ERIC Identifier: ED469207
Publication Date: 2001-12-00
Author: Ortiz, Alba
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Languages and Linguistics Washington DC.
English Language Learners With Special Needs: Effective
Instructional Strategies. ERIC Digest.
Students fail in school for a variety of reasons. In some cases, their
academic difficulties can be directly attributed to deficiencies in the teaching
and learning environment. For example, students with limited English may fail
because they do not have access to effective bilingual or English as a second
language (ESL) instruction. Students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may
have difficulty if instruction presumes middle-class experiences. Other students
may have learning difficulties stemming from linguistic or cultural differences.
These difficulties may become more serious over time if instruction is not
modified to address the students' specific needs. Unless these students receive
appropriate intervention, they will continue to struggle, and the gap between
their achievement and that of their peers will widen over time.
Still other students need specialized instruction because of specific
learning disabilities. The overrepresentation of English language learners in
special education classes (Yates & Ortiz, 1998) suggests that educators have
difficulty distinguishing students who truly have learning disabilities from
students who are failing for other reasons, such as limited English. Students
learning English are disadvantaged by a scarcity of appropriate assessment
instruments and a lack of personnel trained to conduct linguistically and
culturally relevant educational assessments (Valdes & Figueroa, 1996).
English language learners who need special education services are further
disadvantaged by the shortage of special educators who are trained to address
their language- and disability-related needs simultaneously.
Improving the academic performance of students who from non-English
backgrounds requires a focus on the prevention of failure and on early
intervention for struggling learners. This digest presents a framework for
meeting the needs of these students in general education and suggests ways to
operationalize prevention and early intervention to ensure that students meet
their academic potential.
PREVENTION OF SCHOOL FAILURE
Prevention of failure among
English language learners involves two critical elements: the creation of
educational environments that are conducive to their academic success and the
use of instructional strategies known to be effective with these students
(Ortiz, 1997; Ortiz & Wilkinson, 1991).
Preventing school failure begins with the creation of school climates that
foster academic success and empower students (Cummins, 1989). Such environments
reflect a philosophy that all students can learn and that educators are
responsible for helping them learn. Positive school environments are
characterized by strong administrative leadership; high expectations for student
achievement; challenging, appropriate curricula and instruction; a safe and
orderly environment; ongoing, systematic evaluation of student progress; and
shared decision-making among ESL teachers, general education teachers,
administrators, and parents. Several other factors are critical to the success
of English language learners, including the following: (1) a shared knowledge
base among educators about effective ways to work with students learning
English, (2) recognition of the importance of the students' native language, (3)
collaborative school and community relationships, (4) academically rich programs
that integrate basic skill instruction with the teaching of higher order skills
in both the native language and in English, and (5) effective instruction.
Shared Knowledge Base
Teachers must share a common philosophy and knowledge base relative to the
education of students learning English. They should be knowledgeable about all
of the following areas: second language acquisition; the relationship of native
language proficiency to the development of English; assessment of proficiency in
the native language and English; sociocultural influences on learning; effective
first and second language instruction; informal assessment strategies that can
be used to monitor progress, particularly in language and literacy development;
and effective strategies for working with culturally and linguistically diverse
families and communities.
of the Students' Native Language
Language programs must have the support of principals, teachers, parents, and
the community. School staff should understand that native language instruction
provides the foundation for achieving high levels of English proficiency
(Cummins, 1994; Krashen, 1991; Thomas & Collier, 1997). Language development
should be the shared responsibility of all teachers, not only those in bilingual
and ESL classes.
Parents of students learning English must be viewed as capable advocates for
their children and as valuable resources in school improvement efforts (Cummins,
1994). By being involved with the families and communities of English learners,
educators come to understand the social, linguistic, and cultural contexts in
which the children are being raised (Ortiz, 1997). Thus, educators learn to
respect cultural differences in child-rearing practices and in how parents
choose to be involved in their children's education (Garcia & Dominguez,
Students learning English must have opportunities to learn advanced skills in
comprehension, reasoning, and composition and have access to curricula and
instruction that integrate basic skill development with higher order thinking
and problem solving (Ortiz, & Wilkinson, 1991).
Students must have access to high-quality instruction designed to help them
meet high expectations. Teachers should employ strategies known to be effective
with English learners, such as drawing on their prior knowledge; providing
opportunities to review previously learned concepts and teaching them to employ
those concepts; organizing themes or strands that connect the curriculum across
subject areas; and providing individual guidance, assistance, and support to
fill gaps in background knowledge.
EARLY INTERVENTION FOR STRUGGLING LEARNERS
problems can be prevented if students are in positive school and classroom
contexts that accommodate individual differences. However, even in the most
positive environments, some students still experience difficulties. For these
students, early intervention strategies must be implemented as soon as learning
problems are noted. Early intervention means that "supplementary instructional
services are provided early in students' schooling, and that they are intense
enough to bring at-risk students quickly to a level at which they can profit
from high-quality classroom instruction" (Madden, Slavin, Karweit, Dolan, & Wasik, 1991, p. 594).
The intent of early intervention is to create general education support
systems for struggling learners as a way to improve academic performance and to
reduce inappropriate special education referrals. Examples of early intervention
include clinical teaching, peer and expert consultation, teacher assistance
teams, and alternative programs such as those that offer tutorial or remedial
instruction in the context of general education.
Clinical teaching is carefully sequenced. First, teachers teach skills,
subjects, or concepts; then they reteach using different strategies or
approaches for the benefit of students who fail to meet expected performance
levels after initial instruction; finally, they use informal assessment
strategies to identify the possible causes of failure (Ortiz, 1997; Ortiz &
Wilkinson, 1991). Teachers conduct curriculum-based assessment to monitor
student progress and use the data from these assessments to plan and modify
or Expert Consultation
Peers or experts work collaboratively with general education teachers to
address students' learning problems and to implement recommendations for
intervention (Fuchs, Fuchs, Bahr, Fernstrom, & Stecker, 1990). For example,
teachers can share instructional resources, observe each other's classrooms, and
offer suggestions for improving instruction or managing behavior. ESL teachers
can help general education teachers by demonstrating strategies to integrate
English learners in mainstream classrooms. In schools with positive climates,
faculty function as a community and share the goal of helping students and each
other, regardless of the labels students have been given or the programs or
classrooms to which teachers and students are assigned.
Assistance Teams (TATs)
TATs can help teachers resolve problems they routinely encounter in their
classrooms (Chalfant & Pysh, 1981). These teams, comprised of four to six
general education teachers and the teacher who requests assistance, design
interventions to help struggling learners. Team members work to reach a
consensus about the nature of a student's problem; determine priorities for
intervention; help the classroom teacher to select strategies or approaches to
solve the problem; assign responsibility for carrying out the recommendations;
and establish a follow-up plan to monitor progress. The classroom teacher then
implements the plan, and follow-up meetings are held to review progress toward
resolution of the problem.
Programs and Services
General education, not special education, should be primarily responsible for
the education of students with special learning needs that cannot be attributed
to disabilities, such as migrant students who may miss critical instruction over
the course of the year or immigrant children why may arrive in U. S. schools
with limited prior education. General education alternatives may include
one-on-one tutoring, family and support groups, family counseling, and the range
of services supported by federal Title I funds. Such support should be
supplemental to and not a replacement for general education instruction.
REFERRAL TO SPECIAL EDUCATION
When prevention and early
intervention strategies fail to resolve learning difficulties, referral to
special education is warranted. The responsibilities of special education
referral committees are similar to those of TATs. The primary difference is that
referral committees include a variety of specialists, such as principals,
special education teachers, and assessment personnel. These specialists bring
their expertise to bear on the problem, especially in areas related to
assessment, diagnosis, and specialized instruction.
Decisions of the referral committee are formed by data gathered through the
prevention, early intervention, and referral processes. The recommendation that
a student receive a comprehensive individual assessment to determine whether
special education services are needed indicates the following: (1) the child is
in a positive school climate; (2) the teacher has used instructional strategies
known to be effective for English learners; (3) neither clinical teaching nor
interventions recommended by the TAT resolved the problem; and (4) other general
education alternatives also proved unsuccessful. If students continue to
struggle in spite of these efforts to individualize instruction and to
accommodate their learning characteristics, they most likely have a learning
disability (Ortiz, 1997).
Early intervention for English learners who are
having difficulty in school is first and foremost the responsibility of general
education professionals. If school climates are not supportive and if
instruction is not tailored to meet the needs of culturally and linguistically
diverse students in general education, these students have little chance of
succeeding. Interventions that focus solely on remediating students' learning
and behavior problems will yield limited results.
The anticipated outcomes of problem-prevention strategies and early
intervention include the following: a reduction in the number of students
perceived to be at risk by general education teachers because of teachers'
increased ability to accommodate the naturally occurring diversity of skills and
characteristics of students in their classes, reduction in the number of
students inappropriately referred to remedial or special education programs,
reduction in the number of students inaccurately identified as having a
disability, and improved student outcomes in both general and special education.
Chalfant, J. C., & Psyh, M. V. D. (1981,
November). Teacher assistance teams-A model for within-building problem solving.
Cummins, J. (1989). A theoretical framework for bilingual special education.
"Exceptional Children, 56," 111-19.
Cummins (1994). Knowledge, power, and identity in teaching English as a
second language. In F. Genesee (Ed.), "Educating second language children: The
whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community" (pp. 103-25). Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Bahr, M. W., Fernstrom, P., & Stecker, P. M.
(1990). Prereferral intervention: A prescriptive approach. "Exceptional
Children, 56," 493-513.
Garcia, S. B., & Dominguez, L. (1997). Cultural contexts that influence
learning and academic performance. In Silver, L. B. (Ed.), "Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Clinic of North America: Academic Difficulties" (pp. 621-55).
Philadelphia: Saunders Co.
Krashen, S. D. (1991). "Bilingual education: A focus on current research"
(FOCUS Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education No. 3). Washington, DC: National
Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N. L., Dolan, L., & Wasik, B.A.
(1991). Success for all. "Phi Delta Kappan, 72," 593-99.
Ortiz, A. A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurring concomitantly with
linguistic differences. "Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30," 321-32.
Ortiz, A. A. & Wilkinson, C. Y. (1991). Assessment and intervention model
for the bilingual exceptional student (AIM for the BESt). "Teacher Education and
Special Education, 14," 35-42.
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language
minority students (Resource Collection Series No. 9). Washington: National
Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Valdes, G., & Figueroa, R. A. (1996). Bilingualism and testing: A special
case of bias. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Yates, J. R., & Ortiz, A. (1998). Issues of culture and diversity
affecting educators with disabilities: A Change in demography is reshaping
America. In R. J. Anderson, C. E. Keller, & J. M. Karp (Eds.), Enhancing
diversity: Educators with disabilities in the education enterprise. Washington:
Gallaudet University Press.