flexibility within the four criteria and how you apply them to making decisions about when and how to reclassify ELs with disabilities. To apply the four criteria in EC Section 313(f) to reclassification policies regarding ELs with disabilities, the following suggestions are given: • Criterion 1: Assessment of ELP Using an Objective Assessment Instrument o Assessment of ELP using an objective assessment, including, but not limited to, the ELPAC is the first of four criteria in state law per EC Section 313(f) to be used by LEAs in determining whether an EL should be reclassified as fluent English proficient (RFEP). The IEP team can use the scores from ELPAC or the Alternate ELPAC (if the alternate assessment has been specified in the student’s IEP) which are aligned with the state 2012 ELD Standards for reclassification purposes (see “Assessing Students with Disabilities,” of the ELPAC Information Guide). • Criterion 2: Teacher Evaluation o Use the student’s classroom performance information that is based on the student’s IEP goals for academic performance and ELD, per EC Section 56345(a)(2) and Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 300.160(a) (34 CFR 300.160(a)). • Criterion 3: Parent Opinion and Consultation
o The parent/guardian is a participant on the IEP team. • Criterion 4: Comparison of Performance in Basic Skills
o The IEP team should specify in the student’s IEP an assessment of basic skills to meet the guidelines for reclassification (e.g., the California Alternate Assessment for English language arts) per EC Section 56345(a)(6)(B) and 34 CFR Section 300.160(a). The IEP team may consider using other assessments that are valid and reliable and designed to compare the basic skills of ELs with disabilities to native speakers of English with similar disabilities to determine whether an EL with disabilities has sufficiently mastered the basic skills for reclassification consideration.
(End of “Sections”)
Chapter 4 – Instructional Planning and the IEP, Desert Mountain SELPA As of 04/18/2025 CAHELP Steering Committee Review
Page 27
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator