPED
Background checks for staff
Comprehensive Guidance and Counseling
Additional requirements for Alternative Schools:
Transition plan
Transportation plan
Special Education Transition Plan
What resources are available?
Alternative Education web site http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=78
Oregon State School Directory http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=227
Alternative School Evaluation Toolkits http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=731
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 46
Comprehensive Guidance and Counseling
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=132
How might ELD instruction in an alternative education setting be different than a traditional
school?
ELD instructional period may look different, less time, etc.
Small group or individual instruction
Homeroom and advisory periods to support non-academic skills
District counts by hours of instruction “part-time”
Drug/alcohol intervention/counseling may be included in the program
Instructors may or may not have the same academic background and licensure as
ELD instructors in traditional school:
public alternative schools = same licensure requirements as traditional schools
private alternative schools (contractors) = not required to employ only licensed
teachers or administrators (see ORS 336.635 (3))
JDEP, YCEP, LCTC
JDEP - Juvenile Detention Education Program
YCEP - Youth Correctional Education Program
LCTC - Long-Term Care and Treatment Education Programs
All the Youth Correctional Education Programs (YCEP) and Juvenile Detention Education
Program (JDEP) sites adhere to the current EL service and reporting requirements. The
client services contracts that ODE has with each school district or educational service
districts to provide the educational services have the following paragraph as a requirement.
“Contractor’s Education Program shall comply with all requirements of OAR Chapter 581,
Division 22 (Standards for Public Elementary and Secondary Schools), to the extent
appropriate given the student’s anticipated length of stay, and OAR Chapter 581, Division
15 (Special Education) and all state and federal statutes and regulations referenced
therein. Contractor shall comply with all other state and federal laws, regulations, and
administrative rules applicable to the services provided under this Contract.”
The YCEP has two points of entry referred to as “Intake” into the YCEP system: Farrell HS
for the boys and Three Lakes HS for the girls. At each intake program, the students are
assessed to determine whether they are eligible for EL services. The student’s status is
designated in the statewide student information system that all the YCEP and JDEP schools
utilize. Each year, the different sites administer the ELPA as appropriate for each student.
Additional information is available at:
JDEP and YCEP: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=158
LTCT: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=79
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 47
OREGON DIPLOMA REQUIREMENTS
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=368
ESSENTIAL SKILLS
In January 2007, the State Board adopted Essential Skills as a requirement for graduation.
After public review and input, the Essential Skill definitions were adopted by the State Board
of Education in March 2008. Beginning in 2012, students must demonstrate proficiency in
identified essential skills to receive a high school diploma. The essential skills are process
skills occurring across academic disciplines and are embedded in the content standards.
The skills are not content specific and can be applied in a variety of courses, subjects, and
settings.
Specific Essential Skills graduation requirements are based on the year the student first
enrolled in Grade 9:
Enrolled in Grade 9 in 2010-11 and beyond: Read and comprehend a variety of text;
write clearly and accurately; and apply mathematics in a variety of settings.
The remaining Essential Skills will be phased-in over subsequent years - timeline to be
determined.
Essential Skills:
1. Read and comprehend a variety of text.
2. Write clearly and accurately.
3. Apply mathematics in a variety of settings.
The following Essential Skills were phased-in after 2014; timeline to be determined:
4. Listen actively and speak clearly and coherently.
5. Think critically and analytically.
6. Use technology to learn, live, and work.
7. Demonstrate civic and community engagement.
8. Demonstrate global literacy.
9. Demonstrate personal management and teamwork skills.
In support of the Essential Skills graduation requirement, many districts will offer work
samples as an assessment option for their students. As districts build their local assessment
systems, they will need to develop or acquire work sample resources such as prompts and
scoring. ODE has developed a list of districts that have work sample resources in a variety of
languages that are available to share with other districts in the areas of Reading, Writing, and
Math. The list is located at:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/wma/teachlearn/testing/resources/work-sample-sharing.xls
Please visit the Essential Skills website for additional information:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2042
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 48
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Office of Civil Rights
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/qa-EL.html
Title III web page:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=106
Title III Contact List:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=2593
STATUES, RULES, AND MEMORANDUMS: SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS
Federal Law
Each LEA receiving Title III funds is required by federal law to meet minimum program
requirements. Federal laws relating to the distribution and use of Title III funds are found in
the current ESEA document: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg39.html
Title III – Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students
SEC. 3102. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this part are —
(2) to help ensure that children who are limited English proficient, including immigrant
children and youth, attain English proficiency, develop high levels of academic
attainment in English, and meet the same challenging State academic content and
student academic achievement standards as all children are expected to meet;
(3) to assist all limited English proficient children, including immigrant children and
youth, to achieve at high levels in the core academic subjects so that those
children can meet the same challenging State academic content and student
academic achievement standards as all children are expected to meet, consistent
with section 1111(b)(1);
(4) to develop high-quality language instruction educational programs designed to
assist State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and schools in
teaching limited English proficient children and serving immigrant children and
youth;
(5) to assist State educational agencies and local educational agencies to develop and
enhance their capacity to provide high-quality instructional programs designed to
prepare limited English proficient children, including immigrant children and youth,
to enter all-English instruction settings;
(6) to assist State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and schools to
build their capacity to establish, implement, and sustain language instruction
educational programs and programs of English language development for limited
English proficient children;
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 49
(7) to promote parental and community participation in language instruction
educational programs for the parents and communities of limited English proficient
children;
(8) to streamline language instruction educational programs into a program carried out
through formula grants to State educational agencies and local educational
agencies to help limited English proficient children, including immigrant children
and youth, develop proficiency in English, while meeting challenging State
academic content and student academic achievement standards;
(8) to hold State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and schools
accountable for increases in English proficiency and core academic content
knowledge of limited English proficient children by requiring —
(A) demonstrated improvements in the English proficiency of limited English
proficient children each fiscal year; and
(B) adequate yearly progress for limited English proficient children, including
immigrant children and youth, as described in section 1111(b)(2)(B); and
(9) to provide State educational agencies and local educational agencies with the
flexibility to implement language instruction educational programs, based on
scientifically based research on teaching limited English proficient children, that the
agencies believe to be the most effective for teaching English.
Funds are directed to states and eligible local districts or consortia through a formula grant
allocation to:
develop high-quality language instruction educational programs;
assist SEAs, LEAs, and schools to build their capacity to establish, implement, and
sustain language instruction and development programs;
promote parental and community involvement; and to
hold SEAs, LEAs, and schools accountable for increases in English proficiency and
core academic content knowledge of limited English proficient children by:
demonstrated improvements in the English proficiency of limited English;
proficient children each fiscal year; and
adequate yearly progress for limited English proficient children, including
immigrant children and youth, as described in section 1111(b)(2); and (B).
The link to U.S. Department of Education Private School Participation, Sec. 9501 is:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg111.html
The Non-Regulatory Guidance for ESEA 9501 can be found at:
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/psguidance.doc
SEC. 3116. LOCAL PLANS (AKA Plan of Service/Lau Plan).
(b) PLAN REQUIRED - Each eligible entity desiring a sub-grant from the State
educational agency under section 3114 shall submit a plan to the State educational
agency at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the State
educational agency may require.
(c) CONTENTS - Each plan submitted under subsection (a) shall—
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 50
(1) describe the programs and activities proposed to be developed, implemented,
and administered under the sub-grant;‘‘
(2) describe how the eligible entity will use the sub-grant funds to meet all annual
measurable achievement objectives described in section 3122;
(3) describe how the eligible entity will hold elementary schools and secondary
schools receiving funds under this subpart accountable for—
(A) meeting the annual measurable achievement objectives described in
section 3122;
(B) making adequate yearly progress for limited English proficient children,
as described in section 1111(b)(2)(B); and
(C) annually measuring the English proficiency of limited English proficient
children, so that such children served by the programs carried out under
this part develop proficiency in English while meeting State academic
content and student academic achievement standards as required by
section 1111(b)(1);
(4) describe how the eligible entity will promote parental and community
participation in programs for limited English proficient children;
(5) contain an assurance that the eligible entity consulted with teachers,
researchers, school administrators, and parents, and, if appropriate, with
education-related community groups and nonprofit organizations, and
institutions of higher education, in developing such plan; and
(6) describe how language instruction educational programs carried out under the
subgrant will ensure that limited English proficient children being served by the
programs develop English proficiency.
(d) TEACHER ENGLISH FLUENCY - Each eligible entity receiving a sub-grant under
section 3114 shall include in its plan a certification that all teachers in any language
instruction educational program for limited English proficient children that is, or will be,
funded under this part are fluent in English and any other language used for
instruction, including having written and oral communications skills.
(e) OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL - Each local plan shall also contain
assurances that—
(1) each local educational agency that is included in the eligible entity is complying
with section 3302 prior to, and throughout, each school year;
(2) the eligible entity annually will assess the English proficiency of all children with
limited English proficiency participating in programs funded under this part;
(3) the eligible entity has based its proposed plan on scientifically based research
on teaching limited English proficient children;
(4) the eligible entity will ensure that the programs will enable children to speak,
read, write, and comprehend the English language and meet challenging State
academic content and student academic achievement standards; and
(5) the eligible entity is not in violation of any State law, including State
constitutional law, regarding the education of limited English proficient children,
consistent with sections 3126 and 3127.
Subpart 2—Accountability and Administration
SEC. 3121. EVALUATIONS.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 51
(a) IN GENERAL - Each eligible entity that receives a sub-grant from a State educational
agency under subpart 1 shall provide such agency, at the conclusion of every second
fiscal year during which the sub-grant is received, with an evaluation, in a form
prescribed by the agency, that includes—
(1) a description of the programs and activities conducted by the entity with funds
received under subpart 1 during the two immediately preceding fiscal years;
(2) a description of the progress made by children in learning the English language
and meeting challenging State academic content and student academic
achievement standards;
(3) the number and percentage of children in the programs and activities attaining
English proficiency by the end of each school year, as determined by a valid
and reliable assessment of English proficiency; and
(4) a description of the progress made by children in meeting challenging State
academic content and student academic achievement standards for each of the
2 years after such children are no longer receiving services under this part.
(b) USE OF EVALUATION - An evaluation provided by an eligible entity under subsection
(a) shall be used by the entity and the State educational agency—
(1) for improvement of programs and activities;
(2) to determine the effectiveness of programs and activities in assisting children
who are limited English to attain English proficiency (as measured consistent
with subsection (d)) and meet challenging State academic content and student
academic achievement standards; and
(3) in determining whether or not to continue funding for specific programs or
activities.
(c) EVALUATION COMPONENTS - An evaluation provided by an eligible entity under
subsection (a) shall—
(1) provide an evaluation of children enrolled in a program or activity conducted by
the entity using funds under subpart 1 (including the percentage of children)
who—
(A) are making progress in attaining English proficiency, including the
percentage of children who have achieved English proficiency;
(B) have transitioned into classrooms not tailored to limited English proficient
children, and have a sufficient level of English proficiency to permit them
to achieve in English and transition into classrooms not tailored to limited
English proficient children;
(C) are meeting the same challenging State academic content and student
academic achievement standards as all children are expected to meet;
and
(D) are not receiving waivers for the reading or language arts assessments
under section 1111(b)(3)(C); and
(2) include such other information as the State educational agency may require.
(d) EVALUATION MEASURES - A State shall approve evaluation measures for use under
subsection (c) that are designed to assess—
(1) the progress of children in attaining English proficiency, including a child’s level
of comprehension, speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills in English;
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 52
(2) student attainment of challenging State student academic achievement
standards on assessments described in section 1111(b)(3); and
(3) progress in meeting the annual measurable achievement objectives described
in section 3122.
(e) SPECIAL RULE FOR SPECIALLY QUALIFIED AGENCIES - Each specially qualified
agency receiving a grant under this part shall provide the evaluations described in
subsection (a) to the Secretary subject to the same requirements as apply to eligible
entities providing such evaluations to State educational agencies under such
subsection.
SEC. 3122 – ACHIEVEMENT OBJECTIVES AND ACCOUNTABILITY. ESEA 20 USC 6842
(b) ACCOUNTABILITY -
(1) FOR STATES - Each State educational agency receiving a grant under subpart
1 shall hold eligible entities receiving a sub-grant under such subpart
accountable for meeting the annual measurable achievement objectives under
subsection (a), including making adequate yearly progress for limited English
proficient children.
(2) IMPROVEMENT PLAN - If a State education agency determines, based on the
annual measurable achievement objectives described in subsection (a), that an
eligible entity has failed to make progress toward meeting such objectives for 2
consecutive years, the agency shall require the entity to develop an
improvement plan that will ensure that the entity meets such objectives. The
improvement plan shall specifically address the factors that prevented the entity
from achieving such objectives.
(3) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE - During the development of the improvement plan
described in paragraph (2), and throughout its implementation, the State
educational agency shall —
(A) provide technical assistance to the eligible entity;
(B) provide technical assistance, if applicable, to schools served by such
entity under subpart 1 that need assistance to enable the schools to
meet the annual measurable achievement objectives described in
subsection (a);
(C) develop, in consultation with the entity, professional development
strategies and activities, based on scientifically based research, that the
agency will use to meet such objectives;
(D) require such entity to utilize such strategies and activities; and
(E) develop, in consultation with the entity, a plan to incorporate strategies
and methodologies, based on scientifically based research, to improve
the specific program or method of instruction provided to limited English
proficient children.
(4) ACCOUNTABILITY- If a State education agency determines that an eligible
entity has failed to meet the annual measurable achievement objectives
described in subsection (a) for four consecutive years, the agency shall —
(A) require such entity to modify the entity's curriculum, program, and
method of instruction; or
(B) (i) make a determination whether the entity shall continue to receive
funds related to the entity's failure to meet such objectives; and
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 53
(ii) require such entity to replace educational personnel relevant to the
entity's failure to meet such objectives.
LEGAL REFERENCES
There are both Federal and State Laws governing the implementation of EL programs. In
addition, there is a requirement for all public schools to follow the guidelines 1) 1868 -
Fourteenth Amendment - "No state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws."
3) Bilingual Education Act (Amended in 1974 and 1978) - "The Congress declared it to be the
policy of the United States, in order to establish equal educational opportunity for all children,
(a) to encourage the establishment and operation, where appropriate, of educational
programs using bilingual educational practices, techniques, and methods; and (b) for that
purpose, to provide financial assistance to local education agencies, and to State education
agencies for certain purposes, in order to enable such local educational agencies to develop
and carry out such programs in elementary and secondary schools, including activities at the
pre-school level, which are designed to meet the educational needs of such children; and to
demonstrate effective ways of providing, for children of limited English speaking ability,
instruction designed to enable them, while using their native language, to achieve
competence in the English language."
The United States Office of Civil Rights (OCR)
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html
Overview of the Agency
The mission of the Office for Civil Rights is to ensure equal access to education and to
promote educational excellence throughout the nation through vigorous enforcement of civil
rights.
We serve student populations facing discrimination and the advocates and institutions
promoting systemic solutions to civil rights problems. An important responsibility is resolving
complaints of discrimination. Agency-initiated cases, typically called compliance reviews,
permit OCR to target resources on compliance problems that appear particularly acute. OCR
also provides technical assistance to help institutions achieve voluntary compliance with the
civil rights laws that OCR enforces. An important part of OCR's technical assistance is
partnerships designed to develop creative approaches to preventing and addressing
discrimination.
Step 1: Determine the planned Educational Approach.
Step 2: Have a system for identification.
Step 3: Have a planned assessment to determine students who have identified a primary
language other than English on the HLS for English proficiency.
Step 4: Develop a system for placement and services.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 54
Step 5: Provide adequate staffing and resources.
Ensure instructional staff are appropriate to implement services, have the educational
expertise, and are qualified to implement services.
Recruit and hire qualified staff, and establish a timetable to have them in place.
Identify and meet training needs.
Identify and obtain resources needed to implement the EL program.
Step 6: Develop and communicate a consistent system for transition/exiting students.
Step 7: Monitoring.
Monitor the success of former ELs for two years after exiting bilingual/ESL program.
Determine how often students will be monitored and what information will be reviewed
to measure success.
If a student is not successful, determine whether the causes are language, academics,
or other reasons.
Have procedures in place to assist students.
Inform parents of service options.
Step 8: Program Evaluation.
In order to meet state regulatory requirements, LEAs should have a system of evaluating
their programs in place. It will likely include:
Description of programs and activities;
ELs’ progress in English and academic achievement;
Determine effectiveness of programs and activities;
Determine whether to continue funding for specific programs or activities.
State Educational Agency (SEA) Responsibilities:
Allocate sub-grants and provide technical assistance to LEAs, creating systems to
complying with federal and state program requirements.
Participate in monitoring of LEAs.
Establish and calculate AMAOs.
Provide technical assistance.
Collect and synthesize data on effectiveness of services and activities.
Report to the USDOE on the effectiveness of services in improving the education of
ELs.
Oregon State Laws
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) and Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) for Education
related to ELs are listed on page 67 in the Appendix section of this guide. The Appendix lists
the sections in OAR and ORS that pertain to ELs, with hyperlinks to specific sections for
viewing of complete text. Web page addresses for OAR and ORS sites are:
OAR: http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_500/oar_581/581_tofc.html
ORS: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/home.htm
The following OAR and ORS are a few, but not all, of those relating to ELs.
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 55
ORS 336.079 Special English courses for certain children. Specific courses to teach
speaking, reading, and writing of the English language shall be provided at kindergarten and
each grade level to those children who are unable to benefit from classes taught in English.
Such courses shall be taught to such a level in school as may be required until children are
able to profit from classes conducted in English. [1971 c.326 §3; 1993 c.45 §77]
ORS 659.850 Discrimination in education prohibited; rules.
(1) As used in this section, “discrimination” means any act that unreasonably
differentiates treatment, intended or unintended, or any act that is fair in form but
discriminatory in operation, either of which is based on race, color, religion, sex,
sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, age or disability. “Discrimination”
does not include enforcement of an otherwise valid dress code or policy, as long as
the code or policy provides, on a case-by-case basis, for reasonable accommodation
of an individual based on the health and safety needs of the individual.
(2) A person may not be subjected to discrimination in any public elementary, secondary
or community college education program or service, school or interschool activity or in
any higher education program or service, school or interschool activity where the
program, service, school or activity is financed in whole or in part by moneys
appropriated by the Legislative Assembly.
(3) The State Board of Education and the State Board of Higher Education shall establish
rules necessary to ensure compliance with subsection (2) of this section in the
manner required by ORS chapter 183. [Formerly 659.150; 2007 c.100 §29]
OAR 581-021-0046(8) Bilingual or Linguistically Different Students. Districts shall
develop and implement a plan for identifying students whose primary language is other than
English and shall provide such students with appropriate programs until they are able to use
the English language in a manner that allows effective and relevant participation in regular
classroom instruction and other educational activities.
The following OAR is under review for updated language, this OAR is subject to
change during the 2015-16 school year.
OAR 581-023-0100 (4)
(4) Pursuant to ORS 327.013(7)(a)(B), the resident school districts shall receive an
additional .5 times the ADM of all eligible students enrolled in an English as a Second
Language program. To be eligible, a student must be in the ADM of the school
district in grades K through 12 and be a language minority student attending English
as a Second Language (ESL) classes in a program which meets basic U.S.
Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights guidelines. These guidelines provide
for:
(a) A systematic procedure for identifying students who may need ESL classes,
and for assessing their language acquisition and academic needs;
(b) A planned program for ESL and academic development, using instructional
methodologies recognized as effective with language minority students;
(c) Instruction by credentialed staff and trained in instructional strategies that are
effective with second language learners and language minority students, or by
tutors supervised by credentialed staff trained in instructional strategies that are
effective with second language learners and language minority students;
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 56
(d) Adequate equipment and instructional materials;
(e) Evaluation of program effectiveness in preparing ESL students for academic
success in the mainstream curriculum.
(f) Evaluation of program effectiveness in preparing ESL students for academic
success in the mainstream curriculum.
(g) Process for transition from ELL Services that include procedures and criteria for
determining when students no longer need those services. The criteria shall
include:
(A) Achieving at the advanced level on the State’s English Language Proficiency
Assessment (ELPA).
(B) The advanced level is a culmination of progress demonstrated on the same state
proficiency measure over a legitimate period of time.
Case Law and Related Statutes
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its regulations at 34 CFR Part 100 2) - "No person
in the U.S. shall, on the ground of race, color, national origin be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial
assistance."
May 25, 1970, Memorandum, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare - This
memorandum interpreted the Civil Rights Act. It delineates the responsibility of school
districts in providing equal education opportunity to national origin minority group students
whose English language proficiency is limited. The following quotes discuss some major
areas of concern with respect to compliance with Title VI and have the force of Law:
"Where inability to speak and understand the English language exclude national origin
minority group children from effective participation in the educational program offered by a
school district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in
order to open its instructional program to these students."
"School districts have the responsibility to adequately notify national origin minority group
parents of school activities which are called to the attention of other parents. Such notice,
in order to be adequate, may have to be provided in a language other than English."
"School districts must not assign national origin minority group students to classes for the
mentally retarded on the basis of criteria which essentially measure or evaluate English
language skills; nor may school districts deny national origin minority group children
access to college preparation courses on a basis directly related to the failure of the
school system to inculcate English language skills."
5) 1974 - Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA) - "No state shall deny equal
educational opportunity to an individual on account of his or her race, color, sex or
nation origin, by the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to
overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its
instructional programs."
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 57
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 USC 12131-12161
Individuals with Disabilities Educational Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004
Lau v. Nichols - The decision stated that providing students the same desks, books, teachers
and curriculum did not ensure that they had equal educational opportunity, particularly if the
students did not speak English. If English is the mainstream language of instruction, then
measures have to be taken to ensure that instruction is adapted to address those children's
linguistic characteristics (Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S. Ct. 786, 1974).
Castaneda v Pickard, 648 F2d 989(5th Cir 1981), the 5th Circuit set out a widely adopted
three-part test to determine whether districts have taken “appropriate action” to remedy the
language deficiencies of their ELs: (1) is the school “pursuing a program informed by an
educational theory recognized as sound by some experts in the field, or at least, deemed a
legitimate experimental strategy”; (2) are the programs and practices actually used by the
school “reasonably calculated to implement effectively the educational theory adopted by the
school”; and (3) does the program “produce results indicating that the language barriers
confronting students are actually being overcome”. Congress intended that schools make a
“genuine and good faith effort, consistent with local circumstances and resources, to remedy
the language deficiencies of their students”.
State Archiving (Retention) Requirements
Educational Service Districts, School Districts, and Individual School Records, Division 400
http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_100/oar_166/166_400.html
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 58
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR) AND OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS)
Web page addresses for OAR and ORS sites are:
OAR: http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_500/oar_581/581_tofc.html
ORS: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/home.htm
The following is a list of OAR and ORS that relate to ELs, with hyperlinks to the specific
section.
Oregon 2015 passes new legislation this June, this bill has not been given it ORS number at
the time of this posting. This is HB 3499. Two workgroups are in process as outlined in this
bill. Additional requirements will be forthcoming in the coming months, including additional
OARs.
Oregon Department of Education
Type
Number
Title
Click on Link, then scroll down to
specific number
OAR
581-021-0030
Limitation on Administration and Utilization
of Tests in Public Schools
OAR 581-021-0030
OAR
581-021-0045
Discrimination Prohibited
OAR 581-021-0045
OAR
581-021-0046
Program Compliance Standards
OAR 581-021-0046
OAR
581-021-0260
An Educational Agency or Institution's
Annual Notification
OAR 581-021-0260
OAR
581-022-0610
Administration of State Assessments
OAR 581-22-0610
OAR
581-022-0615
Assessment of Essential Skills
OAR 581-22-0615
OAR
581-022-0617
Essential Skill Assessments for English
Language Learners
OAR 581-22-0617
OAR
581-022-1140
Equal Educational Opportunities
OAR 581-22-1140
OAR
581-022-1363
Expanded Options -- Definitions
OAR 581-22-1363
OAR
581-023-0100
Eligibility Criteria for Student Weighting for
Purposes of State School Fund Distribution
OAR 581-023-0100
ORS
327.013
State School Fund distribution computations
for school districts
ORS 327.013
ORS
327.345
Grants for training English as second
language teachers; qualifications; use; rules
ORS 327.345
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 59
Oregon Department of Education
Type
Number
Title
Click on Link, then scroll down to
specific number
ORS
336.074
Teaching in English required; exceptions
ORS 336.074
ORS
336.079
Special English courses for certain children
ORS 336.079
ORS
336.081
Opportunity to qualify to assist non-English-
speaking students
ORS 336.081
ORS
339.351
Definitions for ORS 339.351 to 339.364.
ORS 339.351
ORS
659.850
Discrimination in education prohibited; rules
ORS 659.850
ORS
659.855
Sanctions for noncompliance with
discrimination prohibitions
ORS 659.855
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 60
Numbered Memoranda Pertaining to English Learners
Numbered
Memorandum
Pertaining to:
Link
001-2014-15
English Learner Students with
Disabilities
Executive Numbered Memorandum 001-
2014-15 English Learner Students with
Disabilities
009-2013-14
Proper Identification of Spanish-
Speaking English Learners for the
Kindergarten Assessment
Executive Numbered Memorandum 009-
2013-14 – Proper Identification of Spanish-
Speaking English Learners for the
Kindergarten Assessment
007-2013-14
Reclassification and Retention
Procedures for English Learners (ELs)
(Revision to Memo #002-2008-09)
(Note: this memorandum is under
review for updating to reflect ELPA21)
Executive Numbered Memo 007-2013-14 –
Reclassification and Retention Procedures
for English Learners
011-2012-13
Postponement of Materials for English
Language Proficiency and
Development (ELP/D)
Executive Numbered Memo: 011-2012-13 –
Postponement of Materials for English
Language Proficiency and Development
(ELP/D)
007-2011-12
ELL participation in annual English
Language Proficiency Assessment
(Revision)
(Note: this memorandum is under
review for updating to reflect ELPA21)
MEMORANDUM NO. 007-2011-12 - ELL
Participation in annual English Language
Proficiency Assessment (Revision to
MEMORANDUM NO. 006-2009-10)
007-2009-10
Assessment of Essential Skills Options
for LEP Students
(Note: this memorandum is under
review for updating to reflect ELPA21)
MEMORANDUM NO. 007-2009-10 –
Assessment of Essential Skills Options for
LEP Students
006-2009-10
ELL participation in annual English
Language Proficiency Assessment
(original)
MEMORANDUM NO. 006-2009-10 – ELL
Participation in annual English Language
Proficiency Assessment (ELPA)
002-2008-09
(Revised/Out
of date)
Promoting, Retaining, and Exiting
English Language Learners from
English Language Development
Program
Memo # 002-2008-09 Promoting, Retaining
and Exiting English Language Learners
from English Language Development
Program
010-2006-07
New federal regulations and
assessment options for LEP
Memo # 010-2006-07 New federal
regulations and assessment options for
LEP
024-2005-06
Meeting State Annual Measurable
Achievement Objectives (AMAOs)
Memo # 024-2005-06 Meeting State Annual
Measurable Achievement Objectives
(AMAOs)
005-2005-06
Oregon’s New English Language
Proficiency Assessment (ELPA)
(Note: This memorandum is under
Memo # 005-2005-06 Oregon's New
English Language Proficiency Assessment
(ELPA)
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
Updated Sept 2015 61
review for archiving).
029-2003-04
Assessing New LEP students – state
assessments
(Note: this memorandum is under
review for updating to reflect ELPA21)
Memo # 029-2003-04 Assessing New
Limited English Proficient Students
001-2003-04
English Language Proficiency Testing
– identification
Memo # 001-2003-04 English Language
Proficiency Testing
App1.4A.1_ODE_ELProgramGuide
Oregon Extended Assessment Technical Report
