According to data from the WIDA Consortium (https://wida.wisc.edu/), 11% of all students identified as English learners (ELs) in 2014, who were between 6 and 21 years of age, were also identified as having one of the 13 federal categories of disabilities (See Images below). This means that, in the whole country, 1.2 million ELs were receiving some kind of special education support, which is comparable to the 13% of the general student population. In the same sense, 50% of ELs have been identified with a Specific Learning Disability (SLD), this percentage is well above the national rate of 39% identified students in the general education setting as having SLD.
 |
| Disability Rate for ELs. Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/ |
 |
| SLD Identification Rate for Els with IEPs. Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/ |
These facts might look like a great step forward in providing needed services to students who need them, but the reality is quite different. For several years now, there has been a constant worry about misrepresentation, or overidentification of ELs as having a learning disability. Misidentification of students with SLDs has a big impact on groups that have been historically marginalized due to their cultural and linguistic traits as viewed as deficits instead of assets or differences, which tends to create the idea of these students "not meeting the norm." Misidentification of students for SLDs also impacts a broad range of students from historically marginalized groups because the cultural and linguistic resources they bring are framed as deficits rather than differences (Hauerwas, Brown & Scott, 2013).
This is when we can start asking ourselves what is normal? As Dr. Nelson stated during the conference called Challenging Deficit Models of Language Differences: Asset-Based Teaching in the 2018 Illinois Statewide Conference for Teachers Serving Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Students, "Every kind of measurement results in a statistical distribution, and statistical distributions are the basis for deciding in most cases what is normal." If normal is decided by a statistical distribution, why should we be concerned about normality? Kauffman & Hallahan (2018) have some kind of response "Special education is designed for, and is necessary for individuals whose scores on tests, or whose performances on other types of measures are on the extremes -much lower or higher than the typical." Special education services are intended to level the playing field for all students within their own context but, in the case of identification of ELs, sometimes it means that their skills, abilities, and differences are compared to pre-existing norms established for students that don't have anything in common with them (in regards to culture, home support, resources, language, etc.), creating great discrepancies that are not always understood by school administrators and that provoke ELs to end up placed in a school environment that is not the optimal and where expectations might be lowered, or where their skills are being restricted due to lack of understanding.
Hamayan et al (2013) provide a useful tool to help school personnel start the identification process for ELs, where a student that might be showing some academic or social concerns is viewed from both sides of the coin: The language side and the Special education side, to help schools determine the origin of those struggles and facilitate the administration of resources and interventions in the least restrictive environment (LRE). This tool is called the Seven Factors Template and is intended to gather all information about the factors to consider while creating a plan of support for struggling ELs. Personally, I find this template to be of the utmost importance to staff who is not as informed about the language acquisition process because it helps them understand that "Not speaking English is not a disability" (Kvinta, personal communication, December 7, 2018). At the same time, it helps school personnel whose knowledge of the special education referral process is not strong. Finally combining the expertise of both teams in benefit of the struggling ELs in their schools.
To finish up this first post, I would like to remind you that when we are working with struggling students, in this case struggling ELs, we should keep in mind the lyrics from Journey's most famous song "Don't stop believin'" in our ELs and how our differences make us stronger.
Please send me your comments, I would love to have your feedback!
Please send me your comments, I would love to have your feedback!
The Unicorn Leader
References
Hauerwas, L. B., Brown, R., & Scott, A. N. (2013). Specific learning disability and response to intervention: State-level guidance. Exceptional Children,
80(1), 101-120.
Hamayan, E., Marler, B., Sanchez-Lopez, C., and Damico, J. (2013). Special
Education Considerations for English Language Learners. Philadelphia:
Caslon Publishing.
(2017, May 1). Identification - WIDA - University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/
Kauffman, J. M., Hallahan, D. P., Pullen, P. C., & Badar, J. (2018). Special
education: What is it and why we need it. Routledge.
Nelson, R. (2018). Challenging Deficit Models of Language Differences: Asset-
Based Teaching. 42nd. Statewide Conference for Teachers Serving
Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Students. Oakbrook Terrace, IL.
Education Considerations for English Language Learners. Philadelphia:
Caslon Publishing.
(2017, May 1). Identification - WIDA - University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/
Kauffman, J. M., Hallahan, D. P., Pullen, P. C., & Badar, J. (2018). Special
education: What is it and why we need it. Routledge.
Nelson, R. (2018). Challenging Deficit Models of Language Differences: Asset-
Based Teaching. 42nd. Statewide Conference for Teachers Serving
Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Students. Oakbrook Terrace, IL.
