# data[].attributes.headline
Confirm what falls under an Intellectual Disability (ID) - Neurodevelopmental conditions that effect functioning in two areas

# data[].attributes.subject
Confirm what falls under an Intellectual Disability (ID) - Neurodevelopmental conditions that effect functioning in two areas

# data[].attributes.body
When an EL student is suspected of having a learning challenge, educators must determine whether the student is going through the regular process of acquiring and learning English, or whether the student has a learning  disability interfering with his/her progress.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Language Difference or Language Disorder? ELs and Special Education

Download: Exploring Equity - ELs and Special Ed

Part of CEE's Exploring Equity Issues series, this paper provides an overview of the over and under- identification of English Learners (ELs) with disabilities and the contributing factors. Recommendations for appropriate identification are also discussed.

Language Difference or Language Disorder? ELs and Special Education

There is a growing concern in US schools about the over-identification and under-identification of English Learners (ELs) with disabilities (Hoover & Klingner, 2011; Hamayan, Marler, Sanchez Lopez, & Amico, 2007; Artiles & Ortiz, 2002). The National Center for Education Statistics data (NCES 2017) shows that the percentage of ELs that attend public schools has increased from 3.8 million (8.1%) in the fall of 2000 to 4.8 million (9.5%) in the fall of 2015. NCES 2018 data indicates that in the fall of 2015, some 713,000 ELs were identified as students with disabilities, representing 14.7 percent of the total EL population enrolled in public schools. There are several issues that contribute to the over-identification or under-identification of these students. This brief explores some of the factors contributing to this problem. Recommendations for appropriate identification are also discussed.

PART 1: THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROBLEM
When an EL student is suspected of having a learning challenge, educators must determine whether the student is going through the regular process of acquiring and learning English, or whether the student has a learning disability interfering with his/her progress. Usually, the referring teacher (or teachers) suspects that there might be other issues present that have not been observed in other ELs as they acquire and learn English.

According to the U.S. Department of Education's website, more than 6.5 million young people with disabilities receive services. They range from infants and toddlers (birth to age 2) to children and youth (ages 3-21). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the federal law that ensures free appropriate public education to these children and that they receive special education and related services. IDEA also governs how states and public agencies provide these services, such as early intervention, special education, and related services. Each state has in place criteria for determining whether a child is learning disabled. Part of that criteria includes:

* The child does not achieve adequately
* The child does not make sufficient progress
* The areas of concern are (in general) Mathematics, Reading, Oral & Written Expression, Listening Comprehension.

IDEA regulations also include "Exclusionary Factors," aspects of the student's background and/or experience which might influence the student's performance. These include visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, cognitive or emotional disabilities, cultural factors, environmental or economic disadvantages, and limited English proficiency. Each school has an interdisciplinary team that makes determinations regarding student assessment. The team must rule out these factors as the primary reason for student's difficulty before that student can be found to have a specific learning disability.

Although ELs might exhibit similar behaviors as LD students, the causal factors are not the same. For example, an EL who has had interrupted schooling, and who is now in an English dominant classroom that offers little in terms of differentiated or sheltered instruction, will encounter difficulties in understanding and in applying information, making English acquisition and learning an arduous process. The EL's behaviors might mirror those of an LD student; however, the causal factors are quite different. IDEA recognizes this and requires educators to consider and address exclusionary factors to determine what placement and services will best meet the student's needs, in
the least restrictive environment. Some ELs are inappropriately identified as LD not because they have learning disabilities, but rather because they have not received an adequate opportunity to learn. (Echevarria, Vogt, Richards-Tutor, 2014.) Federal and state special education laws specify that a lack of opportunity to learn must be ruled out before a disability determination can be made (IDEA 2006).

Recently, an influx of Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education has renewed schools' challenges and piqued their interest in determining the best path of least struggle but greater outcomes for these students. These students' needs are multiple and diverse. Schools have had to draw and design service models that synergistically include the Response to Instruction & Intervention (RTI2) Tier process, (Orosco & Klingner, 2010) the inclusivity of Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS), and the "It takes a Village" vision to forge ahead, relying more on an evidence-based model befitting the needs of their specific population. Solid research is not yet available, prompting the reliance on evidence-based practices.

Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) assert that ELs must perform double the work of their native English-speaking peers-learning English while studying core content areas in English. By extension, ELs who have learning disabilities perform triple the work, because their disability-related needs must be met as well. With this burden in mind, we suggest that English Learners who have disabilities often perform triple the work,since their disability-related needs must be met as well. Hence, there is a need for cross-training and Professional Development that is inclusive of expertise in the areas of English as a Second Language and Special Education.

PART II: WHAT CAN WE DO?

How do we ensure that our EL students are receiving the appropriate supports?

Schools should form a synergistic multidisciplinary team to address these students' needs from several angles and at different levels. Based on a problem solving model, the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) approach considers environmental factors as they might apply to an individual student's difficulty and provides services and interventions as soon as the student demonstrates a need. It does not follow the "wait-to fail" trail. Additional support systems show systemic alignment and support in providing opportunities for all students to succeed and excel.

Many school districts already have MTSS teams in place (rti4success.org); however, the cross-training expertise to be able to meet the multifaceted needs of ELs, particularly those with gaps in their education, is not so readily available. Quite often, the fact that the student is an English Learner will bring a cold stop to the process of determining if there is a need for referral, interventions, and perhaps on to Special Education services. "Erring on the side of caution," as some districts tend to do, does not make for equal access, and will most likely impede a student's progress. Proceeding with the MTSS proactive mindset of early intervention and prevention provided by a multi-tiered system of support, facilitates equity of services as well as equal access to a free, appropriate public education for ELs (IDEA 2004).

The need for cross-training and professional development between English as a Second Language (ESL) and Special Education is critical, and the expansion of that training and professional development across the multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) team is crucial. The U.S. Departments of Education and Justice issued joint guidance to assist SEAs, school districts, and all public schools in meeting their legal obligations "to ensure that EL students can participate meaningfully and equally in educational programs and services." The guidance provides an outline of the legal obligations of SEAs and school districts to EL students under the civil rights laws (USDOE/DOJ 2015). It specifically addresses evaluating EL students for Special Education services. They recommend that "members of the IEP team to include professionals with training, and preferably expertise, in second language acquisition and an understanding of how to differentiate between the student's limited English proficiency and the student's disability." In addition, the guidance states that, "When administering written or oral evaluations to determine whether an EL student has a disability under Section 504, school districts must administer those evaluations in an appropriate language to avoid misclassification.... Prior to evaluating an EL student, school districts should, to the extent practicable, gather appropriate information about a student's previous educational background, including any previous language-based interventions." USDOE/DOJ 2015, pp. 27-28).

Families are children's first teachers. Make sure families know about the district's policies and their parental rights. Translate the policies into multiple languages. Ensure that the parents of ELs are not only involved, but also engaged in their children's education. Interview parents to gather information about the student and his/her growth and development, schooling, family life, socio-emotional progress, etc. This will help address current needs and develop the next steps in supporting the student's progress.

The decision whether to refer and ultimately place an EL student in Special Education should be driven by a welldeveloped, cross-trained Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) team. The team can be guided by these "If...Then" questions:

1. If English learners have received high-quality instruction in general education that is research-validated for ELs;
2. If their language proficiency and sociocultural context have been considered;
3. And if appropriate intervention has been tried and well documented, yet they are not making progress with appropriate intervention (and other factors have been excluded as influences on their learning).

Then identification of a learning disability should be considered.

(Echevarria 2014) Written by Tery J. Medina and edited by Phoebe Schlanger, MAEC
REFERENCES
Artiles, A. & Ortiz, A. (Eds.) (2002). English Language Learners with Special Education Needs: Assessment, Identification, and Instruction. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Center on Response to Intervention at American Institutes for Research - https://www.rti4success.org/

Custodio, B., & O'Loughlin, J.B., (2017). Students with Interrupted Formal Education-Bridging Where They Are and What They Need. Thousand Oaks, CA. Corwin.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Richards-Tutor, C. (2014). Response to Intervention (RTI) and English Learners : Using the SIOP Model. New York, NY: Pearson. Florida's MTSS-A multi-tiered system of supports. http://www.floridarti.org/educatorResources/MTSS_Book_ImplComp_012612.pdf

Hamayan, E., Marler, B. Sanchez Lopez C., & Damico, J. (2007). Special Education Considerations for English Learners: Delivering a Continuum of Services. Philadelphia: Caslon.

Hoover, J & Klinger, J. (2011). Promoting Cultural Validity in Assessment of Bilingual Special Education Students. In Cultural Validity in Assessment: Addressing Linguistic and Cultural Diversity.

Basterra, M. Trumbull, E. & Solano-Flores, G. Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group. Orosco, M., & Klingner, J.K. (2010). One school's implementation of RTI with English language learners: "Referring into RTI." Journal of Language Disabilities, 43, 269-288.

Short, D., & Fitzsimmons, S. (2007). Double the work: Challenges and solutions to acquiring language and academic literacy for adolescent English language learners - A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

U.S. DOE & U.S.DOJ: Guidance from the Departments of Education and Justice on Equitable Educational
Access for English Learner Students. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Retrieved from
Office of Special Education Programs' (OSEP's) IDEA website. http://idea.ed.gov.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Language Difference or Language Disorder? ELs and Special Education - MAEC, Inc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Part of CEE's Exploring Equity Issues series, this paper provides an overview of the over and under- identification of English Learners (ELs) with disabilities and the contributing factors. Recommendations for appropriate identification are also discussed. Language Difference or Language Disorder? ELs and Special Education There is a growing concern in US schools about the over-identification [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
Cognitive functioning: Learning, Problem Solving, & Judgment

# data[].attributes.subject
Cognitive functioning: Learning, Problem Solving, & Judgment

# data[].attributes.body
Such as being disorganized, poor Short-term memory, and poor standardized test scores. (Some ELs may have this information from their home countries)

# data[].attributes.headline
Adaptive Functioning: Daily life activities such as communication skills and social participation

# data[].attributes.subject
Adaptive Functioning: Daily life activities such as communication skills and social participation

# data[].attributes.body
Poor social skills

Lack of empathy

Low Communication skills

Lack of ability to follow rules

# data[].attributes.body
The English Learners' (EL) behaviors might mirror those of an LD student; however, the causal factors are quite different. Some ELs are inappropriately identified as LD not because they have learning disabilities, but rather because they have not received an adequate opportunity to learn.

# data[].attributes.headline
Check in with other teachers in different subjects to see if there is an issue

# data[].attributes.subject
Check in with other teachers in different subjects to see if there is an issue

# data[].attributes.body
• The child does not achieve adequately
• The child does not make sufficient progress
• The areas of concern are (in general) Mathematics, Reading, Oral & Written Expression, Listening Comprehension.

# data[].attributes.headline
Discuss with parents about what they notice outside of school. Such as communication issues in home language.

# data[].attributes.subject
Discuss with parents about what they notice outside of school. Such as communication issues in home language.

# data[].attributes.body
Note: Families have varying beliefs about disabilities so communicating these issues need to be taken with care. Building report with parents can help withe this process.

# data[].attributes.body
Get to know the student to better support their needs. Such as setting actionable goals, changing seating arrangements, collaborate with other teachers in supporting the student, involving parents, etc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by TeachThought Staff

This is part 2 of our #iteachthought series (because we refuse to say "back to school"-well, except for just then). Part 1 looked at classroom design, specifically offering alternatives to rows of desks. Today, we're going to help you create smarter, student-centered learning profiles.

If you're creating a learning profile, what kind of information should be included? What's the point of such a profile? How will it be used? Most learning profiles are quick glances of academic data. And there's nothing wrong with this-it's quick, useful, and basic.

But it's also limited. To take another approach, as Grant Wiggins might suggest, let's work backward. And further, let's do so from a single big idea that unifies everything. Specifying a single idea that's broad and accessible enough to be useful may be a challenge, but let's try, starting with a few underlying assumptions.

1. Teachers plan learning experiences for students.

2. Different students have different needs. This implies a need for differentiation of instruction, personalization of curriculum, or both.

3. In this way, teachers are like designers. The data teachers use to make these kinds of design decisions varies.

4. An additional challenge? Teachers have a finite ability to process data, which implies a need to be selective with the data that is sought out and adjusted for.

5. At the classroom level, data is broadly considered in terms of content and performance.

6. Another way of thinking about this is to consider data quality-and not quality as it relates to accuracy or reliability, but rather what sort of information do I need about students to help them learn?

Though I disagree with what might be the fundamental premise that this post rests on-that teachers alone are responsible for the miracle of learning, and can even begin to know everything about every student-the idea here has to do with rethinking how we see students and how they relate to curriculum, and then designing both curriculum and learning models that fit these personalized learning needs.

What Good Teachers Know About Their Students

1. Native language

2. Critical medical needs

3. IEP/504s/Giftedness, and other services

4. Living Situation", including religious beliefs, safety, food, family, access to books, technology, etc.

5. Grade Point Average & academic strengths

6. Favorite subjects

7. Reading levels & reading habits

8. How they respond to accountability

9. Relative strengths and weaknesses as a student

10. Classroom citizenship habits

11. Academic expectations (including difference between own goals and those of family)

12. How to 'motivate' them

13. Trend of general academic progress over last 1-3 years

14. Progress towards mastery of power standards/data from relevant standardized assessments

15. How to help them do well in your class

What Great Teachers Know About Their Students

1. Critical thinking habits

2. Ideal learning environment & circumstances

3. Which challenges they'll respond to most powerfully

4. Their personal histories (e.g., what they've overcome)

5. Personal strengths

6. Insecurities about school

7. How they respond to structure

8. How they respond to open-endedness and uncertainty

9. What 'school' means to them

10. Digital citizenship habits

11. Intellectual and human affections

12. How to help them find their own motivation

13. View of self as a reader, writer, and a person

14. Progress towards mastery of personal goals (creative, professional, familial, or other) and how to help them set-and doggedly pursue-their own goals

15. How to help them create their own standards and metrics for 'success'

*Age appropriate

See also What Makes A Teacher Great-From The Perspective Of A 10th Grader

Additional Reading
How-tos Of Differentiation Lesson Planning Learning Profile Cards Learning Profile (embedded above) by Jessica Winston Creating Student-Centered Learning Profiles: What Great Teachers Know About Their Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning Profiles: What Great Teachers Know About Their Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most learning profiles are quick glances of academic data. There's nothing wrong with this. They are useful, but they are also limited.

# data[].attributes.body
Work with parents, colleagues, and student to develop an IEP.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Development of the IEP

When developing your child's IEP, the team must consider five areas:

1. Your child's strengths

2. Your concerns regarding your child's education

3. The results of the most recent evaluation

4. Academic, developmental, and functional needs

5. Special factors

1. Student's Strengths

Your child's strengths and interests must be discussed by the IEP team and used as the basis for planning an educational program. Strengths and interests can form the framework on which to build new skills and behaviors. For example, if your child enjoys helping others, perhaps you can use this strength as encouragement to hand in all assignments and, as a reward, help a younger child with an art project. If your child has learning difficulties but is a good speller, perhaps teachers could build your child's self-esteem by asking him or her to spell words that the rest of the class finds difficult.

2. Educational Concerns of Parents

The IEP team must discuss your concerns related to your child's education. For example, you might be concerned that your child is being bullied, has few friends, is failing general education math, or doesn't have enough time to move from one class to the next. The concern also could be long term. Perhaps you fear that your child will become frustrated and drop out of school. The IEP team must address these concerns if they have an impact on education.

3. Results of the Most Recent Evaluation

The IEP team will consider the results of your child's most recent evaluation (initial evaluation or the three-year comprehensive reevaluation) when developing the IEP.

4. Academic, Developmental, and Functional Needs

Additional information for IEP team planning will include recent regular education report cards, results of state and district-wide assessments, progress made on goals in the current IEP, and discussion of the effectiveness of current IEP accommodations and modifications. The team will consider any new developmental or functional (activities of everyday life) needs that may have arisen for the child during the year.

5. Special Factors

The IEP team must consider additional special factors when a child:

Has behavior that negatively affects his or her own learning or the learning of others

Has limited English skills

Is blind or visually impaired

Has communication needs

Is deaf or hard of hearing

May need assistive technology devices and services

For more information on how to use the special factors, see PACER's handout "Five Areas that May Affect Individualized Education Program (IEP) Services."

Note: Some districts do not include the above areas on their IEP forms. Although the discussion is required, documentation on the IEP form is necessary only when the team determines that your child needs a particular IEP service. Schools also may document this discussion using the Prior Written Notice Form.

Parents Need to Know

Assistive technology devices and services should be considered for all children who have an IEP. Communication needs also apply to many children with variety of disabilities. Lack of communication skills sometimes leads to behavior concerns.

If the team determines that your child needs particular assistive technology device or service because of one or more special considerations, this determination must be written in the IEP.

Results of the discussion of the above topics may be noted in the appropriate section of the IEP form. These sections include present level of academic achievement and functional performance, annual instructional goal, services and modifications, or another appropriate section of your school's IEP form.

Children with IEPs who move from one school district to another, or from one state to another, are called transfer students. For more information on how the IEP process works for transfer students, see PACER's handout "Transfer Students and Special Education."

Plan Ahead for Academic Success Using the IEP Meeting Checklist
This checklist can be used as you plan for your child's annual Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting and at the meeting itself.

Next Section: Content of the IEP

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When developing your child's IEP, the team must consider five areas: Your child's strengths Your concerns regarding your child's education The results of the most recent evaluation Academic, developmental, and functional needs Special factors Your child's strengths and interests must be discussed by the IEP team and used as the basis for planning an educational program.