# data[].attributes.headline
Educating English-Language Learners with Special Needs: Beyond Cultural and Linguistic Considerations

# data[].attributes.subject
Educating English-Language Learners with Special Needs: Beyond Cultural and Linguistic Considerations

# data[].attributes.body
This research article contains information about ELLs with special needs who need extra support in our school systems in the U.S. The article talks over critical issues and challenges that are faced with ELLs with special needs. Policy issues are also made aware throughout the text that involve ELLs with disabilities. Recommendations are also listed to improve ELLs with special needs. All in all, this research is relevant to the provided topic because it explains the issues and recommendations to improve in with having in our society today with ELLs with special needs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Response: Ways to Support ELLs with Special Needs

# data[].attributes.subject
Response: Ways to Support ELLs with Special Needs

# data[].attributes.body
The author of this article explains to us different ways educators can support ELLs with special needs. The text discusses key strategies that can be used within the classroom that can benefit the needs of an emergent bilingual. There are also strategies listed about classroom management when having ELLs with special needs in your classroom. The article also provides material presentations, useful assessments, and coping strategies that can really support your students. Overall, this provides important information related to the topic because it can benefit an educator and students that need these accommodations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Response: Ways to Support ELLs With Special Needs (Opinion)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Today, Maria Montalvo, Beverly Maxwell, Ann Wilson, Jennie Farnell share their suggestions on how to support English Language Learners with special needs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dual Language Learners and English Learners with Disabilities 

# data[].attributes.subject
Dual Language Learners and English Learners with Disabilities 

# data[].attributes.body
In this book, within chapter 10, discusses how dual language learners and ELLs have been identified in having disabilities. This chapter shows a review of research on dual language learners and ELLs with disabilities discussing policies, practice, and research. This chapter also talks about short descriptions of different disabilities as well as a few myths that are connected to dual language learners and ELLs with disabilities. There are five major disabilities categories discusses that are affiliated with emergent bilinguals and describe the characteristics that come with the disabilities. Policy issues are as well talked about that are shown in ELLs in special education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Read "Promoting the Educational Success of Children and Youth Learning English: Promising Futures" at NAP.edu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read chapter 10 Dual Language Learners and English Learners with Disabilities: Educating dual language learners (DLLs) and English learners (ELs) effectiv...

# data[].attributes.headline
Who Are English Language Learners with Disabilities?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who Are English Language Learners with Disabilities?

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses important information of defining who and ELL with disabilities is. An ELL with disabilities is a student who is able to have both ESL and special education. Students who are identified with special education can have services in any of the federal disability categories, including ESL as well. The article also talks about the number of the students nationwide are limited and not really publicized that are identified as an emergent bilingual with disabilities. The text also talks about service-related characteristics as well as services that have been received in this classification of education. It also provides programs and services that can help emergent bilinguals with disabilities to have the help they need within the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
English language learners (ELLs) with disabilities represent an increasingly larger segment of the K-12 student population in the U.S. Because of the interaction of their disability and second-language learning processes these students may have unique learning needs that affect teaching and also affect the way students show what they have learned. This article will explore what is known about the prevalence of disabilities among ELLs and the characteristics of ELLs with disabilities. It will conclude with recommendations for schools and organizations serving these students.

Definition of an ELL with a Disability

Generally speaking, an ELL with a disability is a student who is eligible for both special education and English as a second language (ESL) or bilingual education services. There are different identification issues associated with each service, creating variability in the definition of an ELL with a disability across the country. Educators in different locales must be aware that they may not always be considering the same students when they refer to ELLs with disabilities.

Students who are identified for special education may receive services for any one of the 14 federally recognized disability categories. Some variation in the primary disability categories occurs across states. Federal legislation requires that ELLs with suspected disabilities be assessed in both their native language and English to ensure that any difficulties with learning are evident in both languages and are not solely the result of natural second-language learning processes. Educators and schools report that providing appropriate assessments in two languages and differentiating language learning from language-related disabilities is extremely challenging. For this reason, there is a national concern with the accuracy of special education identification rates for ELLs. This concerned is heightened for ELLs in some racial or ethnic groups.

Students who are ELLs are not proficient in English and are eligible for English language support services.1 Schools commonly provide ESL and/or bilingual education to identified ELLs. ESL prioritizes language instruction while bilingual programs include content instruction in the native language as well as instruction in English. The goal of both types of programs is to increase students' English proficiency so that they can succeed in English-only content classrooms. Typically, children are identified as ELLs through a multi-step process that includes a home language questionnaire parents complete when children are enrolled in school. If parents report that another language is used in the home, students are then given an English language proficiency screening test to determine whether or not they are eligible for ESL or bilingual education. Parent consent for language screening is not required, but parents have the right to refuse ELL services.

While the ELL identification process may appear straightforward, the accuracy of the information gathered may be compromised at several points (Bailey & Kelly, 2010). For example, parents may provide different answers to the home language questionnaire if a child moves to a new district or language use patterns in the home change. Individual states and school districts may ask different questions on the questionnaire, use a different screening assessment, and set different score ranges to be identified as an ELL. There may also be inconsistencies in administering the home language questionnaire to parents whose children have known disabilities.

Variations in the special education or ELL identification process may result in different groups of students being included in the group of ELLs with disabilities in different places. An educator in California and a disability advocacy organization in West Virginia may not be talking about exactly the same type of student when they refer to an ELL with a disability.

Numbers Nationwide

Determining the exact number of ELLs with disabilities nationwide is a challenge because there is a limited amount of publicly-available information on students who are both ELLs and have an identified disability. Estimates may differ depending on the purpose for which the information was collected, and the way in which the information was collected. For example, the Office of Special Education Programs reports on the number of students in special education for ages birth through 21 who were also limited English proficient (LEP).2 This information is included in federally mandated child count data provided annually by schools. However, it is reported by school special education staff and not by ESL or bilingual education departments, and thus may not reflect the total number of enrolled ELLs. In addition, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data identify the number of students of various racial/ethnic groups in each disability category, but do not break out the data for ELLs. It is possible to find national data on the number of Hispanic students with Autism Spectrum Disorders, for example, but not on the number of Hispanic ELLs in this disability category.

We get the most comprehensive picture of the population by piecing together information from multiple sources and making some general inferences about ELLs with disabilities based on what we know about ELLs and about students with disabilities overall. However, this type of approach must be interpreted with some caution. Some estimates of the population size are provided below based on a combination of information from multiple U.S. Department of Education sources for the 2009-2010 school year:

About 9.3% of K-12 students in U.S. schools were identified as ELLs (roughly 4,647,016 out of 49,788,000).3

According to IDEA child count data for the 2009-10 school year, 518,088 students with disabilities were classified as limited English proficient (LEP). This represents approximately 8.5% of all students with disabilities (Data Accountability Center, 2013a).

Of the 518,088 LEP students reported as receiving special education services, 200,347 were in California, representing 39% of the national total. Only 2% of all ELLs in the state are identified as having disabilities, however, compared with 4.8% of English proficient students. Among all states, California identified the highest percentage of ELLs with disabilities. More than half of all states report that they provide special education services to less than 0.5% of the ELL population.

ELLs with disabilities have a number of characteristics that vary across students. By definition they are all limited in their English proficiency, but students may vary greatly in the amount of time they have spent in the country, their previous educational experiences, their actual levels of English proficiency, the other languages that they speak, and the type of primary disability that they have.

Nationwide, the majority of ELLs speak, or have exposure in the home, to some form of Spanish. However, there may be as many as 400 different language groups represented in the ELL population across the country (Boyle, Taylor, Hurlburt, & Soga, 2010). Common language groups for ELLs with disabilities most likely reflect the common languages spoken by ELLs overall. For the 2009-2010 school year, the largest language groups reported by states included speakers of Arabic (29 states), Chinese (32 states), Hmong (7 states), Russian (7 states), Somali (10 states), and Vietnamese (31 states).4 Different areas of the country had concentrations of different language groups represented in that year. For example, Somali was among the largest language groups in the ELL populations of 10 states. Schools and advocacy organizations in these states could expect to serve Somali ELLs with disabilities and could anticipate the need for Somali-speaking staff, as well as the need for materials in Somali. However, Somali was not one of the largest language groups in the other states, perhaps due to different patterns of Somali refugee resettlement and migration. Global events are also a factor in predicting what groups will require services as a result of trends in immigration and refugee resettlement.

National data on students in special education do provide data on primary disabilities for all students (Data Accountability Center, 2013b). From the data on all students with disabilities we can make some inferences about ELLs with disabilities. In 2009-2010 approximately two-thirds of all students with disabilities ages 3-21 were identified with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD), Speech/Language Impairments (SLI), Mental Retardation (MR), and Emotional Disturbance (ED). The largest group of students had specific learning disabilities, followed by those with speech or language impairments. It is likely, then, that the largest groups of ELLs with disabilities could have these same primary disabilities. Evidence provided in 2001-2002 by ESL departments in K-12 schools (Zehler et al., 2003) and by a 2006 Office for Civil Rights data collection (Office for Civil Rights, 2013) verified that these disability categories were, in fact, common among ELLs.

Services Received

In 2006, the Office for Civil Rights reported that, nationwide, only about 88% of students with disabilities who were in need of ESL or bilingual instruction actually received it (Office for Civil Rights, 2013). State level data can show variations among ELLs with disabilities who received language support services across racial and ethnic groups. For example, in one Midwestern state 60% of students with disabilities in the Hispanic ethnic group reported that their home language was Spanish. However, only 58% of these Spanish-speaking students were classified as ELLs and the remaining 42% were classified as English proficient. Of the students who were classified as being eligible for ELL services, 7% did not receive them. This information raises questions regarding the accuracy of the disability identification, the accuracy of procedures to determine English proficiency, and whether students were being denied services for which they were eligible.

Program and Service Considerations

The information presented in this article shows the diversity of ELLs with disabilities and some of the variation in this student population across states and across types of organizations serving the students and their families. It is important for educators and others who work with ELLs with disabilities to ensure they understand the characteristics of students in general and specifically of the population in the area they serve. Several recommendations are provided here to consider in developing programs and services for ELLs with disabilities and their families:

Understand that if you serve ELLs or students with disabilities, you most likely serve ELLs with disabilities. These students are a part of both groups, but may have needs that are different from either due to the interaction of students' disabilities and second-language learning processes.

Keep in mind that the labels applied to students are not sufficient to describe students' characteristics. Because there is a great deal of variability in the population of ELLs with disabilities, educators and service providers must look beyond the group name and develop appropriate ways to understand the complex characteristics of the students they serve. They should be sensitive to within-group variation and to changes in group characteristics due to acculturation that occurs over time.

Recognize that descriptions of populations of ELLs with disabilities vary across states and programs, depending on who is identifying the size of the group and for what purpose. No one source of information captures all of the relevant information on students. Each state is unique in the size and make-up of the population of ELLs with disabilities, the prevalence of particular home languages, and other factors relevant to providing appropriate supports and services for students and families. It may be necessary to piece together a knowledge base from multiple sources of information, but this must be done cautiously.

Plan for student and family supports and services that meet the needs of the particular population in your area. Having targeted services and supports that meet the needs of a particular language group, for example, will require staff who are knowledgeable about the characteristics and needs of students and families from that group. Developing this type of knowledge in staff will require specialized staff recruitment and training efforts within a school or organization serving individuals with disabilities. Outreach materials will be needed in both the languages and preferred media of the local population. For example, some groups may be more likely to access information via DVDs or local television while others prefer print information. Organizations should also be prepared for periodic shifts in the language and cultural groups requiring services, due to changes that occur at the local, national and international level.

Know that there will be ongoing issues and challenges in appropriately identifying and serving ELLs with disabilities in schools. The needs of ELL families will fluctuate over time, particularly with newly arriving groups. Research in the field of ELL special education is also evolving rapidly. Educators and policymakers must be flexible and willing to rethink decisions based upon changing circumstances and emerging information.

2 See https://www.ideadata.org/PartBData.asp , Part B Data and Notes, Child Count Data.

3 To calculate the percentage of ELLs we divided the total number of ELLs that states reported in 2009-2010 Consolidated State Performance Reports (available at http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/consolidated/ sy09-10part1/index.html ) by their projected total enrollment using projected growth rates for Fall 2009 published in the Digest of Education Statistics (Table 34 available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_034.asp ).

4 Based on data compiled from 2009-2010 Consolidated State Performance Reports (available at http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/consolidated/sy09-10part1/index.html ).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Impact | Volume 26, Number 1 | Who Are English Language Learners with Disabilities?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
English language learners (ELLs) with disabilities represent an increasingly larger segment of the K-12 student population in the U.S. Because of the interaction of their disability and second-language learning processes these students may have unique learning needs that affect teaching and also affect the way students show what they have learned.

# data[].attributes.headline
Contention Between English as a Second Language and Special Education Services for Emergent Bilinguals with Disabilities

# data[].attributes.subject
Contention Between English as a Second Language and Special Education Services for Emergent Bilinguals with Disabilities

# data[].attributes.body
What I found interesting about this article is that it is given in English and Spanish so it can be read. This article talks over the tension between English as a second language and special education services for emergent bilinguals with disabilities and how it can be resolved. It is shown that classroom behaviors relate to learning a new language can mimic a disability. It is crucial that educators support the development of a new language while acknowledging students disabilities. By supporting emergent bilinguals with disabilities, it is important to recognize the consequences of ranking the services that they receive and can explore the influence that those rankings will have on the learner's language and their disability. This article can relate to the topic because it talks about the resolutions that can be made between English as a second language and special education services for emergent bilinguals with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Proposed Changes to the Special Education Code of New Jersey

# data[].attributes.subject
Proposed Changes to the Special Education Code of New Jersey

# data[].attributes.body
This letter discusses the needs of emergent bilinguals with disabilities in the state of New Jersey. The letter shows suggestions on how the state can improve their programs with emergent bilinguals in special education. One policy listed for a suggestion is, to measure the extent to which a student with limited English proficiency has a disability and needs special education, rather than measure the students English language skills. The suggestion to this policy is to have materials and procedures used to assess a student in the earlier stages of emergent bilingual. This is useful information because these suggestions can improve these policies to help emergent bilinguals with disabilities to have the support services they need.

# data[].attributes.headline
ELL in Special Education: 4 things to know about partnering with families

# data[].attributes.subject
ELL in Special Education: 4 things to know about partnering with families

# data[].attributes.body
This resource gives us guiding strategies and tips to know about ELLs in special education and connecting with their families. It discusses how important student's families are connecting and communicating with teachers. It shows to be beneficial from cultural and linguistic experiences that families can bring to school communities. One important factor is the expectations of school, and how educators need to make sure they are communicating regularly to all families to make sure each student is on track in school. Another factor is cultural perspectives about disability and how different cultures can have different definitions, viewpoints, and expectations on disabilities. The third factor is revolved around language and how families of ELLs have the legal right to retrieve school documents and meetings that are in their home language. The last factor talks about immigration concerns and how someone in an ELLs family can have an immigration status and are not documented U.S residents or citizens. These factors are important to understand as an educator because, an emergent bilinguals family is essential to communicate with so that the family understands what learning needs the student must be supported with.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As teachers, we know that some of our most powerful allies are students' families. This is especially true of English language learners (ELLs) who learn and think differently. Establishing a strong partnership is a win for students, families, and teachers alike. We can all benefit from the rich cultural and linguistic experiences these families bring to the school community.

Sometimes barriers can get in the way of family engagement. That can leave families' expertise and contributions unrecognized and untapped by schools.

So how can you tap into this rich resource, especially when it comes to conversations about special education? Here are some things to keep in mind about culture, language, and immigration - plus some strategies to help you get started.

In Understood's resources, we use the term "English language learners" (or "ELLs") to talk about students who are learning English. You may use this term or others in your school. Many educators are beginning to use "emergent bilinguals" (EBs) to acknowledge students' bilingual skills.

Factor 1: Expectations of schools

How a family participates in a child's education, including special education services, can depend on what the family understands their role in their child's education to be. It can also have to do with how the family feels at the school.

For example, in many Latin American countries, public education calls for a family's participation in terms of providing school uniforms and materials. Families are also expected to prepare children for school by teaching social, behavioral, and emotional life skills. Often, public schools in Latin America do not invite families to teach academics, partner with the teacher, or provide information on the child's learning like they do in the United States, according to research.

As educators, it's our job to communicate to all families that we want to draw on their valuable assets. Those assets can greatly contribute to their child's development and learning, especially if a child is struggling in school.

Take, for instance, first-generation immigrants who may not have had access to education past primary school or who may not yet speak fluent or academic English. Those family members may assume they can't contribute to their child's academic development. Here again, schools can help them understand the important contributions they are already making and can continue making as experts of their children.

Start with these general strategies for partnering with families of English language learners (both in and outside of special education settings).

If your school is holding parent-teacher conferences, send home a letter explaining what conferences are. That way, you can clarify the purpose of the conferences (as some families may think that they or their child did something wrong). Encourage families to prepare questions to ask at the conferences. This can be particularly helpful if they're concerned about their child's progress.

Consider activities that allow families to participate regardless of language, like painting a mural or helping in the school garden.

Find ways for families to share their perspective on what matters most to them about their child's education. You might use this questionnaire (available in English and Spanish).

For Spanish-speaking families, share a resource in Spanish about the importance of family involvement in U.S. schooling .

Engage students in creating an artifact (like a drawing or a letter) for their family members using their home language or cultural depictions, telling what they want to share about school.

Factor 2: Cultural perspectives about disability

Different cultures may have different perceptions, definitions, and expectations about disabilities. Those cultural associations or stigmas can impact how families view their child's disability.

Some families may blame themselves for their children's disabilities. Others may believe a curse is to blame for the disability, rather than a medical cause. Of course, be careful not to make assumptions about families' preferences or perspectives based on their culture or language.

As one example of a cultural view, people in many Latin American countries use the term "disabilities" to mean a visible or medical disability. Learning disabilities that are not immediately obvious may not be considered disabilities.

Also, many Latinx families think of kindness, good behavior, a strong work ethic, and collective responsibility to family as "being educated." So the idea that a child may have a learning disability may conflict with the family's perception that their child is an active and able part of their community. They may disagree with or feel discouraged by the news of their child's disability.

On the other hand, some of the Native American families I've collaborated with have viewed disabilities more holistically. They have shared that their communities tend to focus on supporting the strengths of people with disabilities.

Clearly, different cultures respond differently to the concept of "disabilities." But no matter the culture, families may also have questions about whether a disability is something the child will "grow out of" or whether the struggle is actually related to learning English . It's important to be prepared for these questions with updated information about the child's evaluation and about instruction and progress in English.

Talk with families to frame the term "disability" by focusing on the child's strengths and needs. Here are three important messages to communicate:

A child's learning or thinking difference is not a deficit.

The child has many strengths from which to build.

There are specific supports the child can receive to build on those strengths.

Most families want to make sure their child has access to the supports they need to learn and thrive. When we frame special education supports this way, the conversation shifts from focusing on deficits to finding opportunities for better learning experiences.

To learn more about cultural perspectives on disability, talk with colleagues, like ESL teachers, family liaisons, or interpreters. Other families with experience in special education can also provide insights.

Share with the family your insights about the student's strengths and interests, as well as examples of personal interactions with the student. This will help families understand that you care and that you see the child's strengths - not just the disability.

Allow the family to share information about the child's strengths at home and in the community, especially non-academic strengths. Include the family members' strengths, too.

Ensure that families understand the services that their child is receiving or is eligible to receive.

Families of English language learners have a legal right to access school documents and meetings in their home language. That includes special education paperwork and communication. Both oral and written translation of special education information requires expertise in the services and terminology.

Ideally, the translation and interpretation will also take cultural factors and nuances into account, especially given the different cultural perspectives on disability. It also should be provided in a format that is accessible and user-friendly.

After the information is translated, it's critical that families understand the terms - and the implications of those terms. For example, a translator may use the Spanish term "problema de aprendizaje," which translates to "learning problem." This term may not convey to families that this "problem" is a disability that needs to be addressed by special services. Watch the video below from Colorín Colorado to learn more.

Explain to families that they have a right to access information in their home language. Be clear that you value their language and see it as an asset for their child.

Learn more about your school's or district's translation services to make sure families have full access to information they need to participate meaningfully in this process. For example, the school district may provide a translation hotline. In addition, community members or other parents can be trained as volunteer interpreters. (Students should not serve as interpreters in these situations.)

If you are working with an interpreter, sit down before family meetings to talk through any areas of concern. Ask about particular issues, cultural factors, or perspectives you should understand.

If adequate language support is not being provided to families, raise your concern with colleagues or administrators. Look for additional information and resources from ESL/bilingual colleagues, family liaisons, district departments, or your state ELL department.

Factor 4: Immigration concerns

Some immigrant families may have mixed immigration status, meaning that not all family members are documented U.S. residents or citizens. Family members may feel uneasy about participating in formal school meetings, filling out paperwork, or sharing personal information with the school. Perhaps families are unsure of their rights or those of their children. They could also be concerned about immigration enforcement.

You should approach families with empathy when talking about the complexities that immigrant families face. Take the time to understand a family's concerns that might come up when discussing services available and legal paperwork. Educators like you can put practices into place that help build a culture of caring and safety at your school.

Communicate clearly with families and colleagues that all students in the United States have a right to a free, appropriate education, regardless of immigration status. The immigration status of a child or family member has no impact on eligibility for special education services.

Keep in mind that families may be wary of signing documents (related to the special education process or otherwise), especially if they have experience with detention or deportation. ( Read more about my experience with one of my students' families.) By building trust, you should be able to partner with families to obtain services that make a significant difference.

For similar reasons, families may also be worried about coming to school or sharing personal information. Schools are still considered "sensitive locations" where immigration enforcement should not take place. Students also have certain legal protections regarding personal information and privacy, regardless of immigration status. If families have questions about these topics, direct them to accurate, updated information from administrators or school district personnel.

Draw on strategies to work around barriers to communication with families. Know that family members who are working and do not have work visas may be more vulnerable at work. This could mean that they are unable to answer their phones during work hours or take time off of work for school meetings.

Partnerships that promote growth

For English language learners who learn and think differently - and their families - navigating school can be complex. As an educator, you can draw on a student's and family's assets to lay the foundation for genuine, solid partnership. By doing so with an open mind and empathy, you will begin building a trusting relationship that will benefit your students, often in life-changing ways.

About the Author

About the Author

Juliana Urtubey, MA is the 2021 National Teacher of the Year. She is an Understood Mentor Fellow and a special education teacher and instructional strategist working in inclusion and resource settings in Las Vegas.

Reviewed by

Reviewed by

Claudia Rinaldi, PhD is the Joan Weiler Arnow '49 Professor at Lasell University, where she serves as chair of the education program.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
English language learners in special education: 4 things to know about partnering with families

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As teachers, we know that some of our most powerful allies are students' families. This is especially true of English language learners (ELLs) who learn and think differently. Establishing a strong partnership is a win for students, families, and teachers alike. We can all benefit from the rich cultural and linguistic experiences these families bring to the school community.

# data[].attributes.headline
Some Myths Regarding ELLs and Special Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Some Myths Regarding ELLs and Special Education

# data[].attributes.body
In this text, the article discusses in depth three myths that connect to English language learners as well as special education. The first myth talks about labeling an ELL with a learning disability, at least they will get help. This is shown as a myth because it is an incorrect label they would be using for an emergent bilingual if they do not have a special learning need. The second myth is that, waiting five to seven years for ELLs to develop their English language skills before language can be ruled out of a cause for the student's difficulty. This is not true because a student should not be withheld from any support services that the student might need in the future. Lastly, the third myth is when an ELL is shown to have a disability, the instruction should only be in English so the student is not confused. This as well is shown to be false because students with speech, language, and learning impairment can become fully bilingual. Overall, these myths are important to understand because, these myths keep ELLs from learning English in correct instructed way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Some Myths Regarding ELLs and Special Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Several myths prevail in the area of special education for ELLs. These myths guide us in the way we approach education in general, in the way we interpret students' behaviors, and in how we teach and assess students. The following are commonly held misconceptions regarding ELLs and special education.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Education of emergent bilinguals with disabilities: State of practice

# data[].attributes.subject
The Education of emergent bilinguals with disabilities: State of practice

# data[].attributes.body
This article contains relevant information to emergent bilinguals in special education involving students who have disabilities. Educators in the bilingual and special education system need to recognize the issues that are faced by emergent bilingual students who have disabilities. The article discusses the misconceptions emergent bilinguals and that there are a lack of linguistic and cultural educational policies and instructional practices. Educators are shown to reflect on different views that can effect their professional practice as well as, engaging and evaluating programs to make sure the right curriculum and instruction is provide to emergent bilinguals with disabilities. Overall, this article wants educators to focus on strategies to get rid of institutional practices and policies that can place students at risk of failure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1968, Lloyd Dunn wrote a classic article on the over-representation of "socioculturally deprived" children in special education programs. He attributed disproportionality to several factors, including general education teachers who did not have the skills to meet the needs of students from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds and who resorted to special education referral to remove "problem children" from their classrooms. When CLD students were referred to special education, assessment personnel diagnosed disabilities based on results of norm-referenced assessments that were invalid for CLD students. The performance of students classified as having disabilities did not improve because special education teachers were ill-prepared to serve them. Both general and special education teachers responded to disability labels by lowering their expectations for student success. The net result was that neither general nor special education programs were effective in providing CLD students with appropriate educational opportunities. Sixteen years later, Baca and Cervantes () described barriers to educational opportunities for Emergent Bilinguals (EBs) almost identical to those identified by Dunn (): overrepresentation in special education, biased assessments, stigma associated with disability labels, and teachers' negative attitudes toward, and lowered expectations for, the potential of these students. The articles in this issue of the Bilingual Research Journal suggest that, almost four decades later, these barriers are entrenched and continue to deny EBs equitable, appropriate educational opportunities.

Disproportionate representation of EBs in special education

In aggregate, national data indicate that EBs are under-represented in special education in comparison to those from homes where English is the primary language (Morgan et al., ). However, there is great variability across states, districts, and schools in special education representation based on students' race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, age and grade. For example, in a study of urban school districts in California, Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, and Higareda () found that EBs tended to be under-represented in the specific learning disability (SLD) and speech/language impairment (SLI) categories in the elementary grades, but significantly over-represented in the upper grades. EBs with low skills in both English and Spanish were more likely to be placed in special education than their English proficient peers. Those in English immersion programs were also more likely to be placed than students in bilingual education programs or in modified immersion programs that provided instruction in English with native language support. These within-group differences in referral and placement rates underscore that EBs are not a monolithic group. Understanding special education representation requires that data be disaggregated at several levels (e.g., national, state, district, and, perhaps most importantly at the school level). Data must also be disaggregated across multiple factors, including student characteristics (e.g., age, grade, language proficiency), language instruction educational program in which students are served (e.g., bilingual education vs. English as a second language program), disability categories, and special education programs and services provided.

Whether EBs are over-, under-, or proportionately represented in special education is based on the assumption that prevalence equates with accurate identification. This is not always the case. In studies involving 44 EBs with reading-related specific learning disability, researchers concluded that some EBs were accurately identified (n = 10; 23%), some had primary disabilities (e.g., speech/language impairment) other than specific learning disability (n = 18; 41%), and that, in more than a third of the cases (n = 16; 36%), data were insufficient to qualify students for special education or to support a specific learning disability diagnosis (Ortiz et al., ). As many as 77% of these students may have been misdiagnosed. Inaccurate identification and/or classification has serious consequences for EBs, including lowering teachers' expectations for student performance, regardless of their actual academic performance (Kangas, this issue) and limiting their long-term social, academic, and economic opportunities.

Education reform without reform for emergent bilinguals

In the present context of comprehensive school reform and evidence-based instructional programs and practices, one would expect that school improvement initiatives would specifically target the needs of EBs, the country's fastest-growing segment of the preK-12 student population. However, school reform is oftentimes a response to federal and state laws that delineate requirements and responsibilities (e.g., addressing the language needs of EBS or providing appropriate educational opportunities for students with disabilities). However, laws do not prescribe models, services, practices or actions, leaving it to local education agencies to determine how they will meet federal and state mandates. Consequently, reforms tend to begin with "one size fits all" approaches, with modification or alternatives for CLD students an afterthought. For example, the Elementary and Secondary Action Act (Section 8101(21)(A)) mandates that schools use evidence-based programs and interventions to ensure positive academic outcomes, but does not mandate that EBs be provided native language instruction, giving states wide latitude in choosing the language of instruction, including allowing states to adopt English-only approaches to the education of EBs. Such approaches run counter to research that documents that EBs who are provided native language instruction achieve at higher levels than peers instructed primarily in English and native English speakers (August & Shanahan, ; Thomas & Collier, ). These findings hold for EBs with disabilities (Genesee & Fortune, ; Connor, Baker, & Allor, this issue).

Multi-tiered system of support and response to intervention

To prevent disproportionate representation of CLD students and EBs in special education, most states and school districts have now implemented Multi-tiered System of Support and/or Response to Intervention (RTI) frameworks that include: (a) school-wide improvement plans, (b) universal screening to establish performance levels of all students, (c) decision making based on student data, and (d) continuous progress monitoring. The models also include multi-tiered instruction that provides evidence-based practices in delivering core instruction to all students, supplemental intervention for those experiencing academic difficulties or behavioral problems, and specialized instruction for students with disabilities. Research on whether these frameworks have improved the academic achievement of EBs, reduced inappropriate referrals, or led to accurate diagnosis of disabilities among EBs are limited. However, achievement data (e.g., retention rates, graduation rates, performance on state-mandated accountability assessments) and patterns of over- and under-identification of EBs with disabilities suggest they have not. A possible explanation is that MTSS/RTI frameworks are not culturally and linguistically responsive. Most do not include a systematic process for universal screening, progress monitoring, and benchmark assessments in the oral language domain (Cavazos & Ortiz, this issue). Yet, language data are central to differentiating instruction consistent with students' language proficiency(ies), evaluating instruction, and determining whether students are making adequate progress toward meeting state-mandated language proficiency and content standards. For MTSS/RTI to meet the goal of providing appropriate educational opportunities, educators must evaluate whether, and how, each of the essential components represents culturally and linguistically responsive and evidence-based practices.

Special education practices involving EBs

As is the case for MTSS and RTI, special education practices and procedures must also be linguistically and culturally responsive.

Special education assessment

When EBs are referred, special education assessment instruments and procedures must be (a) administered in the student's native language, (b) valid and reliable for EBs, and (c) administered by appropriately trained and/or certified personnel (IDEA, ). Complying with these federal mandates is difficult given the limited number of valid and reliable assessment instruments for EBs in languages other than English and the shortage of bilingual assessment personnel (e.g., school psychologists and speech pathologists) who have in-depth expertise specific to the assessment of EBs. One of the most common reasons for not developing standardized assessment instruments in Spanish, the second most common language spoken in the U.S., is that doing so is impossible given the number of Spanish dialects. One cannot help but wonder how it was possible to develop standardized assessments in English given the variety of dialects of English spoken across the country. Without instruments in the native language and/or instruments developed with representative samples of EBs in norming samples, EBs will continue to be disproportionately represented in special education. The costs associated with educating EBs who are inaccurately identified as having disabilities, or who are placed in the wrong disability category, are likely greater than the costs of developing appropriate assessment instruments.

Multidisciplinary teams

Special education multidisciplinary teams are responsible for determining students' eligibility for special education services. They examine results of the comprehensive special education assessment and data from other sources (e.g., developmental and school histories, parent reports, progress monitoring data) and provide assurances that students' learning problems are not primarily the result of limited English proficiency, cultural factors, environmental or economic disadvantage, or lack of access to appropriate instruction [CFR x 300.306(b)(1)(i)(iii)]. To that end, multidisciplinary teams must include personnel with expertise specific to EBs, including the child's parent(s). Educators must provide parents of EBs the supports and resources they need to participate meaningfully in Individualized Education Program (IEP) proceedings (e.g., interpreters; orienting them to what the meeting is about and the significance of the decisions that will be made). Educators should also assure that parents understand their rights and those of their children in all proceedings. For example, parents should know that their child has a right to be served in special education and language instruction educational programs. Denying them access to both programs is expressly prohibited by federal law and constitutes a civil rights violation (U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education ()).

Individualized education programs

IDEA () requires that EBs with disabilities have an IEP that addresses both disability- and language-related needs (U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education, ). The IEP is the cornerstone of a quality education for EBs. Yet, IEPs contain little or no reference to students' diverse linguistic and cultural characteristics and do not recommend native language or English as a second language instruction or accommodations that should be provided to EBs (Hoover, Erickson, Patton, Sacco, & Tran, ). Without such guidance, instruction will reflect educators' perceptions and beliefs, not evidence-based practices. Cioè-Peña (this issue) and Connor and colleagues (this issue) present evidence that educators believe that EBs with disabilities should be educated in English-only to avoid linguistic confusion. They convince parents that their children should be placed in general education programs in which instruction is entirely in English or, if the student is already enrolled in a bilingual education program advice parents to request that their child be exited and placed in a general education classroom. Excluding EBS with disabilities from educational programs that use bilingual approaches denies them the opportunity to become bilingual and biliterate. This, in turn, deprives them of future social, educational, and economic disadvantages. Cioè-Peña (this issue) and Martínez-Álvarez (this issue) argue that these inequities emanate from racism, sexism, classism, and ableism perspectives. They urge educators to advocate on behalf of EBs and their parents to eliminate deficit orientations, to provide access to equitable learning opportunities, and to ensure that EBs with disabilities reach their maximum potential.

Collaboration in service delivery

Educators must accept joint responsibility for planning and implementing instruction to address the needs of EBs with disabilities. They must work together to understand the complex factors that contribute to the success, or lack of success, of these students. One of the difficult conversations about the education of EBs with disabilities must center on how schools serve to maintain the social, educational, economic, and political inequities reflected in society, inequities that result in long-term, negative consequences for EBS, including academic underachievement, high rates of school attrition, and disproportionate representation in remedial and special education programs. As suggested by Martínez-Álvarez (this issue) and by Cioè-Peña (this issue), educators must develop a sense of agency and the capacity to change deficit orientations, their own and those of their colleagues, and all must work together to eliminate institutional racism and policies and practices that serve to disempower EBs. In schools, change can begin with collective agency, dialogue and collaboration across disciplines for the express purpose of enhancing the education of students with disabilities (Martínez-Álvarez, this volume). Educators must move out of departmentalized approaches to the education of EBs and EBs with disabilities (e.g., bilingual educators are responsible for addressing native language and English proficiency; special educators address (dis)ability-related needs). Departmentalization ignores the reality that EBs have multiple identities (e.g., a Latino male who is economically disadvantaged, classified as an emergent bilingual, and identified as a student with a disability) and that these identities must be acknowledged in every program and every classroom in which students are served. Creating a shared knowledge base among educators is a key strategy for ensuring the success of EBs. Bilingual educators must share their expertise about language acquisition and culturally and linguistically responsive pedagogy with special education personnel; in turn, special educators must share their expertise about (dis)ability and effective practices for inclusive classrooms. Collaboration across disciplines and programs prepares educators to address the intersections of identity markers and to select, modify, or create programs, instructional approaches, and curricula that truly serve the whole child, not their characteristics in isolation.

There is no better way for educators to understand EBs than by providing them, and their families, opportunities to share their lived experiences. This information will help teachers understand, and appreciate, students' and families' social, linguistic and cultural capital, as well as supports they may need to assure school success. Incorporating student, family, and community funds of knowledge into the teaching-learning process is the essence of culturally and linguistically responsive education practice. Kangas (this issue) shares the voices of EBs with disabilities and shows how they challenge educators' deficit perceptions of them as low-performing students based on their language characteristics and disability classifications. Emergent bilinguals showcased their bilingual proficiencies and their academic accomplishments, countering that the root of their academic difficulties is instruction that is irrelevant and uninspiring, not their language and disability status.

Cioè-Peña (this issue) documents that parents of EBs with disabilities understand their children's need and recognize the benefits of bilingualism in a global society. But, parents give in to the misguided advice of educators about which program placement and language of instruction are in the best interest of their children with disabilities. The advice given by educators to parents is based on misconceptions about the intersection of language proficiency and (dis)ability, misconceptions that cannot be changed unless educators have deep expertise about, and implement, evidence-based practices for EBs and EBs with disabilities. The research literature is clear that using the native language is an effective instructional practice for EBs (August & Shanahan, ; Thomas & Collier, ) and for EBS with disabilities (Genesee & Fortune, ; Connor, Baker, & Allor, this issue). Dialogs involved in collaborative approaches are instrumental in changing deficit perspectives and creating a shared knowledge base among all educators who serve EBs with disabilities (Martínez-Álvarez, this issue).

The education of EBs with disabilities in the context of COVID-19

Providing appropriate educational opportunities for EBs with disabilities has always presented complex challenges, but these challenges are exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools must develop proactive plans to meet the needs of EBs with disabilities who are more likely than their non-disabled peers to have chronic medical conditions that put them at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. Plans should ensure that the provisions of students' IEPs are implemented, in-person or virtually, including individualized social and academic interventions and specialized services such as speech or occupational therapy. Educators must ensure that students and families have appropriate, accessible technology (e.g., computers, assistive or augmentative devices), access to internet services to be able to use that technology, and the resources needed to support instruction in home or school settings. They must also ensure that parents understand that if their child does not receive the services specified in their IEPs, they may be eligible for compensatory services to make up for services lost because of the school's failure to provide appropriate educational opportunities during the pandemic. Compensation is critical given that it may take years for students to fill in gaps that widened because of interrupted or inconsistent instructional opportunities associated with the pandemic.

The articles in this issue of the Bilingual Research Journal, along with the books reviewed, take a fresh look at the barriers to the education of EBs with disabilities identified by Dunn in 1968 and Baca and Cervantes in 1984. These barriers continue to characterize the state of practice in the education of EBs with disabilities today. Contributors offer specific guidance for overcoming these barriers and moving the education field closer to the promise of a free, appropriate education for EBs with disabilities.

Research articles and book reviews

In Bilingualism for Students with Disabilities, Deficit or Advantage?: Perspectives of Latinx Mothers, María Cioè-Peña argues that bilingual educators must advocate to safeguard bilingualism as a basic human right of Emergent Bilingual Learners Labeled as Dis/abled. (EBLADs). These students continue to be placed in educational settings where instruction is primarily in English. Educators recommend to mothers that their children with disabilities be placed in English-only instructional programs to avoid linguistic confusion. Although they first resisted, mothers subsequently internalized educators' deficit-perspectives about their children's language skills and agreed to recommended placements. Bilingual educators have contributed to the shift from perceptions of bilingualism as a deficit to bilingualism as an advantage and from bilingual education as a right to bilingual education as a privilege. These shifts have negatively impacted the education of EBLADs by limiting their access to multilingual instruction.

In an ethnographic embedded case study, Counternarratives of English Learners with Disabilities, Sara Kangas draws upon dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit) as a lens for understanding the lived experiences and perceptions of 12 English learners with disabilities in middle school. Challenging a dominant narrative that focused on students' perceived academic and linguistic deficiencies, these students recounted their academic achievements and efforts as well as their bilingual proficiency. Further, in opposition to the dominant notion that intersecting disability and low English proficiency limited their learning opportunities, students indicated that unengaging learning environments negatively influenced their academic success. Students' counternarratives highlight how important it is for research and practice to be inclusive of the voices of English learner students with disabilities.

Carlin Conner, Doris Luft Baker, and Jill Allor reviewed studies that examined whether children who have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and who are from culturally and linguistically diverse communities benefit more from being exposed to one versus two or more languages. Findings reported in Multiple Language Exposure for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities suggest that children with autism spectrum disorder benefit from richer interactions with parents and teachers in their native language. These findings contradict practitioners' advise that parents of children with autism spectrum disorder speak only the majority language to reduce deficits in language development. In fact, the results from the review suggest that there appears to be no advantage to limiting a child with autism spectrum disorder to one language. Promoting the use of the child's native language, along with the predominant language used at school, may actually promote social language and academic growth.

Essential Constructs in the Preparation of Inclusive Bilingual Education Teachers: Mediation, Agency, and Collectivity, by Patricia Martínez-Álvarez, addresses the question, how can we build the knowledge base in teacher education to prepare teachers for inclusive bilingual education classrooms? She argues that three constructs are essential to the preparation of teachers who work in these settings: mediation, agency, and collectivity. Implications for teacher preparation programs are discussed and praxis examples are provided.

Linda O. Cavazos and Alba A. Ortiz make the case that oral language assessments should be routinely included in Multi-tiered System of support (MTSS) and Response to Intervention frameworks for English Learners. Without up-to-date language data, teachers may not have sufficient information about native language and/or English proficiency to plan and deliver lessons that support oral language development or to judge whether students are making expected progress toward mastery of the target language. The English Learner Oral Narrative Scale (ELONS) was developed as an informal, criterion-referenced instrument to assess the personal narrative skills of ELs (i.e., skills in recounting personal experiences). The ELONS was piloted with 28 third grade ELs in a transitional bilingual education program to describe participants' personal narrative skills and to explore relationships between narrative skills and reading achievement. Mean scores were at the Advanced level for English global narrative proficiency and vocabulary, grammar, and fluency; mean ratings for oral comprehension and pronunciation were at the Advanced High level. Twelve of 28 ELs produced Spanish narratives of sufficient length to score. Mean global and subskill scores were at the Advanced level except for fluency (Intermediate level). ELONS global proficiency scores showed moderate correlations to state assessments of English language proficiency and English reading. Implications for oral language assessment in MTSS/RTI frameworks and future research directions are discussed.

Three books that can serve as important resources for educators who serve emergent bilingual learners with disabilities are included in issue 43(3) of the Bilingual Research Journal.

Laura Turner reviews Disabled upon arrival: Eugenics, immigration, and the construction of race and disability by J.T. Dolmage. Rhetoric surrounding immigration has been used throughout the course of North American history to justify policy aims and to create boundaries around what is considered normal and acceptable. This process of normalization - a process by which certain people, behaviors, and ways of being serve as limits for what is considered normal - accompanied the immigration experience in both the United States and Canada in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Jay Dolmage roots this historical framework within the confines of normative Whiteness and the "science" of eugenics, defining what was important, of value, and normal, in society during this particular time period in North American history. The book serves as a close examination of the intersection between the race and dis/ability constructs. The interdisciplinary nature of Disabled Upon Arrival makes it applicable and relevant to the work of scholars interested in immigration, dis/ability studies, rhetoric, and the intersection of race and dis/ability in North American history and education.

Language, culture, and education: Challenges of Diversity in the United States, edited by E. Ijalba, P. Velasco, and C. J. Crowley, is reviewed by Fabiola Vargas Londono. The book provides an overview of the current situation that immigrant families experience in the United States. To represent the ongoing impact of the political and social situation, the authors focused on five groups, Chinese, Korean, Hispanic, Arab-American, and Mixteco-Spanish, and their experiences navigating both the school system and health services in New York. Part I offers an introduction to the history of bilingual education in the United States and the challenges in diagnosing a disability from bilingual students. Part II provides an in-depth understanding of cultural differences and practical ideas to enhance bilingualism with immigrant families. The final sections move from the experiences of immigrant families in the school to their experiences with health services, and ends with the current political situation and future actions. This book offers valuable information for caregivers and speech-language pathologists, the latter of whom are the main focus of this book. Teachers, health-care professionals, and therapists can also benefit from the information provided since they also impact the daily lives of immigrant families. Overall, this book enriches the practices of service providers by cultivating the bilingualism of diverse students and families.

Finally, Cheryl Y. Wilkinson, reviews Supporting English learners in the classroom: Best practices for distinguishing language acquisition from learning disabilities by Eric Haas and Julie Esparza Brown. This book is intended to help educators and caregivers (parents and guardians) determine what EL students need to succeed and the best ways to provide these supports. The book's eight chapters present evidence-based practices and decision-making strategies for ELs using a three-tier Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) model, and detail the processes needed (i.e., referral, eligibility assessment, eligibility determination and Individualized Educational Program development and implementation) when an EL is suspected of having, or has, a language-related disability. The book also includes resources for schools and districts that wish to implement the practices and procedures described. Haas and Esparza Brown have provided a strong resource for researchers, but also for schools or districts looking to evaluate and improve their services for ELs, and this would be an excellent work for learning communities or working groups to read and discuss.

In summary, educators must recognize that the issues faced by emergent bilingual students with disabilities stem, in large part, to misconceptions about these students and the lack of culturally and linguistically responsive educational policies and instructional practices. The articles and books included in this issue of the BRJ provide guidance to help educators and families advocate for equitable, appropriate learning opportunities for emergent bilingual students with and without disabilities. An important first step is for educators to reflect on their worldviews and how these influence their professional practice. A second step is to engage in evaluation of the extent to which the programs, curricula and instruction provided all emergent bilingual students reflect evidence-based practice. If they do not, educators must shift their attention from prevention and intervention strategies that focus on students to strategies to eliminate institutional policies and practices that place students at-risk of failure.

References

, , , & (2005). Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate representation: English language learners in urban school districts. Exceptional Children , 71(3), 283-300. doi:10.1177/001440290507100305

, & (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel for language-minority children and youth . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

(1968). Special education for the mildly retarded-Is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children , 35(1), 5-22. doi:10.1177/001440296803500101

Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114 Stat. 1177 (2015-2016)

, Erickson, J. R. , , , & (2018). Examining IEPs of English Learners with learning disabilities for cultural and linguistic responsiveness. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice , 34(1), 14-22. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12183

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Pub. L. No 94-142, 20 U.S.C. §1415 (2004).

, Robertson, P. M. , Wilkinson, C. Y. , , , & (2011). The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: Implications for response to intervention. Bilingual Research Journal: Journal of the Association for Bilingual Education , 34, 316-333. doi:10.1080/15235882.2011.628608

, & (2012). Dual language education for a transformed world . Albuquerque: Dual Language Education of New Mexico - Fuente Press.

U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education . (2015). Dear colleague letter: English Learner students and limited English proficient parents . Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The education of emergent bilinguals with disabilities: State of practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1968, Lloyd Dunn wrote a classic article on the over-representation of "socioculturally deprived" children in special education programs. He attributed disproportionality to several factors, including general education teachers who did not have the skills to meet the needs of students from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds and who resorted to special education referral to remove "problem children" from their classrooms. When CLD students were referred to special education, assessment personnel diagnosed disabilities based on results of norm-referenced assessments that were invalid for CLD students.

# data[].attributes.headline
Supporting Emergent Bilinguals with Individualized Education Plans: Tips from CUNY-NYSIEB

# data[].attributes.subject
Supporting Emergent Bilinguals with Individualized Education Plans: Tips from CUNY-NYSIEB

# data[].attributes.body
This article focuses on emergent bilinguals who need support within the classroom, with a specific learning need, with the guidance of CUNY-NYSIEB. CUNY-NYSIEB is a collaborative project with team members that are from the research institute for the study of language in urban society.A program that can help emergent bilinguals with their learning needs is an Individualized Education Plan (IEP.) This resource can help emergent bilingual students who need support in their language development and have the right type of advocacy that can be given to them. This company as well discusses the main principles of the support of emergent bilingual with IEPS, as well as supporting emergent bilinguals with IEPS on a school wide level, and inside the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Making sure the emergent bilingual learners (EBLs) in your class receive the support they need can be challenging, particularly if they also require support for a specific learning need as indicated in an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). This resource is designed to help you in your work with and advocacy for students who need support in language development and have additional learning needs.

The ideas and examples we will share in this resource draw on the expertise and years of experience of the CUNY-NYSIEB support team, whose members have guided dozens of schools across New York State to develop best practices for emergent bilingual students, including those with IEPs. We draw on our core principles in all the work we do, which view bilingualism as a resource in education and support a multilingual ecology for the whole school.

Before we start, a quick note about language: If you are new to CUNY-NYSIEB's work, you may be wondering why we refer to students as we do. Labeling so often characterizes emergent bilinguals' learning experiences in school: they are called ELLs (English Language Learners), and in the case of those IEPs, SWDs (Students with Disabilities) or SPEDs (Special Education Students), all terms that emphasize what they can't do or the services they receive. We refer to these students as emergent bilinguals to emphasize their skills (bilingualism) and their growth potential (emergence).

I. Background information on Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs

How do we get to know Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs?

Emergent Bilinguals with Individualized Education Plans (EBL-IEPs) receive both mandated English as a New Language (ENL) support as well as services for a documented learning need under an IEP.

We want to emphasize that these students are an incredibly diverse group in terms of language and cognition. Also, because students' performances fluctuate over time, they can actually be "decertified" as they move through the school system (that is, they stop needing ENL or IEP services). Therefore, it is crucial to emphasize the talents, literacies, and intelligences of emergent bilinguals with IEPs, even as we acknowledge their particular needs.

For more information on identifying, monitoring, and providing appropriate services for EBL-IEPs, check out Chapter 6 of the US Department of Education's frequently-updated English Learner Toolkit.

What can schools do for Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs?

Typically, an emergent bilingual will be referred for evaluation for special education services if his or her ENL teacher realizes that the student needs additional help that is not a function of English Language acquisition. However, providing an accurate diagnosis for EBL-IEPs can be a challenge; it is widely documented that EBLs are both over- and under-identified for special education services (Brown & Campbell-Ault, 2015). Because evaluations for special education are normed on monolingual populations, they can give an inaccurate picture of an emergent bilingual student (Hart, 2009). In all contexts, evaluating students for special education services must be done with the family's input and in a way that is culturally appropriate and recognizes the student's bilingualism. For more identification and support, this resource page on addressing EBL-IEP's linguistic and educational needs can help.

II. Using CUNY-NYSIEB Principles to Support Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs

In CUNY-NYSIEB's experience working with schools, a few strategies have stood out as particularly promising for emergent bilinguals with IEPs. We highlight classroom examples from cohort schools where these strategies have been successfully implemented. We present them here divided into "school based" and "classroom based" practices, to differentiate between what we have seen successfully implemented on a schoolwide level and what individual teachers have accomplished with these students.

A. Supporting Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs on a Schoolwide Level

Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs receive two different types of support: they get help developing English for academic purposes, as well as assistance for physical, cognitive, or other reasons under a documented IEP. It is critical not to assume, however, that because these students are receiving so much support their needs are always being met. On the contrary, because these supports can mean separate classes or instructional periods, it is critical to ensure these students do not feel isolated from "mainstream" populations as a result. It is just as critical to ensure they are not stigmatized among their peers or held to lower expectations by their teachers. Having a whole school culture of high expectations and inclusivity is key to the success of these students, and the following strategies adhere to this philosophy.

1. Building Community

Families are key members of students' support team. You can also tap into resources within your school community: bilingual staff members and parent volunteers can help in communicating with families, designing relevant curricula and resources, and conducting assessments in the home language.

Once you have identified key community members as collaborators, an important next step is creating an understanding of what community is. Help community members understand the school-community relationship as reciprocal, that is, the ways we help each other and why we do so. This includes students and their family members in the broader community and ensures all members are on the same page when it comes to learning goals. Additionally, positive peer and adult relationships are supported, which helps establish behavioral norms for social situations and helps educators understand behaviors that may be culturally informed.

2. Collaborative Decision Making

The collaborative team approach is crucial when it comes to making instructional decisions about Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs. In this approach, educators work together with administrators, parents, and specialists to create a unified vision of support for student needs, teachers collaborate across disciplines, and all teachers receive Professional Development (PD) in accessible pedagogy.

Collaborative decision making essentially extends the building community goal. Once you have established reciprocal relationships among all stakeholders, it is far easier to begin asking those involved with these students to help make decisions about their education. Additionally, this strategy asks all teachers - not just teachers of Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs - to become involved and join their community of support.

CUNY-NYSIEB Successful Strategies: Making Decisions Collaboratively

At one cohort elementary school, a recent shift in enrollment had increased the numbers of emergent bilingual students, many of whom additionally received services under an IEP. Many teachers were unsure how to best serve the needs of their students. With the support of the CUNY-NYSIEB team and the principal, teachers formed a leadership team that involved all stakeholders: mainstream teachers, special education teachers, and ENL support specialists. Through regular meeting and dialogue, the team was able to learn and implement school-wide and classroom supports that all teachers agreed upon and were grounded in the principles of inclusion and bilingualism as a resource. As the year progressed, teachers were able to implement and then workshop strategies with their colleagues, in order to decide which interventions were the most useful to their students. At the end of the year, teacher provided the feedback to CUNY-NYSIEB support staff that they felt more competent in meeting the needs of their emergent bilingual students with IEPs, as well as had grown more skilled in seeing their colleagues as resources and partners. Moreover, the teachers felt empowered using the strategies, because they had all decided on using them together.

3. Base Pedagogical Choices on Student Needs

Every student is an individual, with different learning needs, cultural and linguistic background, and talents. Thus, instruction for Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs needs to be accessible and leverage their diverse abilities and language practices. Moreover, when instruction is relevant to students, they and their families see learning experiences as valuable.

B. Supporting Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs in the Classroom

One big way you can support students is by opening up your classroom to translanguaging. The principles of inclusive education are all about removing barriers to participation so that all groups and individuals can have access to high quality education. Because translanguaging affirms students' diverse language practices and uses them as a resource in education, translanguaging does this for emergent bilingual students. That makes it a natural fit in a special education context!

When special educators plan supports and scaffolds for their students, they always keep in mind the idea that students learn through different modalities. When we look at students' language repertoires through this lens, we see the need to include multiple means of representation, expression, and engagement in our lessons. The ideas we present below explain how translanguaging can help create a more inclusive environment for Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs. These strategies also fit in very well across the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework and are aligned to UDL principles of teaching and learning.

For more translanguaging strategies, click on the Guide above!

1. Activating Background Knowledge Across Languages

We must appreciate that Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs arrive in classrooms with considerable prior learning. This can help us design learning experiences that welcome and build on what students know, as well as intentionally teaching specific, relevant knowledge and skills that they need in order to access new content and tasks.

This can be done by providing materials and using instructional tools that give multilingual options for students to receive new information. Many curricular materials are English-only, and particularly in the case of these students, materials in the home language can provide an additional academic support.

CUNY-NYSIEB Successful Strategies: Activating Background Knowledge Across Languages

In an 8th grade integrated team teaching English Language Arts class, the teacher team planned to introduce their students to the idea of "taking a stand," a key theme in the unit they were starting that featured "To Kill a Mockingbird" as the class novel. Knowing the dense novel would be a challenge to their students, many of whom receive language and special education services, the teachers wanted to provide a low-stakes, high-interest entry point to engage their students in thinking about the book from the get go. They set up a multilingual and multicultural "gallery walk" of images and signage that represented individuals and groups from the students' linguistic and cultural communities "taking a stand" on important issues. Students rotated around the room with language partners, and had a "silent conversation" in English and the home language about what they saw. In a "silent conversation," students respond to each other in writing - in the case of this class, the teachers provided prompts in English and the home languages of the class to scaffold students' responses and teach them the language of building and questioning. After the activity, students read the posters together in mixed language groups, using each other as resources to make sense of the multilingual responses. They had meaningful conversations around what the images mean to them, as well as generated questions about what they might mean in connection to the unit they were starting. The teachers noticed that when students used their background knowledge (cultural context of the photographs) and home languages, students were able to successfully understand and engage in the activity and generate meaningful conversation and writing in English afterward.

Note: For more like this, see the CUNY-NYSIEB Translanguaging Pedagogy for Writing Guide

2. Using Multiple Entry Points for Task Completion

Students should be invited to demonstrate their learning using multiple modes and languages, including on assessments. When it comes to sharing what they know and have learned, the language students use is not critical unless that is what is being assessed. What does this mean? If you want students to demonstrate how well they have mastered writing a well-organized paragraph in English, the final product (the assessment or completed task) should be in English. However, if you are assessing how much they have learned about the life cycle of a butterfly and they are able to use gestures, home language, pantomime, or other modes to express this concept, it can be accepted as a completed task.

3. Support Planning and Strategy Development

Students can learn to monitor and support their own learning. You can support students in doing this by teaching them ways to develop executive functioning mechanisms such as reflection and self monitoring so they can learn to adjust their actions in ways that support their own learning.

4. Spotlight on Classroom Practices: Translanguaging and Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs

Translanguaging in Action for Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs: Special Educator Scaffolds Students' Writing:

A 6th grade Special Education teacher in an urban public school had a class of 12 students, some of whom were Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs with Haitian Creole, Bengali, Fulani, Arabic, and French as their home languages. The teacher asked the students to write 3-5 sentence narratives that described their daily lives. The teacher posted sentence stems such as, "On Saturdays, I like to ..." and "My favorite food is ... " The whole group listed different foods in English and in the students' home languages on the board and created a multilingual chart of terms. Afterward, students used the sentence starters to complete at least one sentence in English. The teacher further aided students' multi-literacy skills by having students write sentences in their home languages as well. Those who could explain more were challenged to write two or three sentences, but everyone was able to complete some type of authentic writing that served a real purpose and audience, and where students were able to make choices about topics and express their own voices. Even the most hesitant speakers were proud to share.

Successful uses of Translanguaging strategies in this lesson included:

Using students' home languages as a resource

Chunking what seemed to be a simple task into several steps

Brainstorming ideas before speaking and writing about them

Providing scaffolding in the form of English sentence starters and multilingual, student - generated vocabulary lists

Differentiating the task complexity according to student strengths

Allowing student choice of language use during the discussion

Spotlight on Students: Emergent Bilinguals with IEPs

Juan, 7, 2nd grade student from Puerto Rico

Juan is a 7-year-old student who arrived to the U.S. from Puerto Rico as a toddler. He speaks Spanish as a home language, and has been receiving ENL services since entering Kindergarten, and is additionally classified with another health impairment (OHI).

His class is a bilingual, co-teaching model, where his two teachers - the general education bilingual teacher and the special education teacher - work in consultation with the ENL teacher. Juan also receives pull-out resource room services to address his IEP goals in Spanish. Through the bilingual instruction in his classroom, Juan is developing good verbal English expressive and receptive abilities in addition to developing literacy skills in Spanish. He is below grade level in reading and writing in both languages, but is learning quickly and is really excited by his schoolwork.

Juan experiences academic successes when given the opportunity to express his learning in different ways. For instance, he likes to use a reading "app" on the classroom iPads to demonstrate his developing mastery of English phonics. He also benefits from reading texts in context and discussing them with his peers: On a recent class trip to the zoo, for instance, reading English and Spanish texts about the animals and talking about them with his peers helped him complete a detailed writing assignment about the trip.

However, Juan also faces some barriers to consistent success. The students in his class, half of whom receive one form of supplemental educational service or another, have a great deal of individual needs and Juan sometimes gets distracted or struggles when a teacher is assisting another student. Another challenge has been the medication Juan takes for his diagnosed Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). His doctors and parents are working to regulate the dosage, because when his medication is off, Juan is either lethargic or disruptive.

Héctor, 14, 8th grade student from Panama

Héctor is a 14-year old student originally from Panama who came to the U.S. in first grade. Since coming to the US he has been in three schools, in three different states.

Perhaps as a result of this inconsistency in schooling, Héctor was not identified as an EBL until 6th grade. In addition to the EBL label, he also receives services for a classified learning disability under an IEP. Héctor is placed in a general education classroom with pull-out ENL services and Special Education Teacher Support Services (SETSS).

Héctor is charming, likeable, and very social. While quiet in his classes, he likes to exchange secret messages or gestures with his peers. He loves basketball and plays for the school team. He seems to be well-integrated among his peers, although he can appear shy among adults. Where he thrives socially, Héctor's relationship with academics is more complex, particularly in regard to language use.

At home with his family, Héctor only uses Spanish. However, at school he only uses English. When other Spanish-English bilingual classmates communicate in both English and Spanish among themselves, Héctor does not participate. He doesn't feel comfortable providing Spanish translation to newcomer students who don't speak English and doesn't like to say that he was born in Panama. Also, though he can speak and understand Spanish he does not read or write it, possessing literacy skills in English only.

Héctor has been experiencing some academic successes recently, leading to notable improvements in his reading and writing proficiency in English (though he is still at below grade-level expectations). Héctor's teachers had been noticing he is often hesitant to begin a written task and is forgetful of steps, so this year they began supporting him with sentence starters and writing models. These graphic organizers have been helpful in teaching Héctor to structure his writing. When reminded of steps and presented with models, Héctor can now produce independent writing that fulfills the requirements of the task. Another area of strength is that he responds well to feedback from both his teachers and his peers.

Valentina, 17, 11th Grade Student from the U.S.

Valentina is a 17-year old student born in the U.S. of Mexican descent. She has been receiving ENL services for 11 consecutive years, so is classified as a Long Term English Language Learner. She also receives services under an IEP because of a classified learning disability. Valentina is in 11th grade at a high school in a large urban area, and receives language and special education services through integrated co-teaching with two or more teachers (general education, special education, and/or ENL teachers) in different subjects.

Valentina loves cooking and drawing, is social and polite, and gets along well with her peers. Valentina speaks both English and Spanish at home. She has strong Spanish literacy skills, having participated in one-way dual language programs as an elementary school student and "Spanish for Native Speakers" classes through middle and into high school, yet she prefers to speak and write in English. She demonstrates strong comprehension of written texts and the ability to retell or paraphrase what she has read. She is also a talented creative writer who enjoys crafting imaginative narratives and poetry.

Some areas of difficulty for Valentina include organization and applying appropriate mechanics in her writing. Specifically, she is inconsistent with distinguishing claims from counterclaims and using transitions to connect body paragraphs with claims. She also often has challenges remaining on task. Successful strategies her teachers have tried include giving her question prompts, using graphic organizers, applying annotation routines, and providing redirection. When her teacher gives her prompting with questions, Valentina can recognize and implement corrections on her own most of the time. For organization, her teacher has used T-charts to help her organize ideas for an essay and provided a pre-filled organizer for her to insert relevant information. Learning an annotation routine has also helped Valentina to improve her reading comprehension. Valentina is now able to apply the routine without prompting, and this has improved her overall proficiency in literacy-based skills.

Helpful Links: Further Reading and References:
Brown, J.E. & Campbell Ault, P. (2015). Disentangling language differences from disability: A case study of district-preservice collaboration. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 6, 111-166. Retrieved from http://fordham.bepress.com/jmer/vol6/iss1/7

Celic, C. and Seltzer, K. (2012). Translanguaging: A CUNY-NYSIEB Guide for Educators. Available here: http://www.nysieb.ws.gc.cuny.edu/files/2012/06/FINAL-Translanguaging-Guide-With-Cover-1.pdf

Cheatham, G. A. & Hart Barnett, J.E. (2016). Overcoming common misunderstandings about students with disabilities who are English language learners. Intervention in School and Clinic, 1-6.

Ebe, A. (2010, Sept/Oct). Culturally Relevant Texts and Reading Assessment for English Language Learners. Reading Horizons, 50(3), 193-210. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=reading_horizons

García, S. & Tyler, B. (2010). Meeting the needs of English language learners with learning disabilities in the general curriculum. Theory Into Practice, 49(2), 113-120.

Gordon, D., Meyer, A., and Rose, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing. Available here: https://www.amazon.com/Universal-Design-Learning-Theory-Practice/dp/0989867404/

Hart, J. E. (2009). Strategies for culturally and linguistically diverse students with special needs. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 53(3), 197-208.

Wang, P., & Woolf, S. (2016). Trends and issues in bilingual special education teacher preparation: A literature review. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 6(1), 35-59. Retrieved from http://fordham.bepress.com/jmer/vol6/iss1/4/

Acknowledgments

This CUNY-NYSIEB resource was created by Kathryn Fangsrud Carpenter, Kahdeidra Martin, and Louis Olander. María Cioè-Peña, Maite Sánchez and Kate Seltzer served as advisors to the authors. We would like to give special thanks to the teachers and administrators who provided feedback on this resource.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Supporting Emergent Bilinguals with Individualized Education Plans: Tips from CUNY-NYSIEB

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Making sure the emergent bilingual learners (EBLs) in your class receive the support they need can be challenging, particularly if they also require support for a specific learning need as indicated in an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). This resource is designed to help you in your work with and advocacy for students who need support in language development and have additional learning needs.