TxEdlif-lever-1
Lever 2

Program Model and Design

Lever 2 Essential Action:


Prioritized emergent bilingual students, a clear language and content allocation plan, and ensures 50% of instruction in partner language.

Txedlif-logo
Lever 2 Success Criteria and Rubric
2.1

DLI program clearly prioritizes serving emergent bilinguals

Mark

2.1.a - Ensure all emergent bilinguals are served in the DLI program either through oneway or two-way DLI classrooms

Mark

2.1.b - Ensure the allocation of space for late-coming emergent bilinguals

Mark

2.1.c - Serve emergent bilinguals in their first language and English with no less than 50% in the partner language at all grade levels

Mark

2.1.d - Encourage emergent bilingual students whose first language is not available in a DLI program to participate in the available DLI program



2.2

A clear DLI model is communicated, implemented, and evaluated

Mark

2.2.a - Establish and communicate to all stakeholders a district-wide DLI model and goals for all participating schools

Mark

2.2.b – The content and language allocation plan is implemented and monitored with fidelity

Mark

2.2.c - Provide metalinguistic and metacognitive connections in both the partner language and English

Mark

2.2.d - Evaluate DLI program based on qualitative and quantitative data in both program languages and biliteracy trajectory data


2.3

Students with different levels of language proficiency have multiple entry points into the DLI program and are encouraged to continue

Mark

2.3.a - Support campuses with DLI program roll-out to begin at PK, K, or 1st and continue each year until fully implemented at 5th or 6th grade

Mark

2.3.b - Ensure reclassified emergent bilinguals continue in DLI program until at least 5th or 6th grade

Mark

2.3.c - Facilitate inclusion of emergent bilingual students (including newcomers) who speak the partner language to participate in DLI program, if available, for all grades PK12

Mark

2.3.d - Show clear evidence of communication and modeling of linguistic equity between the partner language and English, actively integrating families, school, and local communities in this effort

Mark

2.3.e - Support reclassification of some emergent bilingual students but “no” exiting, as they must continue in the DLI program


2.4

Program model ensures high academic achievement in both languages, bilingualism, biliteracy and sociocultural competence

Mark

2.4.a - Plan for, deliver, and seek feedback on linguistically accommodated content instruction that is based on culturally and linguistically sustaining practices, ensures academic & linguistic achievement in both program languages, and supports biliteracy and sociocultural competence

Mark

2.4.b - Promote a district-wide plan for academic & linguistic achievement in both program languages to support biliteracy and sociocultural competence

Mark

2.4.c - Ensure there are opportunities for all stakeholders to be involved and valued in the DLI Program

Mark

2.4.d - Demonstrates alignment and implementation of linguistically appropriate and instructional materials based in culturally and linguistically sustaining practices


2.5

Stakeholders are actively involved in creating a school that values the sociocultural competence of students.

Mark

2.5.a - Provide opportunities for all stakeholders to be involved and valued in the DLI program

Mark

2.5.b - Staff at all levels are actively involved in the creation and implementation of a school-wide plan that addresses the development of sociocultural competency and elevates the understanding of biliteracy development among all stakeholders


2.6

Program model builds on the assets of students’ languages and builds biliteracy development

Mark

2.6.a - Schedule reflects oral and academic literacy and biliteracy development according to the respective model design

Mark

2.6.b - Through an asset-based lens, support students’ linguistic approaches such as translanguaging while maintaining a strict separation of instructional language

Mark

2.6.c - Appropriate allotment of oral and academic language and literacy development time in both languages depending on program model and design

Mark

2.6.d - Model adheres to consistent separation of instructional languages while supporting student’s translanguaging