U.S. Department of Education

ENGLISH

LEARNER

TOOL KIT

for

State and Local Education

Agencies(SEAs and LEAs)
This document was prepared by the National Center for English Language Acquisition (NCELA), 

under Contract No. ED-ELA-12-C-0092, awarded to Leed Management Consulting, Inc. in Silver 

Spring, Maryland. Synergy Enterprises, Inc. also assisted with the publication of the document.

September 2015
ENGLISH LEARNER TOOL KIT

INTRODUCTION 

The U.S. Departments of Education (ED) and Justice (DOJ) released joint guidance on January 7, 2015, 

reminding states, school districts and schools of their obligations under federal law to ensure that English 

Learners have equal access to a high-quality education and the opportunity to achieve their full academic

potential. In this context, the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) at the U.S. Department of

Education is pleased to provide the English Learner (EL) Tool Kit, a companion to the Office for Civil Rights 

and Department of Justice “Dear Colleague Letter” (DCL). The tool kit is designed to help state and local

education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) in meeting their legal obligations to ELs and in providing all ELs with the 

support needed to attain English language proficiency while meeting college- and career-readiness standards. 

The EL Tool Kit is intended primarily for state, district, school administrators, and teachers, but may also inform

other stakeholders concerned with the education of ELs. 

The 10 chapters of the EL Tool Kit, published in serial form over the last number of months, correspond to the

10 sections of the January 2015 DCL. Each chapter provides (1) explanations of the civil rights and other legal

obligations to ELs; (2) checklists SEAs, LEAs, and schools can use as self-monitoring tools; (3) sample tools

that may be used or adapted for use in SEAs, LEAs, and schools to aid with compliance; and (4) additional

resources that may provide further relevant information and assistance.* The tool kit does not encompass all 

resources about EL services, only a sample. For the reader’s convenience, the tools and resources are free 

and accessible via the Internet.

The chapters of the tool kit are: 

Chapter 1: Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learner Students

Chapter 2: Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners with a Language Assistance Program

Chapter 3: Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program

Chapter 4: Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Meaningful Access to Core Curricular 

and Extracurricular Programs

Chapter 5: Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for and Avoiding the 

Unnecessary Segregation of English Learners

Chapter 6: Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities

Chapter 7: Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs

Chapter 8: Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Exiting English Learners from EL Programs and 

Services

Chapter 9: Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program

Chapter 10: Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with Limited English 

Proficient Parents

As part of the Department’s mission, OELA provides national leadership to help ensure that ELs and immigrant 

students attain English language proficiency and achieve rigorous academic standards, identify major issues 

affecting the education of ELs, and support state and local systemic reform efforts to improve EL achievement. 

This tool kit, used in conjunction with the January 2015 DCL, serves an important role in accomplishing these 

goals by helping SEAs and LEAs to better understand and meet their obligations to ELs. 

OELA led the development of the tool kit, with assistance from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of 

Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Institute for Education 

Sciences (IES), the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), and the Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), as well as staff from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The National 

Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA) also was integral to developing the tool kit. 

*No official endorsement by the Department of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred. For the 

reader’s convenience, the tool kit contains information about and from outside organizations, including URLs. Inclusion of such information does not constitute the 

Department’s endorsement.
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS 1

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR 

IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS

This is the first 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 Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Justice’s joint guidance, “English Learner Students 

and Limited English Proficient Parents,” which outlines SEAs’ and LEAs’ legal obligations to EL students under civil rights laws 

and other federal requirements.

IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL ENGLISH LEARNERS

KEY POINTS

• LEAs must identify in a timely manner EL

students in need of language assistance

services.

• The home language survey (HLS) is

the most common tool used to identify

potential ELs.

• An HLS must be administered effectively

to ensure accurate results.

LEAs must identify in a timely manner EL students 

in need of language assistance services. The home 

language survey (HLS) is a questionnaire given to 

parents or guardians that helps schools and LEAs identify 

which students are potential ELs and who will require 

assessment of their English language proficiency (ELP) 

to determine whether they are eligible for language 

assistance services. Many SEAs either require a statedeveloped HLS or provide a sample for LEAs to use; thus, 

it is advisable to check with the SEA about HLS guidance.

Research has shown that there is a great deal of variation 

in HLS instruments across the United States (Bailey & 

Kelly, 2010). However, an HLS typically includes questions 

about what language(s) the student first learned, 

understands, uses, and hears, and in what contexts. 

Additional questions about a student’s language exposure 

and background (e.g., languages used in the home) 

help ensure that ELs are not missed, and guard against 

inaccurate reporting of the student’s English abilities. 

Information from the HLS informs placement into a 

language assistance program (e.g., a bilingual and/or 

English as a Second Language [ESL] program).

To obtain accurate information, schools should reassure 

parents that the HLS is used solely to offer appropriate 

educational services, not for determining legal status or 

for immigration purposes. Parents and guardians should 

also be informed that, even if their child is identified as 

an EL, they may decline the EL program or particular EL 

services in the program.

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

developing HLS instruments and procedures. The 

checklist provides suggestions only, and schools and LEAs 

should check their SEA’s policies to ensure compliance 

with state requirements.

Content of the Home Language Survey

 Is the purpose and use of the HLS clearly 

communicated to both families and those who 

administer the survey?

 Does the HLS elicit information about the student’s 

current English abilities?

 Are the questions clear and understandable to those 

who administer the HLS?

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

CHAPTER 1
2 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS

Translation of the Home Language Survey

 Is the HLS translated into the home languages of 

students, and parents and guardians, in the school 

and LEA?

 Are qualified oral interpreters available when needed 

to help families complete the HLS?

Procedures for Administering, Interpreting, and Managing 

Results of the Home Language Survey

 Has a welcoming environment been established 

where the HLS is disseminated, made available, or 

administered?

 Are there standard and uniform procedures for 

administering and interpreting the HLS results?

 Do the procedures describe whose responsibility it 

is to administer the HLS, how it is to be done, and 

in what forms it should be administered (i.e., orally, 

written, in English, or in a home language translation)?

 Are there procedures to document and describe how 

to train the staff who will administer the HLS and 

how often refresher training will occur?

DETERMINING WHICH STUDENTS ARE ENGLISH LEARNERS

 Do procedures provide specific guidelines for 

interpreting HLS responses that include but are not 

limited to the following considerations: (a) Which 

responses indicate that a student will take an ELP 

placement test?; (b) How should responses be 

interpreted as a whole?; and (c) What are the next 

steps if responses are unclear or contradictory?

 Do procedures include methods to record HLS results 

in the student’s permanent records and to record 

the translation and interpretation needs of the EL’s 

parents in the student information system?

 What is the continuous review process? Is there a 

process to gather feedback from parents and school 

personnel? Is there a process to revise the HLS, 

including piloting a new version as appropriate?

Reference: Linquanti, R.,& Bailey, A.L. (2014). Reprising the Home 

Language Survey: Summary of a National Working Session on Policies, 

Practices, and Tools for Identifying Potential English Learners. 

Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from 

http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2014/CCSSO%20Common%20EL%20

Definition%20Reprising%20the%20Home%20Language%20Survey%20

01242014.pdf.

KEY POINTS

• All potential ELs must be assessed with a valid 

and reliable assessment to determine if they 

are in fact ELs.

• Parents and guardians must be informed in a 

timely manner of their child’s ELP level and EL 

program options.

• LEAs are required to communicate information 

regarding a child’s ELP level and EL program 

options in a language the parent understands.

Once students are identified as potential ELs, they 

must be assessed with a valid and reliable assessment 

to determine if they are indeed ELs. LEAs and SEAs 

commonly refer to these assessments as “placement/

screener tests.” Placement/screener tests are typically 

selected at the SEA level. Such ELP tests must assess the 

proficiency of students in all four language domains (i.e., 

speaking, listening, reading, and writing). Some SEAs and 

LEAs also use ELP assessments that evaluate speaking, 

listening, pre-reading, and pre-writing for entering 

kindergarten students with a primary or home language 

other than English.

Placement tests require that those administering 

and scoring them receive some level of training. LEA 

guidelines should describe who will administer and score 

assessments, and what training is required to ensure 

valid and reliable results. After the student completes 

the assessment, parents or guardians must receive in a 

timely manner information about the student’s ELP level 

and program options, and an opportunity to opt out of 

the EL program or particular EL services in the program. 

Translating this information into the family’s home 

language is critical, and if a written translation is not 

provided, an oral interpretation should be made available 

whenever needed.

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
IDENTIFYING ALL 

ENGLISH LEARNERS

TOOLS

The U.S. Department of Education does not mandate or prescribe particular curricula, lesson plans, assessments, or 

other instruments in this tool kit. Rather, this tool kit contains examples, 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 as an example of the many resources that educators, parents, advocates, administrators, and other 

concerned 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 such inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed or 

materials provided.

HOME LANGUAGE SURVEYS

The following information about home language surveys is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to 

offer examples. LEAs are reminded to check with their SEAs to see if a particular HLS is prescribed, and, if so, what the 

current version is.

The following three HLS questions have been approved 

by the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights 

(OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in their 

compliance work under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act 

and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974. Asking 

these three questions, and then testing a student whose 

parent or guardian responded to one or more of these 

three questions with a language other than English, is 

considered minimally compliant under the law.

OCR- and DOJ-approved home language survey questions:

1) What is the primary language used in the home, 

regardless of the language spoken by the student?

2) What is the language most often spoken by the 

student?

3) What is the language that the student first acquired?

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 3
The following home language surveys are provided for the reader’s convenience and also included here as examples of such surveys. The inclusion 

of these examples, or of links to resources, does not reflect their importance, nor is their inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or 

materials provided in them. LEAs should check if their SEA prescribes a particular home language survey because SEAs often do and also continually 

update them.

SAMPLE #1

Home Language Survey

To make sure that all students receive the education services they need, the law requires us to ask questions about students’ language backgrounds. 

The answers to Section A below will tell us if a student’s proficiency in English should be evaluated and help us to ensure that important opportunities 

to receive programs and services are offered to students who need them. The answers to Section B below will help us communicate with you 

regarding the student and all school matters in the language you prefer.

Student’s Name: Date of Birth:

SECTION A: Please answer the questions below.

1. What are the primary languages used in the home regardless of the language spoken by the student? (Select up to three.)

 English

 Arabic

 Burmese

 Cambodian

 Cantonese

 Cape Verdean

Creole

 French

 Greek

 Hmong

 Haitian-Creole

 Italian

 Korean

 Mandarin

 Portuguese

 Russian

 Somali

 Spanish

 Toishanese

 Vietnamese

 Other 

(Please specify)

 __________________

2. What is the language most often spoken by the student? (Select only one.)

 English

 Arabic

 Burmese

 Cambodian

 Cantonese

 Cape Verdean

Creole

 French

 Greek

 Hmong

 Haitian-Creole

 Italian

 Korean

 Mandarin

 Portuguese

 Russian

 Somali

 Spanish

 Toishanese

 Vietnamese

 Other 

(Please specify)

 __________________

3. What is the language that the student first acquired? (Select only one.)

 English

 Arabic

 Burmese

 Cambodian

 Cantonese

 Cape Verdean

Creole

 French

 Greek

 Hmong

 Haitian-Creole

 Italian

 Korean

 Mandarin

 Portuguese

 Russian

 Somali

 Spanish

 Toishanese

 Vietnamese



 Other 

(Please specify)

 __________________

Parent/Guardian Signature: Date:

4 IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 

SECTION B: Please answer the questions below.

1. In which language do you prefer to receive written school communications? (Select only one.)

 English

 Arabic

 Burmese

 Cambodian

 Cantonese

 Cape Verdean

Creole

 French

 Greek

 Hmong

 Haitian-Creole

 Italian

 Korean

 Mandarin

 Portuguese

 Russian

 Somali

 Spanish

 Toishanese

 Vietnamese

 Other 

(Please specify)

 __________________

2. In which language do you prefer to receive oral school communications? (Select only one.)

 English

 Arabic

 Burmese

 Cambodian

 Cantonese

 Cape Verdean

Creole

 French

 Greek

 Hmong

 Haitian-Creole

 Italian

 Korean

 Mandarin

 Portuguese

 Russian

 Somali

 Spanish

 Toishanese

 Vietnamese

 Other 

(Please specify)

 __________________

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
The following home language surveys are provided for the reader’s convenience and also included here as examples of such surveys. The inclusion 

of these examples, or of links to resources, does not reflect their importance, nor is their inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or 

materials provided in them. LEAs should check if their SEA prescribes a particular home language survey because SEAs often do and also continually 

update them.

SAMPLE #2

Primary/Home Language Survey for 

All New Kindergarten and Incoming Students

Instructions for schools in completing the survey:

1. Interview the parents or guardians of ALL new kindergarten and incoming students in grades k–12 and record all 

information requested.

2. Provide interpretation services whenever necessary.

3. Check to see that all questions on the form are answered.

Student Information (The parents or guardians should complete this section.)

First Name:________________________________________________________________________

Last Name:________________________________________________________________________

Date of Birth:

(Month/Day/Year)

Questions for Parents or Guardians Response

What language(s) is (are) spoken in your home?

Which language did your child learn first?

Which language does your child use most 

frequently at home?

Which language do you most frequently 

speak to your child?

In what language would you prefer to get 

information from the school?

Parent or Guardian’s Signature: Date:

IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 5

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

The following home language surveys are provided for the reader’s convenience and also included here as examples of such surveys. The inclusion 

of these examples, or of links to resources, does not reflect their importance, nor is their inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or 

materials provided in them. LEAs should check if their SEA prescribes a particular home language survey because SEAs often do and also continually 

update them.

6 IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 

Complete this home language survey at the student’s initial enrollment in school. This form must be signed and dated 

by the parent or guardian. It must be kept in the student’s file. This form will be used only for determining whether 

the student needs English Learner services and will not be used for immigration matters or reported to immigration 

authorities.

School: Student ID #: 

Student’s Last Name: 

Student’s First Name:

SAMPLE #3

ENGLISH

1. Is a language other than English spoken in your home?  No  Yes ___________________________ (specify language)

2. Does your child communicate in a language other than English?  No  Yes __________________________ (specify language)

3. Which language did your child learn first? __________________________ (specify language)

4. In which language do you prefer to receive information from the school? ___________________________ (specify language)

5. What is your relationship to the child?  Father  Mother  Guardian  Other (specify) ___________________________ 

ESPAÑOL (SPANISH)

1. ¿Se habla otro idioma que no sea el inglés en su casa?  No  Sí ___________________________ (especifique idioma)

2. ¿Habla el estudiante un idioma que no sea el inglés?  No  Sí ___________________________ (especifique idioma)

3. ¿Cuál fué el primer idioma que aprendió su hijo/a? ___________________________ (especifique idioma)

4. ¿En que idioma prefiere recibir comunicaciones de la escuela? ___________________________ (especifique idioma)

5. ¿Cuál es su relación con el estudiante?  Padre  Madre  Guardián  Otro (especifique) _________________________

FRANÇAIS (FRENCH)

1. Parle-t-on une autre langue que l’anglais chez vous ?  Non  Oui ___________________________ (veuillez préciser la langue)

2. Votre enfant parle-t-il une autre langue que l’anglais ?  Non  Oui ___________________________ (veuillez préciser la langue)

3. Quelle langue votre enfant a-t-il apprise en premier ? __________________________ (veuillez préciser la langue)

4. Dans quelle langue préférez-vous recevoir les communications de l’école ? __________________________ (veuillez préciser la langue)

5. Quelle est votre lien de parenté avec l’enfant ?  Père  Mère  Tuteur  Autre (veuillez préciser) ___________________________
You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

The following home language surveys are provided for the reader’s convenience and also included here as examples of such surveys. The inclusion 

of these examples, or of links to resources, does not reflect their importance, nor is their inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or 

materials provided in them. LEAs should check if their SEA prescribes a particular home language survey because SEAs often do and also continually 

update them.

Tiếng Việt (VIETNAMESE)

1. Có nói tiếng nào khác tiếng Anh không được nói ở nhà quý vị không?

 Không  Có ___________________________ (hãy cho biết tiếng nào)

2. Con quý vị có nói tiếng nào khác tiếng Anh không?

 Không  Có ___________________________ (hãy cho biết tiếng nào)

3. Con quý vị đã học tiếng nào đầu tiên? __________________________ (hãy cho biết tiếng nào)

4. Quý vị muốn nhận được thông tin từ trường học bằng tiếng nào?

__________________________ (hãy cho biết tiếng nào)

5. Quý vị có quan hệ như thế nào đối với con?

 Cha  Mẹ  Người giám hộ  Quan hệ khác (hãy cho biết) ___________________________

CHINESE

1. 除了英语之外,您家是否还说其他语言?

ο 否 ο 是 ___________________________(请说明是哪种语言)

2. 除了英语之外,您的孩子是否还说其他语言?

ο 否 ο 是 ___________________________(请说明是哪种语言)

3. 您的孩子最先学习的是哪种语言?__________________________(请说明是哪种语言)

4. 您希望学校用哪种语言授课?__________________________(请说明是哪种语言)

5. 您与孩子的关系?

ο 父亲 ο 母亲 ο 绚 ο 其他(请说明)___________________________

AMHARIC

1.	 ከእንግሊዝኛ ውጪ የሆነ ቋንቋ በቤትዎ ውስጥ ይነገራል?  አይ  አዎ (ቋንቋውን ይጥቀሱ)

2.	 ከእንግሊዝኛ ውጪ በሆነ ቋንቋ ልጅዎ ይናገራል/ትናገራለች?  አይ  አዎ (ቋንቋውን ይጥቀሱ)

3.	 ልጅዎ መጀመሪያ የተማረው ቋንቋ ምንድነው? (ቋንቋውን ይጥቀሱ)

4.	 ከትምህርት ቤቱ መረጃን በምን ቋንቋ ማግኘት ይፈልጋሉ? (ቋንቋውን ይጥቀሱ)

5.	 ከልጅዎ ጋር ያለዎት ዝምድና ምንድነው?  አባት  እናት  ሞግዚት/አሳዳጊ 

 ሌላ (ይጥቀሱ) 

IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 7
You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

The following home language surveys are provided for the reader’s convenience and also included here as examples of such surveys. The inclusion 

of these examples, or of links to resources, does not reflect their importance, nor is their inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or 

materials provided in them. LEAs should check if their SEA prescribes a particular home language survey because SEAs often do and also continually 

update them.

ARABIC

8 IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 

Signature of Parent/Guardian: Date:
This information about placement tests is provided for the reader’s convenience and is included here to offer examples. Inclusion of links to items 

does not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

PLACEMENT TEST CHECKLISTS

The following checklists provide suggestions and some requirements (as indicated) for assisting with reviewing 

placement/screener tests used to determine a student’s EL status. 

State Education Agency Checklist

 Has the SEA clearly communicated to LEAs which 

placement test is recommended or required?

 Is SEA guidance about EL placement testing readily 

available to LEAs?

If a placement test (i.e., assessment) is required or 

recommended by the SEA:

 In what year was the assessment developed? Have 

items been refreshed since its initial development? 

What is the refreshment cycle?

 Does the assessment developer follow best practices 

in placement test development, such as pilot testing, 

field testing, and ensuring consistency with state ELP 

standards?

 Has the assessment developer provided information 

about the reliability and validity of the assessment?

 Does the assessment developer provide a test 

administration manual and test administration 

training for those administering the assessment and 

scoring results?

 Have templates been developed in languages 

representative of the EL community for LEAs to use in 

communicating placement information to EL families?

Local Education Agency Checklist

 Have LEA or school staff checked with the SEA 

to determine whether to adopt a required or 

recommended placement test?

If a required test is not provided and the LEA selects a 

placement test:

 Does the placement test assess English language 

proficiency appropriately, including the required 

testing in all four domains (speaking, listening, 

reading, and writing)?

 In what year was the assessment developed? Have 

items been refreshed since its initial development? 

What is the refreshment cycle?

 Does the assessment developer follow best practices 

in placement test development, such as pilot testing, 

field testing, and ensuring consistency with SEA ELP 

standards?

 Has the assessment developer provided information 

about the reliability and validity of the assessment?

 Does the assessment developer provide a test 

administration manual and test administration 

training for those administering the assessment and 

interpreting the results?

Administration Procedures

 Have LEA or school staff created detailed 

administration procedures to describe (1) whose 

responsibility it is to administer the assessment, 

(2) what the training requirements are (based on the 

test developer’s recommendations), and (3) whether 

refresher training is suggested?

 Have procedures for record keeping been developed, 

including, for example, how assessment results will 

be stored and linked to the student’s permanent 

records, and shared with appropriate instructional 

staff?

 Are the purpose and use of the placement test clearly 

communicated to stakeholders?

 Have procedures and translated forms been 

developed for communicating placement information 

to EL families?

 Has the LEA established a process by which teachers 

may recommend a student for further ELP testing 

if, for example, the student’s language needs as 

observed in class indicate that the student is EL 

despite the placement tests results to the contrary?

IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — TOOLS 9

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
10 IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — RESOURCES

IDENTIFYING ALL 

ENGLISH LEARNERS

RESOURCES

The U.S. Department of Education does not mandate or prescribe particular curricula, lesson plans, assessments, or other 

instruments in this tool kit. Rather, this tool kit contains examples, 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 as an example of the many resources that educators, parents, advocates, administrators, and other concerned 

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 such inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Abedi, J. (2009). English language learners with 

disabilities: Classification, assessment, and 

accommodation issues. Journal of Applied Testing 

Technology, 10 (4), pp. 1–30. Davis, CA: University 

of California/Davis, National Center for Research 

on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. 

Retrieved from http://www.testpublishers.org/assets/

documents/Special%20issue%20article%202.pdf

This article addresses issues concerning the 

assessment, identification, and classification of 

ELs with disabilities. Accommodations for ELs with 

disabilities are discussed and recommendations for 

more accessible assessments for these students are 

provided.

Bailey, A. (2011). Lessons from AZ’s EL identification 

issues: How guidance could strengthen process. NCLB 

Advisor, 6(4), pp. 5–8. Retrieved from 

http://eveaproject.com/doc/A%20%20Bailey%27s%20

Piece%209_26_11%20SO.pdf

This article reviews the limitations of Arizona’s singlequestion HLS and provides ways these surveys can 

be improved and complemented to ensure ELs are 

identified for assessment and receive the services 

they need.

Bailey, A. and Kelly, K. (2010). ELPA Validity Evaluation: 

Creating Enhanced Home Language Survey Instruments. 

Retrieved from http://www.eveaproject.com/doc/

HomeLanguageSurveyInstrument.pdf

This document guides the creation of enhanced home 

language surveys to better discriminate between 

students in the general k–12 student population who 

may need further assessment or placement in English 

language support services. It also provides a validity 

argument that the responses to new items will 

produce meaningful information so that an HLS can 

be more effectively used for its intended purpose of 

initially identifying the EL student population.

Bailey, A., and Kelly, K. (2010). The use and validity of 

home language surveys in state English language 

proficiency assessment systems: A review and issues 

perspective. Retrieved from http://www.eveaproject.

com/doc/Bailey%20%20Kelly%20HLS%20EVEA%20

%20white%20paper%20July%202010%20revised%20

Jan%202011and%20Sept%202011.pdf

This paper focuses on the home language surveys 

used by five SEAs to initially identify students who 

may be eligible for language assistance services.

Contents include a brief history of the use of such 

surveys in U.S. schools and current practices, with 

examples from selected SEAs. The authors also 

examine the evidentiary bases for current HLS design; 

summarize challenges for initially identifying ELs; 

provide suggestions for designing validation plans; 

and offer alternative approaches for existing home 

language surveys and make recommendations for 

guidance and validation of them.

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
IDENTIFYING ALL ENGLISH LEARNERS — RESOURCES 11

Linquanti, R., and Bailey, A. (2014). Reprising the home 

language survey: Summary of a national working 

session on policies, practices, and tools for identifying 

potential English Learners. Retrieved from 

http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2014/CCSSO%20

Common%20EL%20Definition%20Reprising%20

the%20Home%20Language%20Survey%2001242014.

pdf

This document is the first in a series of working 

papers that elaborate on a framework of four key 

stages in moving toward a common definition of EL. 

The paper summarizes a national working session 

of September 2013, which deliberated on the first 

stage in the Council of Chief State School Officers’ 

guidance document, Toward a ‘Common Definition of 

English Learner’—Identifying a student as a potential EL. 

The goal was to build understanding and consensus 

among assessment consortia, participating states, 

and other stakeholders on key issues, and on 

strengthening related policies, practices, and tools.

Linquanti, R., and Cook, H.G. (2013). Toward a “common 

definition of English Learner”: Guidance for states and 

state assessment consortia in defining and addressing 

policy and technical issues and options. Retrieved 

from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2013/

Toward_a_Common_Definition_2013.pdf

This paper provides guidance that consortium member 

states can use to move toward establishing a common 

EL definition in ways that are theoretically sound, 

evidence-based, pragmatic, and sensitive to many 

policy, technical, and legal issues. Specifically, the 

paper outlines central issues, and discusses policy and 

technical options for defining ELs using a four-stage 

framework of key criteria and processes to (1) identify 

a student as a potential EL; (2) classify (confirm or 

disconfirm) a student as an EL; (3) establish an ELP 

performance standard on the state or consortium ELP 

test against which to assess ELs’ English language 

proficiency; and (4) reclassify an EL student to former 

EL status through the use of multiple exit criteria.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, and 

U.S. Department of Justice. (January 2015). English 

Learner Students and Limited English Proficient 

Parents. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/

offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html

This document provides guidance to assist SEAs, 

school districts, and all public schools in meeting 

their legal obligations to ensure that EL students can 

participate meaningfully and equally in educational 

programs and services. This guidance provides an 

outline of the legal obligations of SEAs and school 

districts to EL students under the civil rights laws. 

Additionally, the guidance discusses compliance 

issues that frequently arise in OCR and DOJ 

investigations under Title VI and the EEOA and offers 

approaches that SEAs and school districts may use 

to meet their Federal obligations to EL students. The 

guidance also includes discussion of how SEAs and 

school districts can implement their Title III grants 

and subgrants in a manner consistent with these civil 

rights obligations. Finally, the guidance discusses the 

Federal obligation to ensure that LEP parents and 

guardians have meaningful access to district- and 

school-related information.

You can access Tools and Resources for Identifying All English Learners at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.
1

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR 

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH A 

LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

This is the second chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Dear Colleague Letter on 

“English Learner Students and Limited English Proficient 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 

CHAPTER 2 

Published March 2015

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH A 

LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

KEY POINTS

• EL services and programs must be educationally sound 

in theory and effective in practice. 

• EL programs must be designed to enable ELs to attain 

both English proficiency and parity of participation 

in the standard instructional program within a 

reasonable length of time.

• LEAs must offer EL services and programs, until ELs are 

proficient in English and can participate meaningfully in 

educational programs without EL support. 

• Additionally, LEAs must provide appropriate special 

education services to ELs with disabilities who are found 

to be eligible for special education and related services.

After ELs have been identified using a valid and reliable 

English language proficiency (ELP) assessment, LEAs 

must provide ELs with appropriate language assistance 

services and programs, commonly known as “EL services 

and programs.” LEAs must also provide special education 

services to ELs who have been identified as children 

with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) or as qualified students with 

disabilities under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973 (Section 504). Meeting the needs of ELs with 

disabilities will be discussed in depth in Chapter 6 of the 

EL Tool Kit.

LEAs have the flexibility to choose the EL services and 

programs that meet civil rights requirements and best 

meet the needs of their EL population. Appropriate EL 

services and programs enable ELs to attain both English 

proficiency and parity of participation in the standard 

instructional program within a reasonable amount of 

time. LEAs must offer appropriate EL services until ELs 

are proficient in English and can participate meaningfully 

in educational programs without EL support. This includes 

continuing to provide EL services to ELs at the highest 

levels of English proficiency until they have exited from 

EL services and programs.

To determine which EL services and programs are best 

suited for a student identified as an EL, LEAs must 

consider the student’s (1) English proficiency level, 

(2) grade level, and (3) educational background, as well 

as (4) language background for bilingual programs. Other 

child-centered factors that LEAs may consider include the 

student’s native language literacy; acculturation into U.S. 

society; and age he or she entered the United States. LEAs 

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 
2

must ensure that qualified teachers provide EL services 

and it is important for school personnel to understand 

and address these factors. 

LEAs should apply the same standards that OCR and DOJ 

apply when evaluating whether their chosen EL services 

and programs meet civil rights requirements. These 

standards, established in Castañeda v. Pickard, include 

a three-pronged test: First, is the program based on an 

educational theory recognized as sound by some experts 

in the field or considered a legitimate experimental 

strategy? Second, are the programs and practices 

(including resources and personnel) reasonably calculated 

to implement this theory effectively? Third, does the 

program succeed in producing results indicating that 

students’ language barriers are being overcome within a 

reasonable period of time? 

Some common EL programs considered educationally 

sound in theory under the first prong include: (1) English 

as a Second Language (ESL) or English Language 

Development (ELD); (2) Structured English Immersion 

(SEI); (3) Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) or EarlyExit Bilingual Education; and (4) Dual Language or TwoWay Immersion. The first two programs are usually taught 

in English, and the latter two are taught both in English 

and in the EL’s primary language.

Additionally, for new arrivals and students with 

interrupted formal education (SIFE), LEAs may establish 

newcomer programs. These programs offer specialized 

services and classes to help these students acclimate to 

U.S. schools, develop foundational skills in content areas 

(e.g., basic literacy and math concepts), and prepare them 

for the program options above. Newcomer programs are 

short-term, typically lasting no longer than one year.

Finally, there is increased focus on the large number of 

ELs who, despite many years in US schools, are still not 

proficient in English. These students are often referred 

to as Long Term English Learners (LTELs). To ensure that 

LEAs have selected and implemented EL services and 

programs that succeed within a reasonable period of time, 

LEAs should monitor the progress of ELs and adjust EL 

services and programs to ensure that students are making 

expected progress.

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

providing appropriate EL services and programs. The 

checklist provides suggested questions only. LEAs should 

check their SEA’s policies and federal guidance to ensure 

compliance.

 On which educational theory are the EL services and 

program options based?

 What are the resources needed to effectively 

implement the chosen program?

 Does the school have qualified staff to implement the 

chosen program?

 How are placement in a particular EL program and 

the provision of EL services informed by a student’s 

English proficiency level, grade level, and educational 

and language backgrounds?

 Are EL services and programs provided to all eligible 

ELs, regardless of scheduling conflicts, grade, 

disability, or native language?

 Does the chosen EL program include instruction 

aligned to the state ELP standards and grade-level 

content standards?

 Do the EL services and programs provide ELs in 

all grades with equal opportunities to participate 

meaningfully and equally in all of the schools’ 

curricular and extracurricular programs?

 Are EL services and programs designed to provide 

more intensive instruction for ELs who are the least 

proficient in English?

 Are ELs at the highest levels of ELP continuing to 

receive EL services until they have exited from EL 

services and programs?

 Are there additional EL services and programs 

available for ELs who have not made expected 

progress despite extended enrollment in the EL 

program (i.e. LTELs)?

 What criteria is the LEA using to evaluate its program 

and determine if it is meeting its goals?

For example:

a. Are there processes and criteria in place to monitor 

ELs in and across programs in both academic 

content and ELP?

b. Is there a process for modifying or replacing the 

EL program if data shows that students are not 

making expected progress within a reasonable 

period of time?

c. Is there a process for monitoring ELs after exiting 

the program?

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 3

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH A 

LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

TOOLS

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 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 items does not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

The following set of tools is intended to help schools, LEAs, and SEAs in providing ELs with appropriate language 

assistance services and programs, commonly known as “EL services and programs,” and sometimes referred to as 

“language instruction education programs (LIEPs).” The tools give examples of how schools can understand the 

individual needs of students, identify the needs of subgroups of students, and apply systemic considerations when 

determining what EL services and programs they should offer. 

Tool #1, Guiding Questions to Learn About 

Your EL Population, can help schools/

LEAs learn important information about 

their ELs.

Tool #2, Long Term English Learners, 

provides a checklist for schools and LEAs 

to address the needs of this particular 

group of ELs. 

Tool #3, Research-Based Considerations, 

offers broad-based considerations for EL 

services and programs. 

Tool #4, English Learner Program Chart, 

gives a brief overview of some EL 

programs. 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

4 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

TOOL #1 

GUIDING QUESTIONS TO LEARN ABOUT YOUR EL POPULATION

In order to select or create an appropriate EL program model, it is necessary to understand the local EL population. 

To help do this, the Education Alliance at Brown University’s 2003 publication Claiming Opportunities: A Handbook for 

Improving Education for English Language Learners Through Comprehensive School Reform provides a “Student Population 

Discussion Tool.” This set of ten questions, listed below, can assist schools or LEAs in discussing and learning about 

their EL populations, and help teachers frame these discussions. Organizations may add to or modify these questions to 

obtain more information about various sub-populations, including ELs with disabilities.

STUDENT POPULATION DISCUSSION TOOL

1. How many or what percentage of students in the school have a home language other than English? 

2. What languages are spoken in their homes? 

3. What places of origin are represented? 

4. Are students from urban or rural backgrounds? 

5. What community organizations represent various groups? 

6. What educational backgrounds are represented? (Continuous or interrupted prior schooling, no prior 

schooling, schooling in home country, rural or urban schooling, preschool, kindergarten?) 

7. Are some students literate in another language? 

8. Are ELs the subject of many disciplinary referrals or actions in your school? 

9. How many or what percentage of students in the school are actually classified as EL? 

•	 How many students currently receive language services? 

•	 How are these students distributed across grade levels? 

•	 What are their levels of English proficiency? 

•	 What language services do ELs currently receive? 

•	 In what types of classrooms do they receive literacy and content instruction? 

•	 What are these ELs’ academic strengths and weaknesses? (What is the evidence?) 

10. How many students (for whom English is a second language) have met exiting criteria and are now 

classified as “English proficient”? 

•	 How are these students distributed across grade levels? 

•	 What services, such as monitoring or transitional support, do exited ELs currently receive? 

•	 How do they perform in mainstream classes? (What is the evidence?) 

•	 What are their academic strengths and weaknesses? (What is the evidence?) 

Source: Vialpando, J., Yedlin, J., Linse, C., Harrington, M., & Cannon, G. (2005). Educating English language learners: Implementing instructional practices. 

Washington, DC: National Council of La Raza. Retrieved from http://www.brown.edu/academics/education-alliance/sites/brown.edu.academics.

education-alliance/files/publications/edells_impinstprct.pdf

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

5

TOOL #2

LONG TERM ENGLISH LEARNERS

The following checklist has been reprinted with permission from Californians Together, a statewide group of parents, 

teachers, educators, and civil rights leaders promoting equal access to quality education for all children. It is taken 

from Reparable Harm: Fulfilling the Unkept Promise of Educational Opportunity for California’s Long Term English Learners 

by Laurie Olsen. Though it references the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and the California 

Standards Tests, the checklist can be adapted and used to address the needs of LTELs in other states.

A DISTRICT CHECKLIST

STEPS FOR ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF LONG TERM 

ENGLISH LEARNERS

District and school leadership should be knowledgeable about the diversity of the EL enrollment (typologies) and 

understand the implications of that diversity for program design, program implementation and instructional practices. 

District systems should be created to prevent the development of Long Term English Learners and serving those Long 

Term English Learners who are enrolled in secondary schools across the district. 

A district addressing the needs of Long Term English Learners should have the following in place: 

 We have a formal definition for Long Term English Learners. 

 We have designated annual benchmark expectations for English Learners by number of years in United States 

schools and by progress towards English proficiency. 

 We have conducted our own inquiry (including analysis of data, student interviews, and focus groups, review of 

cumulative file histories, and classroom observations) to develop a deeper understanding of our own Long Term 

English Learner population. 

 We have an English Learner Master Plan that includes descriptions of research based program models for different 

typologies of English Learners, including a designated program and pathway for Long Term English Learners. 

 Site and district leadership are knowledgeable about the diversity of the English Learner enrollment in our district, 

including the different needs of newcomer students, normatively progressing English Learners, and Long Term 

English Learners. 

 Our data system enables us to analyze English Learner achievement data by length of time in United States schools 

and by English proficiency levels. 

 We can analyze data longitudinally to assess issues of program consistency and long-term program impact for our 

English Learners. 

 We regularly disaggregate English Learner data by length of time in the United States and English proficiency level 

and review that data to inform and trigger district planning. 

 We identify “Long Term English Learner candidates” in fourth grade and develop a catch up and program consistency 

plan for those students. 

 At the secondary school level, we have specially designed English Language Development (ELD) to focus on the 

unique needs of Long Term English Learners, including academic language and writing. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

6 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

TOOL #2: LONG TERM ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

 At the secondary school level, Long Term English Learners are in classes with high quality SDAIE [Specially Designed 

Academic Instruction in English] instruction in clusters within rigorous classes along with English fluent students.

 Our programs at the elementary, middle and high schools support the development of students’ native language 

to threshold levels of rich oral language and literacy—and students have the opportunity to develop their native 

language through Advanced Placement levels. 

 Our elementary school programs are research-based and we use the most powerful models of English Learner 

language development. The district monitors and ensures these are well-implemented with consistency. 

 We hold meetings, publish materials, and fully expect that all administrators, teachers, English Learner students, 

and their parents know about and understand the reclassification criteria. 

 We report annually to English Learner parents on: their child’s status compared to the number of years that research 

indicates English Learners need to achieve English proficiency and compared to district expectations. These reports 

include longitudinal test data for their child including the CELDT initial score and date, plus all subsequent CELDT 

proficiency levels, as well as scores on the California Standards Test in English Language Arts and Math for the three 

most recent years, and yearly benchmark growth targets for English Learners based on the California Standards Test 

and CELDT by years of United States schooling.

 The district has adopted and purchased English Language Development materials and our teachers have received 

professional development in their use. 

 Our Long Term English Learners are knowledgeable about the purposes of the CELDT and implications of their 

CELDT scores. They know what they need to do in order to reach reclassification criteria. 

 We calendar the CELDT with sufficient advance notice so sites can protect the testing window and ensure supportive 

conditions for testing. Students are tested by their English teachers and the district provides subs and release time 

to enable teachers to do the testing. 

 Professional development and collaborative planning time for teachers of classes with Long Term English Learners 

is a high priority for the use of professional development funds. 

 We assign the most experienced and most prepared teachers to the classrooms and sites with the highest need. 

 We monitor student schedules and class schedules to ensure that English Learners have access to the full 

curriculum. 

 We provide supplementary materials and relevant literature for academic classes with Long Term English Learners 

in order to enhance access, engagement, and academic success. 

 Our secondary school counselors have received professional development in appropriate placements and monitoring 

for Long Term English Learners, and work together with district/site English Learner Coordinators in developing 

each individual English Learner’s schedule and in planning the school master schedule to facilitate flexible and 

accelerated progress.

Source: Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept promise of educational opportunity for California’s Long Term English Learners. Long Beach, 

CA: Californians Together. Retrieved from www.californianstogether.org/docs/download.aspx?fileId=227
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 7

TOOL #3

RESEARCH-BASED CONSIDERATIONS

The following excerpt, “Conclusions and Recommendations,” from the report Succeeding with English Language Learners: 

Lessons Learned from the Great City Schools, has been reprinted with permission from the Council of the Great City 

Schools. The document is an open-source document made available to Users by the Attribution-NoDerivs CC BY-ND 

license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/. This license allows redistribution, commercial and noncommercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to the Council of the Great City Schools. 

As such, the excerpt below is unchanged. It uses the term “English Language Learner (ELL)” to refer to students 

otherwise referred to as “ELs” in the EL Tool Kit.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Despite the diversity of the districts profiled in this study, a fairly consistent picture emerged of the preconditions and 

practices that existed in improving districts. These strategies for improving ELL achievement closely mirrored those 

identified in Foundations for Success as having contributed to districts’ efforts to improve teaching and learning for all 

students. However, such across-the-board district reform efforts do not automatically or inevitably lead to high quality 

ELL programming. Districts that saw improvement of their ELL instructional program—and of ELL student achievement—

demonstrated the capacity and political will to explicitly address the academic needs of English Language Learners.

While no school or school district has found a way to meet every student’s needs and to close the gap between ELLs and 

native English speakers, clearly some districts are setting higher standards for all of their students and making progress 

toward these goals. Based on what we have learned from their experiences and approaches to reform, several broadbased recommendations can be made to help district leaders think about ELL program reform efforts in their own cities. 

These recommendations fall into two broad categories: context and strategy.

CONTEXTUAL RECOMMENDATIONS

It was clear from the results of this study that improving the academic achievement of English language learners 

involved more than instructional strategy and traditional bilingual education models. It also meant creating an 

environment conducive to implementing and sustaining districtwide reform efforts. To create these preconditions for 

progress, the Council would propose that districts—

 Develop a clear instructional vision and high expectations for ELLs. This means being clear about academic goals for 

these students, communicating these goals emphatically to stakeholders in the district, and ensuring that ELLs are 

held to the same high standards as other students throughout the district. 

 Approach external pressure to improve services for ELLs and other students as an asset rather than a liability. 

Rather than addressing state or court directives defensively or adopting measures aimed solely at ensuring legal 

compliance, external requirements should be approached as mandates for long-term, systemic reform efforts to 

raise student achievement. 

 Incorporate accountability for ELLs organizationally into the broader instructional operation of the school district. 

This entails being clear at the leadership level that everyone is accountable for the academic attainment of these 

students—not simply ELL teachers and ELL department staff. This not only spurs collaboration, but it provides greater 

assurance that these students have broader and fuller access to the general education curriculum 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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

8 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

 Empower strong ELL program administrators to oversee progress. Prioritizing ELL reform also means appointing 

and empowering someone in the district to serve as a “point person” on ELL issues. In improving districts, the office 

of ELLs and its director were included in the highest levels of decision making and given the authority to oversee 

implementation of the district’s strategy for ELL reform. 

 Pursue community support for initiatives designed to accelerate achievement among English language learners. 

Having the community behind the district’s efforts to improve academic performance helps create the political 

conditions under which reforms can be sustained. 

STRATEGIC AND INSTRUCTIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS 

The contextual recommendations allow for reforms to be articulated and sustained, but the district must couple them 

with a convincing instructional strategy that is capable of teaching ELLs to the highest standards. The Council of the 

Great City Schools would propose that districts—

 Review general education and ELL programs to ensure that there is an explicit focus on building academic literacy 

and cultivating English language development. Focusing on academic literacy among ELLs—and all students—and 

providing them with specific language acquisition strategies are critical steps for ensuring the long-term academic 

success of students. 

 Ensure that all teachers of ELLs have access to high-quality professional development that provides differentiated 

instructional strategies, promotes the effective use of student assessment data, and develops skills for supporting 

second-language acquisition across the curriculum. This professional development should be made jointly available 

to ELL and general education teachers and evaluated for how well it is implemented and its effects on student 

achievement. 

 Assess district standards for hiring, placing, and retaining teachers, paraprofessionals, and staff members who work 

directly with ELLs to ensure that these students have access to highly qualified personnel. While these decisions are 

sometimes shaped by state policy, in other cases they are the result of locally determined policies and collective 

bargaining agreements that districts should be mindful of as they craft their ELL programs. 

 Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the level of access that ELLs have to the entire spectrum of district course 

offerings, including gifted and talented programs and special education. The results of these simple analyses can 

reveal to districts whether ELLs—and others—have equal access to educational opportunities and are held to the 

same academic standards as other students. 

 Ensure that resources generated by and allocated for English language learners are properly and effectively 

expended to provide quality ELL instruction and services. Districts also should be careful to not allow the 

categorical nature of various funding sources to limit ELL programming or services. General education funds, federal 

Title I funds, categorical state funds, and other resources can be used to ensure that these students get the support 

and instruction they need across the board. 

 Develop a system for tracking multiple measures of ELLs’ educational progress. The collection and analysis of data 

on the characteristics, teachers, English proficiency level, program placement, and academic attainment of ELLs are 

critical to ensuring the success of these students. This means integrating all data on ELLs into the district’s general 

database to ensure broader access and to promote regular review of this data by school and district instructional 

staff and the board.

Source: Council of the Great City Schools. (2009). Succeeding with English language learners: Lessons learned from the Great City Schools. Retrieved 

from http://cgcs.schoolwires.net/cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/Domain/35/Publication%20Docs/ELL_Report09.pdf

TOOL #3: RESEARCH-BASED CONSIDERATIONS (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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 9

TOOL # 4

ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM CHART

The following chart provides a brief overview of some common EL programs. Each program requires that teachers have 

specialized training in meeting the needs of ELs (e.g., an ESL or bilingual teaching credential and/or SEI or ELD training) 

and have demonstrated the skills to effectively implement the chosen EL program.

SOME EL PROGRAMS CONSIDERED EDUCATIONALLY 

SOUND IN THEORY UNDER CASTAÑEDA’S FIRST PRONG

Program Option Program Goal Language/s Used 

for Instruction

English as a Second 

Language (ESL) or 

English Language 

Development (ELD)

Program of techniques, methodology, and special 

curriculum designed to teach ELs explicitly about the 

English language, including the academic vocabulary 

needed to access content instruction, and to develop 

their English language proficiency in all four language 

domains (i.e., speaking, listening, reading, and writing). 

Usually provided in English 

with little use of the ELs’ 

primary language(s) 

Structured English 

Immersion (SEI)

Program designed to impart English language skills 

so that the ELs can transition and succeed in an 

English-only mainstream classroom once proficient. 

Usually provided in English 

with little use of the ELs’ 

primary language(s)

Transitional Bilingual 

Education (TBE), or 

early-exit bilingual 

education

Program that maintains and develops skills in the 

primary language while introducing, maintaining, and 

developing skills in English. The primary purpose of 

a TBE program is to facilitate the ELs’ transition to an 

all-English instructional program, while the students 

receive academic subject instruction in the primary 

language to the extent necessary.

Students’ primary language 

and English

Dual Language or 

Two-Way Immersion 

Bilingual program where the goal is for students to 

develop language proficiency in two languages by 

receiving instruction in English and another language 

in a classroom that is usually comprised of half 

primary-English speakers and half primary speakers of 

the other language. 

English and another 

language

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, & U.S. Department of Justice. (2015, January). Dear colleague letter: English learner students and limited English proficient parents (p. 12). Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

10 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH A 

LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

RESOURCES

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 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 items does not reflect their importance, nor is it 

intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing 

literacy in second-language learners: Report of the 

National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children 

and Youth (Executive Summary). Mahwah, NJ: 

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://

www.bilingualeducation.org/pdfs/PROP2272.pdf

This executive summary presents the findings from 

an Institute of Education Sciences (IES) expert panel 

review of research related to the development of 

literacy in language-minority students. Research 

topics include the development of literacy; crosslinguistic relationships; sociocultural contexts and 

literacy development; instruction and professional 

development; and student assessment. 

Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective 

instruction for English learners. Future of Children,

21(1), 103-127. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/

fulltext/EJ920369.pdf

This article reviews research related to programs 

and practices that have demonstrated improvement 

in reading and language outcomes in ELs. The 

authors discuss the following program models 

and model components for ELs: school structures 

and leadership; language and literacy instruction; 

integration of language, literacy, and content 

instruction in secondary schools; cooperative learning; 

professional development; parent and family support 

teams; tutoring; and monitoring implementation 

and outcomes. The authors assert that the quality of 

instruction is what matters most in educating ELs. 

They advocate whole-school interventions for ELs and 

recommend professional development to implement 

this approach.

Castañeda v. Pickard, 648 F.2d 989 (5th Cir. 1981). 

Retrieved from http://faculty.ucmerced.edu/khakuta/

LAU/IAPolicy/IA1bCastanedaFullText.htm

This court case established the following three-part 

test to evaluate the adequacy of an LEA’s program for 

ELs: First, is the program based on “an educational 

theory recognized as sound by some experts in 

the field or considered a legitimate experimental 

strategy”? Second, are the programs and practices, 

including resources and personnel, reasonably 

calculated to implement this theory effectively? 

Third, does the LEA evaluate its programs and make 

adjustments where needed to ensure language 

barriers are actually being overcome within a 

reasonable period of time?

Coleman, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2010, Summer). What does 

research say about effective practices for English 

learners? Part IV: Models for schools and districts. 

Kappa Delta Pi Record, 46(4), 156–163. Retrieved 

from http://www.sewanhaka.k12.ny.us/cms/lib3/

NY01001491/Centricity/Domain/2473/KDP%20

article%20series%20on%20ELLs.pdf

In Part IV of this series of articles, the authors 

discuss models for schools and LEAs that support EL 

programs. Also included are scenarios on how these 

programs might look based on examples from actual 

schools and LEAs, and specific practices for classroom 

teachers.

Published March 2015
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 11

Council of the Great City Schools. (2009). Succeeding 

with English language learners: Lessons learned 

from the Great City Schools. Retrieved from 

http://cgcs.schoolwires.net/cms/lib/DC00001581/

Centricity/Domain/35/Publication%20Docs/ELL_

Report09.pdf

This study of six urban LEAs examined how the 

organizational, structural, instructional, and staffing 

factors impact the academic achievement of ELs. 

It found that successful EL programs include the 

following contextual features: “a shared vision for 

reform,” “leadership and advocacy on behalf of [ELs],” 

“empowerment of the [LEA’s EL] office,” and “external 

forces as catalyst for reforms.” The report provides 

the following two types of recommendations: 

(1) contextual changes that would create an 

environment that encourages implementing and 

sustaining districtwide reform efforts that support 

ELs, and (2) strategic and instructional changes that 

promote high standards in the teaching of ELs.

Espinosa, L. M. (2013, August). PreK-3rd: Challenging 

common myths about dual language learners

(PreK-3rd Policy to Action Brief No. 10). New York, NY: 

Foundation for Child Development. Retrieved from 

http://fcd-us.org/sites/default/files/Challenging%20

Common%20Myths%20Update.pdf

This brief reviews beliefs about the development and 

learning of young children who are acquiring English 

as their second language. The brief also summarizes 

research to guide policies for teaching ELs. 

Fortune T. W., & Christian, D. (2012, October). Dual 

language immersion education: State of the states. 

Introduction to Panel Presentation at Immersion 

2012: Bridging Contexts for a Multilingual World, 

St. Paul, MN. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.

edu/conferences/past/immersion2012/handouts/

StateoftheStates.ppt.pdf

This presentation about Dual Language Immersion 

(DLI) education provides the educational philosophy, 

program goals, and general overview of DLI program 

growth in the United States. The presentation also 

discusses data on DLI programs in selected states, and 

state-level DLI policies. 

Goldenberg, C. (2013, Summer). Unlocking the research 

on English learners: What we know—and don’t yet 

know—about effective instruction. American Educator. 

Retrieved from https://www.aft.org//sites/

default/files/periodicals/Goldenberg.pdf

This article identifies four important principles 

based in EL research: (1) “generally effective 

practices are likely to be effective with ELs,” (2) “ELs 

require additional instructional supports,” (3) “the 

home language can be used to promote academic 

development,” and (4) “ELs need early and ample 

opportunities to develop proficiency in English.” For 

each principle, the author provides specific examples 

from research.

Hakuta, K., Butler, Y., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does 

it take English learners to attain proficiency? (Policy 

Report No. 2000-1). Berkeley, CA: University of 

California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. 

Retrieved from http://web.stanford.edu/~hakuta/

Publications/%282000%29%20-%20HOW%20

LONG%20DOES%20IT%20TAKE%20ENGLISH%20

LEARNERS%20TO%20ATTAIN%20PR.pdf

This report discusses how long students require 

EL services before they become proficient in oral 

and academic English. The authors analyze EL data 

from two school districts in the San Francisco Bay 

Area, as well as summary data from a school in 

Ontario, Canada. The report concludes that while oral 

proficiency takes 3 to 5 years to develop, academic 

English proficiency can take 4 to 7 years. 

Howard, E. R., Sugarman, J., Christian, D., Lindholm-Leary, 

K. J., & Rogers, D. (2007). Guiding principles for dual 

language education (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Center 

for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from http://www.cal.

org/twi/Guiding_Principles.pdf

This document is organized into “seven strands, 

reflecting the major dimensions of program 

planning and implementation.” These strands are 

(1) assessment and accountability; (2) curriculum; 

(3) instruction; (4) staff quality and professional 

development; (5) program structure; (6) family and 

community; and (7) support and resources. Each 

strand includes guiding principles and one or more key 

points that elaborate on each principle and specific 

elements that align with each principle.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

12 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

Moughamian, A. C., Rivera, M. O., & Francis, D. J. (2009). 

Instructional models and strategies for teaching English 

language learners. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research 

Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517794.pdf

This publication offers guidance on effective 

strategies for instructing ELs. The report outlines 

“key contextual factors that decision-makers should 

take into account when making instructional 

choices” for ELs. Also included is a brief overview 

of bilingual and English-only instructional models 

and the influence of language instruction models on 

academic outcomes for ELs. The authors contend that 

“regardless of the model that school districts select, 

teachers must use the most effective strategies 

to accelerate student learning and maximize 

instructional time.” Also included are research-based 

instructional strategies. 

National Association of Charter School Authorizers. 

(2014). Charter schools and ELLs: An authorizer and 

school leader guide for educating ELLs. Retrieved from 

http://www.qualitycharters.org/assets/files/images/

stories/publications/Issue_Briefs/IssueBriefNo22_

CharterSchoolsandELLs.pdf

This document provides charter authorizers and 

school leaders with essential information about the 

education of ELs, offering “background information 

related to ELs, the state and federal laws that affect 

the education of ELs, and the education needs of 

these children.”

Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept 

promise of educational opportunity for California’s Long 

Term English Learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians 

Together. Retrieved from www.californianstogether.

org/docs/download.aspx?fileId=227

This report describes the results of a 40-district 

survey on LTELs in California, and identifies LTELs as 

secondary school students “in United States schools 

for more than six years without reaching sufficient 

English proficiency.” It provides an estimate of the 

number of LTELs in the state while identifying 

the lack of a common definition as problematic. 

The report also discusses LTEL causes, student 

characteristics, current educational services, and 

district roles and responsibilities, and provides 

system-wide policy recommendations. 

Olsen, L. (2012). Secondary school courses designed to 

address the language needs and academic gaps of Long 

Term English Learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians 

Together. Retrieved from www.californianstogether.

org/docs/download.aspx?fileId=357

This report articulates the collective emerging 

knowledge base about how to design and implement 

effective courses that meet the needs of LTELs. 

The report synthesizes the lessons learned from 

districts throughout California and provides needed 

guidance on how to design and implement courses 

that address the needs of these students. The ideas, 

advice, and information were culled from a forum that 

Californians Together organized with educators from 

24 districts that were piloting programs. The goal was 

to start a statewide network for districts and teachers 

to exchange information and ideas. Prior to this, the 

LEAs had mostly been working in isolation.

Saunders, W., Goldenberg, C., & Marcelletti, M. (2013, 

Summer). English language development: Guidelines 

for instruction. American Educator. Retrieved from 

https://www.aft.org//sites/default/files/periodicals/

Saunders_Goldenberg_Marcelletti.pdf

This article brings together multiple sources that 

provide guidelines for ELD instruction including 

theoretical, programmatic, and practitioner 

information. The authors’ focus is specifically on 

assisting in the delivery of ELD instruction and not on 

content area instruction. 

Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC). (2013). 

English language learners & Southeast Asian American 

communities (Fact Sheet). Retrieved from http://www.

searac.org/sites/default/files/SEARAC_ELL_2013-1.pdf

This fact sheet provides an overview of the Southeast 

Asian American (SEAA) EL population and focuses on 

the states with the largest concentrations of SEAA 

ELs and the languages spoken by those ELs. It lists 

the needs of SEAA ELs, and suggestions for how local 

and federal policymakers may better serve them. 

U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Educational services 

for immigrant children and those recently arrived to the 

United States. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/

policy/rights/guid/unaccompanied-children.html

This page on the Department’s website provides 

information and existing resources available to 

help SEAs and LEAs educate all immigrant students 

including children who recently arrived in the United 

States.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published March 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing ELs with a Language Assistance Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ELS WITH A LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 13

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. 

(2014, October). Dear colleague letter: Resource 

compatibility [Guidance to ensure all students have 

equal access to educational resources]. Retrieved from 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 for providing 

educational resources that disproportionately affect 

students of a particular race, color, or national 

origin, absent a substantial justification. The law 

does not require that all students receive the exact 

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, Office for Civil Rights, 

& U.S. Department of Justice. (2015, January). Dear 

colleague letter: English learner students and limited 

English proficient parents. Retrieved from http://www2.

ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleagueel-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 

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. 

The guidance also includes discussion of how SEAs 

and LEAs can implement their Title III grants and 

subgrants in a manner consistent with these civil 

rights obligations. Finally, the guidance discusses 

the federal obligation to ensure that limited English 

proficient parents and guardians have meaningful 

access to SEA-, LEA-, and school-related information.

Valentino, R. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2014, March) 

Effectiveness of four instructional programs designed 

to serve English language learners: Variation by 

ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Unpublished 

manuscript, Center for Education Policy Analysis, 

Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, 

Stanford, CA. Retrieved from http://cepa.stanford.

edu/sites/default/files/Valentino_Reardon_EL%20

Programs_14_0326_2.pdf

Researchers set out to examine the effectiveness 

of different programs for ELs longitudinally, and to 

compare results for Latino and Chinese ELs. They 

found that in the short term, EL second graders in dual 

immersion scored below those in English immersion. 

Conversely, in the long term, those in dual immersion 

scored substantially higher than students in English 

immersion. Looking at both ethnicities across program 

type, the Chinese students’ English acquisition 

occurred faster than that of the Latino students.

Vialpando, J., Yedlin, J., Linse, C., Harrington, M., & 

Cannon, G. (2005). Educating English language learners: 

Implementing instructional practices. Washington, DC: 

National Council of La Raza. Retrieved from http://

www.brown.edu/academics/education-alliance/

sites/brown.edu.academics.education-alliance/files/

publications/edells_impinstprct.pdf

This publication aims to assist schools in developing 

their capacities to provide appropriate curricula, 

instruction, and assessment for ELs, and to increase 

educators’ awareness of how to access relevant 

resources. This guide “is designed for teachers, 

academic coaches, staff developers, and school 

leaders,” and provides “instructional strategies, 

techniques, and guidelines helpful for engaging ELs 

and other diverse learners.” 

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs, 

please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.
1

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR 

STAFFING AND SUPPORTING 

AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM 

This is the third chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter on “English Learner 

Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

STAFFING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

CHAPTER 3

Published April 2015

KEY POINTS

• LEAs must provide the personnel necessary to effectively 

implement EL programs. 

•	 Necessary personnel include teachers who are qualified

to provide EL services, core-content teachers who are

highly qualified in their field as well as trained to support EL

students, and trained administrators who can evaluate these

teachers. 

•	 LEAs must provide adequate professional development and

follow-up training in order to prepare EL program teachers

and administrators to implement the EL program effectively.

•	 LEAs must ensure that administrators who evaluate EL

program staff are adequately trained to meaningfully

evaluate whether EL teachers are appropriately employing

their training in the classroom in order for the EL program 

model to successfully achieve its educational objectives. 

• SEAs	must	ensure	that	LEAs	have	qualified	teachers and 

administrators for their EL programs.

Recruiting, developing, and retaining excellent educators 

is essential in order to ensure that EL program models 

successfully achieve their educational objectives. LEAs 

must hire an adequate number of teachers who are 

qualified to provide EL services, and core-content teachers 

who are highly qualified in their field as well as trained 

to support EL students. These teachers must meet state 

requirements and have mastered the skills necessary to 

effectively teach in the LEA’s EL program.

In some instances SEA endorsements or other 

requirements may not be rigorous enough to ensure that 

teachers of ELs have the skills to actually carry out the 

LEA’s chosen EL program. Indeed, a study from the Center 

on American Progress (Samson & Collins, 2012) found 

that “[d]espite the fact that 49 states have programs 

that are accredited. . . the enforcement of diversity 

standards and the use of research-based knowledge on 

best practices when it comes to ELs is often not reflected 

in program requirements.” In light of this, SEAs must at 

least monitor whether teachers are adequately trained. 

Having EL teachers who are well prepared and effectively 

employing their training in the classroom will help ensure 

that the EL program model successfully achieves its 

educational objectives.

LEAs must hire teachers qualified and certified to teach 

ELs, or support unqualified staff as they work towards 

obtaining the qualifications within a reasonable period 

of time (e.g., within two years). LEAs that cannot hire 

an adequate number of qualified ESL/bilingual or 

trained core-content teachers must ensure that current 

teachers obtain the requisite training, either through 

the SEA’s training and certification program or through 

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
2

the LEA’s own training program. In one study (NCEE, 

2015), a majority of participating teachers who received 

professional development (PD) on such topics as 

instructional strategies for advancing English proficiency, 

or teaching ELs in content areas, reported that the PD 

improved their effectiveness as teachers of ELs.

ELs who are also students with disabilities (dually 

identified ELs) may be receiving content instruction in 

general classroom environments and special education 

services as defined in their Individualized Education 

Program (IEP), as appropriate. Thus, it is important to train 

both general and special education teachers of dually 

identified ELs.

SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH 

LEARNER PROGRAM

KEY POINTS

•	 LEAsare obligatedtoprovide the resources

necessary to effectively implement EL programs.

•	 Necessary resources includeadequateand

appropriate materials for the EL programs.

LEAs must provide ELs with adequate and appropriate 

resources. These resources include sufficient quantities 

of instructional materials at the appropriate English 

proficiency and grade levels, bilingual materials for 

bilingual programs, and, when necessary, materials for 

students with disabilities. These resources should provide 

challenging academic content that is aligned with gradelevel state content standards. Title III funded services 

must supplement the core curriculum.

Resources may also include appropriately trained and 

supervised paraprofessionals, as appropriate, to provide 

support services, such as helping ELs understand tasks, 

restating directions, and interpreting for students. 

However, paraprofessionals, aides, and tutors may not 

take the place of qualified teachers except as an interim 

measure while recruiting, hiring, or training qualified 

teachers. 

SEAs and LEAs may wish to consider diversity workforce 

initiatives that include recruiting candidates of varied 

backgrounds and diverse language skills in order to meet 

the staffing needs of their EL program.

The following checklist is intended to assist SEAs and 

LEAs in ensuring that they provide the appropriate 

staffing for their EL programs. The checklist provides 

suggested questions only, and schools and LEAs should 

check with their SEA’s policies and federal guidance to 

ensure compliance. 

Qualified Teachers

 Do all EL program, core-content, and special

education teachers who instruct ELs have the

appropriate certification, licensure, or training to 

teach ELs? If not, are they working to obtain it within 

a reasonable period of time?

 Does the SEA provide guidance about and monitor

whether LEAs have qualified teachers to deliver

instruction to ELs?

 Do all teachers who instruct ELs demonstrate the

skills necessary to effectively implement the LEA’s EL

program?

 Does the LEA or SEA provide supplemental

professional learning opportunities, when necessary,

to ensure that the EL program is implemented 

effectively?

 Do all EL program, core-content, and special

education teachers who deliver instruction to ELs

with disabilities receive PD specifically related to 

teaching dually identified ELs?

Adequate Number of Qualified EL Staff

 Are the LEA’s EL services adequately staffed with

qualified ESL, bilingual, core-content, and special

education teachers trained in EL strategies, in order 

to meet ELs’ language and content needs?

 Are principals or other administrative staff tasked

with evaluating EL teachers certified and sufficiently

trained in EL strategies in order to meaningfully 

evaluate teachers who deliver instruction to ELs? 

 Are paraprofessionals adequately trained to

support ELs, and are they working under the direct

supervision of a qualified teacher?

Adequate Resources for an EL Program

 Does the LEA provide sufficient and appropriate

materials for EL students at all levels of English

language proficiency, including all grade levels, and 

for each EL program? 

 Do the resources provide challenging academic

content aligned with grade-level state content

standards?

Published April 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
3

TOOL #1 

STAFFING AND SUPPORTING 

AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM 

TOOLS

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 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 items does not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

The following set of tools is intended to help schools, LEAs, and SEAs in supporting the professional learning of 

teachers of ELs. The first three tools offer suggestions on how adult learning can inform PD as well as the various 

components of effective PD for teachers of ELs. The last tool offers and expands upon examples from teacher 

evaluation frameworks to address specific considerations for teaching ELs.

Tool #1, Professional Development for Teaching 

ELs, provides a frame for how PD may be structured 

to build on what teachers know and maximize adult 

learning. 

Tool #2, Professional Development for General 

Education Teachers of ELs, provides a recommended 

set of components for a comprehensive PD program 

for general education teachers of ELs. 

Tool #3, Meeting the Needs of ELs, delves deeper 

into what general education teachers should know 

to teach ELs effectively. 

Tool #4, Frameworks for Supporting Classroom 

Teaching of ELs, provides an overview of the work 

being done to incorporate effective instructional 

practices for ELs in current teacher evaluation and 

support systems by the American Institutes for 

Research’s Center on Great Teachers and Leaders 

and Center for English Language Learners, working

alongside the Council of Chief State School Officers’ 

ELL State Collaborative on Assessment and Student 

Standards (ELL SCASS). 

Published April 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
4

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

FOR TEACHING ELS

Effective PD must be ongoing, interesting, and meet the needs of participating personnel. The five core 

principles of PD for those teaching ELs, presented here, are based on the tenets of adult learning theory, the 

published work of several researchers, and “the fundamental belief that all teachers bring strengths to their 

profession and want their students to achieve and feel successful.” SEAs and LEAs can use these principles to 

structure PD opportunities to facilitate successful outcomes for EL teachers and their students. 

CORE PRINCIPLES FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

OF TEACHERS OF ELS

 Principle 1: Build on a foundation of skills, knowledge, and expertise. Professional development must

build upon the current foundation of basic skills, knowledge, and areas of expertise of the educational

personnel involved. Professional development will link new knowledge and activities with what the 

practitioners already know and are able to do, and will extend their thinking. Those attending any 

professional development activity will bring with them different experiences, knowledge, and skills. The 

individual(s) providing the activity must determine the current level of expertise, the needs of participants, 

and develop appropriate materials and activities. Professional development activities that do not target 

a specific audience must, at a minimum, offer basic knowledge to ensure that practitioners are operating 

from the same foundation. 

 Principle 2: Engage participants as learners. Professional development should include rich and varied

opportunities that engage educational personnel as learners and offer the opportunity to apply new skills

and knowledge. Professional development is effective when the materials are presented in a hands-on 

manner using techniques that suit various learning styles. In addition, practitioners need time to try out 

new methods in a safe environment before either moving to another topic or attempting the method in 

the classroom. 

 Principle 3: Provide practice, feedback, and follow-up. Professional development should offer educational

personnel opportunities for (1) practicing the new skills, strategies, and techniques; (2) providing feedback

on performance; and (3) continuing follow-up activities. A constructivist approach to staff development 

precludes the didactic presentation of decontextualized knowledge and skills. Principle 3 reinforces 

the precept that information about skills and knowledge must be presented to educational personnel 

in a manner that allows them to link new information to their current knowledge and skills, and allows 

them to construct their own meanings. Interactive, hands-on approaches to professional development 

make use of sound principles of adult learning. Modeling specific skills with practice sessions also will 

allow practitioners actively to make meaning out of the new information. Finally, a period of classroom 

application followed by formal observation and feedback should be used to reinforce the development of 

new skills.

 Principle 4: Measure changes in teacher knowledge and skills. Successful and effective professional

development should be manifested by measurable increases in participant knowledge and skills. The

evaluation of a participant’s knowledge and skills is essential to the effectiveness of the professional 

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
5

development program. In order to evaluate the participant, an appropriate amount and variety of 

information about what participants do and their effect on people should be collected. Assuming that the 

participants are teachers, then a variety of evidence of the genuine teaching work and performance of the 

teacher should be collected.

 Principle 5: Measure changes in student performance. Professional development should be linked to

measurable outcomes in student performance, behavior, and/or achievement. A direct link to student

outcomes is necessary to determine what types of professional development activities are effective

within specific contexts. The local level district involved in focused, long-term professional development 

activities must first identify what measurable student outcomes it wants to change. The problem for 

which professional development is sought may provide the type of outcome to be assessed. For example, 

a school district recently wished to link professional development more closely to student outcomes. The 

outcomes this district identified as important to change were the number of EL students (1) placed in 

pull-out English as-a-second language (ESL) programs; (2) who received low grades in reading, math, and 

science; and (3) who dropped out of school. Principle 5 states that a link must be established as evidence 

that professional development contribute to significant improvement in the quality of educational 

programs or student achievement. 

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHING ELS (CONTINUED)

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

Source: Casteel, C. J., & Ballantyne, K. G. (Eds.). (2010). Professional development in action: Improving teaching for English learners. Washington, DC: 

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://www.ncela.us/files/uploads/3/PD_in_Action.pdf
6

 A process for establishing high standards for English language acquisition, English language

development, and academic content in lesson planning and instruction.

 A process for integrating teachers’ understanding of academic content and English-language

proficiency standards with instruction in teaching methods and assessments.

 Knowledge and use of effective pedagogy.

 Methods for implementing instructional strategies that ensure that academic instruction in English is

meaningful and comprehensible.

 Exposure to a demonstration showing how to implement strategies that simultaneously integrate

language acquisition, language development, and academic achievement.

 Exposure to a demonstration showing why increasing academic achievement of ELs is dependent upon

multiple instructional approaches or methodologies.

 Providing a “strategies toolkit” for teachers, which offers ways to enhance and improve instruction for

struggling students, based on assessment results.

 Cultural awareness is also an important component of a professional development program. To

maximize achievement opportunities for ELs, educators must understand and appreciate students’

different cultural backgrounds.

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR 

GENERAL EDUCATION TEACHERS OF ELS

This tool has been adapted and reprinted with permission from the National Education Association (NEA). It is 

intended to help school, LEA, and SEA leaders think about PD for general education teachers of ELs. 

ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF 

EFFECTIVE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR 

GENERAL EDUCATION TEACHERS OF ELS

General education teachers need practical, research-based information, resources, and strategies to 

teach, evaluate, and nurture ELs. NEA recommends focusing on the following essential components of a 

comprehensive professional development program for general education teachers of ELs:

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

Source: National Education Association. (2011). Professional development for general education teachers of English language learners. (NEA Policy Brief). 

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB32_ELL11.pdf
7

 Oral language proficiency allows students to participate in academic discussions, understand

instruction, and build literacy skills.

 Students with more developed first language skills are able better able to develop their second

language skills.

 Vocabulary knowledge plays an important role in oral language proficiency. ELs require direct teaching

of new words along with opportunities to learn new words in context through hearing, seeing, and

saying them as well as during indirect encounters with authentic and motivating texts.

 Building oral proficiency in a second language can be supported by the use of nonverbal cues,

visual aids, gestures, and multisensory hands-on methods. Other strategies include establishing

routines, extended talk on a single topic, providing students with immediate feedback, opportunities 

to converse with teachers, speaking slowly, using clear repetition, and paraphrasing supports oral 

communication.

 Students should receive explicit instruction and preparation techniques to aid in speaking with others

by teaching words and grammatical features that are used in academic settings.

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3 

MEETING THE NEEDS OF ELS

This tool has been adapted and reprinted with permission from the Center for American Progress. It is taken 

from the study “Preparing All Teachers to Meet the Needs of English Language Learners: Applying Research 

to Policy and Practice for Teacher Effectiveness.”

The fact that the nation’s teachers are encountering and will increasingly encounter a diverse range of learners 

requires that every teacher has sufficient breadth and depth of knowledge and range of skills to be able to 

meet the unique needs of all students, including those for whom English is not their primary language. While 

it is true that there are educational specialists who have expertise in supporting ELs—English as a second 

language and bilingual teachers, for example—many teachers do not. Yet the reality is that most, if not all, 

teachers have or can expect to have EL students in their classroom and therefore must be prepared to best 

support these children. 

ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE FOR TEACHERS OF ELS

SUPPORT ORAL LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

EXPLICITLY TEACH ACADEMIC ENGLISH

 Academic language is decontextualized, abstract, technical, and literary. It is difficult for native

speakers and even more difficult for ELs.

 Academic language is not limited to one area of language and requires skills in multiple domains,

including vocabulary, syntax/grammar, and phonology.
8

 Understanding the differences of informal language and academic language is important.

Opportunities to learn and practice academic language are essential. Students must be exposed to

sophisticated and varied vocabulary and grammatical structures and must avoid slang and idioms.

 Opportunities and instruction on using academic language accurately in multiple contexts and texts is

of critical importance for all ELs.

 School-wide efforts and coordination of curriculum across content area helps teachers build on a

foundation of prior knowledge.

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3: MEETING THE NEEDS OF ELS (CONTINUED)

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

VALUE CULTURAL DIVERSITY

 ELs typically face multiple challenges in the transition from home to school as most are from culturally

diverse backgrounds. Schooling experiences should reaffirm the social, cultural, and historical

experiences of all students.

 Teachers and students should be expected to accept, explore, and understand different perspectives

and to be prepared as citizens of a multicultural and global society.

 Opportunities for teachers and students to interact with diverse cultures can be created in multiple

ways through inclusive teaching practices, reading and multimedia materials, school traditions and

rituals, assembly programs, and cafeteria food that represent all backgrounds.

 Involving parents and community in a meaningful way with outreach and letters to homes, bulletin

boards, and staff helps build appreciation of diversity.

Source: Samson, J. F., & Collins, B. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers to meet the needs of English language learners: Applying research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535608.pdf
9

 Marzano, R. J. (2013). The Marzano teacher evaluation model. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research 

Laboratory.

 Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Mintz, S. L. (2012). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS):

Secondary manual. Charlottesville, VA: Teachstone.

As part of this work each of these frameworks has been reviewed. The components or elements of the 

evaluation systems have not been changed, but staff has provided indicators and examples to illustrate how 

the components and elements might be enacted in classrooms with ELs. Subsequent activities to further 

develop indicators and examples of effective teaching for ELs include face-to-face collaborative work with 

ELL SCASS members and local educational agency representatives, and field-testing of the indicators and 

examples in select school districts. A publication will be prepared that documents the work.

EXAMPLES

Following are two sample elements from each of the three frameworks, with added indicators and examples 

for teachers working with ELs (in blue).

Published April 2015

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 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 items does not reflect 

their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4 

FRAMEWORKSFORSUPPORTING 

CLASSROOM TEACHING OF ELS

The American Institutes for Research’s (AIR’s) Center on Great Teachers and Leaders and Center for English 

Language Learners have been working collaboratively with the Council of Chief State School Officers’ 

ELL State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards (ELL SCASS) to ensure that current teacher 

evaluation and support systems incorporate effective instructional practices for ELs. An additional goal of the 

collaboration is to inform the next iteration of teacher evaluation and support systems and teacher pre-service 

evaluation systems. Diane August, a managing researcher at AIR, is leading this work. The following tool 

provides an overview and examples of the work currently underway.

INDICATORS AND EXAMPLES OF 

EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM TEACHING FOR ELS

OVERVIEW

ELs constitute a large and growing percentage of students in U.S. schools. For schools to educate a diverse 

student population effectively, all teachers of ELs must have the necessary knowledge and skills to do so. To 

measure and evaluate teacher competencies, many states have recently updated their teacher evaluation and 

support systems; however, additional attention to ELs would enhance instruction for these students.

Many states have based their new teacher evaluation systems on one of three major frameworks:

 Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument. Princeton, NJ: The Danielson Group.

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
10

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction

Element 2: Instructional materials and resources: Aids to instruction are appropriate to the learning needs 

of students. 

EL Indicator: Aids to instruction for ELs include supplementary resources to help make second 

language content comprehensible and concurrently build the student’s second language proficiency. 

Aids to instruction take into consideration ELs’ levels of proficiency and knowledge in their first 

language. 

EL Examples: 

 The teacher provides bilingual dictionaries and glossaries, English dictionaries and glossaries 

with comprehensible definitions, non-linguistic representations of text (e.g., audio recordings and 

visuals), graphic organizers tailored to specific content, and realia and manipulatives. 

 The teacher uses parents as multicultural resources, supplements texts with guest speakers who 

speak the students’ first language, and provides experiences for ELs that develop background 

knowledge related to content they are acquiring. 

 When learning objectives include home language knowledge and skills, resources are available in 

students’ home languages. 

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4: FRAMEWORKS FOR SUPPORTING CLASSROOM TEACHING OF ELS (CONTINUED)

Danielson: The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

Domain 3: Instruction

Component 3e: Engaging Students in Learning

Element 3: Instructional materials and resources: The instructional materials a teacher selects to use 

in the classroom can have an enormous impact on students’ experience. Though some teachers are 

obliged to use a school’s or district’s officially sanctioned materials, many teachers use these selectively 

or supplement them with others of their choosing that are better suited to engaging students in deep 

learning—for example, the use of primary source materials in social studies.

EL Indicator: In addition to the mainstream anchor texts used in English instruction, teachers provide 

supplementary materials on similar topics appropriate for different levels of English proficiency. 

Teachers give ELs opportunities to read in their home language to build the background knowledge 

they need for reading in English.

EL Examples:

 As students study a topic (e.g., ancient Greece), the teacher selects leveled readers on the same 

topic at different reading levels appropriate to the students’ current level of English proficiency, to 

supplement the grade-level textbook.

 Teachers select supplementary materials on the topic in a student’s first language, if the student 

is literate in that language, and provide related materials, including glossaries and bilingual 

dictionaries with definitions.

 Teachers scaffold the use of primary source materials by pairing ELs with students of the same first 

language who are more proficient in English to discuss the meaning of those materials.
11

Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors 

Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4: FRAMEWORKS FOR SUPPORTING CLASSROOM TEACHING OF ELS (CONTINUED)

Marzano: Teacher Evaluation Model 

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM

1. Providing Clear Learning Goals and Scales (Rubrics): The teacher provides a clearly stated learning goal

accompanied by a scale or rubric that describes levels of performance relative to the learning goal.

EL Indicator: The teacher provides English language proficiency (ELP) goals as well as content goals

and presents them in ways that are comprehensible to ELs. The teacher monitors performance related

to both types of goals.

2. Tracking Student Progress: The teacher facilitates tracking of student progress on one or more learning

goals using a formative approach to assessment.

EL Indicator: The formative approach to assessment measures second language development as well as

the development of content area knowledge. The teacher uses approved accommodations when

formatively assessing ELs.

EL Example: Formative assessment practices are scaffolded in ways that align with classroom

instructional supports. For example, if students at emerging levels of proficiency are given sentence

frames and word banks to respond to guiding questions, sentence frames and word banks can be used

to formatively assess students’ reading comprehension.

Pianta et al.: Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS)

Classroom Organization

1. Behavior Management: Behavior management encompasses the teacher’s use of effective methods to

encourage desirable behavior and prevent and redirect misbehavior.

EL Indicator: Some ELs may have challenging life experiences (e.g., poverty, traumatic experiences

in home countries, culture shock as new arrivals to the U.S.) that prevent them from fully engaging

in a classroom setting. The more aware teachers are of students’ prior experiences and home

environments, the better they will be able to support ELs.

EL Examples:

 Teachers meet proactively with parents (with interpreters as needed) to better understand home

environments and ways to support ELs.

 Teachers seek additional resources (e.g., counselors and social workers) to support individual 

students’ needs.

2. Productivity: Productivity considers how well the teacher manages time and routines so that instructional time is maximized. This dimension captures the degree to which instructional time is effectively

managed and down time is minimized for students; it is not a code about student engagement or about

the quality of instruction or activities.

EL Indicator: Because ELs are processing language and content simultaneously, they may need

additional wait time to answer questions and additional time to complete activities.

Source: August, D., & Predaris, T. (2015). Frameworks for supporting classroom teaching of English learners. Manuscript in preparation. Washington, DC: 

American Institutes for Research, Center on Great Teachers and Leaders, & Center for English Language Learners.
12

STAFFING AND SUPPORTING 

AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM 

RESOURCES

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 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 such 

inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

Alfaro, C., Durán, R., Hunt, A., & Aragón, M. (2014). 

Steps toward unifying dual language programs, 

Common Core State Standards, and critical pedagogy: 

Oportunidades, estrategias y retos. Association of 

Mexican-American Educators (AMAE) Journal, 8(2), 17-30. 

Retrieved from http://amaejournal.utsa.edu/index.

php/amae/article/view/194/153

This article discusses a partnership between Chula 

Vista Learning Community Charter School and the 

bilingual teacher education program at the College 

of Education at San Diego State University. The 

partnership prepares teachers and administrators to 

implement and develop dual language instruction 

that is aligned to Common Core State Standards. 

The article addresses the opportunities, strategies, 

and challenges of working together to implement a 

pedagogy-based curriculum.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). (n.d.). 

Teaching diverse learners. Retrieved from http://

connectingthedots.aft.org/hot-topics/teachingdiverse-learners

The Teaching Diverse Learners page on AFT’s 

Connecting the Dots website provides a number of 

resources to help LEAs in educating all students, 

with particular consideration of ELs and students 

with disabilities (SWDs). Among the resources 

included are elements of a teacher development and 

evaluation system developed by AFT and two of its 

state federations, the New York State United Teachers 

(NYSUT) and the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers 

and Health Professionals (RIFTHP), as part of the 

Educator Evaluation for Excellence in Teaching and 

Learning Consortium (E3TL) Investing in Innovation 

(i3) Project. This page includes links to teacher 

Published April 2015

practice rubrics with consideration of ELs and SWDs, 

developed by NYSUT and RIFTHP, as well as a basic 

training module to “make evaluators and educators 

more familiarized with ELLs and SWDs and the issues 

involved in instruction and classroom observations.” 

Funding for the work by E3TL came from an i3 grant 

provided by the U.S. Department of Education, and 

initial funding provided by the AFT Innovation Fund. 

Apthorp, H., Wang, X., Ryan, S., and Cicchinelli, L. (2012). 

Teaching English language learner students: Professional 

standards in elementary education in Central Region 

states (REL 2012–122). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education, Institute of Education 

Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and 

Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory 

Central. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/

projects/project.asp?ProjectID=103

This report from REL Central explores official 

professional teaching standards and “examines what 

K-8 general education teachers are expected to know

and be able to do” in order to teach ELs. It reviews

the standards for the coverage of six topics that

are important for improving student achievement,

according to research. All seven Central Region states

include in their teaching standards the knowledge and

skills needed for teaching ELs. Five states include in

their standards recognition and support for diverse

language backgrounds, and four states include in their

standards the knowledge of the theoretical basis of

second language acquisition and related strategies

of support. There are no state standards referencing

how to select materials or modify curricula to

accommodate the learning needs of ELs.

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

13

August, D., Estrada, J., & Boyle, A. (2012). Supporting 

English language learners: A pocket guide for state and 

district leaders. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes 

for Research. Retrieved from http://www.air.org/sites/

default/files/downloads/report/ELL_Pocket_Guide1_0.

pdf

This pocket guide provides research-based information 

to support state and district leaders in implementing 

reforms related to ELs on the first three principles 

in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

flexibility plan requirements. This guide suggests 

establishing empirically informed expectations 

for ELs’ academic progress that account for their 

expected or current levels of English proficiency. 

To create EL content-area performance goals that 

are both meaningful and challenging, expectations 

for EL content-area progress should reflect both 

the developmental nature of ELs’ English language 

acquisition and its role in ELs’ acquisition of gradelevel content knowledge in English. 

August, D., Salend, S., Staehr Fenner, D., & Kozik, P. (2012, 

July). The evaluation of educators in effective schools and 

classrooms for all learners (Issue Brief). Washington, 

DC: E3TL Consortium. Retrieved from http://

connectingthedots.aft.org/sites/aft/files/documents/

i3_Grant-ELL-SWD_Working_Group-Shared_Values_

Paper-FINAL-7-3-12.pdf

This brief provides an outline of the conditions that 

are necessary in order to ensure that all students 

can become successful learners in general education 

classrooms. The authors discuss what is necessary, 

not only in the classroom, but also in professional 

development to ensure that SEAs and LEAs evaluate 

teachers in ways that advance the learning of all 

students.

Ballantyne, K. G., Sanderman, A. R., Levy, J. (2008). 

Educating English language learners: Building 

teacher capacity (Roundtable Report). Washington, 

DC: National Clearinghouse on English 

Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from 

http://www.ncela.us/files/rcd/BE024215/

EducatingELLsBuildingTeacherCa.pdf

This report informs federal, state, and local policy 

makers responsible for teacher education and the 

PD of EL content teachers, and offers a functional 

resource guide for teachers and other practitioners. 

The goal of this report is to supplement the extensive 

literature on the preparation and PD of EL content 

teachers.

Bunch, G., Kibler, A., & Pimentel, S. (2012, January). 

Realizing opportunities for English learners in the 

Common Core English Language Arts and Disciplinary 

Literacy Standards. Paper presented at the 

Understanding Language Conference, Stanford 

University, Stanford, CA. Retrieved from http://

ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academicpapers/01_Bunch_Kibler_Pimentel_RealizingOpp%20

in%20ELA_FINAL_0.pdf

This paper examines the areas that the Common Core 

State Standards for English Language Arts and the 

literacy standards in History/Social Studies, Science, 

and Technical Arts highlight as necessary to achieve 

college and career readiness: (1) “engaging with 

complex texts”; (2) “using evidence in writing and 

research”; (3) “speaking and listening in order to work 

collaboratively and present ideas”; and (4) “developing 

the language to do all of the above effectively.” The 

authors contend that EL educators need to help 

ELs realize these opportunities to achieve success. 

The paper also argues that ELs may be well served 

by opportunities to explore, and defend, their own 

“textual hypotheses,” even if their interpretations 

differ from those of the teacher.

Casteel, C. J., & Ballantyne, K. G. (Eds.). (2010). Professional 

development in action: Improving teaching for English 

learners. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for 

English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from 

http://www.ncela.us/files/uploads/3/PD_in_Action.pdf

This compendium report contains various PD projects 

from both LEAs and colleges of education that train 

teachers to work with ELs. Entries include information 

on successful and innovative practices, including 

mentoring programs, methods to incorporate new 

classroom methodologies, and best practices for ELs 

with disabilities. The report also includes examples 

of successful collaborations between colleges 

of education and LEAs, and the evaluation of PD 

programs. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

14

Council of the Great City Schools. (2014, August). A 

framework for raising expectations and instructional 

rigor for English language learners. Washington, DC: 

Author. Retrieved from http://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/

DC00001581/Centricity/Domain/4/Framework%20

for%20Raising%20Expectations.pdf

In this report, the authors set a new vision for English 

Language Development. They share instructional

delivery models that are appropriate for urban school 

districts. They also provide step-by-step guidance 

to apply these models, along with accompanying 

materials, to hasten ELs’ acquisition of the academic

language skills and grade-level content necessary 

for success. The methods contained in this report can 

be used alone or in concert with other LEA-approved 

evaluation methods.

Deussen, T., Autio, E., Miller, B., Lockwood, A. T., & 

Stewart, V. (2008, November). What teachers should 

know about instruction for English language learners. 

Portland, OR: Education Northwest. Retrieved 

from http://educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/

files/resources/what-teachers-should-know-aboutinstruction-for-ells.pdf

In response to a 2007 request from the Washington 

state legislature, this report seeks to answer two 

fundamental questions about teaching ELs: (1) What 

is the basic foundation teachers need to have in order 

to work with ELs in the classroom? (2) How can EL 

specialists and classroom teachers collaborate for the 

benefit of ELs? The authors answered these questions 

through reviewing and evaluating the existing 

research and presenting the results in lay language. 

The report also identifies 14 key principles that 

teachers of ELs need to know in order to succeed.

Fenner, D., Kozik, P., & Cooper, A. (2014). Evaluating 

teachers of all learners. Leadership, 43(4), 8-12. 

Retrieved from http://content.yudu.com/Library/

A2r3h6/MarchApril2014Leader/resources/index.htm?r

eferrerUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsa.org%2FFunctio

nalMenuCategories%2FMedia%2FLeadershipMagazine

%2F2014-Archives%2FMarchApril-2014.aspx

This article offers an inclusive framework for teacher 

evaluation and support systems. The authors provide 

four principles of inclusive teacher evaluation, each 

with its own set of guiding questions and “look fors.” 

The principles may guide educators to reflect upon 

the inclusiveness of their classrooms with regard 

to ELs, and encourage improvements in the teacher 

evaluation process for all teachers who work with ELs. 

Francis, D., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, 

H. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education

of English language learners: Research-based

recommendations for serving adolescent newcomers.

(Under cooperative agreement grant S283B050034A

from U.S. Department of Education). Portsmouth, NH:

RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/

lep-partnership/newcomers.pdf

This document serves as a practical guide for 

policymakers, schools, and others who educate 

adolescent newcomers to the United States. The 

authors present both instructional and organizational 

guidelines for educational programs for adolescent

newcomers. These guidelines support both sides 

of the program—teaching and learning—and are 

designed to effectively meet students’ needs. 

Garcia, P. & Potemski, A. (2009, January). Key issue: 

Recruiting teachers for schools serving English language 

learners. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive 

Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://

www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/

recruitingTeachersforSchoolsServingELLs.pdf

This resource is a guide to recruiting highly qualified 

teachers who can best serve ELs in the classroom. It 

provides strategies and the research behind them to 

help LEAs find teachers who best meet their ELs’ 

needs. 

Goe, L., & Matlach, L. (2014, September). Supercharging 

student success: Policy levers for helping 

paraprofessionals have a positive influence in the 

classroom (Policy Snapshot). Washington, DC: 

American Institutes for Research, Center on Great 

Teachers and Leaders. Retrieved from http://

www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/Snapshot_

Paraprofessional.pdf

This policy snapshot discusses how paraprofessionals 

contribute to the classroom both academically 

and behaviorally. The authors provide policy 

considerations for how to prepare and supervise 

paraprofessionals, including insights into appropriate 

professional and career development for both 

paraprofessionals and the teachers who work with 

them.

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

15

Hill, J. D. & Hoak, H. (2012, April 30). English language 

learner resource guide: Top ten instructional tips for 

schools with a low incidence of ELLs. Denver, CO: 

Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning 

(McREL), North Central Comprehensive Center. 

Retrieved from http://www.education.ne.gov/

NATLORIGIN/PDF/Classroom%20Instructions/

ELL%20Resource%20Guide_%20Top%20Ten%20

Tips%20for%20Schools%20with%20a%20Low%20

Incidence%20of%20ELLs.pdf

This resource provides 10 research-based 

instructional strategies for students who struggle 

with learning academic language. These strategies 

may be used for ELs or for other students who 

have difficulties learning and adapting to academic 

language. 

Lawrence, M. (2012). ELL strategies for paraprofessionals. 

Retrieved from http://www.colorincolorado.org/

article/49061/

The author discusses the roles and responsibilities of 

paraprofessionals in EL classrooms, including their 

responsibilities to students during both instruction 

and testing, and offers tips on how they can 

collaborate effectively with classroom teachers. 

Lopez, A., & Zepeda, M. (2012). Dual language learner 

teacher competencies (DLLTC) report. Los Angeles, CA: 

Alliance for a Better Community. Retrieved from

http://www.buildinitiative.org/Portals/0/Uploads/

Documents/DualLanguageLearnerTeacherCompetencies

Report.pdf

This report discusses a set of “Dual Language Learner 

Teacher Competencies (DLLTC).” These competencies 

are seen as integral to the preparation of prospective 

teachers who wish to successfully work with dual 

language learners.

NCEE (U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences, National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional Assistance). (2015). Building 

teacher capacity to support English language learners 

in schools receiving School Improvement Grants (NCEE 

Evaluation Brief). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved 

from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20154004/

pdf/20154004.pdf

This study examines 35 schools that received School 

Improvement Grants from the 2010-11 through the 

2012-13 school years. It highlights the results of the 

analysis of 11 schools with a high proportion of ELs, 

and, specifically, how schools worked to improve 

their teachers’ capacity to teach ELs through staffing 

changes and PD. Teachers in these schools reported 

that increased PD on ELs improved their ability to 

teach ELs.

National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. 

(2012, July). Summary of “Expert forum on the 

evaluation of teachers of English language learners” 

(Forum Summary). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved 

from http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/

docs/ForumSummary_July2012.pdf

This brief documents the results of a one-day forum 

convening EL experts from around the country. It 

summarizes the findings of that forum on such topics 

as current efforts related to teacher evaluation and 

ELs, challenges in evaluating teachers of ELs, and 

SEA- and LEA-level considerations when designing 

evaluation and support systems.

National Education Association. (2011). Professional 

development for general education teachers of English 

language learners (NEA Policy Brief). Washington, DC: 

Author. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/

docs/PB32_ELL11.pdf

This policy brief “reviews the challenges and 

identifies essential, research-based components 

of a comprehensive professional development 

program for general education teachers of [ELs]. 

It focuses on principles, policies, and strategies to 

facilitate local professional development, and offers 

recommendations for national, state, and local 

policymakers.” 

Rodriguez, D. (2005). A conceptual framework of bilingual 

special education teacher programs. In Cohen, J.,

McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K., & MacSwan, J. (Eds.), 

Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on 

Bilingualism. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 

Retrieved from http://www.lingref.com/isb/4/152ISB4.

PDF

This research paper focuses on the need for bilingual 

special education teachers to undergo additional 

training during their teacher preparation programs. 

The author identified five main areas for success for 

bilingual special education teachers. These areas were 

then verified in a study of 100 educators as being 

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
Published April 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

16

important components to their teaching success. 

The author also gives recommendations on what 

additional information should be included in teacher 

preparation programs to help create successful 

bilingual special education teachers.

Samson, J. F., & Collins, B. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers 

to meet the needs of English language learners: Applying 

research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. 

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. 

Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

ED535608.pdf

This report summarizes “key findings drawn from the 

literature on promising practices that all teachers can 

employ when working with ELs,” and “the degree to 

which that research is integrated into the preparation, 

certification, and evaluation of teachers as a means 

for improving educational outcomes for ELs.” In order 

to improve the effectiveness of teachers of ELs, the 

authors recommend consistent and specific guidelines 

to address oral language, academic language, and 

cultural needs. 

Santos, M., Darling-Hammond, l., & Cheuk, T. (2012). 

Teacher development appropriate to support ELLs. Paper 

presentation at Understanding Language Conference, 

Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Retrieved 

from http://ell.stanford.edu/publication/teacherdevelopment-appropriate-support-ells

This paper outlines strategies to prepare teachers 

to better meet the needs of ELs, including “more 

aggressive and creative capacity-building initiatives 

that strengthen and integrate the disciplinary 

teaching strategies with literacy and language 

development strategies.” The authors discuss 

the value and implications of new partnerships, 

structures for collaboration, and time dedicated to 

engaging experts from different fields in the design 

and delivery of teacher preparation and PD. The 

link includes a related video in which Maria Santos, 

conference co-chair and senior advisor for leadership 

at Understanding Language, discusses how new 

approaches to teacher development are needed to 

help ELs and their teachers meet new demands in 

content and language learning.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, 

and U.S. Department of Justice. (2015, January). Dear 

colleague letter: English learner students and limited 

English proficient parents. Retrieved from http://

www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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. The guidance also includes discussion of how 

SEAs and LEAs can implement their Title III grants and 

subgrants in a manner consistent with these civil 

rights obligations. Finally, the guidance discusses the 

federal obligation to ensure that limited English 

proficient parents and guardians have meaningful 

access to SEA-, LEA- and school-related information.

Valdés, G., Kibler, A., & Walqui, A. (2014, March). Changes 

in the expertise of ESL professionals: Knowledge and 

action in an era of new standards. Alexandria, VA: 

TESOL International Association. Retrieved from 

http://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/papersand-briefs/professional-paper-26-march-2014.

pdf?sfvrsn=2

This paper is “intended to inform K-12 ESL 

professionals, a group of key individuals in U.S. 

education that includes teachers, teacher-leaders, 

school principals, district administrators, and other 

K-12 educators who work primarily or exclusively with 

ELs,” of the “challenges and possibilities associated 

with the new standards for the ESL profession in the 

K–12 context.” It also examines the ways in which 

implementation of these standards raises important 

questions about the views on the teaching and 

learning of English as a second language. 

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs, please 

visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/

You can access Tools and Resources for Staffing and Supporting an English Learner Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STAFFING AND SUPPORTING AN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM
1

Published June 2015

CHAPTER 4

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH 

LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND 

EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

This is the fourth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter on “English Learner 

Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO 

CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

KEY POINTS

• SEAs and LEAs must design and implement 

services and programs that enable ELs to 

attain both English proficiency and parity of 

participation in the standard instructional 

program, within a reasonable length of time.

• SEAs and LEAs must provide equal 

opportunities for EL students to meaningfully 

participate in curricular, co-curricular, and 

extracurricular programs and activities.

• SEAs must ensure that schools and LEAs use 

appropriate, reliable, and valid evaluations and 

testing methods to measure ELs’ acquisition of 

English and core-content knowledge.

Meaningful access to the core curriculum (e.g. reading/

language arts, math, science, and social studies) is a 

key component in ensuring that ELs acquire the tools 

to succeed in general education classrooms within a 

reasonable length of time. Thus, both SEAs and LEAs 

have the dual obligations to not only provide programs 

that enable EL students to attain English proficiency, 

but also to provide support in other curricular areas that 

will ensure ELs have equal opportunities to participate 

in the curriculum. LEAs may use a curriculum that 

temporarily emphasizes English language acquisition 

over other subjects, but any interim academic deficits 

in other subjects must be remedied within a reasonable 

length of time. LEAs may also offer EL programs that 

include grade-level content instruction in the student’s 

primary language. Additionally, for eligible ELs with 

disabilities, special education and related services, 

and supplementary aids and services, as specified in 

their individualized education programs (IEPs), must 

be provided in conjunction with the general education 

curriculum and any EL services. 

One measure of whether ELs are able to attain equal 

participation in the standard instructional program within 

a reasonable length of time is whether a beginner EL 

will be able to earn a regular high school diploma in four 

years. ELs in high school, like their never-EL peers, should 

also have the opportunity to be competitive in meeting 

college entrance requirements. According to the U.S. 

Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil 

Rights Data Collection (March 2014), while 69 percent 

of non-ELs have access to the full range of math and 

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS
2 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

Published June 2015

science courses, only 65 percent of ELs attend schools 

offering Algebra I, geometry, Algebra II, calculus, biology, 

chemistry, and physics.

When adapting instruction in the core curriculum, LEAs 

should provide EL services (e.g., bilingual, English as a 

Second Language [ESL], or other program of instruction) 

that are age appropriate and of equal rigor as non-EL 

instruction. Placing ELs in age-appropriate grade levels 

will provide meaningful access to programs designed 

to help ELs meet grade-level standards. Other factors 

LEAs may consider include determining if the curriculum 

reflects the experiences and perspectives of a variety of 

cultural and linguistic groups. Schools may also consider 

whether the school culture is inclusive of culturally and 

linguistically diverse (CLD) students in order to facilitate 

an effective learning environment for all students.

ELs are a heterogeneous group, diverse in ethnic and 

language backgrounds, socioeconomic status, education 

levels, and levels of English language proficiency (ELP). 

In order to effectively educate ELs, teachers must assess 

each student’s academic and language-development 

needs and tailor their instruction accordingly. Teachers 

also need to closely monitor student progress. Schools 

and LEAs must use appropriate and reliable evaluations 

and testing methods to measure ELs’ knowledge of core 

subjects. This includes assessing ELs in their primary 

languages when ELs receive content instruction in those 

languages. Additional information on monitoring the 

progress of ELs will be discussed in depth in Chapter 8 of 

this tool kit.

As noted earlier, if students develop academic gaps 

while focusing on English language acquisition, LEAs 

must provide compensatory and supplemental services 

to remedy those gaps. Provided that those services are 

offered during the instructional day, LEAs may also 

consider for example, ELs’ access to summer programs 

that can provide extra support. Sacks (2014) studied one 

statewide effort to provide summer programs for ELs, 

and concluded that programs with a mix of academic 

instruction and enrichment activities diminished summer 

learning loss for ELs. 

In addition to offering equal access to the core curriculum, 

LEAs have an obligation to provide ELs with equal 

opportunities to participate meaningfully in “all programs 

and activities . . . whether curricular, co-curricular, or 

extracurricular.” (U.S. Department of Education, Office 

of Civil Rights, and U.S. Department of Justice, January 

2015). This includes the obligation to provide ELs with 

equal access to all school facilities—including computer 

labs, science labs, etc. It also includes pre-kindergarten, 

magnet, and career and technical education programs, as 

well as counseling services, online and distance learning 

opportunities, performing and visual arts, athletics, 

and extracurricular activities, such as clubs and honor 

societies. As the next section explores, LEAs must also 

provide ELs with equal access to Advanced Placement 

(AP), honors, and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses, 

and gifted and talented education (GATE) programs.

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

providing equal access to curricular and extracurricular 

programs. The checklist provides suggested questions 

only. Schools and LEAs should check with their SEA’s 

policies and federal guidance to ensure compliance. 

English Language Development (ELD)

 Does ELD instruction prepare ELs to participate in the 

academic curriculum in English?

 Is the ELD instruction tailored to and does it build 

upon students’ levels of ELP?

 Is there ongoing, systematic assessment of ELs’ 

progress toward English proficiency?

Curricular and Extracurricular Programs

 Do the EL programs provide access to the same 

standard grade-level curriculum—or to a comparable 

curriculum, equally rigorous—as is offered to neverELs, while also providing appropriate language 

assistance strategies in core instruction?

 Are ELs integrated into the school’s educational 

programs, extracurricular offerings, additional 

services, and student body?

 Do ELs have equal access to all of the school’s 

facilities (e.g., computer labs, science labs, cafeteria, 

gym, and library)? 

 Are ELs assessed in the core-content areas with 

appropriate and reliable evaluations and testing 

methods?

 Do content assessments indicate that ELs are making 

academic progress while in the EL program, and that 

former ELs are performing comparably to that of their 

never-EL peers? If not, are timely services provided 

to ELs to accelerate academic progress? Are those 

services offered within the school day?

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 3

Published June 2015

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS 

TO ADVANCED COURSES AND GIFTED AND 

TALENTED PROGRAMS

KEY POINTS

• LEAs may not exclude ELs from GATE programs, or

other specialized programs, such as AP, honors, and

IB courses.

• LEAs must ensure that evaluation and testing

procedures for GATE or other specialized programs

do not screen out ELs because of their ELP levels.

• SEAs and LEAs should monitor the extent to which

ELs and former ELs are referred for and participate

in GATE programs and AP, honors, and IB courses, as

compared to their never-EL peers.

In school year 2011–12, ELs represented 5 percent of 

high school students, yet only two percent of all students 

who were enrolled in at least one AP course. That same 

school year, ELs represented only 1 percent of the 

students receiving a qualifying score of three or above 

on an AP exam. As shown below, non-ELs participated in 

AP programs at a rate of two-and-a-half times that of ELs 

and in GATE programs at a rate of three-and-a-half times 

that of ELs (U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil 

Rights, 2014).

Source: U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, Civil 

Rights Data Collection. (2014, March). Data snapshot: College and 

career readiness (Issue Brief #3). Washington, DC: Author.

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

2% 2%

5%

7%

Advanced

Placement Programs

Gifted and Talented

Education Programs

EL Students Non-EL Students

LEAs should identify all students, including ELs, who can 

participate in GATE or other specialized courses such as 

AP, honors, or IB. Expanded access to rigorous coursework 

helps prepare students for success in college and careers. 

LEAs must ensure that their GATE admission policies and 

practices do not limit ELs’ access to and participation 

in GATE. If an LEA believes there is an educational 

justification for requiring English proficiency in a particular 

GATE or other advanced program, it should consider 

whether a school could use a comparably effective policy 

or practice that would have a less adverse impact on 

EL students. Lastly, SEAs and LEAs should monitor the 

extent to which ELs and former ELs are referred for and 

participate in GATE programs and AP, honors, and IB 

courses, as compared to their never-EL peers. 

A case study of one LEA (Harris, Plucker, Rapp, & 

Martínez, 2009) found that ELs are underrepresented 

in gifted and talented programs, and presented several 

barriers related to LEA referral and identification policies. 

The challenges included (1) a lack of clear guidance from 

the SEA on identifying students from underrepresented 

populations who may be gifted; (2) the frequent 

mobility among some ELs; (3) some teachers’ belief 

that attaining ELP should occur before identifying ELs 

as gifted and talented; (4) assessment instruments that 

are not culturally appropriate; (5) a lack of professional 

development for general education teachers about the 

cultural backgrounds and histories of ELs; and (6) a lack of 

effective communication with EL parents. 
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

4 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

Published June 2015

To ensure that ELs have the opportunity to participate 

in GATE programs, LEAs should evaluate them using 

multiple assessment tools, methods (e.g., non-verbal 

assessments, such as drawing, matching, portfolios, 

performances, etc.), and contexts (e.g., in-school and outof-school), so that ELs can demonstrate their knowledge 

without relying primarily on their ability to use English 

(Harris, Rapp, Martínez, & Plucker, 2007). LEAs should 

also consult various sources, such as teachers, parents, 

and others. School personnel evaluating ELs for GATE 

services should also strive to understand ELs’ diverse 

cultural values because different cultures stress different 

gifts and talents. 

Additionally, ELs who are gifted and have a disability—

sometimes referred to as twice exceptional students—

must be carefully monitored so that they can receive 

EL and special education services, and gifted curricula 

at their ability levels. Twice exceptional ELs should 

receive services consisting of GATE instruction, English 

language support, special education and related services 

and supplementary aids and services (as specified in 

their IEPs), and appropriate accommodations and case 

management. 

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

providing equal access to advanced classes and GATE 

programs for ELs. The checklist provides suggested 

questions only. Schools and LEAs should check with their 

SEA’s policies and federal guidance to ensure compliance.

 Do GATE admission criteria apply equally to both 

ELs and their never-EL peers? Are criteria for ELs 

unwittingly or arbitrarily set higher (for example, 

admitting only students with “B” averages or higher, 

when grades may be affected by ELP levels)?

 Are GATE evaluations and testing methods available 

in formats that do not depend on students’ English 

language skills?

 Do GATE evaluations include multiple sources, 

methods, and recommendations from both ESL 

teachers and general education teachers?

 Do the school personnel making GATE program 

participation decisions have knowledge of ELs’ 

cultures and backgrounds?

 Do policies and processes enable ELs to access 

advanced classes and GATE programs for which ELP is 

not necessary for meaningful participation? 

 Do policies and processes ensure that advanced 

classes, GATE programs, and EL services are not 

scheduled at the same time?

 Do SEAs and LEAs have a process and policy to 

monitor the rate at which ELs and former ELs are 

referred for and participate in GATE programs and AP, 

honors, and IB courses, as compared to their never-EL 

peers? 
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 5

Published June 2015

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO 

CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

TOOLS

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 concerned 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 items does not reflect their 

importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links included here were verified on 

June 10, 2015. 

The following set of tools is intended to assist schools, LEAs, and SEAs in providing ELs with equal access to curricular 

and extra-curricular programs, advanced classes, and GATE programs. The tools provide information on how to access 

relevant school and district data, strategies for supporting ELs in meeting college- and career-ready standards and 

considerations in identifying and serving gifted ELs. 

Tool #1, Data Collection, provides information 

on how to access and use the data on ELs from 

the Office for Civil Rights’ Civil Rights Data 

Collection (CRDC). 

Tool #2, Six Key Principles for Teaching English 

Learners, will help guide LEAs as they work to 

develop standard-aligned instruction for ELs.

Tool #3, English Learners and the College- and 

Career-Ready Standards, provides examples of 

resources, instructional strategies, coursework, 

etc., designed to help ELs meet college- and 

career-ready standards in language arts and 

mathematics. 

Tool #4, Serving Gifted English Learners, 

includes policy recommendations for 

identifying and serving ELs who are gifted 

and talented. 
Published June 2015

6

TOOL #1

DATA COLLECTION

In analyzing school and LEA services to ELs, educators may begin with a review of the educational data 

available through multiple local, state, and national resources. One such resource is the CRDC website which 

provides data collected from schools and LEAs on key education and civil rights issues in our nation’s public 

schools—including student enrollment and educational programs and services—and disaggregated by race/

ethnicity, sex, EL status, and disability. The website presents this data using various reports and tools. It also 

provides school- and LEA-level summaries of the CRDC in its “Summary of Selected Facts” charts, and allows 

users to “drill down” into disaggregated data displays for all of the civil rights data from the 2011–12 school 

year for a school or LEA. The data can be an indicator of potential equity and opportunity gaps that may exist 

between ELs (or limited English proficient [LEP] students, as they are referred to here) and non-ELs. The data, 

however, does not disaggregate between ELs, former ELs, and never-ELs.

TIPS FOR FINDING CRDC DATA ON ENGLISH LEARNERS

How to Obtain and Use the Data

To investigate a school’s or LEA’s EL and non-EL enrollment rates in Algebra I, AP, and GATE programs as well 

as other information on ELs, follow these steps:

1. Visit OCR’s CRDC website at http://ocrdata.ed.gov.

2. Click on “School and District Search” on the left-hand navigation menu or on “2009–10 and 2011–12 LEA

or School Reports” in the center of the page.

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS
Published June 2015

7

3. Click on “Find School(s)” or “Find District(s),” depending on your search.

• To search for a school by name, enter its name into the “School Name” field, and click “School Search.” To

focus on a particular state, select the state before clicking “School Search.”

• To search for a district, click on the “Find District (s)” tab, enter the name into the “District Name” box,

and click “District Search.”

• Users can also search for a school or district by name, address, city, NCES ID, distance from zip code,

state, or regional office. Please note that searches are limited to 200 results.

4. Search results will appear below the “Additional Search” options. Click the school or district link from the

list of results. Clicking on the name of a school will take you to the “School Summary” page, while clicking

on the name of a LEA will take you to the “District Summary” page.

5. The “Summary of Selected Facts” page displays overview information about the chosen school or district.

Selected data are displayed in five categories: (1) Characteristics and Membership, (2) Staffing and Finance,

(3) Pathways to College and Career Readiness, (4) College and Career Readiness, and (5) Discipline,

Restraint/Seclusion, Harassment/Bullying.

6. To look into more detailed EL data, use the links in the light blue boxes called “Additional Profile Facts

Available.” Users can choose to view the data as charts or tables (counts or percentages). OCR has

compiled many pertinent EL facts into EL reports. Click on “English learner (EL) report” to review the main

report, or on the plus sign to the left to view an expanded menu that includes “Total LEP students” or “LEP

students enrolled in LEP programs” sub-reports.

• The main report includes data on the following topics:

 District characteristics

 LEP enrollment, including race/ethnicity and proportions served in English Language Instruction 

Educational Programs and under the Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA)

 Pathways to college- and career-readiness, including information on LEP enrollment in early childhood, 

advanced math and science, and AP classes; gifted and talented education programs; and SAT and ACT 

test taking 

 Discipline

• The sub-reports compare overall enrollment to the race/ethnicity, sex, and disability status of total LEP

students in the school or those enrolled in LEP programs.

• For additional data on ELs with disabilities, click “Students With Disabilities (IDEA)” or “Students With

Disabilities (504)” in the blue box on the right-hand side of the screen. At the bottom of the page are data

comparing rates of all students with those of ELs in an LEA who are served under IDEA or Section 504 of

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. Under “EDFacts IDEA” are data by type of disability.

7. Using the “Detailed Data Tables” under “Custom Chart & Detailed Data Tables” in the left-hand navigation

menu of the homepage (or in the main menu in the center of the page) allows users to view and compare

data across multiple years and schools. Users can access and customize detailed data tables.

TOOL #1: DATA COLLECTION (CONTINUED)

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

8 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

TOOL #2

SIX KEY PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH LEARNERS

The Understanding Language District Engagement Subcommittee at Stanford University compiled the 

following principles from papers presented and discussions had at its January 2012 meeting. In developing 

these principles, the subcommittee drew directly from theory, research, and professional knowledge related to 

the education of ELs and the papers presented at the conference.

KEY PRINCIPLES FOR ENGLISH LEARNER INSTRUCTION 

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English Language Arts and Mathematics as well as the Next 

Generation Science Standards (NGSS) require that ELs meet rigorous, grade level academic standards. The 

following principles are meant to guide teachers, coaches, EL specialists, curriculum leaders, school principals, 

and district administrators as they work to develop CCSS-aligned instruction for ELs. These principles are 

applicable to any type of instruction regardless of grade, proficiency level, or program type. Finally, no single 

principle should be considered more important than any other. All principles should be incorporated into the 

planning and delivery of every lesson or unit of instruction. 

1. Instruction focuses on providing ELs with opportunities to engage in discipline-specific practices, which

are designed to build conceptual understanding and language competence in tandem. Learning is a

social process that requires teachers to intentionally design learning opportunities that integrate reading,

writing, speaking, and listening with the practices of each discipline.

2. Instruction leverages ELs’ home language(s), cultural assets, and prior knowledge. ELs’ home language(s)

and culture(s) are regarded as assets and are used by the teacher in bridging prior knowledge to new

knowledge, and in making content meaningful and comprehensible.

3. Standards-aligned instruction for ELs is rigorous, grade-level appropriate, and provides deliberate

and appropriate scaffolds. Instruction that is rigorous and standards-aligned reflects the key shifts in

the CCSS and NGSS. Such shifts require that teachers provide students with opportunities to describe

their reasoning, share explanations, make conjectures, justify conclusions, argue from evidence, and

negotiate meaning from complex texts. Students with developing levels of English proficiency will require

instruction that carefully supports their understanding and use of emerging language as they participate

in these activities.

4. Instruction moves ELs forward by taking into account their English proficiency level(s) and prior

schooling experiences. ELs within a single classroom can be heterogeneous in terms of home language(s)

proficiency, proficiency in English, literacy levels in English and student’s home language(s), previous

experiences in schools, and time in the U.S. Teachers must be attentive to these differences and design

instruction accordingly.

5. Instruction fosters ELs’ autonomy by equipping them with the strategies necessary to comprehend and

use language in a variety of academic settings. ELs must learn to use a broad repertoire of strategies to

construct meaning from academic talk and complex text, to participate in academic discussions, and to

express themselves in writing across a variety of academic situations. Tasks must be designed to ultimately

foster student independence.

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 9

6. Diagnostic tools and formative assessment practices are employed to measure students’ content

knowledge, academic language competence, and participation in disciplinary practices. These assessment

practices allow teachers to monitor students’ learning so that they may adjust instruction accordingly,

provide students with timely and useful feedback, and encourage students to reflect on their own thinking

and learning.

TOOL #2: SIX KEY PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Source: Stanford University, Graduate School of Education, Understanding Language. (2013). Key principles for ELL Instruction. Stanford, CA: Author.

Retrieved from http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Key%20Principles%20for%20ELL%20Instruction%20with%20references_0.pdf

TOOL #3

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 items does not reflect their importance, 

nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 
Published June 2015

10

Continued on next page

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 items does not reflect their importance, 

nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #3

ENGLISH LEARNERS AND THE COLLEGE- AND 

CAREER-READY STANDARDS

While the following tool is designed for states that have adopted the Common Core State Standards it may prove useful 

for any state in applying college- and career-ready standards to ELs. The National Governors Association Center for 

Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers are the owners and developers of the Common Core State 

Standards. The resource below, and others, can be found on the http://www.corestandards.org website.

ELLs are a heterogeneous group with differences in ethnic background, first language, socioeconomic status, 

quality of prior schooling, and levels of ELP. Effectively educating these students requires diagnosing each student 

instructionally, adjusting instruction accordingly, and closely monitoring student progress. For example, ELLs who 

are literate in a first language that shares cognates with English can apply first-language vocabulary knowledge 

when reading in English; likewise ELLs with high levels of schooling can often bring to bear conceptual knowledge 

developed in their first language when reading in English. However, ELLs with limited or interrupted schooling will 

need to acquire background knowledge prerequisite to educational tasks at hand. Additionally, the development 

of native like proficiency in English takes many years and will not be achieved by all ELLs especially if they start 

schooling in the US in the later grades. Teachers should recognize that it is possible to achieve the standards for 

reading and literature, writing & research, language development and speaking & listening without manifesting 

native-like control of conventions and vocabulary. 

English Language Arts

The Common Core State Standards for English language arts (ELA) articulate rigorous grade-level expectations 

in the areas of speaking, listening, reading, and writing to prepare all students to be college and career ready, 

including English language learners. Second-language learners also will benefit from instruction about how to 

negotiate situations outside of those settings so they are able to participate on equal footing with native speakers 

in all aspects of social, economic, and civic endeavors.

ELLs bring with them many resources that enhance their education and can serve as resources for schools 

and society. Many ELLs have first language and literacy knowledge and skills that boost their acquisition of 

language and literacy in a second language; additionally, they bring an array of talents and cultural practices 

and perspectives that enrich our schools and society. Teachers must build on this enormous reservoir of talent 

and provide those students who need it with additional time and appropriate instructional support. This includes 

language proficiency standards that teachers can use in conjunction with the ELA standards to assist ELLs in 

becoming proficient and literate in English. To help ELLs meet standards in language arts it is essential that they 

have access to:

 Teachers and personnel at the school and district levels who are well prepared and qualified to support ELLs 

while taking advantage of the many strengths and skills they bring to the classroom;

 Literacy-rich school environments where students are immersed in a variety of language experiences;

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS
Published June 2015

11

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 items does not reflect their importance, 

nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #3: ENGLISH LEARNERS AND THE COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS (CONTINUED)

Continued on next page

 Instruction that develops foundational skills in English and enables ELLs to participate fully in grade-level 

coursework; 

 Coursework that prepares ELLs for postsecondary education or the workplace, yet is made comprehensible 

for students learning content in a second language (through specific pedagogical techniques and additional 

resources); 

 Opportunities for classroom discourse and interaction that are well-designed to enable ELLs to develop 

communicative strengths in language arts; 

 Ongoing assessment and feedback to guide learning; and 

 Speakers of English who know the language well enough to provide ELLs with models and support.

Mathematics 

ELLs are capable of participating in mathematical discussions as they learn English. Mathematics instruction 

for ELLs should draw on multiple resources and modes available in classrooms—such as objects, drawings, 

inscriptions, and gestures—as well as home languages and mathematical experiences outside of school. 

Mathematics instruction for ELLs should address mathematical discourse and academic language. This instruction 

involves more than vocabulary lessons. Language is a resource for learning mathematics; it is not only a tool for 

communicating, but also a tool for thinking and reasoning mathematically. All languages and language varieties 

(e.g., different dialects, home or everyday ways of talking, vernacular, slang) provide resources for mathematical 

thinking, reasoning, and communicating. 

Regular and active participation in the classroom—not only reading and listening but also discussing, explaining, 

writing, representing, and presenting—is critical to the success of ELLs in mathematics. Research has shown 

that ELLs can produce explanations, presentations, etc. and participate in classroom discussions as they are 

learning English.

ELLs, like English-speaking students, require regular access to teaching practices that are most effective for 

improving student achievement. Mathematical tasks should be kept at high cognitive demand; teachers and 

students should attend explicitly to concepts; and students should wrestle with important mathematics. Overall, 

research suggests that: 

 Language switching that can be swift, be highly automatic, and facilitate rather than inhibit solving word 

problems in the second language, as long as the student’s language proficiency is sufficient for understanding 

the text of the word problem;

 Instruction should ensure that ELLs understand the text of word problems before they attempt to solve them;

 Instruction should include a focus on “mathematical discourse” and “academic language” because they 

are important for ELLs. Although it is critical that students who are learning English have opportunities 

to communicate mathematically; this is not primarily a matter of learning vocabulary. Students learn to 

participate in mathematical reasoning, not by learning vocabulary, but by making conjectures, presenting 

explanations, and/or constructing arguments; and

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS
Published June 2015

12

TOOL #3: ENGLISH LEARNERS AND THE COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS (CONTINUED)

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 items does not reflect their importance, 

nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

 While vocabulary instruction is important, it is not sufficient for supporting mathematical communication. 

Furthermore, vocabulary drill and practice are not the most effective instructional practices for learning 

vocabulary. Research has demonstrated that vocabulary learning occurs most successfully through 

instructional environments that are language-rich, actively involve students in using language, require that 

students both understand spoken or written words and also express that understanding orally and in writing, 

and require students to use words in multiple ways over extended periods of time. To develop written and oral 

communication skills, students need to participate in negotiating meaning for mathematical situations and in 

mathematical practices that require output from students.

©2010, National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All 

rights reserved.

Source: Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.). Application of Common Core State Standards for English language learners. Retrieved from 

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/application-for-english-learners.pdf

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 13

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL # 4 

SERVING GIFTED ENGLISH LEARNERS

The National Association for Gifted Children developed a position statement that includes four dimensions 

and recommendations for equitably identifying gifted students from culturally, linguistically, and 

socioeconomically diverse groups. The following excerpted recommendations may help SEAs and LEAs 

develop and implement practices for ELs who are gifted. 

IDENTIFYING AND SERVING CULTURALLY AND 

LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE (CLD) GIFTED STUDENTS

Develop culturally sensitive identification protocols 

 NAGC recommends that states and school districts critically examine policies and practices related to identification 

to determine where and how diverse students are excluded from gifted programs. 

 To capture a holistic profile of all students, multiple criteria should be the norm. Qualitative and quantitative 

information gathered from families, teachers, and students should be part of the evaluative process. 

 All instruments used for screening and identification (e.g., checklists, referral forms, assessments) should be valid, 

reliable, and culturally and linguistically sensitive. 

Ensure early and continuous access to high-end curriculum 

 Teachers should provide CLD [culturally and linguistically diverse] students with opportunities to be inspired and 

to demonstrate their giftedness. These opportunities should be provided early and continuously to ensure student 

success in gifted programs. 

 Institutions of Higher Education and school districts should utilize the National Gifted Education Standards for PreK12 Professional Development and Using the Gifted Education Standards for University Teacher Preparation Programs 

as guides for developing coursework and opportunities for professional development.

Provide essential supports for CLD gifted students 

 Schools should create support programs to help gifted students from diverse backgrounds develop strong academic 

identities, learn coping strategies for dealing with negative peer pressure and discriminatory practices, and gain 

resiliency for responding to challenging life circumstances. Supportive programs should include opportunities to 

develop relationships with adults and college students from varied cultural groups across multiple domains. 

Establish effective home, school, and community connections 

 School leadership and personnel should be proactive in building trusting, reciprocal relationships with diverse 

families and communities. 

 School personnel should enlist the support of local businesses and civic and faith-based organizations as partners in 

identifying and educating CLD gifted children and youth 

 Schools are also encouraged to present information to faculty, staff, families, and the community about cultural 

influences on giftedness and how giftedness may be manifested. 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

14 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

 CLD parent support groups can be formed to help families of CLD students bond with each other and help schools 

enrich curriculum with information about unique cultural values. 

Focus Research on Equity Issues

 University, school district, private, and federal entities working in partnership should seek funding for research and 

demonstration projects related to equity issues. 

 Where best practices are currently in place, funding should be secured to ensure continuation of programming with 

consideration toward replicating such programs.

TOOL #4: SERVING GIFTED ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Source: National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC). (2011). Identifying and serving culturally and linguistically diverse gifted students (Position 

Statement). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/Position%20Statement/Identifying%20and%20Serving%20Culturally%20and%20Linguistically.pdf

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 15

Published June 2015

PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO 

CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

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 June 10, 2015. The list of resources will be updated and revised in the future.

American Educational Research Association. (2004, 

Winter). English language learners: Boosting academic 

achievement (Research Points Vol. 2 Issue 1). 

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.

aera.net/Portals/38/docs/Publications/ENglish%20

Language.pdf

This article provides guidance on how to teach literacy 

to ELs most effectively. The author identifies four 

critical components of reading instruction for ELs: 

(1) phonics, (2) vocabulary, (3) comprehension, and 

(4) speech. Several recommendations intend to help 

policy makers provide literacy support to ELs.

August, D., Salend, S., Staehr Fenner, D., & Kozik, P. (2012, 

July). The evaluation of educators in effective schools and 

classrooms for all learners (Issue Brief). Washington, 

DC: E3TL Consortium. Retrieved from http://

connectingthedots.aft.org/sites/aft/files/documents/

i3_Grant-ELL-SWD_Working_Group-Shared_Values_

Paper-FINAL-7-3-12.pdf

This issue brief discusses how to help all students 

experience success in general education classrooms. 

The authors base this discussion on four interrelated 

educational principles: (1) all learners and equal 

access; (2) individual strengths and challenges 

supporting diversity; (3) reflective, responsive, 

differentiated, and evidence-based practices; and (4) 

culture, community, and collaboration. 

Baker, S., Lesaux, N., Jayanthi, M., Dimino, J., Proctor, C. 

P., Morris, J., Gersten, R., Haymond, K., Kieffer, M. J., 

Linan-Thompson, S., & Newman-Gonchar, R. (2014). 

Teaching academic content and literacy to English 

learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE 2014-

4012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 

Institute of Education Sciences, National Center 

for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance 

(NCEE). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

practiceguide.aspx?sid=19

This practice guide offers “educators specific, 

evidence-based recommendations that address the 

challenge of teaching ELs in the elementary and 

middle grades: building their ELP while simultaneously 

building literacy, numeracy skills, and content 

knowledge of social studies and science. The guide 

provides practical and coherent information on critical 

topics related to literacy instruction for ELs, and is 

based on the best available evidence as judged by 

the authors.”

Bermudez, A., & Marquez, J. (1998). Insights into gifted and 

talented English language learners. Retrieved from 

the Intercultural Development Research Association 

(IDRA) website: http://www.idra.org/IDRA_Newsletter/

June__July_1998_Gifted_and_Talented_Students_

Celebrating_25_Years_1973_-_1998/Insights_into_

Gifted_and_Talented_English_Language_Learners/

This article discusses challenges in identifying gifted 

and talented ELs and strategies for doing so. The 

suggestions offered include guidelines to assist 

teachers and other school personnel in better serving 

these ELs. 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

16 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

Blocher, R. L. (n.d.). Our most able learners from culturally 

and linguistically diverse backgrounds [Presentation]. 

Retrieved from https://www.cosa.k12.or.us/

downloads/profdev/State%20EL%20Conference/2013/

Handouts/Rebecca%20Blocher.pdf

This presentation identifies characteristics of gifted 

and talented children for both the general student 

population and ELs. Key strategies for identifying 

gifted ELs include (1) using assessment data that are 

gathered from multiple sources and include objective 

and subjective data, and professional and nonprofessional input on behavior; and (2) implementing 

identification practices that are early, specific, and 

on-going. This presentation recommends advocating 

for gifted and talented ELs, involving parents in the 

process, identifying cultural and linguistic differences, 

and inviting input from classroom and EL teachers. 

Bunch, G. C., Kibler, A., & Pimentel, S. (2012). Realizing 

opportunities for English learners in the Common 

Core English Language Arts and Disciplinary Literacy 

Standards. Paper presentation at Understanding 

Language Conference, Stanford University School 

of Education, Stanford, CA. Retrieved from http://

ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academicpapers/01_Bunch_Kibler_Pimentel_RealizingOpp%20

in%20ELA_FINAL_0.pdf

This paper addresses literacy instruction of ELs 

as a shared responsibility among teachers across 

disciplines, as well as curriculum developers, textbook 

writers, assessment specialists, teacher educators, 

administrators, researchers, policy makers, and others. 

The authors focus on four areas emphasized by the 

CCSS—reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and 

overall language acquisition—and within each offer a 

new approach in language and literacy instruction.

Castellano, J. A. (1998). Identifying and assessing gifted 

and talented bilingual Hispanic students (ERIC Digest).

Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural 

Education and Small Schools. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED423104.pdf

This article addresses the issues in identifying 

and assessing gifted bilingual Hispanic students. 

It recommends the use of multiple criteria in the 

screening and identification process, including 

ethnographic, dynamic, and portfolio assessments; 

test scores; teacher observation; behavioral checklists; 

past school performance; parental interviews; writing 

samples; and input from the student’s identified 

cultural group. 

Coleman, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2012, February). The 

Common Core challenge for English language learners 

(ELLs). Principal Leadership, 12(6), 46-51. Retrieved 

from http://www.nassp.org/content/158/pl_feb12_

goldenberg.pdf

This article focuses on the challenges of implementing 

CCSS with ELs. The authors provide suggested 

guidelines for school leaders and teachers to promote 

high levels of content and language learning for 

ELs through instruction in the content areas and 

promoting ELP.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.). Application 

of Common Core State Standards for English language 

learners. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.

org/assets/application-for-english-learners.pdf

This document offers an overview of how the CCSS 

relate to ELs in ELA and mathematics. It highlights 

best practices for instruction and identifies current 

research on the topic. 

Cook, H. 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 discusses “the rate at which English 

learners acquire academic English, and the time 

needed for English learners to become English 

proficient.” The authors conclude that both language 

proficiency and academic content proficiency must be 

used in any definition of “English proficiency,” and that 

ELs do not all grow at the same rate.

Council of the Great City Schools. (2014, August).

A framework for raising expectations and instructional 

rigor for English language learners. Washington, DC: 

Author. Retrieved from http://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/

DC00001581/Centricity/Domain/4/Framework%20

for%20Raising%20Expectations.pdf

This document outlines a framework for acquiring 

English and attaining content mastery across the 

grades in an era in which college- and career-ready 

standards require more reading in all subject areas. It 

also includes criteria by which school administrators 

and teachers can determine whether instructional 

materials being considered for implementation 

are appropriate for ELs and are consistent with the 

college- and career-ready standards.
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 17

Council of Chief State School Officers. (2014, April). 

English language proficiency (ELP) standards with 

correspondences to k–12 practices and Common Core 

State Standards. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved 

from http://www.elpa21.org/sites/default/files/

Final%204_30%20ELPA21%20Standards_1.pdf

The ELP standards—developed for kindergarten and 

grades one, two to three, four to five, six to eight, 

and nine to 12—highlight the language knowledge 

and skills that allow EL students to succeed in ELA, 

as well as in literacy, mathematics, and science. 

The standards focus on a strategic set of language 

functions (“what students do with language to 

accomplish content-specific tasks”) and forms 

(“vocabulary, grammar, and discourse specific to a 

particular content area or discipline”).

Educational Testing Service (ETS). (2014, March). 

Assessment Services Supporting English Learners 

through Technology systems (ASSETS). Princeton, New 

Jersey: Author. Retrieved from http://www.k12center.

org/rsc/pdf/assets_handout_march_2014.pdf

This document summarizes ASSETS, a “nextgeneration, technology-based English language 

proficiency assessment system for English language 

learners in Grades 1–12,” and provides a timeline for 

its development and release. Based on the English 

language development (ELD) standards developed 

by the WIDA Consortium, ACCESS “will include a 

summative language proficiency assessment, an 

on-demand screener, classroom interim assessments, 

and foundations for formative assessment resources, 

as well as accompanying professional development 

materials.”

EngageNY. (2014). Scaffolding instruction for English 

language learners: Resource guides for English 

language arts and mathematics. Retrieved from the 

EngageNY website at https://www.engageny.org/

resource/scaffolding-instruction-english-languagelearners-resource-guides-english-language-arts-and

These resource guides for ELA and mathematics 

provide guidance on how to use the curricular 

materials on the EngageNY website. The site is 

maintained by the NY State Education Department 

to support the implementation of key aspects of the 

New York State Board of Regents Reform Agenda. The 

resource guides provide additional “scaffolds” for ELs 

appropriate for their level of ELP. 

Fultz, M., Lara-Alecio, R., Irby, B., & Tong, F. (2013). 

The Hispanic bilingual gifted screening instrument: 

A validation study. National Forum of Multicultural 

Issues Journal, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.

nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20

Volumes/Fultz,%20Monica%20The%20Hispanic%20

Bilingual%20Gifted%20Screening%20Instrument%20

NFMIJ%20V10%20N1%202013.pdf

This study examined the Hispanic Bilingual Gifted 

Screening Instrument (HBGSI) and analyzed its 

reliability and its concurrent validity with the 

Bilingual Verbal Ability Test (BVAT). The authors 

found that the HBGSI shows substantial evidence of 

reliability and of concurrent validity, indicating that 

this tool may help schools identify those ELs who 

may be gifted and talented.

Harris, B., Rapp, K. E., Martinez, R. S., & Plucker, J. A. 

(2007, November). Identifying English language 

learners for gifted and talented programs. Roeper 

Review, 29(5), 26-29. Retrieved from http://www.

redorbit.com/news/education/1152658/identifying_

english_language_learners_for_gifted_and_talented_

programs/

This study reports the findings from a case study on 

the strategies used to identify gifted and talented 

(GT) ELs. The study collected data from staff, parents, 

students, and a review of district and state policies. 

Results revealed both theoretical and practical 

challenges for identifying GT.

Harris, B., Plucker, J. A., Rapp, K. E., & Martínez, R. S. 

(2009). Identifying gifted and talented English 

language learners: A case study. Journal for the 

Education of the Gifted, 32(3), 368–393. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ835865.pdf

This study reports the findings from a case study of 

an LEA’s practices to identify ELs who may be gifted 

and talented. Data were collected from staff, parents, 

and students, and a review of district and state 

policies.

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

18 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

Haynes, M. (2012, October). The role of language and 

literacy in college- and career-ready standards: 

Rethinking policy and practice in support of English 

language learners (Policy Brief). Washington, 

DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved 

from http://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/

LangAndLiteracyInStandardsELLs.pdf

This policy brief describes (1) implementing 

new college- and career-ready standards for ELs; 

(2) understanding language acquisition among ELs; 

(3) aligning language proficiency and rigorous content 

standards for ELs; (4) analyzing language demands 

of the new standards; (5) changing the structure of 

secondary schools; and (6) changing state and local 

policies.

Kaplan, K. C., Lavadenz, M., & Armas, E. G. (2011, 

December). Essential elements of effective practices for 

English learners (Policy Brief No. 1). Long Beach, CA: 

Californians Together. Retrieved from Californians 

Together website: http://www.californianstogether.

org/docs/download.aspx?fileId=340

This document synthesizes effective practices 

for ELs; presents four elements needed to 

implement programs for ELs, how to monitor 

teacher effectiveness; and program and policy 

recommendations. Recommendations include (1) 

district and state level policies, (2) alignment of 

targeted fiscal and human resources, and (3) teacher 

preparation and credential requirements. 

King, K. A., Kozleski, E. B., & Lansdowne, K. (2009, May/

June). Where are all the students of color in gifted 

education? Principal, 16-20. Alexandria, VA: National 

Association of Elementary School Principals. 

Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/resources/2/

Principal/2009/M-J_p16.pdf

This article explores how to improve the quality of 

learning opportunities, such as gifted education, 

for students who are culturally and linguistically 

diverse (CLD). Suggested strategies include retaining 

dually skilled teachers—those who are qualified to 

teach both gifted education and English-language 

learning—and enhancing criteria to identify and 

recruit students. 

Koelsch, N. (2006, November). Improving literacy 

outcomes for English language learners in high 

school: Considerations for states and districts in 

developing a coherent policy framework (Research 

Brief). Washington, DC: National High School Center.

Retrieved from http://betterhighschools.org/docs/

NHSC_ImprovingLiteracy_010907.pdf

This brief addresses elements to consider when 

educating ELs at the secondary level: course 

offerings, overrepresentation of ELs in special 

education, graduation requirements, and professional 

learning for staff. The brief urges states and districts 

to “redesign literacy work for ELs in high school by 

moving from remediation to academic acceleration 

and enrichment.”

Mathews, M. S. (2009, September). English language 

learner students and gifted identification. Retrieved 

from http://tip.duke.edu/node/921

This post focuses on the underrepresentation of ELs 

in gifted education programs in the United States. 

The author states that there are multiple reasons for 

this but targets schools’ identification procedures 

as a major one. He also discusses how a school’s 

“underlying philosophy on gifted education” can be 

a hindrance to ELs accessing gifted programs, and 

encourages parents to ask questions of their child’s 

school concerning these opportunities.

Moschkovich, J. (2012). Mathematics, the Common Core, 

and language: Recommendations for mathematics 

instruction for ELs aligned with the Common Core. Paper 

presentation at Understanding Language Conference, 

Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Retrieved from 

http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/

academic-papers/02-JMoschkovich%20Math%20

FINAL_bound%20with%20appendix.pdf

This paper provides recommendations for 

developing mathematics programs for ELs that 

focus on improving mathematics instruction through 

language, professional development, and curriculum 

development.
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 19

National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC). (2011). 

Identifying and serving culturally and linguistically 

diverse gifted students (Position Statement).

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.

nagc.org.442elmp01.blackmesh.com/sites/default/

files/Position%20Statement/Identifying%20and%20

Serving%20Culturally%20and%20Linguistically.pdf

This position statement paper proposes a “multidimensional paradigm shift from a deficit- to a 

strength-focused perspective” to meet the needs of 

CLD students in gifted education. Recommendations 

and best practices focus on (1) developing culturally 

sensitive identification protocols; (2) ensuring early 

and continuous access to high-rigor curricula; (3) 

providing essential support for CLD gifted students; 

(4) establishing home, school, and community 

connections; and (5) focusing research on equity 

issues. 

National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC). (n.d.). 

Classroom instruction and teacher training for 

gifted students from diverse populations. Retrieved 

from http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/

resources/timely-topics/ensuring-diverse-learnerparticipation-gifted-1

This page on the NAGC website suggests the 

following four practices to promote equitable 

access and school success for underrepresented 

gifted students: (1) developing culturally sensitive 

identification protocols; (2) ensuring early and 

continuous access to high-end curriculum; (3) 

providing essential supports; (4) and establishing 

effective home, school, and community connections. 

Oakes, A., & Maday, T. (2009, August 30). Engaging 

Native American learners with rigor and cultural 

relevance (Issue Brief). Washington, DC: Center for 

Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. 

Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

ED507588.pdf

This issue brief makes the case that a blend of strong 

instruction and cultural relevance can collaboratively 

boost lagging achievement among Native American 

students. The authors review educational challenges, 

research on instruction, and best-practice case studies 

with Native American students from California, 

Colorado, and New Mexico.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Thomson, D. (2010, Fall). Gifted 

programming for poor or minority urban students: 

Issues and lessons learned. Gifted Child Today, 33(4), 

58-64. Retrieved from http://www.davidsongifted.

org/db/Articles_id_10670.aspx

This article presents research showing that successful 

programs for low-income or minority, gifted urban 

students are both multifaceted and flexible. It argues 

that effective programs must understand and build 

support within the family, school, and community. 

The article profiles two projects geared toward lowincome or minority, gifted urban students, Project 

Excite and Project LIVE. These programs are designed 

to prepare talented minority students to enter 

existing programs for advanced learners.

Plucker, J., Giancola, J., Healey, G., Arndt, D., & Wang, C. 

(2015, March). Equal talents, unequal opportunities: A 

report card on state support for academically talented 

low-income students. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Kent 

Cooke Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.

excellencegap.org/assets/files/JKCF_ETUO_Report.pdf

The authors of this report investigated state-level 

interventions designed to support “advanced learners” 

from low-income families. The study identifies statelevel policies that support advanced learning, and 

highlights “disparities in educational outcomes of 

advanced learners from low-income families.” Also 

included are best practices that states may adopt, and 

“interventions that have the greatest efficacy.” The 

authors also rate each state based on its policies and 

the outcomes of high-ability, low-income students.

Plucker, J. A., Hardesty, J., & Burroughs, N. (n.d.) Talent on 

the sidelines: Excellence gaps and America’s persistent 

talent underclass. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, 

Neag School of Education, Center for Education Policy 

Analysis. Retrieved from http://webdev.education.

uconn.edu/static/sites/cepa/AG/excellence2013/

Excellence-Gap-10-18-13_JP_LK.pdf

This report is a follow up to one released in 2010, Mind 

the (Other) Gap, which identified large gaps in academic 

achievement between low-income and minority 

students and their more affluent and white peers. 

The newer report reviews related studies since the 

2010 report; examines data both on the relationship 

between minimum competency achievement gaps and 

excellence gaps and on the overall level of excellence 

in American schools; and provides recommendations 

for research, policy, and practice. 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

20 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

Quinn, H., Lee, O., & Valdés, G. (n.d.). Language demands 

and opportunities in relation to next generation science 

standards for English language learners: What teachers 

need to know. Paper presentation at Understanding 

Language Conference, Stanford University, Stanford, 

CA. Retrieved from http://ell.stanford.edu/

sites/default/files/pdf/academic-papers/03-

Quinn%20Lee%20Valdes%20Language%20and%20

Opportunities%20in%20Science%20FINAL.pdf

This paper discusses challenges and opportunities 

for ELs as they are taught from the Next Generation 

Science Standards (NGSS). Topics include a focus 

on science and engineering practices, intersections 

between science practices and language learning, 

features of science language, supporting science and 

language learning for ELs, and general language 

support strategies. 

Sacks, L. D. (2014). About time: A mixed-methods 

evaluation of the Massachusetts Gateway Cities 

summer academies for English language learners. 

Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A. 

Humanities and Social Sciences, 76(5). Retrieved from 

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1645275090

This abstract describes a dissertation at Harvard 

University that examined Massachusetts’ Gateway 

Cities summer academies to determine their impact 

on ELs. The author found that the majority of the 

students followed in the programs retained or 

increased their English knowledge. 

San Diego County Office of Education. (n.d.) Common Core 

en Español: State Standards Initiative Translation 

project. Retrieved from: http://commoncore-espanol.

com/

This website provides resources for the CCSS in 

Spanish. It provides grade-by-grade translations of 

the standards as well as lists of books and resources 

for Spanish speakers.

Saunders, W., Goldenberg, C., & Marcelletti, M. (2013, 

Summer). English language development: Guidelines 

for instruction. American Educator. Washington, DC: 

American Federation of Teachers. Retrieved from 

https://www.aft.org//sites/default/files/

periodicals/Saunders_Goldenberg_Marcelletti.pdf

This article highlights individual studies and research 

syntheses that point to how educators might provide 

effective ELD instruction. This instruction focuses 

specifically on helping ELs develop English language 

skills during a portion of the school day that is 

separate from the instruction of academic content 

that all students need to learn. 

Slavin, R. E., & Cheung, A. (2004, July). A synthesis of 

research on language of reading instruction for English 

language learners. Retrieved from http://files.eric.

ed.gov/fulltext/ED483806.pdf

This article compares the results of reading 

performances for ELs who received bilingual 

instruction with those who were in English-only 

programs. The authors compared a total of 18 

programs and concluded that, although the number of 

programs identified was relatively small, the evidence 

“favors bilingual approaches, especially paired 

bilingual strategies that teach reading in the native 

language and English at different times each day.” 

Slavin, R. E., Madden, N., Calderón, M., Chamberlain, A., & 

Hennessy, M. (2010, January). Reading and language 

outcomes of a five-year randomized evaluation of 

transitional bilingual education. Retrieved from

http://www.bestevidence.org/word/bilingual_

education_Apr_22_2010.pdf

This paper compares the performances of Spanishdominant students in the fifth year of either a 

transitional bilingual education (TBE) program or a 

structured English immersion (SEI) program. Student 

performances were measured based on various 

standardized assessments and the results varied. 

However, they suggest that Spanish-dominant 

students performed “equally well” whether enrolled 

in a TBE or an SEI program.

Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC). (2013, 

September). How will Common Core State Standards 

impact Southeast Asian American students? (Fact 

Sheet). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.searac.org/sites/default/files/SEARAC_

COMMONCORE_2013.pdf

This fact sheet discusses the CCSS, how they will 

impact Southeast Asian American students, and 

SEARAC’s recommendations to policy makers to 

ensure that these students will benefit from Common 

Core implementation.
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 21

Stanford University, Graduate School of Education, 

Understanding Language. (2013, January). Key 

principles for ELL instruction. Stanford, CA: Author. 

Retrieved from http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/

default/files/Key%20Principles%20for%20ELL%20

Instruction%20with%20references_0.pdf

These principles gleaned from papers presented 

at the January 2012 Understanding Language 

Conference at Stanford University. The principles 

reflect “theory, research, and professional knowledge 

related to the education of ELs.” The principles may 

apply to any type of instruction “regardless of the 

grade, proficiency level or program type.”

Szymanski, T., & Shaff, T. (2013) Teacher perspectives 

regarding gifted diverse students. Gifted Children, 

6(1). Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/

viewcontent.cgi?article=1055&context=giftedchildren

This study examines teachers’ perceptions of 

their preparedness to teach in multicultural 

settings, specifically working with “gifted Hispanic 

children.” The authors find that in the “absence of 

training,” teachers’ perceptions of how to work with 

multicultural students vary. They conclude that 

“integrated trainings” are necessary to ensure that all 

students have access to these gifted programs.

TESOL International Association. (2013, March). Overview 

of the Common Core State Standards initiatives for ELLs 

(Issue Brief). Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.tesol.org/docs/advocacy/overview-ofcommon-core-state-standards-initiatives-for-ells-atesol-issue-brief-march-2013.pdf?sfvrsn=4

This issue brief discusses the “initiatives now in 

place to address the needs of English language 

learners” in the CCSS. The authors discuss the 

development of the ELP standards and what is 

necessary to ensure that ELs are accessing the CCSS. 

They conclude that although a great deal of work is 

underway, “significant resources and professional 

development for teachers” is necessary for successful 

implementation of the CCSS.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education 

Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation 

and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational 

Laboratory for the Central Region. (2011, June). 

Compilation of abstracts: Effective teaching of American 

Indian students. Retrieved from http://www.niea.org/

data/files/rel%20central%20american%20indian%20

abstract%20compilation%202011.06.01.pdf

REL Central, at the request of the National Indian 

Education Association (NIEA), compiled this review 

of 128 abstracts from research on the education of 

American Indian/Alaska Native youths. The research 

areas are broken down into the following categories: 

(1) language needs of native speakers, (2) the effects 

of family and community involvement, (3) alternate 

instructional techniques, (4) culturally responsive 

teaching, and (5) standards-based instruction. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office 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/offices/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 justification. The law does not require 

that all students receive the exact 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.

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

22 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

between students of different ethnicities (Latino 

and Chinese). They found that in the short term, 

EL second graders in dual immersion programs 

scored below those in English immersion programs. 

However, in the long term, those in dual immersion 

programs scored substantially higher than students 

in English immersion. Looking at both ethnicities 

across program types, Chinese ELs achieved English 

acquisition faster than Latino ELs.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, 

& U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. 

(2015, January). Dear colleague letter: English learner 

students and limited English proficient parents.

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/

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. The guidance 

also includes discussion of how SEAs and LEAs can 

implement their Title III grants and subgrants in a 

manner consistent with these civil rights obligations. 

Finally, the guidance discusses the federal obligation 

to ensure that limited English proficient parents and 

guardians have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and 

school-related information. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil 

Rights Data Collection (CRDC). (2014, March). Data 

snapshot: College and career readiness (Issue Brief #3). 

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www2.

ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdc-college-andcareer-readiness-snapshot.pdf

This brief provides a quick overview of data about the 

status of college and career readiness in schools. It 

addresses such areas as the growing opportunity gap 

in gifted and talented education for students of color, 

ELs, and students with disabilities. Information is also 

provided on access to English language programs and 

retention rates for these populations. 

Valentino, R. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2014, March). 

Effectiveness of four instructional programs designed 

to serve English language learners: Variation by 

ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Unpublished 

manuscript, Center for Education Policy Analysis, 

Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, 

Stanford, CA. Retrieved from http://cepa.stanford.

edu/sites/default/files/Valentino_Reardon_EL%20

Programs_14_0326_2.pdf

Researchers examined the effectiveness of 

different programs for ELs longitudinally and 

Vialpando, J., Yedlin, J., Linse, C., Harrington, M., & 

Cannon, G. (2005). Educating English language learners: 

Implementing instructional practices. Washington, DC: 

National Council of La Raza. Retrieved from 

http://www.nclr.org/images/uploads/publications/

file_ELL_Guide_2_FNL.pdf

This publication aims to assist schools in developing 

their capacity to provide appropriate curricula, 

instruction, and assessment for ELs, and to increase 

educators’ awareness of how to access relevant 

resources. This guide “is designed for teachers, 

academic coaches, staff developers, and school 

leaders” and provides “instructional strategies, 

techniques, and guidelines helpful for engaging ELs 

and other diverse learners.”

Wolf, M. K., Shore, J. R., & Blood, I. (2014, January).

English Learner formative assessment (ELFA): A design 

framework. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. 

Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/s/research/pdf/

elfa_design_framework.pdf

English Learner Formative Assessment (ELFA) is “a 

classroom-based, formative assessment of academic 

reading comprehension for ELs in middle schools.” 

In particular, the assessment is designed for use in 

classes that focus on English as a Second Language 

(ESL), ELD, or English Language Arts (ELA) to 

develop students’ ELP. As an assessment tool, ELFA 

may be used to help ELs develop academic reading 

comprehension skills. This resource includes a set of 

academic reading comprehension assessments and 

accompanying materials to be used as part of daily 

instruction. 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.
Published June 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Providing English Learners Equal Access to Curricular and Extracurricular Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING ENGLISH LEARNERS EQUAL ACCESS TO CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS 23

Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011, June). Socialpsychological interventions in education: They’re not 

magic. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 267–301.

Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/~gwalton/

home/Research_files/YeagerWalton2011.pdf

The authors studied interventions that target 

students’ “psychology,” such as “their beliefs that 

they have the potential to improve their intelligence 

or that they belong and are valued in school.” The 

interventions can help students of all backgrounds 

focus on learning opportunities in schools and have 

the potential to address challenges, such as low 

student achievement levels among minority and 

disadvantaged students. 

Zehler, A. M., Adger, C., Coburn, C., Arteagoitia, I., 

Williams, K., & Jacobson, L. (2008, June). Preparing to 

serve English language learner students: School districts 

with emerging English language learner communities

(Issues & Answers Report, REL 2008–No. 049). 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 

Institute of Education Sciences, National Center 

for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 

Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia. 

Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/

appalachia/pdf/REL_2008049front.pdf

This report may help school districts deal with newly 

enrolling or rapidly increasing numbers of ELs. It 

offers background information and experiences 

from districts that have faced similar challenges 

in providing services and infrastructure to support 

the success of these students. The appendixes 

provide links to resources; identify sources of expert 

guidance; and list for each state in the region the 

districts that enroll ELs, to support district sharing of 

experiences and information.

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs, 

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.
Published September 2015

CHAPTER 5

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR CREATING AN 

INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE 

UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

This is the fifth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Dear Colleague Letter on 

“English Learner Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING 

THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

KEY POINTS

• LEAs must limit the segregation of ELs to the

extent necessary to reach the stated goals of an

educationally sound and effective program.

• LEAs should not keep ELs in segregated EL

programs (or “EL-only” classes) for periods longer

or shorter than required by each student’s level

of English proficiency, time and progress in the EL

program, and the stated goals of the EL program.

• While ELs may receive intensive English language

instruction or bilingual services in separate classes,

it would rarely be justifiable to segregate ELs

from their non-EL peers in subjects like physical

education, art, music, or other activity periods

outside of classroom instruction.

Preparing all students for college, careers, and civic life 

begins with creating an inclusive and welcoming school 

climate where effective teaching and learning occur. 

Schools should take steps to create positive school 

climates that welcome diversity and that prevent and 

address inappropriate behaviors, such as bullying and 

harassment. Such positive steps include training staff, 

engaging families and community partners, and helping 

students develop social-emotional skills that include 

conflict resolution. For additional information on school 

climate from the U.S. Department of Education, see 

Guiding Principles: A Resource Guide for Improving School 

Climate and Discipline at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/

guid/school-discipline/guiding-principles.pdf/. As part 

of an inclusive school climate, LEAs should implement 

educationally sound and effective EL programs and limit 

the degree of segregation of ELs to what the program 

requires. 

EL programs may not segregate students on the basis of 

national origin or EL status unless there is a programrelated, educational justification for doing so. Programs 

that allow for continuous inclusion and interaction 

between ELs and non-ELs, such as two-way immersion 

programs, do not raise concerns about segregation. 

In addition, LEAs should not keep EL students in EL 

programs for periods that are longer or shorter than 

necessary to achieve the program’s educational goals. 

The degree of segregation should be necessary to achieve 

the stated goals of the program and required by each 

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 1
Published September 2015

student’s level of English language proficiency (ELP) 

and his or her time and progress in the EL program. 

For example, as ELs in a Spanish-transitional bilingual 

education program acquire higher levels of ELP, they 

should be transitioned from EL-only classes in Spanish 

into integrated content classes in English. These should 

include continued supports, as needed, in the students’ 

primary languages or other supports needed to access the 

content. Further, while ELs may receive intensive English 

language instruction or bilingual services in separate 

classes, it would rarely be justifiable to segregate 

them from their non-EL peers in subjects like physical 

education, art, music, or other activity periods (e.g., 

lunch, recess, assemblies, and extracurricular activities). 

Research shows that when placed at length in segregated 

settings, ELs may be at risk for school failure, delayed 

graduation, and negative academic self-concepts (Gandara 

& Orfield, 2010). 

Therefore, before placing an EL in an EL program that 

contains a degree of segregation, an LEA should ensure 

that (1) the degree of segregation in the program is 

necessary to achieve the goals of an educationally sound 

and effective program; (2) the EL has comparable access 

to the standard curriculum within a reasonable period of 

time; and (3) the ELs in the EL program have the same 

range and level of extracurricular activities and additional 

services as non-EL students. 

Some LEAs establish newcomer programs that are 

designed to help high school–age immigrant students 

develop linguistic, academic, and cultural skills. LEAs 

operating such programs should focus on increasing 

their inclusion by limiting the duration of self-contained 

newcomer programs (generally to one year) and regularly 

evaluating students’ ELP to allow appropriate transitions 

out of newcomer programs throughout the academic year. 

It is important to note that participation in a segregated 

EL program is voluntary. Further, the LEA should at 

least annually assess the ELP and appropriate level of 

language assistance for its ELs and determine their 

eligibility to exit. 

See Chapter 2 for information on educationally sound and 

effective programs, Chapter 7 for information on parents’ 

rights to opt their EL students out of EL programs or 

particular EL services, and Chapter 8 for information on 

monitoring and exiting ELs.

The following checklist is intended to assist SEAs 

and LEAs in determining whether their EL programs 

unnecessarily segregate ELs from non-ELs. The checklist 

provides suggested questions only. Schools and LEAs 

should check their SEAs’ policies and federal guidance to 

ensure compliance. 

 What steps have been taken to develop positive and 

inclusive school climates for ELs?

 What are the stated educational goals of the EL 

program? Is the degree of segregation necessary to 

achieve those goals?

 Does the degree of segregation decrease 

commensurate with ELs’ rising ELP levels as well as 

their time and progress in the EL program?

 Do EL students participate with their non-EL peers 

during

• grade-level curriculum?

• extracurricular activities?

• after-school activities?

• other subjects (e.g., physical education, art, music)?

 Is the EL program carried out in the least segregative 

manner, consistent with achieving the program’s 

stated educational goals?

 Have parents been informed of their right to opt 

their children out of the EL program or particular EL 

services? 

 Does the LEA at least annually assess the ELP of ELs 

and base program placement decisions on that data?

 How is EL student progress monitored and assessed 

throughout the school year to inform instruction and 

placement?

 For those EL students who are newcomers:

• Does the LEA offer a segregated newcomer

program? If so, is participation in it voluntary?

• Is participation in a newcomer program based

on ELs’ academic and linguistic needs and not

perceived behavior issues or other perceived needs?

• Does the LEA offer opportunities for ELs in a

newcomer program to take classes and participate

in activities with non-ELs?

• What support is provided to assist ELs to

successfully transition out of newcomer programs?

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

2 CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Published September 2015

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR 

AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY 

SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

TOOLS

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 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 items does not reflect 

their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links were verified on 

August 11, 2015.

The following set of tools is intended to help schools, LEAs, and SEAs to create welcoming and inclusive environments 

for and avoid the unnecessary segregation of ELs. The tools give tips on how to begin conversations about diversity and 

address bullying and harassment. They also provide a sample self-monitoring aid to avoid unnecessary segregation.

Tool #1, Diversity Self-Assessment, can help generate conversation among teachers and other education personnel on 

the topic of diversity.

Tool #2, Resources to Address Bullying and Harassment, provides resources to help address the bullying and harassment 

of ELs. 

Tool #3, Sample Self-Monitoring Aid, can help schools, LEAs, and SEAs monitor the extent to which ELs are segregated 

in order to address any potential issues.

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 3
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1

DIVERSITY SELF-ASSESSMENT 

This Diversity Self-Assessment tool has been reprinted with permission from the Council for Exceptional Children. It can 

be used by individual teachers or during administrative team meetings, professional development sessions, or district 

planning meetings. Educators, administrators, and other stakeholders can answer the questions below to “examine their 

assumptions and biases in a thoughtful and potentially productive way.” This tool can be adapted from an individual to a 

team-building tool in order to engage in conversations on diversity.

DIVERSITY SELF-ASSESSMENT

1. What is my definition of diversity?

2. Do the children in my classroom and school come from diverse cultural backgrounds?

3. What are my perceptions of students from different racial or ethnic groups? With language or dialects different from

mine? With special needs?

4. What are the sources of these perceptions (e.g., friends, relatives, television, movies)?

5. How do I respond to my students, based on these perceptions?

6. Have I experienced others’ making assumptions about me based on my membership in a specific group?

How did I feel?

7. What steps do I need to take to learn about the students from diverse backgrounds in my school and classroom?

8. How often do social relationships develop among students from different racial or ethnic backgrounds in my

classroom and in the school? What is the nature of these relationships?

9. In what ways do I make my instructional program responsive to the needs of the diverse groups in my classroom?

10. What kinds of information, skills, and resources do I need to acquire to effectively teach from a multicultural

perspective?

11. In what ways do I collaborate with other educators, family members, and community groups to address the needs of

all my students?

Source: Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating culturally responsive, inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 4-9. Retrieved from http://

www.nclr.org/images/uploads/general/A1d_%20Creating%20CR%20Classrooms.pdf

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

4 CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

TOOL #2

RESOURCES TO ADDRESS BULLYING AND HARASSMENT

As part of the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI), the U.S. 

Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department 

of Justice collaborated to form an AAPI Bullying Prevention Task Force (AAPI Task Force). The AAPI 

Task Force recently launched a bullying prevention website, available at http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/

aapi/aapi-bullying/. The website includes timely, relevant statistics about bullying, specifically bullying 

related to race, religion, or immigration status. It also provides links to useful resources from multiple 

federal agencies, many of which are available in multiple languages.

INFORMATION ON BULLYING AND HARASSMENT

• Some students, such as Micronesian students whose families have recently immigrated to the United States, face

bullying and harassment based on their immigration status.

• Other students are bullied for the way they look or for their lack of English language skills. One 2014 study found

that 67 percent of turbaned Sikh youths in Fresno, California, have experienced bullying or harassment.

• A 2012 survey found that half of the 163 Asian-American New York City public school student participants reported

experiencing some kind of bias-based harassment, compared with only 27 percent in 2009.

• Another 2012 survey found that 50 percent of Muslim youths surveyed experienced verbal or social bullying

because of their religion.

SAMPLE RESOURCES AVAILABLE

Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention 

http://www.stopbullying.gov

Video: Overview of School Districts’ Federal Obligation to Respond to Harassment

U.S. Department of Justice

Harassment Fact Sheet – English | Punjabi

Community Relations Service: Flyer on Student Problem Identification and Resolution of Issues Together – SPIRIT

“Federal Protections Against National Origin Discrimination” Arabic, Cambodian, Chinese, English, Farsi, French,

Haitian Creole, Hindi, Hmong, Korean, Laotian, Punjabi, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Urdu, Vietnamese

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights

OCR Fact Sheet on Harassment and Bullying (October 2010): English | Chinese | Korean | Punjabi | Tagalog | 

Vietnamese

OCR Fact Sheet on Bullying and Harassment of Students w/ Disabilities (October 2014)

“Dear Colleague” letter (Oct. 26, 2010) clarifying the relationship between bullying and discriminatory harassment, 

providing examples of harassment and illustrating how a school should respond in each case

Source: White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Bullying (Web page). Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/aapi/

aapi-bullying/

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 5
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

TOOL #3

SAMPLE SELF-MONITORING AID

The following tool is a self-monitoring aid that schools, LEAs, and SEAs can use to determine if ELs are unnecessarily 

segregated from their non-EL peers. The sample tool is based on current LEA and SEA tools. The form begins with key 

guidelines for creating an inclusive environment for ELs. 

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR ELs: 

SELF-MONITORING FORM 

KEY GUIDELINES • While most EL programs require that EL students receive separate instruction for a limited period of time

(e.g., a period of ESL), LEAs must implement each program in the least segregative manner, consistent with 

achieving the program’s stated educational goals.

• LEAs must ensure that (1) parents are informed that they have the right to opt their children out of the EL program

or particular EL services, and (2) EL students have their English proficiency assessed at least annually to ensure

appropriate placement and levels of language assistance services.

• LEAs should not keep EL students in EL programs for periods longer or shorter than necessary to achieve the

program’s educational goals, and the degree of segregation should not exceed that required by each student’s level

of ELP and time and progress in the EL program.

• LEAs operating newcomer programs or schools should limit the duration of self-contained newcomer programs (to

generally one year) and regularly evaluate students’ ELP to allow appropriate transitions into more integrated EL

programs throughout the academic year.

Elements to Support Inclusion

Rating

5 = All of the time

4 = Most of the time

3 = Some of the time

2 = Rarely

1 = Never

Evidence to 

Support Rating Needed Action

1. Vision

a. The LEA values and celebrates student

diversity as reflected in its organizational

vision or mission statement.

b. Leadership is knowledgeable about civil rights

laws as they pertain to English Learners.

c. The LEA has a plan of action to facilitate an

inclusive school culture and climate.

Continued on next page

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

6
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

TOOL #3: SAMPLE SELF-MONITORING AID (CONTINUED)

Elements to Support Inclusion

Rating

5 = All of the time

4 = Most of the time

3 = Some of the time

2 = Rarely

1 = Never

Evidence to 

Support Rating Needed Action

2. Program Placement

a. The LEA’s enrollment forms do not inquire

about students’ or their parents’ immigration

status.

b. The LEA does not segregate EL students from

their English-speaking peers, except where

programmatically necessary, to implement an

educationally sound and effective EL education

program.

c. If it is programmatically necessary to separate

ELs from their English-speaking peers for

part of the school day, the LEA (or SEA when

prescribing the EL program) provides guidance

on the amount of time that is instructionally

appropriate for each program model and the

ELs’ ELP level and time and progress in the

program.

d. ELs participate fully with their non-EL peers

in subjects like physical education, art, music,

or other activity periods outside of classroom

instruction (e.g., recess, lunch, and assemblies).

e. The LEA ensures that participating in an EL

program is voluntary by informing parents

of their right to opt their children out of EL

programs and services.

f. Program facilities and resources are

comparable to the facilities and resources of

the non-EL student population.

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 7
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

TOOL #3: SAMPLE SELF-MONITORING AID (CONTINUED)

Elements to Support Inclusion

Rating

5 = All of the time

4 = Most of the time

3 = Some of the time

2 = Rarely

1 = Never

Evidence to 

Support Rating Needed Action

3. Curriculum

a. The LEA ensures that ELs have access to

the same academic standards and rigorous

curriculum as their non-EL peers.

b. The LEA ensures that EL students have the

opportunity to enter academically advanced

classes, receive credit for work done, and have

access to the full range of programs as non-EL

students.

4. Assessment and Monitoring

a. ELs are included in SEA and LEA assessments.

b. Classroom assessments are culturally and

linguistically appropriate.

c. The LEA regularly monitors EL placement

patterns to ensure that placement decisions

are based on each student’s level of ELP and

time and progress in the EL program.

5. Access to Support Services and Activities

a. The LEA provides access to the full range of

academic instruction and supports including

special education and/or related aids and

services for eligible students with disabilities

under the Individuals With Disabilities Education

Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973, Title I services, career and technical

education, magnet programs, and any other

services and supports available to non-EL

students.

b. The LEA ensures that ELs have equal access to

all co-curricular and extracurricular activities.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

8
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

TOOL #3: SAMPLE SELF-MONITORING AID (CONTINUED)

Elements to Support Inclusion

Rating

5 = All of the time

4 = Most of the time

3 = Some of the time

2 = Rarely

1 = Never

Evidence to 

Support Rating Needed Action

6. Staffing

a. The EL program is staffed with teachers who

are qualified to provide EL services, corecontent teachers who are highly qualified in

their field as well as trained to support EL

students, and trained administrators who can

evaluate these teachers.

b. The LEA provides resources to support

the professional learning of all staff in the

requirements for EL inclusion and effective EL

instructional practices.

c. The LEA provides appropriate administrative

support for implementing inclusive practices

for ELs.

7. Communication with Students and Families

a. Limited English proficient (LEP) parents are

provided information in a language they

understand about any program, service, or

activity that is called to the attention of nonLEP parents.

b. Parents of ELs are involved as members of

school and LEA committees and engaged

in decision-making activities affecting their

children’s education.

c. The LEA provides support to schools in their

efforts to reach out to families and engage

them as partners in their children’s education.

d. The LEA provides parents with information,

training, and support that are respectful of

cultural and linguistic diversity.

Source: Belknap, B., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Creating an inclusive environment for ELs: Self-monitoring form. Silver Spring, MD: National 

Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/inclusive-environment-els-sample-monitoring-form

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 9
CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND 

AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION 

OF ENGLISH LEARNERS

RESOURCES

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 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 items does not reflect their 

importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links were verified on August 11, 2015. 

The list of resources will be updated and revised in the future.

Arias, M. B. (2007). PICS: The educational implications of 

linguistic isolation and segregation of Latino English 

language learners (ELLs). Retrieved from The Civil 

Rights Project website: http://civilrightsproject.

ucla.edu/legal-developments/court-decisions/theeducational-implications-of-linguistic-isolation-andsegregation-of-latino-english-language-learners-ells 

This article responds to the Supreme Court 2007 

decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools 

v. Seattle School District, also known as the “PICS”

case, and looks at it through the lens of the English 

acquisition needs of Latino ELs. The author argues 

that if Latino ELs are to receive constitutionally 

guaranteed access to opportunities to learn English, 

there must be mechanisms permitted for identifying 

and implementing best practices and beneficial 

educational contexts most conducive to ELs’ academic 

success.

Belknap, B., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Creating an 

inclusive environment for ELs: Self-monitoring form. 

Silver Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English 

Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from 

http://ncela.ed.gov/inclusive-environment-els-samplemonitoring-form

This is self-monitoring aid that schools, LEAs, and 

SEAs can use to determine if Els are unnecessarily 

segregated from their non-EL peers. The sample tool 

is based on current LEA and SEA tools. The form 

begins with key guidelines for creating an inclusive 

environment for ELs. 

Gandara, P., & Orfield, G. (2010). A return to the “Mexican 

room”: The segregation of Arizona’s English learners. 

Los Angeles, CA: University of California Los Angeles, 

The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved from ERIC website: 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED511322.pdf

This paper reviews the research on the impact of 

segregation on Latino students and ELs, including 

empirical research conducted in Arizona. It also 

reviews court decisions regarding students’ right to be 

integrated with their mainstream peers and provides 

data on the segregation of Arizona’s Latino students 

and ELs. This paper also reviews the existing literature 

on the impact of segregation at both the school and 

classroom levels and pays special attention to the 

effects of linguistic isolation for ELs. 

Haynes, J. (2014). Strategies for providing a bully-free 

environment for ELLs. TESOL Blog. Retrieved from 

http://blog.tesol.org/strategies-for-providing-a-bullyfree-environment-for-ells/

This article provides suggestions for teachers who 

would like to help students learn about bullying 

through “language, visuals, and peer translation.” The 

author offers strategies for helping ELs when they 

encounter bullying. The article is based on a chapter 

entitled “Sticks and Stones: Preventing Bullying in 

the Elementary School,” by Joann Frechette and Judie 

Haynes, in Authenticity in the Language Classroom and 

Beyond, edited by Maria Dantas-Whitney and Sarah 

Rilling.

Published September 2015

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

10 CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

Language Lizard. (2011). Eight tips to protect ELLs 

from bullying in your classroom and school. 

Retrieved from the Colorín Colorado website: 

http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/55612/

This article explains how ELs are often bullied 

and mocked because of their accents and diverse 

cultural characteristics. Included are suggestions 

and resources for families and teachers to help ELs 

understand and cope with bullying.

Mendez v. Westminster School District of Orange County, 

64 F. Supp. 544 (S.D. Cal. 1946), aff’d, 161 F.2d 774 

(9th Cir. 1947) (en banc). Retrieved from 

http://www.esauboeck.com/index/Mendez_v_

Westminster_64_FSupp_544 

This federal court case, brought by the fathers of five 

Mexican and Mexican-American students, challenged 

racial segregation of Mexican and Mexican-American 

students in Orange County, California, schools. The 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

ultimately held that the segregation of these students 

into separate “Mexican schools” was unconstitutional. 

This case preceded Brown v. Board of Education and 

laid the foundation for ending school segregation. 

Menken, K., Kleyn, T., & Chae, N. (2012). Spotlight on 

“long-term English language learners”: Characteristics 

and prior schooling experiences of an invisible 

population. International Multilingual Research Journal, 

6, 121-142. Retrieved from https://katemenken.files.

wordpress.com/2011/10/menken-kleyn-chae-2012-

spotlight-on-e2809clong-term-english-languagelearnerse2809d-imrj1.pdf

This article presents qualitative research findings 

about the characteristics and prior schooling 

experiences of “long-term English language 

learners (LTELLs),” who have attended U.S. schools 

for seven years or more, and about whom there is 

little empirical research, despite their significant 

numbers. Findings indicate that these students are 

orally bilingual for social purposes yet have limited 

academic literacy skills in English or in their native 

languages as a result of prior schooling experiences. 

Two main groups of LTELLs are identified: (1) students 

with inconsistent U.S. schooling, who have shifted 

between bilingual education, English as a Second 

Language (ESL), and mainstream classrooms with no 

language support programming, and (2) transnational 

students, who have moved back and forth between 

the United States and their families’ countries of 

origin. It argues that programming for LTELLs in 

high school must be distinctive and offers policy and 

practice recommendations.

Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating culturally responsive, 

inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children,

33(4), 4-9. Retrieved from http://www.nclr.org/

images/uploads/general/A1d_%20Creating%20CR%20

Classrooms.pdf

The author provides suggestions for creating 

culturally responsive classrooms to help culturally 

diverse students understand the meaning of what is 

being taught and the tasks they must perform. The 

author provides numerous suggestions for creating 

a culturally responsive classroom. A first step is to 

conduct a diversity self-assessment to understand 

assumptions and biases. 

National Education Association. (2012, May). Focus on 

Asian American and Pacific Islanders: API students at 

increased risk for bullying. Washington, DC: Author. 

Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/

FocusOnAsianAmPacificIsl.pdf

This article provides several reasons why AsianAmerican and Pacific-Islander students are bullied, 

such as “racial tensions, resentment of immigrants 

and language barriers . . . , the stereotype of API 

students as unassertive overachievers, and the spike 

in attacks against students perceived as Muslim.” 

It includes strategies and resources that schools, 

teachers, and policy makers can use to “protect 

students and empower the school community” 

against bullying. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. 

(2010, October). Dear colleague letter: 

Harassment and bullying. Retrieved from 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/

colleague-201010.pdf

This Dear Colleague Letter outlines the obligations 

of schools to prevent bullying and harassment 

on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or 

disability. The guidance draws a distinction between 

bullying and discriminatory harassment and outlines 

the obligations of schools to address both forms 

of student misconduct appropriately. The guidance 

points to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or 

national origin; Title IX of the Education Amendments 

of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS 11
sex; and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which 

prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. 

Schools have responsibilities under these statutes 

to prevent and address discrimination, sometimes 

beyond the requirements of their anti-bullying 

policies. The letter offers several concrete examples 

in which schools failed to respond to discriminatory 

student conduct appropriately and guidance on what 

should have been done differently. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office 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/offices/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 

justification. The law does not require that all students 

receive the exact 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, Office for Civil Rights, 

and U.S. Department of Justice. (2015, January). 

Dear colleague letter: English learner students and 

limited English proficient parents. Retrieved from 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 proficient parents and guardians 

have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and schoolrelated information. 

White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific 

Islanders. (n.d.). Bullying. (Web page). Retrieved from 

http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/aapi/aapi-bullying/

The White House Initiative on Asian Americans and 

Pacific Islanders was created to “improve the quality 

of life for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders,” and—

through the efforts of its Asian American and Pacific 

Islander Bullying Prevention Task Force—has a bullying 

prevention website that includes timely, relevant 

statistics about bullying and specifically bullying 

related to race, religion, or immigration status. 

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs,

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.

You can access Tools and Resources for Creating an Inclusive Environment for English Learners at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

12

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

CREATING AN INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR AND AVOIDING THE UNNECESSARY SEGREGATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

 

 

 

-

 

 

-

CHAPTER 6
 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING 

ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 

This is the sixth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Dear Colleague Letter on 

“English Learner Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH 

LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 

KEY POINTS 

• LEAs must identify, locate, and evaluate ELs with 

disabilities in a timely manner. 

• LEAs must consider the English language proficiency 

of ELs with disabilities in determining appropriate 

assessments and other evaluation materials. 

• LEAs must provide and administer special education 

evaluations in the child’s native language, unless 

it is clearly not feasible to do so, to ensure that a 

student’s language needs can be distinguished from a 

student’s disability related needs. 

• LEAs must not identify or determine that EL students 

are students with disabilities because of their limited 

English language proficiency. 

• LEAs must provide EL students with disabilities with 

both the language assistance and disability related 

services they are entitled to under federal law. 

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and related aids and services under Section 504). Disability 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) evaluations may not be delayed because of a student’s 

address the rights of students with disabilities in school limited English language proficiency (ELP) or the student’s 

and other educational settings. If an EL is suspected of participation in a language instruction educational 

having one or more disabilities, the LEA must evaluate program (LIEP). Also, a student’s ELP cannot be the basis 

the EL promptly to determine if the EL has a disability for determining that a student* has a disability. 

or disabilities and whether the EL needs disability- It is important for educators to accurately determine related services (which are special education and related 

whether ELs are eligible for disability-related services. services under IDEA or regular or special education and Research shows that there is variability in how LEAs 

*IDEA refers to a ‘child’ with a disability. In this document ‘student’ is used to mean ‘child’ under IDEA. 

NOTE: Neither this tool kit nor the above-cited OCR/DOJ Dear Colleague Letter is intended to be a replacement for the careful study of Part B of 

the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), which govern the education of students 

with disabilities. More information about IDEA and Section 504 can be found at: http://idea.ed.gov and http://www.ed.gov/ocr/publications. 

html#Section504, respectively. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

1 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

 

identify ELs as eligible for special education services; 

some LEAs over-identify and others under-identify 

ELs as eligible for special education services when 

compared to non-ELs (Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, & 

Higareda, 2005; Zehler et al., 2003). Researchers have 

identified four potential factors that may contribute 

to the misidentification of special education needs, 

and learning disabilities in particular, among students 

who are ELs: (1) the evaluating professional’s lack 

of knowledge of second language development and 

disabilities; (2) poor instructional practices; (3) weak 

intervention strategies; and (4) inappropriate assessment 

tools (Sánchez, Parker, Akbayin, & McTigue, 2010). 

Appropriate disability identification processes that 

evaluate the student’s disability-related educational 

needs and not the student’s English language skills will 

help school personnel to accurately identify students 

in need of disability-related services. In addition, 

LEAs must ensure that a student’s special education 

evaluation is provided and administered in the student’s 

native language or other mode of communication and in 

the form most likely to yield accurate information about 

what the student knows and can do, unless it is clearly 

not feasible to do so. Assessing whether a student has 

a disability in his or her native language or other mode 

of communication can help educators ascertain whether 

a need stems from lack of ELP and/or a student’s 

disability-related educational needs. 

Both IDEA and Section 504 require that schools provide 

a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to eligible or 

qualified students with disabilities. Under IDEA, FAPE 

requires, among other things, the provision of special 

education and related services at no cost to the parents 

in conformity with an individualized education program 

(IEP). An IEP is a written document, developed at a 

meeting of the IEP team that includes the specialized 

instruction and related services to address the student’s 

needs that result from the student’s disability. LEAs 

must develop and implement either an IEP under 

IDEA, or convene a group of knowledgeable persons 

to determine what services the student should receive 

under Section 504, as appropriate. Depending on the 

individual needs of the student, FAPE under Section 504 

could include regular or special education and related 

aids and services designed to meet the individual 

educational needs of students with disabilities as 

adequately as the needs of nondisabled students are 

met. While Section 504 and IDEA are different statutes, 

as reflected in ED’s regulations, one way to meet the 

requirements of Section 504 FAPE is to implement an 

IEP developed in accordance with IDEA. 

When an EL student is determined to be a child with 

a disability—as defined in IDEA, or an individual with 

a disability under the broader definition of disability 

in Section 504—the student’s EL and disability-related 

educational needs must be met. For EL students, 

in addition to the required IEP team participants 

under IDEA, it is essential that the IEP team include 

participants who have knowledge of the student’s 

language needs. It is also important that the IEP team 

include professionals with training, and preferably 

expertise, in second language acquisition and how to 

differentiate between the student’s needs stemming 

from a disability or lack of ELP. 

In addition, under IDEA, the LEA must take whatever 

action is necessary to ensure that the student’s parents 

understand the proceedings of the IEP team meeting, 

including arranging for an interpreter for parents with 

limited English proficiency or parents who are deaf. 

Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 

Equal Educational Opportunities Act, for an LEP parent to 

have meaningful access to an IEP or Section 504 plan 

meeting, it also may be necessary to have the IEPs, 

Section 504 plans, or related documents translated into 

the parent’s primary language. For more information on 

the separate Title VI obligations of school districts to 

communicate with LEP parents, see Chapter 10 of the 

EL Tool Kit. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

2 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

Should parents decline disability-related services 

under IDEA and Section 504, the SEA and LEA remain 

obligated to provide appropriate language assistance 

services to ELs. If parents opt out of specific EL programs 

and services, but have consented to the provision of 

disability-related services, the LEA remains obligated to 

provide such services as required in the IEP or Section 

504 plan, and to conduct ELP monitoring and/or provide 

language assistance as appropriate. See Chapter 7 of the 

EL Tool Kit for information on obligations to students 

who opt out of EL programs and services. 

The following checklist is intended to help SEAs and 

LEAs serve ELs who also have a disability. The checklist 

provides suggested questions only. LEAs and schools 

should check their SEA’s policies and procedures and 

federal regulations and guidance to ensure compliance. 

Identifying Whether an EL Has a Disability 

 When an EL is suspected of having a disability, 

is the disability evaluation administered within 

required timelines once required notices have been 

provided and parental consent has been obtained? 

 Is the reason for the disability evaluation based 

on the student’s suspected disability and need for 

disability-related services, and not on the student’s 

ELP? 

 Does the evaluation use appropriate methods 

to measure the student’s abilities and not the 

student’s English language skills? 

 Is the disability evaluation administered in the 

child’s native language, unless clearly not feasible 

to do so, to avoid misclassification? 

 Can the disability evaluation be conducted in more 

than one form, such as orally or in writing? 

 Did the IEP or Section 504 team gather information 

from the student, parents, and school records 

regarding the student’s previous educational 

experiences, language assessments, and special 

education assessments? 

Analyzing and Utilizing the Results of the Disability 

Evaluation 

 Are evaluators trained to conduct the evaluation 

and interpret the results, including knowing how 

to differentiate between language needs and a 

disability? 

 Does the IEP or Section 504 team include 

participants who have knowledge of the student’s 

language needs and training in special education 

and related services, and professionals with 

training in second language acquisition and EL 

services? Do these participants have the knowledge 

to recommend an educational program or plan 

that provides the student with appropriate services 

and/or supports based on the student’s disability 

and English language acquisition needs? Do these 

participants also understand cultural differences 

that may exist? 

 Have the parents been invited to participate in the 

planning process and informed of their rights, in a 

language they understand? 

 Have a trained interpreter and translated 

documents been made available for parents with 

limited English proficiency when required (e.g., 

parent notices under IDEA), or when determined 

necessary to ensure effective communication? 

Is a qualified sign language interpreter available 

for parents who have hearing loss and need such 

services? 

 Does the LEA’s educational program address the 

EL’s language needs and include disability-related 

services designed to address those needs? 

 Does the IEP or Section 504 plan outline when 

and by whom the accommodations, modifications, 

and supports in the IEP or Section 504 plan will be 

provided? 

 Will the recommended services allow ELs with a 

disability to be involved and make progress in the 

general education curriculum and to participate in 

extracurricular activities? 

 Is there a formal plan to monitor the progress of 

ELs with disabilities with respect to language and 

disability-based goals? 

 Have the student’s general education teachers and 

related service providers been made aware of the 

IEP or Section 504 services for the EL? 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

3 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 

TOOLS
 

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 concerned 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 items 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 10, 2015. 

The following set of tools* is intended to help schools, LEAs, and SEAs in appropriately identifying and serving ELs with 

disabilities. The tools give examples of how schools can refer, assess, and identify ELs who may have a disability; how to 

write an IEP and select accommodations for ELs with disabilities; and how to compare data about EL students with 

disabilities from LEA to LEA. 

Tool #1, Referral, Identification, Assessment, and Service Delivery to ELs with Disabilities, includes recommendations 

about ELs with disabilities from states with large or rapidly growing EL student populations. 

Tool #2, Considering the Influence of Language Differences and Disability on Learning Behaviors, offers a matrix of 

learning behaviors organized by skill area (e.g., listening, speaking, reading, etc.) and the varying roles that language 

difference or disability can play in those behaviors. 

Tool #3, Developing an IEP for an English Learner 

with a Disability, is a list of questions to consider 

for ELs during the IEP-writing process. 

Tool #4, How to Use Data from the Office for 

Civil Rights’ Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), 

provides instructions about how to access EL data 

at the LEA level, including data about ELs with 

disabilities. 

Tool #5, Selecting Appropriate Accommodations for 

Students with Disabilities, offers a list of “dos” and 

“don’ts” related to choosing accommodations for 

students with disabilities. 

*The list of tools above may not reflect the actual titles of the individual documents/sources. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

4 
 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #1 

REFERRAL, IDENTIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND SERVICE 

DELIVERY TO ELs WITH DISABILITIES 

This list of policy recommendations comes from the National Association of State Directors of Special Education as part 

of a publication dedicated to policies related to ELs with disabilities. For this publication, researchers interviewed SEA 

staff members from seven states that were selected because they had a large or rapidly growing EL population. The 

states were Alaska, Arkansas, California, Florida, Kansas, New Mexico, and Texas. 

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
 

The states that participated in the interviews offered a number of suggestions when asked for policy recommendations 

pertaining to referral, identification, assessment, and service delivery to ELs with disabilities. 

•	 Local accountability—Local planning areas that submit special education program plans to the state should 

be required to detail their process for the referral, identification, assessment, and service delivery to ELs with 

disabilities. 

•	 Clear policies and guidance—States should create a comprehensive policy for ELs with exceptionalities (including 

gifted education) based on current research followed by extensive guidance to localities. 

•	 Teacher training and licensure—States should facilitate and/or require all teachers to be trained to some extent 

in ESL [English as a Second Language] strategies and language acquisition. Further, policies should be in place 

that require any teacher who serves at least one EL to be trained in the appropriate ESL or bilingual education 

strategies necessary in order to meet the language development as well as academic needs of the students. 

•	 Coordinated policies between special education and EL professionals—States should consider developing 

policies that require and set parameters for communication and collaboration between EL and special education 

professionals at the point of entry to and exit from special education as well as during the monitoring process 

while ELs are being served in special education. 

Source: Keller-Allen, C. (2006). English language learners with disabilities: Identification and other state policies and issues. Alexandria, VA: 

National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). Retrieved from http://nasdse.org/DesktopModules/DNNspot-Store/ 

ProductFiles/31_37349382-317f-47d9-aefc-7a2c0636eb11.pdf 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 5 
 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #2 

CONSIDERING THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES 

AND DISABILITY ON LEARNING BEHAVIORS 

Differentiating language and literacy acquisition from disability can be difficult for some educators. The following table 

illustrates learning behaviors that a student might exhibit in class, followed by corresponding indicators of whether 

that behavior could represent a language difficulty or a potential learning disability. By determining the root of each 

student’s difficulties, educators can select the most appropriate and effective teaching and learning strategies to use. 

COMPARISON OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES
 

VERSUS DISABILITIES
 

This tool is taken from Meeting the Needs of English Learners with Disabilities: Resource Book by Jarice Butterfield, Ph. 

D., Santa Barbara County SELPA, on behalf of the SELPA Administrators of California Association. In the tool below, L1 

refers to the student’s native language and L2 refers to the student’s second language (English). It is reprinted with 

permission of Dr. Butterfield. 

Oral Comprehension/Listening 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student does not respond to verbal 

directions 

Student lacks understanding 

of vocabulary in English but 

demonstrates understanding in L1 

Student consistently demonstrates 

confusion when given verbal 

directions in L1 and L2; may be due 

to processing deficit or low cognition 

Student needs frequent repetition of 

oral directions and input 

Student is able to understand verbal 

directions in L1 but not L2 

Student often forgets directions or 

needs further explanation in L1 and 

L2 (home & school); may be due to 

an auditory memory difficulty or low 

cognition 

Student delays responses to 

questions 

Student may be translating question 

in mind before responding in L2; 

gradual improvement seen over time 

Student consistently takes a longer 

time period to respond in L1 & L2 

and it does not change over time; 

may be due to a processing speed 

deficit 

Continued on next page 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

6 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
 

 

 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #2: CONSIDERING THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES

 AND DISABILITY ON LEARNING BEHAVIORS (CONTINUED) 

Speaking/Oral Fluency 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student lacks verbal fluency (pauses, 

hesitates, omits words) 

Student lacks vocabulary, sentence 

structure, and/or self-confidence 

Speech is incomprehensible in L1 

and L2; may be due to hearing or 

speech impairment 

Student is unable to orally retell a 

story 

Student does not comprehend story 

due to a lack of understanding and 

background knowledge in English 

Student has difficulty retelling a 

story or event in L1 and L2; may 

have memory or sequencing deficits 

Student does not orally respond to 

questions, or does not speak much 

Lacks expressive language skills in 

English; it may be the silent period in 

2nd language acquisition 

Student speaks little in L1 or 

L2; student may have a hearing 

impairment or processing deficit 

Phonemic Awareness/Reading 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student does not remember letter Student will initially demonstrate Student doesn’t remember letter 

sounds from one day to the next difficulty remembering letter sounds 

in L2 since they differ from the letter 

sounds in L1, but with repeated 

practice over time will make progress 

sounds after initial and follow-up 

instruction (even if they are common 

between L1/L2 ); may be due to due 

a visual/auditory memory deficit or 

low cognition 

Student is unable to blend letter 

sounds in order to decode words in 

reading 

The letter sound errors may be 

related to L1 (for example, L1 may 

not have long and short vowel 

sounds); with direct instruction, 

student will make progress over time 

Student makes letter substitutions 

when decoding not related to L1; 

student cannot remember vowel 

sounds; student may be able to 

decode sounds in isolation, but 

is unable to blend the sounds to 

decode whole word; may be due to a 

processing or memory deficit 

Student is unable to decode words 

correctly 

Sound not in L1, so unable to 

pronounce word once decoded 

Student consistently confuses 

letters/words that look alike; makes 

letter reversals, substitutions, etc. 

that are not related to L1; may be 

processing or memory deficit 

Continued on next page
	

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 7 
 

 

 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #2: CONSIDERING THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES

 AND DISABILITY ON LEARNING BEHAVIORS (CONTINUED) 

Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student does not understand 

passage read, although may be able 

to read w/ fluency and accuracy 

Lacks understanding and background 

knowledge of topic in L2; is unable 

to use contextual clues to assist with 

meaning; improvement seen over 

time as L2 proficiency increases 

Student doesn’t remember or 

comprehend what was read in L1 or 

L2 (only applicable if student has 

received instruction in L1); this does 

not improve over time; this may 

be due to a memory or processing 

deficit 

Does not understand key words/ 

phrases; poor comprehension 

Lacks understanding of vocabulary 

and meaning in English 

The student’s difficulty with 

comprehension and vocabulary is 

seen in L1 and L2 

Writing 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Errors made with punctuation/ 

capitalization 

The error patterns seen are 

consistent with the punctuation 

and capitalization rules for L1; 

student’s work tends to improve with 

appropriate instruction in English 

Student consistently or inconsistently 

makes capitalization and punctuation 

errors even after instruction; 

this may be due to deficits in 

organization, memory or processing 

Student has difficulty writing Student’s syntax is reflective of The student makes more random 

grammatically correct sentences writing patterns in L1; typical error 

patterns seen in 2nd language 

learners (verb tense, use of adverbs 

or adjectives); improves over time 

errors such as word omissions, 

missing punctuation; grammar errors 

are not correct in L1 or L2; this may 

be due to a processing or memory 

deficit 

Student has difficulty generating a Student is not yet proficient in The student seems to have difficulty 

paragraph or writing essays but is writing English even though they paying attention or remembering 

able to express his or her ideas orally may have developed verbal skills; 

student makes progress over time 

and error patterns are similar to 

other 2nd language learners 

previously learned information; the 

student may seem to have motor 

difficulties and avoids writing; 

student may have attention or 

memory deficits 

Continued on next page 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

8 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #2: CONSIDERING THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES

 AND DISABILITY ON LEARNING BEHAVIORS (CONTINUED) 

Spelling 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student misspells words Student will “borrow” sounds from 

L1; progress seen over time as L2 

proficiency increases 

Student makes errors such as writing 

the correct beginning sound of words 

and then random letters or correct 

beginning and ending sounds only; 

may be due to a visual memory or 

processing deficit 

Student spells words incorrectly; 

letters are sequenced incorrectly 

Writing of words if reflective of 

English fluency level or cultural 

thought patterns; words may align to 

letter sounds or patterns of L1 (sight 

words may be spelled phonetically 

based on L1) 

The student makes letter sequencing 

errors such as letter reversals that 

are not consistent with L1 spelling 

patterns; may be due to a processing 

deficit 

Mathematics 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student manifests difficulty learning Student lacks comprehension of oral Student has difficulty memorizing 

math facts and/or math operations instruction in English; student shows 

marked improvement with visual 

input or instructions in L1 

math facts from one day to the 

next and requires manipulatives or 

devices to complete math problems; 

may have visual memory or 

processing deficits 

Student has difficulty completing Student lacks comprehension of oral Student forgets the steps required 

multiple-step math computations instruction in English; student shows 

marked improvement with visual 

input or instructions in L1 

to complete problems from one 

day to the next, even with visual 

input; student reverses or forgets 

steps; may be due to a processing or 

memory deficit 

Student is unable to complete word 

problems 

Student does not understand 

mathematical terms in L2 due to 

English reading proficiency; student 

shows marked improvement in L1 or 

with visuals 

Student does not understand how 

to process the problem or identify 

key terms in L1 or L2; may be a 

processing deficit/reading disability 

Continued on next page
	

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 9 
 

 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #2: CONSIDERING THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES

 AND DISABILITY ON LEARNING BEHAVIORS (CONTINUED) 

Handwriting 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student is unable to copy words 

correctly 

Lack of experience with writing the 

English alphabet 

Student demonstrates difficulty 

copying visual material to include 

shapes, letters, etc. This may be due 

to a visual/motor or visual memory 

deficit 

Behavior 

Learning Behavior Manifested Indicators of a Language Difference 

due to 2nd Language Acquisition 

Indicators of a Possible Learning 

Disability 

Student appears inattentive and/or 

easily distracted 

Student does not understand 

instructions in English due to level of 

proficiency 

Student is inattentive across 

environments even when language is 

comprehensible; may have attention 

deficits 

Student appears unmotivated and/or 

angry; may manifest internalizing or 

externalizing behavior 

Student does not understand 

instruction due to limited English 

and does not feel successful; student 

has anger or low self-esteem related 

to 2nd language acquisition 

Student does not understand 

instruction in L1 or L2 and across 

contexts; may be frustrated due to a 

possible learning disability 

Student does not turn in homework Student may not understand 

directions or how to complete the 

homework due to lack of English 

proficiency; student may not have 

access to homework support at home 

Student seems unable to complete 

homework consistently even when 

offered time and assistance with 

homework during school; this may 

be due to a memory or processing 

deficit 

Source: Butterfield, J. (2014). Meeting the needs of English learners with disabilities: Resource book. Goleta, CA: Santa Barbara County Special 

Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), on behalf of the SELPA Administrators of California Association. Retrieved from http://www.sbcselpa.org/ 

wp-content/uploads/2014/06/EL-Resource-Book-Revised-6-14.pdf. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

10 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #3 

DEVELOPING AN IEP FOR AN ENGLISH LEARNER 

WITH A DISABILITY 

The following list of questions is included as part of a National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities 

(NICHCY) training tool on IDEA. It is a tool to assist educators in developing IEPs for an EL student with a disability. 

A CHECKLIST FOR IEP TEAMS: CONSIDERING LIMITED 


ENGLISH PROFICIENCY—DEVELOPING THE IEP
 

In developing an IEP for a student with limited English proficiency, the IEP Team must consider the student’s level of 

ELP, this includes both second language conversational skills as well as academic language proficiency. Therefore, the 

IEP Team must consider the student’s level of ELP in listening, speaking, reading and writing, to support and strengthen 

implementation of the IEP goals. The IEP Team may find it helpful to ask the following framing questions: 

Framing Questions Yes No 

1. Has the dominant language in the home been considered? 

2. Has the child’s primary language of communication been considered? 

3. Have the cultural values and beliefs of the parents been considered in planning for the child’s 

education? 

4. Does the instructional plan incorporate a variety of instructional strategies? 

5. Is there a member of the IEP Team who has expertise regarding the student and understands how 

language develops as well as strategies that can be used when educating a student with English 

as a second language? 

6. Does the IEP Team have access to assessment data that is accurate and unbiased? 

7. Does the assessment information use a variety of methods and environments? 

8. Does the “present levels” statement in the IEP address both how the student uses his or her native 

language and how the student uses English? 

9. Do progress monitoring activities measure progress toward the mastery of English? 

10. Do the goals delineate in which language they will be addressed and who will be responsible for 

measuring the outcomes? 

11. Is there collaboration between general and special education as well as English as a Second 

Language and bilingual education if appropriate? 

12. Is an interpreter for the parents and the student present at the IEP meeting? 

Continued on next page
	

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 11 
 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #3: DEVELOPING AN IEP FOR AN ENGLISH LEARNER WITH A DISABILITY (CONTINUED) 

Framing Questions Yes No 

13. Are the IEP Team members trained in how to use an interpreter? 

14. Is the evaluation process that will be used carefully defined in the native language and in English 

during the reviews and reevaluations? 

15. Are the behaviors that are being measured carefully defined in the native language and in English 

during the reviews and reevaluations? 

16. Is the setting that the language is being measured in defined? 

17. Is the type of language that is being measured defined? 

Source: Center for Parent Information and Resources. (n.d.). Considering limited English proficiency: Developing the IEP. Retrieved from 

http://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/considering-lep/ 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

12 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

TOOL #4 

HOW TO USE DATA FROM THE OFFICE FOR 

CIVIL RIGHTS’ CIVIL RIGHTS DATA COLLECTION (CRDC) 

In analyzing school and LEA services to ELs, educators may begin with a review of the educational data available 

through multiple local, state, and national resources. One such resource is the CRDC website, which provides data 

collected from schools and LEAs on key education and civil rights issues in our nation’s public schools—including student 

enrollment and educational programs and services—disaggregated by race/ethnicity, sex, EL status, and disability. The 

website presents this data using various reports and tools. It also provides school- and LEA-level summaries of the CRDC 

in its “Summary of Selected Facts” charts, and allows users to “drill down” into disaggregated data displays for all of the 

civil rights data from the 2011–12 school year for a school or LEA. The data can be an indicator of potential equity and 

opportunity gaps that may exist between ELs (or limited English proficient [LEP] students, as they are referred to here) 

and non-ELs. The data, however, does not disaggregate between ELs, former ELs, and never-ELs. 

TIPS FOR FINDING CRDC DATA ON 


ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES
 

To investigate a school’s or LEA’s EL and non-EL enrollment rates, including race/ethnicity and proportions served under 

the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) or Section 504, follow these steps: 

1.		 Visit OCR’s CRDC website at http://ocrdata.ed.gov. 

2.	 Click on “School and District Search” on the left-hand navigation menu or on “2009–10 and 2011–12 District or 

School Reports” in the center of the page. 

3.		 Click on “Find School(s)” or “Find District(s),” depending on your search. 

•	 To search for a school by name, enter its name into the “School Name” field, and click “School Search.” To 

focus on a particular state, select the state before clicking “School Search.” 

•	 To search for a district, click on the “Find District(s)” tab, enter the name into the “District Name” box, and 

click “District Search.” 

•	 Users can also search for a school or district by name, address, city, NCES ID, distance from zip code, state, or 

regional office. Please note that searches are limited to 200 results. 

4.		 Search results will appear below the “Additional Search” options. Click the school or district link from the list 

of results. Clicking on the name of a school will take you to the “School Summary” page, while clicking on the 

name of a LEA will take you to the “District Summary” page. 

5.		 The “Summary of Selected Facts” page displays overview information about the chosen school or district. 

Selected data are displayed in five categories: (1) Characteristics and Membership, (2) Staffing and Finance, 

(3) Pathways to College and Career Readiness, (4) College and Career Readiness, and (5) Discipline, Restraint/ 

Seclusion, Harassment/Bullying. 

6.		 To look into more detailed EL data, use the links in the light blue box called “Additional Profile Facts Available.” 

Users can choose to view the data as charts or tables (counts or percentages). OCR has compiled many pertinent 

EL facts into EL reports. Click on “English learner (EL) report” to review the main report, or on the plus sign to 

view an expanded menu that includes “Total LEP students” or “LEP students enrolled in LEP programs” subreports. Users can chose to view the data as charts or tables (counts or percentages). 

•	 The main EL report includes data on the following topics: 

•	 Race/ethnicity of ELs 

•	 Sex of ELs 

•	 Proportions of ELs served under IDEA. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

13 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

TOOL #4: HOW TO USE DATA FROM THE OFFICE FOR 

CIVIL RIGHTS’ CIVIL RIGHTS DATA COLLECTION (CRDC) (CONTINUED) 

•	 Users can find information on the percentage of ELs enrolled in IDEA compared to overall enrollment in the 

LEA in two locations: 

•	 If the user clicks “English Learner (EL) Report” without expanding the menu, and scrolls down, the user will 

see pie charts similar to the one below: 

•	 If the user expands the “English Learner (EL) Report” tree and then clicks on “Total LEP Students” or “LEP 

Students Enrolled in LEP Programs” and then scrolls down the page, the user will see bar charts similar to 

the one below: 

•	 The sub-reports compare overall enrollment to the race/ethnicity, sex, and disability status of total LEP 

students in the school or those enrolled in LEP programs. 

•	 For additional data on ELs with disabilities, click “Students with Disabilities (IDEA)” or “Students with 

Disabilities (504)” in the blue box on the right-hand side of the screen. At the bottom of the page are data 

comparing rates of all students with those of ELs in a school or district who are served under IDEA or Section 

504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. Under “EDFacts IDEA” are data by type of disability. 

7.		 Using the “Detailed Data Tables” under “Custom Chart & Detailed Data Tables” in the left-hand navigation menu 

of the homepage (or in the main menu in the center of the page) allows users to view and compare data across 

multiple years and schools. Users can access and customize detailed data tables. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

14 
 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

TOOL #5 

SELECTING APPROPRIATE ACCOMMODATIONS 

FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 

ELs with disabilities may need accommodations for instruction and assessment. Decisions about whether to use 

accommodations, and what accommodations to use, should be made on an individual student basis and consider each 

student’s needs and past and present level of performance. Accommodations should also be written in the IEP. 

“DOS” AND “DON’TS” WHEN SELECTING ACCOMMODATIONS
 

The following table lists common “dos” and “don’ts” for selecting appropriate accommodations for students with 

disabilities. This table is from the Accommodations Manual: How to Select, Administer, and Evaluate Use of Accommodation 

for Instruction and Assessment of Students with Disabilities, produced by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) 

State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards Assessing Special Education Students. According to this 

document, “the guidance in the manual pertains to students with disabilities who participate in large-scale assessments 

and the instruction they receive.” This list, while generic to all students with disabilities, can be adapted for ELs based 

on SEA and LEA policies and requirements. 

Do...make accommodation decisions based on 

individualized needs. 

Don’t...make accommodations decisions based on whatever 

is easiest to do (e.g., preferential seating). 

Do...select accommodations that reduce the effect of 

the disability to access instruction and demonstrate 

learning. 

Don’t...select accommodations unrelated to documented 

student learning needs or are intended to give students an 

unfair advantage. 

Do...be certain to document instructional and 

assessment accommodation(s) on the IEP or 504 plans. 

Don’t...use an accommodation that has not been 

documented on the IEP or 504 plans. 

Do...be familiar with the types of accommodations 

that can be used as both instructional and assessment 

accommodations. 

Don’t...assume that all instructional accommodations are 

appropriate for use on assessments. 

Do...be specific about the “Where, When, Who, and 

How” of providing accommodations. 

Don’t...simply indicate an accommodation will be provided 

“as appropriate” or “as necessary.” 

Do...refer to state accommodations policies and 

understand implications of selections. 

Don’t...check every accommodation possible on a checklist 

simply to be “safe.” 

Do...evaluate accommodations used by the student. Don’t...assume the same accommodations remain 

appropriate year after year. 

Do...get input about accommodations from teachers, 

parents, and students, and use it to make decisions at 

IEP team or 504 planning committee meetings. 

Don’t...make decisions about instructional and assessment 

accommodations alone. 

Do...provide accommodations for assessments 

routinely used for classroom instruction. 

Don’t...provide an assessment accommodation for the first 

time on the day of a test. 

Do...select accommodations based on specific 

individual needs in each content area. 

Don’t...assume certain accommodations, such as extra time, 

are appropriate for every student in every content area. 

Source: Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011). Accommodations manual: How to select, administer, and evaluate the use of accommodations 

for instruction and assessment of students with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/ 

accommodations_manual.asp 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 15 
TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES

Published September 2015

 

ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 

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 10, 2015. The list of resources will be updated and revised in the future. 

Abadeh, H. (2015). Home-school communications: 

Multicultural parents of children with disabilities. 

NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 6. Retrieved from 

https://www2.nau.edu/nabej-p/ojs/index.php/njrp/ 

article/view/91/73 

This study examines “the role of communication 

between parents of children with special needs 

and schools.” The study uses a survey as the data 

collection tool to “determine perceptions of Arab 

American parents of children with special needs 

regarding communications between the home and 

school. Findings...indicated that parents born in the 

United States had more positive perceptions regarding 

communications with teachers.” 

Abedi, J. (2006). Psychometric issues in the ELL assessment 

and special education eligibility. Teachers College 

Record, 108(11), 2282–2303. Retrieved from http:// 

www.ncaase.com/docs/Abedi_TCRE782_2006.pdf 

This article discusses the challenges involved with (1) 

content assessments for ELs; and (2) misclassifying 

ELs as students with learning disabilities. The 

author claims that “[a]ssessments in English that 

are constructed and normed for native English 

speakers may not provide valid inferences about the 

achievement of English language learners.” 

Abedi, J. & Ewers, N. (2013, February). Accommodations 

for English language learners and students with 

disabilities: A research-based decision algorithm. Davis, 

CA: University of California, Davis: Smarter Balanced 

Assessment Consortium (SBAC). Retrieved from 

http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/08/Accomodations-for-underrepresented-students.pdf 

This paper provides context and recommendations 

related to selecting accommodations for ELs and 

students with disabilities. Under this framework 

an accommodation must be feasible to implement; 

appropriate for the student; sensitive to a student’s 

background; not alter the assessment; and make 

the assessment more accessible. The authors offer 

research to support these conditions. 

Adelson, V., Geva, E., & Fraser, C. (2014). Identification, 

assessment, and instruction of English language 

learners with learning difficulties in the elementary and 

intermediate grades: A guide for educators in Ontario 

school boards. Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto, 

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Applied 

Psychology and Human Development. Retrieved from 

http://www.ctserc.org/assets/documents/initiatives/ 

specific-learning-disabilities-dyslexia/archive/ELLswith-special-needs.pdf 

This resource guide was written as a tool for educators 

who work with ELs and/or students with disabilities 

in Canada. Focused mainly on reading and writing 

in lower grades, it includes practical information 

and guidance on the identification, assessment, and 

instruction of ELs with disabilities. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

16 
 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

Albus, D. A., & Thurlow, M. L. (2007). English 

language learners with disabilities in state English 

language proficiency assessments: A review of state 

accommodation policies (Synthesis Report 66). 

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National 

Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO). Retrieved 

from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/ 

Synthesis66/Synthesis66.pdf 

This report discusses “states’ participation and 

accommodation policies for [ELs] with disabilities 

on their English language proficiency (ELP) 

assessments.... The summary of findings suggests 

a number of promising practices and issues to be 

addressed.” 

Albus, D., Thurlow, M., & Clapper, A. (2007). Standardsbased instructional strategies for English language 

learners with disabilities (ELLs with Disabilities Report 

18). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota,NCEO. 

Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/ 

Onlinepubs/ELLsDis18/ELLsDisRpt18.pdf 

This study reviews and reports state standards, 

strategies, and supplementary instructional 

documents for the instruction of ELs with disabilities. 

The authors state that more research on instructional 

strategies is needed with students across a range of 

language and cultural backgrounds and with diverse 

types of disabilities. 

Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2005). 

Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate 

representation: English language learners in urban 

school districts. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 283-300. 

Retrieved from http://educationforall. 

lmu.edu/speakerdocs/Artiles_etal_EC.pdf 

This article examines the weakness of research on 

minority students’ placement in special education 

due to many studies defining minority populations 

too broadly. According to the article, this can be due 

to a failure to disaggregate such factors as language 

proficiency or a failure to consider other relevant 

variables such as social class or program type. The 

authors reviewed placement patterns of ELs, an 

identified understudied group, in California urban 

districts. They found “disproportionate representation 

patterns relating to grade level, language proficiency 

status, disability category, type of special education 

program, and type of language support programs.” 

The authors discuss implications for further research 

and practice. 

Burr, E., Haas, E., & Ferriere, K. (2015, July). Identifying 

and supporting English learner students with learning 

disabilities: Key issues in the literature and state practice. 

Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. 

Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/ 

west/pdf/REL_2015086.pdf 

This report reviews research and policies about ELs 

with learning disabilities. The report is based on the 

premise that “two factors have been identified that 

lead to inconsistent identification of students who 

may have learning disabilities: a lack of understanding 

among teachers about why English learner students 

are not making adequate progress, and poorly 

designed and implemented referral processes.” There 

are two report components: (1) research on literature 

consisting of 52 articles or reports discussing the topic 

of EL and learning disability identification, and (2) an 

analysis of EL procedures from the 20 states with the 

largest population of ELs. 

Center for Parent Information and Resources (2010, 

December). Considering limited English proficiency: 

Developing the IEP. Retrieved from http://www. 

parentcenterhub.org/repository/considering-lep/ 

This checklist is included as part of a National 

Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities 

(NICHCY) training tool on IDEA. It presents framing 

questions to be considered when writing an IEP for 

an EL, on topics that include assessments, home 

languages, communication methods, and instructional 

goals. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 17 
 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

Collier, C. (2014). What every administrator should know 

about separating differences and disabilities: A webinar 

for school administrators. Retrieved from 

http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/elme/ 

schadmins-2014.pdf 

In this webinar, Collier outlines the current legislative 

context and cultural assumptions related to ELs 

with disabilities. She also offers seven pillars of 

appropriately serving ELs with disabilities in a way 

that distinguishes language difference from learning 

difference: (1) providing adequate and appropriate 

staff and resources to support ELs with disabilities 

and their families; (2) implementing strategies 

to support student resilience; (3) differentiating 

instruction from intervention; (4) monitoring 

classroom instruction and intervention; (5) referring 

students for special education services when 

appropriate; (6) ensuring an IEP is cross-cultural and 

responds to a student’s learning and language needs; 

and (7) promoting staff collaboration and multidimensional school support systems. 

Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011). 

Accommodations manual: How to select, administer, and 

evaluate the use of accommodations for instruction and 

assessment of students with disabilities. Washington, 

DC: Author. Copies may be downloaded from the 

Council’s website at http://www.ccsso.org/ 

“The guidance in the manual pertains to students 

with disabilities who participate in large-scale 

assessments and the instruction they receive.” This 

manual, while generic to all students with disabilities, 

can be adapted for ELs based on SEA and LEA policies 

and requirements. It includes recommended steps to 

select, administer, and evaluate the effectiveness of 

accommodations for students with disabilities. 

Echevarria, J. (2009). The role of professional development 

in helping English learners with disabilities achieve 

high standards. AccELLerate, 1(3), 6-9. Retrieved from 

http://ncela.ed.gov/files/uploads/17/Accellerate_1_3. 

pdf 

This article describes the elements of an effective 

professional development program that was used 

successfully with ELs with disabilities (Echevarria & 

Short, 2009). The case study shows that researchbased practices coupled with effective professional 

development ensure high levels of implementation. 

Guzman-Orth, D., Laitusis, C., Thurlow, M., & Christensen, 

L. (2014, October). Conceptualizing accessibility for 

English language proficiency assessments. Princeton, 

New Jersey: Educational Testing Service (ETS). 

Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/ 

OnlinePubs/K12ELAccessibilityPaper.pdf 

This white paper discusses English language 

proficiency assessments (ELPAs) and how to make 

them more accessible for ELs with disabilities. The 

paper discusses the accessibility measures currently 

available for ELs with disabilities; the challenges 

associated with ELPAs for ELs with disabilities; 

recommendations for practice; and research 

considerations. This is the second in a series of ETS 

papers related to improving ELPAs for ELs. 

Hamayan, E., Marler, B., & Damico, J. (2013). Special 

education considerations for English language learners: 

Delivering a continuum of services (2nd ed.). Caslon 

Publishing: Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved from http:// 

caslonpublishing.com/titles/1/special-educationconsiderations-english-language-/ 

This book is written for special education 

professionals who work with ELs. It provides guidance 

on the unique needs of ELs with disabilities and 

how to design appropriate interventions. It includes 

professional development activities and discussion 

questions as well as graphic organizers. 

Keller-Allen, C. (2006). English language learners with 

disabilities: Identification and other state policies and 

issues. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State 

Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). Retrieved 

from http://nasdse.org/DesktopModules/DNNspotStore/ProductFiles/31_37349382-317f-47d9-aefc7a2c0636eb11.pdf 

For this publication, which is dedicated to policies 

related to ELs with disabilities, researchers 

interviewed SEA staff members from seven states 

that were selected because they had a large or rapidly 

growing EL population. The states included were 

Alaska, Arkansas, California, Florida, Kansas, New 

Mexico, and Texas. SEAs can review the policies and 

recommendations included in this publication to see 

if their own policies for ELs with disabilities align. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

18 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

Klingner, J. K., & Harry, B. (2006). The special education 

referral and decision-making process for English 

language learners: Child study team meetings and 

placement conferences. Teacher College Record, 

108(11), 2247-2281. Retrieved from http://www. 

colorado.edu/UCB/AcademicAffairs/education/ 

faculty/janetteklingner/Docs/Klingner%20&%20 

Harry_The%20Special%20Education%20Referral%20 

and%20Decision-Making%20Process.pdf 

This study was completed to examine “the special 

education referral and decision-making process for 

English language learners (ELLs), with a focus on 

Child Study Team (CST) meetings and placement 

conferences/multidisciplinary team meetings”. 

Observation of CST meetings revealed that in 

practice, “only cursory attention was given to prereferral strategies” and that “most students were 

pushed towards testing.” 

Lazarus, S. S., Kincaid, A., Thurlow, M. L., Rieke, R. L., 

& Dominguez, L. M. (2014). 2013 state policies for 

selected response accommodations on statewide 

assessments (Synthesis Report 93). Minneapolis, MN: 

University of Minnesota, NCEO. Retrieved from http:// 

www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Synthesis93/ 

SynthesisReport93.pdf 

This report provides an overview of the testing 

accommodations available for students with 

disabilities for content assessments according to state 

policies. It also includes an analysis of how those 

policies have changed over time since 1992. The 

accommodations considered in this report include 

human scribe, speech to text, audio transcription, 

word prediction, grammar checker, spell checker, and 

calculator. 

National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (2005). 

Responsiveness to intervention and learning disabilities. 

Retrieved from the American Speech Hearing 

Association website: http://www.asha.org/policy/ 

TR2005-00303/ 

This report “examines the concepts, potential 

benefits, practical issues, and unanswered questions 

associated with responsiveness to intervention 

(RTI) and learning disabilities (LD). A brief overview 

of the approach is provided, including attributes, 

characteristics, and promising features, as well as 

issues, concerns, unanswered questions, and research 

needs.” 

Nguyen, H. (2012). General education and special 

education teachers collaborate to support English 

language learners with learning disabilities. Issues 

in Teacher Education, 21(1), 127-152. Retrieved 

from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ986820.pdf 

This paper describes the need for general education 

and special education teachers to collaborate to meet 

the needs of ELs with learning disabilities; discusses 

research-based approaches for teaching these 

students; and suggests effective and appropriate 

methods and strategies for use in least restrictive 

environments. 

Butterfield, J. (2014). Meeting the needs of English learners 

with disabilities: Resource book. Goleta, CA: Santa 

Barbara County SELPA, on behalf of the SELPA 

Administrators of California Association. Retrieved 

from http://www.sbcselpa.org/wp-content/ 

uploads/2014/06/EL-Resource-Book-Revised-6-14.pdf 

“This resource book has two primary focus areas: (1) 

understanding the requirements for EL assessment, 

identification, and program requirements, and (2) how 

these processes are expanded to incorporate special 

education procedures when an EL is suspected of 

having a disability. As such, it is intended as a tool to 

assist general and special education administrators, 

teachers, special education staff, and English 

language support staff to better understand the 

needs of K-12 ELs with disabilities.” 

Sánchez, M. T., Parker, C., Akbayin, B., & McTigue, A. 

(2010). Processes and challenges in identifying learning 

disabilities among students who are English language 

learners in three New York State districts (Issues & 

Answers Report, REL 2010–No. 085). Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education 

Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation 

and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational 

Laboratory Northeast and Islands. Retrieved from 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project. 

asp?ProjectID=116 

This study examines practices and challenges in the 

processes applied in three New York State districts in 

identifying learning disabilities among EL students. 

Analysis suggests five interrelated elements that 

appear to be important for avoiding misidentification 

of learning disabilities among students who are ELs: 

(1) adequate professional knowledge, (2) effective 

instructional practices, (3) effective and valid 

assessment and interventions, (4) interdepartmental 

collaborative structures, and (5) clear policy 

guidelines. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 19 
 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

Schilder, D. (2013). Training to screen young English 

language learners and dual language learners for 

disabilities (CEELO FASTfacts). New Brunswick, NJ: 

Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes 

(CEELO). Retrieved from http://ceelo.org/wp-content/ 

uploads/2013/08/Training-to-Screen-Young-ELLsand-DLLs-for-Disabilities.pdf 

This brief outlines some of the challenges associated 

with identifying young ELs with disabilities and 

offers research-based recommendations for policy 

and practice; considerations for selecting assessment 

tools; recommendations for training practices; contact 

information for national experts in the field; and 

resources on assessing ELs. 

Spear-Swerling, L. (2006). Learning disabilities in English 

language learners. Retrieved from http://www. 

ldonline.org/spearswerling/Learning_Disabilities_in_ 

English_Language_Learners 

This article examines identification of and 

remediation for ELs with possible LDs. Identification 

methods include assessments and information 

obtained from the parents about the prior history 

of the child and family. The article concludes that 

further research on identifying and teaching is 

needed for ELs with LDs. 

Sullivan, A. (2011). Disproportionality in special education 

identification and placement of English language 

learners. Exceptional Children, 77(3), 317-334. 

Retrieved from http://debdavis.pbworks.com/w/file/ 

fetch/81120626/journal%202.pdf 

“This study explores the disproportionality in the 

identification and placement of culturally and 

linguistically diverse...ELs in special education.” 

Descriptive analysis and regression analyses results 

indicate that ELs “are increasingly likely to be 

identified as having learning disabilities or mental 

retardation, and less likely to be served in either the 

least or most restrictive educational environment 

relative to their white peers.... The study presents 

implications for further research and practice.” 

Thurlow, M., Liu, K. Ward, J., & Christensen, L. (2013). 

Assessment principles and guidelines for ELLs with 

disabilities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, 

Improving the Validity of Assessment Results for 

English Language Learners with Disabilities (IVARED). 

Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/nceo/ 

onlinepubs/ivared/IVAREDPrinciplesReport.pdf 

This report identifies five core principles of inclusive 

and valid assessment for ELs with disabilities. A brief 

rationale and specific guidelines that reflect each 

principle are also provided. 

Understood. (2014). Accommodations: What they are 

and how they work. Retrieved from https://www. 

understood.org/en/learning-attention-issues/ 

treatments-approaches/educational-strategies/ 

accommodations-what-they-are-and-how-they-work 

This article defines accommodations and identifies 

four types: (1) presentation, (2) response, (3) setting, 

and (4) timing and scheduling. The authors state that 

accommodations should be tailored to the child’s 

specific needs and should be regularly monitored and 

evaluated. 

University of Minnesota, NCEO. (2014, May). Participation 

of ELLs with disabilities in ELP assessments (NCEO 

Brief #8). Minneapolis, MN: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/briefs/ 

brief08/NCEOBrief8.pdf 

This brief focuses on the rate and type of 

participation of ELs with disabilities in state 

English language proficiency assessments. The 

topics included in the brief are: “(a) state policies 

on participation, (b) use and reporting of data 

on participation in ELP assessments, (c) experts’ 

recommendations about assessment participation, 

and (d) the understanding of practitioners 

about the participation of ELLs with disabilities 

in ELP assessments.” The brief also includes 

recommendations for practice. 

University of Minnesota, NCEO. (2014, June). State 

assessment decision-making processes for ELLs with 

disabilities (NCEO Brief #9). Minneapolis, MN: Author. 

Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/ 

OnlinePubs/briefs/brief09/NCEOBrief9.pdf 

This brief reviews how decisions are made about 

what assessments and what accommodations are 

appropriate for ELs with disabilities. The topics 

addressed include: “(a) required assessment decisionmaking processes, (b) experts’ recommendations 

about assessment decision making for ELLs [English 

language learners] with disabilities, (c) resources 

available to guide assessment decision making, 

(d) standards-based IEPs, and (e) recommended 

participants on the decision-making team.” The brief 

also includes policy recommendations. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

20 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
 

 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. The 

Civil Rights Data Collection: 2011-12 [Online database]. 

Retrieved from http://ocrdata.ed.gov/ 

The Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) is a biennial 

(i.e., every other school year) survey required by 

the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil 

Rights (OCR). Since 1968, the CRDC has collected 

data on key education and civil rights issues in 

our nation’s public schools for use by OCR in its 

enforcement and monitoring efforts regarding equal 

educational opportunity. The CRDC is also a tool 

for other department offices and federal agencies, 

policymakers and researchers, educators and school 

officials, and the public to analyze student equity and 

opportunity. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office 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/offices/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 justification. 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, Office for Civil Rights, and 

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2015, January). 

Dear colleague letter: English learner students and 

limited English proficient parents. Retrieved from 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 proficient parents and guardians 

have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and schoolrelated information. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language 

Acquisition. (2015, March). Assessing the English 

language proficiency of English learners with disabilities 

(Panel presentations). Retrieved from 

http://ncela.ed.gov/files/15_2037_QELPA_ELSWD_ 

Summary_final_dla_5-15-15_508.pdf 

In March 2015, OELA hosted a series of panel 

presentations on assessing the ELP of ELs with 

disabilities. Experts in the field provided background 

information, context, and current data related to 

distinguishing language difference from disability; 

using valid and reliable assessments for ELs with 

disabilities; and assessing ELs with significant 

cognitive disabilities. This document summarizes all 

the papers. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services. (2014). Questions and 

answers regarding the inclusion of English learners with 

disabilities in English language proficiency assessments 

and Title III annual measurable achievement objectives. 

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/ 

list/osers/osep/policy.html#elp-qa 

This document provides guidance on the inclusion of 

ELs with disabilities in ELP assessments under Titles I 

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 proficiency. (An addendum was released in 

July, 2015.). 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 21 
 

 

Published September 2015 

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services. (2014). 36th annual 

report to Congress on the implementation of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2014. 

Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/ 

annual/osep 

This annual report provides various data on 

assessments, child counts, and educational 

environments for IDEA Parts B and C. Part B of IDEA 

provides funds to states to assist them in providing 

FAPE to children with disabilities, ages three through 

21, who are in need of special education and related 

services. 

Zehler, A., Fleischman, H., Hopstock, P., Stephenson, T., 

Pendzick, M., & Sapru, S. (2003). Policy report: Summary 

of findings related to LEP and SpEd-LEP students. 

Arlington, VA: Development Associates, Inc. (Contract 

No. ED-00-CO-0089, U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of English Language Acquisition, Language 

Enhancement, and Academic Achievement of Limited 

English Proficient Students). Retrieved from http:// 

www.ncela.us/files/rcd/BE021195/policy_report.pdf 

This study provides findings on the number of ELs, 

their backgrounds, and the “instructional services 

they received in grades K–12 in public schools in the 

United States for SY 2001-02.” This study includes 

a special focus on ELs with disabilities who are 

identified as being in need of special education 

services (SpEd-LEP), national estimates on the number 

of SpEd-LEP students, identified disability categories, 

nature of instructional services they receive, and 

“information on policy and practice related to ELs 

participation in standards and assessments.” 

Zhang, C. & Cho, S. (2010). The development of 

the bilingual special education field: Major 

issues, accomplishments, future directions, 

and recommendations. Journal of Multilingual 

Education Research, 1(1), 45–62. Retrieved from 

http://fordham.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent. 

cgi?article=1012&context=jmer 

This paper reviews challenges in educating children 

“with and without disabilities from culturally and 

linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds. The 

challenges discussed include (1) biased assessment 

that results in mis- or over representing CLD students 

in special education, (2) difficulty distinguishing 

between disability and differences, and (3) lack of 

competent bilingual special educators.” The authors 

recommend the use of “the response to intervention 

(RTI) model in identifying and instructing CLD 

children with and without disabilities.” Future 

research should (1) “examine how collaborative 

service delivery models contribute to referrals of CLD 

children” with and without disabilities and to their 

instruction, and (2) “focus on how to expand teachers’ 

knowledge about both the sociocultural and learning 

contexts to aid in producing positive outcomes for 

CLD children both with and without disabilities.” 

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs,

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/. 

You can access Tools and Resources for Addressing English Learners with Disabilities at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html. 

22 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES 
Published September 2015

CHAPTER 7

TOOLS AND RESOURCES 

FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS 

WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS

This is the seventh chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter, “English Learner 

Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS

KEY POINTS

• Parents have the right to opt their children out of

EL programs or particular EL services. This decision

must be voluntary and based on a full understanding

of the EL child’s rights, the range of services

available to the child, and the benefits of such

services to the child.

• If a parent decides to opt his or her child out of EL

programs or particular EL services, that child still

retains his or her status as an EL.

• LEAs must continue to monitor the English language

proficiency (ELP) and academic progress of students

who opt out of EL programs and services. If a

student does not demonstrate appropriate growth

in ELP or maintain appropriate academic levels,

the LEA must inform the parents in a language they

understand and offer EL services.

Any parent whose child is receiving or is eligible to 

receive EL programs or services has the right to decline or 

opt his or her child out of the EL programs or particular 

EL services being offered. LEAs may not recommend that 

a parent opt a child out of EL programs or services for any 

reason. 

The LEA must provide guidance in a language parents 

can understand to ensure that parents understand their 

child’s rights, the range of EL services that their child 

could receive, and the benefits of such services. This is 

to ensure that the parent’s decision to opt out is knowing 

and voluntary. LEAs that receive Title I or Title III funds 

must provide written notification to parents of their 

children’s recommended placement in an EL program 

within 30 days of the start of the school year (or within 

two weeks for later-arriving students). The notification 

must include all of the statutorily-required elements, 

including the right to opt out (See Tool #1, attached). 

The LEA should retain appropriate documentation to 

demonstrate that a parent knowingly and voluntarily 

opted his or her EL child out of EL programs or particular 

EL services. It is important to note that opting out of 

EL programs or particular EL services does not affect a 

student’s ability to participate in any other programs or 

services, such as special education services. 

If a parent decides to opt his or her child out of EL 

programs or particular EL services, that child retains his 

or her status as an EL. The LEA remains obligated to take 

affirmative steps and appropriate action required by civil 

rights laws to provide the EL student meaningful access 

1

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

to its educational program. Thus the LEA must continue 

to monitor periodically the opted-out student’s academic 

progress. 

Specific monitoring practices will vary from LEA to LEA. 

They should include a combination of performance 

data, such as information on assessment results, grades, 

courses taken, observations, attendance, and parent 

meeting notes, along with possible comparisons to other 

EL students of similar ELP levels. Appropriate personnel 

should analyze this information throughout the year and 

make recommendations based on the student’s current 

ELP level and ability to perform at grade level. 

If an LEA finds that a student is struggling, it should 

take appropriate steps to assist the student. These steps 

may include, but are not limited to, further assessing the 

student’s ELP; notifying the student’s parent about his or 

her child’s lack of progress, and encouraging him or her to 

opt the child into EL programs and services; and providing 

supports for the student’s language acquisition, such as 

offering professional development in second language 

acquisition to the student’s core curriculum teachers. 

ELs who opt out of services must, like those receiving 

programs or services, have their ELP reassessed a 

minimum of once per year until they exit EL status. After 

it is determined that the EL no longer qualifies as an EL, 

the LEA must continue to monitor the student for at least 

two years, just as it would an EL who has received EL 

programs and services.

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

developing processes and providing support for ELs 

whose parents choose to opt them out of EL programs or 

particular EL services. The checklist provides suggested 

questions only. LEAs and schools should check their SEA’s 

policies and other federal guidance to ensure compliance. 

Communicating with Parents

 How are parents informed of their children’s EL 

status and the right to opt their children out of the EL 

programs or particular EL services being offered? 

 Are there procedures in place to ensure that parents 

do not opt their children out of any EL programs or 

services based on inadequate information about those 

programs or services, or on unanswered questions 

about their children’s EL status? 

 Are there procedures in place to ensure that parents 

do not opt their children out of any EL programs 

or services based on schedule conflicts with other 

programs (such as special education programs); 

insufficient space in the available EL programs; or 

insufficient offerings within the EL program? 

 Are there procedures in place to address parental 

concerns about the quality of the EL services and 

programs being offered? 

 Is information provided in a language that parents 

understand?

 Does the LEA have a formal mechanism for 

documenting which students opted out of services, 

including tracking communications to and from the 

ELs’ parents in the appropriate languages? 

 Is there a process (perhaps during parent-teacher 

conferences or after report cards are issued) for 

informing parents who opted their children out of 

EL programs or services that their children are not 

making progress in ELP or academic content areas, 

when applicable? 

 Is there a process for parents to revisit their opt-out 

decision and opt their children back into EL programs 

or particular EL services?

 Is there a process for SEAs and LEAs to explore the 

cause of high opt-out rates for EL services if and 

when they occur?

Addressing ELs’ Needs

 If a parent opts his or her child out of EL services, 

is there a process to ensure and monitor that (1) 

the child maintains his or her EL status; (2) the LEA 

is fulfilling its obligation of meeting the child’s 

language and academic needs; and (3) the child still 

has appropriate access to the general curriculum?

 Are ELs who have opted out being assessed for ELP at 

least annually?

 If a parent continues to opt his or her child out of EL 

programs and services after being notified of that 

child’s insufficient progress, is the LEA providing 

additional training to the student’s classroom 

teacher(s) in EL instructional strategies? 

2

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS 

WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS

TOOLS

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 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 concerned 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 items does not reflect their importance, nor is it 

intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links included here were verified September 9, 2015.

The following set of tools is intended to assist schools, LEAs, and SEAs in developing processes to assist in meeting 

legal requirements when parents of ELs choose to opt their child out of EL programs or particular EL services. LEAs are 

reminded to check with their SEAs to see if a particular parent notification letter is required, and, if so, what the current 

version is.

Tool #1, Statutorily Required Elements of Parent Notification Letter, cites relevant Title III requirements for notifying 

parents of their children’s EL status and their right to opt their children out of EL programs or particular EL services.

Tool #2, Sample Parent Notification Letter for a Child’s Placement in English Learner Programs and Services, provides 

one example of a parent notification letter that LEAs could use to notify parents of their children’s EL status and their 

right to opt their children out of EL programs or particular EL services.

Tool #3, Sample English Learner Programs 

and Services Opt-Out Notification, provides 

one example of a form that LEAs could use to 

provide documentation for legal compliance 

when a parent has expressed the desire to 

opt his or her child out of EL programs or 

particular EL services.

Tool #4, Sample Notification to Opt a 

Child Back into English Learner Programs 

or Services, provides one example of 

a form that LEAs could use to provide 

documentation when a parent revisits his 

or her decision and decides to opt the child 

back into EL programs or particular EL 

services.

3

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1 

STATUTORILY REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF 

PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTER

This tool cites the relevant Title III requirements for notifying parents of their children’s EL status and their right to opt 

their children out of EL programs or particular EL services. SEAs and LEAs that receive Title I or Title III funds should 

be familiar with the requirements of Title I and Title III and ensure parental notification letters include all statutorily 

required elements.

TITLE III: SECTION 3302 OF THE ESEA (20 USC 7012) 

[See same provision in Title I: Section 1112(g) of the ESEA (20 USC 6312(g)]

(a) IN GENERAL—each eligible entity using funds provided under this title to provide a language instruction educational 

program shall, not later than 30 days after the beginning of the school year, inform a parent or the parents of a limited 

English proficient child identified for participation in, or participating in, such program of

(1) the reasons for the identification of their child as limited English proficient and in need of placement in a 

language instruction educational program;

(2) the child’s level of English proficiency, how such level was assessed, and the status of the child’s academic 

achievement;

(3) the method of instruction used in the program in which their child is, or will be, participating, and the methods 

of instruction used in other available programs, including how such programs differ in content, instruction goals, 

and use of English and a native language in instruction;

(4) how the program in which their child is, or will be participating will meet the educational strengths and needs of 

the child;

(5) how such program will specifically help their child learn English, and meet age appropriate academic 

achievement standards for grade promotion and graduation;

(6) the specific exit requirements for such program, the expected rate of transition from such program into 

classrooms that are not tailored for limited English proficient children, and the expected rate of graduation from 

secondary school for such program if funds under this title are used for children in secondary schools;

(7) in the case of a child with a disability, how such program meets the objectives of the individualized education 

program of the child; and

Continued on next page

4

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

5

TOOL #1: STATUTORIALY REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTER (CONTINUED)

(8) information pertaining to parental rights that includes written guidance

(A) detailing—

(i) the right that parents have to have their child immediately removed from such program upon their 

request; and

(ii) the options that parents have to decline to enroll their child in such program or to choose another 

program or method of instruction, if available; and

(B) assisting parents in selecting among various programs and methods of instruction, if more than one program 

or method is offered by the eligible entity.

(b) * 

(c) Receipt of information

The information required to be provided under subsections (a) and (b)* of this section to a parent shall be provided in an 

understandable and uniform format and, to the extent practicable, in a language that the parent can understand.

(d) Special rule applicable during school year

For a child who has not been identified for participation in a language instruction educational program prior to the 

beginning of the school year, the eligible entity shall carry out subsections (a) through (c) of this section with respect to 

the parents of the child within 2 weeks of the child being placed in such a program.

*Section (b) of the statute is omitted, as it is not directly relevant to the information in this chapter.

Source: Elementary and Secondary Education Act, §3302, 20 USC 7012 (2001). Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg50.

html#sec3302

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 5
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2

SAMPLE PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTER FOR A CHILD’S 

PLACEMENT IN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

The following tool provides one example of a parent notification letter that LEAs could use to notify parents of their 

children’s EL status and their right to opt their children out of EL programs or particular EL services. The tool is based on 

forms currently used by SEAs and LEAs. The form would need to be provided in a language that the parent understands.

PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTER FOR PLACEMENT IN 

ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

[SCHOOL NAME, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION]

Date:

Dear Parent,

When you enrolled your child in school this year, you noted on the home language survey that he or she may use a 

language other than English. Based on this response, the law requires us to test your child’s English language proficiency 

to determine if s/he is legally entitled to English Learner (EL) support services. We used this test to determine the 

best educational program placement for your child. We are required to inform you of the test results, our program 

recommendation, and all of the placement options available for your child. That information appears below, along with 

information our school district uses to determine when a student is ready to exit the EL program. 

Based on your child’s test results, your child qualifies for EL support services. Additional English language instruction is 

instrumental in increasing a student’s English language proficiency and ability to acquire grade-level academic content. 

We highly recommend that your child participate in and receive the benefits from an EL program.

1. Your child’s English language assessment scores for this school year are as follows:

Area Level/Score

Listening

Speaking

Reading

Writing

Overall

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

6 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2: SAMPLE PARENT NOTIFICATION LETTER FOR A CHILD’S PLACEMENT 

IN ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES (CONTINUED)

2. Your child’s EL programs and services will entail the following types of instruction:

*Insert available EL programs and services here*

3. The overall goal of the EL program is for students to become fully proficient in English and to master state standards 

for academic achievement as rapidly as possible. The exit criteria are as follows:

*Insert exit criteria here*

4. If your child has an Individualized Education Program (IEP), the EL program will assist in meeting the IEP goals in the 

following ways:

*Insert description here*

As mentioned, we highly recommend that your child participate in and receive the benefits from this program; however, 

you have the right to decline your child’s participation in or ‘opt your child out’ of the EL program or particular EL 

services. Please telephone the school at [Insert telephone number.] or contact your child’s teacher if you would like to 

schedule a parent conference to discuss your child’s options for program placement and/or if you wish to opt your child 

out of the EL program or particular EL services within the EL program.

Sincerely, 

Source: Bell, T., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Sample parent notification letter for a child’s placement in English learner programs and services. Silver 

Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/sample_parent_

notification_letter_for_el_placement.pdf

7

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 7
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3

SAMPLE ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES 

OPT-OUT NOTIFICATION

The following tool provides one example of a form that LEAs could use to provide documentation for legal compliance 

with the requirements of the EL opt-out decision-making process when a parent chooses to opt his or her child out of the 

EL program or particular EL services. The tool reflects forms currently used by LEAs to document that parents have been 

notified of their child’s rights, the range of EL services that their child could receive, and the benefits of such EL services, 

before voluntarily waiving them. The form would need to be provided in a language that the parents understand.

NOTIFICATION TO OPT A CHILD OUT OF EL PROGRAMS OR 

PARTICULAR EL SERVICES

[SCHOOL NAME, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION]

Date:

Dear Parent,

We understand that you would like to decline the English Learner (EL) program or particular EL services proposed for 

your child (insert child’s name). EL services are specifically designed to help your 

child obtain English language proficiency as well as acquire grade-level content. However, as stated in our conversation, 

you have the legal right to opt your child out of the program or particular services. 

If you still wish to opt your child out of the EL program or particular EL services, please initial next to each item on the 

checklist below. Doing so will indicate that you fully understand and agree with each statement. After you have initialed 

next to each of the statements, please sign, date, and return the form to your child’s school. We will keep this document 

on file stating that you have declined or do not want these indicated EL services for your child. 

I am aware of my child’s English language assessment score and other information about my child’s current 

academic progress, and understand why he/she was recommended for additional English language instruction. 

I am familiar with the EL programs and services the school has available for my child. 

I have had the opportunity to discuss the available EL programs and services with the school.

I understand that the school believes its recommendation is the most academically beneficial for my child.

I understand that my child will still be designated an “English Learner” and have his or her English proficiency 

assessed once per year until he/she no longer meets the definition of an English Learner. 

All of this information has been presented to me in a language I fully understand.

Continued on next page

8

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3: SAMPLE ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES 

OPT-OUT NOTIFICATION (CONTINUED)

I, (insert name), with a full understanding of the above information, wish to

 decline all of the EL programs and EL services offered to my child.

 decline some of the EL programs and/or particular EL services offered to my child.

I wish to decline (List program/services) 

Parent’s Signature Child’s Name Date

Source: Zantal-Wiener, K., & Bell, T. (2015). Sample English learner programs and services opt-out notification. Silver Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse 

for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/sample_notification_to_opt_out.pdf

9

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 9
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4

SAMPLE NOTIFICATION TO OPT A CHILD BACK INTO ENGLISH 

LEARNER PROGRAMS OR SERVICES

The following tool provides one example of a form that LEAs could use to provide documentation when parents decide 

to opt their children back into EL programs or particular EL services. This form would only be used if/when a parent 

revisited his or her initial decision to opt his or her child out of EL programs or particular EL services. The form would 

need to be provided in a language that the parent understands.

NOTIFICATION TO OPT A CHILD BACK INTO EL PROGRAMS 

OR PARTICULAR EL SERVICES

[SCHOOL NAME, ADDRESS, CONTACT INFORMATION]

Date: 

Dear Parent:

On (insert date of Notice to Opt-Out), you notified us of your desire to decline the English Learner 

(EL) program or particular EL services proposed for your child (insert name). 

We understand that you have revisited your previous decision and would now like to accept the EL program or particular 

EL services proposed for your child. EL services are specifically designed to help your child obtain English language 

proficiency as well as acquire grade-level academic content. We believe these services will be a tremendous benefit to 

your child.

Please indicate below the EL program or particular EL services you would like your child to participate in. We will keep 

this form on file indicating that you have revisited your previous decision and do indeed want EL services for your child. 

I, (insert name of parent), wish to

 opt my child back into all of the EL programs and services offered to my child.

 opt my child back into some of the EL programs or particular EL services offered to my child. 

I wish to accept (List program/services)

Parent’s Signature Child’s Name Date

Source: Bell, T., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Sample notification to opt a child back into English learner programs or services. Silver Spring, MD: National 

Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/sample_notification_to_opt_in.pdf

10

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS 

WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS

RESOURCES

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 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 September 9, 2015. The 

list of resources will be updated and revised in the future.

Bell, T., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Sample parent 

notification letter for a child’s placement in English 

learner programs and services. Silver Spring, MD: 

National Clearinghouse for English Language 

Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.

ed.gov/files/forms/sample_parent_notification_letter_

for_el_placement.pdf

This tool is one example of a parent notification 

letter that LEAs could use to notify parents of their 

children’s EL status and their right to opt their children 

out of EL programs or particular EL services. The tool 

reflects forms currently used by SEAs and LEAs. 

Bell, T., & Zantal-Wiener, K. (2015). Sample notification 

to opt a child back into English learner programs or 

services. Silver Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for 

English Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from

http://ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/sample_notification_

to_opt_in.pdf

This tool provides one example of a form that LEAs 

could use to provide documentation when a parent 

decides to opt his or her child back into EL programs or 

particular EL services. This form would only be used if/

when a parent changes his or her initial decision to opt 

out of EL programs or particular EL services. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), 

and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2015, January). 

Dear colleague letter: English learner students and 

limited English proficient parents. Retrieved from

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 proficient parents and guardians 

have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and schoolrelated information.

Zantal-Wiener, K., & Bell, T. (2015). Sample English learner 

programs and services opt-out notification. Silver Spring, 

MD: National Clearinghouse for English Language 

Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://ncela.

ed.gov/files/forms/sample_notification_to_opt_out.pdf

This tool is one example of a form that LEAs could 

use to provide documentation for legal compliance 

with the requirements of the EL opt-out decisionmaking process when a parent wishes to opt his or her 

child out of the EL program or particular EL services. 

The tool reflects forms currently used by LEAs to 

document that a parent has been notified of his or her 

child’s rights, the range of EL services that the child 

could receive, and the benefits of such EL services, 

before voluntarily waving them.

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs,

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.

11

You can access Tools and Resources for Serving English Learners Who Opt Out of EL Programs at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR SERVING ENGLISH LEARNERS WHO OPT OUT OF EL PROGRAMS 
Published September 2015

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 Office for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter on “English 

Learner Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/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 gradelevel 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 gradelevel 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 

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.

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.

1 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES 
Published September 2015

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.

SEAs must use valid and reliable ELP assessments that 

test all four language domains (listening, speaking, 

reading, and writing) to ensure that ELs have achieved 

English proficiency. The proficiency 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 proficient 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 proficient on 

these content assessments.

SEAs may use additional objective criteria related 

to English proficiency to decide if an EL who scores 

proficient on the ELP assessment is ready to exit EL 

services. However, these additional criteria may not 

substitute for a proficient score on a valid and reliable 

ELP assessment. 

Exiting 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. 

The 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? 

 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 

deficits 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 proficiency 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?

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 
Published September 2015

MONITORING AND EXITING ENGLISH LEARNERS 

FROM EL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

TOOLS

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). 

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 3
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

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

4

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

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 twoyear 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

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2: MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS IN CORE CONTENT AREAS (CONTINUED)

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

Continued on next page

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2: MONITORING ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRESS IN CORE CONTENT AREAS (CONTINUED)

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 

proficiency 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 

proficiency 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/files/forms/content_monitoring_form.pdf

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

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 

EL students 

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 

EL students 

Continued on next page

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3: DIGITAL PROGRESS MONITORING (CONTINUED)

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 

specific 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.infinitecampus.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 

EL students

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 

EL students

*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). Retrieved from http://ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/digital_progress_monitoring.pdf

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

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, Office for Civil Rights. (n.d.) Resource materials for planning and self-assessments. Retrieved from http://

www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/index.html

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 
Published September 2015

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). Classification system for English 

language learners: Issues and recommendations. 

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(3). 

Retrieved from http://education.ucdavis.edu/sites/

main/files/LEP_Class_EMIP_New.pdf

The purpose of this paper is to “reveal issues 

concerning the validity of the current EL classification 

system”. Past studies show inconsistencies in how 

states, LEAs, and schools within states determine 

English language proficiency and define 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 classification 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/

files_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 

proficiency standards and assessments. San Francisco, 

CA: WestEd. Retrieved from http://files.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/files/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 careerready 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 first three principles.”

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Bell, T. (2015). Sample digital monitoring systems. Silver 

Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for English 

Language Acquisition (NCELA). Retrieved from http://

ncela.ed.gov/files/forms/digital_progress_monitoring.

pdf 

This tool is an alphabetical list of some datamonitoring systems used by SEAs, LEAs, and 

individual schools. The tool describes the general 

features of the systems, and if applicable, features 

specifically 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, Office of Special Education Programs, 

National Center on Response to Intervention. 

Retrieved from http://www.rti4success.org/sites/

default/files/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/_files/pdfs/articles/2005/Callahan%202005.pdf

This study examines the effects of “track placement 

and English proficiency 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 find 

that “track placement was a better predictor of 

achievement than proficiency 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 “performancebased standardized assessments; assessment as a 

tool for informing instruction; use of assessment to 

reinforce reading comprehension; and student selfassessment and self-monitoring.” The author also 

provides ideas on how EL and mainstream teachers 

can collaborate to more effectively assess ELs.

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).” Specific 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 “highquality, research-based instructional information on 

what educators can do to help their ELLs succeed 

academically.” The kit contains worksheets to monitor 

students’ conversation skills, fluency, reading, and 

comprehension. It was developed for Spanishspeaking students and also contains a short Spanishto-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 

proficiency for ELs and the relationship between 

academic language and academic content proficiency. 

Research suggests that comparisons between ELP and 

academic content proficiency should be part of the 

process that states use to define English proficiency. It 

also suggests that representations of EL achievement 

must be sensitive to the fact that ELs progress at 

different rates.

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Cook, H. G., Linquanti, R., Chinen, M., & Jung, H. (2012). 

National evaluation of Title III implementation 

supplemental report—Exploring approaches to setting 

English language proficiency performance criteria and 

monitoring English learner progress. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Education; Office of Planning, 

Evaluation and Policy Development; Policy and 

Program Studies Service. Retrieved from http://

www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/title-iii/implementationsupplemental-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 proficiency 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://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

EJ853517.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 find 

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://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ965168.pdf

This article discusses decision points to reclassify 

students as fluent and proficient in English. The study 

examines “the achievement gap between English 

learners and the overall student population and the 

reclassification of English learners as proficient 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/files/

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 identified as ELs 

before sixth grade, and new ELs, students identified 

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 reclassified 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’ reclassification (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 reclassification of 

ELs.” Authors investigated the academic outcomes 

of reclassified ELs in general education classrooms 

in a local control state. They found that “ELL [EL] 

students tend to make a smooth transition upon 

their reclassification and keep pace in mainstream 

classrooms.”

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 
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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Published September 2015

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 

Kim, J. & Herman, J. L. (2012). Understanding patterns and 

precursors of ELL success subsequent to reclassification

(CRESST Report 818). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA, 

Graduate School of Education and Information 

Studies; CRESST. Retrieved from http://files.eric.

ed.gov/fulltext/ED540604.pdf

This study focuses on ELs who were reclassified after 

they finished elementary school. Findings reveal that 

there was “no evidence of former ELLs [ELs] falling 

behind in academic growth after reclassification, 

either relative to their non-ELL [non-EL] peers or in 

terms of absolute academic proficiency levels.”

Linquanti, R., & Cook, H. G. (2013). Toward a “common 

definition of English learner”: Guidance for states and 

state assessment consortia in defining and addressing 

policy and technical issues and options. Washington, 

DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved 

from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2013/

Toward_a_Common_Definition_2013.pdf

This paper outlines key issues in defining ELs and 

discusses specific policy and technical options 

through a four-state framework. The framework 

captures the following key criteria and processes to 

define 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 proficiency, 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 reclassification of ELs from limited 

to fluent English proficient. The authors provide 

state and local administrators and policymakers with 

guidance for reviewing their current reclassification 

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 Office 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 decisionmaking 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 benefits of using CurriculumBased Measurement (CBM) for monitoring EL progress 

and using CBM within an RTI model. 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

U.S. Department of Education, Office 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/offices/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 justification. 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, Office for Civil Rights, and 

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2015, January). 

Dear colleague letter: English learner students and 

limited English proficient parents. Retrieved from 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 proficient parents and guardians 

have meaningful access to SEA-, LEA-, and schoolrelated information. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services. (2014). Questions and 

answers regarding the inclusion of English learners with 

disabilities in English language proficiency assessments 

and Title III annual measurable achievement objectives. 

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/

list/osers/osep/policy.html#elp-qa 

This document provides guidance on the inclusion of 

ELs with disabilities in ELP assessments under Titles I 

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 proficiency.

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, 

Office 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 definitions, 

emerging practices in RTI, as well as revised 

assessment tools and resources.

Wolf, M. K., Herman, J. L., Bachman, L. F., Bailey, A. L., & 

Griffin, N. (2008). Issues in assessing English language 

learners: English language proficiency measures 

and accommodation uses—Literature review, Part 1 

of 3 (CRESST Report 731). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA, 

Graduate School of Education and Information 

Studies, CRESST. Retrieved from http://files.eric.

ed.gov/fulltext/ED502283.pdf

This literature review is “the first 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.”

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 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Wolf, M. K., Kao, J., Griffin, N., Herman, J. L., Bachman, P. 

L., Chang, S. M., & Farnsworth, T. (2008). Issues in 

assessing English language learners: English language 

proficiency 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://

files.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] identification 

and re-designation, the characteristics of English 

language proficiency 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., 

& Griffin, N. (2008). Recommendations for assessing 

English language learners: English language proficiency 

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://

files.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=reclassification+ells&ft=on&id=ED520528

This brief identifies five considerations for 

improving the validity of assessment systems for 

EL students. The authors’ recommendations include 

“improvements in: (1) English Language Proficiency 

standards and assessments; (2) ELL [EL] Classification 

and Reclassification; (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., & 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/files/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/.

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 
Published September 2015

CHAPTER 9

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR 

EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A 

DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM

This is the ninth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies 

(SEAs and LEAs) meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. 

Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Dear Colleague Letter on “English Learner 

Students and Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/ellresources.html.

EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S 

EL PROGRAM 

KEY POINTS

• Successful EL programs enable EL students 

to attain both English proficiency and parity 

of participation in the standard instructional 

program within a reasonable period of time. 

• LEAs should collect longitudinal data to 

monitor and compare the performance of 

current ELs, former ELs, and never-ELs in the 

LEA’s standard instructional program. Data 

should not be limited to annual measurable 

achievement objectives (AMAOs).

• When EL programs do not produce both English 

proficiency and parity of participation within 

a reasonable period of time, SEAs and LEAs 

must modify the EL program.

Successful EL programs must, at a minimum, be designed 

to enable EL students to attain both English proficiency 

and parity of participation in the standard instructional 

program, comparable to their never-EL peers, within a 

reasonable period of time. Research shows that effective 

academic programs for ELs eliminate achievement gaps 

by providing cohesive, sustained systems of support 

(Valentino & Reardon, 2014; Baker et al., 2014; Calderón, 

Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). Another key element of effective 

EL programs is full access to academic, grade-level content. 

This access facilitates ELs’ exiting from EL programs when 

they achieve English proficiency within a reasonable period 

of time, participating meaningfully in classes without EL 

services, and graduating prepared for college and careers.

To determine the effectiveness of an LEA’s EL program, an 

LEA must periodically evaluate its EL programs. Indeed, 

evaluation should be integrated into all EL program 

activities and focus on policies, procedures, programs, 

practices, resources, staffing, and student outcomes. 

Moreover, Title III of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act (ESEA) requires that every LEA receiving 

Title III Part A funds carry out an evaluation every two 

years and submit the results to the SEA (20 U.S.C. § 6841). 

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 1
Published September 2015

Student achievement data is necessary to determine an 

EL program’s effectiveness and ensure compliance with 

SEA and federal reporting requirements. An evaluation 

of an EL program should not be limited to annual 

measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs)1; it should 

be continuous and include multiple data points on ELs. 

If an LEA or SEA has more than one EL program, data 

should be disaggregated, by program, to determine if each 

is effective. The data should be gathered, analyzed, and 

used to change or modify the EL program and services, 

as appropriate. Schools can also use individual student 

achievement data to inform decisions about appropriate 

instruction and interventions.

Exhibit 1 displays data elements for SEAs, LEAs, and 

schools to collect in order to determine how ELs are 

progressing academically, whether the EL program 

provides ELs with equal opportunities to participate in all 

other programs and activities, as well as whether any 

achievement gaps exist between former ELs and their 

never-EL peers. 

Exhibit 1: Data Elements for Evaluating and 

Monitoring Programs for English Learners

• Scores on state and local assessments

• Scores on annual English language proficiency 

tests

• Grades in content courses

• Retention in grade

• Reclassification/exit rates

• Graduation and dropout rates 

• Participation rates in gifted and advanced courses 

(e.g., honors, Advanced Placement (AP), gifted 

and talented, and International Baccalaureate (IB) 

courses)

• Enrollment rates in pre-kindergarten, magnet, and 

other choice programs

• Enrollment rates in special education and related 

services

• Mobility and attendance rates

• Participation in extracurricular programs

• Suspension rates

• Other indicators of college and career readiness

Meaningful EL evaluations include longitudinal data 

that compares the performance of current ELs, former 

ELs, and never-ELs in the LEA’s standard instructional 

program over time. Longitudinal data is especially 

important in evaluating the success of each EL program, 

given the ever-changing nature of the EL student 

population. Comprehensive longitudinal monitoring and 

1 Title III, Section 3122(a) of the ESEA requires SEAs to establish a set 

of three annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs): AMAO 

1—Annual increases in the number or percentage of children making 

progress in learning English; AMAO 2—Annual increases in the number 

or percentage of children attaining English proficiency by the end of 

each school year and AMAO 3—Making adequate yearly progress (AYP) 

for limited English proficient children as described in Title I, Section 

1111(b)(2)(B), of ESEA.

evaluation will help LEAs and schools determine if ELs 

are (1) meeting college- and career-ready standards; 

(2) participating in, and performing comparably to their 

never-EL peers in, the standard instructional program; 

(3) accessing the same curricular and extracurricular 

opportunities as their never-EL peers; and (4) exiting EL 

programs at appropriate rates (Hill, 2012). 

If evaluations show that EL programs are not effective, 

the LEA must make appropriate programmatic changes.

The following checklist is intended to assist with 

evaluating programs and services for ELs. The checklist 

provides suggested questions only. Schools and LEAs 

should check their SEA’s policies and federal guidance to 

ensure compliance. 

 To what extent is the LEA tracking data, both 

periodically and longitudinally, and by EL program, on 

ELs’ acquisition of English proficiency and mastery of 

grade-level content?  

 To what extent is the EL program meeting its stated 

educational goals without unnecessarily segregating 

EL students from never-EL students? 

 Do all ELs have comparable access to opportunities 

that prepare them for college and careers (e.g., 

higher-level courses, extracurricular activities, field 

trips, etc.) as their never-EL peers?

 Are ELs making progress toward achieving language 

proficiency within a reasonable period of time, as 

evidenced by multiple performance indicators? 

 To what extent do longitudinal data compare 

performance in the core-content areas (e.g., via valid 

and reliable standardized tests), and graduation, dropout, and retention data among current ELs, former 

ELs, and never-ELs?

 To what extent are EL students meeting exit 

criteria and being exited from EL programs within a 

reasonable period of time? 

 Are all ELs receiving EL services until they achieve 

English proficiency and not exited from these services 

based on time in the EL program or opted-out status?

 Is the LEA tracking data of former ELs over time and 

is it able to compare that data to that of their neverEL peers? For example, to what extent do grades and 

state and local assessment data in the core-content 

areas indicate that former ELs

•	 participate meaningfully in classes without EL 

services?

•	 perform comparably to their never-EL peers in the 

standard instructional program?

 Do LEAs modify EL programs when longitudinal 

performance data indicate ELs are not reaching 

English proficiency within a reasonable period of 

time, or when former ELs are not participating in the 

standard instructional program comparable to their 

never-EL peers?

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

2 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS 

OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM

TOOLS

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 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 concerned 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 items 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 19, 2015.

The following tools are intended to assist schools, LEAs, and SEAs in evaluating EL programs and services. The tools 

provide guidelines and specific examples of program elements to evaluate. 

Tool #1, Evaluating Programs and Services for 

English Learners, offers suggested topics and 

questions for EL program evaluation. 

Tool #2, Improving SEA Systems to Support All 

Students, provides information that may assist 

SEAs in sustaining reform efforts, including those 

focused on ELs. 

Tool #3, Improving LEA Systems to Support English 

Learners, provides information that may help LEAs 

strengthen their EL programs. 

Tool #4, Improving School-Based Systems for 

English Learners, provides information that may 

help schools strengthen their EL programs.

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 3
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1

EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES 

FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS

It is important that evaluations of EL programs and services focus on overall and specific program goals. The goals 

should address expected progress in English language development and core-content instruction. SEAs and LEAs are 

encouraged to develop continuous evaluation systems that align with both program design and the needs of EL students 

in each state or community. 

COMPONENTS OF AN EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS 

AND SERVICES FOR ELs

The following tool is based on the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights’ Web page “Developing 

Programs for English Language Learners,” located at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/programeval.html. 

It may help SEAs and LEAs identify elements for evaluating EL programs and services. Questions and data sources 

focus on EL program implementation information; staffing and professional learning; student performance in English 

language development and academic content areas; and analyzing the information collected and identifying areas for 

improvement. EL program evaluation will vary from LEA to LEA; thus, the information below is illustrative. 

A. EL Program Implementation Information

Overview: Following are questions to consider in collecting and maintaining information needed to determine 

whether all aspects of an LEA’s EL program(s) are being evaluated. Where an LEA uses more than one EL program, the 

evaluation should disaggregate current and former EL students’ performance data by program to ensure that each 

program’s strengths and weaknesses can be identified and addressed, as needed.

Questions to Ask About EL Program Implementation:

1. Does the evaluation cover all procedural and service provision requirements set forth in the LEA’s EL plan, 

including 

•	 the identification/screening process? 

•	 the student assessment process, including the annual ELP assessment? 

•	 the provision of EL programs and services to all EL students in ways that avoid the unnecessary segregation of 

EL students? 

•	 the provision of qualified staff and resources consistent with EL program design? 

•	 equal opportunities to participate meaningfully in programs and activities, whether curricular, co-curricular, or 

extracurricular?

•	 following appropriate criteria for exiting students from EL program services? 

•	 the implementation of monitoring practices for current EL students, including opt-out ELs, and former EL 

students who have transitioned from EL program services?

2. Is the information collected on each EL program element being assessed with reference to the specific 

requirements of the district’s EL plan? For example, when looking at the process for identifying potential EL 

students, does the evaluation determine whether the LEA has followed the established plan for identifying 

potential EL students with a home language survey (HLS) and timely referral for an ELP assessment?

3. Does the evaluation determine whether staff are adequately trained and have followed applicable procedural and 

service requirements, including frequency, timeliness, and documentation to ensure no lapses in EL services? 

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

4 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Possible Data Sources: 

•	 file and record reviews (e.g., date of enrollment, HLS, assessment, placement, notice letter to EL parent)

•	 staff interviews and surveys

•	 enrollment data in advanced, gifted, and special education courses; choice programs, like magnets; 

extracurricular activities

•	 input from parents, student surveys, or focus group meetings

•	 grievances or complaints made to the district regarding program implementation, service delivery, or access to 

programs

 B. Staffing and Professional Learning

Overview: The following questions will be helpful to ask to determine if school leaders and EL program teachers are 

well prepared and effectively employing professional learning in the classroom to help ensure that EL programs and 

services facilitate improved educational outcomes and English language development for ELs. 

Questions to Ask About Staffing and Professional Learning:

1. Do classroom teachers have the resources, skills and knowledge to address the needs of EL students in their 

classroom?

2. Are content teachers trained in specific methodologies to provide EL students with meaningful access to the 

content?

3. If English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers teach in content areas, do they have certification in their specific 

content areas, as well as ESL certification?

4. Does the LEA provide adequate professional development and follow-up training in order to prepare EL program 

teachers and administrators to implement the EL program effectively?

5. Are administrators who evaluate EL program staff adequately trained to meaningfully evaluate whether EL 

teachers are appropriately employing their training in the classroom?

6. Does the school use mainly paraprofessionals to serve EL students or teachers who are qualified to deliver EL 

services?

Possible Data Sources:

•	 copies of required certifications, licenses or endorsements of teachers who instruct ELs, including content-area 

certification, as appropriate

•	 list of all paraprofessionals who work with ELs and their qualifications to provide support to ELs

•	 classroom observations

•	 class lists and description of how ELs are placed in classes (e.g., ESL, bilingual, and supported content 

instruction)

•	 topics, schedules, and participants at professional learning opportunities

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 5
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

C. Student Performance Information: English Language Development

Overview: Following are questions that may be considered when evaluating the success of EL programs in meeting 

English language development (ELD) goals.

Questions to Ask About English Language Development Goals:

1. Rate of English Language Development

•	 Are EL students acquiring English language skills in all four language domains (e.g., listening, speaking, 

reading, and writing) at a pace that is consistent with EL program goals or expectations and with EL students at 

comparable ages and initial ELP levels? 

•	 Is the rate of language development compatible with the LEA’s objectives for academic progress?

•	 Is the language progress of intermediate and advanced ELs or ELs with disabilities stagnating? If so, what 

supports are these ELs receiving in addition to continued ELD instruction targeted to their language needs? 

2. English Language Proficiency

•	 How are EL students performing in English language skills compared to the LEA’s goals and standards? 

•	 Are EL students progressing in English language skills so they will be able to successfully manage regular 

coursework? 

•	 Do former EL students, who no longer receive English language development services, continue to demonstrate 

English language skills that enable them to successfully manage regular coursework?

Possible Data Sources: 

•	 performance on standardized achievement tests

•	 standardized language proficiency tests

•	 English oral, reading, and writing skills, as demonstrated by grades in language development courses

•	 year-to-year test scores

•	 teacher observation

•	 parental observations and feedback

•	 records on length of time from entry to exit from the program

•	 grades in core classes

•	 graduation rates

Note: Longitudinal data is especially important in evaluating the success of each EL program with respect to whether 

ELs attain English proficiency within a reasonable time period. Disaggregating data by current ELs, former ELs, and 

never ELs is particularly useful for assessing whether EL programs enable ELs to attain parity of participation in the 

standard program within a reasonable time period.

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

6 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

D. Student Performance Information: Academic Content

Overview: This area addresses whether EL students are demonstrating progress in grade-level academic content and 

are not incurring irreparable academic deficits. The following are questions that may be appropriate to consider when 

evaluating program success in the area of academic performance.

Questions to Ask:

Rate of Academic Progress

•	 Are EL students receiving ELD services targeted to their language needs and progressing academically relative 

to EL program goals or expectations?

•	 Are EL students learning grade-level core content in addition to English language development?

•	 Depending upon the LEA’s EL program model(s) and goals, are EL students making sufficient academic 

progress in the core- content areas so that they are either at academic grade level or will be able to “catch up” 

academically within a reasonable period of time?

•	 Are middle and high school EL students receiving meaningful access to courses needed to graduate on time?

Comparison to Other Students

•	 Once EL students have exited EL programs and services, are they able to participate meaningfully in the 

standard curriculum comparable to their never-EL peers? 

•	 How are EL and former EL students doing, over time, as compared to the academic performance of never-EL 

students in core-content subjects and with respect to on-time graduation? 

•	 How do the percentages of current ELs, former ELs, and never-ELs compare in special education, advanced 

courses, and extracurricular activities? Does such access differ by EL program or language background? If there 

is disproportionate participation, what are the barriers to participation? Are the barriers based on language 

needs or EL status?

•	 Are multiple measures used to assess the overall performance of current EL and former EL students in meeting 

the educational goals the district has established for its EL program?

Note: Longitudinal data is especially important in evaluating the success of each EL program. Disaggregating academic 

performance data by current ELs, former ELs, and never ELs is particularly useful for assessing whether EL programs 

enable ELs to attain parity of participation in the standard instructional program within a reasonable period of time.

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 7
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Possible Data Sources: 

•	 performance on standardized achievement tests

•	 year-to-year test scores

•	 teacher observation

•	 parental observations and feedback 

•	 records on length of time from entry to exit from program, including the EL student’s ELP and age at the time of 

entry

•	 grades in core classes

•	 graduation and drop-out rates

•	 inclusion of EL students in gifted and talented, as well as other special programs (e.g., magnet programs)

•	 participation in extracurricular activities

•	 measures related to meeting state or local school reform goals

Note: Most data should already be available in the LEA’s student records. Are data collection and maintenance systems 

maintained to effectively support this portion of the evaluation? Are data systems maintained that permit EL and 

former EL students to be compared to never-EL students?

E. Analyzing the Information and Identifying Areas for Improvement

Overview: This section provides information on analyzing the data collected and describes steps to consider in 

developing an action plan to address the findings from the evaluation. For illustrative purposes, the information is 

organized into three areas discussed below.

Questions to Ask:

1. Review of Results—Findings and Conclusions

Following are questions that may be considered when compiling, organizing, and summarizing the information 

collected for each area where the district is not meeting the educational goals it established:

•	 Is each identified area of concern evaluated to determine why it arose and how it is interfering with program 

objectives? 

•	 Were adequate resources allocated to the area of concern? 

•	 Were the responsible staff adequately trained with respect to their duties? 

•	 Were goals and expectations realistic? Were goals and other program expectations adequately communicated? 

•	 Does the concern suggest the need to take another look at some aspect of the program design?

•	 Are there any contributing factors, explanations, or reasons for each area of concern?

Note that it may be convenient to organize a written summary of three basic components: 

•	 Goal or Standard—Describe program goal or standard where a concern has been identified.

•	 Actual Outcome—Describe what the evaluation demonstrated with respect to shortcomings in achieving the 

desired goal or standard.

•	 Contributing Factors—Describe factors and circumstances that may have influenced the outcome of the goal or 

standard (i.e., why was the outcome not as expected?

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

8 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Questions to Ask (continued)

2. Planning and Designing Modifications and Improvements

The following questions relate to planning and designing corrective measures or improvements tailored to address 

the specific concerns identified, while promoting the overall success of the program:

•	 Has a description of the changes been developed (e.g., What procedural and program modifications will be 

undertaken? Who is expected to be responsible for what? When will the changes be implemented?) 

•	 Has a description of the rationale and objective(s) been developed (e.g., What are the changes expected to 

accomplish? How will success be measured?)

3. Implementing Program Changes

Once the planned modifications are developed, they can be put in place. Questions about implementation 

procedures may include:

•	 Have all stakeholders (i.e., responsible and interested parties) been notified of any program changes? 

•	 Has necessary training been identified? Have appropriate steps been put in place so that responsible persons 

understand expectations and are prepared to implement the changes as planned?

To facilitate the success of the program improvement process, you may wish to consider the following questions:

•	 Staff Responsibilities—Have staff been assigned specific responsibility for activities? Have the assigned staff been 

granted appropriate authority and have they been provided directions describing responsibilities and expected 

outcomes? 

•	 Establishing Schedules—Has a schedule of due dates been established for key events, action steps, and 

expectations? Does the schedule provide for prompt actions to afford equal educational opportunities to EL 

students? 

•	 Follow-up, as Appropriate—Has an approach been established to ensure that the process moves forward as 

expected? Has a person been designated with overall responsibility for the process to ensure its effective 

implementation?

Adapted from U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights. (n.d.). Developing programs for English language learners: Resource materials for 

planning and self-assessments. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/programeval.html

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 9
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2

IMPROVING SEA SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT ALL STUDENTS

Many SEAs have adopted reforms to improve student outcomes and to support all students, including English Learners. 

States then face the challenge of sustaining these reforms.

SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK

The following tool is an excerpt from the Reform Support Network’s Sustainability Rubric: A Tool to Help State 

Educational Agencies Access Their Current Efforts to Sustain Reform Strategies to Meet Student Achievement Goals. 

This guide to the initial stages of planning for sustainable education reform is intended to help SEA leaders sustain the 

initiatives that have the greatest impact on student achievement. It provides an introduction to the cycle of assessment 

and planning designed to ensure the continual refocusing and strengthening of efforts to improve how education 

serves all students, including ELs. This tool is part of a suite of resources from the Reform Support Network. The suite 

includes an LEA sustainability rubric, a case study, and capstone publications summarizing the lessons learned as well 

as recommendations from peer states that have used and have helped shape these sustainability resources. These 

additional resources are located at http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/implementation-support-unit/tech-assist/

resources.html#capacity-building. 

Sustainability Framework Components

1. Context for Sustaining Reform

A. Alignment of the Statewide System

i. Align the policy agenda with priority reforms

B. Public Value

i. Build stakeholder support for priority goals and reforms

ii. Build broad public support for priority goals and reforms

2. System Capacity

A. SEA Capacity

i. Align human capital decisions with priority goals and reforms

ii. Build a culture of continuous improvement toward priority goals

iii. Align organizational structure with priority goals and reforms

B. State Capacity

i. Extend capacity through partnerships

ii. Extend capacity in the field

3. Performance Management

A. Clarity of Outcomes and Theory of Action

i. Set student outcome targets to achieve priority goals

ii. Establish a theory of action and strategies for implementing priority reforms

iii. Develop plan(s) that align strategies with priority goals

B. Alignment of Resources (People, Time, Technology and Money)

i. Direct resources to priority reforms

ii. Establish clear leadership of priority goals and reforms

C. Collection and Use of Data

i. Ensure quality data on performance

ii. Ensure quality data on implementation

iii. Use data to review progress and make mid-course corrections

D. Accountability for Results

i. Link internal accountability to results

ii. Link external accountability to results

iii. Engage stakeholders about results

Category 

(1, 2, 3)

Variable

(A, B...)

Element

(i, ii...)

Source: Reform Support Network. (2015, June). Sustainability rubric: A tool to help state educational agencies assess their current efforts to sustain 

reform strategies to meet student achievement goals. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/implementation-support-unit/tech-assist/

sustainability-rubric-full.pdf.

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

10 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3

IMPROVING LEA SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT ENGLISH LEARNERS

Evaluating the effectiveness of EL programs and services is essential for ensuring that LEAs meet the needs of all ELs. 

The following tool may help LEAs evaluate various aspects of their EL programs and services, collect data, and inform 

instructional program decisions for ELs. 

SEVEN DIMENSIONS OF AN LEA’S NEEDS ASSESSMENT: 

THE PROMOTING EXCELLENCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM 

The Promoting Excellence Appraisal System (PEAS) was developed by the George Washington University Center for 

Equity and Excellence in Education to support higher achievement among ELs. The system comprises seven dimensions 

and corresponding standards of practice: leadership, personnel, professional development, instructional program design, 

instructional implementation, assessment and accountability, and parent and community outreach. The following tool is 

excerpted from one dimension—instructional program design. In this tool, the term “ELL” (English Language Learner) is 

used to refer to “EL” (English Learner). 

Instructional Program Design

Constructs Code Standard Name Definition Effective Design

DE1 Research-based The district’s ELL program design is consistent with current theory and research 

about effective instructional programs for ELLs. 

DE2 Aligned with vision The district’s ELL program design is aligned with the district’s overall vision, 

mission, and goals for ELLs. 

DE3 Aligned with needs The district’s ELL program design addresses the needs of the diverse 

populations of ELLs in the district (students at different English language 

proficiency levels, ages, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds, time in the U.S., 

and levels of prior schooling). 

Access to grade-level content

DA1 Rigor The district’s ELL program design is academically rigorous (not remedial), and 

promotes the knowledge and higher-level thinking skills to prepare students for 

college and satisfying careers. 

DA2 Access to gradelevel instruction

The district’s ELL program(s) are designed to ensure ELLs have equitable access 

to grade-level instruction in the academic content areas. 

DA2A Instructional time ELLs are provided adequate instructional time to learn the intended curriculum. 

DA3 Additional support The district provides additional grade-level academic support for ELLs, 

including translators, tutors, and bilingual instructional aides.

DA4 High quality 

resources

The district provides sufficient and equitable access to high quality instructional 

materials, educational technology, libraries, laboratories and other relevant 

resources that support ELLs’ English language development and grade-level, 

academic content learning in English and the native language. 

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 11
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3: IMPROVING LEA SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Constructs Code Standard Name Definition Access to grade-level content (continued)

DA5 L1 instructional 

resources

High quality native language instructional materials and resources are available 

at each grade level and subject area to support literacy and academic content 

learning. 

DA6 Multicultural 

resources

Instructional materials and resources that reflect and value a wide diversity 

of cultural backgrounds and histories are integrated throughout the general 

education curriculum for all students. 

DA7 Vertical coherence The district ensures sustained, consistent, and coherent instructional support 

from grade to grade until ELLs have reached parity with English speaking 

students on measures of academic achievement in the core content areas. 

DA8 Struggling 

students

The ELL plan includes a timely means for identifying struggling students who 

need additional support, including both active ELLs and those who are not 

currently receiving ELL services. 

Source: Acosta, B., Marzucco, L., Bayraktar, B., & Rivera, C. (2012). Evaluation of English learner programs in Alexandria City Public Schools. 

Washington, DC: The George Washington Center for Equity and Excellence in Education. Retrieved from http://www.acps.k12.va.us/curriculum/ell/

gwu-report.pdf

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

12 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4

IMPROVING SCHOOL-BASED SYSTEMS 

FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS

Evaluating the effectiveness of EL programs and services is essential for ensuring that schools meet the needs of all ELs. 

The following tool may help schools evaluate various aspects of their EL programs and services, collect data, and inform 

instructional program decisions for ELs. 

ENGLISH LEARNER PROGRAM SURVEY FOR PRINCIPALS

Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands (REL-NEI), administered by the Education Development Center, and 

the English Language Learners Alliance developed a survey to collect consistent data on EL programs and students. The 

survey is designed for school principals and covers EL programs, policies, and practices. The survey itself is a multi-page 

document. Below is an overview of its domains and the information obtained by each domain. Both SEAs and LEAs may 

wish to use the survey as a planning tool for providing school leaders professional learning opportunities about ELs. 

“ELL” (English Language Learner) is used to refer to “EL” (English Learner). 

THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNER PROGRAM SURVEY FOR PRINCIPALS

Domain Information Obtained 

Principal characteristics • Characteristics of the responding principal 

ELL student population • Percentage of students in school who are ELL students 

Former ELL student population • Percentage of students in school who are former ELL students 

ELL instructional models • Instructional models used in the school 

Responsibility for ELL students • What personnel at the school are responsible for the education of ELL 

students 

ELL professional development • Types of professional development received and types of professional 

development needed 

ELL student monitoring • Whether and how the school monitors the academic achievement and 

English proficiency of ELL students 

Former ELL student monitoring • Whether and how the school monitors the academic achievement of former 

ELL students 

ELL teacher evaluation • School practices regarding the evaluation of ELL teachers and general 

education teachers with ELL students in their classrooms 

Response to intervention for ELL 

students 

• How the school uses response to intervention for ELL students 

Continued on next page

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 13
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #4: IMPROVING SCHOOL-BASED SYSTEMS FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (CONTINUED)

Domain Information Obtained 

Challenges to implementation • Challenges to implementing the school’s ELL program 

Familiarity with research • Familiarity with research related to instructional practices for ELL students 

Familiarity with state guidelines 

and standards for ELL student 

education 

Familiarity with state guidelines and standards concerning 

• ELL entrance and exit criteria 

• ELL program standards

• ELL students with learning disabilities 

• State ELP assessment

• State ELP assessment score interpretation 

English acquisition • Beliefs about how ELL students learn English, including the role of the native 

language and the importance of academic English 

Teaching ELL students and ELL 

teacher training 

• Beliefs about teaching ELL students and the importance of professional 

development for ELL teachers and general education teachers with ELL 

students in their classrooms 

Sociocultural issues around 

educating ELL students 

• Beliefs about the role that socio-cultural factors play in educating ELL 

students 

ELL students and learning 

disabilities 

Beliefs about ELL students and learning disabilities 

Source: Grady, M. W., & O’Dwyer, L. M. (2014). The English language learner program survey for principals (REL 2014-027). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational 

Laboratory Northeast & Islands. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2014027.pdf

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

14 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM

RESOURCES

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 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 concerned 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 items does not reflect their importance, nor is it 

intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links were verified on September 8, 2015. The list of resources 

will be updated and revised in the future.

Acosta, B., Marzucco, L., Bayraktar, B., & Rivera, C. (2012). 

Evaluation of English learner programs in Alexandria 

City Public Schools. Washington, DC: The George 

Washington Center for Equity and Excellence in 

Education. Retrieved from http://www.acps.k12.va.us/

curriculum/ell/gwu-report.pdf

This resource provides an example of the information 

collected during an evaluation of an EL program. 

It illustrates data elements for SEAs and LEAs to 

consider when making the decisions about actions 

most likely to improve learning and teaching for ELs.

August, D., Salend, S., Staehr Fenner, D., & Kozik, P. 

(2012, July). The evaluation of educators in 

effective schools and classrooms for all learners. 

Washington, DC: AFT. Retrieved from http://

connectingthedots.aft.org/sites/aft/files/documents/

i3_Grant-ELL-SWD_Working_Group-Shared_Values_

Paper-FINAL-7-3-12.pdf

This brief outlines the necessary conditions for 

ensuring that all students can become successful 

learners in general education classrooms. The authors 

discuss what is necessary in the classroom, as well as 

in professional practice and development, to ensure 

that SEAs and LEAs evaluate teachers in ways that 

advance the learning of all students.

Baker, S., Lesaux, N., Jayanthi, M., Dimino, J., Proctor, C. 

P., Morris, J., Gersten, R., Haymond, K., Kieffer, M. J., 

Linan-Thompson, S., & Newman-Gonchar, R. (2014). 

Teaching academic content and literacy to English 

learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE 

2014- 4012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Evaluation and Regional 

Assistance (NCEE). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/

ncee/wwc/practiceguide.aspx?sid=19

This practice guide offers “educators specific, 

evidence-based recommendations that address 

the challenge of teaching ELs in the elementary 

and middle grades: building their ELP while 

simultaneously building literacy, numeracy skills, and 

content knowledge of social studies and science. The 

guide provides practical and coherent information on 

critical topics related to literacy instruction for ELs, 

and is based on the best available evidence as judged 

by the authors.”

Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective 

instruction for English learners. Future of Children, 

21(1), 103-127. Retrieved from http://www.princeton.

edu/futureofchildren/publications/docs/21_01_05.pdf

This article identifies the elements of effective 

instruction and reviews successful program models 

for ELs. The authors highlight both comprehensive 

reform models and individual components of the 

models. Examples include (1) school structures and 

leadership; (2) language and literacy instruction; 

(3) integration of language, literacy, and content

instruction in secondary schools; (4) cooperative

learning; (5) professional development; (6) parent and

family support teams; (7) tutoring; (8) and monitoring

implementation and outcomes.

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 15
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

George Washington University Center for Equity 

and Excellence in Education. (1994). Promoting 

excellence: Ensuring academic success for English 

language learners—Guiding principles. Washington, 

DC: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.cgu.edu/include/guidingprinciples.pdf

This guide catalogs standards that support educators 

working with ELs and former ELs. The Promoting 

Excellence principles are the foundation of the 

Promoting Excellence Appraisal System, which was 

used by the George Washington University Center for 

Equity and Excellence in Education to support SEAs 

and LEAs in evaluating EL programs. 

Giancola, S. (2014). Evaluation matters: Getting the 

information you need from your evaluation. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of Secondary and Elementary Education, 

School Support and Rural Programs. Retrieved from 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/sst/

evaluationmatters.pdf

This guide will help SEA and LEA staff to build 

evaluations into EL programs and projects. It also 

explains how to be an informed, active partner with 

an evaluator to make sure that evaluation improves 

programs. Appendices include evaluation resources, 

instruments, and templates. 

Grady, M. W., & O’Dwyer, L. M. (2014). The English 

language learner program survey for principals (REL 

2014-027). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Evaluation and Regional 

Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory 

Northeast & Islands. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/

ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2014027.pdf

This document includes survey questions for SEAs to 

use to collect data on (1) school policies and practices 

for educating ELs; (2) the types of professional 

development on EL education that principals have 

received and would like to receive; (3) principals’ 

familiarity with state guidelines and standards for 

EL education; and (4) principals’ beliefs about the 

education of ELs. 

Hill, P., Murphy, P., & Redding, S. (2013, May). The SEA of 

the future: Leveraging performance management to 

support school improvement. Building State Capacity 

and Productivity Center, 1(1). Retrieved from 

http://www.bscpcenter.org/sea/pdf/sea_of_the_

future%20_vol_1_052113.pdf

This four-volume publication discusses “how [SEAs] 

can shift from a compliance to a performanceoriented organization.” Volume titles are:

1. “Leveraging Performance Management to Support 

School Improvement”

2. “Prioritizing Productivity”

3. “Building the Productivity Infrastructure “ 

4. “Uncovering the Productivity Promise of Rural 

Education” 

Each volume provides specific strategies 

for transforming SEAs into more productive 

organizations.

National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. 

(2013). Serving English language learners: A toolkit 

for public charter schools. Retrieved from http://www.

publiccharters.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/

NAPCS_ELL_Toolkit_04.02.13_20130402T114313.pdf

This tool kit discusses key federal laws and policies 

and provides examples of state laws. “It also gives 

real-world examples from charter schools across 

the country, and provides a basic framework for 

conceptualizing, implementing, and monitoring an 

EL instructional program.... This toolkit discusses 

the areas that charter schools should consider when 

serving EL students: school opening, recruitment, 

admissions, identification and assessment, program 

requirements, teacher qualifications, exiting students 

from the program, program monitoring, and parental 

communication.”

National Charter School Resource Center. (2014). Legal 

guidelines for educating English learners in charter 

schools. Houston, TX: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.charterschoolcenter.org/sites/default/

files/files/field_publication_attachment/NCSRC%20

Legal%20Guidelines%20for%20Educating%20

English%20Learners%20in%20Charter%20Schools_

FINAL_0.pdf

This report discusses the legal requirements that 

charter schools need to be aware of as they serve 

the needs of ELs. “Section I outlines the broad legal 

framework governing equal educational access for 

ELs in charter schools as established by federal law. 

Section II highlights state laws enacted to clarify, 

extend, or implement federal requirements.” 

Section III “discusses issues related to the availability 

and quality of available data on ELs in charter 

schools.” Section IV “outlines policy implications at 

the federal and state levels.”

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

16 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Reform Support Network. (2015, April) Sustainability 

rubric: A tool to help state educational agencies 

assess their current efforts to sustain reform 

strategies to meet student achievement goals. 

Retrieved from 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/implementationsupport-unit/tech-assist/sustainability-rubric-full.pdf

This rubric is a tool for SEAs to assess their capacities 

to sustain priority reforms. The rubric comprises 

three sections (1) “Context for Sustaining Reform,” 

(2) “System Capacity,” and (3) “Performance 

Management,” each with multiple variables and 

elements to measure reform. A four-scale rating (i.e., 

inadequate, emerging, strong, and exemplary) is used 

for measurement and the rubric includes “look-fors” 

for guidance. 

 Reform Support Network. (2015, June). Sustainability 

rubric for local educational agencies. Retrieved 

from https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/

implementation-support-unit/tech-assist/

sustainabilityrubricsummaryforlea.pdf

This rubric is a tool for LEAs to assess their capacities 

to sustain priority reforms. The rubric includes 19 

elements of sustainability, and provides a four-scale 

rating (inadequate, emerging, strong, and exemplary) 

for each. Together, these ratings show clear strengths 

and challenges in LEA sustainability. 

Rhim, L. M., & Redding, S. (Eds.). (2014). The state 

role in turnaround: Emerging best practices. San 

Francisco, CA: WestEd. Retrieved from http://

centeronschoolturnaround.org/wp-content/

uploads/2014/01/The_State_Role_in_School_

Turnaround.pdf

This resource examines the role of the SEA in school 

turnaround efforts. The editors apply research 

and best practices related to the SEA’s leadership 

role in driving and supporting successful school 

turnarounds.

Shakman, K., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2015). Logic models for 

program design, implementation, and evaluation: 

Workshop toolkit (REL 2015–057). Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education 

Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation 

and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational 

Laboratory Northeast & Islands. Retrieved from 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/

REL_2015057.pdf

This workshop tool kit is designed to help resource 

education leaders better understand, monitor, 

and evaluate their programs and develop program 

outcomes using logic models. It includes facilitator 

and participant workbooks, and an accompanying 

slide deck. 

U.S. Department of Education, Implementation and 

Support Unit (ISU). (2015, August). Race to the Top 

publications and resources. Retrieved from 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/implementationsupport-unit/tech-assist/resources.html

This Web page provides links to Race to the Top 

guidance and resource documents. It contains a 

drop-down menu of education reform resources 

and a section of documents organized into the 

following five categories: (1) “Instructional 

improvement and Data Systems,” (2) “Teacher and 

Leader Effectiveness/Standards and Assessments,” 

(3) “School Turnaround,” (4) “SEA Capacity 

Building,” and (5) “Stakeholder Communication and 

Engagement.” The “SEA Capacity Building” section 

contains tools specifically developed by the Reform 

Support Network to guide SEA reform initiatives. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights 

(OCR). (n.d.). Developing programs for English 

language learners: Resource materials for planning 

and self-assessments. Washington, DC: Author. 

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/

list/ocr/ell/programeval.html

This Web page may help SEAs and LEAs in evaluating 

programs for ELs. It contains the following resources: 

key elements to evaluate EL programs, information 

needed to determine whether an LEA is evaluating 

all aspects of its EL program, questions to ask when 

evaluating EL programs, information on analyzing 

program data, and steps toward developing an action 

plan to address evaluation findings.

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM 17
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

U.S. Department of Education, Office 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/offices/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 justification. 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, Office for Civil Rights, and 

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2015, January). 

Dear colleague letter: English learner students and 

limited English proficient parents. Retrieved from 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/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 

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 proficient 

parents and guardians have meaningful access to 

SEA-, LEA-, and school-related information. 

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs,

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.

You can access Tools and Resources for Evaluating the Effectiveness of a District’s EL Program at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

18 TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A DISTRICT’S EL PROGRAM
Published September 2015

CHAPTER 10

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING 

MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH 

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT PARENTS

This is the tenth chapter of the English Learner Tool Kit, which is intended to help state and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) 

meet their obligations to English Learners (ELs). This tool kit should be read in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education 

Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) and the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Dear Colleague Letter on “English Learner Students and 

Limited English Proficient 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/offices/list/ocr/

ellresources.html.

ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LIMITED 

ENGLISH PROFICIENT PARENTS

KEY POINTS

• SEAs and LEAs have an obligation to communicate

meaningfully with limited English proficient (LEP)

parents and to notify LEP parents adequately of

information about any program, service, or activity

called to the attention of non-LEP parents.

• LEAs must have a process to identify LEP parents

and provide them with free and effective language

assistance, such as translated materials or an

appropriate and competent interpreter.

• Appropriate and competent translators or

interpreters should have proficiency in target

languages; ease of written and oral expression;

knowledge of specialized terms or concepts; as well as

be trained on their role, the ethics of interpreting and

translating, and the need for confidentiality.

Research shows that strong family-school relationships 

are an indicator of student success (Weiss, López, 

& Rosenberg, 2011). Communication with limited 

English proficient (LEP) parents in a language they can 

understand provides a foundation for students’ academic 

success and creates a welcoming school community; it 

provides these parents with access to all the necessary 

information about their child’s education.

SEAs and LEAs have an obligation to communicate 

meaningfully with LEP parents and to adequately notify 

them of information about any program, service, or 

activity called to the attention of non-LEP parents. 

Successful communication provides LEP parents the 

school-related information they need to make informed 

decisions about, and be helpful participants in, their 

children’s education. This may include but not be limited 

to information about language assistance programs, 

special education and related services, Individualized 

Education Program (IEP) meetings, grievance procedures, 

notices of nondiscrimination, student discipline policies 

and procedures, registration and enrollment, report cards, 

requests for parent permission for student participation 

in district or school activities, parent-teacher conferences, 

parent handbooks, gifted and talented programs, and 

magnet and charter schools.

LEAs must develop and implement a process for 

determining (1) if parents and guardians have limited 

English proficiency; (2) what their primary language is; 

and (3) what their language needs are. An LEA may use 

a student registration form, such as the home language 

1

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

survey (HLS), to inquire about whether a parent or 

guardian requires oral and/or written communication in 

a language other than English. LEAs and schools should 

translate the HLS into languages that are common in 

the school and surrounding community. Schools should 

take parents at their word about their communication 

needs if they request language assistance. Schools should 

also understand that parents may not be proficient 

in English, even if their child is.SEAs and LEAs must 

provide language assistance to LEP parents effectively 

with appropriate, competent staff or appropriate and 

competent outside resources. To provide these services, 

LEAs may canvas staff to see if they are trained and 

qualified to provide effective language assistance, or 

obtain qualified interpreters and translators if staff is 

unqualified or if it would minimize the degree to which 

trained bilingual staff is called away from instruction and 

other duties to translate or interpret. Schools or LEAs may 

also use a language phone line to provide oral translation 

and interpretation services. Students, siblings, friends, 

and untrained staff members are not considered qualified 

translators or interpreters, even if they are bilingual. All 

interpreters and translators, including staff acting in this 

capacity, should be proficient in the target languages; 

have knowledge of specialized terms or concepts in both 

languages; and be trained in the role of an interpreter or 

translator, the ethics of interpreting and translating, and 

the need to maintain confidentiality.

Building strong relationships between families and 

schools or LEAs occurs over a period of time, and 

these relationships can be established and nurtured in 

numerous ways. It is essential to understand the cultures 

of LEP families and “integrate cultural traditions of 

families throughout the school” (Breiseth, 2011). Schools 

and LEAs can also foster relationships by inviting families 

to volunteer in the school and encouraging families 

to help children integrate their cultural and linguistic 

traditions into school assignments and other curricular 

and extracurricular activities.

The following checklist is intended to help SEAs, LEAs, 

and schools have meaningful communication with LEP 

parents. The checklist provides suggested questions only. 

Schools and LEAs should check their SEA’s policies and 

federal guidance to ensure compliance. SEAs may also 

have translated forms.

Family, Language, and Culture 

 How does the school honor and reflect the diversity 

of families, including their languages and cultures?

 Are staff members trained in engaging diverse 

families and communities?

 Are parent meetings and school events scheduled 

with interpreters present on dates and times that 

facilitate LEP parent participation?

Language Identification Procedures

 What is the process for determining parents’ language 

needs (e.g., HLS)?

 Does the LEA or school have the HLS translated 

into the language(s) common to the community and 

have qualified interpreters available to help parents 

complete the survey accurately?

Interpretation and Translation Services

 What is the process for providing language assistance 

to LEP parents or guardians?

 How does the LEA inform LEP parents about the 

availability of free language assistance services, 

including qualified interpreters and translators?

 What is the process for acquiring qualified and trained 

interpreters and translators?

 What is the process for determining that the LEA staff 

is competent and appropriate to serve as interpreters 

or translators?

 How does the LEA ensure that interpreters and 

translators have knowledge of all specialized 

educational terms and concepts?

Parent Notification

 What procedures are in place for LEP parents to be 

informed of programs, services, and activities in a 

language they understand?

 How does the LEA ensure that translated written 

communications--including information regarding 

progress reports, report cards, and permission 

slips--are provided in a language that LEP parents 

understand?

 What is the process for providing translation or 

interpretation services, when needed, for parentteacher conferences, IEP meetings, and disciplinary 

proceedings?

Partnerships

 What parent, school, and community partnerships 

exist at the SEA-, LEA-, and school levels?

 What learning and leadership opportunities are 

available for LEP parents?

2

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH 

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT PARENTS

TOOLS

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 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 concerned 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 September 8, 2015. 

The following set of tools is intended to assist schools, LEAs, and SEAs in working with families of ELs. The tools 

provide information on how to help families participate in their child’s education and other school activities.

Tool #1, Establishing Family-School Partnerships, provides 

a framework for family engagement activities that 

help schools and families partner for improved student 

outcomes.

Tool #2, Tapping into the Strengths of Families and 

Communities, provides educators with ideas to establish 

and maintain strong parental engagement in schools.

Tool #3, Interpretation and Translation Resources, 

contains multiple resources for interpretation and 

translation.

3

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1

ESTABLISHING FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS

The U.S. Department of Education (ED), in partnership with the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL), 

developed the following framework to support family engagement activities that help schools and families partner for 

improved student outcomes. Partners in Education: A Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family-School Partnerships (the 

framework) describes itself as a “scaffold for the development of family engagement strategies, policies, and programs.” 

The shortened framework provided below was excerpted from the entire framework, which discusses the goals and 

conditions needed for effective family engagement that supports student achievement and school improvement. The 

complete framework is available at http://www2.ed.gov/documents/family-community/partners-education.pdf

DUAL CAPACITY-BUILDING FRAMEWORK FOR 

FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS

The Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family-School Partnerships was formulated using research on effective 

family engagement and home-school partnership strategies and practices, adult learning and motivation, and leadership 

development. The framework’s components include the following:

1. The challenges (e.g., lack of knowledge about developing partnerships, and personal, cultural, and structural 

barriers) faced by both the school/program staff and the families for building effective home–school 

partnerships.

2. The process conditions (e.g., linking partnerships to learning) and organizational conditions (e.g., systemic and 

sustained strategies) integral to the success of family-school partnership initiatives and interventions.

3. The areas (e.g., skills, knowledge, networks, beliefs, values, and self-efficacy) that staff and families need to 

create, implement, and sustain family-oriented policy and program goals. 

4. A description of the capacity-building outcomes for school/program staff and families that support student 

achievement and school improvement.

The publication also presents three case studies from a school, a district, and a county. The case studies illustrate 

capacity-building strategies based on the framework.

Continued on next page

4

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #1: ESTABLISHING FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS (CONTINUED)

Figure 2: The Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family–School Partnerships

THE 

CHALLENGE

Lack of opportunities 

for School/

Program Staff to 

 build the capacity 

for partnerships

Ineffective 

Family–School 

Partnerships

Lack of 

opportunities for 

Families to build 

the capacity for 

partnerships

OPPORTUNITY

CONDITIONS

Process Conditions

• Linked to learning

• Relational

• Development vs. serviceorientation

• Collaborative

• Interactive

Organizational Conditions

• Systemic: across the organization

• Integrated: embedded in all 

programs

• Sustained: with resources and 

infrastructure

POLICY AND

PROGRAM 

GOALS

To build and enhance the capacity of staff/families in the “4 C” areas:

• Capabilities (skills and knowledge)

• Connections (networks)

• Cognition (beliefs, values)

• Confidence (self-efficacy)

FAMILY 

AND STAFF 

CAPACITY 

OUTCOMES

School and Program 

Staff who can

• Honor and recognize

families’ funds of 

knowledge

• Connect family 

engagement to 

student learning

• Create welcoming, 

inviting cultures

Effective 

Family–School 

Partnerships

Supporting Student 

Achievement 

 & School 

Improvement

Families who 

can negotiate 

multiple roles

• Supporters

• Encouragers

• Monitors

• Advocates

• Decision Makers

• Collaborators

Source: U.S. Department of Education and Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (2013). Partners in education: A dual capacity-building 

framework for family-school partnerships. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/documents/family-community/partners-education.pdf

5

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #2

TAPPING INTO THE STRENGTHS OF

 FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES

Schools are diverse communities, and educators can use the strengths families possess to support student achievement. 

It is important to understand and value the backgrounds and experiences of parents. This will help school staff identify 

strategies for developing and sustaining strong partnerships to help all children succeed in school.

BRIDGING FAMILIES’ CULTURE AND SCHOOLS 

The Regional Educational Laboratory for the Pacific (REL Pacific) developed a tool kit that focuses on practices and tools 

that provide an integrated approach for engaging families and the community with the schools. The tool kit consists of 

four parts. Below is the introduction from “Part 2: Building a Cultural Bridge,” which focuses on using the strengths of 

families to actively engage them in student learning. 

•	 It is critical to identify family strengths in order to engage with families as partners in their children’s education.

To identify and make use of family strengths, educators may need to shift from a deficit model—focusing on what 

families aren’t doing—to a strengths-based model that acknowledges that families want to help their students succeed 

(Moore, 2011). For example, in the Chuukese population it is not unusual for the extended family or another interested 

community member to come to school functions when a child’s parent is not available. Rather than seeing this as 

a case in which parents do not care about their child’s education, educators can see the involvement of others as a 

reflection of a cultural strength—the community is interdependent and focused on group success. If the parent isn’t 

available, another member of the community steps in to support the student. Of course, educators must avoid the 

pitfall of thinking that all family characteristics in a culture can be generalized. Instead, they must get to know each 

family better. 

•	 Collaborating with families based on strengths develops strong relationships between home, school, and community.

Educators can help families build on their strengths by asking them how they want to be involved and how the school 

and community can create opportunities for that involvement. When educators recognize parents’ strengths, they 

are more likely to reach out to parents as true partners in their children’s education (e.g., work together with them 

to set goals for their children’s education, help them understand how to support their children’s learning at home, 

acknowledge the importance of the home language). To make use of family strengths, the school and community need 

to offer diverse and culturally-appropriate approaches to engaging families. They need to provide opportunities for 

parents to be viewed as individuals, recognizing the diversity that occurs within and between cultural groups. 

•	 Partnering with communities to promote family engagement helps schools and families support student learning.

Family, school, and community have “overlapping spheres of influence” and if the three spheres, or areas of influence, 

interact and communicate with each other, it is more likely that students will receive common messages about student 

success (Epstein, 2010). By partnering with communities (e.g., businesses, faith-based organizations, community 

centers), families and schools can maximize their efforts to support student success (Epstein et al., 2002). Research 

shows that all students can benefit when all stakeholders work together. 

 References: 

• Epstein, J. L., (2010). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(3),81–96.

• Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., & Voorhis, F. (2002). School, family and community partnerships: Your 

handbook for action (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press

• Moore, T. (2011). Drawing on parents’ strengths: The role of districts and schools in empowering families to be effective partners in learning. 

Family Involvement Network of Educators (FINE) Newsletter, 3(2). 

Source: Regional Educational Laboratory for the Pacific. (2015). Toolkit of resources for engaging parents and community as partners in education, Part 2: 

Building a cultural bridge. Retrieved from http://relpacific.mcrel.org/resources/~/media/RELPacific/Files/Part%202_Jan2015.ashx

6

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

TOOL #3

INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION RESOURCES

The following tool is a sampling of resources for interpretation and translation resources from the U.S. Department of 

Justice’s LEP.gov website. Not all resources on the website are listed below. It is important to note that the interpretation 

and translation resources included here are not necessarily endorsed by ED, DOJ, or the Federal Interagency Working 

Group on LEP. A more complete list of LEP information and resources can be found at http://www.lep.gov/interp_

translation/trans_interpret.html.

A. Federal Resources

1. Before You Hire—Ask Yourself: “What Are My Project’s Language Needs?”— TIPS (Translation and Interpretation 

Procurement Series) for making language service hiring decisions. (PDF)

2. TIPS on Hiring the Right Telephonic Interpretation Vendor —TIPS to finding a high-quality telephone 

interpretation vendor. (PDF)

3. TIPS for Working With Telephone Interpreters—TIPS for planning, placing, and troubleshooting phone calls with 

telephone interpreters. (PDF)

4. What Does It Mean to Be a Certified Linguist?—TIPS for discovering vendor and linguist qualifications. (PDF) 

5. Top 10 Best Practices for Multilingual Websites—Suggestions include providing prominent access on the English 

site and ensuring that the multilingual site and English site provide a comparable experience.

6. Lost in Translation, Automated Translations—Good Solution or Not?

B. The Difference Between an Interpreter and a Translator

1. “[T]he ordinary or common meaning of ‘interpreter’ does not include those who translate writings. Instead, 

we find that an interpreter is normally understood as one who translates orally from one language to 

another.” Taniguchi v Kan Pac. Saipan, Ltd, 132 S Ct 1997, 2003-04 (May 21, 2012).

2. What is the difference between a bilingual staff person and an interpreter or translator? DOJ Question 11, Commonly 

Asked Questions and Answers Regarding Limited English Proficient (LEP) Individuals

C. National Interpreter and Translator Associations and Organizations

1. Regional and State Interpreter Associations (Word document)

2. Interpreter and Translator Training and Certificate Programs (Word document)

3. The American Association of Language Specialists

4. The American Literary Translators Association 

5. The American Translators Association (ATA)

6. ATA Affiliated Chapters and Groups

7. ATA Other Interpreter and Translator Groups

8. The Association of Language Companies

9. National Association of Judiciary Interpreters & Translators 

Source: LEP.gov. (n.d.). Interpretation and translation. Retrieved from http://www.lep.gov/interp_translation/trans_interpret.html

7

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION 

WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT PARENTS

RESOURCES

The U.S. Department of Education does not mandate or prescribe particular curricula, lesson plans, assessments, or other 

instruments in this tool kit. Rather, 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 concerned 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 such inclusion intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided. All links included here 

were verified on September 8, 2015. The list of resources will be updated and revised in the future.

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). 

Collaborating with interpreters: Overview. Retrieved 

from http://www.asha.org/PRPSpecificTopic.

aspx?folderid=8589935334§ion=Overview

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 

outlines several roles and responsibilities for providing 

culturally- competent materials and translation or 

interpretation services when working with nonEnglish speakers. The article is written for speech 

and language pathologists; however, it provides 

suggestions that LEAs may wish to consider when 

working with interpreters and translators.

Breiseth, L. (2011, August). Engaging ELL families: 20 

strategies for school leaders with questions for reflection 

and checklists. Washington, DC: Colorín Colorado. 

Retrieved from http://www.colorincolorado.org/

pdfs/articles/Engaging-ELL-Families_A-Checklist-forSchool-Leaders.pdf

This guide offers 20 ideas to help school leaders 

strengthen home-school partnerships; engage staff, 

parents, and students; create a culture of respect 

in the community; and advocate and allocate 

resources for EL families. The guide has six sections: 

(1) connecting with EL families, (2) communicating

important information, (3) parent participation, (4)

parents as leaders, (5) community partnerships, and

(6) creating a plan of action.

Bridging Refugee Youth & Children’s Services (BRYCS). 

(2015). Interpretation—Serving refugee and immigrant 

children. Retrieved from http://www.brycs.org/

clearinghouse/Highlighted-Resources-InterpretationServing-Refugee-and-Immigrant-Children.cfm

This Web page contains resources about using 

translators and interpreters in various settings related 

to services for adults and children.

Bridging Refugee Youth & Children’s Services. (n.d.). 

Federal requirements to provide interpretation/

translation in the schools. In Refugee children in U.S. 

schools: A toolkit for teachers and school personnel. 

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from 

http://www.brycs.org/documents/upload/

Interpretation-Translation-FAQ.pdf

This chapter of the BRYCS tool kit on refugee 

children provides information about federal laws 

and regulations on national origin discrimination, 

and translation and interpretation for students and 

parents. Educational glossaries are included, along 

with other resources on etiquette for translators, 

suggestions for improving LEP services, and the 

effective use of interpreters for parent-teacher 

conferences.

Center for Parent Information and Resources. (2015). 

English language learners (ELL) resources. Retrieved 

from http://www.parentcenterhub.org/topics/ell/

The Center for Parent Information and Resources 

provides assistance to parents of ELs. The resources 

provide information on using interpreters effectively, 

ensuring EL students have equal access to high-quality 

education, and the education rights of immigrant 

children, among other topics. The page provides links 

to all resources.

Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). For families. Retrieved from 

http://www.colorincolorado.org/families/

The Colorín Colorado is a bilingual website that 

provides parents and families with information to help 

their children become good readers and successful 

students. This page for families contains reading tips 

and activities, suggestions for choosing books to read 

with children, ideas for getting involved at a child’s 

school, and more.

8

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Colorín Colorado. (n.d.). Parent outreach. Retrieved from 

http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/c44/

Parents of ELs may feel apprehensive about getting 

involved at school because they lack English skills 

or knowledge of U.S. culture and the public school 

system. This resource provides information about how 

to reach out to the parents of ELs and involve them in 

their children’s learning, both at school and at home.

Detzner, D., Xiong, B., & Eliason, P. (2010). Helping youth 

succeed: Bicultural parenting for Southeast Asian 

families. Retrieved from http://www.extension.umn.

edu/family/families-with-teens/resources-parents/

bicultural-parenting/background/

This paper provides an overview of Southeast 

Asian parenting and child-rearing practices, 

as well as background information about the 

“cultural values and beliefs that influence parents, 

especially regarding family life and interpersonal 

relationships.” It also includes a review of gender 

roles in the family; parent-child relationships among 

Cambodian, Hmong, Lao, and Vietnamese families; 

and issues confronting Southeast Asian parents and 

youths in the United States.

Erekson, J., Kim, Y., & Lycke, K. (2015, March). Five 

principles with twenty examples for engaging ELL 

families. ASCD Express: Ideas from the field, 10(13). 

Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/

vol10/1013-erekson.aspx

This discussion looks at three approaches to parental 

engagement: (1) invite families to school activities; 

(2) empower learners by studying the funds of 

knowledge families bring from their varied class and 

cultural backgrounds; and (3) develop teacher-parent 

collaborations where teachers focus on a specific 

set of home-friendly strategies. The authors provide 

tables and explanations for implementing their 

proposed strategies.

Grantmakers for Education. (2013, April). Educating 

English language learners: Grantmaking strategies for 

closing America’s other achievement gap. Portland, OR: 

Author. Retrieved from http://edfunders.org/sites/

default/files/Educating%20English%20Language%20

Learners_April%202013.pdf

This report presents an overview of ELs, the history 

of grants on their behalf, and how philanthropy can 

impact the education of English learners. The report 

also details four case studies of grants in action 

in three states—California, Illinois, and Texas—

and includes information about successful parent 

programs in EL communities.

Harry, B., & Waterman, R. (2008). Building collaboration 

between schools and parents of English language 

learners: Transcending barriers, creating opportunities 

(Practictioner Brief). Tempe, AZ: National Center for 

Culturally Responsive Educational Systems. Retrieved 

from http://www.nccrest.org/Briefs/PractitionerBrief_

BuildingCollaboration.pdf

This brief discusses barriers between schools 

and parents of ELs. It offers concrete suggestions 

to (1) inform school staff about school-initiated 

efforts to build partnerships with parents; 

(2) overcome language barriers; (3) provide access 

to comprehensible information about U.S. schools 

and culturally and linguistically diverse families; 

(4) address concerns related to special education 

placement and referral; (5) reduce immigrant 

isolation; and (6) raise awareness of EL concerns 

related to undocumented legal status.

Mathis, W. (2013, March). English language learners 

and parental involvement. Boulder, CO: National 

Education Policy Center (NEPC), School of Education 

at the University of Colorado-Boulder. Retrieved 

from http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/

Policy_Briefs/Research-Based-Options/07-MathisParentalInvolvement.pdf

This multi-part brief summarizes relevant findings in 

education policy research for engaging the families 

of English learners. The author recommends twoway communication with EL families; as well as the 

involvement of these families in the life of the school, 

community collaboration, school governance, and 

their child’s schoolwork.

National Charter School Resource Center. (2014). Engaging 

English learner families in charter schools. Houston, 

TX: Safal Partners. Retrieved from http://www.

charterschoolcenter.org/resource/engaging-englishlearner-families-charter-schools

This paper highlights several practices for engaging 

EL families. Section I describes “practices employed 

by charter operators to reach out to EL families and 

involve them in the activities of their charter schools.” 

Section II provides an overview of funding strategies 

used by schools to finance their family engagement, 

and Section III discusses the implications of the 

findings.

9

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Omniglot. (n.d.). The difficulties involved in SpanishEnglish translation. Retrieved from 

http://www.omniglot.com/language/articles/

spanishenglishtranslation.htm

The article discusses difficulties involved in 

translating from Spanish-to-English and Englishto-Spanish. The author states that, although they 

are both Romance languages, grammatical and 

syntactical constructs in English and Spanish, such 

as general word order, make it very challenging for 

translators to translate correctly between the two 

languages. The article concludes by adding that 

“[h] igh proficiency is required in both the languages 

for performing flawless and authentic English-Spanish 

translation and Spanish-English translation.”

Payton, B. (2014, February). New funding law puts focus 

on translation for non-English speakers. EdSource. 

Retrieved from http://edsource.org/2014/newfunding-law-puts-focus-on-translation-for-nonenglish-speakers/57514

This article discusses how four districts in California 

(Oakland, San Jose, West Contra Costa, and Fresno) 

are instituting updated translation services to ensure 

proper communication with non-English speaking 

parents. This follows passage of a new California 

funding law. The districts offer “real-time meeting 

interpreting through headsets, bilingual PowerPoint 

presentations, translated written materials,” and 

other translation formats at the LEA level.

Regional Educational Laboratory for the Pacific. (2015, 

January). Toolkit of resources for engaging parents 

and community as partners in education (Parts 1–3). 

Retrieved from http://relpacific.mcrel.org/resources/

tools

Part 1 of this toolkit, on building trusting 

relationships with families and community 

through effective communication, provides tools 

that help school staff become aware of “how 

their beliefs and assumptions about family and 

community engagement influence their interactions 

with families,” as well as how the demographic 

characteristics of the families can inform family 

engagement with these schools. Part 2, on building 

a cultural bridge, focuses on tapping the strengths 

of families and community members to help families 

become active in the school community in support 

of student learning. Part 3, on building trusting 

relationships with families and community through 

effective communication, “discusses cross-cultural 

and two-way communication as ways to enhance 

family and community engagement.”

Rowe, D., & Fain, J. (2013, July). The family backpack 

project: Responding to dual-language texts through 

family journals. Language Arts, (90)6, 402–416. 

Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/library/

NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/LA/0906-jul2013/

LA0906Family.pdf

This article describes parent and child responses to 

a home book-reading program designed to provide 

prekindergarten students and their families with 

access to dual-language books and audio recordings 

in English as well as their home language. The 

authors emphasize that “family literacy practices are 

a foundation for initiating preschoolers into literacy” 

and understanding interactions, values, and beliefs of 

various cultures. 

San Francisco Unified School District, Translation and 

Interpretation Unit. (2014, October). SFUSD glossary 

of educational terms. San Francisco, CA: San Francisco 

Unified School District. Retrieved from 

http://www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/services/

files/translation-interpretation-glossary.pdf

SFUSD created this glossary of terms to facilitate 

effective communication between families and 

school staff. The glossary covers a wide range of 

educational terms in English, Chinese, and Spanish 

and is designed to help schools translate documents 

into predominant languages as well as those that are 

less common in their school communities. Additional 

information about translation and interpretation can 

be found at http://www.sfusd.edu/en/family-andcommunity-support/translation-and-interpretation.

html.

Shamseddine, R. (2011). Interpreting in a classroom 

setting. Washington, DC: Bridging Refugee Youth and 

Children’s Services. Retrieved from http://www.brycs.

org/documents/upload/classroominterpreting.pdf

This document provides information about 

interpretation in the classroom setting. It includes 

recommendations on seating arrangements, preinterviews with the interpreter, and the roles of both 

the teacher and interpreter.

10

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

Sperling, J. (2011, January). Communicating more for less:

Using translation and interpretation technology to serve 

limited English proficient individuals. Washington, 

DC: Migration Policy Institute, National Center on 

Immigrant Integration Policy. Retrieved from 

http://www.maine.gov/education/esl/webinars/

documents/LEPtranslationtechnologyJan2011.pdf

This report discusses how advances in interpretation 

and translation technology can cut costs by reducing 

redundancy and saving resources. The document 

may assist practitioners in understanding and 

identifying which services would best meet their 

language access needs.

U.S. Department of Education. (2008, June). Preparing to 

serve English language learner students: School districts 

with emerging English language learner communities

(Issues & Answers, REL 2008–No. 049). Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences, National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional 

Educational Laboratory-Appalachia. Retrieved 

from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.

asp?pubid=REL2008049

This report offers suggestions for helping to overcome 

the challenges of newly enrolling or rapidly increasing 

EL student populations. Information is provided on 

encouraging parents to participate in their children’s 

education, as well as reaching out to social services to 

assist district and school staff in addressing student 

needs for housing and other support. The appendices 

provide links to resources and sources of guidance.

U.S. Department of Education. (2015). I have a question. 

What parents and caregivers can ask and do to help 

children thrive at school: A parent checklist. Retrieved 

from http://www2.ed.gov/documents/familycommunity/parent-checklist.pdf

This checklist was developed by the Department of 

Education in collaboration with America Achieves, 

National Parent Teacher Association, National Council 

of La Raza, and United Negro College Fund and 

provides questions for parents to ask educators about 

their child’s education. The questions focus on five 

areas of school performance: “(1) quality; (2) ready for 

success; (3) safe and healthy; (4) great teachers; and 

(5) equity and fairness.” In addition, there are possible 

follow-up questions, developed by teachers, on how 

parents can support their child’s success in school, as 

well as a list of resources on a variety of educational 

topics. The checklist is available in both English and 

Spanish.

U.S. Department of Education & Southwest Educational 

Development Laboratory. (2013). Partners in 

education: A dual capacity-building framework for 

family-school partnerships. Retrieved from http://

www2.ed.gov/documents/family-community/

partners-education.pdf

This paper provides guidance on how to build 

successful family-school partnerships. The ideas 

presented are “designed to act as a scaffold for 

the development of family engagement strategies, 

policies, and programs.”

U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, & Too Small to Fail. (2015). 

Talk, read, and sing together every day! Tip sheets 

for families, caregivers, and early learning educators. 

Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/early-learning/

talk-read-sing

Six tip sheets are the result of a commitment made 

at the White House Summit on Early Education, 

which focused on increasing the quantity and quality 

of words that children learn. The tip sheets—made 

specifically for families, caregivers, and early 

educators—provide guidance on how to enrich 

a child’s early language experiences as much as 

possible. Each tip sheet is available in English and 

Spanish.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, 

& U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. 

(2015, January). Dear colleague letter: English learner 

students and limited English proficient parents. 

Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/

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 

proficient parents and guardians have meaningful 

access to SEA-, LEA-, and school-related information.

11

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS 
Published September 2015

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 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 items does 

not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or materials provided.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2014). Limited English 

proficiency (LEP): A federal interagency website. 

Retrieved from http://www.lep.gov/interp_

translation/trans_interpret.html

This website provides links to resources for 

implementing and understanding translation and 

interpretation services.

Vietnamese American Young Leaders Association of 

New Orleans (VAYLA). (2011). ESL: Lost in the system, 

21 Asian and Latino families speak out on barriers to 

educational access in New Orleans Public Schools. 

Retrieved from http://vayla-no.org/wp-content/

uploads/2014/07/ESL-Lost-In-The-Sytem-2013.pdf

The first section of the report contains the personal 

testimony of youth leaders and their peers as well as 

accounts of how they worked to create change. The 

second section reflects the challenges encountered 

by parents and families seeking school support for 

their children. In the final section, youth leaders and 

staff members provide recommendations to improve 

learning “for limited-English proficient students and 

families and to create a school system that truly 

values them.”

Waterman, R., & Harry, B. (2008). Building collaboration 

between schools and parents of English language 

learners: Transcending barriers, creating opportunities. 

Tempe, AZ: National Center for Culturally 

Responsive Educational Systems. Retrieved from 

http://www.nccrest.org/Briefs/PractitionerBrief_

BuildingCollaboration.pdf

This brief discusses the barriers to parental 

involvement and offers concrete suggestions for 

creating positive relationships between schools and 

parents of ELs.

Weiss, H., Lopez, M., & Rosenberg, H. (2010, December). 

Beyond random acts: Family, school, and community 

engagement as an integral part of education reform. 

Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project. 

Retrieved from http://www.nationalpirc.org/

engagement_forum/beyond_random_acts.pdf

“This publication advocates family, school, and 

community engagement (FSCE) as a strategy to 

support student success.” It is the precursor to a forum 

that “sought to serve as a catalyst for reframing what 

FSCE should look like in the twenty-first century.”

Wessels, S. (2014). Supporting English and Spanish 

literacy through a family literacy program. School 

Community Journal, (24)2, 147–164. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1048612.pdf

This article reports on a qualitative research study 

that explored the effects of an eight-week bilingual 

family literacy program for Latino, English-learning 

families. Data from the study showed (1) that 

maintaining the first language is important; (2) that 

practicing what has been taught helps to sustain 

language; and (3) the importance of time. The article 

also discusses implications of the study’s findings for 

educators. 

Wisconsin Early Dual Language Learner Initiative. (n.d.). 

How to use interpreters effectively (Facts & Tips 

Series, Topic #2.2). Retrieved from http://www.

collaboratingpartners.com/documents/Topic_2.2_

How_to_use_interpreters_effectively.pdf

This fact sheet addresses how to establish guidelines 

for interpretation for young children and young dual 

language learners. Also discussed are the proper use 

of translation software and the reasons why school 

staff should meet with interpreters prior to holding 

meetings with families.

To access these and other relevant resources, 

and for additional information about ELs,

 please visit http://www.ncela.ed.gov/.

12

You can access Tools and Resources for Ensuring Meaningful Communication with LEP Parents at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/index.html.

TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR ENSURING MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION WITH LEP PARENTS