Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education
Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education Full Report - Center for Collaborative Education
For LEP and EP students we can only compare SY2008 data (SY2009 data are not reported in ELL Sub-Committee, 2009). Unlike for SY2009, our data show higher dropout rates than MDESE data for SY2008. In addition, the way in which some data were calculated or analyzed may also be subject to some limitations. • Grade Retention. The construction of the grade retention variable relied upon comparing a student’s grade in one school year to his/her grade in the previous school year, which means that if the student was not enrolled in BPS for two consecutive school years, we were unable to determine if the student had been retained. This may have led us to underestimate grade retention. • MCAS for LEP Students in Their First Year in U.S. Schools. When reporting MCAS ELA data, we did not exclude any LEPs in their first year in U.S. schools from our analysis. While this group of students is not required to take the MCAS ELA exam, there were some students coded as LEPs in their first year in the U.S. who had MCAS ELA scores. Because we could not verify if these students were incorrectly coded as being in their first year in U.S., we did not exclude them. In addition, including these students allowed for comparison of MCAS ELA pass rates across the four years of our study period, as the LEP in first year in U.S. schools variable was not present in SIMS data collection in SY2006-SY2007. We also compared MCAS data received for this study to BPS MCAS data reported by MDESE. MCAS pass rates calculated from data received from this study are in general only a few percentage points higher than MCAS pass rates reported by MDESE. We include the comparisons in the tables below. Table 7: MCAS ELA, Math, and Science Pass Rates for LEP and EP Students. BPS, SY2009 EP LEP MCAS ELA MCAS Math MCAS Science MCAS ELA MCAS Math MCAS Science Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Grade 4 Source: MDESE Source: Data 78.1% 78.1% NA 60% 67% NA received for this study 79.9% 79.9% NA 61.6% 69.7% NA Grade 8 Source: MDESE Source: Data 90.0% 59.7% 52.5% 51% 28% 16% received for this study 92.2% 61.5% 54.0% 55.6% Grade 10 31.6% 17.7% Source: MDESE Source: Data 93.5% 88.2% 82.7% 70% 72% 54% received for this study 95.2% 89.7% 82.4% 72.6% 76.3% 59.2% Source for MDESE data is MDESE (n.d., c) 116 Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools
Table 8: MCAS ELA Pass Rates of LEP Students of Different English Proficiency Levels. BPS, SY2009 MEPA L1 MEPA L2 MEPA L3 MEPA L4 MEPA L5 Grade 4 Source: MDESE 0% 3.0% 20.6% 66.8% 94.9% Source: Data received for this study 0% 8.6% 20.2% 66.9% 94.7% Grade 8 Source: MDESE 5.3% 16.4% 42.3% 83.0% 89.7% Source: Data received for this study 5.6% 15.5% 44.2% 83.3% 89.8% Grade 10 Source: MDESE 33.3% 47.6% 58.9% 92.9% 98.6% Source: Data received for this study 25.0% 50.0% 61.2% 92.6% 98.7% Source for MDESE data is English Language Learners Subcommittee (2009). Table 9: MCAS Math Pass Rates of LEP Students of Different English Proficiency Levels. BPS, SY2009 MEPA L1 MEPA L2 MEPA L3 MEPA L4 MEPA L5 Grade 4 Source: MDESE 6.7% 9.7% 38.0% 75.8% 94.3% Source: Data received for this study 23.1% 22.2% 40.6% 75.5% 94.2% Grade 8 Source: MDESE 3.8% 13.4% 23.6% 37.8% 60.0% Source: Data received for this study 3.7% 15.2% 27.1% 39.6% 61.7% Grade 10 Source: MDESE 66.7% 71.8% 66.1% 83.8% 85.7% Source: Data received for this study 69.2% 75.0% 69.7% 84.7% 86.7% Source for MDESE data is English Language Learners Subcommittee (2009). ! Another limitation of the study is that, due to budgetary and time constraints, the research team did not collect any additional quantifiable data on ELL programs other than the type of program in which the student was enrolled or by aggregating demographic and outcomes data on students enrolled in those programs. The inclusion of data on the qualifications of ELL teachers, specific instructional strategies used, and other characteristics of ELL programs would have strengthened our findings but was beyond the scope of the project. Finally, due to lack of availability in SIMS or other state-collected data sources, a number of variables were not included in the analysis for this study whose presence would have strengthened our findings (e.g., prior schooling in home country, parents’ level of education). In addition, some variables were considered but ultimately not included because the way in which they were collected or defined was not ideal for use in this study (e.g., immigrant status DOE022, country of origin DOE023). Methods 1. Literature Review This study was guided by a review of recent literature on factors affecting the academic performance of ELLS, specifically in terms of achievement tests and dropout; on studies of ELLs using HLM or linear regression models to assess achievement and dropout; and on studies conducted in California and Arizona, two other states that have similar restrictive language laws to Massachusetts’. 2. Data Analysis After cleaning and compiling the data files, basic frequencies and cross-tabulations were conducted in SPSS. Specific aggregations of categories often responded to the needs expressed by OELL. For example, MEPA SY2009 data were collapsed into three proficiency levels (1-2, 3, and 4-5) at the request of OELL. When there were fewer than 10 students in a group or subgroup for a given indicator, data were suppressed in the report to maintain student confidentiality. These analyses were conducted for each year SY2006-2009. In the report, we focus the discussion on data findings from SY2009 and highlight Improving Educational Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools 117
- 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 and 114: Overview The report sought to answe
- Page 115 and 116: Table 1. Variables, Definitions and
- Page 117 and 118: In TBE learn solely in English. In
- Page 119 and 120: Table 2: Variables, Definitions and
- Page 121: ! ! ! 5. Limitations of the Data Wh
- 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
For LEP and EP students we can only compare<br />
SY2008 data (SY2009 data are not reported in ELL<br />
Sub-Committee, 2009). Unlike <strong>for</strong> SY2009, our<br />
data show higher dropout rates than MDESE data<br />
<strong>for</strong> SY2008.<br />
In addition, the way in which some data were<br />
calculated or analyzed may also be subject to some<br />
limitations.<br />
• Grade Retention. The construction of the<br />
grade retention variable relied upon comparing<br />
a student’s grade in one school year to his/her<br />
grade in the previous school year, which means<br />
that if the student was not enrolled in BPS <strong>for</strong><br />
two consecutive school years, we were unable to<br />
determine if the student had been retained. This<br />
may have led us to underestimate grade retention.<br />
• MCAS <strong>for</strong> LEP Students in Their First Year in<br />
U.S. Schools. When reporting MCAS ELA data,<br />
we did not exclude any LEPs in their first year in<br />
U.S. schools from our analysis. While this group<br />
of students is not required to take the MCAS<br />
ELA exam, there were some students coded as<br />
LEPs in their first year in the U.S. who had MCAS<br />
ELA scores. Because we could not verify if these<br />
students were incorrectly coded as being in their<br />
first year in U.S., we did not exclude them. In<br />
addition, including these students allowed <strong>for</strong><br />
comparison of MCAS ELA pass rates across the<br />
four years of our study period, as the LEP in first<br />
year in U.S. schools variable was not present in<br />
SIMS data collection in SY2006-SY2007.<br />
We also compared MCAS data received <strong>for</strong> this<br />
study to BPS MCAS data reported by MDESE.<br />
MCAS pass rates calculated from data received<br />
from this study are in general only a few percentage<br />
points higher than MCAS pass rates reported by<br />
MDESE. We include the comparisons in the tables<br />
below.<br />
Table 7: MCAS ELA, Math, and Science Pass Rates <strong>for</strong> LEP and EP Students. BPS, SY2009<br />
EP LEP<br />
MCAS ELA MCAS Math MCAS Science MCAS ELA MCAS Math MCAS Science<br />
Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate Pass Rate<br />
Grade 4<br />
Source: MDESE<br />
Source: Data<br />
78.1% 78.1% NA 60% 67% NA<br />
received <strong>for</strong> this<br />
study<br />
79.9% 79.9% NA 61.6% 69.7% NA<br />
Grade 8<br />
Source: MDESE<br />
Source: Data<br />
90.0% 59.7% 52.5% 51% 28% 16%<br />
received <strong>for</strong> this<br />
study<br />
92.2% 61.5% 54.0% 55.6%<br />
Grade 10<br />
31.6% 17.7%<br />
Source: MDESE<br />
Source: Data<br />
93.5% 88.2% 82.7% 70% 72% 54%<br />
received <strong>for</strong> this<br />
study<br />
95.2% 89.7% 82.4% 72.6% 76.3% 59.2%<br />
Source <strong>for</strong> MDESE data is MDESE (n.d., c)<br />
116 Improving <strong>Education</strong>al Outcomes of English Language Learners in Schools and Programs in Boston Public Schools