English Language Learners: Academic Experience, Pre-referral and

Assessment Best Practices Martha Villegas-Gutiérrez, Ph.D.Licensed PsychologistEducation Evaluation CenterThe Teaching Research InstituteWestern Oregon University

Objectives

Case Review IDEIA Reflection: ELL Students academic

experiences Demographics Definitions ELL Identification

Objectives (Cont.)

Important Considerations Language ELL Instructional Programming Research Linguistic Needs Acculturation ELL Pre-Referral

Language Proficiency Assessment Practices

Formal Assessment Practices Learning Disability Possibility Language Difference Possibility Summary and Recommendations

Case Review

Jesus1st grade, monolingual/Spanish, male student referred for an evaluation due to

“being significantly behind in all areas”Areas of Concern: Reading Problem Solving Memory Writing Organization Skills Speaking Skills Concentration/paying attention Math Communication Skills Self-Confidence Passing classes.

Legislation

IDEIA 300.534 Determination of Eligibility-A Child may not be determined to be eligible under this part if

the determinant factor for that eligibility determination is

(i) Lack of instruction in reading or math;(ii) Limited English Proficiency

Actividad en Español

Tome cinco minutos para contestar las siguientes preguntas:

1. ¿Cuál es su nombre?2. ¿Cuál es su profesión?3. Describa su preparación y experiencia profesional

para trabajar con estudiantes clasificados como aprendices del inglés o ELL (por sus siglas en inglés).

4. ¿Tiene usted alguna pregunta con respecto a los procesos de referir y evalualar estudiantes clasificados como ELL para educación especial?

Know Thy Self

Cultural Background Language Language Modality (Verbal, Nonverbal)

ELL Demographics

Limited English Proficient Students will constitute 40% of students in public education by 2030 (Thomas and Collier, 2003)

1997-98 to 2008-09 English-language learners enrolled in public schools increased from 3.5 million to 5.3 million, or by 51 percent

(National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition, 2011)

Definitions

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD)

Non-English-proficient (NEP)

Limited-English-Proficient (LEP)

English Language Learners (ELL)

ELL Identification

Home Language Survey English Proficiency Screening (State

Standards)

Special Ed. Identification Difficulties Over-identification

-Students classified due to language difference (Diana V. California Board of Education)

Under-Identification-delay in referring student due to possibility of misclassification

**ELL with real special education needs are not being met.

Important Considerations

Language Acquisition: CLD children’s knowledge and learning is based on the language spoken at home.

Home language and Children’s culture communicate traditions, values, and attitudes.

**Encourage parents to use and develop children’s home language to enhance children’s learning and development.

Language

Language Proficiency

BICSBasic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) are skills used in day to day interactions with others. I.E., playground conversations between children and informal verbal interactions with a parent, a friend or a neighbor. ELL need an average of one to three years of exposure to the second language to reach appropriate levels of conversational proficiency with peers. (Cummins, 2004).

Language Proficiency

CALPCognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) is the ability to use and understand complex linguistic meaning in verbal or written communication.

I.E., engaging in sophisticated, intellectual conversations or writing school essays. ELL need five to seven years, on average, to reach peer-appropriate grade norm levels in academic areas taught in a second language (Cummins, 2004).

The Second Language Acquisition Process:

The second language acquisition process is a complex, and lifelong process similar to first language acquisition.

Second language acquisition is best developed by exposure to meaningful activities that focus on language use. (Collier, 1995).

The Second language acquisition process:

Children of low social economic background or those whose parents have not had the opportunity to receive formal schooling are those most in danger of lost years of cognitive development due to an early switch to the second language in preschool.

Wong Fillmore, 1991

Language and Identity:

Language is an important marker of one’s identity. For young language learners and school age children, language is a fundamental part of the social world they have grown up in. To disallow a child to use her language for self expression is to diminish her as an individual.

Genesee, Paradis, Crago 2004

Language and Identity:

“What is lost when children and parents cannot communicate easily with one another? What is lost is no less than the means by which parents socialize their children: When parents are unable to talk to their children, they cannot easily convey to them their values, beliefs, understandings or wisdom about how to cope with experiences.”

Wong Fillmore, 1991

Individual Differences in English Acquisition Silent period (six or more months) Code Switching/Code Mixing (Me voy a poner my

shoes) Conversational skills acquisition but not truly

proficient Conversational proficiency (developmentally

appropriate receptive and expressive skills)

Factors that Influence the second language acquisition process

Home and Community Characteristics Parental and community attitudes Degree of parents’ bilingualism Literacy in the home Use of mixed languages History of Education Quality of Schooling in native country Languages Years in school Interruptions in schooling Quality of education Socio cultural background/Acculturation

Acculturation

The process of adaptation to a new cultural environment without abandoning native cultural values.Acculturation influences family and social interactions. It also influences cognition, emotion, and behavior, perceptions, ideologies, beliefs, values, language use, and other aspects of human behavior and functioning.

Cuellar & Paniagua, 2000

Acculturation:

Integration/Biculturalism: Integrate aspects from both cultures. Healthiest acculturation outcome

Assimilation: Replacement of home culture and language by school/new culture and language.

Rejection: Rejection of home/heritage for school/new culture and language, or rejection of school/new culture and language for home/heritage culture.

Deculturation: Acceptance of neither home/heritage nor school/new culture/language.

Effects of Acculturation:

Heightened Anxiety Confusion in Locus of Control Withdrawal Silence or unresponsiveness Response Fatigue Code Switching Distractibility Resistance to Change Disorientation Stress Related Behaviors

C. Collier, 2002

Family Acculturation

Family’s Cultural Background Cultural Identification to both native and

mainstream culture Cultural Family Traditions Cultural Educational Beliefs Parents’ acculturation pattern

Observations and Interviews

Conduct observations and ask questions to assess Rhodes, Ochoa and Ortiz (2005)10 Domains:

1. Language use or language preference.2. Social affiliation3. Daily living habits4. Cultural traditions5. Communication style

Interviews and Observation (Cont.)

6. Cultural identity or cultural pride

7. Perceived prejudice or discrimination

8. Generational status

9. Family socialization

10. Cultural Values

Professional Training for working with ELL Students Language Proficiency

Second Language Acquisition

Acculturation

ELL Pre-Referral Process

Rhodes, Ochoa & Ortiz Prereferral (2005) EEC Data Gathering

-Parent Questionnaire-lang. dev., hearing, vision, past or current illness

-School Questionnaire-File Review-Student Interview-Parent Interview-Teacher Interview

Pre-Referral (Cont.)

-Observations: Classroom, playground, testing

Pre-Referral Team Consideration Areas: General Educational Background History Preschool Experiences Schooling Factors Evaluation Student’s Performance Language Considerations Family and Cultural Factors

(Rhodes, Ochoa, and Ortiz, 2005)

Language Proficiency Identification

Native Language Proficiency

-Formal

-Informal Measures (language sample, oral story retelling, receptive language evaluation)

English Language Proficiency Formal and Informal Measures

Formal Assessment Language Alternatives English Native Language Bilingual Non-Verbal

Formal Assessment: Multidimensional Assessment Model for Bilingual Individuals: (MAMBI) Rhodes, Ochoa and Ortiz (2005)

recommended system to determine the language of formal cognitive and academic evaluation

Based on Language Proficiency Levels, Grade Level and Academic Programming

Jesus’ Results

Language Difference Possibility

Difficulties related to:

Typical Second Language Acquisition Stages:Silent PeriodCode SwitchingBICS

Difficulties observed Only in Second language (Student’s oral and literacy skills are developmentally appropriate in native language.

Assuming research based, native language instruction opportunities.

Learning Disability Possibility:

Native language delay or disability history

Assuming Adequate Instruction in Native Language:

Native language literacy difficulty Familial learning disability history

LD Possibility (Cont.)

Specific language weaknesses:

Phonemic awareness in both languages History difficulty in spite of research

based, high quality reading intervention designed for ELL compared to other, similar English language learners.

Review Formal and Informal Results Patterns Informal Assessment: English- word id. and basic sentences.

Spanish-unable to read or write. Can count from 1 to 20.

Formal Language Results: Very Low Expressive skills in both Spanish and English, Average Receptive skills in both Spanish and English

Formal Academic Results (English) reflect Average Reading Skills (English)Low Average decoding and calculation skills.

Formal Cognitive Results: High Average Nonverbal Reasoning Abilities

Conclusion

ELL Pre-Referral and Assessment Process:

Personal Cultural/Linguistic BackgroundProfessional Training and ExperienceLanguage ProficiencySecond Language AcquisitionAcculturation

Muchas Gracias!

I hope you found this presentation practical and helpful in addressing the needs of Oregon’s ELL students.

Resources

Colorincolorado.org CrossCultural Developmental Educational Services Education Evaluation Center, The Teaching Research Institute,

Western Oregon University www.wou.tri.eec National Center for Cultural and Responsive Educational Systems

nccrest.org (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition, 2011) Readingrockets.org

References

Banerjee, R., Guiberson, M. (2012) Young Exceptional Children, p. 37. Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A.M. Padilla (Ed.).

Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp.9-25). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Collier, C. (2004). Separating Difference from Disability: Assessing diverse learners (3rd ed.). Ferndale, Wash.: Cross Cultural Developmental Education Services.

Collier, V. (1995). Promoting academic success for ESL students. Woodside, NY: Bastos Book Co.

Cummins, J. (2001). Language, Power, and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire.

Genessee, F., Paradis, J., & Crago, M.B. (2004). Dual language development & Disorders; A handbook on bilingualism and second language learning. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

References (Cont.)

Cuellar, I., Paniagua, F. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of multicultural mental health: Assessment and treatment for diverse populations. San Diego, CA: Harcourt (Academic Press).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act Revision (Public Law No. 108.446), U.S.C. Section 300.304 (2004).

Rhodes, R. L., Ochoa, S. H. & Ortiz, S.O. (2005). Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students. The Gilford Press

Thomas, W. P., Collier, V. (2002). A National study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Retrieved Dec. 7, 2006 from http://repositories.cdlib.org/crede/finalrpts/