Language

Program
Review Summary









South Kingstown School District


April 2022

Prepared by Chad Ransom

chadransom@[Link]

Table of Contents

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………2

Review Methods and Data Collection………………………………………………………………………..3

Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………4

Brief Findings Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………..5

Recommendations Summary……………………………………………………………………………………8

Program Review Detail…………………………………………………………………………………………….9

1

Introduction
This program review process utilizes multiple methods to analyze the effectiveness of language
programs and identify areas of improvement. Based on findings from the review, action items are
identified to improve the program implementation. These recommendations provide an initial
starting point in the creation of the program improvement plan. The plan will then be co-created with
the district and relevant stakeholders.

As the largest program in the district, the majority of the discussion below involves an evaluation of
the Dual Language Immersion (DLI) program. Additional information was collected regarding the
current world languages program (secondary level) and the Multilingual Learner (ML) program. The
ML program is considered a low incident program with approximately 50 students enrolled K-12.

Additionally, data were analyzed to determine the community demand and district capacity for
additional language programming at the elementary level. There are a continuum of language
program possibilities that schools might choose to implement. They vary in purpose, resource
requirements, and methodology. The table below outlines that continuum.

Type Foreign Language Foreign Language in Dual Language Immersion
Exploratory (FLEX) Elementary Schools (FLES) (DLI)
Purpose Build cultural and Build some language Develop bilingual and
linguistic awareness. proficiency over the course biliterate students.
Develop interest in further of elementary school.
language study at the
secondary level.
Methodology Typically, one to two Minimum of 30 minutes At least 50% of instruction
sessions per week (ie: per day, often 45-60 (both time and content)
elementary specials). minutes per day. Typically, taught completely in the
Content focuses on basic academic content is taught target language.
phrases, building interest, in the second language
and cultural awareness. (science, social studies,
etc.)
Resource Additional staffing Significantly more staffing Most DLI programs have
Requirement required. required. no additional ongoing
costs.

For families who desire high levels of language proficiency, DLI programs are by far the most effective.
DLI programs are also the most cost effective for school districts. For families who are less interested
in developing bilingualism, FLEX or FLES programs provide the opportunity for robust K-12 language
pathways. Typically, districts implement a FLEX model based on available resources.

2

Review Methods
This review measures how well current programming aligns with standards of high-quality programs.
Standards for the dual immersion program are derived from an exhaustive review of research on
effective programs and are codified in The Guiding Principles for Dual Language Education. The review
process utilizes multiple data sources that are triangulated to ensure the accurate evaluation of each
program standard. These sources include school and classroom observation, individual and group
interviews, stakeholder surveys, and document reviews.

Data Collection
For this review, data were collected through stakeholder surveys, focus group and individual
interviews, classroom and school observations, and a document analysis.

Stakeholder Method Data Collected
Group
Two focus group interviews were conducted with the entire
Focus Group
administrative team.
School and District Individual interviews were conducted with each building
Individual
Leadership principal, the assistant superintendent, and multiple school
Interviews
committee members.
Stakeholder Survey 8 school leaders responded to the staff survey.
Classroom Observations were conducted in almost every elementary
Observations classroom and in every secondary world language class.
Separate teacher focus groups were conducted for the following
groups: West Kingston school improvement team, Peace Dale
school improvement team, all DLI staff, DLI Spanish teachers,
Teachers Focus Groups DLI English teachers, any teacher from Matunuk or Wakefield
elementaries, 6-12 world language teachers, and K-12 ML
teachers. In total, over 80 staff members participated directly in
these groups.
150 staff responded to the stakeholder survey, of which 52
Stakeholder Survey
identified as working in the DLI program.
Two student focus groups were conducted at Broad Rock Middle
Students Focus Group
School. These included time in both English and Spanish.
Two parent stakeholder groups were conducted: (1) the
Focus Groups combined elementary PTO and (2) combined secondary PTOs.
Parents/
In total, approximately 30 parents participated.
Community
479 respondents participated in the parent/community survey.
Stakeholder Survey
Of those, 263 were enrolled in traditional classrooms.
A comprehensive document review was conducted examining
Document Review existing policies, procedures, program documents, and school
committee presentations.

Data were determined to be valid and reliable through three key research structures. First,
triangulation was used to ensure identified themes came from multiple data sources. Second, the
number of participants was well above what would be needed for a valid sample size. Lastly, the point
of saturation was reached during the interview process. At that point, no new themes are presented.

3

Executive Summary
Overview
There are a number of relative strengths within the existing language programming, as well as
opportunities to become more effective. Instructional practices are high across program models and
there is a high degree of support from parents for language programming in general. There are a
number of staffing and other cost saving measures that may be considered. Additionally, the
redistricting process provides a huge opportunity to consider additional configurations that are the
most effective programmatically and the most cost efficient.

There are a number of key improvements that need to be made for the dual immersion program to
continue being successful and address the current divide that exists between program models.
Fortunately, none of the identified areas of need require intensive change. Unfortunately, the
current political climate and past history makes program improvement more complex. The
manner in which the program has been implemented has led to a number of issues that should be
addressed moving forward. Additionally, the lack of communication, transparency, and proactive
planning has perpetuated many misconceptions about the program and fostered conflict between
the dual immersion and traditional programs. Lastly, many of the areas identified in this program
review are connected to broader district needs that are not specific to the dual immersion program.

Opportunities exist to make the existing language programs more efficient and effective, as well as
offer additional elementary language programs for students enrolled in traditional programs.

One Community, One School District
In smaller districts and in schools that have both traditional and dual immersion strands, creating a
unified culture is critical. Transparent and proactive communication presents the advantages and
considerations of all programs. Explicit communication prevents misconceptions and strategic efforts
are made to integrate students, families, and staff. Additionally, leaders and other staff proactively
work to integrate students and families from all programs into a cohesive community of learners.
Regardless of the direction the school committee decides regarding language programming, engaging
in the proactive development of a unified community should be a priority.

The opportunity exists to create multiple language pathways that meet the differing desire of families
in the community. Moving forward, there should be an explicit goal to create one community, one
school district. No decision regarding redistricting or language programs offered will make every
stakeholder happy; nor will they erase past concerns – valid or invalid. The district has the
opportunity to move forward with the program models that will best meet the needs of students,
parent desire for language opportunities, and meet fiscal responsibility.

4

Brief Findings Summary
Relative Strengths Leverage Points
• Effective teaching practices – in both dual • The redistricting process provides a
immersion and traditional elementary number of possible opportunities to
classrooms. better offer language programs in general.
• Strong parent support for the DLI • Low student to teacher ratio in the ML
program. program.
• General parents support for language
programs overall.

Barriers to a Unified School Community
Needs Solutions
• Disproportionality in classes – while • Create enrollment procedures that ensure
being perceived as more significant than balanced classrooms across DLI and
it actually is, there is some evidence that traditional classrooms.
the student population in the dual • Create and follow exit procedures that
immersion program differs in some keep DLI students enrolled in the
grades and at some schools from the program at minimum K-5.
traditional classrooms.
• Cohorts in small schools – having both • This is not uncommon in small schools,
DLI and traditional strands in small but significant effort is required to
schools creates small cohorts of students. develop and maintain integration across
the programs and a positive, cohesive
school culture.
• Transparency and communication – the • Create authentic stakeholder involvement
biggest theme from all stakeholder processes that drive two-way
groups was the lack of communication communication and foster buy-in and
and transparency. involvement.
• Additionally, the lack of communication • Create ongoing communication structures
has created a large amount of that ensure transparency and trust – for
misconceptions and misinformation. (For both DLI and traditional programming.
examples of the most relevant, see pg.
11.)
Many districts consider consolidating similar programs in one building, which greatly reduces some
of the needs presented in this section. As the redistricting process has already concluded, this may
be a future consideration.

Structural Challenges
Needs Solutions
• Assessment and Accountability System • These four needs have been clustered as
• Multi-Year Program Implementation and they represent work that needs to be
Development Plan, including K-12 World completed for the district as a whole, not
Languages Pathways just for the world language programming.
• Program Model Articulation and These systems and plans require some
Curriculum Maps time commitment by affected stakeholder
groups, but little additional resources.
• Leadership - The district has experienced • Consider hiring additional leadership
significant leadership turnover in recent support through already allocated

5

years. This includes both the district and funding or budget neutral staffing shifts
school levels. The number of staff may be available.
currently at the district level is • Train and support building leaders to
insufficient to accomplish the work of a better understand all program models.
district this size. This is not specific to the
world language programs. Additionally,
there is a strong need to support building
leaders in their understanding of all
program models.

Other Efficiency or Cost Saving Opportunities
Needs Solutions
• Efficient scheduling to cluster ML Opportunities for budget savings or cost neutral
students services staffing shifts:
• Examining equitable budget allocations: • The low staff to student ratio in the ML
DLI program materials, Spanish teaching program provides the opportunity to
assistants, etc. consider more efficient scheduling
structures. This could greatly enhance
the current ML program through better
supporting mainstream teachers or the
district may consider utilizing this
opportunity to address some of the
current budgetary needs.
• It appears that there may be additional
Spanish teaching assistants as compared
with the ratio in traditional classrooms.
(This should be verified.). If so, equalizing
teaching assistant ratios would provide
additional opportunities to address
budgetary needs.
• Finalizing the DLI program model will
drive materials needs for the program.
Materials expenditures, per pupil, should
be equal for both DLI and traditional
classrooms.

Opportunities for Additional Language Programming
Language programming should reflect the needs of the community. Currently, the demand for the DLI
program is close to being met. (With clearer entrance and exit criteria, this may be even more the
case.) However, more than half of parents enrolled in traditional programming state it is extremely
important to them that the district offer a different language program for students not in the DLI
program. It is important to note that many of the parents in traditional programming did not want
their child in an immersion model and many do not think that a world language program at the
elementary level is a priority at all.

For those reasons, if the district has the capacity to increase the world language program offerings, it
would be my recommendation to implement a Foreign Language Exploratory (FLEX) program at the
elementary grades for students not enrolled in the DLI program. This would be similar to the itinerant
teacher the district utilized a few years ago. As discussed in more detail below, a common

6

misconception is that by discontinuing the dual immersion program, the district could provide
additional language programming for all students. Discontinuing the DLI program would provide little
cost savings beyond those already realized from the recommendations above. In fact, as the FLEX
program would not be implemented in the DLI classes, the district requires less funding to implement
the program for students in traditional classrooms.

7

Recommendations Summary
The recommendations below are ordered by priority, but are not all linear or sequential. This is meant
to be the starting point for co-creating a plan with the district based on their priorities, available
resources, and other contextualized factors. Additionally, the process for completing the tasks is very
context dependent. When possible, it is our recommendation that it should follow a process where
leadership explores the topic first to determine boundaries and then the work is co-completed by the
teachers and administrators (and parents when appropriate).

Summary Steps

1
Finalize and codify the program models, benchmarks, assurances, policies,
and procedures. This would include the implementation of any other
language programming options and finalized K-12 pathways articulated.

Develop a multi-year plan for program implementation and ongoing

2 improvement. There is a high priority to complete the necessary

development for 7/8 dual immersion program implementation and create
initial plans for the high school.

3 Create equitable budget expenditures across program models.

4 Establish a comprehensive assessment and accountability system.

5 Create vertical and horizontal curriculum maps.

6
Engage in ongoing and sustained communication to address
misconceptions, report on program outcomes, and work to bridge the
divide that exists between programs.

7 Ensure sufficient leadership staffing and understanding to support the

ongoing work for all programs.

8

Program Review Detail

Current Dual Immersion Program
While there are a number of identified areas of need, the dual immersion program also has a number
of strengths. Overall teacher practices are high-quality. Overall instructional quality was high across
all elementary classrooms at the district. This cannot be understated and is a strong foundation from
which to build ongoing improvement work. Additionally, the dual immersion staff are generally
knowledgeable about dual immersion pedagogy and program methodology. While challenging, the
district has also been able to successfully recruit teachers with native or very high levels of Spanish
proficiency.

Another strength is the strong support from parents within the
program. Parents are generally satisfied with the program, with
84% saying they are very likely to recommend the program to
other parents. Additionally, parents generally feel the district does
a good job partnering with families in support of students. Ninety
three percent of parents in the dual immersion program indicate
that the district does extremely or somewhat well in that category,
while 82% of parents in traditional classrooms feel the same.
Overall, while communication is parent’s biggest area of concern
generally (discussed more below), the main area of dissatisfaction
for parents in the dual immersion program is the lack of long-term
planning and especially the implementation at the secondary level.

Disproportionality
Disproportionality between the dual immersion and traditional classrooms may be the most important
issue to address in the program, as it lies at the root of many other programmatic issues and much of
the tension between the traditional and dual immersion programs. There is some evidence that the
student population in the dual immersion program differs in some grades and at some schools from
the traditional classrooms. This is a significant issue as it prevents accurate analysis of program
effectiveness, perpetuates the perception that dual immersion is an elitist program, and causes
unnecessary burdens on traditional classrooms. It should be noted that the perception of many about
the degree of disproportionality is exaggerated, but it is an issue that should be addressed.

This issue is easily solved (moving forward) by developing entrance procedures that create
balanced classrooms across the district and developing a clear exit policy that prevents students
from being moved to traditional classrooms except under the most extreme circumstances.
Examples can be drawn from many other programs. It should be noted that this was a
recommendation in October 2019 as well. By balancing classrooms entering Kindergarten the district
better follows its existing policy (8135) and allows for ongoing program evaluation by starting with
comparative groups of students.

Students should not be exited from a dual immersion program unless they are diagnosed with a
disability that is exacerbated by the program model (ie: an auditory processing disorder). Otherwise,
it is expected that some students will need additional academic support, as the program enrolls a
range of students. That support would be provided regardless of programming. Additionally, there is
significant research indicating that students who exit a dual immersion program almost never perform
better after exiting. Again, it should be noted that the perception of this issue is much greater than
evidence suggests. As reported in the Feb. 8th, 2022 school committee meeting, few students have

9

exited the program each year and only 5 of those have moved from dual immersion to a traditional
classroom in the district over the last 7 years.

This issue should also be addressed as soon as possible, given the district’s new initiative to cluster
students with Individual Education Plans (IEPs), which has the potential to further stratify classrooms.

Cohorts and Small Schools
The second most pressing issue identified in this review is the implementation of dual immersion
strands within small schools. By default, this creates cohorts of students that remain together for
multiple years and may be fairly isolated from one another. This issue is amplified when the
disproportionality issue above is not addressed. While it is not uncommon in other dual immersion
programs that operate as strands to have small cohort sizes, special attention is paid to ensure
integration across the school. This includes whole school events, parent involvement, recess, specials
(ie: art, music), intervention and enrichment activities, etc. This has not been addressed for a number
of years.

This is an important issue for the district to consider immediately with the current redistricting
process. There has been some discussion about having a strand of dual immersion at all three schools.
Additionally, many participants identified the option of having one magnet school to house the dual
immersion program as an additional alternative. This possibility is discussed in more detail below.

Pending decisions regarding redistricting, explicit effort must be made to create cohesive school
cultures that recognize and value the various programs, staff, and students in a building.

Transparency and Communication
By far the two biggest themes that emerged across all
stakeholder groups and spanning every program and school
were district communication and the lack of long-term
planning. It is important to note that this is not specific to
the dual immersion program. Forty one percent of all
parents responded that they were dissatisfied with the level
of district and school communication. The overall lack of
communication and a coherent long-term plan have created
a lack of trust and fostered misconceptions and animosity
between parents and staff.

Again, the solutions to these issues are fairly straightforward: create ongoing communication
structures that ensure transparency and trust and create a coherent long-term plan for the dual
immersion program, other language offerings, and the broader district as a whole. Unfortunately, the
last few years have created a great need for this work and it will take time to bridge the divide that has
been created.

It is important to note some of the common misconceptions heard through the interview and survey
process. Many of these misconceptions have driven animosity towards the dual immersion program
and should be explicitly addressed as part of the ongoing communication work.

10

Frequently Heard Misconceptions
While true that districts often spend some initial startup costs when implementing a new
The dual immersion program program, they often spend less on dual immersion students in the long run. There was a report
costs lots of money and that provided to the school committee on February 8th, 2022 that indicates additional costs for the
money should be used for all dual immersion program. However, those costs are not compared to general district spending on
students all students. If there are not equivalent expenditures related to paraprofessionals in traditional
classrooms, then the district should consider equaling those costs.
Connected to the first misconception, ending the dual immersion program would not provide
The money for dual immersion additional money for other language programs. Should the district desire to add foreign language
should be spent on providing at the elementary level for all students, additional staff would need to be hired. In fact, having the
language opportunities for all dual immersion program reduces the amount of additional staff, as those classrooms would not
elementary students. receive that additional program. If Spanish paraprofessionals are an additional costs not shared
by traditional classrooms, then that funding could be moved to provide an itinerant language
teacher.
Although we dug into each of these issues, it was hard to find evidence to support any of these
misconceptions. It appears straightforward that Wakefield is being closed for budgetary reasons.
The dual immersion program
When asked about science and social studies in traditional classrooms, those teachers said they
has caused the closure of
do still teach them. Some did say that the district focus on dual immersion has led to less focus on
Wakefield Elementary School,
other areas. However, we found little leadership time focused on the dual immersion program
reduced the amount of science
that would not be spent providing leadership for any teacher in their buildings. It seems that a
and social studies taught to all
number of factors have contributed over the last few years, most importantly the pandemic and
students, and “was the start of
the multiple changes of leadership. One of the PTO officers, whose children are not in the dual
the great decline of the whole
immersion program, summed up their discussion on this issue in this way: “Many district issues
district.”
have been viewed as being a DLI problem, they’re not. The issues are communication,
transparency, and planning…trust with the district is the issue. It’s not a DLI thing at all.”
As noted above, the dual immersion program was not available to all families in its inception.
However, the misconception is that all students should receive all of the same programming.
Having the same opportunity to participate is not the same as everyone participating. It is also
Every student should be
important to note that not all families want their child in the dual immersion program. Twenty
provided the same
five percent of parents say they did not want that for their child with an additional 15% stating
opportunities.
that they did not have enough information to decide. Additionally, schools have many programs
that are either chosen by families or prescribed based on need that all students do not participate
in: strings, sports, gifted and talented services, academic interventions, etc.
The dual immersion program There is clear research that students in dual immersion program perform as well or better than
is an “extra” program and we similar peers and there is no need to ensure mastery of content before introducing a second
should be ensuring students language. This connects with the misconception that the program should only be for “high”
can read before teaching them students. In fact, the program is effective with all students and the enrollment policy should
a second language. ensure balanced classes that make the program available to all students in the community.
While it is true that there are a number of areas of need, this exists within any program. It is
inaccurate to say that the current program is broken. Only 6.7% of parents in the program
indicate they are not satisfied with their child’s level of bilingualism and only 1.4% indicate their
The dual immersion program
child’s overall achievement does not meet their expectations. In fact, a significantly higher
is completely broken and there
amount of parents in traditional programs state their child’s academic achievement does not
is no way to fix it.
meet their expectations (9%). Working to implement the recommendations in this review will
take time and especially leadership to guide the process, but most of the necessary changes are
easily implemented.
Both of these were presented by stakeholders. There is little evidence that either is accurate. It
appears that a few families did specifically move to the area for the dual immersion program, but
The dual immersion program not a huge number. (Estimates are between 2-5 on any given year.). We could find no evidence
has increased / decreased that families left the district because of the dual immersion program. (Over the last 7 years, there
enrollment in the district. were 16 students who transferred to other school districts in Rhode Island, but it is unclear why.)
It should be noted that in other places, districts have seen increasing enrollment from
neighboring districts because of their DLI program.
The current 6th grade teacher did an excellent job addressing this misconception with the high
Students in the dual school teacher. As part of the review, we also conducted student focus groups and spent part of
immersion program in 6th the time in Spanish. Students are not as high as they could be, but they are well above the
grade can’t even read in misconception presented here. Additionally, parents in the DLI program are generally satisfied
Spanish with their child’s level of bilingualism with 93% of parents stating they are extremely or
somewhat satisfied with the results so far.

11


It is also important to note the issues identified through the review process that have created
animosity and are accurate. These include the disproportionality issue raised above. Another issue
that has rightly created animosity among staff is how teachers were hired or lost their jobs in the past
to make room for the program. While this cannot be changed now, it is important to recognize the
divide that created and to ensure that does not happen in the future. Additionally, there are a
number of misconceptions that persist, even though the district has addressed them. For example, the
program was not truly available to all families when it started, because transportation was not
provided. Although this has been changed, the misconception persists.

Assessment and Accountability System
Essential to creating transparency is the development of a clear assessment and accountability system.
Targets for student outcomes should be identified for the dual immersion and other programs. These
targets need to reflect research on expected program outcomes to create a series of benchmarks
across the course of the program. The assessment system then reflects what needs to be measured for
those outcomes at each grade level. Ultimately, program evaluation data that includes students’
academic achievement, language acquisition, and cross-cultural competencies should be reported
publicly on an annual basis.

Additionally, this system ensures effective interventions and supports for students so that the exit
policy described above can be enforced. Parents receive timely information about their child’s
progress and teachers have the data needed to inform their instruction.

Multi-Year Program Implementation and Development Plan
Data from the assessment system and program review need to be used to create ongoing program
implementation and improvement plans. This process should include representatives from each
stakeholder group and involve opportunities for broader input. At this point in time, the most
important plans involve implementing the dual immersion program at the secondary level. A
comprehensive plan should already be in place to extend the program through the high school and
involve multiple years to design any needed courses, hire staff, and develop curriculum. There also
exists a great potential resource to assist with that pathway at the University of Rhode Island. Given
the planned use of Project Lead the Way courses at Curtis Corner, there is a strong opportunity to
connect with the University of Rhode Island’s International Engineering and other international
programs. Concurrent enrollment courses and other connections would provide the opportunity for
an excellent secondary program.

Current programming at Broad Rock Middle School is very limited. Students in 5th grade only receive
90 minutes of Spanish per day and it is not focused on Spanish literacy development. Planned
programming at Curtis Corner would be one period every day for the year and one period every other
day for a semester. That would equate to less than one period per day for the year. At the middle
school level, most programs implement two periods per day. It will be important to consider what
secondary programming should look like in the future and create a long-term plan for that
implementation.

As noted in a past superintendent report to the school committee (October 2019) a long-term
commitment to the program is essential for its success. Many families and staff mentioned the ongoing
cycles of defending the program and trying to ensure it remains. This volatility has also increased the
animosity between program models. Having a long-term commitment and plan for ongoing
implementation decreases those issues significantly.

12

Program Model Articulation and Curriculum Maps
Dual immersion staff indicate the development of a comprehensive program model and curriculum
mapping as the two most needed areas of improvement. A clearly articulated program model drives
the assessment and accountability system and ensures program efficacy. Curriculum maps are critical
to dual immersion programs, as curriculum looks different in an immersion setting than in traditional
classrooms. Teachers cannot follow the same map as their colleagues, nor that which is provided by
the adopted curriculum materials. Those materials are designed for monolingual instruction and must
be adapted to meet the needs of immersion students. The map also ensures cross-linguistic transfer
and coordination between languages in the program.

It is important to note that as with many of the recommendations in this report, mapping curriculum is
a broader district need that has been identified by both leadership and staff across programs.

Leadership
The district has experienced significant leadership turnover in recent years. This includes both the
district and school levels. It is conceivable that much of the poor program implementation can be
directly tied to this lack of leadership. Leadership capacity and leadership understanding/support of
program models are critical needs within the program. Only 13% of staff and 39% of parents believe
the program has effective leadership.

Currently, the number of staff at the district level is too few to engage in program development and
ongoing improvement. This is not specific to the dual immersion program. It would be virtually
impossible for a district office consisting of a superintendent and one assistant superintendent to
manage all of the curriculum, instruction, assessment, and program needs within any district this size.
Simply stated, the district needs additional leadership capacity to support their work in all areas.
This could be solved by re-hiring a language program coordinator or the district may consider other
broader job duties that support aspects of curriculum and instruction across program models.

Second, and just as critical, is the understanding and support of language programs by district and
school administrators. All leaders interviewed readily offered that they do not have expertise in dual
immersion programming. This is completely expected given they have received no training or support
in the program model previously. Many perceptions related to the dual immersion program appear to
be based on misconceptions regarding the model and program components. It is important to note
that some are relevant to the disproportionality and other issues mentioned. There also has been little
leadership work to bridge the dual immersion and traditional programs.

Current World Language Program
The current world languages program begins in middle school and continues through the end of high
school. Tracks or partial tracks are available for Spanish, French, and Italian. An elementary Spanish
program was introduced for one year, but then discontinued. Both parents and faculty cite that year as
one of the few years “the district felt more unified.” Approximately 2/3 of existing high school
students take a foreign language at some point during their high school career, with around ½ being
enrolled during any given semester.

Approximately 47% of all parents indicate that the current language offerings at the secondary level do
not meet the needs of the community. World language teachers have identified the biggest need in the
program as creating clear vertical pathways for each language that are consistent from school to
school. Over the last several years, the types of courses and which languages were available have
shifted at the middle school level.

13


Opportunities for Additional Language Programming
When considering language programming opportunities, it is important to analyze the community’s
desire for those services. Family preferences ranges from full immersion to basic exposure to a
preference of not having any language opportunities. Only 60% of families indicate that they wanted
to participate in the dual immersion program before enrolling in kindergarten. Currently, almost 40%
of K-4 students are enrolled in the program. While this does not capture all families who are
interested, it is a very high proportion. Almost no program is able to admit every family who is
interested and there are many other important considerations regarding the size of the program.
Small schools (as mentioned above) and the relative size of the school district are important factors.
Successful programs start small and expand as there are opportunities for increased staffing.

Of those who are not enrolled in the dual immersion
program, 56% say that it is extremely important to
offer some other form of language opportunity at the
elementary level. Most comments in the survey, as
well as through the stakeholder groups, suggested
providing additional language exposure through an
itinerant teacher, similar to what the district
provided a few years ago. As noted above, the dual
immersion program facilitates this option by
requiring less staffing to provide this programming.

As mentioned above, the idea of shifting the dual immersion strands into one school was brought up by
several stakeholder groups. Many districts consider this option as it provides more efficiency in
programming, decreases conflict and perceived differences between traditional and dual immersion
programs, and more easily fosters strong, cohesive school cultures for all schools. Unfortunately, this
work has not been connected with the redistricting process. From past experience, it is unlikely that
transportation costs would be significantly different than the current model. It also facilitates an
itinerant language teacher, as they would have only two schools to travel to, rather than three. Other
services are often similarly more efficient.

K-12 World Language Pathways
Regardless of the district decision regarding the addition of additional language offerings at the
elementary level, there is a significant need to map the language pathways offered by the district to
ensure coherence and alignment. This work is not time intensive and can be accomplished with the
current world language staff during professional development time. The work involves course
sequencing, setting end of course benchmarks, curriculum and assessment alignment, and the
development of shared instructional practices.

Multilingual Learner (ML) Program
There are currently four ML staff in the district: one at the high school, one at Broad Rock Middle
School, one at Curtis Corner Middle School, and one that travels among the elementary schools. There
are currently 46 active ML students. As a low incidence district, a current strength is the low teacher
to student ratio. This supports the large amount of second languages as well as covering many
different buildings. The high ratio also allows for flexibility in program design and scheduling.

Codify Program Model
As highlighted by current staff, the program model and various program components are not codified
in a way that ensures consistency in meeting state requirements and facilitates efficiency in services

14

provided. These program documents need not be overly prescriptive, but provide common
understandings for ML staff, administrators, and teachers as to service requirements and
programming expectations. While outlining the legal requirements for ML services (ie: enrollment,
program model, etc.), they also articulate district specific structures that increase efficiency and
effectiveness within the program. For example, at the secondary level, the program model articulates
the course sequence provided to newcomer students in a way that leverages available resources to
best meet the needs of ML students.

Efficient Scheduling to Cluster Students for Services
One key area of this process would be to maximize ML staff expertise and time in meeting the needs of
ML students. With more standardized programming, it is possible that the district could better meet
the English Language Development (ELD) service requirements for ML students and provide more
intensive support. Ensuring consistent ELD scheduling and clustering of students in specific courses
may allow for additional programming possibilities. These could greatly enhance the current ML
program through better supporting mainstream teachers or the district may consider utilizing this
opportunity to address some of the current budgetary needs.

Additionally, there needs to be a consistent policy regarding new ML students and the dual immersion
program. The program review process uncovered that this has not been consistent in the past and
there were native Spanish-speaking students who were not placed in the dual program and some who
were. Additionally, some speakers of other languages were automatically placed in the program. A
consistent policy needs to be established that leverages the dual immersion program to meet the needs
of Spanish-speaking newcomers (for example, the district just enrolled 5 new Spanish-speakers that
should all be placed in the program). This reduces the number of ML students that need additional
ELD services and maximizes ML staff time.

Supporting Mainstream Teachers
Ultimately, the majority of ML students’ time takes place in mainstream classrooms. In order for them
to be effective, mainstream teachers need to utilize linguistically appropriate instructional practices to
ensure their success in meeting content standards. As a low incidence district, this recommendation
has less of a priority than the others mentioned previously. Considerations around clustering students
for ELD services may also help in targeting support to specific mainstream teachers.

15