Updated November 2016
1
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
ESSA
UPDATE
INCLUDED*
CHAPTER 8
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR
MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS
FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
This is the eighth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies
(SEAs and LEAs) in meeting their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the
U.S. Department of Education Ofce for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter on “English
Learner Students and Limited English Procient Parents,” published in January 2015, which outlines SEAs’ and LEAs’ legal
obligations to ELs under civil rights laws and other federal requirements. The Dear Colleague Letter can be found at
http://www2.ed.gov/about/ofces/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
TRACKING THE PROGRESS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
KEY POINTS
• LEAs must monitor the progress of all ELs in
achieving English language proficiency (ELP)
and in acquiring content knowledge.
• LEAs should establish rigorous monitoring
systems that include benchmarks for expected
growth and take appropriate steps to assist
students who are not adequately progressing
towards those goals.
• SEAs must monitor LEAs to ensure that they
are providing ELs meaningful access to grade-
level core content instruction and remedying
any academic deficits in a timely manner.
LEAs must monitor and regularly assess the progress
of all ELs, including those who have opted out of EL
programs, in both English language proficiency (ELP) and
content knowledge. This includes conducting an annual
ELP assessment and, at least annually, measuring their
performance in grade-level core content areas.
Establishing rigorous monitoring systems that include
periodic benchmarks allows LEAs to monitor ELs’ progress
over time, determine when students are not making
appropriate progress, and provide additional support to
enable ELs to reach English proficiency and gain grade-
level content knowledge. SEAs must monitor LEAs to
ensure that they are providing ELs meaningful access to
grade-level core content instruction and remedying any
academic deficits in a timely manner.
ELs could benefit from multi-tiered systems of support.
One such system for supporting students, including ELs, is
Response to Intervention (RTI). RTI is not an EL program
and may not substitute for one. However, RTI can provide
additional systems of support for ELs in areas such as
assessment, screening, intervention, and monitoring,
which when combined can help improve instructional
outcomes for ELs (Brown & Sanford, 2011; Sáenz, 2008).
Educators, including teachers, need tools that help
them continually monitor students’ progress and adjust
instructional strategies to target and support students’
needs. Regularly monitoring ELs’ progress in ELP and
content knowledge allows teachers to target instruction
and provide additional support services, as needed. For
ELP, LEAs must assess ELs at least annually using a valid
*This chapter has been updated to reect changes in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds
Act of 2015 (ESSA). The U.S. Department of Education has released a non-regulatory guidance (NRG) about ESSA and ELs that is available at
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/essatitleiiiguidenglishlearners92016.pdf. The text of the ESEA, as amended by ESSA, can be found at
http://www2.ed.gov/documents/essa-act-of-1965.pdf.
Updated November 2016
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
2
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
and reliable assessment that is aligned to state ELP
standards. In addition, periodic formative assessments
of ELP help inform instruction and support ELs’ English
language development throughout the school year.
EL progress should inform EL program evaluations. See
Chapter 9 of this tool kit for information on evaluating the
effectiveness of an LEA’s EL program.
EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS
KEY POINTS
• LEAs must document that an EL has
demonstrated English proficiency using a valid
and reliable ELP assessment that tests all four
language domains.
• Students exiting from EL status must be
monitored for at least two years, to ensure
that (1) they have not been prematurely exited;
(2) any academic deficits incurred as a result
of participating in the EL program have been
remedied; and (3) they are meaningfully
participating in the standard program of
instruction comparable to their never-EL peers.
• In addition, the ESEA now requires LEAs
to report on the number and percentage of
former ELs meeting state academic standards
for four years.
SEAs must use valid and reliable ELP assessments that
te
st all four language domains (listening, speaking,
reading, and writing) to ensure that ELs have achieved
English prociency. The prociency score on the ELP
assessment must be set at a level that enables students to
effectively participate in grade-level content instruction
in English without EL services. This does not mean that
students must score procient on a content assessment
(e.g., reading/language arts) in order to exit EL status;
indeed, there are never-EL students who are in the
general education program who do not score procient on
these content assessments.
SEAs may use additional objective criteria related
to English prociency to decide if an EL who scores
procient on the ELP assessment is ready to exit EL
services. However, these additional criteria may not
substitute for a procient score on a valid and reliable
ELPassessment.
Ex
iting EL students either too soon or too late raises
civil rights concerns. EL students who are exited too
soon are denied access to EL services while EL students
who are exited too late may be denied access to parts
of the general curriculum. Denied or delayed access to
the general curriculum can impede academic growth and
contribute to a higher risk of dropping out of school.
After students have exited an EL program, LEAs must
monitor their academic progress for at least two years. If
an exited EL is not progressing academically as expected
and monitoring suggests a persistent language need,
LEAs should re-test the student’s ELP with a valid,
reliable, and grade-appropriate ELP test to see if the
student must be offered additional language assistance
services. In no case should re-testing of an exited
student’s ELP be prohibited. If the student is reentered
into EL services, however, the LEA should document the
reasons why and the parent’s consent to reentry. If SEAs
or LEAs find that changes to exit criteria or procedures are
necessary, SEAs and LEAs need to provide teachers and
staff with appropriate training.
ESSA UPDATE
Under Title III of the ESEA, as amended by
ESSA [Section 3121(a)(5)], LEAs must report
on the number and percentage of former ELs
meeting state standards for four years. For
more information, see sectionJ of the NRG (U.S.
Department of Education, Ofce of Elementary
and Secondary Education, 2016). In addition, the
ESEA [Section 3113(b)(2)] requires standardized
statewide entrance and exit procedures for ELs.
Th
e following checklist is intended to assist with tracking
the progress of ELs and exiting ELs. The checklist
provides suggested questions only. Schools and LEAs
should check their SEA’s policies and federal guidance to
ensure compliance.
Tracking the Progress of ELs
Are all ELs, including those who have opted out of EL
programs and services, monitored at least annually
for progress in achieving ELP and acquiring content
knowledge?
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
3
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Are LEAs monitoring ELs’ progress toward established
benchmarks for expected growth in ELP and the
grade-level content areas and assisting students who
are not making timely progress towards those goals?
Does the SEA monitor LEAs to ensure that they are
both providing ELs meaningful access to grade-level
core content instruction and remedying any academic
decits in a timely manner?
Has the SEA developed ELP standards and ensured
that LEAs are implementing those ELP standards to
inform EL programs, services, and assessments?
Exiting ELs
Are procedures in place to ensure that students exit
from EL programs, services, and status only after
they demonstrate English prociency on a valid and
reliable ELP assessment?
What processes are in place to monitor the progress of
former ELs? Do LEAs monitor, for at least two years,
the academic progress of students who have exited EL
status to ensure that they have not been prematurely
exited and that they are meaningfully participating in
the LEA’s standard educational programs comparable
to their never-EL peers?
MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS
FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
TOOLS
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
4
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
The U.S. Department of Education does not mandate or prescribe particular curricula, lesson plans, assessments, or other
instruments in this tool kit. This tool kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to some resources created and
maintained by other public and private organizations. This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included
here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents, advocates, administrators, and other interested parties
may find helpful to use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy,
relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does not reflect their
importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links verified on August 25, 2015.
The following tools are intended to assist schools, LEAs, and SEAs in establishing rigorous monitoring systems that
include benchmarks for expected growth and taking appropriate steps to assist students who are not adequately
progressing towards those benchmarks.
Tool #1, Monitoring English Learner Progress in English
Language Proficiency, is an example of a monitoring form
that can help determine if an EL is making appropriate
progress, or needs additional support to attain English
proficiency.
Tool #2, Monitoring English Learner Progress in Core
Content Areas, is an example of a form that can help track
an EL’s educational progress in the content areas.
Tool #3, Digital Progress Monitoring, provides examples
of five digital systems available online to monitor ELs’
progress.
Tool #4, Resources for Planning and Self-Assessments,
provides reference tools, materials, and resources from
the Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
5
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
TOOL #1
MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS IN
ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
Educators need tools that will help them continually monitor students’ progress and adjust instructional strategies to
target and support students’ language needs. Such tools must be used in addition to, rather than in lieu of, the annual
ELP assessment.
EL LANGUAGE PROGRESS MONITORING FORMS
The following tool is used with permission from Colorín Colorado’s ELL Starter Kit for Educators: Tools for Monitoring
Language Skills. It may be helpful to use these forms to monitor ELs in the classroom, to determine if their progress is
appropriate or whether they need additional support to attain English proficiency. The form below is an excerpt from
a larger document. Additional monitoring forms for oral communication skills, reading and fluency skills, and use of
comprehension strategies can be found in the starter kit (link provided below). The forms also may help in planning and
communicating with parents and other teachers.
Source: Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). ELL Starter Kit For Educators: Tools for monitoring language skills. Washington, DC: AFT. Retrieved from
http://www.colorincolorado.org/pdfs/guides/ellstarterkit.pdf
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
6
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
TOOL #2
MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS
IN CORE CONTENT AREAS
LEAs should create rigorous monitoring systems that include benchmarks for expected growth in acquiring academic
content knowledge during the academic year and take appropriate steps to assist students who are not adequately
progressing towards those goals. Classroom teachers and EL specialists should gather data on EL progress and
collaborate based on this data to ensure that the EL is growing at an acceptable rate in both English language
acquisition and content knowledge.
CONTENT MONITORING FORM FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS OR
FORMER ENGLISH LEARNERS
The following tool was developed by the National Clearinghouse on English Language Acquisition (NCELA) based on
tools used by SEAs and LEAs. This form may be useful to track an EL’s educational progress during the school year. The
tool is meant to be used at team meetings in which classroom teachers and EL specialists (1) review each student’s
progress in mastering academic content standards and meeting benchmarks, and (2) determine the support and services
an EL may need. This form could also be modified for use in tracking the progress of former ELs during the required two-
year monitoring period.
STUDENT INFORMATION
Student Name Date of Birth
School Name
Date Entered U.S. Schools
Home Language
STATE CONTENT ASSESSMENT TEST SCORES
Year: Results:
Year: Results:
Year: Results:
GRADES
Year: Grades:
Year: Grades:
Year: Grades:
Is the student on track to graduate on time?
Continued on next page
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
7
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
CURRENT YEAR BENCHMARKS
Subject
Term 1
Benchmark
Term 2
Benchmark
Term 3
Benchmark
Term 4
Benchmark
English/Language
Arts
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Mathematics
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Science
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Social
Studies
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Other
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
Above grade level
On grade level
Below grade level
TOOL #2: MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS IN CORE CONTENT AREAS (CONTINUED)
Continued on next page
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
8
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
TEACHER OBSERVATIONS
Rating Scale: 1: Never 2: Seldom 3: Sometimes 4: Often 5: Always
Characteristic
Term
1
Term
2
Term
3
Term
4
Completes class assignments on time
Participates effectively in class discussions
Works independently
Completes homework assignments
Displays effort
ATTENDANCE AND TARDY DATA
Term 1 Term 2 Term 3 Term 4
Attendance
Tardy
SUMMARY AND ACTION STEPS
Summary
1. Student meets grade-level academic standards or benchmarks.
2. Student does not meet grade-level academic standards or benchmarks. English language
prociency is not a reason the student is not meeting grade-level academic standards or
benchmarks.
3. Student does not meet grade-level academic standards or benchmarks. Limited English language
prociency in one or more language domains is a reason the student is not meeting grade-level
academic standards or benchmarks.
Action Steps:
Date: Person Completing the Form and Title:
Team Members:
Source: Zantal-Wiener, K., & Bell, T. (2015). Content monitoring form for English learners or former English learners. Silver Spring, MD: National
Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/les/forms/content_monitoring_form.pdf
TOOL #2: MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS IN CORE CONTENT AREAS (CONTINUED)
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
9
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Continued on next page
TOOL #3
DIGITAL PROGRESS MONITORING
There are numerous Web-based tools available to monitor students’ academic progress. Each tool has a wide range of
functionality, including the ability to monitor an EL’s placement and progress. Some systems generate individualized
lesson plans and assignments and chart progress based on assessment results and the proficiency levels of all students.
Some additional considerations may include accessibility for parents and staff with disabilities as well as availability of
parent information in multiple languages.
SAMPLE DIGITAL MONITORING SYSTEMS
NCELA developed an alphabetical list of some data monitoring systems used by SEAs, LEAs, and individual schools. The
chart below briefly describes the general features of the systems and, if applicable, features specifically for ELs. It is
important to note that the U.S. Department of Education does not endorse any particular system, product, or program
for data monitoring.
Program General Features EL-Specific Features
Blackboard/Blackboard Engage
(previously Edline)
http://www.blackboard.com/platforms/
engage/overview.aspx
SEA, LEA, and school-wide student
management system:
• tracks attendance
• tracks enrollment
• creates class lists
• produces grade reports
• creates report cards
• provides parental access
• developed in accordance with the
internationally recognized Web
Content Accessibility (WCAG)
Guidelines 2.0, Level AA, as well as
the Section 508 standards in the
United States
• Has the capacity to track progress
for individual EL students, groups
of EL students, and former
ELstudents
Edmodo*
https://www.edmodo.com/
SEA, LEA, school-wide and
classroom-wide instructional system:
• creates assignments
• creates quizzes
• assists with lesson planning
• has online professional learning
communities (PLCs)
• Has the capacity to track progress
for individual EL students, groups
of EL students, and former
ELstudents
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
10
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Program General Features EL-Specific Features
ELLevation*
http://ellevationeducation.com/
SEA, LEA, and school-wide student
management system:
• provides suggestions for
differentiation
• includes individualized EL
instructional plans
• sets goals based on individual data
• has a progress dashboard to view
specic topics and areas
• recommends accommodations
based on student data and
characteristics
• Has the capacity to track progress
for individual EL students, groups
of EL students, and ELs in the
required two-year monitoring
phase
• Title III Parent letters in 28
languages
Infinite Campus*
https://www.innitecampus.com/
SEA, LEA, and school-wide student
management system:
• tracks attendance
• tracks enrollment
• creates class lists
• creates assignments
• produces grade reports
• creates report cards
• provides parental access
• Has the capacity to track progress
for individual EL students, groups
of EL students, and former
ELstudents
Powerschool*
http://www.pearsonschoolsystems.com/
products/powerschool/
SEA, LEA, and school-wide student
management system:
• tracks attendance
• tracks enrollment
• creates class lists
• creates assignments
• produces grade reports
• creates report cards
• provides parental access
• Has the capacity to track progress
for individual EL students, groups
of EL students, and former
ELstudents
*Vendor websites do not state explicitly whether programs are WCAG 2.0 or 508 compliant. Contact vendor directly for more information.
Source: Bell, T. (2015). Sample digital monitoring systems. Silver Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Re-
trieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/les/forms/digital_progress_monitoring.pdf
TOOL #3: DIGITAL PROGRESS MONITORING (CONTINUED)
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
11
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
TOOL #4
RESOURCES FOR PLANNING AND SELF-ASSESSMENTS
In addition to the Dear Colleague Letter regarding EL students published on January 7, 2015 (http://www2.ed.gov/about/
offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf), OCR’s website contains resource materials from 1999 that may assist
LEAs in serving their EL students. These reference tools, materials, and resources address procedures for determining
when students no longer need EL services, and must be used consistently with the guidance on monitoring and exiting
ELs in the 2015 EL Dear Colleague Letter.
Topic Description URL
Progression of Student
Through EL Program
Flowchart describes an EL’s progression through
an EL program. The steps include (1) enrollment
in a school; (2) identification as a potential EL;
(3) assessment to determine need for services;
(4)provision of appropriate services; (5) transition
from services; and (6) monitoring of the former EL
to gauge ability to participate meaningfully in the
general education program.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/cprogression.html
Flowchart describes a district’s responsibility for
providing EL services, including transitioning out of
services and monitoring former EL students.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/coverview.html
Transition from
EL Services
Questions that districts may use as a checklist
for developing a description of the transition
procedures.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/transition.html
Flowchart describes criteria to determine when
EL students no longer need EL services, and if a
student is ready to transition from services.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/ctransition.html
Monitoring Former
EL Students
Questions that districts may use to develop a
description of the procedures for monitoring former
EL students.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/cmonitoring.html
Flowchart describes processes for monitoring a
transitioned former EL student and what to do if the
EL is not meaningfully participating in the district’s
educational program.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/
list/ocr/ell/cmonitoring.html
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Ofce for Civil Rights. (n.d.) Resource materials for planning and self-assessments. Retrieved from http://
www2.ed.gov/about/ofces/list/ocr/ell/index.html
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
12
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS
FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
RESOURCES
The U.S. Department of Education does not mandate or prescribe particular standards, curricula, lesson plans, assessments,
or other instruments in this tool kit. This tool kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and
maintained by other public and private organizations. This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included
here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents, advocates, administrators, and other interested parties
may find helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy,
relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to resources does not reflect
their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links included here were
verified on August 25, 2015. The list of resources will be updated and revised in the future.
Abedi, J. (2008, Fall). Classication system for English
language learners: Issues and recommendations.
Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(3).
Retrieved from http://education.ucdavis.edu/sites/
main/les/LEP_Class_EMIP_New.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to “reveal issues
concerning the validity of the current EL classication
system”. Past studies show inconsistencies in how
states, LEAs, and schools within states determine
English language prociency and dene ELs. This
paper suggests using pre-existing criteria, such as
home language surveys and standardized language
assessments, in a step-by-step process to ensure
consistency in the classication of ELs.
Alvarez, L., Ananda, S., Walqui, A., Sato, E., & Rabinowitz,
S. (2014). Focusing formative assessment on the needs
of English language learners. San Francisco, CA:
WestEd. Retrieved from http://www.wested.org/wp-
content/les_mf/1391626953FormativeAssessment_
report5.pdf
This paper examines ways for educators to use
formative assessment in improving pedagogical
and instructional outcomes for ELs. The authors
“highlight the opportunities and challenges inherent
in integrating formative assessment into the
instruction for ELL students [ELs]”. They believe that
teachers must simultaneously assess ELs’ content and
language skills to gauge academic growth.
Assessment and Accountability Comprehensive Center.
(2009). Framework for high-quality English language
prociency standards and assessments. San Francisco,
CA: WestEd. Retrieved from http://les.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/ED524106.pdf
This framework provides criteria for high-quality
ELP standards and aligned assessments using
research and practice. Intended primarily for SEAs,
the framework suggests a cross-disciplinary process
for using the criteria to either “1) engage in an
evaluation of states’ existing ELP standards and
assessments, and their implementation, or 2) oversee
the development and implementation of new ELP
standards and assessments.”
August, D., Estrada, J., & Boyle, A. (2012). Supporting
English language learners: A pocket guide for state and
district leaders. Washington, DC: American Institutes
for Research. Retrieved from http://www.air.org/
sites/default/les/downloads/report/ELL_Pocket_
Guide1_0.pdf
This guide provides research-based guidelines to
support state and district leaders in implementing
reforms for ELs outlined by the U.S. Department of
Education in 2011. The reforms are broken into four
main principles: “1) achieving college- and career-
ready expectations for all students; 2) developing
differentiated recognition, accountability, and
support systems; 3) supporting effective instruction
and leadership; and 4) reducing duplication and
unnecessary burden.” This guide “focuses on the
implementation of reforms related to ELLs [ELs]
across the rst three principles.”
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
13
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Bell, T. (2015). Sample digital monitoring systems. Silver
Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English
Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from
http://ncela.ed.gov/les/forms/digital_progress_
monitoring.pdf
This tool is an alphabetical list of some data-
monitoring systems used by SEAs, LEAs, and
individual schools. The tool describes the general
features of the systems, and if applicable, features
specically for ELs.
Brown, J. E., & Sanford, A. (2011, March). RTI for English
language learners: Appropriately using screening and
progress monitoring tools to improve instructional
outcomes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, Ofce of Special Education Programs,
National Center on Response to Intervention.
Retrieved from http://www.rti4success.org/sites/
default/les/rtiforells.pdf
This brief provides a framework for using Response
to Intervention (RTI) methods with students who are
ELs from Hispanic backgrounds. Highlights include
guiding appropriate screening, progress monitoring,
and goal setting to promote English literacy, as well
as the need for system-wide process and professional
development plans to ensure educational equity for
ELs and other diverse student populations.
Callahan, R. M. (2005, Summer). Tracking and high school
English learners: Limiting opportunity to learn.
American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328.
Retrieved from http://www.utexas.edu/cola/orgs/
etag/_les/pdfs/articles/2005/Callahan%202005.pdf
This study examines the effects of “track placement
and English prociency on secondary English learners’
academic achievement.” The study also controls
for students’ previous schooling and how long they
attended school in the United States. Authors nd
that “track placement was a better predictor of
achievement than prociency in English.”
Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). Assessment of English language
learners [Webcast]. Retrieved from http://www.
colorincolorado.org/webcasts/assessment/
This 45-minute webcast discusses various methods for
assessing ELs. Topics covered include “performance-
based standardized assessments; assessment as a
tool for informing instruction; use of assessment to
reinforce reading comprehension; and student self-
assessment and self-monitoring.” The author also
provides ideas on how EL and mainstream teachers
can collaborate to more effectively assessELs.
Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). English language learners with
learning disabilities [Webcast]. Retrieved from http://
www.colorincolorado.org/webcasts/disabilities/
This webcast “discusses effective assessment and
instruction strategies for ELs with learning disabilities
(LD).” Specic strategies discussed include “assessing
children regularly and carefully,” “basing instructional
design upon assessment data,” “having consistency
across languages of instruction,” “providing
opportunities to develop social language skills,” and
“focusing intensively on high-level vocabulary and
comprehensive skills.” This webcast also provides
suggestions for involvement of parents of ELs with LD
in their children’s schools.
Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). ELL starter kit for educators: Tools
for monitoring language skills. Washington, DC: AFT.
Retrieved from http://www.colorincolorado.org/pdfs/
guides/ellstarterkit.pdf
This starter kit for English learners provides “high-
quality, research-based instructional information on
what educators can do to help their ELLs succeed
academically.” The kit contains worksheets to monitor
students’ conversation skills, uency, reading, and
comprehension. It was developed for Spanish-
speaking students and also contains a short Spanish-
to-English translation guide.
Cook, G., Boals, T., & Lundberg, T. (2011, November).
Academic achievement for English learners: What can
we reasonably expect? Kappan, 93(3), 66-69. Retrieved
from https://www.wida.us/get.aspx?id=485
This article addresses the journey to English
prociency for ELs and the relationship between
academic language and academic content prociency.
Research suggests that comparisons between ELP and
academic content prociency should be part of the
process that states use to dene English prociency. It
also suggests that representations of EL achievement
must be sensitive to the fact that ELs progress at
different rates.
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
14
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Cook, H. G., Linquanti, R., Chinen, M., & Jung, H. (2012).
National evaluation of Title III implementation
supplemental report—Exploring approaches to setting
English language prociency performance criteria and
monitoring English learner progress. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education; Ofce of Planning,
Evaluation and Policy Development; Policy and
Program Studies Service. Retrieved from http://
www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/title-iii/implementation-
supplemental-report.pdf
This report describes “several empirical methods
and conceptual or theoretical rationales” to assist in
creating meaningful ELP performance standards. The
authors discuss various methodological approaches
that may assist educators to “1) determine a
meaningful ELP performance standard; 2) establish
a realistic, empirically anchored time frame for
attaining a given ELP performance standard; and
3) take into account an EL’s ELP level when setting
academic progress and prociency expectations.”
de Jong, E. J. (2004, September). After exit: Academic
achievement patterns of former English language
learners. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(50).
Retrieved from http://les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
E J853517. pdf
This study examines the achievement patterns in
English language arts, math, and science of former
ELs who attended a bilingual and an ESL program.
Results show that “4th grade students more closely
paralleled non-ELL [non-EL] students’ achievement
patterns than 8th grade students, particularly for the
BE [bilingual education] students.” The authors nd
that “exit grade does emerge as an important variable
to take into consideration in setting exit guidelines.”
Gallegos, C. and Wise, D. (2011, September). Leadership
for English learners: Challenges and questions.
Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching
and Program Development, 23, 37-55. Retrieved from
http://les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ965168.pdf
This article discusses decision points to reclassify
students as uent and procient in English. The study
examines “the achievement gap between English
learners and the overall student population and the
reclassication of English learners as procient in
English in schools across three California counties.”
Gwynne, J., Stitziel Pareja, A., Ehrlich, S. B., & Allensworth,
E. (2012, May). What matters for staying on-track and
graduating in Chicago public schools: A focus on English
language learners. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved
from https://ccsr.uchicago.edu/sites/default/les/
publications/ELL%20Report_0.pdf
This report analyzes “ninth-grade course performance
indicators.” These indicators are seen as good
predictive measures for high school graduation
amongst the overall student population. The authors
examine whether these indicators have the same
predictive ability with ELs. The authors differentiate
between long-term ELs, students identied as ELs
before sixth grade, and new ELs, students identied
as ELs after the sixth grade.
Kim, J. (2011). Relationships among and between ELL status,
demographic characteristics, enrollment history, and
school persistence (CRESST Report 810). Los Angeles,
CA: University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA),
Graduate School of Education and Information Studies,
National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards,
and Student Testing (CRESST). Retrieved from
http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R810.pdf
“This report examines enrollment history,
achievement gaps, and persistence in school for
ELL students [ELs] and reclassied ELL students as
compared to non-ELL students. … [R]esults show
that after accounting for academic achievement,
behavioral issues, background, and district contexts,
the longer a student is designated as an EL, the more
likely the student will be to drop out [of school].”
Kim, J., & Herman, J. L. (2010). When to exit ELL students:
Monitoring success and failure in mainstream classrooms
after ELLs’ reclassication (CRESST Report 779). Los
Angeles, CA: UCLA, Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies; CRESST. Retrieved from https://
www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R779.pdf
This study “assesses the validity of existing systems
in terms of gross consequences of reclassication of
ELs.” Authors investigated the academic outcomes
of reclassied ELs in general education classrooms
in a local control state. They found that “ELL [EL]
students tend to make a smooth transition upon
their reclassication and keep pace in mainstream
classrooms.”
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
15
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Kim, J. & Herman, J. L. (2012). Understanding patterns and
precursors of ELL success subsequent to reclassication
(CRESST Report 818). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA,
Graduate School of Education and Information
Studies; CRESST. Retrieved from http://les.eric.
ed.gov/fulltext/ED540604.pdf
This study focuses on ELs who were reclassied after
they nished elementary school. Findings reveal that
there was “no evidence of former ELLs [ELs] falling
behind in academic growth after reclassication,
either relative to their non-ELL [non-EL] peers or in
terms of absolute academic prociency levels.”
Linquanti, R., & Cook, H. G. (2013). Toward a “common
denition of English learner”: Guidance for states and
state assessment consortia in dening and addressing
policy and technical issues and options. Washington,
DC: Council of Chief State School Ofcers. Retrieved
from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2013/
Toward_a_Common_Denition_2013.pdf
This paper outlines key issues in dening ELs and
discusses specic policy and technical options
through a four-state framework. The framework
captures the following key criteria and processes to
dene ELs: (1) identifying potential ELs, (2) classifying
a student as an EL, (3) establishing EL performance
standards on state or consortium ELP tests to assess
EL prociency, and (4) using multiple exit criteria to
reclassify ELs.
Linquanti, R. (2001). The redesignation dilemma: Challenges
and choices in fostering meaningful accountability for
English learners (Policy Report 2001-1). Santa Barbara,
CA: University of California Linguistic Minority
Research Institute. Retrieved from http://www.
wested.org/online_pubs/redesignation.pdf
This policy report focuses on issues surrounding
redesignation or reclassication of ELs from limited
to uent English procient. The authors provide
state and local administrators and policymakers with
guidance for reviewing their current reclassication
policies and procedures.
Musgrove, M. (2011, January). A response to intervention
(RTI) process cannot be used to delay-deny an evaluation
for eligibility under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) [Memorandum]. Washington,
DC: Department of Education Ofce of Special
Education Programs. Retrieved from https://www2.
ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/osep11-
07rtimemo.pdf
This memorandum aims to clarify the relationship
between Response to Intervention and evaluations
pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA). It suggests examination of procedures and
practices in states to ensure any LEA implementing
RTI strategies is appropriately using RTI and not
delaying or denying timely initial evaluations of
children suspected of having a disability.
National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). (2014,
June). State assessment decision-making processes for
ELLs with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/
OnlinePubs/briefs/brief09/brief09.html
This brief presents information on determining state
assessments for ELs with disabilities. Topics discussed
in the brief include: “(a) required assessment decision-
making processes, (b) experts’ recommendations
about assessment decisions for ELs with disabilities,
(c) resources available to guide assessment decisions,
(d) standards-based individualized education
programs, and (e) recommended participants on the
decision-making team.”
Sáenz, L. (2008, March). Using CBM to progress monitor
English language learners [Slide presentation].
Retrieved from National Center on Student Progress
Monitoring website, http://www.studentprogress.org/
doc/webinars/mar08webinarslides.pdf
This webinar consists of four sections, (1)
“Introductions and ELL Background,” (2) “PM with
CBM,” (3) “RTI and ELL,” and (4) “A Closer Look at
CBM in a RTI Model,” and describes the process of
how CBM and RTI assist with monitoring ELLs. It also
highlights the potential benets of using Curriculum-
Based Measurement (CBM) for monitoring EL progress
and using CBM within an RTI model.
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
16
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
U.S. Department of Education, Ofce for Civil Rights.
(2014, October). Dear colleague letter: Resource
comparability. (Guidance to ensure all students have
equal access to educational resources.) Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/ofces/list/ocr/letters/
colleague-resourcecomp-201410.pdf
This document provides detailed and concrete
information to educators on the standards set in
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including
information on the requirements for educational
resources; how OCR investigates resource disparities;
and what SEAs, LEAs, and schools can do to meet
their obligations to all students. Under Title VI,
SEAs, LEAs, and schools must not intentionally
treat students differently based on race, color, or
national origin in providing educational resources.
In addition, they must not implement policies or
practices that disproportionately affect students of
a particular race, color, or national origin, absent a
substantial justication. The law does not require
that all students receive exactly the same resources
to have an equal chance to learn and achieve. It does,
however, require that all students have equal access
to comparable resources in light of their educational
needs.
U.S. Department of Education, Ofce for Civil Rights, and
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2015, January).
Dear colleague letter: English learner students and
limited English procient parents. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/ofces/list/ocr/letters/
colleague-el-201501.pdf
This document provides guidance to assist SEAs,
LEAs, and all public schools in meeting their legal
obligations to ensure that ELs can participate
meaningfully and equally in educational programs
and services. This guidance provides an outline of the
legal obligations of SEAs and LEAs to ELs under the
civil rights laws. Additionally, the guidance discusses
compliance issues that frequently arise in OCR and
DOJ investigations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act,
and offers approaches that SEAs and LEAs may use
to meet their federal obligations to ELs. A discussion
of how SEAs and LEAs can implement their Title III
grants and subgrants in a manner consistent with
these civil rights obligations is included. Finally, the
guidance discusses the federal obligation to ensure
that limited English procient parents and guardians
have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and school-
related information.
U.S. Department of Education, Ofce of Elementary
and Secondary Education. (2016). Non-regulatory
guidance: English Learners and Title III of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),
as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/
essatitleiiiguidenglishlearners92016.pdf
This guidance provides state and local educational
agencies (SEAs and LEAs) with information to assist
them in meeting their obligations under Title III of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA),
as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015
(ESSA). This guidance also provides members of the
public with information about their rights under this
law and other relevant laws and regulations.
U.S. Department of Education, Ofce of Special Education
and Rehabilitative Services. (2014). Questions and
answers regarding the inclusion of English learners with
disabilities in English language prociency assessments
and Title III annual measurable achievement objectives.
Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/ofces/
list/osers/osep/policy.html#elp-qa
This document provides guidance on the inclusion of
ELs with disabilities in ELP assessments under TitlesI
and III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965, as amended. These are assessments designed
to measure the progress of ELs in attaining English
language prociency.
Western Oregon University, The Teaching Research
Institute, Education Evaluation Center. (2007).
Guidelines and resources for the Oregon Department
of Education: Special education assessment process for
culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students (Rev.
ed.). Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Education,
Ofce of Student Learning & Partnerships. Retrieved
from https://www.wou.edu/tri/eec/CLD.pdf
This manual provides best practices for the special
education assessment process for culturally and
linguistically diverse (CLD) students. The manual
includes an “integrated assessment paradigm” and
practice, expanded terminologies and denitions,
emerging practices in RTI, as well as revised
assessment tools and resources.
The EL Tool Kit contains examples of, adaptations of, and links to resources created and maintained by other public and private organizations.
This information is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples of the many resources that educators, parents,
advocates, administrators, and other interested parties may nd helpful and use at their discretion. The U.S. Department of Education does not
control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links to items does
not reect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
17
You can access Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services
at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Updated November 2016
Wolf, M. K., Herman, J. L., Bachman, L. F., Bailey, A. L., &
Grifn, N. (2008). Issues in assessing English language
learners: English language prociency measures
and accommodation uses—Literature review, Part 1
of3 (CRESST Report 731). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA,
Graduate School of Education and Information
Studies, CRESST. Retrieved from http://les.eric.
ed.gov/fulltext/ED502283.pdf
This literature review is “the rst component of a
series on assessing ELL students [ELs], containing
pertinent literature related to assessing ELs. The
areas being reviewed include validity theory, the
construct of ELP assessments, and the effects of
accommodations in the assessment of ELL students’
content knowledge.”
Wolf, M. K., Kao, J., Grifn, N., Herman, J. L., Bachman, P.
L., Chang, S. M., & Farnsworth, T. (2008). Issues in
assessing English language learners: English language
prociency measures and accommodation uses—
Practice review, Part 2 of 3 (CRESST Report 732). Los
Angeles, CA: UCLA, Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies, CRESST. Retrieved from http://
les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502284.pdf
This practice review is the second component
of the series on assessing ELs, providing a
comprehensive picture of states’ current policies
related to EL assessment. The areas reviewed
include “the procedures of ELL [EL] identication
and re-designation, the characteristics of English
language prociency assessments, including validity
information, and the use of accommodations in the
assessment of content knowledge.”
Wolf, M. K., Herman, J. L., Bachman, L. F., Bailey, A. L.,
& Grifn, N. (2008). Recommendations for assessing
English language learners: English language prociency
measures and accommodation uses — Recommendations
report, Part 3 of 3 (CRESST Report 737). Los Angeles,
CA: UCLA, Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies, CRESST. Retrieved from http://
les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502273.pdf
Third in a series on assessing ELs, this report
presents a set of “guidelines and recommendations
for practitioners to use as a resource to improve EL
assessment systems.”
Wolf, M. K., Herman, J. L., & Dietel, R. (2010, Spring).
Improving the validity of English language learner
assessment systems (Policy Brief 10). Los Angeles, CA:
UCLA, Graduate School of Education and Information
Studies, CRESST. Retrieved from http://eric.
ed.gov/?q=reclassication+ells&ft=on&id=ED520528
This brief identies ve considerations for
improving the validity of assessment systems for
EL students. The authors’ recommendations include
“improvements in: (1) English Language Prociency
standards and assessments; (2) ELL [EL] Classication
and Reclassication; (3) Content Assessments for ELL
students [ELs]; (4) ELL [EL] Test Accommodations;
and (5) Teacher Capacity and ELL students’ [ELs]
Opportunity to Learn.”
Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Content monitoring form for
English learners or former English learners. Silver
Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English
Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from
http://ncela.ed.gov/les/forms/content_monitoring_
form.pdf
This tool, based on tools used by SEAs and LEAs,
may be useful to track an EL’s educational progress
during the school year. The tool may be used at
team meetings in which classroom teachers and
EL specialists review each student’s progress in
mastering academic content standards and meeting
benchmarks and to determine the support and
services an EL may need. This form could also be
modified for use in tracking the progress of former
ELs during the required two-year monitoring period.
To access these and other relevant resources,
and for additional information about ELs,
please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.
