Special Needs/RTI

A 2006 meta-analysis conducted by National Literacy Panel found that the instructional interventions that were regularly used for non-EL students often inadequately met the specific needs of EL students, suggesting that EL students require additional support and accommodations to benefit from effective interventional instruction practices. The research also noted that accommodations and interventions for ELs should be dynamic and shift as EL students further develop levels of English proficiency. The study, therefore, suggests that in order to appropriately address the needs of EL students, systems of support, scaffolding, and sheltering of the core content should be used to enable English learners’ enhanced access to academic instruction and language development.

The National Literacy Panel findings suggest that, in order to be effective, sheltered instructional approaches should: provide explicit, directed instruction regarding English language features (i.e. syntax, grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary); provide EL students with many opportunities to apply newly-acquired English skills; and, be implemented within the context of the content-based curriculum, not delivered in isolation. 

 Resources

August, D. & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

What tools, resources, and strategies do you use in your classroom to help ensure that all students are accessing the instructional content while also working to develop their reading, writing, and language skills?

For many students that are continuing to develop their academic reading, writing, and language skills, or struggling to do so, implementing purposeful and directed small-group interventions in the classroom can help ensure that all students are supported in their continued academic and linguistic development. Intensive small-group interventions can come in many shapes and sizes, but should be modeled to help directly support and respond to students as they acquire and develop essential skills. While small-group interventions should be designed to meet students where they are, they can benefit greatly by applying mixed models to a diverse range of students (e.g., a small-group structure that has both English learners and native English-speaking students).

For a look at some of the best practices when it comes to small group interventions, as well as recommendations, roadblocks, and solutions, check out this article from Reading Rockets.

Did you know that the most common reason for referring ELs to remedial and special education programs is that they show signs of reading difficulties?

In reality, EL students may struggle with reading for a number of reasons besides reading disability. For example, reading difficulties might be due to linguistic differences, limited English language proficiency, or content instruction that is not well supported to address student needs either academically or culturally.

It is always important to consider what tools and additional support students may need in order to be better prepared for learning. Using differentiated instruction or other support systems in your classroom can help address the needs of all students and promote learning and instruction that meets students at their level.

Resources

McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D’Emilio, T. (2005). Learning disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(1), 1-5.

Shifrer, D., Muller, C., & Callahan, R. (2011). Disproportionality and learning disabilities: Parsing apart race, socioeconomic status, and language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(3), 246-257.

Implementing RTI for EL students might seem challenging, especially in terms of determining students’ knowledge, skills and performance in their home language(s) and the target language (English). Other challenges might have to do with limited resources (either written materials intended for instruction, or resources such as a bilingual teacher) available in the students’ home language to assist with instruction. While there might be many important considerations involved in decision making about screening, assessment, and intervention for ELs, parents and educators must make appropriate and prompt decisions that will facilitate appropriate early identification and intervention to improve student outcomes.

In a recent brief (Brown & Doolittle, 2008), the authors discuss how to implement RTI as a culturally and environmentally sensitive framework for ELs to more accurately assess student performance and student needs. The authors stress the importance of (i) considering specific “background ecologies” (p.5) of ELs and academic achievement in classrooms; (ii) examination of classroom instruction and context with regard to individual student factors; (iii) prior information gathered through formal and informal assessments; and, (iv) fair interpretation of assessment data. 

Resources

Vaughn, S., & Ortiz, A. A. (2010). Response to intervention in reading for English language learners. Retrieved from http://www.rtinetwork.org/

Brown, J.E., & Doolittle, J. (2008). A cultural, linguistic, and ecological framework for response to intervention: A preliminary guide. Practitioner Brief Series. Boulder, CO: National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems.

Did you know that a study conducted in 2008 suggests that roughly 7.6% of EL students in the United States are believed to have a learning disability? That is just over half a million ELs nationwide. Within this broader national number, variance at the state level is striking—while California reports 28.36% of its EL population as having a learning disability, West Virginia counts only 0.35%. Developing key tools and resources to help states, districts, and schools better identify and serve ELs who may also have learning disabilities is essential to providing the supports necessary for promoting successful language and content learning.

Resources

Ortiz, A. A., & Yates, J. R. (2001). A framework for serving English language learners with disabilities.Journal of Special Education Leadership, 14, 72–80.

Peña, E.D., Bedore, L.M., & Gillam, R.B. (2011). Two to untangle: language impairment and language differences in bilinguals. AccELLerate, 3(3), 7-11.

Sánchez, M. T., Parker, C., Akbayin, B., & McTigue, A. (2010). Processes and challenges in identifying learning disabilities among students who are English language learners in three New York State districts(Issues & Answers Report, REL 2010–085). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast and Islands.

Schools and districts often face challenges when it comes to accurately identifying EL students who may have a non-language oriented learning difficulty.

The Response to Intervention (RTI) model is intended to serve as an intervention to diminish the likelihood of incorrectly identifying ELs as in need of Special Education services.  

Using RTI to more accurately assess and track students’ understanding and gains in language development is critical to eliminating cases of misidentification, which have been a consistent challenge for schools and districts in attempting to distinguish between linguistic, versus cognitive or other learning issues. 

Resources

Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Lonstaff, J., et al. (2007). Use of evidenced-based, small group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: secondary-tier intervention.Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 30, 163-168.

Klingner, J. K., & Harry. B. (2006). The special education referral and decision-making process for English language learners: Child study team meetings and staffings. Teachers College Record, 108, 2247-2281.

Lesaux, N. K. (2006). Building consensus: Future directions for research on English; language learners at risk for learning difficulties. Teachers College Record, 108, 2406-2438.

Linan-Thompson, S., Cirino, R T., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Determining English language learners' response to intervention: Questions and some answers. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 30, 185- 195.

McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D'Emilio, T. (2005). Learning disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 1-5.

Wagner, R. K., Francis, D. J., & Morris, R. D. (2005). Identifying English language learners with learning disabilities: Key challenges and possible approaches. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(1), 17-23.

As the population of ELs grows, so too will the number of ELs with disabilities who need special educational supports. It can often be difficult to distinguish between the role of language proficiency, versus other learning challenges, for ELs.

According to IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) child count data, of the estimated 4.6 million ELs in the United States, 670,632 students with disabilities were considered limited English proficient (LEP). Yet there is a long-standing concern regarding both over- and under-identifying ELs with disabilities. There are documented cases of both, prompting a need for increased training, familiarity, and preparedness among all who work with this student population.

Resources

The identification of ELs with disabilities is an important area of knowledge development for the future. To read more, Colorín Colorado has a series of pages devoted to special education and ELs, and the University of Minnesota has produced a paperexamining the challenges of providing special education to ELs. In addition, Chapter 10 of this report from the National Academies provides synthesis on research regarding Dual Language Learners with disabilities.

A 2006 meta-analysis conducted by National Literacy Panel found that the instructional interventions that were regularly used for non-EL students often inadequately met the specific needs of EL students, suggesting that EL students require additional support and accommodations to benefit from effective interventional instruction practices. The research also noted that accommodations and interventions for ELs should be dynamic and shift as EL students further develop levels of English proficiency. The study, therefore, suggests that in order to appropriately address the needs of EL students, systems of support, scaffolding, and sheltering of the core content should be used to enable English learners’ enhanced access to academic instruction and language development.

The National Literacy Panel findings suggest that, in order to be effective, sheltered instructional approaches should: provide explicit, directed instruction regarding English language features (i.e. syntax, grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary); provide EL students with many opportunities to apply newly-acquired English skills; and, be implemented within the context of the content-based curriculum, not delivered in isolation. 

 Resources

August, D. & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scientists have shown that infants are adept at learning languages that are present in their environment. But what if an infant only receives exposure to a second language outside of the home? A team from the University of Washington recently explored this idea in a new study. Researchers worked with children and infants who participated in a bilingual English-Spanish program in Spain, and who did not speak English at home. The goal was to determine whether an early English language intervention could influence their ability to understand and speak English. The infants and children who received one hour per day of English interaction produced substantially more English words or phases per hour, compared to peers who only received the standard bilingual program. These findings suggest that even one hour per day of English interaction prior to kindergarten entry can make a difference in a child’s language acquisition.

Resource

To learn more, check out this news brief from the University of Washington, or visit the full study to explore the details.