English Language Learners and Special Education: Who? What? When?Where? Why? How?

scarfpocketΤεχνίτη Νοημοσύνη και Ρομποτική

24 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 5 μήνες)

54 εμφανίσεις

English Language Learners
and Special Education:

Who? What? When?Where?


Why? How?







Barbara Tedesco & Elizabeth Franks

Roselle Public Schools


Concerns


Over
-
identification


Diana v. California
Board of Education.


Students classified due
to language difference;
inappropriate
assessment.



Under
-
identification


Schools are very
sensitive to possibility
of mis
-
classification.


As a result, ELLs with
real special education
needs are left behind.

IDEA 300.534

Determination of eligibility


(b) A child may not be determined to be eligible
under this part if


(1) The determinant factor for that eligibility
determination is


(i) Lack of instruction in reading or math;


(ii) Limited English proficiency;


If the severe discrepancy or low functioning is due to
one of the above factors, the student is NOT
eligible for special education.



Levels of Intervention




Systemic


Instructional


Individual


Response to Intervention Model


Three Tiered Model


Systemic

Instructional


Individual

Systemic

An acceptable and supportive school environment
characterized by:



academically rich,


quality programs
-




ELLs have to “catch


up” (15 month growth


in 10 mos.)



skilled use and


training of teachers




linguistic and cultural


incorporation




making AYP as measured
on benchmarks based on
NCLB legislation



elimination of ineffective
responses to failure:
(retention, low level
academics).



programs that support
interventions.



Curriculum as
window/mirror


Thomas
-
Collier Test for

Equal Educational Opportunity


Typical size of initial achievement gap between ELL
and native English speakers

25
-
30 NCE



Expected NCE gains each year for:




Typical native English speakers

0 NCEs




Students in a
typical

ELL program
1
-
3 NCEs




Students in an
effective

ELL program
4
-
6 NCEs




Students in an
outstanding

ELL program
7
-
9 NCEs



Does your ELL instructional program close the
achievement gap and keep it closed in later years?


Systemic

Process


Profile


Gather relevant data


Attendance/educational gaps


Grades


Assessment of L1


Mobility


Length of time in district/country


Achievement in both languages


Family dynamics


Cultural characteristics

Instructional

All
teachers use instructional strategies effective for ELLs.


Research
-
Based Effective Models:


SIOP



Reading First Initiatives




CREDE’s 5 pedagogical standards






Sheltered Instruction

Observation Protocol (SIOP)




1.
Lesson Planning

2.
Building Background

3.
Comprehensible Input

4.
Strategies

5.
Interaction

6.
Practice/Application

7.
Lesson Delivery

8.
Review/Assessment


Echevarria, Vogt & Short (2002)

Reading First Initiative


Vocabulary
development


Text Comprehension


Phonemic awareness


Phonics instruction


Fluency


Motivation

Literacy
-
rich environment;


Sufficient instructional time;


Careful lesson planning;

School
-
wide assessment system;

School
-
wide interventions for
struggling readers;

Sound instructional approaches;


grouping, maximizing student
learning

School climate of collaboration,
strong leadership, and evidence
of commitment;

High quality professional
development;

School partnerships
.


Center for Research in Excellence,
Diversity & Education (CREDE)


Five pedagogical standards:


Joint productive activity.


Developing language and literacy across the
curriculum.


Making meaning: connecting school to
students’ lives.


Teaching complex thinking.


Teaching through instructional conversation.


Grouping and

Classroom Management


Vary grouping strategies


direct instruction, mixed ability grouping, pairs


Provide for differentiated teaching and learning.


Plan and promote positive interdependence and
individual accountability.


Provide increased opportunity to practice
academic language.


Promote a positive social climate.

Instructional

The teacher uses a clinical teaching cycle in order to resolve the
difficulty and/or validate the problem.


Carefully sequenced, scaffolded instruction


Assess


Teach using significantly different


strategies (learning styles, multiple


intelligences)


Informally monitor progress over time




Document this process



If the problem is not resolved,

seek support systems.



*
Consultation (PAC/I&RS)

Gather relevant data from initial profile

Gather current data

Classroom observations (effective use of strategies; appropriate
interventions)


*

Title I

*

Counseling

* Community
-
based programs

* One
-
on
-
one tutoring, identifying the exact weakness and
using strategies that address that deficiency.




Factors Affecting Second
Language Acquisition


Intra
-
personal


Age


Motivation


Degree of L1
proficiency


Attitude toward target
language community


Tolerance of learner
for own errors


External


Amount of exposure


Manner of acquisition


Availability of
language models


Attitude of target
language community


Tolerance of errors by
the community.


Normal Processes of Second
Language Acquisition



Silent Period


Interference


Code switching


Fossilization


Language Loss


Language Loss

An individual’s change from the habitual use of one language
to the habitual use of another.




Language Loss symptoms resemble monolingual
pathology:


poor comprehension;


limited vocabulary;


grammatical and syntactical errors;


expressive language.



It may be a disorder for one child and/or lack
of English proficiency for another.

Language Loss


Loss in L1 is NOT matched by a
corresponding replacement in L2. Loss can
be much more rapid so that children will
appear deficient in 2 languages.


Investigate the child’s earlier L1
capabilities. Long exposure with errors
still present can indicate speech/language
or learning problems.

If interventions do not solve problem



A special education referral is initiated. A
summary of all of the interventions and
relevant data accompanies the referral.




A child study team convenes to determine
whether the child should be referred for
a comprehensive evaluation.


Child Study Team Referral?


If no
,


Develop supportive plan in general education



If yes,


Determine and document dominant
language

Language Dominance and
Proficiency (1)

Oral language
proficiency assessment
in
both
languages.


If teacher is not fluent
in both languages, train
and use interpreter (see
recommendations for
training and use of
interpreters)




Some suggestions of
instruments
:


LAS, IPT, BVAT,
Brigance Screening


If tests are unavailable in
student’s native language,
use informal assessment
measures (language
sample, oral story retelling,
evaluation of receptive
language
).


Language Dominance and
Proficiency (2)


If L1 dominant, consider English language skills in
achievement.



If English dominant, consider L1 in cognitive
assessment.


If bilingual with no clear dominance, assess in both
languages.



Assessment


Assessment personnel complete the comprehensive individual
assessment



Select assessment battery





-

native language (if available)



-

English language



-

formal and informal procedures


-

curriculum
-
based assessment




Adaptations


Personnel
-

Hierarchy of Preferred Models


Contract services of bilingual professional CST member

Train

bilingual education professional to assist.

Train

other bilingual professionals to assist

Train

community professionals to serve as interpreters.

Train
non
-
professionals in the district as interpreters.

Train
community non
-
professionals as interpreters.


In all instances train assessment personnel (monolingual or
bilingual).


NJAC 6A:14
-
2.4

Native Language

(a) Written notice to the parent shall be provided and parent conferences
required by this chapter shall be conducted in the language used for
communication by the parent and student unless it is clearly not
feasible to do so.


1. Foreign language interpreters or translators and sign language
interpreters for the deaf shall be provided, when necessary, by the
district board of education at no cost to the parent.

(b) If the native language is not a written language, the district board of
education shall take steps to ensure that:


1. The notice is translated orally or by other means to the parent in his
or her native language or other mode of communication;


2. That the parent understands the content of the notice; and


3. There is written documentation that the requirements of (b)1 and 2
above have been met


Characteristics of Interpreters


Have excellent bilingual communication
skills.


Be able to relate to members of the cultural
group.


Understand their ethical responsibilities.


Act in a professional manner.


Be TRAINED for their roles.


Training of Interpreters



Legal requirements and professional ethics.


Goals of testing and/or meeting.


Special education terminology relevant to their
roles in working with family members.


Role on the team.


Procedures for administering tests, if applicable.


Consideration of cultural differences in
assessment.


Strategies for interacting with families.

Use of Interpreters (1)




Prior to the meeting, discuss the questions that
will be asked with the interpreter.


Interpreters should sit as close as possible to
family members.


Introduce family to everyone at the meeting.


Speak in short units and avoid slang and
professional jargon.


Encourage the interpreter to translate the family’s
words without paraphrasing them.


Use of Interpreters (2)


Look at the family rather than the interpreter when
speaking.


Observe the nonverbal behaviors of the family
during the interview.


Allow opportunities for family members to ask
questions.


Provide written information (translated) when
appropriate.


Tape record the interview if the family is
comfortable.

Observation of

Interpretation Session


Observe the interpreter to
prevent the following
problems:


Prompting or giving clues


Using too many words


Giving directions that are
too brief or too complicated


Over
-

or under
-
using
reinforcement


Recording assessment data
incorrectly, if applicable.


Observe the student for
the following behaviors:



Response delays


Uses of gestures to replace
words


False starts, word
repetitions, perseveration


Confusion


Inattention, distractibility


Language and articulation
disorders



Responsibilities of CST
Member in Use of Interpreters


Allow interpreter to only complete the activities
for which training has been provided.


Show the interpreter how to use the tests and
allow time to organize materials, read instructions
and clarify areas of concern.


Provide the interpreter with background
information about the student who is to be tested.


Debrief with the interpreter after the session.


Ensure that the interpreter does not protect the
student by hiding the extent of the
limitations/disabilities.


Assessment Modifications


Administer test according to protocol and score it.


Re
-
administer with the following modifications:



Remove time limits


Vary the mode of response (read test questions to check
receptive language; oral responses)


Translation/Interpreters


Simplification of language


Dynamic assessment: test; teach; retest


Re
-
score and compare


Difference in score indicates 2
nd

language acquisition
process


No difference


possible learning disability


Intelligence/Cognition


Must be conducted in the student’s most
proficient language. (if NA consider
nonverbal + informal measures).


If not clearly proficient in one language,
consider assessing in both languages.


If very young, a developmental scale may
be used.

Academic Evaluation


An English evaluation should be attempted if
English instruction has been given for 1+ years.


If student has received native language instruction
within a reasonable time period (1
-
2 years); a
native language evaluation should be conducted
.


If native language assessment is NA, a
functional assessment can provide
information about student’s ability


NJAC 6A:14
-
3.4 Evaluation


(d) An initial evaluation shall consist of a multi
-
disciplinary assessment in
all areas of suspected disability. Such evaluation shall include
assessment by at least two members of the child study team and other
specialists in the area of disability as required or as determined
necessary. Each evaluation of the student shall:


1. Include,
where appropriate
, or required, the use of a standardized
test(s) which shall be:



i. Individually administered;



ii.
Valid and reliable
;



iii.
Normed on a representative population
; and



iv. Scored as either standard score with standard deviation or

norm referenced scores with a cutoff score;


2.
Include functional assessment of academic performance and,
where appropriate, behavior
.

Functional Assessment

Both languages


Authentic assessment in the classroom


Curriculum
-
based assessment


Dynamic assessment


evaluate performance over
time


Questionnaires from various staff members


Portfolio assessment


Evaluate communication holistically and across
settings


Use natural language samples

Speech and Language


Speech pathologists must use procedures,
modifications and tests appropriate for
diagnosis and appraisal in the language and
speech of child.


May include descriptive linguistic analysis


Results indicating a language disorder
should be handled with care. Language
differences must be considered


Socio
-
cultural


Acculturation pattern


Family background/dynamics


Separation from parents


Educational support at home


Previous educational experiences


Home country political/economic reality


Behavior at home and prior to coming to
U.S.

Indicators of Language
Difference


It is normal for ELLs to demonstrate a lower level of
English proficiency than their monolingual peers.


Second language acquisition follows a developmental
course similar to first language acquisition.


Language loss is a normal phenomenon when
opportunities to hear and use L1 are minimized.


Shifting from one language to another within utterances is
not necessarily an indicator of language confusion (code
switching).


It is normal for second language acquirers to experience
dysfluencies associated with lack of vocabulary, word
finding difficulties and/or anxiety.


Indicators of Learning

Disability


Difficulty in learning language at a normal rate compared to learners
from similar backgrounds, even with special assistance in both
languages.


Short mean length of utterances (in both languages).


Auditory processing problems (e.g. poor memory, poor
comprehension).


Poor sequencing skills. Communication is disorganized, incoherent
and leaves listener confused.


Communication difficulties when interacting with peers from a similar
background.


Lack of organization, structure and sequence in spoken and written
language; difficulty conveying thoughts.

Report Writing


Use adapted
standardized test
information as
functional

assessment.


Report Writing


Document conditions of assessment


Describe the nature of the bilingual evaluations.


Level of evaluation model, language of test and
deviations from standardized administration.


Language dominance and proficiency results.


Relevant behavioral information related to
student’s academic functioning.


All relevant background information.



NJAC 6A:14
-
3.4

Evaluation



f) A written report of the results of each assessment shall be prepared.
Each written report shall be dated and signed by the individual(s) who
conducted the assessment and shall include:…


3.
If an assessment is not conducted under standard conditions, the
extent to which it varied from standard conditions.


4. When a student is suspected of having a specific learning disability,
the documentation of the determination of eligibility shall include a
statement of:…


vii.
The determination concerning the effects of environmental,

cultural or economic disadvantage
;




Committee to

determine eligibility


NJAC:6A:14
-
3.4 Evaluation:

(a) The child study team, the parent and the
regular
education teacher of the student who has
knowledge of the student’s educational
performance or if there is no teacher of the
student, a teacher who is knowledgeable about the
district’s programs

shall:…



NJAC 6A:14
-
3.5

Determination of eligibility for special
education and related services




(b)
In making a determination of eligibility for
special education and related services, a student
shall not be determined eligible if the
determinant
factor

is due to
a lack of instruction in reading or
math or due to limited English proficiency.



Eligibility and IEP Development


The committee determines
eligibility:



Reviews all data.


Determines if child has a
legally defined disability.


Provides assurances that
the determinant factor of
the student’s problems are
not primarily the result of
language, culture or not
having the opportunity to
learn.


The committee develops the
IEP:


Includes present level of
performance: L1 and L2


Annual goals for L1 and L2 (if
applicable).


Amount of time in each setting
and duration of services


Evaluation criteria


Persons responsible for
implementation


Strategies appropriate to disability
and

language and culture.


NJAC 6A:14
-
3.7

Individualized education program


(c) When developing the IEP, the IEP team shall:





4.
In the case of a student with limited English proficiency, consider
the language needs of the student as related to the IEP.


6A:14
-
6.2 Provision of programs and services provided under
N.J.S.A. 18A:46A
-
1 et seq. and 18A:46
-
19.1 et seq



(d) English as a second language shall be provided according to N.J.S.A.
18A:46A
-
2c.



Placement and Services

Services in the least restrictive environment that

address
all

needs


Be Creative


General education program with ESL and/or
inclusion services


Bilingual/ESL with inclusion/resource room
services


Special education with bilingual/ESL services


Bilingual Special Education



And so on….


Collaborative Teaching
Arrangements

Complementary
Instructions

Two lessons are taught:
functional (metacognitive)
and content

Important functional
skills are modeled and
practiced within class
context

Team
teaching

Instruction is provided
alternately by each teacher.

Uses each
professional’s strength.
Opportunity for staff
development.

Supportive
instruction

Specialist develops
specialized instruction,
grouping or practice
techniques.

Enhancement is
incorporated in future
lessons. Students are
supported.

Parallel
Instruction

A small group is taught
separately within the
classroom.

Teachers can
informally observe
each others’ activities.

Tips on Co
-
teaching


Planning is the key.


Discuss views on teaching and learning.


Discuss testing and grading responsibilities.


Attend to details.


Prepare parents.


Avoid the “paraprofessional trap”


When disagreements occur


TALK.


Go slowly.



Instructional adaptations for

students with special needs

Curriculum/

Instruction

Books

Classroom
Modifications

Behavior

Mastery of key
concepts.

Show a model of end
product.

Provide alternative
books with same
content; easier
readability

Reduce visual
distractions.

Arrange a check
-
in time
to organize the day.

Use marker to highlight
important information

Provide audiotapes
of textbooks

Seat student close
to teacher or
helpful peer.

Arrange for time
-
out
space and permission to
leave room

Use computer and/or
calculator.

Use visuals and

Manipulatives.

Provide two sets of
books: home and
school.

Provide visual
cues for routines
and tasks.

Be aware of behavioral
changes related to
medication and time of
day.

Use a study guide.


Adapt reading
selections.

Give directions in
small steps.


Develop individualized
rules.

Assessment Modifications for
Special Needs ELLs


Allow extra time


Reword questions using simplified language


Use bilingual dictionary or translation of
items.


Change percentage of work required for
passing grade.


Use rubric to grade student’s work.


Refer to modifications on IEP.








Every day an old man walked a beach with a pail, picking up starfish that
had been washed in by the tide, and throwing them back into the sea.

One day, a young boy stopped the old man and asked,

“ Why do you throw the starfish back ? It doesn’t matter. They will only
wash up on the shore again tomorrow?”

The old man picked a starfish out of his pail, threw it as far as he could into
the sea, and replied,

“It mattered to that one.”

Resources


Cross
-
cultural Developmental Education Services


Dr. Catherine Collier info @ crosscultured.com

The National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational
Systems (NCCRESt)
A. Artiles, Vanderbilt University and J.
Klingner, University of CO at Boulder
www.Nccrest.org


CEC Division for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse
Exceptional Learners

www.cec.sped.org


Center for Applied Linguistics
www.cal.org



National Literacy Panel




www.cal.nlp


Office English Language Acquisition

www.ed.gov/offices/oela




Resources

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services


www.ed.gov/offices/osers

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development



www.nichd.nih.gov/crmc/cdb/cdb.htm

Intercultural Development Research Association


www.idra.org

National Association of Bilingual Education


www.nabe.org

New Jersey Administrative Code for

Special Education and Bilingual Education



www.nj.gov/njded/code/


References


August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1998).
Educating language minority children
. Washington,

DC: National Research Council Institute of Medicine


Collier, C. (1998).

Cognitive learning strategies for diverse learners.
Ferndale, WA:

Cross Cultural Developmental Education Services


Cummins, J. (1984).
Bilingualism and special education: issues in assessment and

pedagogy
. Clevedon, Eng: Multilingual Matters


Echevarria, J, Vogt, M., Short, D. (2000).
Making Content Comprehensible for



English Language Learners: The siop model
. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &





Bacon.



Gersten, R. & Jimenez, R (Eds.) (1998).

Promoting learning for culturally and



linguistically diverse students.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth


Langdon, H (2000).
Factors affecting special education services for ELLs with

suspected language learning disabilities
. Multiple Voices, 5 (1). 66
-
82.


Mattes, L. & Omark, D. (1984).
Speech and language assessment for the bilingual

handicapped
. San Diego: College Hill Press.


References


Ortiz, A. & Ramirez, B. (Eds.) (1998).

Schools and the culturally diverse

exceptional student:Promising practices and future directions.
Reston,

VA: Council for Exceptional Children.


Ovando, C. & Collier, V. (1998).
Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching in

multicultural contexts
. Boston: McGraw
-
Hill


Roseberry
-
McKibbin, (1995).
Multicultural students with special language

needs.


Tharp, R. et al. (2000).
Teaching transformed: Achieving excellence, fairness,

inclusion and harmony
. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.


Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (1997).
School effectiveness for language minority

students.

Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual

Education.


Determining appropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: A self

assessment guide for principals
.

Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional

Children