english language learners: the impact of language and socio … · 2017-07-26 · who are english...

Ourdailyeducationalexperiencescanbe enrichedbylearninginculturallyand linguisticallydiverseclassroomsbecausewelearnfromotherswhoseexperiencesandbeliefsaredifferentthanours.Welearnto communicateeffectivelyandrespectfullywith individualsofvariedbackgroundsandmaythenthinktwiceaboutstereotypes,prejudices, anddiscriminatorybehaviorsbecausewegrowasindividuals,asstewardsofknowledge,and aschangeagents.Webecomegoodcitizensin apluralisticsociety.

Ourfastestgrowingdiversepopulationin prek-12isEnglishlanguage learners(ELLs) fromdiverseculturesandsocio-economic backgrounds.ThenumberofELLsthatwereenrolledinpublicschoolsinthe2012-13schoolyearwas9.2percent, whichhasincreasedcomparedto2002-03(8.7%).Students who are learning English as another languagearespreadthroughoutthe countrywiththeirproportionofthetotalpublic schoolenrollmentvaryinggreatlybystate.In 2013,ofthesixstateswiththehighestdensityofELLenrollment,Californiahad22.8%,followedbyNewMexico(15.8),Nevada(15.7%),Texas(15.1%),Colorado(12%),andAlaska(11.3%)(U.S.DepartmentofEducation,2015).Furthermore,tohelpensureELLsattainEnglishproficiencyandhighlevelsofacademicachievement,theyareenrolledinappropriatelanguageassistanceprograms.ForexampleinTexas,ofthe739,639ELLs,17%areenrolledinBilingualprograms,18%areenrolledinELLprograms,1.4%areenrolledinimmigrantprograms,0.6%areenrolledinmigrantprograms.Furthermore,accordingtotheTexasEducationAgency(TEA;2015),thereare70,510ELLswho qualified for special education inTexas,highlightingtheongoingdebateonthecorrectidentificationoflearningdisabilitiesamongELLsandtheneedforadequateprogramstoaddress theneedsofELLswithdisabilities.

WhoareEnglishlanguage learners?Almosthalfofallculturallyandlinguistically diversePreK-12studentshavelimitedEnglish language

proficiencyandareclassifiedas ELLs,formerlyknownaslimitedEnglishproficient(LEP).AnELLisonewhohasto acquireasecondoradditionallanguageand culture,aprocessthatcanbeverychallenging. Thedegreeofchallengewilldependonthe personal,experiential,andcontextualfactorsstudentsbringtotheprocessaswellashow welltheyregulatethelinguistic,cognitive, social,andemotionaltasksrequiredin languageandculturalacquisition.

TheELLpopulationisnotonly culturallyandlinguisticallydiverse,butalso socioeconomicallydiverse.Somestudents comefromfamilieswithhighlevelsofincomeandschooling,whileothersliveinpovertyor belowpovertyandhavelittleformalschooling. Thisisimportanttoobecausefamily socioeconomicstatusandeducationlevel influencetheacademicachievementofstudents.Researchindicatesthatlow-incomeELLstudentsareusuallybehindtheirpeers fromhighersocioeconomicbackgroundsin languageandreadinessskills. Therefore,theyespecially need empiricallyvalidatedandculturallyresponsiveinstruction.

TheDifferencebetweenFirstandSecondLanguageAcquisitionOurunderstandingofthenatureofthefirstandsecondlanguage,howtheydevelopandhowtheyareusedbydifferentindividualsatdifferenttimesandindifferentsettings,continuestoevolve.Cummins(1984)statedthatcomparedtothefirstlanguage,learningasecondlanguagecanbeanarduous andslowprocess.Hedifferentiatedbetween socialandacademiclanguageacquisitionandidentifieddifferenttimelinesforeach.Under idealconditions,ittakestheaverageELL2years toacquireBasicInterpersonalCommunicationSkills(BICS).BICSinvolvesthecontext–embedded, everyday languagethat occurs between conversational partners. On the

EnglishLanguageLearners:TheImpactofLanguageand

Socio-CulturalFactorsonLearning

otherhand,CognitiveAcademicLanguage Proficiency(CALP),orthecontext-reduced languageofacademics,takes5to7yearsunder idealconditionstodeveloptoalevel commensuratewiththatofnativespeakers.

Often,manyeducatorsassumethatbecauseELLshaveachievedorallanguageproficiencyin theirsecondlanguagetheydonotneed supportinschool.However,researchhas consistentlyaffirmedthatittakestimeforstudentstoacquireasecondlanguage,atboth theBICSandCALPlevels,andtocatchupwith theirmonolingualpeers.Studentsmustbeexposedto richlearningenvironmentswithregularopportunitiestopracticelanguageandliteracy skillsinthenewlanguage.

Collier(2007)developedThePrismModelthatexplainsthecomplexinteractingfactorsthatELLsexperienceintheprocessofacquiringasecondlanguagewithintheschoolcontext.Thisconceptualmodelhasthefollowingfourinterdependentandcomplexcomponents:

• SocioculturalProcesses.Thesocialandcultural surroundingofELLsisattheheartoftheprocessof acquiringasecondlanguage.ForELLsthesocialand culturalprocessesoccurthrougheverydaylifewithin thehome,school,andcommunitycontext.These processesmayhaveapositive(i.e.,byproviding a socioculturalsupportiveenvironment)ornegative (i.e.,bycreatingsocialandpsychological distancebetweentheELLsandnon-ELLs)effect onELLs.

• LanguageDevelopment.Inadditiontothe metalinguisticandformallanguageinstruction,this componentconsistsofthesubconsciousaspectsof languagedevelopment(theinnateabilitythatall humanspossessforacquiringorallanguage). Linguisticdevelopmentincludestheacquisitionofthe oralandwrittensystemsofthestudent'sfirstand secondlanguagessuchasphonology,vocabulary,

morphologyandsyntax,semantics,pragmatics,paralinguistic,anddiscourse.

• AcademicDevelopment.Academicdevelopmentincludesdifferentsubjectmatterstaughtinschoolsuchaslanguagearts,mathematics,thesciences,andsocialstudiesforeachgradelevel.Thisknowledgetransfersfromthefirstlanguagetothesecondlanguage,makingitmoreefficienttodevelopacademicworkthroughELLs’firstlanguage,whileteachingthesecondlanguagethroughmeaningfulacademiccontentinstruction.

• Cognitivedevelopment.Thisdimensionisanaturalsubconsciousprocessthatoccursdevelopmentallyfrombirthtotheendofschoolingandbeyond,andplaysacriticalrolebothinthefirstandsecondlanguagedevelopment.Ingeneral,studentsbring5-6yearsofcognitivedevelopmentintheirfirstlanguagetothesecondlanguageeducationalsetting.Thisknowledgebaseisanimportantsteppingstonetobuildonasthe cognitivedevelopmentof ELLscontinues. WhenELLsusethesecondlanguageatschool,they functionatalevelcognitivelyfarbelowtheirage. Thus,anELL'scognitivedevelopmentshouldcontinue throughhis or herfirstlanguageatleastthroughthe elementaryschoolyears.

LanguageAcquisitionversusLanguage-BasedLearningDisabilityELLsenterschoolneedingtolearnorallanguageandliteracyinEnglishinanefficientmannertobeabletocatchupwiththeirmonolingualEnglish-speakingclassmates.Unfortunately,duetoa lackofappropriateassessmenttoolsfordistinguishingbetweenan ELL’sdifficultytoacquireasecondlanguageoralanguage-basedlearningdisabilityas well as a lackofprofessionalpersonnelthatareawareoftheuniqueneedsofELLs, manyELLsareinappropriatelyoveridentifiedashavinglearningdisabilitiesandplacedinspecialeducationprograms.Specifically,fivepercentofallschool-agechildreninpublicschoolshavealearningdisability.Overhalfofallstudentswithalearningdisabilityhavea language-basedlearningdisability,manywith challengesinreading(Pierangelo&Giuliani, 2010).Often, ELLswhoareintheprocess ofacquiringasecondlanguagewillexperiencelanguageandliteracydevelopmentchallenges similartotheirpeerswithalanguagelearning disability.Therefore,itiscriticalthatschool personnelareabletopredictwhenanELLmightbeexperiencingalearningdisability.

Although,thereisnosingleeffectivemethodforidentifyingELLswhohavedifficultyacquiringlanguageskillsandthosewhohavelearningdisabilities,thefollowingquestionsmay

helpdeterminethesourceofELL'sdifficulty(Burr,Haas,&Ferriere,2015):

1. IstheELLreceivinginstructionofsufficientqualitytoenablehim or hertomaketheacceptedlevelsofacademicprogress?

2. HowdoestheELL's progressinhearing,speaking,reading,andwritingEnglishcomparewiththeexpectedrateofprogressforhis or her ageandinitiallevelofEnglishproficiency?

3. Towhatextentarebehaviorsthatmightindicatealearningdisabilityconsideredtobenormalforthechild’sculturalbackgroundortobepartoftheprocessofU.S.acculturation?

4. Howmightadditionalfactors,suchassocioeconomicstatus,previouseducationexperience,fluencyin his orherfirstlanguage,attitudetowardschool,attitudetowardlearningEnglish,andpersonalityattributes,impactthestudent’sacademicprogress?

Furthermore,withintheschoolcontext,informationaboutthenormaldevelopmentaltrajectoriesofELLs’literacydevelopment(i.e.,theirreadingandwritingskills)mayalsohelpdifferentiatelanguageacquisitionversuslanguage-basedlearningdisability,suchas:

• Orallanguageproficiency.Orallanguageproficiencyincludesreceptiveskills,expressiveskills,andtheabilitytousespecificaspectsoftheorallanguage,suchasphonology,vocabulary,morphology,grammar,discourse,andpragmaticskills.

• Phonologicalprocessing.Phonologicalprocessingistheabilitytousethesoundsofthelanguagetoprocessoralandwrittenlanguage.Phonologicalprocessingincludesphonologicalawareness(theabilitytoconsciouslyattendtothesoundsofalanguageasdistinctfromitsmeaning),phonologicalrecoding(theabilitytoconvertnonphonologicalstimulus,suchasapictureorawrittenword,tophonologicaloutput),andphonologicalmemory(theabilitytotemporarystorephonologicallycodedinformationintheshort-termmemory).

• Workingmemory.Workingmemoryactivelymanipulatesthepresentedinformationwhilesimultaneouslyholdingtheinformationinthememory.Workingmemoryisvitalforreadingcomprehensionasreadersneedtosimultaneouslydecodewords,activelyprocessandrememberwhathasbeenread.

• Word-levelskills.Word-levelskillsincludea

combinationoftheknowledgeofletter-soundrelationshipstodecodeprint(phonologicalskills),andknowledgeofsightvocabularyofwordsthatarefrequentlyencounteredintext(visualskills).Decodingskillsenablestudentstoreadcomplexandunfamiliarwordswhilevisualskillscontributestostudents’readingfluencyandreadingcomprehension.

• Text-levelskills.Readingcomprehensionandwritingareintegratedtext-levelprocesses.Readingcomprehensioninvolvesacombinationoflexicalknowledge,semanticknowledge,syntacticknowledgeandbackgroundandtextualknowledge.Writinginvolvesword-levelskills,cognitiveabilities(suchasworkingmemory,linguisticawareness,andattention),andmetacognitiveskills(suchasplanning,strategyuse,andself-regulation).

Educatorsneedtousevariousstrategiesandassessmenttools,suchastheresponsetointerventionapproach,toidentifyELL'ssourcesofdifficulty(formoreinformationpleaserefertoLesauxetal.,2008).

ReferralofanELLforSpecialEducationAssessmentTheincreaseinthenumberofELLsinour nation’sschoolsrequirestheretobeastructureinplacewhenreferring,assessing, andidentifyingELLsforspecialeducationservices.Eachschoolshouldhavewell developedreferralguidelinesandprocedures aswellasknowledgeableprofessionalswho canexamineacademicandbehavioralconcerns fromthecontextoflanguage,culture,anddisability.Manyschoolslackacomprehensive approachwhenassessingthesestudents,and educatorshavedifficultiessortingoutthe multipleoverlappingcharacteristicsofELLsand studentswithlearningdisabilities.ItisimportanttorememberthatELLsare entitledtothesameservicesandinterventions astheirnon-ELLpeers.Responseto Intervention(RTI),acriticalcomponentofspecialeducationlaw,ensuresequityand accesstoeducationforallstudents.RTIisa processthatschoolscanusetohelpchildren whoarestrugglingacademicallyor behaviorally.Oneofitsunderlyingpremisesis thepossibilitythatachild’sstrugglesmaybe duetoinadequaciesininstructionorinthe curriculumeitherinuseatthemomentorinthechild’spast.Schoolsidentifystudentsat riskforpoorlearningoutcomes,monitorstudentprogress,provideevidence-based interventionsandadjusttheintensityand natureofthoseinterventionsdependingona student’sresponsiveness,andidentifystudents withlearningdisabilitiesorotherdisabilities(CPRI,2013).

TheRTIinstructionalmethodsand interventionsshouldbeculturallysensitiveand addressthechild’slanguageneeds.Ifafter receivinghigh-qualityinstructionandinterventiontheELLstudentdoesnotdemonstrateimprovement,thestudentshould bereferredtoascreeningorinterventionteam togatherthefollowinginformation:

• Thestudent’slevelofEnglish languageproficiency.

• Thestudent’srateofEnglish acquisition.

• Theextentthatthestudentisstrugglingwithculturaland affectiveissues.

• Theamountofinstructionthat addressesthestudent’slanguageandcultural needs.

• Thestudent’sacademicproficiency levelcomparedtosame-agepeers.

• Theamountofinstructionandinterventiontomeetthestudent’s academicneeds.

• Objectiveevidenceofstudent’sfailuretorespondtointervention.

Iftheinterventionteamdeterminesthe ELL’sdifficultiesarenottheresultoflanguageacquisitionoracculturationissues,itwouldbe appropriatetoreferthestudentforfurther assessmentinordertodetermineeligibilityfor specialeducationservices.

Oncetheinterventionteamformallyrefers thestudent,afullpsychoeducationalevaluationmustbeconducted.ThefollowingguidelinesandrequirementsundertheIndividualswithDisabilitiesEducationAct (IDEA-04),PartB(U.S.Departmentof Education,2006)mustbemet:

1. Amultidisciplinaryteamthatincludesparents, generaleducators,specialeducators,andan English as a Second Language educatorshouldassesswhetherthestudent’s weaknessesareattributabletoinadequateinstruction, limited Englishproficiency,ortoalearningdisability.

2. Avarietyofassessmenttoolsandstrategies shouldbe employedwhengatheringrelevant functional, developmental,andacademic informationaboutthe student.Thisincludes informationprovidedbytheparent onhowthe childfunctionsathome,developmental milestones,andphysicalandsocialbehaviors compared tosiblingsandpeers.

3. Nosinglemeasureorassessmentcanbeu s e d asthe solecriteriontodeterminewhether a childhasa disabilityorfordeterminingan appropriateeducational program.Teamsshouldgathermultiplesourcesof

ThefollowingisalistofinformalassessmentsfordeterminingEnglishlanguageproficiencyandacculturationstatusofELs.

• AcculturationQuickScreen.(2003).PublishedbyCrossCulturalDevelopmentalEducationService,Ferndale,WA.Availableatwww.crosscultured.com

• ChecklistofLanguageSkillsforUsewithLimitedEnglishProficientStudents.Availableat:http://www.davis.k12.ut.us/cms/lib09/UT01001306/Centricity/Domain/93/SPELL%20forms/Checklist%20of%20Language%20Skills%20BICS%20CALPS%20fillable.pdf

• SocioculturalChecklist.(2002).PublishedbyCrossCulturalDevelopmentalEducationService,Ferndale,WA.Availableat:www.crosscultured.com

• StudentOralLanguageObservationMatrix(SOLOM).(1985).DevelopedbySanJoseU.S.D.,SanJose,CA.Availableat:http://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/LangAssessmtMMdl

• LanguageDevelopmentforEnglishLanguageLearnersProfessionalDevelopmentModule.(2009).DevelopedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/language-development-for-english-language-learners-professional-development-module

• TheEnglishLanguageLearnerKnowledgeBase.(2011).PublishedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/the-english-language-learner-knowledgebase

• AccommodationsforEnglishLanguageLearnerStudents:TheEffectofLinguisticModificationofMathTestItemSets.(2010).PublishedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/accommodations-for-english-language-learner-students-the-effect-of-linguistic-modification-of-math-test-item-sets

ResourcesforTeachers

information aboutthestudentbecauseofthechallengesassociatedwithdifferentiatingbetween languageacquisitiondifficultyanddisability-relatedcharacteristicswhendeterminingthe causeforlowachievement.

4. Theinstrumentsusedintheassessment mustbe technicallysoundandhelpindetermininghow cognitive,behavioral, physical,ordevelopmental factors contributetothechild’slearning.Thisrequires thatthe teammembersbeknowledgeableaboutthe instruments andtheirusefulnesswhen assessingELs.

5. Teammembers alsoensurethattheassessments andother evaluationmaterialsselectedand administeredarenotraciallyorculturallybiased.Team membersshouldgatherinformationfrom parentsand othersfamiliarwiththestudentso theycanbetter understandthefamily’sracialandculturalbackground, andthusruleout assessmentsandmaterialsthatare inappropriate.

6. Assessmentandotherevaluationmaterials mustbe providedandadministeredinthe child’sfirstlanguage or othermodeof communication(e.g.,sign language)andinthe modalityandlanguagemostlikely toyieldaccurateinformationaboutthechild’sabilities.

7. T eammembersshouldensurethatthe assessments andmeasuresareusedforthe purposes forwhichthey aredesignedandthus arereliableand valid.For example,averbalintelligencemeasure administeredin Englishshouldnotbeusedtoassess intelligenceifthe studenthasnotyetdeveloped adequateverbal skillsin English.

8. Teammemberswhohavebeentrainedandare knowledgeableofboththeinstrumentsandthenuances associatedwithassessingELLs,mustadministerall assessmentsandevaluationmaterials.

9. Thestudentshouldbeassessedinallareasof suspecteddisability includinghealth,vision, hearing, general i intelligence, academic performance, communicationskills, and motor abilities.The assessment is a collaborationamong all team members, each contributinguniqueinformationabout the studenttohelpdetermineeligibilityandan appropriateeducationalprogram.

DeterminingEligibilityOncetheassessmentiscomplete,theteammustdetermineiftheELLmeetsthecriteriafor specialeducationservices.Thesecriteria include:

• Havingadisability,

• Experiencing adverseeducationaleffectsasaresultofthedisability,and

• Requiringspecialized instructionthatcannotbeprovidedwithina generaleducationprogram.

Ifthechildis eligibleforspecialeducationservices,theteammustbegintostructureaprogramthatmeets thechild’sacademicneedswhilestillproviding accesstothegeneralcurriculum.Thismeans theteamwilldiscussthebestinstructionalmethodsthatwillhelpthechildtocontinuetodevelopEnglishproficiencyaswellasimproveacademicskillsthatwillensurethatthechildmeetsthegeneraleducationcurriculum standardstothegreatestdegreepossible.Once thisinformationisdetermined,anIndividualizedEducationProgram(IEP)willbewritten.

DevelopinganIEPInformationthatwasgatheredduringtheevaluationphaseshouldbeusedtodescribe presentlevelsofperformance,areasof strengthsandweaknesses,thenatureofthedisability,anditsimpactonthestudent’s education.ForELLs,theassessmentsresults shouldalsoprovideeducatorswithaccurate diagnosticinformationaboutthedegreetowhichtheELL’slevelofEnglishproficiencyandrateofacquisitioncannegativelyimpact performanceinthegeneraleducation classroom.Furthermore,itshouldprovide informationonthestudent’sacademicand abilitylevelsinhisorherprimarylanguageandhowthesecomparetothoseinEnglish.This shouldresultindevelopingaprogramthatwillmakeuseofthestudent’sstrengthsinhisor hernativelanguageandskillsinordertofacilitatethedevelopmentofthesecond language.EachcaseofanELLwillbeuniqueandtheIEPwillbeindividualizedforassessmentandinstructionandwillinclude clearlydocumentedgoalsandobjectivesaswell astheeducatorsresponsibleforprovidingthe services.

InstructionalConsiderationsELLs withLDcanbenefit frominterventionsknowntobenefittheirELLpeerswithoutlearningdisabilities.Theseinterventionsinclude,butarenotlimitedto, buildingbackgroundknowledge,explicitphonemicawarenessandphonicsinstruction,explicitinstructionincomprehensionstrategies,direct-instructioninvocabulary, context-embedded instruction,andpeer-assistedlearning.ELLs requireadditionalshelteredinstruction techniquessuchasgraphicorganizers, gestures,visualaids,andmemorystrategiestofacilitateEnglishcomprehension(Spear-Swerling,2006).

References

Burr,E.,Haas,E.,&Ferriere,K.(2015).IdentifyingandsupportingEnglishlearnerstudentswithlearningdisabilities:Keyissuesintheliteratureandstatepractice.U.S.DepartmentofEducation.Retrievedfrom:http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED558163.pdf

Collier,V.P.,&Thomas,W.P.(2007).PredictingsecondlanguageacademicsuccessinEnglishusingthePrismModel.InJ.Cummins&C.Davison(Eds.),TheinternationalhandbookofEnglishlanguageteaching(pp.333-348).Norwell,MA:Springer.

CPRI(2013).Responsetointervention.Retrievedfromhttp://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/rti/

Cummins,J.(1984)Bilingualismandspecial education:Issuesinassessmentand pedagogy.Clevedon,England:Multilingual Matters.

Lesaux,N.K.,Geva,E.,Koda,K.,Siegel,L.S.,&Shanahan,T.(2008).Developmentofliteracyinsecondlanguagelearners.InD.AugustandT.Shanahan(Eds.),Developingreadingandwritinginsecond-languagelearners:lessonsfromthereportofthenationalliteracypanelonlanguage-minoritychildrenandyouth(pp.27-60).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Pierangelo,R.,&Giuliani,G.(2010).Prevalenceof learningdisabilities.Retrievedfromwww.education.com/reference/article/prevalence-learning-disabilities

Spear-Swerling,L.(2006).Learningdisabilitiesin EnglishLanguageLearners.Retrievedfromwww.ldonline.org/spearswerling/Learning_Disabilities_in_English_Language_Learners

TexasEducationAgency.(2015).Retrievedfromhttp://tea.texas.gov/Reports_and_Data/

U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2006).Assistanceto statesfortheeducationofchildrenwith disabilitiesprogramandpreschoolgrantsfor childrenwithdisabilities:Finalrule.Federal Register,34,CRFParts300and301

U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2015).Englishlanguagelearners.Retrievedfromhttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp

CouncilforLearningDisabilitiesCLDgrantspermissiontocopythisarticleforeducationalpurposes.OtherInfoSheetsareavailableonourwebsite(http://www.cldinternational.org).

Recommendedcitation:Khalaf,S.&Santi,K.L.(2016)EnglishLanguageLearners:TheImpactofLanguage andSocio-CulturalFactorsonLearning.CLDInformationSheet.Retrievedfrom:http://www.council-for-learning-disabilities.org/infosheets-supporting-translation-of-research-to-practice.