Difficulties in Language Learning
This presentation covers a brief overview of my findings on ELL (English Language Learners) and SLD (Specific Learning Disability).
If you enjoyed this post and would like to know more, please continue to my blog post, which will cover this in further detail along with an analysis on Speech Pathology.
Myths regarding ELLs and Special Education
1. If we label an ELL as learning disabled, at least they will get some help.
Special education placement doesn’t serve ELLs well. The programs focus more on a specific area for development to help processing, linguistic or cognitive disabilities and limit the growth of second language proficiency. Special education tends to narrow skills to enable mastery, whereas ELLs need a more meaningful context to comprehend the language surrounding them.
2. We have to wait five to seven years for ELLs to develop their English language skills before we can rule out the language to cause the student's difficulty.
Waiting a long period to potentially identify a learning issue. ELLs may indeed take five to seven years to develop proficiency in academic language; we can actively check for issues in their first language and other use contexts.
3. When an ELL is identified as having a disability, instruction should be only in English to not confuse the student.
Learners with speech, language or learning impairment can become fully bilingual. Language learning is not linked to disability. Students with specific language impairment can make better progress in a second language if their native language is also developed. In addition, students with severe disabilities should maintain their native language as their caregivers are often family members who might not be prepared to provide care in their second language.
Reasons for the Misidentification of Special Needs among ELLs
Assessment
The first and most significant reason for the tendency to overidentify ELLs as in need of special education is that the assessment of proficiency and its manifestations among ELLs is fraught with difficulty. Several biases work against ELLs during the identification process.
a focus on superficial behaviours rather than underlying factors as indices of difficulty
the collection of inadequate data — often in the form of norm-referenced and standardized test results — that do not enable sufficient descriptions of proficiency
a lack of recognition of several consequences of bilingualism during an assessment, and
the application of inappropriate discrepancy formulas for interpretation purposes.
Behavioural manifestations: Intrinsic vs extrinsic factors
At a superficial level, the way language difficulties manifest among ELLs can be very similar to students with long-term disabilities or special needs. Both ELLs and SLDs have many underlying variables that create issues in their learning progress, with most issues manifesting as behavioural, despite underlying issues potentially being factors like disability, environment or language differences. Language and learning disabilities are generally due to intrinsic factors to the learner. Factors like neurological impairment, memory issues, symbol recognition or difficulty producing sounds. While difficulties surrounding ELLs are mainly extrinsic factors such as cross-culture differences and the learning process itself.
The data gathered as part of the evaluation process are frequently inadequate. There is a tendency to rely too heavily on norm-referenced and standardized test scores. This can create an inaccurate view of a students ability. These tests often do not give a good sense of what ELLs can do as learners could be given wrong answers not because they have the specific deficit being tested but do not understand the question.
Consequences of bilingualism
Testing for SLDs is generally designed for a monolingual student or developed or translated from one language to another. This approach ignores the difficulties included in comparisons between language and ability, which further reduces the effectiveness of diagnostic tools when focusing on ELLs.
Prevalence of a Medical Model
A fundamental reason for a tendency to overidentify ELLs as needing special education can be linked to the notion that disabilities or challenges can be identified, much like a list of ailments that are officially recognized as diseases in the medical field. This falsely suggests to educators that disabilities can be easily identified validly and reliably. This ignores the individuality of ELLs and the underlying issues that affect their language learning process.
Availability of Categorical Funding
Funding can play a prominent role in the continued misidentification of ELLs as SLD. In many areas of education, schools may not have the needed resources to provide adequate services for ELLs. In contrast, funding can be attained for special needs programs if a student is identified. Due to the discrepancies with the testing processes, it is all too easy for schools to categorize students into special education for falling outside of what is considered standard progress regardless of underlying causes.
The Need to Provide Relevant Services in a Timely Manner
Identifying the special needs of ELLs is vital to the impact of their learning. Incorrectly placing students in a special needs program when not needed can hinder their progress as the course would not be geared towards their specific learning criteria. The best support for a learner having difficulties because of second language issues is expanding the proficiency in the target language and not special education intervention. Another difficulty is the stigma of the labels attached to these. In many countries, ELL or the equivalent face stigma as immigrants and have a lower status in mainstream society as the general society does not value their cultures or language. The misidentification would add a stigmatizing label, and that is not helpful at all. (Hamayan, Marler, Sánchez-López, Damico)
Can Special Education and Bilingual Education be Combined?
Special education and Billingual education programs can be combined with consideration being taking in three factors for each student: degree of disability, level of language proficiency in both English and the primary language, and intellectual capacity. It is important to measure these factors to provide accurate placement. For example, a student with an auditory disability requires a different approach to education than a student with a visual disability. The same can be said for learners in ELL compared to learners with SLD.
Variables to take into consideration:
Student's age.
Type and degree of impairment or disability.
Age at which disability occurred.
Level of language involvement because of the disability.
Level of academic achievement.
Entry-level language skills (upon entering school).
Measured intellectual ability.
Method and language used in measuring academic achievement and intellectual ability.
Level of adaptive behaviour.
Time spent in the United States.
Current cultural home setting.
Social maturity.
Level of language proficiency in English and other languages.
Amount and type of language input received in the home environment.
Speech and language capabilities in both languages.
Presence of multiple handicaps.
Ambulation or mobility.
Success in past and present placements.
Wishes of students and parents.
