The case for school leaders to have a thorough understanding of collaborative practices is growing. For instance, McClure and Cahnmann-Taylor (2010) noted that a mandated co-teaching program ignored "real differences in practice and epistemology, often leaving co-teachers to make their way through these challenges on their own" (p. 111) without administrators' understanding of and support for teacher collaboration. Additionally, they came to the conclusion that the co-teachers who took part in the study "all resisted the notion that co-teaching is a simple and neutral endeavor and confirmed the need for sustained dialogue and support as they worked to collaboratively develop their co-teaching" (p. 122).

       Dahlman and Hoffman (2012) even made the case that it's important to acknowledge how different each collaboration situation is and give it time to go through an organic transformation process. Co-teaching, they advised, "must be integrated into a school's philosophy and become part of the organization's culture and practice through genuine connections to existing practices" (p. 42) if it is to have long-lasting impacts. Co-teaching is therefore anticipated to develop differently in different schools and districts and also have a distinctive appearance in varied circumstances. Yet, we look for a shared understanding of what co-teaching for ELLs is supposed to include (Glenda Harrell, personal communication, July 27, 2014).

      Although it started out as a solitary practice motivated by regional concerns to create a more inclusive program for ELLs, it is now a more widely accessible program alternative for ELLs both domestically and abroad (Honigsfeld & Dove, 2012a). Many professional associations, academics, and ESL teachers have recently reinterpreted the position of the ESL instructor. ESL instructors "should be recognized as experts, consultants, and trainers well versed in teaching rigorous academic content to ELLs" (Staehr Fenner, 2013, p.9).

Additionally, we noted that ESL teachers' "expertise is critical in analyzing the academic language demands of the content curriculum, developing and demonstrating lessons that successfully address academic language and content at the same time, scaffolding oral language and literacy development, and coaching general education teachers in the most effective, standards-based instruction for ELLs. ESL/ELD instructors need to be developed into leadership roles rather than feeling marginalized and alone, which is frequently the case (Honigsfeld & Dove, 2015, pp. 54–55).

          The internal organization of ethnic learning styles consists of at least eight key components (which are set up differently for different groups): preferred content; methods for completing learning tasks; techniques for structuring and expressing ideas and thoughts; physical and social settings for task performance; structural arrangements of work, study, and performance space; and perceptual stimulation for receiving, processing, and demonstrating comprehension and competence; Because culture has a significant impact on the attitudes, values, and behaviors that students and instructors bring to the learning process, it must also play a significant role in determining how underachievement problems are addressed.

Conclusion:
         Education has not been very culturally sensitive to students from different backgrounds. These students have instead been asked to separate themselves from their cultures and learn according to European American cultural norms.  They are put in double jeopardy because they must perform academically while adjusting to cultural norms that are foreign to them and frequently uncomfortable. Their academic performance would be significantly improved by getting rid of this second burden.

          When we translate a test, Peña (2007) suggests that we need to think about:

The content validity of the test may be in jeopardy if there is a lack of equivalence in any of these areas (Rogler, 1999). The test's content validity provides an assessment of how well it measures the intended outcomes. 

            Learning a second language with a gender system, like Spanish, takes time, as anyone who has attempted to do so can attest. It's a complicated system, therefore test equivalency isn't possible when we test young children, and one of them is expected to be able to identify noun genders while the other isn't. 

             Another scenario is when you test a bilingual child who is still learning English but has lost proficiency in their original language, and they perform poorly on BOTH examinations. Although you can't know that, we could argue that is indicative of a linguistic issue or delay. You can obtain a more complete picture by using additional measurements, such as parent and teacher interviews, classroom and playground observations, and triangulating. All the data allows you to get a fuller picture.