Spotlight on Practice: The English Language Learner

1
Spotlight on PracticeThe English Language
Learner
SES Spring 2010
AndSpecial Education
2
Overview

• Referral and Identification
• Assessment Plans and Procedures
• Eligibility Considerations
• IEP Team Meetings
• Current Issues

3
ELL in California

• 1.6 million of the 6.25 million California
  students are considered ELL
• ELL students speak more than 50 different
  languages
• 10-12 percent of ELL students are also students
  with disabilities

4
Referral and Identification

• Who is identified as ELL/LEP?
• Aged 3-21
• Enrolled/preparing to enroll in an elementary or
  secondary school
• Not born in the U.S. or native language not
  English
• And

5
Referral and Identification
cont.

• Who is identified as ELL/LEP?
• English difficulties sufficient to deny student
• ability to meet proficiency level on tests
• ability to achieve successfully in
  English-speaking classroom OR
• opportunity to participate fully in society

6
Referral and Identification

• Native language is defined as
• The language normally used by that individual,
  or, in the case of a child, the language normally
  used by the parents of the child
• In all direct contact with a child, the language
  normally used by the child in the home or
  learning environment

7
Referral and Identification

• How is a school district notified of second
  language issues?
• Home language survey completed
• If a language other than English is spoken in the
  home CELDT administered to determine ELL needs

8
Referral and Identification

• Referral of ELL students follows normal process
• Be sure referral is not based on limited English
  language acquisition

9
Practice Pointer

• Staff members may want to consult with an ELL
  teacher prior to referring an ELL student for
  special education

10
Practice Pointer

• As with all students with disabilities, make
  sure that the ELL students general education
  teacher has implemented effective instructional
  strategies, such as using repetition,
  paraphrasing, etc., prior to referral

11
Assessment Plans

• Districts must provide a proposed assessment plan
  in the native language of the parent/guardian --
• unless to do so is clearly not feasible

12
Assessment Plans

• Clearly not feasible is not defined

13
Practice Pointer

• Make sure parents of ELL student understand the
  purpose of special education in the U.S. this
  may dispel misconceptions.

14
Assessment Plans

• Districts must include the students primary
  language and language proficiency status on any
  proposed assessment plan

15
Assessment Procedures

• Assessments
• Cannot be discriminatory on a racial or cultural
  basis
• Used for the purposes for which assessments or
  measures are valid and reliable
• Administered by trained and knowledgeable
  personnel
• Administered in accordance with any instructions
  provided by the producer of the assessments

16
Assessment Procedures

• Provide and administer assessments and other
  evaluation materials
• In the students native language
• In the form most likely to yield accurate
  information
• unless it is clearly not feasible to so provide
  or administer

17
Practice Pointer

• Review a students CELDT and other assessments in
  listening, speaking, reading, and writing to
  decide whether English or another language is
  appropriate

18
Assessment ProceduresQualified Personnel

• Competent in both the oral, or sign language
  skills, and written skills of the primary
  language and
• Have a knowledge and understanding of the
  cultural and ethnic background of the student

19
Assessment ProceduresInterpreter

• If it is not feasible to administer the
  assessment in the primary language, an
  interpreter must be used and this condition must
  be documented in the report
• Note whether validity may have been affected
• Include a statement that interpreter administered
  under supervision of the assessor

20
Practice Pointer

• Use non-traditional methods to gather assessment
  information if necessary, such as reviewing
  student work samples and seeking parental
  feedback about the student

21
Assessment Reports

• Assessment reports must address the effects of
  environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage
  
• Particularly important for ELL student to avoid
  over-identification

22
Assessment Reports

• It is not clear whether districts must provide a
  written translation of assessment reports
• However, doing so may help demonstrate that a
  parent has been fully informed and has had the
  opportunity to participate in his childs
  education

23
Eligibility Considerations

• Limited English proficiency cannot be the primary
  determining factor for special education
  eligibility
• IEP teams must rule out cultural factors,
  environmental or economic disadvantage, and
  limited English proficiency in determining
  whether a student has a SLD

24
IEP Team Meetings

• Parent Participation
• State and federal law contain requirements
  designed to ensure the participation of parents
  whose primary language is other than English

• E.g., notice of IEP team meetings, copies of IEPs
  to parents, etc.

25
IEP Team Meetings

• Districts must ensure that parents understand the
  proceedings of IEP team meetings, including
  providing an interpreter when necessary

26
Practice Pointer

• Insure that interpreters have sufficient
  training to help parents participate in an IEP
  team meeting, including the ability to translate
  special education terminology

27
IEP Team Members

• The IEP team may require particular expertise in
  ELL issues, such as
• Staff member who can interpret the results of
  CELDT testing
• Staff trained in second language acquisition able
  to determine and write linguistically appropriate
  goals

28
Access to ELD Programs

• California law requires that all ELL students,
  including students with disabilities, have access
  to ELD programs
• This is problematic if disability affects second
  language acquisition

29
Access to ELD Programs

• If students potential for learning a second
  language is severely limited --

IEP team may consider requesting a parental
waiver from an ELD program
30
IEP Team Meetings

• IEP teams must consider the language needs of the
  student as those needs relate to his or her IEP

31
Practice Pointer

• Add the requirement to include linguistically
  appropriate goals, objectives, programs, and
  services as a separate agenda item to ensure that
  the language development needs of the ELL student
  are discussed

32
IEP Team Meetings

• IEPs for ELL students must include
  linguistically appropriate goals, objectives,
  programs, and services
• This means
• Activities which lead to the development of
  English language proficiency
• Instructional systems which meet the language
  development needs of the ELL student

33
Practice Pointer

• At the IEP team meeting, directly address the
  need for ELD or bilingual services. Include such
  issues as
• the appropriate school placement to allow access
  to needed ELD services
• the appropriate language for speech and language
  therapy services
• the need for bilingual aide services

34
CELDT Accommodations

• The IEP team should consider what accommodations
  and modifications the student might need to
  participate in CELDT testing.
• Students unable to participate in the CELDT with
  variations, accommodations or modifications may
  take an alternative assessment
• These decisions should be documented in the IEP

35
Practice Pointer

• IEP teams should ask whether a student has a
  unique educational need to have his special
  education program delivered in English only, or
  in another language

36
OAH, ELL and FAPE

• Student v. Los Angeles USD (OAH 2006)
• 5th grader
• Eligible under OHI
• At the initial IEP team meeting, the IEP team
  discussed ELD based on observations, ELD
  standards, and assessments of Students work
• IEP team designed a program to meet his unique
  needs in the area of ELD
• District prevailed on all issues heard
• The fact that District discussed ELD and that ELD
  was a component of Students program likely added
  to the weight of the evidence in the Districts
  favor

37
OAH, ELL and FAPE

• Clovis USD v. Student (OAH 2009)
• 12-year-old boy
• Eligible under autism
• Parents alleged that District failed to include
  ELD goals and ELD program in IEP
• OAH found in favor of District
• ALJ stated that ELL standards are state-mandated
  and, once Student was assessed and determined to
  still be eligible for ELD services, they were
  provided pursuant to the state mandate,
  irrespective of whether he had an IEP

38
OAH, ELL and FAPE

• Student v. Rialto USD (SEHO 2002)
• FACTS
• Six-year-old girl
• Eligible under speech and language
• Parents alleged that she was not receiving
  appropriate ELD academic support because her IEP
  did not include any ELD goals
• District argued that she received appropriate ELD
  services and that ELD services had no bearing on
  her special education program

39
OAH, ELL and FAPE
cont.

• RULING
• SEHO agreed with the District
• SEHO found that students status as an ELL
  student and placement in an ELD program was
  unrelated to any disability
• Her IEP, therefore, did not require any goals
  related to her participation in the ELD program

(Student v. Rialto USD (SEHO 2002).)
40
Practice Pointer

• Just because a student is identified as an ELL
  student and participates in an ELD program does
  not mean that she must have IEP goals related to
  her participation in the ELD program. This is an
  IEP team decision.

41
Current Issues

• Data Collection and Analysis
• ELL students are the fastest growing subgroup of
  children in the public schools
• Little data, however, exists regarding the link
  between ELL and special education students

42
Current Issues

• Improper Designation
• Approximately 3 out of 4 ELL students in special
  education are improperly placed
• In order to identify whether proper disability
  identification for ELL students is occurring,
  school districts need access to data highlighting
  the link between ELL and special education
  students

43
Current Issues

• Communication and Collaboration Between Special
  Education and EL Staff
• IEP teams need an understanding
• Not only of individual students language needs
• But also of how the student might be included in
  state-mandated ELD instruction

44
Current Issues
cont.

• Communication and Collaboration Between Special
  Education and EL Staff
• Districts may want to consider policies
• Ensuring staff trained in ELD instruction and
  services are members of IEP teams
• Promoting ELD training for special education staff

45
Q A