Section 4.2: Collaborating with ESL Staff and Assessing ELLs

Collaboration Models for General Education and ESL/Bilingual Teachers

To support English Language Learners (ELLs), general education teachers must collaborate with English as a Second Language (ESL) and bilingual specialists. This collaboration ensures that language instruction is integrated into content lessons and that students receive consistent, targeted support.

Co-Teaching Frameworks

Co-teaching involves two or more professionals planning, delivering, and evaluating instruction for a diverse group of students in a shared space. Effective models include:

• One Teach, One Observe / One Assist: One teacher takes lead instruction while the other observes student behaviors or provides individual assistance. Best practice tip: The lead and support roles should rotate regularly so that the ESL teacher is not viewed by students as merely an assistant.
• Parallel Teaching: The class is divided in half. Both teachers teach the same content simultaneously to smaller groups. This lowers the student-teacher ratio and increases opportunities for student participation and language production.
• Station Teaching: Students rotate through different stations or learning centers. Each teacher leads a station, and other stations feature independent or collaborative work. This allows for focused, small-group instruction on specific skills.
• Alternative (Differentiated) Teaching: One teacher manages the large group while the other works with a small group of students for pre-teaching, re-teaching, enrichment, or specialized language support.
• Team Teaching (Tag-Team): Both teachers deliver instruction together to the whole class, exchanging roles and presenting content cohesively. This requires a high level of trust and co-planning.

Co-Planning and Consultation

Co-planning is the foundation of successful co-teaching. General education and ESL teachers must align on:

• Identifying language barriers in upcoming content units.
• Creating dual-focused objectives (content and language).
• Designing formative assessments that accurately measure understanding regardless of language limits.
• Determining appropriate instructional scaffolds.

---

Assessing English Language Learners

Assessment must be fair, valid, and aligned with legal regulations. The key challenge in assessing ELLs is distinguishing between their understanding of content and their level of English language proficiency.

NYS Regulations Part 154: Legal and Procedural Framework

In New York State, Commissioner's Regulations Part 154 governs the services and education of ELLs. Key requirements include:

1. Identification Process:
   • Home Language Questionnaire (HLQ): Administered to all newly enrolling students to identify if a language other than English is spoken at home.
   • Informal Interview: Conducted by qualified personnel in English and the student's home language.
   • NYSITELL (NYS Identification Test for ELLs): If the HLQ and interview indicate a non-English background, the NYSITELL is administered to determine the student's initial English proficiency level.
2. Annual Assessment (NYSESLAT):
   • The New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT) is administered annually to all identified ELLs to assess their progress in English language acquisition (Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing). A student exits ELL status by scoring "Commanding" or "Expanding" (with additional criteria).
3. Testing Accommodations:
   • On state assessments, ELLs are legally entitled to specific accommodations, which must be implemented:
     • Time Extension: Typically time-and-a-half.
     • Bilingual Dictionaries and Glossaries: Word-to-word translation dictionaries (without definitions or pictures) in the student's native language.
     • Separate Location: Administering the test in a quiet, distraction-free environment.
     • Third-Party Translation/Oral Translation: For subjects other than English Language Arts (e.g., Science, Math), tests may be provided in translated editions, or directions/questions may be read aloud in the native language if a translated edition is unavailable.

---

Formative and Summative Content Assessments

To assess what an ELL knows about science, history, or math, teachers must reduce the linguistic load of the assessment:

• Differentiated Assessment Formats: Allow students to demonstrate content knowledge through non-linguistic or low-linguistic means, such as:
  • Labeling diagrams or models (e.g., labeling the water cycle).
  • Ordering steps in a process (e.g., sorting historical events chronologically using pictures).
  • Creating visual presentations, posters, or models.
  • Orally explaining concepts to the teacher or bilingual peer.
  • Using word banks, matching exercises, or fill-in-the-blank questions with choices.
• Assessing Content vs. Language: When grading content assessments, teachers should focus on the accuracy of the concepts, not spelling, grammar, or sentence structure, unless language mechanics are the direct object of the lesson.

---

Distinguishing Language Acquisition from Learning Disabilities

A critical professional responsibility is preventing the misidentification of ELLs for special education services:

• Under-identification: Assuming a student's lack of progress is solely due to the language barrier, thereby delaying necessary intervention for a real learning disability.
• Over-identification: Referring a student to special education because their slow rate of English acquisition is misconstrued as a cognitive impairment or learning disability.
• Key Diagnostic Principles:
  • L1 and L2 Analysis: A true learning disability will manifest in both the student's native language (L1) and English (L2). If a student has age-appropriate reading and cognitive skills in their native language but struggles in English, the issue is language acquisition, not a disability.
  • Socio-Cultural Context: Assess the student's educational background. Have they experienced interrupted formal education (SIFE)? How long have they been in the country? Consistent schooling and exposure to instruction must be considered before concluding a student has a disability.

---

Educator Scenario: Collaborative Assessment Design

Mr. Thompson, a high school science teacher, and Ms. Kim, an ESL specialist, are co-planning a unit test on genetics for a biology class containing several intermediate-level ELLs. The standard unit test consists of multiple-choice questions with dense phrasing and three essay questions requiring students to write complex genetic explanations.

Ineffective approach: Mr. Thompson gives the ELLs the same test and grades them down for incomplete essays, or Ms. Kim pulls the ELLs out to translate the test during class time without prior co-planning, leading to confusion.

Effective, collaborative approach: Mr. Thompson and Ms. Kim work together to adapt the test:

1. They simplify the linguistic complexity of the multiple-choice question stems without changing the scientific vocabulary or concepts.
2. They replace one essay question with a Punnett square diagram that students must fill out and label, along with a short, sentence-frame-supported description: "Based on the Punnett square, there is a ____% chance the offspring will have ________ because both parents carry the ________ allele."
3. They allow students to use a word-to-word bilingual science glossary during the exam.
4. Ms. Kim pulls a small group of ELLs during a co-planned review session to pre-teach the test directions and clarify academic verbs (e.g., identify, explain, compare).

---

Common NYSTCE EAS Exam Traps

• Treating ESL Teachers as Aides: Assigning the ESL specialist to walk around the room and translate for students, or having them sit in the back grading papers. Correct Practice: Treat ESL specialists as equal instructional partners. Leverage their expertise through co-planning, co-teaching, and sharing lead instruction roles.
• Delaying Intervention: Waiting multiple years for an ELL to master English before assessing them for potential special education services when clear warning signs of a learning disability exist. Correct Practice: Gather comprehensive data early. Look at the student's development and skills in their native language (L1), analyze their schooling history, and implement multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS/RtI) before formal referral.
• Grammar over Content: Grading down a science, history, or math assessment because an ELL has grammatical and spelling errors in their responses. Correct Practice: Grade the content knowledge. Focus on whether the student understands the underlying concepts. Separate language grading from content grading.
• Eliminating Accommodations: Denying state-allowed accommodations (like extra time or bilingual dictionaries) on classroom unit exams because "they need to practice for the real world under normal conditions." Correct Practice: Consistently provide testing accommodations. Accommodations must be integrated into daily classroom assessments so students are familiar with them and can accurately demonstrate their knowledge.