Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

Recommendations

Info

Exclusions The following cases were excluded from the database: • Cases with BPS start dates after June 30, 2009. These cases were removed because their start dates were after the end of the study period. In addition, none of these cases had any MCAS or MEPA test data and most had 0 days of attendance (DOE017) and 1 day of membership (DOE018) in BPS or 1 day of attendance and 1 day of membership in BPS. • Cases enrolled in schools not under the authority of BPS. These schools included schools in other districts, parochial and secular private schools, and SPED schools. Many of these schools had enrollments of fewer than 30 students from our original data pull. • Cases whose SIMS codes revealed that the students were not actually enrolled in a given school year. Students who had 0 days of attendance and 1 day of membership (0-1” students) were excluded from the operational database. For SY2009, there were no “0-1” students. The research team deemed this to be a clerical error and instead removed cases with 1 day of attendance and 1 day of membership for that school year only. Cases with an attendance code of “555” were also removed, as this is the code SIMS uses to indicate summer events (e.g., summer graduation, summer dropouts, and summer transfers). All of these cases were removed because their inclusion would have provided an inaccurate count of the number of students actually enrolled in BPS during a given school year and would have artificially skewed data findings. Although these cases were removed from the operational database and excluded in analyses, they were included in the dropout analysis, as explained later on in this appendix. All exclusions were made in consultation with OELL, with the goal of providing an accurate capture of the BPS student enrollment from SY2006 to SY2009. Construction of new variables A list of all student variables included in our analysis, their source, and how they were defined and constructed appears in Table 1. 108 Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools
Table 1. Variables, Definitions and Sources of Data: Student Level Variable Definition Source1 Student Subgroups NES A student who is a native English speaker. Student LEP and FLEP subgroup variables were A student who is a native speaker of a language created using BPS LEP and FLEP date designation NSOL other than English (i.e., a student whose first variables to construct interim LEP and FLEP language is not English). subgroup variables for October and June of each NSOL-EP A student whose first language is not English but who is proficient in English. school year, respectively. Although the research team requested the SIMS variable that indicates A student who is of limited English proficiency, whether a student is of limited English proficiency LEP incapable of performing ordinary schoolwork in (DOE025), the team did not receive it and received in English. its place a variable containing the LEP assignment FLEP A student who is formerly of limited English proficiency. date (and also a FLEP assignment date variable) and LEP status variable from BPS. The source of the latter was not explained. Final versions of the LEP and FLEP variables were created by incorporating native language data (if the student’s native language (DOE024) was listed as English, the student was not coded as a LEP or FLEP). In addition, based on the FLEP date, if the student spent the majority of the EP A student proficient in English, who may be an NES, a FLEP, or an NSOL-EP. In other words, this is any student who is not of limited English proficiency. school year as a LEP, the student was coded as a LEP for that school year. An NSOL-EP variable was constructed to define any student whose native language was not English and who was not a LEP or FLEP. An NSOL variable was constructed that included LEP, FLEP and NSOL-EP students. An NES variable was constructed to define any student whose native language was English. By definition, an NES student was not a LEP, FLEP, or NSOL-EP student. Finally, an EP variable was created which included any NES, NSOL-EP or FLEP students. Demographic Characteristics Gender of student (% male is most frequently used SIMS DOE009 Gender in this report). We defined low-income status as a student who is SIMS DOE019 eligible for free/reduced price lunch. We re-categorized this variable into a dummy Income variable. Language a student has learned from birth. Also SIMS DOE024 first language. We reported on native speakers of English, Spanish, Haitian Creole, Cape Verdean Creole, Chinese dialects, Vietnamese, Portuguese, and Somali. All Native other languages were collapsed into and reported as Language a single “other languages” category. The Chinese category was constructed by collapsing speakers of Chinese dialects, Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, and Fukien, all of which are identified by separate codes in DOE024. We defined mobile students as any student who Constructed by comparing SIMS DOE015 (School ID) changed schools between October and June of a data from October and June SIMS for a given school Mobility given school year. year. SIMS DOE010 This variable was recoded such that Non-Hispanic students are classified into the 5 race categories (White, Black/African American, Asian, American Race/Ethnicity Indian/Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools 109
Page 1 and 2:
Center for Collaborative Education
Page 3 and 4:
This report, Improving Educational
Page 5 and 6:
VII. DROPPING OUT 48 A. What Are th
Page 7 and 8:
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
Page 9 and 10:
Language Learners (OELL) has attemp
Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER II. THE STUDY
Page 13 and 14:
epresented by the blocks in differe
Page 15 and 16:
Table 2. Variables, Definitions, an
Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER III. ENROLLMENT AND CHARACT
Page 19 and 20:
Figure 1. Change in Enrollment of S
Page 21 and 22:
Native speakers of Haitian Creole a
Page 23 and 24:
In Sum Following a swift decline in
Page 25 and 26:
One of the foci of this study is th
Page 27 and 28:
School Poverty Rate. Income status
Page 29 and 30:
ed a significantly smaller proporti
Page 31 and 32:
In Sum In this chapter we focused o
Page 33 and 34:
One of the deepest and most far-rea
Page 35 and 36:
the transfer of large numbers of LE
Page 37 and 38:
education. There are no studies of
Page 39 and 40:
IN DEPTH: Enrollment of English Lan
Page 41 and 42:
Table 14. Nature of Primary Disabil
Page 43 and 44:
choices. From the data gathered, it
Page 45 and 46:
Becoming fully literate in English,
Page 47 and 48:
Populations focused upon in this an
Page 49 and 50:
Table 19. English Proficiency Level
Page 51 and 52:
who attained the level of English p
Page 53 and 54:
ed among those LEP students scoring
Page 55 and 56:
High dropout rates among Boston Pub
Page 57 and 58:
B What Is the Annual High School Dr
Page 59 and 60:
C What Are the Rates of Attendance,
Page 61 and 62:
Table 26. Median Attendance Rates o
Page 63 and 64: Table 29. Attendance, Out-of-School
Page 65 and 66: Table 31. Annual High School Dropou
Page 67 and 68: In Sum This chapter has focused on
Page 69 and 70: The tests of the Massachusetts Comp
Page 71 and 72: student achievement (Rumberger, 199
Page 73 and 74: Table 34. MCAS Math Pass Rates of S
Page 75 and 76: Table 36. MCAS ELA, Math, and Scien
Page 77 and 78: Pass Rates in MCAS ELA, Math, and S
Page 79 and 80: IN DEPTH: Attendance Rates of MCAS
Page 81 and 82: portions of core academic courses t
Page 83 and 84: D What are the MCAS ELA and Math Pa
Page 85 and 86: LEP Students at MEPA Performance Le
Page 87 and 88: school that they attend; if student
Page 89 and 90: Results: English Language Arts In a
Page 91 and 92: 1 Massachusetts meets the requireme
Page 93 and 94: A Overall Findings and General Reco
Page 95 and 96: Designation as student with a disab
Page 97 and 98: B Specific Findings and Recommendat
Page 99 and 100: Recommendation 7: Parents of LEP st
Page 101 and 102: Recommendation 14: Monitor indicato
Page 103 and 104: (2) We found instances in which stu
Page 105 and 106: Recommendation 30: The quality of i
Page 107 and 108: Commonwealth of Massachusetts. (201
Page 109 and 110: Nathan, J., & Thao, S. (2007). Smal
Page 111 and 112: Vaznis, J. (2011, Sept. 18). US fin
Page 113: Overview The report sought to answe
Page 117 and 118: In TBE learn solely in English. In
Page 119 and 120: Table 2: Variables, Definitions and
Page 121 and 122: ! ! ! 5. Limitations of the Data Wh
Page 123 and 124: Table 8: MCAS ELA Pass Rates of LEP
Page 125 and 126: Table 10. Variables Considered in H
Page 127 and 128: APPENDIX 2: Additional Tables and F
Page 129 and 130: ! Table 3.2. Characteristics of Eng
Page 131 and 132: ! ! Table 6.3. English Proficiency
Page 133 and 134: ! Table 7.3. Attendance, Out-of-Sch
Page 135 and 136: ! ! ! Figure 8.3. Science Pass Rate
Page 137 and 138: Table 8.2. MCAS Math Pass Rates for
Page 139 and 140: APPENDIX 3: Characteristics and Out
Page 141 and 142: ! ! ! ! ! ! Table 4. MCAS ELA and M
Page 143 and 144: A discussion of our HLM analyses of
Page 145 and 146: ELA scores on average than LEP stud
Page 147 and 148: Improving Educational Outcomes of E
show all

Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?