Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2013 / Notices 14087 

SEA, LEA, or school define and 

implement significant impact of a 

language other than English on English 

language proficiency? What are the 

factors that determine the number of 

generations that are affected by this 

significant impact? How sensitive are 

current English language proficiency 

assessment instruments in measuring 

the significant impact of an 

environment in which a language other 

than English is spoken? What trends or 

patterns have SEAs, LEAs, schools, or 

tribes observed regarding the 

identification of Native American 

students as English learners and the 

progress of these students in acquiring 

English and attaining English 

proficiency? 

4.2.3 PHLOTE Surveys. How do 

SEAs and LEAs frame questions on 

PHLOTE surveys to ascertain that a 

language other than English has had a 

significant impact on a student’s level of 

English language proficiency? What are 

the practices and policies with regard to 

PHLOTE surveys that SEAs and LEAs 

have used to accurately identify Native 

American students who are English 

learners? Are any of these practices 

promising? If so, please describe the 

practices, as well as evidence to support 

that they are promising. 

4.2.4 Multi-Step Process for 

Identifying Native American English 

Learners. Several States have indicated 

that they use a multi-step process to 

identify Native American English 

learners, such as interviewing a parent 

after completion of the PHLOTE survey 

or using a teacher language-observation 

checklist to verify a child’s language 

needs. What are the multi-step 

processes used in the State, LEA, or 

school, including the components, 

timeline, and roles and responsibilities 

of individuals who assist with 

identification of students? 

What evidence or research exists to 

support that a multi-step process is 

effective in accurately identifying 

Native American English learner 

students? What steps or considerations 

in a multi-step process are of value in 

evaluating Native American students 

who are English learners and who have 

or may be suspected of having 

disabilities; e.g., hearing impairment, 

particularly in the younger age range 

when eligibility evaluations for special 

education services are often conducted? 

What are the benefits and drawbacks of 

using a multi-step process? What are the 

roles of parents and community 

members in assisting with identification 

of these students as English learners? 

Are there barriers to the adoption of 

these practices at the SEA, LEA, or 

school level? 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6801–6871. 

Dated: February 26, 2013. 

Deborah S. Delisle, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

References 

Bailey, A. L. and Kelly, K. R. (July 2010). The 

Use and Validity of Home Language 

Surveys in State English Language 

Proficiency Assessment Systems: A 

Review and Issues Perspective. 

Bright, W. (2004). American Indian 

Languages. Retrieved from http:// 

anthropology.si.edu/outreach/indbibl/ 

americanindianlanguages.pdf. 

Department of Health, Education, and 

Welfare. (July 18, 1970). Identification of 

Discrimination and Denial of Services on 

the Basis of National Origin. 35 FR 

11,595 available at www.ed.gov/ocr/ 

docs/lau1970.html. 

Encyclopedia Britannica. (2012). North 

American Indian Languages. 

Encyclopedia Britannica Online 

Academic Education. Retrieved from 

www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/ 

418877/North-American-Indianlanguages. 

Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 

Department of Education. (November 

2011). NCES 2012459 The Nation’s 

Report Card: Findings in Brief Reading 

and Mathematics 2011. 

Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 

Department of Education. Table A–33–2. 

Number of status dropouts and status 

dropout rates of 16- through 24-year-olds 

in the noninstitutionalized group 

quarters and household population, by 

nativity and selected characteristics: 

American Community Survey (ACS) 

2010. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ 

programs/coe/tables/table-sde-2.asp. 

Leap, W.L. (1993). American Indian English. 

Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah 

Press. 

National Caucus of Native American State 

Legislators. (2008). Striving to Achieve 

Helping Native American Students 

Succeed. Retrieved from Retrieved from 

www.ncsl.org/print/statetribe/ 

strivingtoachieve.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Education. (November 30, 

2011). Tribal Leaders Speak: The State of 

American Indian Education, 2010. 

Retrieved from www.ed.gov/edblogs/ 

whiaiane/files/2012/04/Tribal-LeadersSpeak-2010.pdf. 

United States Census (nd). American Indians 

by the Numbers. Retrieved from 

www.infoplease.com/spot/ 

aihmcensus1.html. 

Weaver, H. N. (2001). Indigenous Identity: 

What is it and Who Really Has it? The 

American Indian Quarterly. Volume 25, 

Number 2, Spring 2001. pp. 240–255. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04819 Filed 3–1–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

DOE/NSF High Energy Physics 

Advisory Panel: Correction 

AGENCY: Office of Science, Department 

of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting: 

Correction. 

SUMMARY: On February 14, 2013, the 

Department of Energy (DOE) published 

a notice of open meeting for the DOE/ 

NSF High Energy Physics Advisory 

Panel to be held on March 11–12, 2013. 

This document makes a correction to 

that notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Kogut, Executive Secretary; High Energy 

Physics Advisory Panel; U.S. 

Department of Energy; SC–25; 

Germantown Building, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–1290; 

Telephone: 301–903–1298. 

Corrections 

In the Federal Register of February 

21, 2013, in FR Doc. 2013–04064, on 

page 12043, please make the following 

correction: 

Under DATES, page 12043, third 

column, first paragraph, first line, the 

time has changed. The new time is 9:00 

a.m.–6:00 p.m. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26, 

2013. 

LaTanya R. Butler, 

Deputy Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04876 Filed 3–1–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES