Professional Documents
Culture Documents
An analysis of the quality and accessibility of instructional materials for ELL students in the
nations urban public school systems
2012-2013
Page i
Table of Figures
Figure 1. Percentage of CGCS respondents by position/title (n=284) .......................................... 6
Figure 2. Percentage of CGCS respondents reporting subjects taught (n=284) ............................ 6
Figure 3. Percentage of CGCS respondents with ELL certification (n=284) ................................ 7
Figure 4. Percentage of CGCS respondents indicating the percentage range of ELL students at
their school (n=250) ........................................................................................................................ 7
Figure 5. Percentage of CGCS respondents selecting statement that best describes ELL
instruction at their school (n=218) .................................................................................................. 9
Figure 6. Percentage of CGCS respondents who feel prepared to implement instructional shifts
required by the common core (n=252)............................................................................................ 9
Figure 7. Percentage of CGCS respondents who feel prepared to use specific strategies to ensure
ELLs meet the common core (n=252) ............................................................................................ 9
Figure 8. Percentage of CGCS respondents ranking factors in order of impact they would have
on their ability to instruct ELLs (n=218) ...................................................................................... 11
Figure 9. Percentage of CGCS respondents rating the impact of the following factors on
improving ELL performance ........................................................................................................ 11
Figure 10. Percentage of CGCS respondents indicating how they choose instructional materials
for ELLs (n=218) .......................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 11. Percentage of CGCS respondents indicating their greatest challenges in selecting and
procuring instructional materials for ELL students (n=218) ........................................................ 13
Figure 12. Percentage of CGCS respondents using various types of instructional materials for
ELL students (n=284) ................................................................................................................... 15
Page ii
Tables
Table 1. Percentage of CGCS respondents who feel prepared to implement the instructional
shifts required by the common core by position/title, 2012 (n=252) ............................................ 10
Table 2. Percentage of CGCS respondents who feel prepared to use specific strategies to ensure
ELLs meet the common core by position/title, 2012 (n=252) ...................................................... 10
Table 3. Percentage of CGCS respondents indicating their greatest challenge in selecting and
procuring ELL instructional materials by the percentage of students considered ELL in school,
2012 (n=216)................................................................................................................................ 14
Page iii
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
22
13
10
7
2
ELL
District-level ELL General ed (e.g.,
teacher/specialist coordinator
classroom)
teacher
Other districtlevel
administrator
School
administrator
(e.g., principal)
Other
40
ESL/ESOL
38
Multiple subjects
33
17
17
English
12
Other
11
Math
Social studies
Science
7
6
Page 6
ESL/ELD license/endorsement
50
ESL/bilingual certification
None
38
19
30
26
23
12
7
3
0-10%
10-30%
30-50%
>50%
I don't know
Not applicable
Page 7
Page 8
63
17
14
Other
Very prepared
Very prepared
10
41
14
13
Prepared
35
Somewhat
prepared
36
14
Prepared
37
Not prepared
Somewhat
prepared
Not prepared
Page 9
17.5
30.8
40.0
11.7
12.0
40.0
36.0
12.0
20.0
40.0
20.0
20.0
3.0
30.3
57.6
9.1
11.8
35.3
52.9
0.0
15.4
40.4
40.4
3.8
Table 2. Percentage of CGCS respondents who feel prepared to use specific strategies to
ensure ELLs meet the common core by position/title, 2012 (n=252)
Somewhat
Very prepared
Prepared
Not prepared
prepared
ELL
19.2
35.0
34.2
11.7
teacher/specialist
General
education
20.0
32.0
28.0
20.0
teacher
School
40.0
40.0
0.0
20.0
administrator
District-level ELL
0.0
36.4
45.5
18.2
coordinator
Other districtlevel
11.8
35.3
47.1
5.9
administrator
Other
7.7
38.5
42.3
11.5
Page 10
40
28
32
23
28
27
27
24
30
25
15
29
28
16
21
22
20
26
26
26
20
24
24
15
17
25
34
14
34
28
42
Low impact
Figure 9. Percentage of CGCS respondents rating the impact of the following factors on
improving ELL performance
Train more general education and content teachers in
ELL strategies (n=203)
57
47
15
41
23
Moderate impact
7 41
32
32
Other (n=59)
High impact
31
13
39
56
13
19
15
52
15
2 2
25
No impact
Page 11
Page 12
46
37
33
32
29
Other
20
17
16
9
34
29
15
14
Page 13
0-10%
10-30%
30-50%
>50%
I don't
know
Not
applicable
4.5
14.9
8.3
25.0
0.0
14.3
40.9
29.9
31.3
21.7
0.0
35.7
22.7
9.0
16.7
13.3
20.0
14.3
4.5
14.9
4.2
6.7
0.0
7.1
27.3
31.3
39.6
33.3
80.0
28.6
Page 14
51
50
48
42
38
32
Online programs
29
25
24
18
Figure 13. Percentage of CGCS respondents rating ELL materials based on how well
materials meet the following criteria
Reflect the rigor required by the Common Core
(n=216)
Are aligned with core general education curriculum
(n=214)
2
6
24
24
57
17
18
56
21
16
48
34
64
13
54
30
11
56
28
Can be used to teach students with different Englishlanguage proficiency levels (n=217)
12
56
54
Somewhat
Well
29
37
Very well
Page 15
2
5
26
12
16
31
25
80%
60%
26
35
High
33
40%
28
Average
42
Low
24
Don't know
20%
23
16
27
14
0%
Basal ESL programs
Supplemental
(n=193)
materials packaged
with core basal
programs (n=194)
Supplemental
materials not
affiliated with any
particular basal
programs (n=191)
Intervention
materials (n=191)
Figure 15. Percentage of CGCS respondents rating ELL instructional materials by content
area
100%
22
13
80%
60%
28
22
18
17
30
33
34
34
High
Average
40%
30
Low
27
Don't Know
20%
40
21
41
42
25
0%
ESL (n=355)
ELA (n=342)
Page 16
11
9
17
80%
25
27
60%
27
24
40%
High
Average
38
Low
Don't know
20%
40
47
23
0%
Elementary K-5 (n=790)
Figure 17. Percentage of CGCS respondents rating ELL instructional materials by levels
of English language proficiency
100%
6
20
15
26
80%
60%
31
High
53
40%
67
Average
Low
Don't Know
35
20%
14
15
14
0%
1 year behind grade level 2 years behind grade
(n=197)
level (n=197)
Page 17
Page 18
New York
Education
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
City
Department
of
Rouge
Parish
School
Page 19