Request for Information To Gather Technical Expertise Pertaining to the Identification and Placement of Native American Students Who Are English Learners in Language Instruction Educational Programs, 14084-14087 [2013-04819]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
14084
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2013 / Notices
soliciting comments on the proposed
information collection request (ICR) that
is described below. The Department of
Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
Title of Collection: Direct Loan, FFEL,
Perkins and TEACH Grant Total and
Permanent Disability Discharge Forms.
OMB Control Number: 1845–0065.
Type of Review: a revision of a
currently approved information
collection.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Individuals or households.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 254,800.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 127,400.
Abstract: The Discharge Application:
Total and Permanent Disability serves as
the means by which an individual who
is totally and permanently disabled, as
defined in section 437(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended,
applies for discharge of his or her Direct
Loan, FFEL, or Perkins loan program
loans, or TEACH Grant service
obligation. The form collects the
information that is needed by the U.S.
Department of Education (the
Department) to determine the
individual’s eligibility for discharge
based on total and permanent disability.
The Total and Permanent Disability
Discharge: Post-Discharge Monitoring
form serves as the means by which an
individual who has received a total and
permanent disability discharge provides
the Department with information about
his or her annual earnings from
employment during the 3-year postdischarge monitoring period that begins
on the date of discharge. The Total and
Permanent Disability Discharge:
Applicant Representative Designation
form serves as the means by which an
applicant for a total and permanent
disability discharge may (1) designate a
representative to act on his or her behalf
in connection with the applicant’s
discharge request, (2) change a
previously designated representative, or
(3) revoke a previous designation of a
representative.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Mar 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
Dated: February 26, 2013.
Stephanie Valentine,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and
Records Management Services, Office of
Management.
[FR Doc. 2013–04883 Filed 3–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket ID: ED–2013–OESE–0016]
Request for Information To Gather
Technical Expertise Pertaining to the
Identification and Placement of Native
American Students Who Are English
Learners in Language Instruction
Educational Programs
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, U.S. Department
of Education.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Education (the Department) requests
information about practices used to
accurately identify Native American
students in grades K–12 as English
learners and to appropriately place
these students in language instruction
educational programs (LIEPs). The
Department makes this request to help
State educational agencies (SEAs), local
educational agencies (LEAs), schools,
tribes, and other interested entities
identify, share, and implement practices
for accurately identifying Native
American students who are English
learners.
SUMMARY:
Written submissions must be
received by the Department on or before
5:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on May
3, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments by fax or by email. To ensure
that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only
once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID and the term ‘‘Identification
of English Learner Native American
Students response’’ at the top of your
comments.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket, is available on the
site under ‘‘Are you new to this site?’’
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments, address them to
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Supreet Anand, Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education, Attention:
Native American English Learner RFI,
U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW., room 3W106,
Washington, DC 20202–6132.
• Privacy Note: The Department’s
policy for comments received from
members of the public (including
comments submitted by mail,
commercial delivery, or hand delivery)
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing in their entirety on
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only
information that they wish to make
publicly available on the Internet.
Submission of Proprietary Information:
Given the subject matter, some
comments may include proprietary
information as it relates to confidential
commercial information. The Freedom
of Information Act defines ‘‘confidential
commercial information’’ as information
the disclosure of which could
reasonably be expected to cause
substantial competitive harm. You may
wish to request that we not disclose
what you regard as confidential
commercial information.
To assist us in making a
determination on your request, we
encourage you to identify in your
comments any specific information that
you consider confidential commercial
information. Please list the information
by page and paragraph numbers.
This Request for Information (RFI) is
issued solely for information and
planning purposes and is not a request
for proposals (RFPs) or a promise to
issue an RFP or a notice inviting
applications. This RFI does not commit
the Department to contract for any
supply or service. Further, the
Department is not now seeking
proposals and will not accept
unsolicited proposals. The Department
will not pay for any information or
administrative costs that you may incur
in responding to this RFI.
If you do not respond to this RFI, you
may still apply for future contracts and
grants. The Department posts RFPs on
the Federal Business Opportunities Web
site (www.fbo.gov). The Department
announces grant competitions in the
Federal Register (www.gpo.gov/fdsys). It
is your responsibility to monitor these
sites to determine whether the
Department issues an RFP or notice
inviting applications after considering
the information received in response to
this RFI.
The documents and information
submitted in response to this RFI
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2013 / Notices
become the property of the U.S.
Government and will not be returned.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Supreet Anand, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
room 3W106, Washington, DC 20202–
6132. Telephone: 202–401–9795.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Introduction
The purpose of title III, part A of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) is to
help ensure that children who are
limited English proficient (LEP) attain
English language proficiency and meet
the same State academic content and
achievement standards all children are
expected to meet. One of the President’s
education goals is for American
students, including Native American
students, to be first in the world in
college completion by 2020.
At present, however, Native American
students, compared to non-Native
American peers, face substantial
achievement gaps (U.S. Department of
Education, November 30, 2011). The
National Caucus of Native American
State Legislators has described the state
of education for Native American
students as ‘‘distressing,’’ pointing to
academic achievement that is two to
three years behind that of their white
peers, high dropout and expulsion rates,
and low college-completion rates
(National Caucus of Native American
State Legislators, 2008). On the 2011
National Assessment of Educational
Progress, for example, Native American
students in grade four performed lower
in reading than any other group of
students. Native American students also
have higher dropout rates than other
students. According to the 2010
American Community Survey, the
percentage of dropouts for ages 16
through 24 was 14.9 percent for Native
American students compared with 5.1
percent for white students and 9.1
percent for black students (Institute of
Education Sciences, American
Community Survey).
With this RFI the Department is
taking several steps to collect
information and gather suggestions to
help SEAs, LEAs, schools, tribes, and
other entities identify, share, and
implement practices for accurately
identifying Native American students
who are English learners so that more
Native American students will be
college- and career-ready.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Mar 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
First, we pose a series of questions—
to which we invite interested members
of the public to respond—about
identifying Native American students as
English learners.
Second, the Department will host a
Web dialogue and conference call
during which external experts and the
public can engage in further discussion
on accurate identification of Native
American English learners.
Third, the Department will make
available to the public the information
collected from this RFI and the Web
dialogue and conference call, as well as
other resources identified by external
experts participating in the Web
dialogue and conference call.
2. Definitions
The following definitions apply to
this RFI. Statutory definitions are
indicated by the citation at the end of
the definition.
English learner means a student who
is limited English proficient.
Limited English proficient (LEP)
means an individual—
(A) Who is aged 3 through 21;
(B) Who is enrolled or preparing to
enroll in an elementary school or
secondary school;
(C)(i) Who was not born in the United
States or whose native language is a
language other than English;
(ii)(I) Who is a Native American or
Alaska Native or a native resident of the
outlying areas; and
(II) Who comes from an environment
where a language other than English has
had a significant impact on the
individual’s level of English language
proficiency; or
(iii) Who is migratory, whose native
language is a language other than
English, and who comes from an
environment where a language other
than English is dominant; and
(D) Whose difficulties in speaking,
reading, writing, or understanding the
English language may be sufficient to
deny the individual—
(i) The ability to meet the State’s
proficient level of achievement on State
assessments described in section
1111(b)(3) of the ESEA;
(ii) The ability to successfully achieve
in classrooms where the language of
instruction is English; or
(iii) The opportunity to participate
fully in society. (section 9101(25) of the
ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7801(25)) (emphasis
added).
Native American means an individual
who is Indian, Alaska Native, Native
Hawaiian, Native American Pacific
Islander, or a native resident of the
outlying areas (20 U.S.C. 7801(25) and
(28); 20 U.S.C. 7491(3); 25 U.S.C. 2902).
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14085
3. Discussion
In this RFI we specifically inquire
into practices regarding: (1) Accurate
initial identification of Native American
students who are English learners; (2)
the use of a survey of primary or home
language other than English (PHLOTE
survey), as well as other methods, in
identifying Native American students as
potential English learners for the
purpose of placement in a LIEP; (3) the
use of multi-step processes for
identifying Native American English
learners; and (4) defining significant
impact of a Native American language
on English language proficiency and
implementing that definition for
determination of English language
proficiency.
To be eligible as LEP under the ESEA,
Native American students must not only
meet the significant impact requirement
in section 9101(25)(C)(ii) of the ESEA;
they must also meet the eligibility
requirement in subparagraph (D) of that
section. In this RFI we focus on the
significant impact requirement.
Accurate identification of English
learner students is essential to ensure
that these students receive the services
necessary to meaningfully access an
educational program, as required under
title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(Civil Rights Act), and the services for
which they are eligible under title III,
part A of the ESEA. Under the ESEA
and title VI, Native American students
who come from an environment in
which a language other than English has
had a significant impact on English
language proficiency may be identified
as English learners. Even if a Native
American child does not speak the
language of his or her tribe, this
language may still have a significant
impact on his or her English mastery
(Leap, 1993). Language impact may
manifest itself in the way a student
constructs meaning or applies syntax or
vocabulary.
All States at the very least
recommend, if not require, the use of a
PHLOTE survey as a first step in
identifying which students may need to
take an English language proficiency
assessment (Bailey and Kelly, 2010). A
student’s performance on that
assessment helps determine whether
she or he is identified as an English
learner student. Any methods used to
identify Native American students as
English learners must be objective,
valid, and reliable. This includes both
initial identification as English learners
and identification after an initial
identification as non-English learners
based on academic performance.
Section 3302(f) of the ESEA provides
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
14086
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2013 / Notices
that a child not be admitted to, or
excluded from, any federally assisted
education program on the basis of a
surname or language-minority status.
Researchers including Bailey and
Kelly (2010) have pointed to the great
variability in the use of PHLOTE
surveys, both across and within States,
thereby calling into question the
validity of the process for identifying
students as English learners. Some
States permit local variability in the
questions included in the PHLOTE
survey. As PHLOTE surveys are
individually and locally administered,
the variability in their administration is
also great. Families may vary their
responses to these surveys, indicating in
one year that a language other than
English is spoken at home and, in
another year that it is not.
Use of PHLOTE surveys with Native
American students is particularly
complex due to the current status of
many Native American languages; e.g.,
the child may not speak the language in
the home but may have a relative who
does, or may have grown up in an
environment in which the syntax,
rhetorical style, and sociolinguistic
patterns reflect the significant impact of
the language. Additionally, among some
communities, there may be a hesitancy
to disclose Native American heritage or
use of a Native American language
(Weaver, 2001). As a result of these
factors, Native American students may
be incorrectly identified as English
learners or as non-English learners upon
their entry into school, and educators
may find at a later point in a child’s
educational career that she or he has not
been appropriately placed in a LIEP, or
in a mainstream classroom with
supports, as needed.
Under title VI of the Civil Rights Act
and related requirements, school
districts must provide meaningful
access to educational programs for
children who are English learners.
Further, the Office for Civil Rights
memorandum of May 25, 1970, states
that:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Where inability to speak and understand
the English language excludes national
origin-minority group children from effective
participation in the educational program
offered by a school district, the district must
take affirmative steps to rectify the language
deficiency in order to open its instructional
program to these students.
‘‘Identification of Discrimination and
Denial of Services on the Basis of
National Origin,’’ Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, 35 FR 11,595
(July 18, 1970).
Accurate identification of students as
English learners is critical to
compliance with the requirements (1) to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Mar 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
properly serve and identify English
learners under title VI of the Civil Rights
Act and (2) to provide appropriate
services under title III, part A of the
ESEA.
Accordingly, SEAs, LEAs, and schools
have an interest in, and must share
responsibility for, developing and
implementing practices that correctly
identify all students, including Native
American students, who are English
learners. According to the 2010 U.S.
Census, 5.2 million Americans identify
themselves as Native American. This is
an increase of 1.1 million since the 2000
Census. The 2010 Census also indicates
that 28 percent of Native Americans
ages 5 and older speak a language other
than English at home, as compared to 21
percent of the population of the Nation
as a whole. Recent estimates indicate
that approximately 200 Native
American languages are ‘‘living
languages’’; i.e., currently spoken
(Bright, 2004; Encyclopedia Britannica,
2012).
Due to its responsibilities under title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
title I, part A and title III, part A of the
ESEA, the Department also has a role in
supporting development and
implementation of practices that
correctly identify students, including
Native American students, as English
learners. For these reasons this RFI
seeks solutions; advice; technical
information; legal, regulatory, and
policy approaches; and other
information from the public about
practices for accurately identifying
Native American students who are
English learners. Through this RFI, the
Department also seeks to gather
information and suggestions for SEAs,
LEAs, and schools on how to address
these issues. The Department welcomes
input from SEAs, LEAs, and schools, as
well as from tribes, researchers, and
other organizations or individuals.
In addition, the Department will host
a Web dialogue and conference call to
engage external experts in an in-depth
discussion about these issues.
Responses to the RFI will be shared
with the external experts and the public
to inform the planning for the Web
dialogue and conference call. Following
the initial Web dialogue and conference
call, the Department will decide the
format and process through which to
make available the collected public
input. This format could include an
online link to all submissions, a
document summarizing this
information, a question-and-answer
document to be posted on the
Department’s Web site, further
Webinars, or other methods.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4. Context for Responses
4.1 The primary goal of this RFI is
to gather information that will help
SEAs and LEAs better understand
existing practices for identifying Native
American students who are English
learners. Because the questions in
section 4.2 of this notice are only guides
to helping us better understand the
issues surrounding identification of
Native American students who are
English learners, you do not have to
respond to any specific question. You
may provide comments in any
convenient format. You may also
provide relevant information that is not
responsive to a particular question but
may, nevertheless, be helpful.
4.2 Questions Regarding the
Identification of Native American
Students Who are English Learners
4.2.1 Practices and Policies. What are
the practices and policies that SEAs and
LEAs have implemented for accurate
initial identification of Native American
students who are English learners? In
the case of Native American students
who may have been misidentified as
English learners or non-English learners,
describe the practices and policies that
SEAs and LEAs have implemented to
accurately identify these students? In
the case of Native American students
with disabilities who may have been
misidentified as English learners or nonEnglish learners, describe the practices
and policies that SEAs and LEAs have
implemented to accurately identify
these students.
What guidance have the SEAs and
LEAs provided regarding accurate
identification of Native American
English learners? What evidence exists
that these are practices that result in
accurate identification of Native
American students who are English
learners? Where have these practices
been adopted? What are the general
lessons learned from these adoptions?
How might these practices be modified
and improved for use in the future? Are
there barriers to the adoption of these
practices at the SEA, LEA, or school
level? Are any of these practices
promising? If so, please describe the
practices, as well as evidence to support
that they are promising.
4.2.2 Defining Significant Impact of
a Language Other Than English on
English Language Proficiency. To be
eligible as English learners, Native
American students must come ‘‘from an
environment where a language other
than English has had a significant
impact on the individual’s level of
English language proficiency’’ (section
9101(25) of the ESEA). How does the
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2013 / Notices
SEA, LEA, or school define and
implement significant impact of a
language other than English on English
language proficiency? What are the
factors that determine the number of
generations that are affected by this
significant impact? How sensitive are
current English language proficiency
assessment instruments in measuring
the significant impact of an
environment in which a language other
than English is spoken? What trends or
patterns have SEAs, LEAs, schools, or
tribes observed regarding the
identification of Native American
students as English learners and the
progress of these students in acquiring
English and attaining English
proficiency?
4.2.3 PHLOTE Surveys. How do
SEAs and LEAs frame questions on
PHLOTE surveys to ascertain that a
language other than English has had a
significant impact on a student’s level of
English language proficiency? What are
the practices and policies with regard to
PHLOTE surveys that SEAs and LEAs
have used to accurately identify Native
American students who are English
learners? Are any of these practices
promising? If so, please describe the
practices, as well as evidence to support
that they are promising.
4.2.4 Multi-Step Process for
Identifying Native American English
Learners. Several States have indicated
that they use a multi-step process to
identify Native American English
learners, such as interviewing a parent
after completion of the PHLOTE survey
or using a teacher language-observation
checklist to verify a child’s language
needs. What are the multi-step
processes used in the State, LEA, or
school, including the components,
timeline, and roles and responsibilities
of individuals who assist with
identification of students?
What evidence or research exists to
support that a multi-step process is
effective in accurately identifying
Native American English learner
students? What steps or considerations
in a multi-step process are of value in
evaluating Native American students
who are English learners and who have
or may be suspected of having
disabilities; e.g., hearing impairment,
particularly in the younger age range
when eligibility evaluations for special
education services are often conducted?
What are the benefits and drawbacks of
using a multi-step process? What are the
roles of parents and community
members in assisting with identification
of these students as English learners?
Are there barriers to the adoption of
these practices at the SEA, LEA, or
school level?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Mar 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register
and the Code of Federal Regulations is
available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you
can view this document, as well as all
other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6801–6871.
Dated: February 26, 2013.
Deborah S. Delisle,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education.
References
Frm 00017
American Community Survey (ACS)
2010. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/
programs/coe/tables/table-sde-2.asp.
Leap, W.L. (1993). American Indian English.
Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah
Press.
National Caucus of Native American State
Legislators. (2008). Striving to Achieve
Helping Native American Students
Succeed. Retrieved from Retrieved from
www.ncsl.org/print/statetribe/
strivingtoachieve.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education. (November 30,
2011). Tribal Leaders Speak: The State of
American Indian Education, 2010.
Retrieved from www.ed.gov/edblogs/
whiaiane/files/2012/04/Tribal-LeadersSpeak-2010.pdf.
United States Census (nd). American Indians
by the Numbers. Retrieved from
www.infoplease.com/spot/
aihmcensus1.html.
Weaver, H. N. (2001). Indigenous Identity:
What is it and Who Really Has it? The
American Indian Quarterly. Volume 25,
Number 2, Spring 2001. pp. 240–255.
[FR Doc. 2013–04819 Filed 3–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
DOE/NSF High Energy Physics
Advisory Panel: Correction
Office of Science, Department
of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting:
Correction.
AGENCY:
On February 14, 2013, the
Department of Energy (DOE) published
a notice of open meeting for the DOE/
NSF High Energy Physics Advisory
Panel to be held on March 11–12, 2013.
This document makes a correction to
that notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Kogut, Executive Secretary; High Energy
Physics Advisory Panel; U.S.
Department of Energy; SC–25;
Germantown Building, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–1290;
Telephone: 301–903–1298.
SUMMARY:
Bailey, A. L. and Kelly, K. R. (July 2010). The
Use and Validity of Home Language
Surveys in State English Language
Proficiency Assessment Systems: A
Review and Issues Perspective.
Bright, W. (2004). American Indian
Languages. Retrieved from https://
anthropology.si.edu/outreach/indbibl/
americanindianlanguages.pdf.
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. (July 18, 1970). Identification of
Discrimination and Denial of Services on
the Basis of National Origin. 35 FR
11,595 available at www.ed.gov/ocr/
docs/lau1970.html.
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2012). North
American Indian Languages.
Encyclopedia Britannica Online
Academic Education. Retrieved from
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/
418877/North-American-Indianlanguages.
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. (November
2011). NCES 2012459 The Nation’s
Report Card: Findings in Brief Reading
and Mathematics 2011.
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. Table A–33–2.
Number of status dropouts and status
dropout rates of 16- through 24-year-olds
in the noninstitutionalized group
quarters and household population, by
nativity and selected characteristics:
PO 00000
14087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
Corrections
In the Federal Register of February
21, 2013, in FR Doc. 2013–04064, on
page 12043, please make the following
correction:
Under DATES, page 12043, third
column, first paragraph, first line, the
time has changed. The new time is 9:00
a.m.–6:00 p.m.
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26,
2013.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–04876 Filed 3–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 42 (Monday, March 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14084-14087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04819]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket ID: ED-2013-OESE-0016]
Request for Information To Gather Technical Expertise Pertaining
to the Identification and Placement of Native American Students Who Are
English Learners in Language Instruction Educational Programs
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department
of Education.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Education (the Department) requests
information about practices used to accurately identify Native American
students in grades K-12 as English learners and to appropriately place
these students in language instruction educational programs (LIEPs).
The Department makes this request to help State educational agencies
(SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs), schools, tribes, and other
interested entities identify, share, and implement practices for
accurately identifying Native American students who are English
learners.
DATES: Written submissions must be received by the Department on or
before 5:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on May 3, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments by fax or by email. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your comments only once. In addition,
please include the Docket ID and the term ``Identification of English
Learner Native American Students response'' at the top of your
comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under ``Are you new to this site?''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments, address them to Supreet Anand, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education, Attention: Native American English
Learner RFI, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
room 3W106, Washington, DC 20202-6132.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy for comments
received from members of the public (including comments submitted by
mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery) is to make these
submissions available for public viewing in their entirety on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to include in their comments only
information that they wish to make publicly available on the Internet.
Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the subject matter, some
comments may include proprietary information as it relates to
confidential commercial information. The Freedom of Information Act
defines ``confidential commercial information'' as information the
disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to cause substantial
competitive harm. You may wish to request that we not disclose what you
regard as confidential commercial information.
To assist us in making a determination on your request, we
encourage you to identify in your comments any specific information
that you consider confidential commercial information. Please list the
information by page and paragraph numbers.
This Request for Information (RFI) is issued solely for information
and planning purposes and is not a request for proposals (RFPs) or a
promise to issue an RFP or a notice inviting applications. This RFI
does not commit the Department to contract for any supply or service.
Further, the Department is not now seeking proposals and will not
accept unsolicited proposals. The Department will not pay for any
information or administrative costs that you may incur in responding to
this RFI.
If you do not respond to this RFI, you may still apply for future
contracts and grants. The Department posts RFPs on the Federal Business
Opportunities Web site (www.fbo.gov). The Department announces grant
competitions in the Federal Register (www.gpo.gov/fdsys). It is your
responsibility to monitor these sites to determine whether the
Department issues an RFP or notice inviting applications after
considering the information received in response to this RFI.
The documents and information submitted in response to this RFI
[[Page 14085]]
become the property of the U.S. Government and will not be returned.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Supreet Anand, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 3W106, Washington, DC 20202-
6132. Telephone: 202-401-9795.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Introduction
The purpose of title III, part A of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) is to help ensure that
children who are limited English proficient (LEP) attain English
language proficiency and meet the same State academic content and
achievement standards all children are expected to meet. One of the
President's education goals is for American students, including Native
American students, to be first in the world in college completion by
2020.
At present, however, Native American students, compared to non-
Native American peers, face substantial achievement gaps (U.S.
Department of Education, November 30, 2011). The National Caucus of
Native American State Legislators has described the state of education
for Native American students as ``distressing,'' pointing to academic
achievement that is two to three years behind that of their white
peers, high dropout and expulsion rates, and low college-completion
rates (National Caucus of Native American State Legislators, 2008). On
the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress, for example,
Native American students in grade four performed lower in reading than
any other group of students. Native American students also have higher
dropout rates than other students. According to the 2010 American
Community Survey, the percentage of dropouts for ages 16 through 24 was
14.9 percent for Native American students compared with 5.1 percent for
white students and 9.1 percent for black students (Institute of
Education Sciences, American Community Survey).
With this RFI the Department is taking several steps to collect
information and gather suggestions to help SEAs, LEAs, schools, tribes,
and other entities identify, share, and implement practices for
accurately identifying Native American students who are English
learners so that more Native American students will be college- and
career-ready.
First, we pose a series of questions--to which we invite interested
members of the public to respond--about identifying Native American
students as English learners.
Second, the Department will host a Web dialogue and conference call
during which external experts and the public can engage in further
discussion on accurate identification of Native American English
learners.
Third, the Department will make available to the public the
information collected from this RFI and the Web dialogue and conference
call, as well as other resources identified by external experts
participating in the Web dialogue and conference call.
2. Definitions
The following definitions apply to this RFI. Statutory definitions
are indicated by the citation at the end of the definition.
English learner means a student who is limited English proficient.
Limited English proficient (LEP) means an individual--
(A) Who is aged 3 through 21;
(B) Who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school
or secondary school;
(C)(i) Who was not born in the United States or whose native
language is a language other than English;
(ii)(I) Who is a Native American or Alaska Native or a native
resident of the outlying areas; and
(II) Who comes from an environment where a language other than
English has had a significant impact on the individual's level of
English language proficiency; or
(iii) Who is migratory, whose native language is a language other
than English, and who comes from an environment where a language other
than English is dominant; and
(D) Whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or
understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the
individual--
(i) The ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement
on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA;
(ii) The ability to successfully achieve in classrooms where the
language of instruction is English; or
(iii) The opportunity to participate fully in society. (section
9101(25) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7801(25)) (emphasis added).
Native American means an individual who is Indian, Alaska Native,
Native Hawaiian, Native American Pacific Islander, or a native resident
of the outlying areas (20 U.S.C. 7801(25) and (28); 20 U.S.C. 7491(3);
25 U.S.C. 2902).
3. Discussion
In this RFI we specifically inquire into practices regarding: (1)
Accurate initial identification of Native American students who are
English learners; (2) the use of a survey of primary or home language
other than English (PHLOTE survey), as well as other methods, in
identifying Native American students as potential English learners for
the purpose of placement in a LIEP; (3) the use of multi-step processes
for identifying Native American English learners; and (4) defining
significant impact of a Native American language on English language
proficiency and implementing that definition for determination of
English language proficiency.
To be eligible as LEP under the ESEA, Native American students must
not only meet the significant impact requirement in section
9101(25)(C)(ii) of the ESEA; they must also meet the eligibility
requirement in subparagraph (D) of that section. In this RFI we focus
on the significant impact requirement.
Accurate identification of English learner students is essential to
ensure that these students receive the services necessary to
meaningfully access an educational program, as required under title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Civil Rights Act), and the services
for which they are eligible under title III, part A of the ESEA. Under
the ESEA and title VI, Native American students who come from an
environment in which a language other than English has had a
significant impact on English language proficiency may be identified as
English learners. Even if a Native American child does not speak the
language of his or her tribe, this language may still have a
significant impact on his or her English mastery (Leap, 1993). Language
impact may manifest itself in the way a student constructs meaning or
applies syntax or vocabulary.
All States at the very least recommend, if not require, the use of
a PHLOTE survey as a first step in identifying which students may need
to take an English language proficiency assessment (Bailey and Kelly,
2010). A student's performance on that assessment helps determine
whether she or he is identified as an English learner student. Any
methods used to identify Native American students as English learners
must be objective, valid, and reliable. This includes both initial
identification as English learners and identification after an initial
identification as non-English learners based on academic performance.
Section 3302(f) of the ESEA provides
[[Page 14086]]
that a child not be admitted to, or excluded from, any federally
assisted education program on the basis of a surname or language-
minority status.
Researchers including Bailey and Kelly (2010) have pointed to the
great variability in the use of PHLOTE surveys, both across and within
States, thereby calling into question the validity of the process for
identifying students as English learners. Some States permit local
variability in the questions included in the PHLOTE survey. As PHLOTE
surveys are individually and locally administered, the variability in
their administration is also great. Families may vary their responses
to these surveys, indicating in one year that a language other than
English is spoken at home and, in another year that it is not.
Use of PHLOTE surveys with Native American students is particularly
complex due to the current status of many Native American languages;
e.g., the child may not speak the language in the home but may have a
relative who does, or may have grown up in an environment in which the
syntax, rhetorical style, and sociolinguistic patterns reflect the
significant impact of the language. Additionally, among some
communities, there may be a hesitancy to disclose Native American
heritage or use of a Native American language (Weaver, 2001). As a
result of these factors, Native American students may be incorrectly
identified as English learners or as non-English learners upon their
entry into school, and educators may find at a later point in a child's
educational career that she or he has not been appropriately placed in
a LIEP, or in a mainstream classroom with supports, as needed.
Under title VI of the Civil Rights Act and related requirements,
school districts must provide meaningful access to educational programs
for children who are English learners. Further, the Office for Civil
Rights memorandum of May 25, 1970, states that:
Where inability to speak and understand the English language
excludes national origin-minority group children from effective
participation in the educational program offered by a school
district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the
language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to
these students.
``Identification of Discrimination and Denial of Services on the Basis
of National Origin,'' Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 35
FR 11,595 (July 18, 1970).
Accurate identification of students as English learners is critical
to compliance with the requirements (1) to properly serve and identify
English learners under title VI of the Civil Rights Act and (2) to
provide appropriate services under title III, part A of the ESEA.
Accordingly, SEAs, LEAs, and schools have an interest in, and must
share responsibility for, developing and implementing practices that
correctly identify all students, including Native American students,
who are English learners. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, 5.2
million Americans identify themselves as Native American. This is an
increase of 1.1 million since the 2000 Census. The 2010 Census also
indicates that 28 percent of Native Americans ages 5 and older speak a
language other than English at home, as compared to 21 percent of the
population of the Nation as a whole. Recent estimates indicate that
approximately 200 Native American languages are ``living languages'';
i.e., currently spoken (Bright, 2004; Encyclopedia Britannica, 2012).
Due to its responsibilities under title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 and title I, part A and title III, part A of the ESEA, the
Department also has a role in supporting development and implementation
of practices that correctly identify students, including Native
American students, as English learners. For these reasons this RFI
seeks solutions; advice; technical information; legal, regulatory, and
policy approaches; and other information from the public about
practices for accurately identifying Native American students who are
English learners. Through this RFI, the Department also seeks to gather
information and suggestions for SEAs, LEAs, and schools on how to
address these issues. The Department welcomes input from SEAs, LEAs,
and schools, as well as from tribes, researchers, and other
organizations or individuals.
In addition, the Department will host a Web dialogue and conference
call to engage external experts in an in-depth discussion about these
issues. Responses to the RFI will be shared with the external experts
and the public to inform the planning for the Web dialogue and
conference call. Following the initial Web dialogue and conference
call, the Department will decide the format and process through which
to make available the collected public input. This format could include
an online link to all submissions, a document summarizing this
information, a question-and-answer document to be posted on the
Department's Web site, further Webinars, or other methods.
4. Context for Responses
4.1 The primary goal of this RFI is to gather information that will
help SEAs and LEAs better understand existing practices for identifying
Native American students who are English learners. Because the
questions in section 4.2 of this notice are only guides to helping us
better understand the issues surrounding identification of Native
American students who are English learners, you do not have to respond
to any specific question. You may provide comments in any convenient
format. You may also provide relevant information that is not
responsive to a particular question but may, nevertheless, be helpful.
4.2 Questions Regarding the Identification of Native American Students
Who are English Learners
4.2.1 Practices and Policies. What are the practices and policies
that SEAs and LEAs have implemented for accurate initial identification
of Native American students who are English learners? In the case of
Native American students who may have been misidentified as English
learners or non-English learners, describe the practices and policies
that SEAs and LEAs have implemented to accurately identify these
students? In the case of Native American students with disabilities who
may have been misidentified as English learners or non-English
learners, describe the practices and policies that SEAs and LEAs have
implemented to accurately identify these students.
What guidance have the SEAs and LEAs provided regarding accurate
identification of Native American English learners? What evidence
exists that these are practices that result in accurate identification
of Native American students who are English learners? Where have these
practices been adopted? What are the general lessons learned from these
adoptions? How might these practices be modified and improved for use
in the future? Are there barriers to the adoption of these practices at
the SEA, LEA, or school level? Are any of these practices promising? If
so, please describe the practices, as well as evidence to support that
they are promising.
4.2.2 Defining Significant Impact of a Language Other Than English
on English Language Proficiency. To be eligible as English learners,
Native American students must come ``from an environment where a
language other than English has had a significant impact on the
individual's level of English language proficiency'' (section 9101(25)
of the ESEA). How does the
[[Page 14087]]
SEA, LEA, or school define and implement significant impact of a
language other than English on English language proficiency? What are
the factors that determine the number of generations that are affected
by this significant impact? How sensitive are current English language
proficiency assessment instruments in measuring the significant impact
of an environment in which a language other than English is spoken?
What trends or patterns have SEAs, LEAs, schools, or tribes observed
regarding the identification of Native American students as English
learners and the progress of these students in acquiring English and
attaining English proficiency?
4.2.3 PHLOTE Surveys. How do SEAs and LEAs frame questions on
PHLOTE surveys to ascertain that a language other than English has had
a significant impact on a student's level of English language
proficiency? What are the practices and policies with regard to PHLOTE
surveys that SEAs and LEAs have used to accurately identify Native
American students who are English learners? Are any of these practices
promising? If so, please describe the practices, as well as evidence to
support that they are promising.
4.2.4 Multi-Step Process for Identifying Native American English
Learners. Several States have indicated that they use a multi-step
process to identify Native American English learners, such as
interviewing a parent after completion of the PHLOTE survey or using a
teacher language-observation checklist to verify a child's language
needs. What are the multi-step processes used in the State, LEA, or
school, including the components, timeline, and roles and
responsibilities of individuals who assist with identification of
students?
What evidence or research exists to support that a multi-step
process is effective in accurately identifying Native American English
learner students? What steps or considerations in a multi-step process
are of value in evaluating Native American students who are English
learners and who have or may be suspected of having disabilities; e.g.,
hearing impairment, particularly in the younger age range when
eligibility evaluations for special education services are often
conducted? What are the benefits and drawbacks of using a multi-step
process? What are the roles of parents and community members in
assisting with identification of these students as English learners?
Are there barriers to the adoption of these practices at the SEA, LEA,
or school level?
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6801-6871.
Dated: February 26, 2013.
Deborah S. Delisle,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
References
Bailey, A. L. and Kelly, K. R. (July 2010). The Use and Validity of
Home Language Surveys in State English Language Proficiency
Assessment Systems: A Review and Issues Perspective.
Bright, W. (2004). American Indian Languages. Retrieved from https://anthropology.si.edu/outreach/indbibl/americanindianlanguages.pdf.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (July 18, 1970).
Identification of Discrimination and Denial of Services on the Basis
of National Origin. 35 FR 11,595 available at www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/lau1970.html.
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2012). North American Indian Languages.
Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Education. Retrieved from
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/418877/North-American-Indian-languages.
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
(November 2011). NCES 2012459 The Nation's Report Card: Findings in
Brief Reading and Mathematics 2011.
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Table
A-33-2. Number of status dropouts and status dropout rates of 16-
through 24-year-olds in the noninstitutionalized group quarters and
household population, by nativity and selected characteristics:
American Community Survey (ACS) 2010. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/tables/table-sde-2.asp.
Leap, W.L. (1993). American Indian English. Salt Lake City, UT:
University of Utah Press.
National Caucus of Native American State Legislators. (2008).
Striving to Achieve Helping Native American Students Succeed.
Retrieved from Retrieved from www.ncsl.org/print/statetribe/strivingtoachieve.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education. (November 30, 2011). Tribal Leaders
Speak: The State of American Indian Education, 2010. Retrieved from
www.ed.gov/edblogs/whiaiane/files/2012/04/Tribal-Leaders-Speak-2010.pdf.
United States Census (nd). American Indians by the Numbers.
Retrieved from www.infoplease.com/spot/aihmcensus1.html.
Weaver, H. N. (2001). Indigenous Identity: What is it and Who Really
Has it? The American Indian Quarterly. Volume 25, Number 2, Spring
2001. pp. 240-255.
[FR Doc. 2013-04819 Filed 3-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
