The ELL: Who should be

referred for SPED

services?
 A Summary of English Language Learners with Special Education Needs
Alfredo J. Artiles and Alba A. Ortiz (2002)
Published by the Center for Applied Linguistics

• English language learners with the least

amount of language support are most
likely to be referred to special education.
ELLs receiving all of their instruction in
English were almost three times as likely
to be in special education as those
receiving some native language support.
 Consequences
• The dropout rates for English language
learners are 15-20% higher than the
overall rate for non-English language
learners. This lack of academic success is
also the cause for referrals of English
language learners to special education.
 1 and 2 language Ac. Sim
st nd

• Both are built through interaction with others

• Easier to learn social than academic language
• Easier to learn at younger ages
• Syntax develops naturally through immersion,
learned through phrases
• Fluency in 1st language makes fluency in 2nd
easier
• More background knowledge in 1st, more
acquisition in 2nd
 BICS
• Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills
(language of the playground and
supermarket)
• meaningful social context.
– not very cognitively demanding.
– not specialized.
– These language skills usually develop within
six months to two years after arrival in the
U.S. http://www.everythingesl.net/inservices/bics_calp.php
 Cognitive Academic Language
Proficiency
• Formal academic learning.
– Includes listening, speaking, reading, and writing
about subject area content material.
– This level of language learning is essential to succeed
in school.
– Usually takes from five to seven years.
– If a child has no prior schooling or has no support in
native language development, it may take seven to
ten years for ELLs to catch up to their peers.
http://www.everythingesl.net/inservices/bics_calp.php
 3 Categories of ELLs who will Experience Academic
Difficulty
Artiles and Ortiz (2002)

1. Deficiencies in their learning-teaching

environment
– Lack of effective ESL support
2. Those experiencing academic difficulties
not related to a learning disability
– Interrupted schooling, limited formal
education, medical problems,
– low attendance, high transiency, etc.
3. True ELLs in need of Special Education
Flow chart
• Is the student experiencing academic
difficulties ?
 Indicators that may characterize a genuine disability
(Roseberry-McKibbin 2002):

• difficulty learning at a normal rate, even with assistance

(especially in the L1)
• deficits in vocabulary (particularly when deficits also exist in
the L1)
• communication difficulties at home and with peers of similar
linguistic and cultural backgrounds
• family history of disability
• report by parents of slower development than siblings
• overreliance on gestures rather than speech (especially when
also observed in the L1)
• need for frequent repetition and prompts during instruction
(especially when also seen with instruction delivered in the L1)
• difficulty following directions, irrespective of language used
• serious qualitative and quantitative differences compared with
peers when speaking the L1
Are the curricula and instructional materials known
to be effective for the LEP?

• Classroom language adapted for LEP?

• Activities adapted for the ELL?
• Are language skills being taught explicitly?
(This is also true for the student from a
lower socio-economic level)
Has the problem been validated by:

– Observations in a variety of settings?

– Comparing the student to others from a
similar background?
– Parental perceptions?
– Work samples?
– BVAT?
 Systematic efforts
• Teacher
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Student
 Systematic efforts (T):
Culture
• Has the teacher gathered cultural
information specific to the student and
his/her family?
– native/traditional versus immigrant group
– parent interviews
– student interviews
– home visits
 Systematic efforts (T):
Language Proficiency
• Were the student's linguistic
characteristics addressed by the teacher
in planning instruction?
– Comprehensible input is provided.
– Focus of instruction is on meaning rather than
error correction.
– There are opportunities for English language
acquisition.
 Systematic efforts
Student Variables: Experiential Background
• Are there any factors in the student's school history
which may be related to the current difficulty?
– attendance/mobility
– opportunities to learn
– program placement(s)
– quality of prior instruction
• Are there any variables related to family history which
may have affected school performance?
– lifestyle
– length of residence in the U.S.
– stress (e.g. poverty, lack of emotional support)
 Systematic efforts
More student variables:
Culture
Language Proficiency
Learning Style
Motivational influence
• Is the student's self-concept enhanced by school
experiences?
• Is schooling perceived as relevant and
necessary for success in the student's family
and community?
 Systematic efforts
Exposure to the Curriculum
• Were skills in question taught?
• Did student receive adequate exposure to curriculum?
– In his/her dominant language
– sufficient practice to achieve mastery
• Was instruction sensitive to student's level of
performance?
– instructional, frustration, independent levels
– higher level cognitive skills vs. basic skills
• Was adequate mastery of skills/concepts ensured prior
to moving on to new material?
 Systematic efforts
• Does the teacher use alternative approaches
when there is evidence of a learning difficulty?
– teach
– reteach using significantly different approaches
– teach prerequisite skills
• Does the teacher use strategies that are known
to be effective for language minority students?
– native language and ESL instruction
– genuine dialogue with students
– contextualized instruction
– collaborative learning
– self-regulated learning
 Let’s look at some scenarios
• http://www.danbury.k12.ct.us/pupilservwe
b/squicmweb/scenarios.html