You are here:

Disentangling language from disability: Teacher implementation of Tier 1 English language development policies for ELs with suspected disabilities
ARTICLE

TATE Volume 80, Number 1, ISSN 0742-051X Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

Educators have long struggled to properly identify English learners (ELs) for special education. Response to intervention (RTI) policies intend to help rule out lack of opportunity to learn English as the cause of ELs' challenges. To this end, RTI must include high-quality Tier 1 English language development (ELD). This study examines teachers’ “capacity and will” (Mclaughlin, 1987) to implement RTI and ELD instructional policies for ELs with suspected disabilities. It addresses a gap in the literature regarding how teachers approach policies meant to improve special education identification for ELs and identifies mechanisms that inhibit proper disentangling of language from disabilities.

Citation

Park, S. (2019). Disentangling language from disability: Teacher implementation of Tier 1 English language development policies for ELs with suspected disabilities. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 80(1), 227-240. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved August 11, 2024 from .

This record was imported from Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies on March 15, 2019. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.02.004

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Adams, M., & Jones, K.M. (2006). Unmasking the myths of structured English immersion: Why we still need bilingual educators, native language instruction, and incorporation of home culture. Radical Teacher, 75, pp. 16-21. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20710342.
  2. Anagnostopoulos, D., Sykes, G., McCrory, R., Cannata, M., & Frank, K. (2010). Dollars, distinction, or duty? The meaning of the national board for professional teaching standards for teachers' work and collegial relations. American Journal of Education, 116(3), pp. 337-369. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/651412.
  3. Annamma, S.A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), pp. 1-31. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511.
  4. Arden, S.V., Gandhi, A.G., Zumeta Edmonds, R., & Danielson, L. (2017). Toward more effective tiered systems: Lessons from national implementation efforts. Exceptional Children, 83(3), pp. 269-280. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917693565.
  5. Artiles, A.J. (2015). Beyond responsiveness to identity badges: Future research on culture in disability and implications for response to intervention. Educational Review, 67(1), pp. 1-22. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2014.934322.
  6. Artiles, A.J., & Klingner, J.K. (2006). Forging a knowledge base on English language learners with special needs: Theoretical, population, and technical issues. Teachers College Record, 108(11), pp. 2187-2194. Available online: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00778.x.
  7. Artiles, A.J., & Ortiz, A.A. (2002). English language learners with special education needs: Identification, assessment, and instruction. Washington, D.C: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems Co., Inc.
  8. Artiles, A.J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J.J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate representation: English language learners in urban school districts. Exceptional Children, 71(3), pp. 283-300. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100305.
  9. Au, W. (2010). The idiocy of policy: The anti-democratic curriculum. Critical Education, 1(1), pp. 1-16. Available online: http://m1.cust.educ.ubc.ca/journal/v1n1.
  10. Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is—or might ee—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform?. Educational Researcher, 25(9), pp. 6-14. Available online: http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X025009006.
  11. Berry, B., & Farris-Berg, K. (2013). Leadership for teaching and learning: How teacher-powered schools work and why they matter. American Educator, 11–17, p. 44. Available online: https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2016/berry_farris-berg.
  12. Brown, J.E., & Doolittle, J. (2008). A cultural, linguistic, and ecological framework for response to intervention with English language learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(5), pp. 66-72. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.074.
  13. Buchanan, R. (2015). Teacher identity and agency in an era of accountability. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 21(6), pp. 700-719. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044329.
  14. Burch, P. (2007). Educational policy and practice from the perspective of institutional theory: Crafting a wider lens. Educational Researcher, 36(2), pp. 84-95. Available online: http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07299792.
  15. Calderón, M., Slavin, R., Sánchez, M., & Slaviti, R. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children, 21(1), pp. 103-127. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2011.0007.
  16. CalSTAT (2015). Response to instruction and intervention. Available online: https://www.calstat.org/PA-RTI2.html.
  17. Coburn, C.E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), pp. 145-170. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3594127.
  18. Coburn, C.E., & Stein, M.K. (2006). Communities of practice theory and the role of teacher professional community in policy implementation. New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity, pp. 25-46. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  19. Collinson, V., & Cook, T.F. (2001). “I don't have enough time” - teachers' interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(3), pp. 266-281. Available online: http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110392884.
  20. Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
  21. Cuban, L. (2013). Why so many structural changes in schools and so little reform in teaching practice?. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(2), pp. 109-125. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1108/09578231311304661.
  22. Datnow, A., & Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1, 2), pp. 183-204. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327671espr0501%262_11.
  23. Day, C., & Smethem, L. (2009). The effects of reform: Have teachers really lost their sense of professionalism?. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2–3), pp. 141-157. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-009-9110-5.
  24. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D.J. (2008). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Pearson.
  25. Emerson, R.M., Fretz, R.I., & Shaw, L.L. (2011). Writing ethnographic field notes. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  26. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. Handbook of research on teaching, pp. 119-161. New York, NY: MacMillan.
  27. Eslinger, J.C. (2014). Navigating between a rock and a hard place: Lessons from an urban school teacher. Education and Urban Society, 46(2), pp. 209-233. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0013124512446221.
  28. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), pp. 93-99. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4.
  29. Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), pp. 14-20. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/004005990703900503.
  30. Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P.L., & Young, C.L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), pp. 157-171. Available online: http://doi.org/doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00072.
  31. Garcia, S.B., & Ortiz, A.A. (1988). Preventing inappropriate referrals of language minority students to special education. NCBE New Focus. Preventing inappropriate referrals of language minority students to special education. NCBE New Focus, Vol. 5 Silver Spring, MD: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
  32. Gass, S.M. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. New York, NY: Routledge.
  33. Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Exceptional Children, 66(4), pp. 454-470. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290006600402.
  34. Goldenberg, C. (2013). Unlocking the research on English learners: What we know – and don't yet know – about effective instruction. American Educator, 37(2), pp. 4-12. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1014021.pdf.
  35. Hall, D., & McGinity, R. (2015). Conceptualizing teacher professional identity in neoliberal times: Resistance, compliance and reform. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(88), pp. 1-17. Available online: http://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2092.
  36. Hargreaves, A. (2005). Educational change takes ages: Life, career and generational factors in teachers' emotional responses to educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(8), pp. 967-983. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.06.007.
  37. Hargreaves, A., & Ainscow, M. (2015). The top and bottom of leadership and change. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(3), pp. 42-48. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0031721715614828.
  38. Hill, D.R., King, S.A., Lemons, C.J., & Partanen, J.N. (2012). Fidelity of implementation and instructional alignment in response to intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(3), pp. 116-124. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00357.x.
  39. Hoover, J., & Erickson, J. (2015). Culturally responsive special education referrals of English learners in one rural county school district: Pilot project. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(4), pp. 18-28. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413476553.
  40. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
  41. Jaeger, E.L. (2015). Learning to construct meaning from text: A case study of the relationship between a tutor and an English learner within a response to intervention setting. Literacy Research and Instruction, 54(4), pp. 285-315. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2015.1062942.
  42. Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., (2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: Secondary-tier intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), pp. 153-168. Available online: http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/30035561.
  43. Kaniuka, T.S. (2012). Toward an understanding of how teachers change during school reform: Considerations for educational leadership and school improvement. Journal of Educational Change, 13(3), pp. 327-346. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-012-9184-3.
  44. Keller-Margulis, M.A. (2012). Fidelity of implementation framework: A critical need for response to intervention models. Psychology in the Schools, 49(4), pp. 342-352. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1002/pits.
  45. Klingner, J.K., & Artiles, A.J. (2003). When should bilingual students be in special education?. Educational Leadership, 61(2), pp. 66-71. Available online: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/when-should-bilingual-students-be-special-education.
  46. Klingner, J., & Artiles, A.J. (2006). Struggling to learn to read: Emergent scholarship on linguistic differences and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), pp. 386-389. Available online: http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390050101.
  47. Klingner, J.K., Artiles, A.J., & Barletta, L.M. (2006). English language learners who struggle with reading: Language acquisition or LD ?. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), pp. 108-128. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390020101.
  48. Klingner, J.K., & Edwards, P.A. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), pp. 108-117. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.6.
  49. Linan-Thompson, S., Cirino, P.T., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Determining English language learners' response to intervention: Questions and some answers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), pp. 185-195. Available online: http://doi.org/10.2307/30035563.
  50. Linn, D., & Hemmer, L. (2011). English language learner disproportionality in special education: Implications for the scholar-practitioner. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 1(1), pp. 70-80. Available online: http://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2011.01.1.06.
  51. Lucas, T. (2011). Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A resource for teacher educators. New York: Routledge.
  52. Marshall, M.N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), pp. 522-526. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522.
  53. McKenzie, K.B., & Scheurich, J.J. (2008). Teacher resistance to improvement of schools with diverse students. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11(2), pp. 117-133. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120801950122.
  54. Mclaughlin, M.W. (1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), pp. 171-178. Available online: https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737009002171.
  55. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  56. Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), pp. 340-363. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1086/226550.
  57. Nazareno, L. (2015). If I could run a school: Teacher-powered schools require a divergent set of skills. Journal of Staff Development, 36(4), pp. 28-33. Available online: https://learningforward.org/publications/jsd/jsd-blog/jsd/2015/08/25/jsd-august-2015-idea-lab-2015.
  58. Norris, J.M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), pp. 417-528. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136.
  59. O'Day, J. (2009). Good instruction is good for everyone—or is it?English language learners in a balanced literacy approach. Journal of Education for StudentsPlaced at Risk, 14(1), pp. 97-119.
  60. Olsen, B., & Sexton, D. (2008). Threat rigidity, school reform, and how teachers view their work inside current education policy contexts. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1), pp. 9-44. Available online: http://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208320573.
  61. Orosco, M.J., & Klingner, J. (2010). One school's implementation of RTI with English language learners: “Referring into RTI. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(3), pp. 269-288. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409355474.
  62. Ortiz, A.A., Robertson, P.M., Wilkinson, C.Y., Liu, Y.-J., McGhee, B.D., & Kushner, M.I. (2011). The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: Implications for response to intervention. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), pp. 316-333. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2011.628608.
  63. Ortiz, A.A., Wilkinson, C.Y., Robertson-Courtney, P., & Kushner, M.I. (2006). Considerations in implementing intervention assistance teams to support English language learners. Remedial and Special Education, 27(1), pp. 53-63. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/07419325060270010601.
  64. Remillard, J.T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers ’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), pp. 315-342. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/0362-6784.00130.
  65. Richards-Tutor, C., Solari, E.J., Leafstedt, J.M., Gerber, M.M., Filippini, A., & Aceves, T.C. (2013). Response to intervention for English learners: Examining models for determining response and nonresponse. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(3), pp. 172-184. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/1534508412461522.
  66. Rinaldi, C., & Samson, J.F. (2008). English language learners and response to intervention: Referral considerations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(5), pp. 6-14. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990804000501.
  67. Robinson, S. (2012). Constructing teacher agency in response to the constraints of education policy: Adoption and adaptation. Curriculum Journal, 23(2), pp. 231-245. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2012.678702.
  68. Roehrig, G.H., & Kruse, R.A. (2005). The role of teachers' beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science & Mathematics, 105(8), pp. 412-422. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18061.x.
  69. Rueda, R., & Ragusa, G. (2010). English language learners with special needs. International encyclopedia of education, Vol. 2, pp. 701-707. Oxford: Elsevier. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01142-8.
  70. Samson, J.F., & Lesaux, N.K. (2009). Language-minority learners in special education: Rates and predictors of identification for services. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(2), pp. 148-162. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408326221.
  71. Sannino, A. (2010). Teachers' talk of experiencing: Conflict, resistance and agency. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), pp. 838-844. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.021.
  72. Saunders, W.M., Foorman, B.R., & Carlson, C.D. (2006). Is a separate block of time for oral English language development in programs for English learners needed?. The Elementary School Journal, 107(2), pp. 181-198. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1086/510654.
  73. Saunders, W., Goldenberg, C., & Marcelletti, D. (2013). English language development: Guidelines for instruction. American Educator, 37(2), pp. 13-25. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1014021.pdf.
  74. Scott, W.R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: The maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), pp. 427-442. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40345595.
  75. Short, D.J., Fidelman, C.G., & Louguit, M. (2012). Developing academic language in English language learners through sheltered instruction. Tesol Quarterly, 46(2), pp. 334-361. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.20.
  76. Singer, J., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J., & Chambers, J.C. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), pp. 165-178. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3503_3.
  77. Skiba, R.J., Simmons, A.B., Ritter, S., Gibb, A.C., Rausch, M.K., & Cuadrado, J. (2008). Achieving equity in special education: History, status, and current challenges. Exceptional Children, 74(3), pp. 264-288. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1377/hpb2011.8.
  78. Smith, T.E.C. (2005). IDEA 2004: Another round in the reauthorization process. Remedial and Special Education, 26(6), pp. 314-319. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260060301.
  79. Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (2008). Form-focused: Isolated or integrated?. Tesol Quarterly, 42(2), pp. 181-207. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.x.
  80. Sullivan, A. (2011). Disproportionality in special education identification and placement of English language learners. Exceptional Children, 77(3), pp. 317-334. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/001440291107700304.
  81. Thorius, K.A.K., & Maxcy, B.D. (2015). Critical practice analysis of special education policy: An RTI example. Remedial and Special Education, 36(2), pp. 116-124. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514550812.
  82. Turkan, S., De Oliveira, L.C., Lee, O., & Phelps, G. (2014). Proposing a knowledge base for teaching academic content to English language learners: Disciplinary linguistic knowledge. Teachers College Record, 116(30308), pp. 1-30. Available online: https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=17361.
  83. Vähäsantanen, K. (2015). Professional agency in the stream of change: Understanding educational change and teachers' professional identities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, pp. 1-12. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.11.006.
  84. Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), pp. 519-558. Available online: http://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207306859.
  85. VanDerHeyden, A.M., Witt, J.C., & Gilbertson, D. (2007). A multi-year evaluation of the effects of a response to intervention (RTI) model on identification of children for special education. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), pp. 225-256. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.11.004.
  86. Xu, Y., & Drame, E. (2007). Culturally appropriate context: Unlocking the potential of response to intervention for English language learners. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4), pp. 305-311. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0213-4.
  87. Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about it. NASSP Bulletin, 90(3), pp. 238-249. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1177/0192636506291521.
  88. Zwiers, J. (2005). The third language of academic English. Educational Leadership, 62(4), pp. 60-63. Available online: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec04/vol62/num04/The-Third-Language-of-Academic-English.aspx.
  89. Zwiers, J. (2007). Teacher practices and perspectives for developing academic language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), pp. 93-116. Available online: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2007.00135.x.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References