This blog post is a review of the journal article "Evaluating Special Education Services for Learners From Ethnically Diverse Groups: Getting It Right" as published by The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps in, JASH, 2001, Vol. 26, No. 3, pg. 138-147.
From the article, "Evaluating Special Education Services for Learners From Ethnically Diverse Groups: Getting It Right", the author, Jill Bevan-Brown explores the most important factors in appropriately assessing and interviewing people from an ethically diverse group. The article begins explaining that when evaluating students of ethically diverse backgrounds their needs to be a focus on obtaining "accurate, valid, reliable and relevant information." (pg. 138)
The article focuses on examples of misconceptions, misunderstandings and a lack of transparency between people of different ethnic backgrounds. For example, the author interviewed a woman of the same ethnic
and cultural identity as her own, but because she did not appear to have the same ethnic background, this information wasn't obvious. The beginning of the interview the woman spent time casually talking to build a small relationship. As the interview began, the interviewer began to ask personal questions on the special education services her son was receiving. One question she asked was if she cared about the cultural differences between her son and his speech therapist. At first the interviewee said this was not a concern to her and she felt comfortable with the speech therapist.
Throughout the rest of the interview the author expresses how formal the interview felt. After a few questions, the interviewer revealed subtly that she has the same ethnic background as her, which made a huge impact on the rest of the interview. The interviewee immediately caught her subtle revelation and asked directly if she was Maori like she was. Once they had this shared equity, the author reveals how quickly their relationship grew. The author explains that she felt that the interviewee opened up and even changed her answers to questions previously asked. She also explained that she did care about the ethnic background of her sons speech therapist and revealed she did not want the interviewer to think she was racially prejudiced. (pg 139)
It is not a huge revelation in my eyes that people with the same ethnic backgrounds are able to have a more intimate conversation. When I worked with a student from India, and said hello to them in their native language, a huge smile swept across their face. I do not have any obvious characteristics that show that my father is from Pakistan, however the second this student realized I had similar ethnic background as him, he felt a connection with me. With this information, it makes you question how accurate is the information we obtain from students who are culturally diverse from those who assess them.
At the school I work at, we do have an ELD teacher who speaks Spanish, however she does not have a ethnically diverse background. She is an American woman who was born and raised by American parents. Does this make it more challenging for her to understand the cultural and social customs of the Spanish students she works with? Is the fact that she speaks Spanish enough to say that her and the students she assesses have a trust and transparency in their relationship?
The article continues on to express the factors needed between students and those who evaluate for special education services to make the information they receive to be valid and reliable. The article has six "rights" to think about for assessing students of ethnic backgrounds that are explained below. (pg 143-145)
1) The right people are asking the questions.
Having someone that the student can trust and be more open with, who may share the same ethnic background as them, will have the student be more forthcoming with information.
2) Asking the right questions.
Having a process for generating a culturally appropriate and meaningful questionnaire for families of the students. This means having an open dialogue for people to share concerns or feedback on the information asked to families and how that can be culturally inappropriate. If you can create a questionnaire that asked the right questions you can get the information that is most appropriate for that ethnic group needed to identify a student.
3) Asking the right people.
Think about how can you find people who can share and express understanding of a culture.
4) Asking in the right way.
Creating a positive relationship and build trust in who you are evaluating to ensure that answers are accurate and meaningful.
5) Asking questions in the right place.
6) Asking questions at the right time.
A lot of cultures have different communication styles that are deemed as respectful or inappropriate. When communicating with people, have some knowledge of respectful practices in their culture. Also, give them the power to set a meeting time and place to converse in a place and time that is comfortable to them.
The study from the article states that students "are classified
through a misunderstanding or through a different
cultural perspective" (pg 145) and are being labeled as having an intellectual disability. Although this article reflects a very specific ethnic group of the Maori culture, it is easy to draw connections in my own placement and experience. As the school I work at becomes more diverse, I want families to know that their child is important and their ethnic background is respected. If we can take the 6 "rights" of evaluating students with diverse backgrounds, we can determine more reliable information on students to properly identify the students struggles in our education system.
There is so much more information that we can get from our research and genuine interest in families that standardized testing will never be able to obtain for us. Each student deserves a individualized assessment and evaluation plan to truly identify where there struggles stem from. If a student struggles in school, receiving special education services may not be the most appropriate or beneficial way for that student to become successful.
Monday, November 6, 2017
Thursday, November 2, 2017
The Child Find Process
This blog post is a review of the journal article "Child Find
Activities Under
the Individuals
With Disabilities
Education Act" as published by Teaching Exceptional Children in, Council for Exceptional Children, 2017, Vol.49, No. 5, pp. 301–308.
Although this blog is dedicated to the research and understanding of how to properly identify students of ethnic backgrounds for special education services, this next article gives us some insight to properly identifying students in general. Child Find, is a term used for programs and people that specifically evaluate and determine students who need to receive special education services. There are many systems in place across the country that are determined at the district level for the evaluation process.
At the school I work at, we use an RTI (Response to Intervention) approach for determining whether or not a student should qualify for special education. This consists of determining that a student is not having the same growth as most of the students in their class. In response to their inability to remain at the same level of growth as their peers, interventions or targeted instruction is documented for that student. If the student does not respond to the targeted intervention they receive over a period of time, they are then able to qualify for the evaluation process into special education.
The article, "Child Find Activities Under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act" is a recent article that gives us a summary of factors that should be included in this process. The most important factor, according to this article, is to always be looking out for students who are considered to be "at-risk." (pg 304) In my school district, students who are considered to be "at-risk" are those who perform well below benchmark for our early literacy skills assessments. These students are then put through our RTI process before determining the need to a special education evaluation process.
The most interesting part of this article was the "common mistakes" found in the Child Find process. The article asks us to look at three areas of concerns (timeline, student progress and mental health) in a more critical lens. When looking at timeline, the evaluation needs to take place in 60 days, the initial evaluation should not be delayed, and waiting for an outside evaluation should not take precedence over that start of the school-based evaluation process. (pg 305)
The article also points out that "cultural factors, environmental or economic disadvantage, and limited English proficiency must be ruled out before a child can be classified as having a specific learning disability." A school needs to have a process for eliminating these other factors to make sure these students are not inappropriately identified. (pg 305) If a school doesn't have a process for examining and ruling out these factors in a valid and reliable way, there is a strong chance of giving misidentifying a ELL student with a learning disability.
According to the article, when examining student progress, be mindful of the amount of undocumented supports the teacher is using to keep the student making progress. If teacher is providing many informal supports over a long period of time, this may show a need for the student to have formal special education report to continue the services the student received from their teacher. (pg 305)
There also needs to be an awareness of the mental health concerns that may need to be addressed if it appears to be affecting the students educational progress. (pg 305) There aren't many referrals in my school specifically for just mental health, however when their mental health is showing a severe impact on that students progress their needs to be formal documentation. It is important to keep in mind that many cultures do not address mental health concerns and that student will not have the chance to receive an outside diagnosis. It is important for the school to express to teachers to be aware of the characteristics of a student who may be struggling with mental health concerns and how to go about creating a referral for them.
In conclusion the article states, "school districts are likely to be found in violation of Child Find activities when school officials overlook signs of a disability, fail to evaluate, or have no justification for deciding not to evaluate." (pg. 307) I think this last statement is really important when determining when to evaluate a student who is culturally diverse. What is the deciding factor in the school that determines whether it is time to evaluate that student for a learning disability? This process is extremely important and specific, so making this process specific to students who are culturally diverse need to be put in place. Working in a growing community with an increase in diversity we are becoming more aware of the changes and updates we need to make on our Child Find activities.
Although this blog is dedicated to the research and understanding of how to properly identify students of ethnic backgrounds for special education services, this next article gives us some insight to properly identifying students in general. Child Find, is a term used for programs and people that specifically evaluate and determine students who need to receive special education services. There are many systems in place across the country that are determined at the district level for the evaluation process.
At the school I work at, we use an RTI (Response to Intervention) approach for determining whether or not a student should qualify for special education. This consists of determining that a student is not having the same growth as most of the students in their class. In response to their inability to remain at the same level of growth as their peers, interventions or targeted instruction is documented for that student. If the student does not respond to the targeted intervention they receive over a period of time, they are then able to qualify for the evaluation process into special education.
The article, "Child Find Activities Under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act" is a recent article that gives us a summary of factors that should be included in this process. The most important factor, according to this article, is to always be looking out for students who are considered to be "at-risk." (pg 304) In my school district, students who are considered to be "at-risk" are those who perform well below benchmark for our early literacy skills assessments. These students are then put through our RTI process before determining the need to a special education evaluation process.
The most interesting part of this article was the "common mistakes" found in the Child Find process. The article asks us to look at three areas of concerns (timeline, student progress and mental health) in a more critical lens. When looking at timeline, the evaluation needs to take place in 60 days, the initial evaluation should not be delayed, and waiting for an outside evaluation should not take precedence over that start of the school-based evaluation process. (pg 305)
The article also points out that "cultural factors, environmental or economic disadvantage, and limited English proficiency must be ruled out before a child can be classified as having a specific learning disability." A school needs to have a process for eliminating these other factors to make sure these students are not inappropriately identified. (pg 305) If a school doesn't have a process for examining and ruling out these factors in a valid and reliable way, there is a strong chance of giving misidentifying a ELL student with a learning disability.
According to the article, when examining student progress, be mindful of the amount of undocumented supports the teacher is using to keep the student making progress. If teacher is providing many informal supports over a long period of time, this may show a need for the student to have formal special education report to continue the services the student received from their teacher. (pg 305)
There also needs to be an awareness of the mental health concerns that may need to be addressed if it appears to be affecting the students educational progress. (pg 305) There aren't many referrals in my school specifically for just mental health, however when their mental health is showing a severe impact on that students progress their needs to be formal documentation. It is important to keep in mind that many cultures do not address mental health concerns and that student will not have the chance to receive an outside diagnosis. It is important for the school to express to teachers to be aware of the characteristics of a student who may be struggling with mental health concerns and how to go about creating a referral for them.
In conclusion the article states, "school districts are likely to be found in violation of Child Find activities when school officials overlook signs of a disability, fail to evaluate, or have no justification for deciding not to evaluate." (pg. 307) I think this last statement is really important when determining when to evaluate a student who is culturally diverse. What is the deciding factor in the school that determines whether it is time to evaluate that student for a learning disability? This process is extremely important and specific, so making this process specific to students who are culturally diverse need to be put in place. Working in a growing community with an increase in diversity we are becoming more aware of the changes and updates we need to make on our Child Find activities.
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
A New Problem to Special Education
This blog post is a review of the journal article "English-Learners Often Misidentified for Special Ed." as published by Editorial Projects in Education in, Education Week, Aug 2012, Vol. 32, Issue 2, pg. 12.
Summary:
I think it is important to first mention how this article starts off and realize that this is something that special education teachers experience constantly. The article begins with a teacher, in a San Diego public school, that received six students who were referred to special education. What makes those six students stand out… all of them were English Language Learners! What interests me further, is not one of those students were placed in special education upon assessment. The article continues to address how these students probably would have been placed in special education if this same situation occurred a few years prior. The schools in San Diego district have gone through an era of receiving a disproportionate amount of referrals of ELL students for special education. What did San Diego do? According to the article, they created a step by step process to ensure every possibility, including language, has been evaluated before their eligibility is determined.
"Special education had become the default intervention," said Sonia Picos, a program manager in the district's special education department. "Special education was seen as the place with the answers, without taking into consideration what the long-term implications were going to be for the students." (p. 1) The article continues with a discussion on the problem of identifying ELL students as a double sided problem. ELLs have been overrepresented in special education, when there is no process on deciphering their abilities. On the other hand, when that problem is considered of being overrepresented, there is a challenge of not providing services for ELL students who need them.
One important take away from the article discusses that national research for misidentified ELLs happened within the last decade. One common factor that was seen across the board is if a district had a small population of ELLs, there was a theme of over-identification present, and districts with a high population of ELLs were under-identified. This is important because "by 2030, English-learners will comprise an estimated 40 percent of the American student population" (p. 12).
The article discusses the root of the problem: do students have a disability or language that is impeding progress? One of the many challenges professionals face are the assessments and evaluation tools available for determining eligibility. The biggest factor, interestingly enough, is NOT that it is in English, because giving them the assessment in Spanish is just as challenging. According to Lesli A Maxwell and Nin Shah, these assessments are catered to students who speak a single language.
How did San Diego’s school district work on the correct identification of ELL students?
1. Have a process catered to English Language Learners. The article discusses the importance of how many factors are added for being a second language learners and evaluators need to slow down the process.
2. Give their district staff members a “pre-referral” process before the jump to special education. This process includes supporting general education teachers with a list of interventions that support ELL students in their Tier 1 instruction.
3. Examine “extrinsic factors” in the student's life. These factors include a look into parental involvement, attendance issues, nutrition, and frequently moving.
Reflection:
It is so frustrating to get referrals for so many students who are ELLs. However, I can’t change the referrals I get, I can only be educated enough to understand where the referral may be stemming from and what questions I need to ask in order to determine if a student is being identified appropriately. My passion for identifying students appropriately, especially ELLs, was inspired by an ESL teacher. This teacher cared so much about her students not receiving the support her students needed to be successful in their general education classroom. This article helped me understand what questions I need to ask in order to help support correctly identifying students.
From this article I gained a lot of insight on thinking about assessments being catered to students who speak one language. If students are learning one language in a social environment and learning academic language at school in another language, there is going to be a struggle in assessing students in only one language. Does there need to be specific assessments for bilingual students? Are they available? Will they bring together the social and academic language together?
Lastly, I want to dive deeper into districts and locations that have dealt with the low population of ELL students and how did they combat their over-representation in special education.
Summary:
I think it is important to first mention how this article starts off and realize that this is something that special education teachers experience constantly. The article begins with a teacher, in a San Diego public school, that received six students who were referred to special education. What makes those six students stand out… all of them were English Language Learners! What interests me further, is not one of those students were placed in special education upon assessment. The article continues to address how these students probably would have been placed in special education if this same situation occurred a few years prior. The schools in San Diego district have gone through an era of receiving a disproportionate amount of referrals of ELL students for special education. What did San Diego do? According to the article, they created a step by step process to ensure every possibility, including language, has been evaluated before their eligibility is determined.
"Special education had become the default intervention," said Sonia Picos, a program manager in the district's special education department. "Special education was seen as the place with the answers, without taking into consideration what the long-term implications were going to be for the students." (p. 1) The article continues with a discussion on the problem of identifying ELL students as a double sided problem. ELLs have been overrepresented in special education, when there is no process on deciphering their abilities. On the other hand, when that problem is considered of being overrepresented, there is a challenge of not providing services for ELL students who need them.
One important take away from the article discusses that national research for misidentified ELLs happened within the last decade. One common factor that was seen across the board is if a district had a small population of ELLs, there was a theme of over-identification present, and districts with a high population of ELLs were under-identified. This is important because "by 2030, English-learners will comprise an estimated 40 percent of the American student population" (p. 12).
The article discusses the root of the problem: do students have a disability or language that is impeding progress? One of the many challenges professionals face are the assessments and evaluation tools available for determining eligibility. The biggest factor, interestingly enough, is NOT that it is in English, because giving them the assessment in Spanish is just as challenging. According to Lesli A Maxwell and Nin Shah, these assessments are catered to students who speak a single language.
How did San Diego’s school district work on the correct identification of ELL students?
1. Have a process catered to English Language Learners. The article discusses the importance of how many factors are added for being a second language learners and evaluators need to slow down the process.
2. Give their district staff members a “pre-referral” process before the jump to special education. This process includes supporting general education teachers with a list of interventions that support ELL students in their Tier 1 instruction.
3. Examine “extrinsic factors” in the student's life. These factors include a look into parental involvement, attendance issues, nutrition, and frequently moving.
Reflection:
It is so frustrating to get referrals for so many students who are ELLs. However, I can’t change the referrals I get, I can only be educated enough to understand where the referral may be stemming from and what questions I need to ask in order to determine if a student is being identified appropriately. My passion for identifying students appropriately, especially ELLs, was inspired by an ESL teacher. This teacher cared so much about her students not receiving the support her students needed to be successful in their general education classroom. This article helped me understand what questions I need to ask in order to help support correctly identifying students.
From this article I gained a lot of insight on thinking about assessments being catered to students who speak one language. If students are learning one language in a social environment and learning academic language at school in another language, there is going to be a struggle in assessing students in only one language. Does there need to be specific assessments for bilingual students? Are they available? Will they bring together the social and academic language together?
Lastly, I want to dive deeper into districts and locations that have dealt with the low population of ELL students and how did they combat their over-representation in special education.
Identifying English Language Learners with Disabilities
Summary
This blog post is a review of the journal article "Identification problems: US special education eligibility for English language learners" as published in International Journal of Education Research, 2014, Vol. 68, pg. 27-34, by David E. DeMatthews, D. Brent Edwards, and Timothy E. Nelson.
This article addressed various topics. The first discussed what the special education eligibility policies are for English Language Learners (ELLs). The article examines the state and district guidelines for testing ELLs. The article focuses on the lack of policies and trained professionals in assessing students. The authors discuss the challenges for identifying special education eligibility when you factor in issues related to language and culture. ELLs are at risk of being both under- and over-identified for special education. Unfortunately, the article makes it clear that there is a limited amount of research, and this is a problem that has been affecting the United States for some time. We are not alone in our struggles, as this topic is relevant even outside of the United States.
Throughout the article, there are multiple cited instances that federal, state, and local policies commonly have limited guidance on supporting ELLs with disabilities. The article does point out policies which are relevant to ELLs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has three main points that directly relate to ELL students. The first point states that any child who is suspected to have a disability should be tested. This policy also states that students with only a language proficiency deficit are not eligible for special education. IDEA mandates that “assessments must be conducted in the student's accustomed manner of communication or language and in a way that clearly identifies what a student knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally. Thus, assessment materials, protocols, and procedures should be in the language that best measures the student's potential disability rather than his or her English language skills” (p. 28).
According to the article, there is little to no clear guidance on a federal, state, or district level. This article states several times how challenging it is for teachers to identify students for disabilities in early grade levels because of the variation in the rate of progress between students. In the survey conducted by the authors, they determined that the challenge during eligibility meetings is not having the tools, procedures, or qualified staff to identify the difference between English language acquisition and disability. The article continues to discuss the importance of having a solid body of evidence to determine where a student falls out. Another factor of disproportionality, the authors determined, were schools not following a response to intervention (RTI) or multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) pre-referral process.
The authors conclude that there are many factors of disproportionality. Their analysis revealed the lack of policy and guidance for English Language Learners with a disability. They also concluded that most staff are not focused on the issue of misidentifying ELLs with disabilities. The article numerously mentions how challenging it was for the states to have a clear and concise response during their data collection process. They also mentioned that the guidance for ELL and special education were separate topics, and were not addressed together.
Incorrect knowledge that was gathered in the survey from participants included:
“They (ELLs) can’t be found eligible for special education in their first year at a school.”
“If they have a disability, you usually know right away.”
The article also shared the awareness for the need for collaboration, but sharing the challenges of the English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers working with the special education team.
“We usually try to have an ESL teacher participate in the IEP meeting to help make sure it's not an issue related to language.”
“This is a real issue, I mean a real struggle for us here. It's very hard to tell the difference between SLD [Specific Learning Disability] if there is a language barrier. We have our ESL team work with the special education team, we do evaluations, observations, and really try to talk through the issues.”
The article concludes with their surveys results of having a strong consensus within the school system of wanting to be able to “assess students in their native language, when appropriate” (p. 32).
Reflection:
As a special education teacher, I would like to think that my colleagues and I are trained to appropriately determine whether a student does or does not having a learning disability. However, this article truly reveals a lack of knowledge on appropriately assessing eligibility for English Language Learners. If there is a disproportionate amount of ELLs in special education, the true issue is why aren’t they being assessed accurately? Something that stood out to me in this article is teachers who are under the assumption that you cannot test an English Language Learner for a disability until two years after their enrollment.
It appears that due to a lack of guidance, there are many assumptions on how to handle the assessment of English Language Learners. It appears that our special education team needs guidance on how to assess ELLs appropriately, as well as them receiving appropriate trainings for assessing students. Are there other states or districts who have dealt with this same issue, and how did they fix it? Is it just a matter of training our teachers, who test for eligibility, for assessing English Language Learners? It is evident that those who test students for eligibility need to be trained appropriately to asses ELL students.
If ELL students are being misidentified as having a learning disability, it is so much easier for their general education teacher to not focus on their needs. General education teachers become reliant on special education teachers to provide for them their level of education. Students who receive services for being an ELL student should be receiving their extra support for understanding the language in Tier 1 instruction.
In reaction to students not being assessed and categorized appropriately, ELLs with disabilities are less likely to be included in the general education classroom. If this specific category of students are further at-risk than being labeled with only special education or ELL, how are we going to protect students who are being misidentified?
How can we reflect on the English language acquisition process and determine if a student is just frustrated with learning a new language or truly having challenges due to a learning disability? We hear that best practice is to determine the full body of evidence for a student, and that one assessment isn’t enough to show a student has a learning disability. However, the challenge still is, what is a valid and reliable assessment tool that considers a student’s language proficiency?
The article showed that a huge factor in not receiving responses during for the survey, was not finding a source to go to that dealt with both special education and English Language Learners. They mention that these two groups are separate and have no policies that combine their resources. Having these departments be so divided and not seeing them collaborate is a huge factor for not seeing that collaboration in schools as well. Of course, when there is a lack of understanding and collaboration, it wasn’t surprising to hear how misconceptions of policies form. This is a huge factor as to why they found so many misconceptions about assessing an ELL student for a disability.
This blog post is a review of the journal article "Identification problems: US special education eligibility for English language learners" as published in International Journal of Education Research, 2014, Vol. 68, pg. 27-34, by David E. DeMatthews, D. Brent Edwards, and Timothy E. Nelson.
This article addressed various topics. The first discussed what the special education eligibility policies are for English Language Learners (ELLs). The article examines the state and district guidelines for testing ELLs. The article focuses on the lack of policies and trained professionals in assessing students. The authors discuss the challenges for identifying special education eligibility when you factor in issues related to language and culture. ELLs are at risk of being both under- and over-identified for special education. Unfortunately, the article makes it clear that there is a limited amount of research, and this is a problem that has been affecting the United States for some time. We are not alone in our struggles, as this topic is relevant even outside of the United States.
Throughout the article, there are multiple cited instances that federal, state, and local policies commonly have limited guidance on supporting ELLs with disabilities. The article does point out policies which are relevant to ELLs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has three main points that directly relate to ELL students. The first point states that any child who is suspected to have a disability should be tested. This policy also states that students with only a language proficiency deficit are not eligible for special education. IDEA mandates that “assessments must be conducted in the student's accustomed manner of communication or language and in a way that clearly identifies what a student knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally. Thus, assessment materials, protocols, and procedures should be in the language that best measures the student's potential disability rather than his or her English language skills” (p. 28).
According to the article, there is little to no clear guidance on a federal, state, or district level. This article states several times how challenging it is for teachers to identify students for disabilities in early grade levels because of the variation in the rate of progress between students. In the survey conducted by the authors, they determined that the challenge during eligibility meetings is not having the tools, procedures, or qualified staff to identify the difference between English language acquisition and disability. The article continues to discuss the importance of having a solid body of evidence to determine where a student falls out. Another factor of disproportionality, the authors determined, were schools not following a response to intervention (RTI) or multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) pre-referral process.
The authors conclude that there are many factors of disproportionality. Their analysis revealed the lack of policy and guidance for English Language Learners with a disability. They also concluded that most staff are not focused on the issue of misidentifying ELLs with disabilities. The article numerously mentions how challenging it was for the states to have a clear and concise response during their data collection process. They also mentioned that the guidance for ELL and special education were separate topics, and were not addressed together.
Incorrect knowledge that was gathered in the survey from participants included:
“They (ELLs) can’t be found eligible for special education in their first year at a school.”
“If they have a disability, you usually know right away.”
The article also shared the awareness for the need for collaboration, but sharing the challenges of the English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers working with the special education team.
“We usually try to have an ESL teacher participate in the IEP meeting to help make sure it's not an issue related to language.”
“This is a real issue, I mean a real struggle for us here. It's very hard to tell the difference between SLD [Specific Learning Disability] if there is a language barrier. We have our ESL team work with the special education team, we do evaluations, observations, and really try to talk through the issues.”
The article concludes with their surveys results of having a strong consensus within the school system of wanting to be able to “assess students in their native language, when appropriate” (p. 32).
Reflection:
As a special education teacher, I would like to think that my colleagues and I are trained to appropriately determine whether a student does or does not having a learning disability. However, this article truly reveals a lack of knowledge on appropriately assessing eligibility for English Language Learners. If there is a disproportionate amount of ELLs in special education, the true issue is why aren’t they being assessed accurately? Something that stood out to me in this article is teachers who are under the assumption that you cannot test an English Language Learner for a disability until two years after their enrollment.
It appears that due to a lack of guidance, there are many assumptions on how to handle the assessment of English Language Learners. It appears that our special education team needs guidance on how to assess ELLs appropriately, as well as them receiving appropriate trainings for assessing students. Are there other states or districts who have dealt with this same issue, and how did they fix it? Is it just a matter of training our teachers, who test for eligibility, for assessing English Language Learners? It is evident that those who test students for eligibility need to be trained appropriately to asses ELL students.
If ELL students are being misidentified as having a learning disability, it is so much easier for their general education teacher to not focus on their needs. General education teachers become reliant on special education teachers to provide for them their level of education. Students who receive services for being an ELL student should be receiving their extra support for understanding the language in Tier 1 instruction.
In reaction to students not being assessed and categorized appropriately, ELLs with disabilities are less likely to be included in the general education classroom. If this specific category of students are further at-risk than being labeled with only special education or ELL, how are we going to protect students who are being misidentified?
How can we reflect on the English language acquisition process and determine if a student is just frustrated with learning a new language or truly having challenges due to a learning disability? We hear that best practice is to determine the full body of evidence for a student, and that one assessment isn’t enough to show a student has a learning disability. However, the challenge still is, what is a valid and reliable assessment tool that considers a student’s language proficiency?
The article showed that a huge factor in not receiving responses during for the survey, was not finding a source to go to that dealt with both special education and English Language Learners. They mention that these two groups are separate and have no policies that combine their resources. Having these departments be so divided and not seeing them collaborate is a huge factor for not seeing that collaboration in schools as well. Of course, when there is a lack of understanding and collaboration, it wasn’t surprising to hear how misconceptions of policies form. This is a huge factor as to why they found so many misconceptions about assessing an ELL student for a disability.
Saturday, September 30, 2017
Are Special Education Teachers Trained
This first blog post is a review of the journal article "Special education trainee teachers’ perceptions of their professional world: motives, roles, and expectations from teacher training" as published by United Kingdom: Taylor and Francis in, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, Feb 2017, Vol. 32, Issue 2, pg. 153-170.
Summary:
The research focused on the responses of ninety-three students, who are training to be special education professionals.
Bella Gavish’s article digs into three separate research questions.
1. What are their motives for joining the profession?
2. How do they perceive the role of the special education teacher?
3. What are their expectations from teacher training?
The article goes into full detail on what motivates them for entering the special education profession. I was very interested in exploring the second and third question that was studied. The first question is important to research because by studying one's motivation for joining the profession, it may relate to how special education teachers value different factors of their position. Also, I am curious on the overall expectations for training special education teachers.
The article discusses a huge shift in the approach of teaching students with special education needs. As discussed in the article, from the mid 1970’s to now, special education has shifted from a medical approach to a social approach. Currently, special education professionals are expected to be leaders of inclusion in their placement.
Inclusion promotes “meeting the needs of all students and respects all kinds of differences – gender, ethnic, linguistic, socioeconomic, intellectual, physical health, and others. It aims to ensure that all students will have equal access to an education that will prepare them for life in the community and in society, and to try to change the system so that it meets the needs of all the children, in contrast to the perception that requires the child change in order to meet the system’s requirements” (p. 155). The article also shares the perception of special education professionals starting with the mindset that they will be working in a “closed environment,” (p. 168). A closed environment means that they work primarily on their own, with little to no help from their colleagues.
The article continues to discuss the revolution in education with special educators promoting inclusion for their students. The role of the special education teacher has shifted, from their positions of being a homeroom teacher, to being a support teacher in the general education classroom. With this shift, “Special education teachers were required to achieve more demanding aims in response to the increasing range of cultures, languages, styles of learning, disorders, and skills; to have a richer repertoire of strategies” (p. 156). Gavish therefore claims there is no denying that the task of the special education teacher has increased with the addition of the inclusion factor for students.
The question I find most appropriate in regard to this blog is the last question, of what training do special education teachers require? With such huge changes in the profession, are their changes in the training of our teachers? The article states special education teachers need to be able to find skills that best support their advancement in their education. They need to be able to evaluate behavior, become familiar and cope with a broad range of disabilities, and to be able to distinguish between “normal” and “abnormal” development. Gavish concludes that training parents to support and help with the interventions that special educators determine are appropriate.
Reflection:
While reading this article, I wanted to fully understand what most special education teachers expect to be focusing on. When you have a focus in mind, it becomes part of your motivation. Understanding the overall expectations of special education teachers is important to help me understand what gaps there are in supporting a change in population. When I talk to teachers who have twenty years of experience over me, a lot of our conversations have a common theme of change. They talk about what expectations were, how they have changed, what has improved, and what they feel still needs improvement. The purpose of my research is to improve the common problem being discussed currently, how do I evaluate English Language Learners?
When you read about special education teachers coming into their profession thinking that they will be working in a “closed environment,” you have to realize that the lack of collaboration will affect their performance. There are many teachers that have shared their experiences with me of being completely isolated in their school, that even the principal never came into the room for corrective feedback. It has become very standard in education that collaboration of teachers help support the student most effectively. This is why IEP meetings involve a team and why response to intervention (RTI) and multi-tiered support systems (MTSS) were put in place. These teams are created to put people with different perspectives and varied professional expertise together to prevent the assumption of disabilities and to find a personalized approach for each student. Do special education teachers use this same collaboration approach when having to identify students they do not have the expertise in all of the factors that these students bring to their case? If many special education professionals feel that they work in isolated environments, how can we expect that they will collaborate with an ELL teacher? As the rise of culture, ethnicity, and language are becoming more prevalent in the classroom, and in the special education realm, we need to focus on developing our teachers to break that barrier with the ELL teacher and find how our interventions relate. The ELL teacher at the school I currently work at said that the first time a special education teacher approached her about a student of hers was in 2017, and she has taught for twenty-two years at the same school. That is my personal experience, but after reading through this article, it makes me feel that more professionals have the same experience.
Summary:
The research focused on the responses of ninety-three students, who are training to be special education professionals.
Bella Gavish’s article digs into three separate research questions.
1. What are their motives for joining the profession?
2. How do they perceive the role of the special education teacher?
3. What are their expectations from teacher training?
The article goes into full detail on what motivates them for entering the special education profession. I was very interested in exploring the second and third question that was studied. The first question is important to research because by studying one's motivation for joining the profession, it may relate to how special education teachers value different factors of their position. Also, I am curious on the overall expectations for training special education teachers.
The article discusses a huge shift in the approach of teaching students with special education needs. As discussed in the article, from the mid 1970’s to now, special education has shifted from a medical approach to a social approach. Currently, special education professionals are expected to be leaders of inclusion in their placement.
Inclusion promotes “meeting the needs of all students and respects all kinds of differences – gender, ethnic, linguistic, socioeconomic, intellectual, physical health, and others. It aims to ensure that all students will have equal access to an education that will prepare them for life in the community and in society, and to try to change the system so that it meets the needs of all the children, in contrast to the perception that requires the child change in order to meet the system’s requirements” (p. 155). The article also shares the perception of special education professionals starting with the mindset that they will be working in a “closed environment,” (p. 168). A closed environment means that they work primarily on their own, with little to no help from their colleagues.
The article continues to discuss the revolution in education with special educators promoting inclusion for their students. The role of the special education teacher has shifted, from their positions of being a homeroom teacher, to being a support teacher in the general education classroom. With this shift, “Special education teachers were required to achieve more demanding aims in response to the increasing range of cultures, languages, styles of learning, disorders, and skills; to have a richer repertoire of strategies” (p. 156). Gavish therefore claims there is no denying that the task of the special education teacher has increased with the addition of the inclusion factor for students.
The question I find most appropriate in regard to this blog is the last question, of what training do special education teachers require? With such huge changes in the profession, are their changes in the training of our teachers? The article states special education teachers need to be able to find skills that best support their advancement in their education. They need to be able to evaluate behavior, become familiar and cope with a broad range of disabilities, and to be able to distinguish between “normal” and “abnormal” development. Gavish concludes that training parents to support and help with the interventions that special educators determine are appropriate.
Reflection:
While reading this article, I wanted to fully understand what most special education teachers expect to be focusing on. When you have a focus in mind, it becomes part of your motivation. Understanding the overall expectations of special education teachers is important to help me understand what gaps there are in supporting a change in population. When I talk to teachers who have twenty years of experience over me, a lot of our conversations have a common theme of change. They talk about what expectations were, how they have changed, what has improved, and what they feel still needs improvement. The purpose of my research is to improve the common problem being discussed currently, how do I evaluate English Language Learners?
When you read about special education teachers coming into their profession thinking that they will be working in a “closed environment,” you have to realize that the lack of collaboration will affect their performance. There are many teachers that have shared their experiences with me of being completely isolated in their school, that even the principal never came into the room for corrective feedback. It has become very standard in education that collaboration of teachers help support the student most effectively. This is why IEP meetings involve a team and why response to intervention (RTI) and multi-tiered support systems (MTSS) were put in place. These teams are created to put people with different perspectives and varied professional expertise together to prevent the assumption of disabilities and to find a personalized approach for each student. Do special education teachers use this same collaboration approach when having to identify students they do not have the expertise in all of the factors that these students bring to their case? If many special education professionals feel that they work in isolated environments, how can we expect that they will collaborate with an ELL teacher? As the rise of culture, ethnicity, and language are becoming more prevalent in the classroom, and in the special education realm, we need to focus on developing our teachers to break that barrier with the ELL teacher and find how our interventions relate. The ELL teacher at the school I currently work at said that the first time a special education teacher approached her about a student of hers was in 2017, and she has taught for twenty-two years at the same school. That is my personal experience, but after reading through this article, it makes me feel that more professionals have the same experience.
Friday, September 1, 2017
About
A teacher's main priority is to do what is best for the student. All educators focus on improving their instructional strategies to meet the needs of their students. I am an elementary school Special Education teacher, who works primarily in moderate needs. Within my own school district, there has been a rise in the number of English Language Learners in Special Education programs, giving us a disproportionate ratio. If we are not distinguishing correctly between students who have a learning disability and those who do not know the language, then we are doing a disservice to our students. If we do not understand the reasoning behind their academic challenges, we are not going to be able to serve them the most appropriate instruction. Throughout my blog, I will explore the over-representation of English Language Learners in Special Education programs and the assessment strategies associated with these students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)