# data[].attributes.headline
Texas Emergent Bilingual Fact Sheet 24-25

# data[].attributes.subject
Texas Emergent Bilingual Fact Sheet 24-25

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unlocking Potential: Spring 2025 Supporting Gifted Emergent Bilingual Learners

# data[].attributes.headline
TX State Plan for the Education of Gifted Students

# data[].attributes.subject
TX State Plan for the Education of Gifted Students

# data[].attributes.headline
Recognizing Gifted Emergent Bilingual Students

# data[].attributes.subject
Recognizing Gifted Emergent Bilingual Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recognizing Gifted Emergent Bilingual Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TX State Plan Identification One-Pager - EB Update

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gifted but Still Learning English Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your source for state public education data

Use our Texas public schools database to learn more about the state's 1,207 districts and 8,966 public schools, including hundreds of charter schools and alternative campuses. You can easily navigate through information on demographics, academic performance, college readiness and average teacher salaries for each school or district.

By Ryan Murphy, Annie Daniel, Mandi Cai, Eric Lau, Yuriko Schumacher and Carla Astudillo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Texas Public Schools: Use our database to learn more about the state's 1,207 districts and 8,966 public schools, including hundreds of charter schools and alternative campuses. You can easily navigate through information on demographics, academic performance, college readiness and average teacher salaries for each school or district.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
English language learners (ELLs) can often be overlooked when students are identified for gifted and talented programs, particularly if tests are verbal or depend on teacher recommendation. These resources and news stories offer ways that teachers and parents can increase ELL access to opportunities for gifted students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
English language learners (ELLs) can often be overlooked when students are identified for gifted and talented programs, particularly if tests are verbal or depend on teacher recommendation. These resources and news stories offer ways that teachers and parents can increase ELL access to opportunities for gifted students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Chapter 89 Crosswalk
The Commissioners Rules in Chapter 89 Subchapter BB became effective August 9, 2023. For a detailed look at the changes, review the Chapter 89 Crosswalk page.
8/29/23

2023 Leadership Academy Series-Registration Open
Registration is now open for the Virtual Leadership Academy event scheduled for September 20-21, 2023. Get more information and register at the Leadership Academy page to save your spot.
8/29/23

Published - Statewide Home Language Survey
As part of the adopted revisions to Adopted Revisions to 19 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 89, Subchapter BB effective August 9, 2023 includes a Statewide Home Language Survey Letter that will be given to all students across the state of Texas upon initial enrollment to Texas public schools.

8/11/23

Save the Dates for the 2023 Leadership Academy Series
Mark your calendars for the three Leadership Academy events scheduled this year. The first one is a 2-day event on September 20-21, 2023.
8/15/23

Chapter 89 Amendments - Open for Public Comment
The Proposed Amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 89 subchapter BB are open for public comment until May 22, 2023. Please review the proposed amendments and provide your comments. The proposed effective date for the amendments is August 8, 2023.
4/27/23

T3 Community Event - Registration Open
The registration for the T3 Community Engagement event, Fostering Statewide Community Communications, is now open. To register, visit the T3 Engagement page.
3/28/23

Now Accepting Nominations - 2023 Hybrid Title III Symposium Awards
We are now accepting nominations for the 2023 Hybrid Title III Symposium awards! To nominate a colleague or yourself, visit the Awards page on txel.org to learn more about the criteria and important dates. The deadline to nominate is Monday, April 3, 2023.
3/3/23

Senate Bill 560 - Emergent Bilingual Strategic Plan
The Senate Bill 560 Emergent Bilingual Strategic Plan is timely in providing a blueprint for support needed to bring intentionality and focus to the continued increase of emergent bilingual students in classrooms across Texas.Our goal for Texas is to ensure that schools and staff are properly equipped to support to our EB students on an individualized basis, because all students deserve access to the same programs and instruction that could lead to academic success.
1/20/2023

End-of-Year LPAC Checklist
To help LEAs prepare for the end of the school year, the End-of-year LPAC Checklist has been uploaded to the LPAC portal under the "Frequently Used Resources" tab.
1/12/2023

T3 Family Event - Registration Open
The T3 event, Empowering Families through Helpful Resources, registration is now open! Join us on Wednesday, February 22, 2023 as a "Watch Party" host. To register and to learn how to host a "Watch Party," visit the T3 Engagement page.
11/18/2022

T3 November Event Recordings Available
Our first T3 Engagement event, Understanding Educational Equity, was a success! To view the recordings in eight different languages, visit the T3 Engagement page.
11/18/2022

T3 Engagement Series
Register now to host a "Watch Party" as part of our T3 Engagement Series that kicks off on November 11, 2022 about Understanding Educational Equity. For more information, visit the T3 Engagement page or the T3 Engagement Series Flyer.
10/7/2022

Fall Sessions - Bilingual Certification Courses
Twelve (12) additional online cohorts have been added to the TEALearn catalog. Seats are limited so please visit the Bilingual Courses page to secure your spot.
9/12/2022

English Learner Support Division - Live Meeting - 9/2/22
The English Learner Support Division is hosting a live meeting via Zoom Friday September 2nd from 9:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. that is open to all ESCs, school district staff, and open-enrollment charter school staff. Please review the topics and guests then register to join us!
8/31/2022

22-23 English Learner Support Division Remote Internships
The English Learner Support Division is offering two unpaid part-time remote internships for the fall semester and as well as for the spring semester. Interns will have an impact on the academic achievement of emergent bilingual students in Texas. Check out the Internship Flyer for more information.
8/23/2022

EB/SPED 2 Day Cross Training - Cancelled
The English Learner Support Division is planning to reschedule this impactful professional development opportunity later in the 2022-2023 school year.
8/23/2022

Beginning-of-year LPAC Checklist
Make sure to use the BOY LPAC Checklist to ensure that the LEA/campus is in compliance. You can find this document on the LPAC - Frequently Used Resources page.
8/12/2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Supporting Emergent Bilingual Students in Texas

# data[].attributes.headline
Content-Based Language Instruction in TX

# data[].attributes.subject
Content-Based Language Instruction in TX

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Diversified Support

Instructional Methods

Linguistic Accommodations

Daily linguistically accommodated instructional methods are what emergent bilingual students need to participate equitably and attain high levels of academic and linguistic development. Implementing instructional methods void of the connections to students' cultural aspects, as mentioned in the Culturally and Linguistically Sustaining Practices (CLSP) section, can impede the lowering of the affective filter, limiting the effectiveness of these efforts.

Newcomer is an umbrella term that includes various categories of immigrants who are born outside of the United States" (USDE, 2017a, p. 11). Title III of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) defines "immigrant children and youth" as students who:

are age 3 through 21,

were not born in any state*; and

have not been attending one or more schools in any one or more states* for more than 3
full academic years.**

*The term "state" refers to each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. **The years in U.S. schools calculation does not begin until grade 1.
As of 2022-2023 (PEIMS Standard Report), immigrant students make up 2% of the total Texas student population, and out of the 1,270,533 emergent bilingual students in Texas, immigrant students make up 8% of the EB student population. The map of the Texas regional Education Service Centers (ESCs) shows how immigrant students are spread across the state.
Percentage of Immigrant Students in Total Student Population by Region

This section will highlight the unique characteristics of newcomers as well as research-based best practices for support within the following components:

Characteristics of Newcomers: Recognize unique characteristics of newcomers, including aspects such as refugee/asylee status, prior schooling, and/or the experience of being an unaccompanied immigrant child.

Affective Support: Equip all instructional and non-instructional staff to welcome and provide ongoing support to newcomers and their families.

Instructional Practices: Use research-based practices for oracy and literacy development, assessment procedures, and comprehensible input that provide opportunities for meaningful practice, leverage students' experiences, interests, culture, and primary language(s), and avoid the overuse of translation during instruction.

Systemic Structures: Create campus- and district-wide processes that support newcomers, including effective intake procedures and achievement plans that include flexible pathways to graduation.

While newcomers share the common ground of having been born outside of the United States, Yzquierdo (2017) reminds us that

"...the newcomer population is quite diverse, with varying degrees of literacy in their first language, background experiences, socioeconomic status, immigration stories, and exposure to English" (p. 18).

Overall, it's important to recognize that not all newcomers are identified as emergent bilingual students since they may arrive with proficient to advanced levels of English proficiency. Also, not all immigrant students identified as EB students are at beginning to intermediate levels of English proficiency and may be close to meeting the state's criteria for reclassification as English proficient. In fact, 2022-2023 PEIMS Data reveals that out of the 122,504 immigrant students in Texas,

85% are identified as EB students,

14% are non-EB students, and

1% are reclassified former EB students.

Furthermore, newcomers have varied proficiency levels in their home language and a wide range of schooling experiences. Calderón and Slakk (2019) refer to the degree of years in language learning in school for newcomers from highly schooled to limited schooling, limited start, and unschooled. In particular, three primary newcomer populations-refugees/asylees, students with limited or interrupted formal education (SLIFE), and unaccompanied children-each have their own set of unique characteristics that contribute to their needs.
Refugees and Asylees

Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education (SLIFE)

As mentioned previously, some newcomers arrive in the U.S. with strong schooling in their home country, which helps their preparedness for U.S. schooling. However, some students have experienced disruptions in their education resulting in limited or no prior schooling and may lack literacy skills and basic subject-matter knowledge in their first language, which can cause a significant disadvantage when beginning U.S. schooling. These learners are identified as students with limited or interrupted formal education (SLIFE), meeting the following characteristics outlined by DeCapua and Marshall (2015):

Unaccompanied Children (UC)

Unaccompanied children are likely refugees and may also be SLIFE, but research has found that, by nature of being unaccompanied, they carry a unique set of support needs, as Aleghfeli and Hunt (2022) explain:

Administrator Considerations

Regardless of the circumstances surrounding it, emigrating to a new place can be an adverse childhood experience (ACE), as discussed in the Culturally and Linguistically Sustaining Practices section of the CBLI Guidebook. This fact requires school systems to be prepared to support the mental health and wellness needs of their new arrival students and to implement trauma-informed practices. From the start, creating a community of welcome for all students, particularly students new to the country, is essential to providing a comfortable learning environment for all students.

"Welcoming newcomers into a school community necessitates empathy and understanding of the unique challenges faced by newcomers and their families. It also necessitates an understanding of the benefits of creating environments that are inclusive, informing, welcoming, and conducive to full participation and academic success for all students" (USDE, 2017.a, p. 2-2).

Notice, there is a strong connection between the affective domain and development of linguistic, cognitive, and academic skills. See the Second Language Acquisition section of the CBLI site for more information on the Affective Filter.

Family communication is important to newcomers' academic success as well as the entire educational experience. From the time of enrollment, schools must inform newcomer students and families of existing school and community supports such as translation services, health care/nutrition, and continuing education. While newcomers are getting comfortable in their new environment, family support is critical for their well-being and healthy adjustment (Fischer, 2017). Short and Boyson (2012) provide a list of information schools should provide newcomer families as part of the welcoming process:

Additionally, for newcomers identified as EB students, it is important to communicate to families the benefits of the bilingual education or English as a second language (ESL) program in which they will be participating. Also, for non-EB newcomer students, ensure that families are aware of dual language immersion two-way program opportunities in which they may participate.

As schools communicate with families of newcomers, it's important to prioritize communication in the preferred language of the parent/guardian, which is not based on the language of the student nor their emergent bilingual student status. This fact sheet from USED explains parental rights for communication. As a reciprocal relationship, families of newcomers also have a wealth of knowledge to share with the school community. Thus, schools can leverage the knowledge and experiences of newcomer families to serve as guest speakers, student mentors, site-based decision making committee members, and other leadership opportunities within the school community.

Zooming out from families, the broader community can offer significant resources to support newcomers' academic success. Breiseth (2011) recommends that schools ask families which topics are most relevant to them and then offer free campus space to relevant local organizations whose services might be beneficial to the newcomer population. Additionally, she recommends inviting community members-local librarians, nurses, firefighters, etc.-to increase awareness for families about their services.

There are any number of ways schools can invite community support for newcomers and their families; it just takes creative thinking about which strategies will best support the students' and families' particular needs. Salva (2021) points out that intentionality is a key factor in supporting the academic success of newcomers, particularly SLIFE, and that social programs that promote multiculturalism support acculturation rather than assimilation.

Technology Tools

The National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA) provides a Family Toolkit that outlines specific information for newcomer families on enrollment and school attendance. It is available in Spanish, Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, and English. There are more chapters coming soon as well.

Also, the TEA is in development of a Family Empowerment Toolkit that will provide extensive information and resources for Texas families of emergent bilingual students. Be on the lookout for its release on txel.org!

Program Model Considerations

The concept of acculturation over assimilation is supported within Culturally and Linguistically Sustaining Practices (CLSP), as described in the second element of this CBLI Guidebook.

Additionally, CLSP is embedded within the Texas Effective Dual Language Immersion Framework (TxEDLIF) and program implementation rubrics for transitional bilingual education (TBE) and ESL programs, particularly in Levers 4 and 5. These resources are located on the TXEL portal Program Implementation webpage.

Intentional Lesson Planning

Language is acquired when students are given comprehensible input in low-anxiety situations and when presented with interesting and meaningful messages that are understood. Effective instructional design for EB students should include opportunities to listen, speak, read, and write at their current levels of language development while gradually increasing the linguistic complexity of the academic language they read and hear, and are expected to speak and write. Therefore, EB students need to interact repeatedly with content material in meaningful ways and in organic conversation or practice opportunities that are scaffolded for their current levels of language proficiency and provide the freedom to take risks in reaching the next level of academic language proficiency. In order for language objectives developed in planning to be effective, they must be tied to intentional language practice within the lesson. Below, the chart provides examples of the connection between content objectives, language objectives, and instructional practices.

Plan for Intentional and Targeted Language Instruction

Lesson planning is the essential first step to ensuring that content-based language instruction happens. Language skills are needed for understanding any content material. However, intention and targeted design are needed to take the essential language skills and turn them into integrated language teaching. Planning for intentional and targeted language instruction considers three main components:

1. Planning: Curriculum Alignment
Utilize the appropriate grade level Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for all subject areas and coordinate integration of the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) and College and Career Readiness Standards (CCRS).

2. Planning: Language Objectives
Set a language objective in all content areas for each lesson according to the language of instruction, connecting to the ELPS during English instruction.

3. Planning: Meaningful Practice
Integrate frequent opportunities for authentic language practice in each content area that aligns to the lesson's language objective, differentiating support based on emergent bilingual students' language proficiency levels.

Planning: Language Objectives

All content lessons delivered in English for emergent bilingual students must have a language objective derived from the ELPS that is connected to the content objective of the lesson. When determining the lesson's language objective, consider the following:

Select one language objective per lesson. Although each lesson may incorporate all aspects of ELPS student expectations, including listening, speaking, reading, writing, and learning strategies, the language objective should focus on one ELPS standard in which the students will be formally or informally assessed.

Connect to the content objective. Think of what language is needed to support the reception or demonstration of content knowledge within the lesson, and set the language objective to capture the language target needed for successful participation with the content material. Consider the content objective as what students will learn and the language objective as how students will receive information or demonstrate understanding.

Use the same language objective for EB students at all levels of English proficiency. Different language objectives are not needed for each of students' English proficiency levels (beginning, intermediate, advanced, or advanced high); rather, the linguistic supports provided will be scaffolded commensurate to the students' needs in order to demonstrate the same language objective.

Vary the focus on the five categories of the ELPS student expectations. There is no scope and sequence for the ELPS. However, based on the needs of the EB students, spiraled focus on each domain of language (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and the use of learning strategies is needed to ensure students have authentic practice across all areas of language development.

Communicate the language objective to students. Displaying a lesson's language objective becomes beneficial when that language objective is communicated to students and even more so when EB students are able to set personal goals for advancing language proficiency to monitor their progress over time.

Planning: Meaningful Practice

Effective instructional design for EB students should include opportunities to listen, speak, read, and write at their current levels of language. When planning, language objective will ensure intentional language practice within the lesson. Below, the chart provides examples of the connection between content objectives, language objectives, and instructional practices.

Kindergarten Social Studies

Instructional Practice
Students will be given pictures that illustrate examples of needs and wants. They will listen to the teacher call out the examples of needs and wants as students organize them into categories based on the description the teacher gives, deciding if they are needs or wants. Then, pairs of students will discuss why they chose to group the examples as they did and how needs and wants are different. To fortify listening skills, pairs will find new partners and retell what they recall their original partner explained about the differences of needs and wants. They will be given these sentence stems to begin their final conversation: "My partner said that needs are.... My partner said that wants are.... "

Chemistry

Instructional Practice
The teacher will model how to create a structural formula for various molecules and how to write the empirical and molecular formulas for each. In small groups, students will create a chart of 5 different molecules, showing the structural, empirical, and molecular formulas. Finally, students will select one other molecule to share with the whole group in which they demonstrate the structural formula and how they discovered the empirical and molecular formulas for the molecule.
Example: Ethane- CH ₃ (empirical), C ₂H ₆ (molecular), structural.

Supplemental Support

The ELPS district responsibilities in Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 74.4 (b) define that linguistically accommodated content instruction for all emergent bilingual (EB) students should be communicated, sequenced, and scaffolded. Furthermore, this section outlines that EB students at beginning or intermediate levels of English proficiency in any domain should receive "intensive and ongoing foundational second language acquisition instruction" that is

focused (explicitly addresses English vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and mechanics),

targeted (formally or informally assessed to match students' proficiency levels), and

systematic (carefully planned, consistently implemented, and monitored for growth).

This supplemental support accelerates English language acquisition when partnered with content-based instruction. The ELPS Instructional Tool serves as a resource for understanding appropriate supplemental supports for EB students. Key features of this resource include the following:

Page 9: Teacher behaviors (focused, targeted, systematic)

Pages 22-25: Teacher tips for beginning and intermediate EB students and linguistic accommodations by proficiency level and domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) including Classroom activities Teacher supports Student outcomes

Pages 26-33: Sentence frames and probing questions

Addressing newcomers' needs includes using research-based instructional practices that develop oracy through multiple opportunities for authentic, meaningful practice. This is essential to second language acquisition, as oracy cannot be separated from literacy in language development (Wilkinson, 1970).

"Quality interaction is described as the 'engine that drives' academic discourse and in-depth content area interaction" (Walqui, 2019, p. 95).

Program Model Considerations

In dual language immersion (DLI) programs, the goal of bilingualism ensures that oracy development is targeted in both program languages.

In transitional bilingual education (TBE) programs, oracy skills in the students' primary language (L1) facilitates development of oracy in English (L2), particularly through cross-linguistic connections.

In bilingual programs (both DLI and TBE), bilingual certified teachers are uniquely positioned to provide continuous cross-linguistic connections. It's important to note that making these explicit connections does not mean that the teacher is conducting concurrent translation throughout instruction. It means the teacher is able to bridge the instruction in both languages through purposeful connections within the lesson, while staying true to the current language of instruction.

In ESL programs, the goal for oracy is in English, but the teacher can support English oracy through cross-linguistic connections. However, the ESL teacher may have students with multiple language backgrounds in the same class and may not speak any or all of the primary languages of the students. Therefore, in order to make cross-linguistic connections, the ESL teacher may need to research vocabulary terms or grammatical features of the students' language(s). ESL teachers may leverage primary language resources and student input to do so.

Further, oracy has a powerful impact on newcomers' social skills and confidence. Kaldahl (2019) explains that cognitive and social skills are also acquired with the immersive process of acquiring oral competence. In fact, being able to adjust to various social and cultural contexts is considered to be part of oral competence, so teaching oracy systematically contributes not only to classroom interactions but is essential for life-long social competence as well.

Mercer and Warwick (2019) echo the importance of focusing on oracy with newcomers.

"A systematic review of research has found positive associations between student learning and the use of extended and cumulative responses in group interactions, and that such capabilities can be developed through specific teaching about how to use talk effectively to engage in reasoned discussions. Overall, this encourages the view that the extent to which schools give direct attention to oracy will not only enable students to use language effectively across a range of contexts, but also influences their learning and cognitive development" (p. 294).

For students at an early stage of second language acquisition who may be in a silent period, it doesn't mean that these students should never be asked to speak, be forced to speak, or not be included in discussions. Rather, students in a silent period should be provided with a comfortable learning environment that:

Alongside oracy development, schools supporting newcomers must use research-based instructional practices that develop literacy with resources that leverage students' experiences and primary language. Literacy development is not solely the responsibility of reading and language arts instructors. Rather, age appropriate, content-based reading should be integrated in all content areas to support literacy.

Program Model Considerations

Similar to oracy development, DLI programs have a goal of biliteracy which works to develop literacy in both program languages. In TBE programs, primary language literacy is developed in order to support English literacy. For ESL programs, the goal is English literacy, but cross-linguistic connections may also be used by ESL teachers in order to leverage students' primary language literacy.

It's important to note that for some newcomers, particularly SLIFE, primary language literacy may not be developed. However, it's never too late to support biliteracy! Through participation in DLI programs, particularly, newcomer SLIFE can have the opportunity to develop literacy in both their home language and English.

Leveraging students' experiences is the first key to effective literacy development, building a personal connection between newcomers and what they're learning.

"Literature transforms human experience and reflects it back to us, and in that reflection we can see our own lives and experiences as part of the larger human experience. Reading, then, becomes a means of self-affirmation and readers often seek their mirrors in books" (Bishop, 1990, p. 1).

This notion of reflection is particularly apt for supporting emergent bilingual students who are new to both the country and, potentially, the English language. Dixon and Nessel (1983) describe the use of the Language Experience Approach (LEA) as a method for using "the student's own vocabulary, language patterns, and background of experiences to create reading texts, making reading an especially meaningful and enjoyable process." This flexible approach provides the means for teachers to directly connect instruction to a student's individual interests and cultural background as they tie their learning to prior experiences outside of school or within school. Particularly, DeCapua and Marshall (2015) also emphasize the importance of relevance to content for SLIFE when they're in the new school environment.

Along with their backgrounds, educators working to support newcomer EB students in developing English literacy must identify resources that leverage their students' primary languages. As mentioned in the Second Language Acquisition section of the CBLI Guidebook, academic reading skills acquired in one language transfer to another. Additionally, it can be essential for newcomer EB students to have opportunities to clarify concepts in their primary language (Echevarria, Vogt, and Short, 2013).

The term "emergent bilingual student" as a replacement for "English learner" is used as an asset-based approach, highlighting the fact that students are not replacing but adding to their home languages. As such, the use of newcomers' primary languages should be not only welcomed but also encouraged within literacy practices. As mentioned in the Program Model Considerations above, DLI programs provide the optimal environment to ensure a fully additive bilingualism approach in biliteracy through the duration of the program.

To best support newcomers in the oracy and literacy skills described above, as well as content-area instruction, teachers should use comprehensible input that provides opportunities for meaningful practice, leverage students' experiences, interests, culture, and primary language(s), and avoid the overuse of translation during instruction.

"Comprehensible input is any written or spoken message that is understandable to a language learner because of the context" (Seidlitz, 2019, p. 30).

Part of Krashen's second language acquisition (SLA) theory, comprehensible input toes the line between challenging enough to encourage language development and not so challenging that the emergent bilingual student can't understand the message (Seidlitz 2019). Teachers may employ the following methods of comprehensible input to convey key content concepts:

Administrator Considerations

Translanguaging is defined within the TxEDLIF as "a process by which students who are bilingual use both languages as one integrated communication system" (p. 71). While supporting students' translanguaging, it is important to maintain a strict separation of languages during instruction to ensure fidelity to the program's language allocation. Training for teachers and monitoring of implementation is essential to ensure the asset-based approach of supporting translanguaging is instilled while upholding target language instruction.

For more information on translanguaging, see this publication from the Center for Applied Linguistics.

Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Once intentional language instruction has been planned for, delivering linguistically accommodated content instructional regularly puts plans into action, providing the appropriate support for EB students at each level of language proficiency. Overall the instructional methods for content-based language instruction can be categorized into three components. These language-focused methods are connected to the district responsibilities within the ELPS to ensure all EB students have access to the grade level curriculum. Each component below dives into the why (purpose), the what (description), and the how (implementation examples).

Communicated Methods

Sequenced Methods

Scaffolded Methods

Provide comprehensible input that includes context-embedded resources and clearly expressed instructions through a communicative language teaching approach.

Differentiate instruction according to students' language proficiency levels by providing explicit academic language development opportunities and making connections to prior knowledge, including intentional cross-linguistic connections using primary language resources.

Embed structured support that includes oral and written development resources, cooperative learning routines, and instructional modeling with structured tools.

These language-focused methods are connected to the district responsibilities within the ELPS to ensure all EB students have access to the grade level curriculum [TAC 74.4(b)].

Communicated Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: One of the foundational ways to lower the affective filter and ensure students feel not only comfortable in the learning environment but involved in the classroom activities is to provide comprehensible input.

Clear instructions
Provide step-by-step
instructions to break down
how to complete tasks,
including a model or
exemplar to show the
expectation for
assignments/tasks.

Visuals
Embed visuals that
purposefully increase
understanding and with
intention of connecting to
students' prior knowledge
and personal backgrounds.

Provide supports, such as:

selecting videos with

a clear speaker's voice and comprehensible
pace and

visual support of key words/vocabulary,

giving a purpose for listening and define key vocabulary prior to viewing,

providing stopping points for questions/reflections, and

ensuring students have captions available in English or their primary language(s), as needed.

Technology Tools

Stopping points during video viewing can be as simple as the teacher pausing the video and asking prompting questions. However, technology tools can be leveraged to create videos with built in pauses for reflection to be viewed as a whole or individually. Some example resources include Spiral Clip and Fluentkey.

Sequenced Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: Emergent bilingual students are a heterogeneous group with varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds. As such, sequenced instructional methods are necessary to differentiate for each student's levels of language proficiency (in their home/primary language an English).

English Language Development (ELD) Tools

Use ELD software/tools as
supplemental resources to
the content, rather than a
replacement of content tasks.

Steps for chunking vocabulary:

1. Make a list of all the academic/subject-specific terms and supporting academic vocabulary (cross-curricular terms) needed for a lesson.

2. Prioritize terms, planning for some to be explicitly introduced and for some to be embedded throughout.

3. visual support of key words/vocabulary,

4. Introduce no more than about 5 academic terms at one time. Include cross-curricular terms, such as transitional words and phrases so that students have the words needed for academic discourse (classroom conversations).

5. Incorporate the lower priority terms throughout the lesson, embedding with visuals and/or restating for contextual definitions (such as the use of synonyms).

6. Spiral in explicitly introduced and context embedded terms with repeated practice.

Scaffolded Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: When emergent bilingual students are provided with linguistic structures, they are able to focus on the academic task with confidence. Scaffolds are intended to be temporary supports that gradually increase linguistic complexity, demonstrating the language needed for not only basic but complex aspects of the target language.

Technology Tools

Padlet is an example of a free tool that a student can use to engage in discussion activities anonymously. Other examples may include the use of interactive documents, such asGoogle classroom or formative assessment resources, such asKahoot.

Rewordify is a resource that can be used to simplify language of a text in English, which can be used to introduce new content or as a side-by-side resource to the full text. Also, some text-to-speech tools that can be used for students to have the text read to them include Immersive Reader feature inMicrosoft, Flipgrid or the Read & Write Google extension.

Adminstrator Considerations

For more examples and detailed information on how to support implementation of comprehensible input in the classroom, see Lever 4 on Lesson Planning and Methods within the TxEDLIF and program implementation rubrics for TBE and ESL programs, located on the TXEL portal Program Implementation webpage.

Along with comprehensible input, instructional methods that relate to students' experiences will drive language acquisition as they highlight the value of each student's unique cultural background and knowledge foundation. Leveraging these global perspectives will not only engage newcomers in learning, but it can also "help all students understand and act on issues of global significance" (USDE, 2017 a., p. 3-2).

In that vein, the USDE's (2017 a.) Global Competencies Matrix identifies the following four skill areas for students:

"(1) Investigate the world beyond their immediate environment;
(2) Recognize perspectives, both others' and their own;
(3) Communicate ideas effectively with diverse audiences; and
(4) Take action to improve conditions.

These skill areas will help all students-newcomers and U.S.-born students alike-in a world of increasing social, cultural, ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity. Incorporating these diverse academic skills, cultures, and languages may create stronger and academically more inclusive classrooms and schools, while broadening the global competence of U.S.-born students" (p. 3-2).

When seeking to provide comprehensible input to newcomers at beginning stages of English proficiency, it can be tempting for teachers to rely on direct translation of content instruction. While use of translation has its place, educators must use caution in overusing it.

According to Yzquierdo (2017), "Students may rely on translation at the expense of constructing meaning through context (e.g. teacher's comprehensible input: visuals, gestures, etc.), possibly slowing their English language development" (p. 103). Likewise, concurrent translation within a bilingual program is not effective bilingual instruction, and particularly in dual language immersion programs, it does not support the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy in both program languages. To this point, educators must keep in mind when providing linguistic supports or instruction in the primary language within a bilingual program that newcomers may also be at beginning stages of their primary/home language proficiency as well.

Again, welcoming students' home languages in any bilingual or ESL classroom through translanguaging is an effective way to encourage students to construct meaning and take advantage of valuable opportunities to practice communicating with both their teachers and their peers. Asghar et al. (2022) note that in recent research, "translanguaging strongly influenced refugee participants' willingness to participate in daily discussions, story reading, and activities, and helped these youth become aware of and comfortable with their bicultural identities" (p. 9).

It is important for schools to ensure equitable assessment practices of content knowledge for emergent bilingual students, particularly those at beginning and intermediate levels of language proficiency.

A primary challenge in assessing newcomer EB students is that they may still be developing the language proficiency necessary for fully demonstrating their content knowledge and skills (Ferlazzo & Sypnieski, 2022). Mann (2018) notes that newcomers may experience difficulty in language development, literacy, numeracy, content knowledge, and social and emotional skills. Because of the range of challenges these students may be facing, it can be difficult to determine whether poor assessment scores are the result of lack of knowledge, inability to express knowledge, or some other factor. Thus, newcomer EB students need assessments that are "inclusive, fair, relevant, comprehensive, valid, and yield meaningful information" (Mann, 2018, p. 32).

So, how can schools implement equitable assessment practices for newcomers? Ferlazzo and Sypnieski (2022) provide a list of key principles at the foundation of equitable assessments for language learners. These assessments:

Ultimately, however, Ferlazzo and Sypnieski (2022) say raising test scores is not about the assessment itself but about the development of language proficiency through engaging and effective classroom instruction. Still, newcomer EB students can also benefit from affective, cognitive, and metacognitive strategies that support effective test-taking skills development.

Monitoring Linguistic Progress in English

Academic progress is typically measured through classroom assessments and campus- or district-wide benchmarks that address the content development of the required curriculum. To monitor linguistic progress in English, the ELPS Proficiency Level Descriptors(PLDs) are foundational in connecting to the ELPS student expectations used for language objectives in daily instruction and to how EB students will be assessed annually in the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS). Teachers can leverage the following process to engage in progress monitoring of linguistic development with the purpose of informing instructional practices.

1) Baseline data: Use the previous year's TELPAS scores to arrange EB students by English language proficiency level (beginning, intermediate, advanced, and advanced high) in each domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing). Thischart from the Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide (LIAG) can be used for this step. If previous TELPAS scores are unavailable, informal assessment of the students' current levels can be conducted using theELPS PLDs.

2) Goal setting: Based on each student's current language proficiency levels, consider goals for increasing English proficiency to the next level for each domain, using the ELPS PLDs. For example, if the student is at a beginning level of English listening proficiency, look at the intermediate level proficiency descriptors for listening to determine goals for development in that domain. Including the student in this goal-setting process is a great way to increase investment in their own linguistic progress.

3) Periodic checks: At designated intervals, use the ELPS PLDs to identify when and how each EB student is attaining new skills in each domain of English proficiency. During each progress review,

document the students' current levels with evidence from the PLDs,

share progress data with the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC),

include students in tracking their own progress and revising goals as they meet previous goals, and

communicate to parents/families, particularly when additional support is needed.

4) Support and celebrate: Use anecdotal data from periodic checks to inform ongoing instructional support. For example, the Suggested Teacher Behaviors in each domain's section of theLIAG can be used to target student needs at each level and in each domain. Additionally, as students progress, include ways for students to celebrate their linguistic progress, such as through goal trackers or checklists.

Linguistically Accommodated Academic Assessment

When determining alternative assessment methods for EB students, the following considerations should be made.

Analyze and adjust the assessment content for cultural aspects that may be unknown to students from varied backgrounds.

Create opportunities for students to have a choice in how they will demonstrate what they know rather than asking questions that only focus on what they do not know.

Determine adaptations needed for linguistic accessibility, limiting the use of unfamiliar terms, idioms, and complex sentence structures.

Alternative assessments don't have to be cumbersome for teachers to implement, and simple accommodations can be implemented without the need for purchasing formalized products or spending hours to develop. They can be used to scaffold for EB students at all levels of language proficiency, embedding linguistic supports that allow for content knowledge to be demonstrated to the full extent. Alternative assessment options provide the opportunity to gradually increase the linguistic complexity in student responses.

Method
& Example

Linguistic Accommodation or Extensions by
Proficiency Levels

Visual Representation

Create a model or physical display using classroom or household items

Draw a picture

Organize images or gifs into a chart or diagram

Beginning/Intermediate:

Label the visual with academic terms related to the topic

Complete a sentence stem to describe the visual

Advanced/Advanced High:

Write a summary of what the visual represents using paragraph frames as needed

Give an oral presentation to describe the visual representation, including key terms from an academic vocabulary bank

Physical Demonstration

Beginning/Intermediate:

Use labels or numbers to show connections

Explain understanding orally in primary language

Advanced/Advanced High:

Oral Explanation

Beginning/Intermediate:

Advanced/Advanced High:

Listen to the presentations of others on the assessed topic(s). Then, give feedback on what could be added or adjusted to the presentation for additional detail or clarity.

Listen to own recording of explanation/presentation. Then, using an academic glossary or thesaurus to enhance academic language used, repeat and re-record the presentation.

Written Explanation

Beginning/Intermediate:

Advanced/Advanced High:

Using examples of compound or complex sentence stems, revise initial written response to extend academic writing.

Choose one or more assessment questions (multiple choice style) to explain in writing.

The strong instructional practices that teachers utilize to support newcomers in the classroom must be reinforced through sustained campus- and district-wide processes that equip instructional staff, non-instructional staff, as well as other students to support newcomers and their families.

Systemic support, however, goes beyond simply welcoming newcomers. Rather, it must include practical and intentional support that is ongoing throughout the school year through:

targeted professional development with aligned resources,

effective intake processes, and

flexible pathways to graduation.

"High-quality education for newcomer students builds on their unique strengths and supports their development in ways that enable them to reach their full potential. Newcomers who need to develop English proficiency require instruction that addresses the simultaneous development of English proficiency and grade-level concepts and skills" (USDE, 2017.a, p. 3-1).

And, when in a bilingual program, particularly DLI classrooms, this includes the simultaneous development of home/primary language proficiency. Providing systemic structures includes professional development for all staff that addresses the instructional needs and strengths of newcomers in both their primary language and English. Yzquierdo (2017) notes that "Instructional support personnel and non-instructional personnel also play an integral, and often overlooked, role in newcomer adjustment and achievement. However, these individuals are seldom included in staff development and training specific to this population" (p. 62).

As campus and district leaders create processes for ongoing newcomer support, considerations for including all stakeholders are necessary.

Another practical aspect to support for newcomers is the intake process. When newcomers arrive in their new school, the school may conduct initial assessments of existing skills, linguistic proficiencies, and academic competencies in order to provide them with the most effective supports based on their linguistic and academic needs. This process must occur in a timely manner. Federal regulations expect school personnel to identify students as English learners within 30 calendar days, and Texas complies with this mandate by providing four calendar weeks for the identification of students as emergent bilingual through the state's process, which includes the state-approved English language proficiency assessment and recommending their placement in the district's required bilingual or ESL program with parental approval. Note that when entering a district with a Spanish bilingual education program, the state-approved Spanish language proficiency assessment will also be administered to inform instructional support within the bilingual program. For bilingual programs in other languages than Spanish when a state-approved assessment is not available, the district will determine the student's level of primary/home language proficiency using informal oral language assessment measures.

Prior to being assessed for English proficiency, the home language survey is administered to parents/guardians, asking the language used most of the time in the home and by the student. For recent immigrant families in particular, it's vital that the home language survey is understood and completed accurately. The USDE (2017b) mentions that the purpose and use of the home language survey must be clearly communicated to both families and administrators, and it must be translated into the home languages of students, parents, and guardians, providing qualified oral interpreters, as needed, to help families complete the survey.

At the time of enrollment, Davis-Samway et al. (2022) recommend ways to gather further information by conducting the following, based on the comfortability of the student and family:

family interview for learning about the student's language background and educational
history,

native language reading assessment, and/or

native language writing sample.

While intake assessments are useful, Salva and Matis (2017) note that they are not the end-all, be-all for identifying support needs:

"We can begin with any intake information gathered by the school or welcome center. Although during initial enrollment, this information is important, it does not tell the whole story" (p. 20).

DeCapua (2020) adds that relationship building and opportunities for interaction between students and their families and teachers, staff members, and other students are also powerful opportunities to identify and prepare to meet newcomers' needs. He goes on to say that schools can begin with informal meetings with newcomer families in order to tour the school and to meet staff, administrators, and other students (especially other newcomers or former newcomers). Then, intake conversations with families can provide the two-way communication needed to truly identify the needs and strengths of students and families.

During the intake process, districts are able to set newcomers on a path to graduation from the start, communicating to students and families an asset-based approach that honors what students bring to the table. Most practically, this means that policies are needed for assessing students' content knowledge, grade and course completion, and credit validation (particularly at high school). It's important that districts include a team of stakeholders in this process, such as the school principal, counselor, registrar, dean of instruction, etc.). The following resources provide guidance on credit validation for transcripts from other countries:

Supporting newcomers through their educational journey also includes creating and communicating achievement plans that include flexible pathways to graduation.

"Scheduling options for newcomers vary widely and are limited only by a school's or district's resources, creativity, and flexibility. In order to meet the needs of newcomer students, especially those in middle and high school who need to learn enough English to earn academic credits and graduate in a short period of time, flexible and creative scheduling is crucial. This often means adjustments and alternatives to the mainstream school schedules and academic programs" (Yzuierdo, 2017, p. 157).

Furthermore, when dual language immersion (DLI) programs are extended into secondary, newcomers can benefit greatly from access to the DLI program, which will support their transfer of cognitive skills in their primary language to English and vice versa.

Identifying and implementing these pathways is a process schools should undergo with both students and their families. Involving families in graduation plans and continuing education counseling should not only begin at high school. As new arrivals enter in elementary or middle school grades, having conversations with families about the path to graduation and beyond is important from the start. Additionally, Salva (2021) mentions that schools should provide clear communication to newcomers and their families regarding supplemental supports that could benefit the student and how they will fit into the path to graduation. The USDE (2017a) suggests leveraging multiple communication methods with families to ensure that collaboration happens, including newsletters distributed in the home language, telephone trees, postings on the school website, and other districtf-developed processes.

Overall, campus and district leaders are tasked with organizing systemic structures that provide targeted and practical support for newcomer students and their families. These structures are best implemented when they include a variety of stakeholders from the start, including teachers, families of newcomers, and newcomer students themselves, and when they communicate clearly an asset-based approach.

Long-term emergent bilingual (LTEB) students, also referred to as long-term English learners (LTELs) in national reports and studies, are typically defined as EB students who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for six or more years and have not yet been reclassified as English proficient. In Texas, LTEB students make up the largest population of EB students in secondary grades. In fact, the 2023 TELPAS Report , showed that out of the 484,580 EB students in grades 6-12 who had a composite TELPAS rating, 76% had been in U.S. schools for six or more years. This section will highlight the unique characteristics of LTEB students as well as research-based best practices for support within the following components:

Characteristics of Long-Term Emergent Bilingual Students: Recognize unique characteristics and contributing factors of students identified as long-term emergent bilingual students who have been enrolled in U.S. schools six or more years without meeting reclassification criteria.

Affective Support: Communicate a strengths-based approach that supports long-term emergent bilingual students in academic and linguistic achievement, social belonging, and increased family engagement.

Instructional Practices: Use research-based practices for literacy development, equitable assessment, and linguistically accommodated, grade-level listening, speaking, reading, and writing opportunities that hold high expectations.

Systemic Structures: Create campus- and district-wide processes that support long-term emergent bilingual students, including strategic scheduling for continuity of program participation, course development, and achievement plans that include flexible pathways to graduation.

Generally speaking, long-term EB students may be orally bilingual but usually have not had the opportunity to develop their primary/home language skills, particularly literacy. Due to having social English speaking and listening comprehension skills similar to native English-speaking peers, LTEB students can fly under the radar of needing support with academic language (Cushing-Leubner & King, 2015).

As mentioned under Addressing Needs, out of all EB students in grades 6-12 who had a 2023 TELPAS composite rating, 76% had been in U.S. schools for 6 or more years, meaning they were LTEB students. Out of these LTEB students in grades 6-12, 39% had beginning or intermediate TELPAS composite ratings. How do these data points inform the needs of LTEB students? What are the contributing factors to becoming a long-term EB student?

They go on to mention that transnational schooling, moving back and forth from the U.S. to their home country, may also create breaks in developing English as well as gaps in academic content attainment based on U.S. standards. Implementing DLI programs consistently and with fidelity can provide the foundation for a bilingual trajectory that can positively impact EB student achievement.

This study (2022) conducted by Rice University and the Houston Education Research Consortium (HERC),identified additional contributing factors for entering LTEB student status, including:

grade retention,

special education identification,

suspension,

absenteeism,

switching schools during the school year (highly-mobile), and

changing EB student programs or participating in multiple EB student programs in elementary school.

Additionally, this study also found that supporting an EB student's home language while learning English, particularly through participation in a dual language immersion or transitional bilingual program during elementary school, decreased the likelihood of becoming a LTEB student. Having higher English comprehension skills at the start of elementary school also had a positive impact on not becoming a LTEB student.

As with newcomers, a strengths-based approach is necessary when supporting LTEB students. This means ensuring that LTEB students have full access to advanced placement courses and rigorous learning opportunities. Since they typically have high bilingual oracy but usually lack primary/home language literacy, their high oral bilingualism can be leveraged for biliteracy emphasis. Having visibility of their home language in the classroom can help LTEB students see themselves and their cultural heritage within the instructional context.

In addition to a strengths-based approach, recognition of external factors that impact LTEB students is important to consider.

Long-term EB status can impact motivation and expectations for success in students and, when shared by teachers/staff, can impede growth.

"Being an LTEL has been shown to have a negative effect on a student's motivation and expectations for academic success," says Clark-Gareca et al. (2019). "Sometimes these lower expectations are also shared by teachers, which further exacerbates the student's difficulties in school" (p. 3).

As a result of these lower expectations, LTEB students are too often given easier tasks, notes Soto (2014), which can lead to "lower track" courses overall. Soto goes on to add that students instead benefit from guided practices before working independently, and may be motivated when teachers monitor them while they work.

Another external factor to consider is socio-economic status. As mentioned previously in the Rice University/Houston Education Research Consortium (HERC) study, it is clear that EB program model participation impacts the likelihood of becoming a LTEB student, but for schools with 90% or higher students who are identified as economically disadvantaged (ED), this impact is even greater.

Ultimately, keeping expectations high for LTEB student achievement requires (informally) evaluating them on metrics other than their test scores.

"Recognizing the various forms of academic success (not limited to standardized testing) within this group does not minimize the real disparities in the academic outcomes. However, in day-to-day interactions with students, the reality that there is diversity among this population is fundamental to effective instruction. They are students that bring with them educational success and strengths" (Brooks, 2019b, p. 177).

A practical way to impact affective support of LTEB students is to involve them in their educational journey. This includes:

Effective instructional practices can support the affective domain by maintaining high academic expectations while supporting language development in all domains. Specific aspects of instructional practices particulary applicable to long-term emergent bilingual (LTEB) students include:

Literacy Development

Content and Language Assessment Procedures

Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Plan for Intentional and Targeted Language Instruction

Lesson planning is the essential first step to ensuring that content-based language instruction happens.Language skills are needed for understanding any content material. However, intention and targeted design are needed to take the essential language skills and turn them into integrated language teaching. Planning for intentional and targeted language instruction considers three main components:

1. Curriculum Alignment

Utilize the appropriate grade level Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for all subject areas and coordinate integration of the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) and College and Career Readiness Standards (CCRS).

2. Language Objectives

Set a language objective in all content areas for each lesson according to the language of instruction, connecting to the ELPS during English instruction.

3. Meaningful Practice

Integrate frequent opportunities for authentic language practice in each content area that aligns to the lesson's language objective, differentiating support based on emergent bilingual students' language proficiency levels.

Effective Use of Language Objectives

All content lessons delivered in English for emergent bilingual students must have a language objective derived from the ELPS that is connected to the content objective of the lesson. When determining the lesson's language objective, consider the following:

Select one language objective per lesson. Although each lesson may incorporate all aspects of ELPS student expectations, including listening, speaking, reading, writing, and learning strategies, the language objective should focus on one ELPS standard in which the students will be formally or informally assessed.

Connect to the content objective. Think of what language is needed to support the reception or demonstration of content knowledge within the lesson, and set the language objective to capture the language target needed for successful participation with the content material. Consider the content objective as what students will learn and the language objective as how students will receive information or demonstrate understanding.

Use the same language objective for EB students at all levels of English proficiency. Different language objectives are not needed for each of students' English proficiency levels (beginning, intermediate, advanced, or advanced high); rather, the linguistic supports provided will be scaffolded commensurate to the students' needs in order to demonstrate the same language objective.

Vary the focus on the five categories of the ELPS student expectations. There is no scope and sequence for the ELPS. However, based on the needs of the EB students, spiraled focus on each domain of language (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and the use of learning strategies is needed to ensure students have authentic practice across all areas of language development.

Communicate the language objective to students. Displaying a lesson's language objective becomes beneficial when that language objective is communicated to students and even more so when EB students are able to set personal goals for advancing language proficiency to monitor their progress over time.

Creating Language Objectives

Effective instructional design for EB students should include opportunities to listen, speak, read, and write at their current levels of language. When planning, lessons, teachers determine content objectives based on the TEKS, and language objectives based on the ELPS. The presence of a focused language objective supports intentional language practice within the lesson. Both the content and language objective should be measurable during or after the lesson.. Below, the chart provides examples of the connection between content objectives, language objectives, and instructional practices.

Kindergarten Social Studies

Instructional Practice
Students will be given pictures that illustrate examples of needs and wants. They will listen to the teacher call out the examples of needs and wants as students organize them into categories based on the description the teacher gives, deciding if they are needs or wants. Then, pairs of students will discuss why they chose to group the examples as they did and how needs and wants are different. To fortify listening skills, pairs will find new partners and retell what they recall their original partner explained about the differences of needs and wants. They will be given these sentence stems to begin their final conversation: "My partner said that needs are.... My partner said that wants are...."

2nd Grade Math

4th Grade English Language Arts

Content Objective
I will make inferences while reading chapter 1 of Island of the Blue Dolphins.
(4.8.A - Multiple genres; literary elements)

Instructional Practice
The teacher will read aloud a section from chapter 1 of Island of the Blue Dolphins by Scott O'Dell. Then, students will re-read the section with a partner, while filling out a 3-column chart with these sections: What I know, What I see, What I infer. In the first column, they will make notes of experiences and prior knowledge they have that relates to what's happening. Then, they will cite portions of the text that support the formation of an inference. Lastly, they will tell what they infer from the text in the last column. Partners will then pair with another partner group to share their inferences and evidence.

7th Grade Science

Algebra I

Chemistry

Instructional Practice
The teacher will model how to create a structural formula for various molecules and how to write the empirical and molecular formulas for each. In small groups, students will create a chart of 5 different molecules, showing the structural, empirical, and molecular formulas. Finally, students will select one other molecule to share with the whole group in which they demonstrate the structural formula and how they discovered the empirical and molecular formulas for the molecule.
Example: Ethane- CH ₃ (empirical), C ₂H ₆ (molecular), structural.

English II

World History Studies

Content Objective
I will summarize the causes of the global depression immediately following World War I and explain the responses of governments.
( 11.A and B - History)

Language Objective
I will describe in detailed writing on the international, political, and economic causes of the global depression after WWI as well as the responses of the US, Germany, Great Britain, and France.
(ELPS 5.G - Writing)

Instructional Practice
After investigating the causes and responses to the global depression after WWI, students will create a type of cause and effect graphic organizer to summarize the details for the causes and responses by governments. Then, the teacher will provide scaffolds, such as word banks, transitional phrase charts, sentence stems and paragraph frames, to support students as they begin to use their graphic organizer to write a brief essay on the causes and responses to the global depression after WWI.

Supplemental Support

The ELPS district responsibilities in Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 74.4 (b) define that linguistically accommodated content instruction for all emergent bilingual (EB) students should be communicated, sequenced, and scaffolded.

This supplemental support accelerates English language acquisition when partnered with content-based instruction. The ELPS Instructional Tool serves as a resource for understanding appropriate supplemental supports for EB students. Key features of this resource include the following:

Page 9: Teacher behaviors (focused, targeted, systematic)

Pages 22-25: Teacher tips for beginning and intermediate EB students and linguistic accommodations by proficiency level and domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) including Classroom activities Teacher supports Student outcomes

Pages 26-33: Sentence frames and probing questions

For additional support with supplement support for LTEB students, see the Content and Language Assessment Procedures section.

To support LTEB students, teachers should use research-based instructional practices that develop literacy with resources that leverage students' language(s) and experiences. In this vein, Menken (2010) proposes three instructional and programming recommendations:

more bilingual educational opportunities for LTEB students;

clear, consistent and cohesive language programs; and

explicit academic language instruction in secondary schools for LTEB students.

Bilingual language instruction is one such practice, with research demonstrating that biliteracy programs can have significant positive impacts for LTEB students, including improving their literacy in both their home language and English (Artigliere, 2019; Menken & Klein, 2010). When students have not had such bilingual/biliteracy instruction in the elementary level, literacy instruction in middle and high school grades becomes increasingly vital. This research brief from the National High School Center (Koelsch, 2006) says,

"Adolescent literacy at the high school level entails the development of disciplinary knowledge and the use of that knowledge in oral interactions, reading and writing. Consequently, states and districts need to redesign literacy work for [EB students] in high school as a change from remediation to academic acceleration and enrichment" (p. 5).

Finally, researchers advocate for structured academic language development to support LTEB students' literacy, bridging the gap between their proficiency in social language and their challenges with academic language. This can be accomplished through an emphasis on vocabulary development across content areas specifically by teaching tiered words. Organizing and teaching vocabulary into tiers or levels is known to be an effective means of supporting academic language for LTEB students. Additionally, Ascenzi-Moreno, Kleyn, and Menken (2013) advocate the following strategies for literacy development in LTEB students:

Translanguaging strategies

Utilizing students' current linguistic practices

Activating prior knowledge

Direct instruction in vocabulary and language

Language instruction within content area instruction

Using shared readings to analyze text

Content and Language Assessment Procedure

To help LTEB students excel on classroom and state assessments, teachers need to ensure appropriate linguistic accommodations. Although research continues to point to the development of language through content as the most impactful pedagogy for instructing EB students in any language, there can be a tendency to over-simplify content and academic tasks for EB students, which then limits academic exposure (Callahan & Shifrer, 2012). Rather than simplifying the content instruction to such a degree that students hardly have the opportunity to learn the material, educators must identify and, to the extent possible, accommodate students' linguistic support needs during content-based (TEKS-aligned) assessments.

Again, it can be difficult to see the need for linguistic support on assessments for LTEB students due to their oral fluency. Thus, providing students with choice on how to demonstrate their understanding of content concepts can be one way for LTEB students to effectively convey their content knowledge with embedded linguistic support from alternative assessment methods. When offering accommodations on assessments, consistency is key, and practicing in the classroom with the same accommodations EB students may receive on formal assessments can be quite helpful.

Students and teachers alike must understand the connection between growth in language proficiency and academic achievement, as well as the role language assessments play in determining LTEB students' educational pathways. For students at all grade levels, being involved in understanding the purpose for assessments, knowing the impact they have on their trajectory, and setting goals for academic and linguistic progress is not only helpful but necessary. Teachers of EB students can facilitate these conversations to build investment in assessments, ensuring students feel comfortable and are prepared to demonstrate their full knowledge and abilities. Then, teachers can take the information from classroom assessments and assignments and provide clear recommendations to the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC) on appropriate assessment decisions, including designated supports.

As students are equipped to perform at their best through clear communication and preparedness, educators are able to curb the potential negative impact of students feeling that ongoing language proficiency assessments are holding them back from scholastic success

(Clark-Gareca et al., 2019). Again, this reinforces the need to ensure that EB students at all levels of language proficiency are provided with full access to the wide scope of educational opportunities, including advanced courses.

Monitoring Linguistic Progress in English

Academic progress is typically measured through classroom assessments and campus- or district-wide benchmarks that address the content development of the required curriculum. To monitor linguistic progress in English, the ELPS Proficiency Level Descriptors (PLDs) are foundational in connecting to the ELPS student expectations used for language objectives in daily instruction and to how EB students will be assessed annually in the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS). Teachers can leverage the following process to engage in progress monitoring of linguistic development with the purpose of informing instructional practices.

1) Baseline data: Use the previous year's TELPAS scores to arrange EB students by English language proficiency level (beginning, intermediate, advanced, and advanced high) in each domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing). Thischart from the Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide (LIAG) can be used for this step. If previous TELPAS scores are unavailable, informal assessment of the students' current levels can be conducted using the ELPS PLDs.

2) Goal setting: Based on each student's current language proficiency levels, consider goals for increasing English proficiency to the next level for each domain, using the ELPS PLDs. For example, if the student is at a beginning level of English listening proficiency, look at the intermediate level proficiency descriptors for listening to determine goals for development in that domain. Including the student in this goal-setting process is a great way to increase investment in their own linguistic progress.

3) Periodic checks: At designated intervals, use the ELPS PLDs to identify when and how each EB student is attaining new skills in each domain of English proficiency. During each progress review,

document the students' current levels with evidence from the PLDs,

share progress data with the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC),

include students in tracking their own progress and revising goals as they meet previous goals, and

communicate to parents/families, particularly when additional support is needed.

4) Support and celebrate: Use anecdotal data from periodic checks to inform ongoing instructional support. For example, the Suggested Teacher Behaviors in each domain's section of theLIAG can be used to target student needs at each level and in each domain. Additionally, as students progress, include ways for students to celebrate their linguistic progress, such as through goal trackers or checklists.

Linguistically Accommodated Academic Assessment

Traditional assessment procedures, such as multiple choice exams, may only assess recall or memorization of facts or terms and not necessarily what an emergent bilingual (EB) student has synthesized and can produce in varied contexts. Thus, without adapting assessments for linguistic accessibility according to students' language proficiency levels, the results may only demonstrate the language level of the student rather than the content knowledge of the student. However, alternative assessment methods (also known as informal, authentic, or formative) are the types of content or performance driven assessments needed to capture a true picture of EB student achievement.

When determining alternative assessment methods for EB students, the following considerations should be made.

Analyze and adjust the assessment content for cultural aspects that may be unknown to students from varied backgrounds.

Create opportunities for students to have a choice in how they will demonstrate what they know rather than asking questions that only focus on what they do not know.

Determine adaptations needed for linguistic accessibility, limiting the use of unfamiliar terms, idioms, and complex sentence structures.

Alternative assessments don't have to be cumbersome for teachers to implement, and simple accommodations can be implemented without the need for purchasing formalized products or spending hours to develop. They can be used to scaffold for EB students at all levels of language proficiency, embedding linguistic supports that allow for content knowledge to be demonstrated to the full extent. Alternative assessment options provide the opportunity to gradually increase the linguistic complexity in student responses.

Description

Linguistic Accommodation or Extensions by
Proficiency Levels

Visual Representation

Beginning/Intermediate:

Label the visual with academic terms related to the topic

Complete a sentence stem to describe the visual

Advanced/Advanced High:
Write a summary of what the visual represents using paragraph frames as needed

Give an oral presentation to describe the visual representation, including key terms from an academic vocabulary bank

Physical Demonstration

Beginning/Intermediate:

Use labels or numbers to show connections

Explain understanding orally in primary language

Advanced/Advanced High:
Give oral directions to someone else to conduct a demonstration

conducting read-alouds by teacher with pauses and appropriate pace or recording them for students to use individually,

Write out steps to a process using transitional words and phrases

Defend agreements/disagreements orally or in writing using examples of compound or complex sentence starters as needed

Beginning/Intermediate:
Advanced/Advanced High:

Listen to the presentations of others on the assessed topic(s). Then, give feedback on what could be added or adjusted to the presentation for additional detail or clarity.for writing.

Listen to own recording of explanation/presentation. Then, using an academic glossary or thesaurus to enhance academic language used, repeat and re-record the presentation.

Beginning/Intermediate:
Advanced/Advanced High:

Using examples of compound or complex sentence stems, revise initial written response to extend academic writing.

Choose one or more assessment questions (multiple choice style) to explain in writing.

Administrator Considerations

School leaders at the campus and district levels have a responsibility to ensure that teachers understand assessment purposes and requirements. Furthermore, they are tasked with facilitating communication of this same information to both students as well as their families.

It is prudent and effective for districts to create procedures and professional development for how to adapt classroom assessments, how to communicate linguistic accommodations, and how to conduct individual student interviews on assessments with goal setting.

Additionally, when considering assessments for EB students, districts must also take into consideration the goals of the EB student program and employ assessments that match them, such as assessing for biliteracy for dual language immersion program participants.

Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Effective instructional practices for LTEB students also include offering plentiful opportunities for academic language development. With this in mind, Seidlitz et al. (2020) recommend six practices for improving instructional design for LTEB students:

Create opportunities for EB students to establish relationships with positive academic role models

Increase the use of academic texts in content area classes

Increase opportunities for academic conversations in content area classes

Promote robust, targeted language development through Reading/Language Arts

Allow Free Voluntary Reading (FVR)

Include EB students in Response to Intervention (RtI) initiatives on campus

Additionally, Artiglieri (2019) identifies five instructional factors that significantly affect LTEB
students' success:

Calderón and Minaya-Rowe (2013) in particular emphasize the targeted vocabulary development (explicitly taught) included in this last factor by adding that EB students "need discussions about word knowledge: cognates, affixes, pronunciation, decoding, multiple meanings, phrasal clusters, and idioms using the word in question" (location 959-Kindle). They also recommend teaching vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension strategies in the context of what students are about to read, as well as incorporating students' background knowledge and interests to encourage engagement, comprehension, and success.

Overall, effective instruction for LTEB students emphasizes cultural and linguistic connections, literacy/biliteracy, and academic language development. It takes a strengths-based approach by leveraging students' general oral language proficiency to increase reading and writing skills across all content areas.

Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Once intentional language instruction has been planned for, delivering linguistically accommodated content instructional regularly puts plans into action, providing the appropriate support for EB students at each level of language proficiency. Overall the instructional methods for content-based language instruction can be categorized into three components. These language-focused methods are connected to the district responsibilities within the ELPS to ensure all EB students have access to the grade level curriculum. Each component below dives into the why (purpose), the what (description), and the how (implementation examples).

Communicated Methods

Sequenced Methods

Scaffolded Methods

Provide comprehensible input that includes context-embedded resources and clearly expressed instructions through a communicative language teaching approach.

Differentiate instruction according to students' language proficiency levels by providing explicit academic language development opportunities and making connections to prior knowledge, including intentional cross-linguistic connections using primary language resources.

Embed structured support that includes oral and written development resources, cooperative learning routines, and instructional modeling with structured tools.

These language-focused methods are connected to the district responsibilities within the English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS) to ensure all EB students have access to the grade level curriculum [TAC Chapter 74.4(b)].

Communicated Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: One of the foundational ways to lower the affective filter and ensure students feel not only comfortable in the learning environment but involved in the classroom activities is to provide comprehensible input.

Technology Tools

Stopping points during video viewing can be as simple as the teacher pausing the video and asking prompting questions. However, technology tools can be leveraged to create videos with built in pauses for reflection to be viewed as a whole or individually. Some example resources include Spiral Clip and Fluentkey.

Sequenced Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: Emergent bilingual students are a heterogeneous group with varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds. As such, sequenced instructional methods are necessary to differentiate for each student's levels of language proficiency (in their home/primary language an English).

Scaffolded Methods for Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Purpose: When emergent bilingual students are provided with linguistic structures, they are able to focus on the academic task with confidence. Scaffolds are intended to be temporary supports that gradually increase linguistic complexity, demonstrating the language needed for not only basic but complex aspects of the target language.

Accessible texts
Adapt texts, rather than relying on translation. Translating materials alone is not supportive of second language development, and based on each student's language development in his/her home language (i.e. Spanish), translation tools or online application translation features may not increase understanding.

Adapt texts by

simplifying grade level English texts, such as:

using text-to-speech features for students to have the text read to them,

conducting read-alouds by teacher with pauses and appropriate pace or recording them for students to use individually,

using primary language texts as side-by-side resources rather than replacements, or

having students pre-read using primary language text

Writing Supports
Provide structures needed to process new learning, express understanding, and organize ideas for extended writing.

Structures for processing information and writing are not effective in and of themselves, but the way they are used determines the effectiveness of the tools. Examples of effective use of structural supports:

Sentence stems can be provided to students to give the language needed to begin a short response. To target support for students at varying levels of language proficiency, give options of sentence stems with varying degrees from simple to compound or complex structures.

Paragraph frames demonstrate not only how to begin but how to add details, create connections to other paragraphs, and to close an extended response or writing task. Students can be provided with generic paragraph frames for types of writing (such as expository, persuasive, procedural, etc.), or they can be generated for the specific task and topic. This can be done by the teacher having an individual student conference or small group to create the paragraph frame together based on the student's/students' ideas.

Note-taking templates can be used to ensure students are taking in key information (by listening or reading) and to plan for writing. Provide students with choice on the types of templates they prefer to use, modeling various methods for note-taking and outlining for writing.

Use graphic organizers strategically by

modeling their use,

adding additional headings to focus on key information,

incorporating ways for students to represent understanding or ideas through pictures or symbols, and

extending notes in graphic organizers into full sentence or paragraph responses (depending on the grade level expectations).

Technology Tools

Rewordify is a resource that can be used to simplify language of a text in English, which can be used to introduce new content or as a side-by-side resource to the full text. Also, some text-to-speech tools that can be used for students to have the text read to them include Immersive Reader feature inMicrosoft,Flipgrid or the Read & Write Google extension

For lasting impact on success for long-term emergent bilingual students as well as the reduction of students identified as LTEB, systemic factors and structures must be addressed so that the same outcomes are not continuously produced. One systemic structure that is pivotal is EB student program model selection. As previously mentioned, programs such as dual language immersion (DLI) that foster bilingualism and biliteracy can greatly impact success for EB students over time. Furthermore, fidelity to any program's implementation is just as important. For example, if English as a second language (ESL) programs are purely nominal, only checking the box of teacher certification, there will continue to be a rise in students becoming LTEB.

Other necessary structures that require collaboration are in regard to both retention practices and special education identification procedures. Schools must be aware of the impact of grade retention on successful completion of high school for EB students as well as their academic and linguistic progress and motivation. In the next component, identification practices for special education services will be discussed in further detail. However, as it relates to LTEB students, if EB students are not appropriately identified for needing special education services in a timely manner, it can impact their LTEB status (Cashiola et. al., 2022).

Furthermore, campuses and districts that implement scheduling practices that include opportunities for heritage language development with a biliteracy focus, access to electives, and additional academic support offer LTEB students the systemic support needed to further advance their linguistic and academic achievement. Callahan and Shifrer (2012) caution that LTEB students can end up in "a cycle of lesser educational opportunities" if they are not provided with the opportunity to reclassify when demonstrating readiness and when high-level coursework access is limited due to participation in ESL courses at secondary levels.

Thus, Ascenzi-Moreno et al. (2013) posits that systemic structures to combat these potential negative impacts from scheduling must be in place with the support of administrators. They go on to recommend the following structure suggestions:

summer programs with language development emphasis,

curriculum mapping, s

ongoing progress meetings regarding LTEB students,

continuous professional development,

peer and administrator observations,

use of collaborative descriptive inquiry groups for meeting the needs of LTEB students,

collaborative planning with all teachers of LTEB students, and

reflective practices from professional development.

Another aspect to scheduling is course offerings. With a need for many LTEB students to increase development of literacy and including biliteracy if feasible, a consideration for course offerings could be to repurpose Languages Other Than English (LOTE) courses as LOTE for heritage-language speakers with an emphasis in literacy. By doing so, the LOTE course can dive deeper into biliteracy practices than in a traditional use of the course for English-speaking students learning a new language with an emphasis on oral language and vocabulary development. Again, research shows that emergent bilingual students who are given opportunities to develop their native languages, such as in DLI programs, are likely to surpass their peers who are in English-only programs (Csorvasi & Colby, 2021).

Offering both bilingual content and native language arts courses is another support for LTELs in that it validates the experiences, both academic and social, that they all bring to schools with them. Native language courses also allow content instruction to move more quickly" (Clark-Gareca et al., 2019, p. 11).

Once processes for effective course scheduling and offerings are in place, the attention can be turned to how campuses and districts can increase graduation rates for LTEB students by using flexible graduation pathways, promoting student social belonging in extracurricular activities, and supporting family and community engagement.

"Students' postsecondary trajectories-college and, subsequently, employment-are in part dependent upon the courses they completed by the end of high school," say Callahan and Shifrer (2012), and "Students placed in low-level math or science at the beginning of high school may have little opportunity to complete more than the basic graduation requirements (Algebra 1, Biology) prior to their senior year. Low levels of content or course-taking suggest limited academic preparation and curricular exposure" (p. 22). As such, flexible pathways to graduation should include opportunities for LTEB students to be in high-track classes (Umansky, 2016).

To promote success in these high-track classes, courses should be relatable and demanding, according to Ascenzi-Moreno et al. (2013). They go on to say that educators should increase the relevancy of the work and not decrease the content load. Curriculum should be culturally and linguistically sustaining and involve critical thinking and project-based learning, not just memorization of facts. In addition, they suggest, schools should provide family support centers to get parents more active in students' educational experiences.

In addition to flexible academic pathways, robust social pathways have a powerful impact on LTEB students' sense of belonging and, in turn, their academic success. Unfortunately, however, the nearsighted view of students that the LTEB status tends to inspire often prohibits them from accessing these opportunities. Here's an example from a study by Brooks (2019b) entitled "A mother's advocacy: Lessons for educators of long-term EL students":

Moreover, she noted that 9th grade would be Eduardo's first opportunity in three years to have an elective. The reading/English language development class in which he was enrolled for all three years of middle school prevented his enrollment in art, theater, and other such classes...Mrs. Avilia was extremely concerned with the way in which the (long-term) English learner label impacted her son's schooling experience, it contributed to him not receiving the kind of educational opportunities that she felt that he deserved" (pp. 182, 184).

As this parent's account suggests, involvement in interest-based extracurricular and elective activities can strongly impact the motivation and investment LTEB students have with their educational experience. The more they are provided with programs and activities of interest, the stronger their connection can be to successful completion of high school and beyond. Likewise, consistent and clear communication and empowerment of families in their child's education can positively influence LTEB achievement.

Identification and Representation

According to 2022-2023 PEIMS data, 21% of students inspecial education are also identified as emergent bilingual students. On the flip side,12% of EB students are also served in special education. In considering these dual-identified students, schools must recognize that students can and should be appropriately identified and served for both or all of the program services for which they qualify. As the Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ) for the LPAC and EB students explains in question I. B-6, "An emergent bilingual student who receives special education services cannot be limited from access to the appropriate bilingual or ESL program", which is based onTAC §89.1230 (a). §89.1230 (a). This point is further confirmed by thejoint colleague letter from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR). Appropriate identification, placement, services, and reclassification procedures must be followed by the LPAC in collaboration with the Admissal, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) committee. Overall, it takes a collaborative effort to ensure support for dual-identified students.

In this component, the following aspects of support for dual-identified EB students served in special education will be addressed:

Characteristics of Emergent Bilingual Students Receiving Special Education Services: Recognize the unique and diverse characteristics and needs of emergent bilingual students who are also eligible to receive special education services.

Identification and Representation: Acknowledge the overrepresentation and underrepresentation of emergent bilingual students in special education services and incorporate identification practices that recognize the various possible reasons for academic challenges EB students may face

Assessment: Develop an individualized education plan (IEP) that is linguistically appropriate (holistic/integrated) and provides ongoing assessments to determine linguistic, academic, and functional progress in both the student's primary language and English.

Instruction: Provide curriculum and instruction that is culturally and linguistically sustaining, include specific accommodations for the special needs of the individual that are designed maximize student potential, and include student's active participation in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in the academic language of the content area as outlined by the IEP.

In Texas, there are 13 disability-related codes within the Texas Education Data Standards (TEDS) with which to identify the needs of students served inspecial education. Within and across disability types there is a wide range of needs, strengths, and individual student characteristics. In addition, any of these students could also be dual-identified as an emergent bilingual.

One area to provide an example of the intersection of disability-related and language-related needs is that of specific learning disabilities. As of 2022-2023 PEIMS Data, students in Texas with a specific learning disability made up 34% of students identified with disabilities, which is the largest group. Tyler and Garcia (2013) explain that learning disabilities "affect a student's ability to understand and/or use language effectively" (p. 1). They note that, while students with learning disabilities are a heterogeneous population, there are some commonalities:

"...they frequently experience difficulty with fast and accurate decoding. Poor decoding skills result in slow, dysfluent reading, limited vocabularies, and, often, below-grade level comprehension. Learning disabilities also affect other areas critical to school success, such as working memory and information processing. Further, students with learning disabilities often lack self-monitoring skills, and may not use the learning strategies they have been taught" (p. 1).

These characteristics may be common to the general population of students with learning disabilities, regardless of linguistic background or ability. However, students with learning disabilities (LD) who are also identified as emergent bilingual students also have their own set of unique characteristics and needs. According to Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017), for example, "ELs with LD are thought to have language patterns that are distinct from others in their cultural and ethnic community" (p. 99). They explain that this includes limited vocabulary in both the home language and the target language and difficulty with both receptive and expressive language as well as nonverbal language.

The combination of dual-identified students' needs for special education services and the challenges of learning a second language lead to highly specialized learning needs that affect both teachers' practices and students' methods for showing what they know (Watkins and Lui, 2013).

It is essential for educators to have professional development to become aware of the diverse characteristics and needs of EB students who are also served in special education. Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017) suggest that this training include the following areas of focus:

Identification and Representation

Emergent bilingual students can be both overrepresented and underrepresented in special education services, but with the right identification practices in place, schools can recognize the various possible reasons for academic challenges EB students may face and ensure the needs of each individual are met.

Overrepresentation is a problematic trend because, like the long-term EB student label, the disability classification can become an inseparable part of a student's identity and lead to lower expectations from teachers and administrators (Rodriguez and Rodriguez, 2017). In turn, this can mean fewer educational and extracurricular opportunities, and fewer choices after graduation as well unless there are proper educator training and equitable systems in place.

Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017) state that in order for emergent bilingual students to qualify for special education, their learning difficulties "cannot be primarily the result of environment" (p. 99). This includes second language acquisition, socioeconomic impacts, and instruction that fails to meet their needs. In fact, according to Echevarria and Graves (2015),

"It has been suggested that many learning problems experienced by students learning English are pedagogically induced, or the result of instructional practices that are not suited to the learner, often resulting in inappropriate placement in special education" (p. 47).

First and foremost, it must be clarified explicitly that having beginning levels of English proficiency is not a reason for identification of the need for special education services and is not indicative of academic or cognitive difficulty. Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017) note that EB students often demonstrate similar characteristics to students with learning disabilities. However, federal regulations require that EB students "with suspected disabilities be assessed in both their native language and English to ensure that any difficulties with learning are evident in both languages and are not solely the result of natural second-language learning processes" (Watkins & Lui, 2013, p. 1). This means that school personnel must be trained to assess EB students' learning abilities properly and "to use nondiscriminatory assessment procedures in order to distinguish between second language development and learning disabilities" (Rodriguez & Rodriguez, 2017, p. 98).

Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, and Higareda (2005) found that overrepresentation of EB students in special education occurs mostly at the secondary level, while at the elementary level, these students are largely underrepresented.

Why the discrepancy? Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017) posit that, "Often times educators are hesitant to refer young ELs to special education because they want to give these students more time to acquire the language" (p. 102). They go on to say that, while this is an understandable instinct, when students truly have learning disabilities, regardless of their English proficiency, the longer they go without the proper supports, the farther behind they fall. Beyond academics, the authors note, students with learning disabilities who do not receive the proper services can eventually face social and emotional challenges, as well as a general aversion to school.

Program Model Considerations

In addition to equitable identification practices, schools must also consider proper placement within the district's required bilingual education or ESL program. As mentioned at the beginning of this component based on 2022-2023 PEIMS data, 12% of EB students in Texas are also served in special education. Of those dual-identified students:

32% are in bilingual education programs,

61% are in ESL programs, and

8% have no bilingual or ESL program services.

Knowing that only 4% of all EB students statewide have no bilingual or ESL program services due to parental denial, it is apparent that having 8% of dual-identified students not served in a bilingual or ESL program is disproportionate. Schools should consider the following when analyzing their own district's participation data of dual-identified students:

What does this mean for program placement decisions?

What does this mean for communication with families of dual-identified students?

How does this impact coordinated services?

What training is needed for proper LPAC and ARD committee collaboration?

Despite the fine line educators and administrators are walking between being too reluctant and too quick to categorize EB students as needing special education services, there are several identification practices noted by Echevarria and Graves (2015) that recognize the possible reasons for academic challenges EB students may face, which may include:

Given the variety of potential reasons for EB students' academic challenges, school personnel must embrace thorough practices to determine whether the source of the challenges is truly a learning disability, other external factors, or part of the second language acquisition process.

For additional information on identification best practices, Karger (2013) points educators to a federal special education statute called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA):

"IDEA is both a funding statute and a civil rights statute that was enacted under the Fourteenth Amendment. IDEA includes several provisions that pertain to the evaluation and identification of ELs with disabilities. These provisions are intended to ensure that ELs are not identified inappropriately for special education. In conducting special education evaluations, school districts must ensure that assessments and other evaluation materials are selected and administered in a manner that is not discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis. In addition, these assessments must be administered in the language and form that is most likely to provide accurate information about what the child knows and can do, unless it is not feasible to do so. Moreover, trained and knowledgeable personnel must administer the assessments. The Act further specifies that a child must not be found eligible for special education services under IDEA if the determining factor is limited English proficiency" (p. 1).

For specific guidance for Texas school districts on identification as well as reclassification of dual-identified EB students also served in special education, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) provides this LPAC and ARD Committee Collaboration resource. Additionally, theTexas SPED Support website includes awebinar from February of 2023 entitled Appropriate Special Education Referrals of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners.

In order to thrive in school, dual-identified EB students also sered in special education require individualized education plans (IEPs) that:

are linguistically appropriate,

provide ongoing assessments to determine competence in both the student's primary language and English, and

include goals to support development in the primary language and English, in alignment with the goals of the language program.

First, an IEP must be tailored to the student's individual linguistic needs. In order for educators to do this successfully, students should be assessed in both the student's primary language and English to determine language competency (Echevarria & Graves, 2015). This is because proficiency in the home/primary language has a significant impact on developing proficiency in English.

"We know that students who speak their native language fluently and have developed appropriate literacy skills have increased opportunities for developing language and literacy skills in English. Further, those who have developed cognitive knowledge and concept comprehension in their native language have better opportunities for learning English" (Echevarria & Graves, p. 4).

To truly ensure these assessments are done effectively-and appropriate IEPs are created-Lo (2013) urges school districts to train all professionals involved on culturally and linguistically sustaining practices, which ensure the consideration of the cultural values and funds of knowledge of the students and their families, and to recruit and retain educators that can provide not only assessments but also instructional support in the primary language(s) of EB students also served in special education.

Second, an effective IEP must provide ongoing assessments to determine competence in both students' primary language and English, as students' skills will evolve over time, and instructional strategies may need to be adjusted accordingly. According to Rodriguez and Rodriguez (2017), teachers must continuously observe, assess, and analyze students' academic performance. These observations are important because they can determine the effectiveness of instructional practices and can help to determine areas of needed growth or gaps in knowledge and skills that can be targeted through intentional instructional design. This process is best achieved through informal assessment practices, such as curriculum-based assessments and ongoing portfolios.

When assessing the progress of dual-identified students, schools are encouraged to use a variety of assessment strategies.

"When choosing a formal test, educators must review the examiner and technical manual carefully to ensure that:

the test is reliable and valid,

the test items and testing procedures are unbiased, and

The norm sample of the test reflects the cultural and linguistic background of
the students" (Lo, 2013, p. 1).

Third, it is beneficial for educators to develop IEPs that include goals to support students' development in both their primary languages and English, and it is necessary for dual-identified students participating in a dual language immersion program. Salva and Matis (2017) note that teachers in any program for EB students that provide materials and supports in students' primary language(s) and promote the ongoing development of these languages are able to more effectively provide culturally and linguistically sustaining practices.

Echevarria and Graves (2015) expand on this idea, saying, "When a student's native language is included in the classroom, students learn that their language is respected and valued. The students, in turn, tend to feel respected and valued because their native language and culture are recognized" (p. 85). The authors recommend using small segments of a student's native language to help them learn concepts in their new language. They state, "Students' ability to retrieve words in a known language facilitates their progress in a new language" (p. 123). The authors also stress the importance of students maintaining their native language as they become proficient in English. For more information on development of appropriate IEPs, see the TEA Technical Assistance Guide on Individualized Education Program (IEP) Development.

Monitoring Linguistic Progress in English

Academic progress is typically measured through classroom assessments and campus- or district-wide benchmarks that address the content development of the required curriculum. To monitor linguistic progress in English, the ELPS Proficiency Level Descriptors(PLDs) are foundational in connecting to the ELPS student expectations used for language objectives in daily instruction and to how EB students will be assessed annually in the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS). Teachers can leverage the following process to engage in progress monitoring of linguistic development with the purpose of informing instructional practices.

1)  Baseline data: Use the previous year's TELPAS scores to arrange EB students by English language proficiency level (beginning, intermediate, advanced, and advanced high) in each domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing). Thischart from the Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide (LIAG) can be used for this step. If previous TELPAS scores are unavailable, informal assessment of the students' current levels can be conducted using theELPS PLDs.

2)  Goal setting: Based on each student's current language proficiency levels, consider goals for increasing English proficiency to the next level for each domain, using the ELPS PLDs. For example, if the student is at a beginning level of English listening proficiency, look at the intermediate level proficiency descriptors for listening to determine goals for development in that domain. Including the student in this goal-setting process is a great way to increase investment in their own linguistic progress.

3)  Periodic checks: At designated intervals, use the ELPS PLDs to identify when and how each EB student is attaining new skills in each domain of English proficiency. During each progress review,

document the students' current levels with evidence from the PLDs,

share progress data with the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC),

include students in tracking their own progress and revising goals as they meet previous goals, and

communicate to parents/families, particularly when additional support is needed.

4)  Support and celebrate: Use anecdotal data from periodic checks to inform ongoing instructional support. For example, the Suggested Teacher Behaviors in each domain's section of theLIAG can be used to target student needs at each level and in each domain. Additionally, as students progress, include ways for students to celebrate their linguistic progress, such as through goal trackers or checklists.

Linguistically Accommodated Academic Assessment

When determining alternative assessment methods for EB students, the following considerations should be made.

Analyze and adjust the assessment content for cultural aspects that may be unknown to students from varied backgrounds.

Create opportunities for students to have a choice in how they will demonstrate what they know rather than asking questions that only focus on what they do not know.

Determine adaptations needed for linguistic accessibility, limiting the use of unfamiliar terms, idioms, and complex sentence structures.

Alternative assessments don't have to be cumbersome for teachers to implement, and simple accommodations can be implemented without the need for purchasing formalized products or spending hours to develop. They can be used to scaffold for EB students at all levels of language proficiency, embedding linguistic supports that allow for content knowledge to be demonstrated to the full extent. Alternative assessment options provide the opportunity to gradually increase the linguistic complexity in student responses.

Description

Linguistic Accommodation or Extensions by
Proficiency Levels

Visual Representation

Beginning/Intermediate:

Label the visual with academic terms related to the topic

Complete a sentence stem to describe the visual

Advanced/Advanced High:
Write a summary of what the visual represents using paragraph frames as needed

Give an oral presentation to describe the visual representation, including key terms from an academic vocabulary bank

Physical Demonstration

Beginning/Intermediate:

Use labels or numbers to show connections

Explain understanding orally in primary language

Advanced/Advanced High:
Give oral directions to someone else to conduct a demonstration

conducting read-alouds by teacher with pauses and appropriate pace or recording them for students to use individually,

Write out steps to a process using transitional words and phrases

Defend agreements/disagreements orally or in writing using examples of compound or complex sentence starters as needed

Beginning/Intermediate:
Advanced/Advanced High:

Listen to the presentations of others on the assessed topic(s). Then, give feedback on what could be added or adjusted to the presentation for additional detail or clarity.

Listen to own recording of explanation/presentation. Then, using an academic glossary or thesaurus to enhance academic language used, repeat and re-record the presentation.

Beginning/Intermediate:
Advanced/Advanced High:

Using examples of compound or complex sentence stems, revise initial written response to extend academic writing.

Choose one or more assessment questions (multiple choice style) to explain in writing.

Administrator Considerations

School leaders at the campus and district levels have a responsibility to ensure that teachers understand assessment purposes and requirements. Furthermore, they are tasked with facilitating communication of this same information to both students as well as their families.

It is prudent and effective for districts to create procedures and professional development for how to adapt classroom assessments, how to communicate linguistic accommodations, and how to conduct individual student interviews on assessments with goal setting.

Additionally, when considering assessments for EB students, districts must also take into consideration the goals of the EB student program and employ assessments that match them, such as assessing for biliteracy for dual language immersion program participants.

Effective curriculum for dual-identified EB students also served in special education
accomplishes four goals:

1. It factors in students' cultural aspects.

2. It includes specific accommodations for the individualized needs of the student, both disability-related and linguistic accommodations, as appropriate.

3. It is designed to maximize student potential.

4. It includes students' active participation in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in the academic language of the content area as outlined by the IEP.

First, it is crucial to provide EB students with a culturally and linguistically appropriate curriculum, including literature that represents all children's cultures and cultures of others, as well as examples and information that are relatable in the lessons (Echevarria & Graves, 2015). Such practices increase student motivation, according to the authors. Salva and Matis (2017) agree by noting that having variety in literature that reflects the cultural and linguistic aspects of the students can increase motivation and provide an inclusive, comfortable learning environment.

However, culturally and linguistically sustaining practices go beyond the literature and curriculum materials students are provided.

"Teachers who understand culturally different behaviors respond in ways that appropriately and proactively accept or redirect students' behavior when necessary" (Cartledge & Kourea, 2008, p. 353).

This is because students from diverse cultures bring diverse cultural experiences to the classroom, and when they feel unwelcome on the basis of those experiences, their motivation to learn decreases significantly. Therefore, it is important that educators allow and encourage dual-identified students to "maximize their own experiences, culture, background knowledge, and reasoning to actively and interactively contribute to instruction and activities designed to promote literacy development" (Herrera & Murry, 2011, p. 73).

Second, effective instruction for dual-identified students includes specific accommodations for the individualized needs of each student. This includes both the language of the instruction and the scaffolds used to support comprehension. Keep in mind that the language of instruction is going to be determined by the bilingual or ESL program in which the student is participating, which is specified in the language allocation plan for a dual language immersion program and according to the student's linguistic needs within a transitional bilingual education program.

In discussing strategies for making content accessible to students, Tyler and Garcia (2013) stress the need to determine the level of difficulty of content in order to "select and use instructional approaches, materials, and assignments that provide comprehensible input" for dual-identified students. In addition, they recommend that teachers "ensure that content, assignments and activities are accessible" and "foster student engagement and motivation to learn" (p. 1).

Similarly, Echevarria and Graves (2015) promote flexibility in the way students show their learning. "If the student understands the information but is unable to express this knowledge in writing, he or she should be provided alternative forms of expression. Language proficiency level cannot be confused with a student's knowledge of subject matter" (p. 138).

Third, the goal of instruction for dual-identified EB students also served in special education is to maximize student potential. This means developing curricula designed to provide students the extra support they need to acquire strong academic language.

"They most likely will not learn at the same rate as other students and often need more repetition and clarification of terms" (Echevarria & Graves, 2015, p. 73).

However, by building on what students know and can do, they will be set up for success through and beyond K-12 schooling.

Fourth, another instructional strategy to support dual-identified EB students served in special education is to include and encourage students' active participation in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in the academic language of the content area. This is because dual-identified students are more motivated to learn and have more positive feelings toward school when they are engaged in constructing their own learning and are given an opportunity to experience success (Echevarria & Graves, 2015).

"Our goal is to create classrooms in which every student participates in academic conversations about great ideas. We want our students to see things from multiple points of view, and we want them to be able to express themselves intelligently and confidently" (Seidlitz & Perryman, 2021, p. 136).

Overall, dual-identified students have the same needs as other EB students for culturally and linguistically sustaining practices and content-based instructional methods that embed language in context for increased academic achievement and linguistic progress.

Effective Use of Language Objectives

All content lessons delivered in English for emergent bilingual students must have a language objective derived from the ELPS that is connected to the content objective of the lesson. When determining the lesson's language objective, consider the following:

Select one language objective per lesson. Although each lesson may incorporate all aspects of ELPS student expectations, including listening, speaking, reading, writing, and learning strategies, the language objective should focus on one ELPS standard in which the students will be formally or informally assessed.

Connect to the content objective. Think of what language is needed to support the reception or demonstration of content knowledge within the lesson, and set the language objective to capture the language target needed for successful participation with the content material. Consider the content objective as what students will learn and the language objective as how students will receive information or demonstrate understanding.

Use the same language objective for EB students at all levels of English proficiency. Different language objectives are not needed for each of students' English proficiency levels (beginning, intermediate, advanced, or advanced high); rather, the linguistic supports provided will be scaffolded commensurate to the students' needs in order to demonstrate the same language objective.

Vary the focus on the five categories of the ELPS student expectations. There is no scope and sequence for the ELPS. However, based on the needs of the EB students, spiraled focus on each domain of language (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and the use of learning strategies is needed to ensure students have authentic practice across all areas of language development.

Communicate the language objective to students. Displaying a lesson's language objective becomes beneficial when that language objective is communicated to students and even more so when EB students are able to set personal goals for advancing language proficiency to monitor their progress over time.

Planning for Language Objectives

Effective instructional design for EB students should include opportunities to listen, speak, read, and write at their current levels of language. When planning, lessons, teachers determine content objectives based on the TEKS, and language objectives based on the ELPS. The presence of a focused language objective supports intentional language practice within the lesson. Both the content and language objective should be measurable during or after the lesson.. Below, the chart provides examples of the connection between content objectives, language objectives, and instructional practices.

Kindergarten Social Studies

Instructional Practice
Students will be given pictures that illustrate examples of needs and wants. They will listen to the teacher call out the examples of needs and wants as students organize them into categories based on the description the teacher gives, deciding if they are needs or wants. Then, pairs of students will discuss why they chose to group the examples as they did and how needs and wants are different. To fortify listening skills, pairs will find new partners and retell what they recall their original partner explained about the differences of needs and wants. They will be given these sentence stems to begin their final conversation: "My partner said that needs are.... My partner said that wants are.... "

2nd Grade Math

Instructional Practice
After the teacher models how to organize data into bar graphs and pictographs, groups of students will create a bar or pictograph with a set of data. Finally, each student will use a set of data to create either a bar graph or pictograph of their choosing. Prior to sharing orally with their table group how they organized the data, students will rotate to at least two partners in the room to practice their explanation.

4th Grade English Language Arts

Content Objective
I will make inferences while reading chapter 1 ofIsland of the Blue Dolphins.
(4.8.A - Multiple genres; literary elements)

Instructional Practice
The teacher will read aloud a section from chapter 1 of Island of the Blue Dolphins by Scott O'Dell. Then, students will re-read the section with a partner, while filling out a 3-column chart with these sections: What I know, What I see, What I infer. In the first column, they will make notes of experiences and prior knowledge they have that relates to what's happening. Then, they will cite portions of the text that support the formation of an inference. Lastly, they will tell what they infer from the text in the last column. Partners will then pair with another partner group to share their inferences and evidence.

7th Grade Science

Content Objective
I will critique a scientific explanation related to
the recent unit on force, motion, and energy,
using my own reasoning or observations.
(7.3.A - Scientific investigation and reasoning)

Language Objective
I will use analytical skills to evaluate a scientific
explanation of my choosing, providing
explanation of my critique with details from my
reasoning or observations.
(ELPS 4.K - Reading)

Instructional Practice
Pairs of students will choose from a list of scientific explanations related to force, motion, and energy. They will conduct a shared reading of the explanation, while taking notes of their agreements or disagreements. Together, they will conduct an experiment or observation before formulating a written evaluation of the scientific explanation, providing evidence from their observation or experiment. Students will use sentence stems to begin their responses, ranging from simple (I agree because...) to complex (Based on evidence from our observation of ..., the scientific explanation of ... is correct because...).

Algebra I

Instructional Practice
Students will explore various transformations (translations, dilations, and reflections) using the variable sliders on a Desmos calculator and replacing the variables in the y=x² + c. Then, using two parabolas, they will write an explanation of how the graph of the quadratic is changed due to the changing variables. A word bank will be provided to include words such as stretch, compress, shift, and vertex.

Chemistry

Instructional Practice
The teacher will model how to create a structural formula for various molecules and how to write the empirical and molecular formulas for each. In small groups, students will create a chart of 5 different molecules, showing the structural, empirical, and molecular formulas. Finally, students will select one other molecule to share with the whole group in which they demonstrate the structural formula and how they discovered the empirical and molecular formulas for the molecule.
Example: Ethane- CH ₃ (empirical), C ₂H ₆ (molecular), structural.

English II

Language Objective
I will report orally on the key information from
several sources on my chosen topic related to
the reading of Life of Pi.
(ELPS 3.H - Speaking)

Instructional Practice
After concluding the reading of the book Life of Pi by Yann Martel, students will select a topic related to the book. They will investigate at least 3 articles or narratives related to the topic. Then, they will explain the key points of their topic to a small group before recording themselves using Flipgrid in order to obtain feedback from another student and the teacher. Students may use their notes when presenting/recording as needed.

World History Studies

Content Objective
I will summarize the causes of the global depression immediately following World War I and explain the responses of governments.
(11.A and B-History)

Language Objective
I will describe in detailed writing on the
international, political, and economic causes of
the global depression after WWI as well as the
responses of the US, Germany, Great Britain, and France.
(ELPS 5.G - Writing)

Instructional Practice
After investigating the causes and responses to the global depression after WWI, students will create a type of cause and effect graphic organizer to summarize the details for the causes and responses by governments. Then, the teacher will provide scaffolds, such as word banks, transitional phrase charts, sentence stems and paragraph frames, to support students as they begin to use their graphic organizer to write a brief essay on the causes and responses to the global depression after WWI.

Supplemental Support

The ELPS district responsibilities in Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 74.4 (b) define that linguistically accommodated content instruction for all emergent bilingual (EB) students should be communicated, sequenced, and scaffolded. Furthermore, this section outlines that EB students at beginning or intermediate levels of English proficiency in any domain should receive "intensive and ongoing foundational second language acquisition instruction" that is

focused (explicitly addresses English vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and mechanics),

targeted (formally or informally assessed to match students' proficiency levels), and

systematic (carefully planned, consistently implemented, and monitored for growth).

This supplemental support accelerates English language acquisition when partnered with content-based instruction. The ELPS Instructional Tool serves as a resource for understanding appropriate supplemental supports for EB students. Key features of this resource include the following:

Page 9: Teacher behaviors (focused, targeted, systematic)

Pages 22-25: Teacher tips for beginning and intermediate EB students and linguistic accommodations by proficiency level and domain (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) including Classroom activities Teacher supports Student outcomes

Pages 26-33: Sentence frames and probing questions

Linguistically Accommodated Content Instruction

Once intentional language instruction has been planned for, delivering linguistically accommodated content instructional regularly puts plans into action, providing the appropriate support for EB students at each level of language proficiency. Overall the instructional methods for content-based language instruction can be categorized into three components. These language-focused methods are connected to the district responsibilities within the ELPS to ensure all EB students have access to the grade level curriculum. Each component below dives into the why (purpose), the what (description), and the how (implementation examples).

Communicated Methods

Sequenced Methods

Scaffolded Methods

Provide comprehensible input that includes context-embedded resources and clearly expressed instructions through a communicative language teaching approach.

Differentiate instruction according to students' language proficiency levels by providing explicit academic language development opportunities and making connections to prior knowledge, including intentional cross-linguistic connections using primary language resources.

Embed structured support that includes oral and written development resources, cooperative learning routines, and instructional modeling with structured tools.

Communicated Methods

Purpose: One of the foundational ways to lower the affective filter and ensure students feel not only comfortable in the learning environment but involved in the classroom activities is to provide comprehensible input.

Program Model Considerations

In a bilingual program, cross-linguistic connections are intentionally incorporated by the teacher who is fluent in both program languages (ex. Spanish and English). It's important to note that making these explicit connections does not mean that the teacher is conducting convurrent translation or code-switching throughout instruction. It means the teacher is able to bridge the instruction in both languages through purposeful connections within the lesson, while staying true to the current language of instruction.

Within bilingual program, cross-linguistic connections take on different purposes. In dual language immersion (DLI) programs, the purposed for making these connectionsis to support bilingualism and biliteracy in both program languages. On the other hand, in transitional bilingual education (TBE) progrms, cross-linguistic connections are used as a leverage point for meeting the goal of English proficiency.

For ESL programs, the ESL teacher may have students with multiple language background in the same class and may not speak any or all of the primary languages of the students. Therefore, in order to make cross-linguistic connections, the ESL teacher may need to research vocabulary terms or grammatical features of the students' language(s). ESL teachers may leverage primary language resources and student input to do so.

Sequenced Methods

Purpose: Emergent bilingual students are a heterogeneous group with varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds. As such, sequenced instructional methods are necessary to differentiate for each student's levels of language proficiency (in their home/primary language an English).

Scaffolded Methods

Purpose: Emergent bilingual students are provided with linguistic structures, they are able to focus on the academic task with confidence. Scaffolds are intended to be temporary supports that gradually increase linguistic complexity, demonstrating the language needed for not only basic but complex aspects of the target language.

Technology Tools

Padlet is an example of a free tool that a student can use to engage in discussion activities anonymously. Other examples may include the use of interactive documents, such asGoogle classroom or formative assessment resources, such asKahoot.

Rewordify is a resource that can be used to simplify language of a text in English, which can be used to introduce new content or as a side-by-side resource to the full text. Also, some text-to-speech tools that can be used for students to have the text read to them include Immersive Reader feature inMicrosoft, Flipgrid or the Read & Write Google extension.

Addressing Needs

Characteristics

Identification and Representation

Advanced Instruction

Another important aspect to how an emergent bilingual student can be dual-identified is through identification as gifted and talented. As with EB students who are dual-identified and served in special education, those who are gifted/talented must also receive coordinated services to ensure equitable access to both the gifted and talented program as well as the district's required bilingual education or ESL program.

In this component, the following aspects of support for gifted/talented EB students will be addressed:

Characteristics of Gifted/Talented Emergent Bilingual Students: Recognize the unique and diverse characteristics and needs of emergent bilingual students who are identified as gifted/talented.

Identification and Representation: Incorporate identification practices that increase representation of emergent bilingual students in gifted and talented programs.

Advanced Instruction: Provide curriculum and instruction that address gifted emergent bilingual students' needs for both advanced learning and language support.

While there is no formal definition of "gifted/talented emergent bilingual students", one can be comprised by combining the Texas definitions of "gifted/talented students" and "emergent bilingual students".

A gifted/talented student is a child or youth who performs at, or shows the potential for performing at, a remarkably high level of accomplishment when compared to others of the same age, experience, or environment, and who:

exhibits high-performance capability in an intellectual, creative, or artistic area;

possesses an unusual capacity for leadership; or

excels in a specific academic field. (Texas Education Code §29.121)

Administrative Code (TAC) §89.1203 defines an emergent bilingual student as A student identified by the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC) who is in the process of acquiring English and has another language as the student's primary or home language. This term is interchangeable with the term of English learner, which is used at the federal level.

In combining these definitions, Voss and Goldman (2022) have determined this working definition of a gifted emergent bilingual student:

"A gifted multilingual student is a student who is age 3-21 and not born in the U.S. or whose native language is a language other than English, who gives evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need both of the following:

services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those high achievement capabilities

services to develop the language skills necessary to meet the challenging State academic standards, achieve in classrooms where the language of instruction is English, and participate fully in society" (n.p.).

Emergent bilingual students are a heterogeneous group with respect to primary language, level of proficiency in primary language and in English, experiential background, income level, culture, and talent (Kitano & Espinosa, 1995). In one study, according to Kitano and Pederson (2002), teachers observed differences in characteristics due to culture, income, education level, and family functioning; however, there was one characteristic that made gifted EB students stand out from other EB students. They demonstrated greater independence than their peers, and they preferred instruction that was fast-paced and challenging.

Over the last 20 years, several researchers have created their own lists of characteristics shared among gifted emergent bilingual students. Notably, Project GOTCHA (Galaxies of Thinking and Creative Heights of Achievement), a Title VII, Academic Excellence Program awarded by the US Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs from 1987-1996, created a comprehensive (if not exhaustive) list of characteristics and grouped them into three categories (Iowa, 2008; Aguirre & Hernandez, 2022).

Learning-Based Characteristics

Language-Based Characteristics

Demonstrates language proficiency levels that are above nongifted students who are also EB students

Learns multiple languages at an accelerated pace

Shows the ability to code switch

Wants to teach others words from their heritage language

Is willing to translate for others

Has superior knowledge of phrases and heritage dialects along with the ability to translate meanings in English

Has a grasp on jokes related to cultural differences

Culture-Based Characteristics

Not all the needs gifted emergent bilingual students bring to the table are entirely unique: Like all EB students, they require a welcoming learning environment that fosters a sense of belonging and makes them feel included and comfortable expressing themselves (Kitano & Pederson, 2002). Additionally, culturally and linguistically sustaining practices are necessary since,

"Inequities in school practices, along with stereotypes, can erode students' strengths, lessen their motivation, and compromise their educational outcomes" (Albrecht, 2018, p. 2).

But many of their needs are unique. This is because, according to Wiggin (2017), giftedness can indicate "asynchronous development in which advanced cognitive abilities and heightened intensity combine to create vivid inner experiences and awareness. More than simply uneven development, asynchrony also involves emotional intensity, complexity, and depth, including traits such as perfectionism and underachievement. Gifted children are aware that they are different than their age peers and they sometimes struggle with social adjustment" (p. 302).

As such, Wiggin recommends that their giftedness be recognized since their exceptionality requires differentiated education, and without it, gifted EB students may not thrive in the school environment and encounter diminished potential. Specifically, these students thrive with:

They may also have additional social-emotional needs, as the selective environment of a gifted program can raise questions of legitimate belonging ("imposter syndrome"), isolation, fear of failure, etc. (Olzewski-Kubilius & Subotnik, 2022).

Identification and Representation

Emergent bilingual students are underrepresented-in levels ranging from moderate to severe - in gifted programs in all 20 educational regions across Texas (Coronado & Lewis, 2017). Siegle et al. (2016) points to a study that, controlling for characteristics such as reading and math achievement, found the odds of being identified as gifted were 2.5 times higher for white students who were neither identified as emergent bilingual nor eligible for free/reduced-price lunch than for EB students who were Latino and eligible for free lunch. The takeaway:

"...traditionally underserved students in their sample (students who are Black and Latino, students who receive free/reduced lunch, and English learners) were less likely to be identified as gifted, even when their achievement is on par with their peers" (p. 4).

2022-2023 PEIMS data reveals that 4% of EB students statewide are identified as G/T. Furthermore, only 1% of all Texas students are identified as both G/T and EB students, while 6% of non-EB Texas students are identified as G/T.

Program Model Considerations

It's important to note as well how the state's gifted EB students are spread across bilingual and ESL programs. Out of the 4% of EB students identified as G/T in Texas in 2022-2023,

45% participate in a bilingual education program,

48% participate in an ESL program, and

7% have no bilingual or ESL program services.

Notice that this rate of denial for no program services is higher than the state's rate for EB student parental denials at 4%.

What's getting in the way of identifying gifted emergent bilingual students? Largely, it comes down to two barriers. The first is that there may be cultural or linguistic barriers that limit EB students from showing their aptitude effectively. Wiggin (2017) explains that the standardized tests used to screen EB students for giftedness may not reflect their linguistic or cultural heritage. She goes on to highlight the linguistic challenges that may impede gifted emergent bilingual identification:

"Additionally, because standardized assessments to identify giftedness are almost always in English, they may inadvertently measure English language ability rather than academic or intellectual ability. The common practice of identifying gifted and talented students on the basis of a single test administration further decreases the chances of identifying gifted [EB students]" (p. 305).

Even where Spanish-language variations of assessments are available, they may not be appropriate for every Spanish-speaking student, note Gubbins et al. (2020): "In addition, although some screening instruments are available in Spanish, dialect variation of students from many different countries may restrict the appropriateness of these tests for local students. It is also important to note the availability of instruments in other languages is limited" (p. 341).

The second primary barrier is a deficit-based approach to EB students, which Mun (2020) notes is identified over and over in research, and drastically reduces EB students' chances of being nominated for gifted programs. Well-meaning teachers may subconsciously overlook their gifted emergent bilingual students, influenced too heavily by standardized test scores or blinded by a lack of cultural awareness (Wiggin 2017).

While these are the primary barriers to identification of gifted EB students, others have been identified as well, including (but not limited to) the following:

For identifying gifted EB students specifically one commonly identified practice is to recognize that these potentially dual-identified students may need to be tested several times over the course of a year or more as their language-and ability to express their aptitude-improves. Gubbins et al. (2018) recommend viewing the identification process as ongoing across grade levels, and Albrecht (2018) recommends using portfolios to demonstrate student growth and ability. Macrine and Lidz (2001) studied the effects of utilizing dynamic assessment as part of a multi-source battery used to identify culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students and found that this approach identified 5% of this population in the school where previous attempts only identified fewer than 1%. Similarly, Albrecht (2018) recommends dynamic assessment, (which accounts for students' ability to grow their mastery as a result of instruction), as an alternative process for identifying gifted EB students.

Along the same lines, several researchers recommend creating what Gubbins et al. (2018) call a "talent pool" of students (who show potential but aren't yet ready to enroll in gifted programs) and continuing to monitor their progress (p. 20). Similarly, Seigle et al. (2016) support a model that "begins with a pre-identification process of identifying students who would benefit from an emergent talent experience that reveals their high potential. These pre-identified students should then participate in a preparation program that provides opportunities for talents to emerge" (p. 22).

Effective test preparation is another barrier-breaking strategy, and Matthews (2006) offers several steps teachers can take to prepare their EB students to demonstrate their aptitude on standardized tests:

Beyond preparing for the assessments, adjusting the assessments has been identified as a powerful identification opportunity as well, with Albrecht (2018) recommending adding alternative assessment methods to the plan for identifying gifted EB students. Gubbins et al. (2018) recommend:

selecting relatable assessment methods that can account for language differences,

employing native/primary language assessments where available, and

including nonverbal ability assessments.

Iowa (2008) also offers a list of potential accommodations to help students understand a test of academic content:

Provide an interpreter to answer clarifying questions.

Use visuals to help the student understand what is being tested.

Employ test tasks such as drawing, sequencing or matching pictures and/or concepts and using graphic organizers.

When testing quantitative achievement and reasoning, use problems with "language free" calculations.

Avoid using timed tests.

Permit the use of a translation dictionary.

Read the test directions for the student and/or offer word pronunciations or meanings when this type of assistance does not influence valid assessment of the subject of skills tested.

As English itself is often a major barrier for EB students who should otherwise be identified as gifted, Iowa (2008), among others, recommends decentering English proficiency as the primary criteria for identification. This means evaluating students in a variety of other domains, including cognitive, affective, and psychomotor/behavior domains as well as acculturation, creativity, and leadership. None of these domains should be considered in isolation, they warn, but should be used as part of a holistic evaluation that includes background and cultural information, school grades, test scores, and classwork.

Teachers, administrators, and staff, when trained properly, can be effective identifiers of gifted EB students, as well. Both Gubbins et al. (2018) and Albrecht (2008) recommend establishing a committee of representatives who work with EB students in varying capacities, including administrators, classroom teachers, gifted specialists, EB specialists, and others to help identify candidates for gifted programs. But, as Mun et al. (2016) remind us, forming the committees is only the first step, noting that, "High-quality professional learning is also key in educating teachers and school personnel on this matter" (p. 324).

The final commonly noted strategy for breaking these barriers to participation in gifted programs is involving parents and guardians in the assessment and decision process.

"This process should utilize multiple pathways in languages appropriate to the population, such as clearly written program information available via the district or school website, video segments posted to school websites and made shareable via social media, information and community-building nights held at the school or in conjunction with community groups, and regularly distributed newsletters" (Gubbins et al., 2018, p. 20).

Ensuring families have the ability to communicate confidently and comfortably will support the student in the selection process and help the families play a guiding role in their children's future.

Once gifted emergent bilingual students have been identified, educators must provide curriculum and instruction that address their needs for both advanced learning and language support in a culturally sustaining context. In a literature review, Kitano & Espinosa (1995) concluded that best practice instructional strategies for gifted EB students meet the following criteria:

Appropriate for gifted learners in general

Incorporate student strengths

Demonstrate high expectations through challenging content

Employ student-centered approaches that promote active learning

Emphasize oral and written language development

Value students' languages, cultures, and experiences.

These standards from 1995 have been upheld in subsequent years, with several studies adding the importance of flexibility and varied practices that account for students' varied interests, background knowledge, and learning styles (Aguirre & Hernandez, 2002; Iowa, 2008; Matthews, 2021).

Another common thread, in alignment with Kitano and Espinosa's identified criteria, is that teachers of gifted EB students must demonstrate consistently high expectations. This doesn't mean, however, that language supports can't or shouldn't be incorporated into a gifted curriculum for EB students, but Iowa (2008) explains that for both EB students and non-EB students,

"Content in gifted/talented programs should not be watered down to address the needs of students who are showing academic potential rather than academic achievement. Instead, teachers may need to modify the way that material is delivered in the classroom in order to make the content more accessible for all students in the program" (p. 37).

Echoing this notion, Matthews (2021) recommends:

Among these linguistic supports, Castellano and Francis (2022) highlight that "Questioning and inquiry are two of the most effective methods for strengthening and supporting language development and communication of learning" for gifted EB students (p. 229).

Finally, Dubois and Greene (2021) note that gifted EB students can benefit from accelerated instruction and that these students should have access to advanced programming (e.g., AP and IB classes) as well as programming that meets their social and emotional needs.

Conclusion to Diversified Support

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Supporting Emergent Bilingual Students in Texas

# data[].attributes.headline
Seven Steps to Building a Language Rich Interactive Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Seven Steps to Building a Language Rich Interactive Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Seven Steps to Building a Language Rich Interactive Classroom

# data[].attributes.headline
Depth & Complexity One Pager with Examples

# data[].attributes.subject
Depth & Complexity One Pager with Examples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
JPEG Icons - The Center For Depth and Complexity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Free Depth & Complexity Icons Simply download our brand new Google Icon Extension that puts the use of Icons at student and teacher fingertips. Join...

# data[].attributes.headline
Byrdseed: Depth & Complexity Alone is Not Enough

# data[].attributes.subject
Byrdseed: Depth & Complexity Alone is Not Enough

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's a video about my 5 Depth and Complexity Mistakes! ➔

The prompts of depth and complexity are an incredible tool to begin differentiating learning objectives.

Teachers can quickly modify a lesson's goal to increase the challenge by plugging in the depth and complexity prompts. But, I frequently see the prompts used at a mere surface level in classrooms.

🚨 Depth and Complexity won't do anything meaningful if we're asking low-level questions to start with 🚨

In other words, you must know how to use Bloom's Taxonomy before you can play with Depth and Complexity.

Beyond Just Depth & Complexity

Sure, you can drop "patterns" into an objective to raise the level of the content, like so:

Before: "Look for a character's actions"

After: "Look for the patterns in a character's actions."

Note, however, that the thinking skill is unchanged. Students are still "looking for." On Bloom's Taxonomy, that's "identify" - a very low-order thinking skill. When we use depth and complexity we can't neglect the thinking skill.

It's Not Your Fault

I gave a talk about this problem and a program supervisor came up afterward, ashen-faced, and said, "I've been doing this wrong for ten years!"

But it's such an easy trap to fall into because every example of Depth and Complexity I see is at the bottom of Bloom's. There's almost nothing out there that's actually deep or complex!

Look at any of these charts and you'll see this pattern: every question begins with "what..."

What are the rules...

What are the patterns...

What are the details...

These low-level questions are an ok starting point, but please don't stop here.

It's About Thinking, Not Just Content

When planning a lesson, we can't just differentiate content (which is what the prompts of depth and complexity do). We must also adjust the thinking that we expect students to do.

A Shakespeare play is content. And it seems like pretty advanced content - unless you're asking something like this:

List the main characters' in Romeo and Juliet.

That's bottom-of-the-barrel Blooms. Remember or identify. You can add all of the depth and complexity you want, but you're still asking a low-level question.

Meanwhile, Dr. Seuss seems like basic content - unless you're asking students something like this:

"Evaluate the ethical use of power in The Cat In The Hat and compare it to the use of power in Green Eggs and Ham. In which story is power used more dangerously?"

Here, despite the seemingly low level of content (Dr. Seuss), we've pumped up both the content (by making it about the ethical use of power) and the thinking (evaluate; compare and contrast) so that it's actually a pretty interesting question... even for older students. Heck, this would have been a fun question to tackle in college!

When writing an objective, we must increase the complexity of, not just the content, but also the thinking skill.

Climb The Taxonomy

Instead of just asking kids to "identify" over and over, climb Bloom's Taxonomy in combination with a prompt of depth and complexity. Here's an example:

1. Look for patterns in a character's actions.

2. Compare the patterns in this character's actions with another character's.

3. Judge the ethics of the patterns we see in this character's actions.

4. Develop a new situation that would continue this pattern.

At each step, students are forced to think harder about the patterns they've uncovered. They're no longer just "identifying."

And notice how each step easily leads to a larger, more complex product.

At level one, a student could just write a sentence, but after that, the responses need to be bigger. Perhaps by the end, students are debating and creating skits.

An Interactive Version

Many years ago, I created The Differentiator, an interactive tool based on these ideas to help you modify the parts of a differentiated objective. Play around with it to see what a big difference the thinking skill can make!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Depth or Complexity Alone Isn't Deep Enough

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You can use the prompts of depth and complexity yet still ask very shallow questions. Here's how to avoid this common pitfall...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Depth and Complexity in Math? Yes, Math! - The Center For Depth and Complexity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is widely understood that the Depth and Complexity Framework is the differentiation solution that provides instructional tools to empower your students and inspire them...

# data[].attributes.headline
K-3 Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide

# data[].attributes.subject
K-3 Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TEA Website A-Z Index Contact TEA Sign Up For Updates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
© site Copyright 2024 Talking Math with Your Kids • Saint Paul, MN, 55114 Rights to individual sets controlled by the named authors

# data[].attributes.headline
4-12 Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide

# data[].attributes.subject
4-12 Linguistic Instructional Alignment Guide