1. Silvia Soderberg, Ed.S. Bryn Harris, Ph.D. Angela Restrepo, Ed.S. Margarita Cordero, Ed.S.

2. Working with Culturally and Linguistically diverse Students

3. Stages of Language Acquisition

5. Colorado language proficiency standards and assessment WIDA (World Class Instructional Design and Assessment) www.wida.us ACCESS (Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State to State for English Language Learners)

6. ACCESS for ELLs Scores

7. Examples of Parent & Teacher Reports

8. WIDA Can do Descriptors

9. Use Caution with Access Scores  No single score or proficiency level should be used as the sole criteria for decision making.  Student scores should be shared with all educators who work with them.  Data in the reports need to be contextualized to be meaningful (both historical and demographic information can inform assessment results)  Each domain has its own scale and cannot be compared to another using scale scores. For more information, contact the WIDA help desk 1-866-276-7735 or help@wida.us

11. Working with Interpreters Parent-Teacher Conference Teacher: Your child is getting F’s Parent: Que es F? (What is an F?) Son: Fantastico (Great)

12. Community Interpreters The Community Interpreter: Professional Interpreter Training for Bilingual Staff and Community Interpreters by Marjory A. Bancroft, Lourdes Rubio-FitzpatrickMarjory A. BancroftLourdes Rubio-Fitzpatrick

13. Interpreter Code of Ethics

14. Awareness of Cultural Differences

18. Building a Body of Evidence Before a Referral for Evaluation of Special Education Eligibility

19. Possible reasons for initiating building a body of evidence The ELL is exhibiting the academic/behavioral difficulties. The ELL teacher supports the position that the ELL is performing differently from his/her cultural peers. The ELL displays very little or no academic progress resulting from appropriate instructional strategies, alternative instruction, or academic interventions. Parents confirm the academic/behavioral difficulties seen in the school setting. School personnel such as tutors and aides confirm the academic/behavioral difficulties seen in the classroom setting.

20.  Instructional issue  Assume there is nothing wrong with the student and that environmental factors are the primary reason for the learning difficulties. Determine if there has been appropriate instruction/intervention at all levels of the RtI process. Analyze data for progress/lack of overtime (RtI, District assessments etc.). MUST involve ESL teacher/coach. Ensure that the ESL staff serve on the instructional decision-making team. Focus on RATE OF LEARNING. Compare the student’s performance to “true peers” (students with the same native language and culture and similar educational histories). Attendance, history of mobility, environmental factors.

21.  English Learning Language development ESL history: Consider the amount and type of ESL instruction the student received in the past and is currently receiving. Consider the impact of language and culture on instruction and learning. Determine language dominance and language proficiency. Consider the amount and type of native language instruction the student received in the past and is currently receiving. Assessment of L1 and L2 – Accent versus Proficiency Direct: standardized language test, conversational sample, observation, informal assessments (e.g. SOLOM, LAS). Indirect: parent interview, parent report, student report, observation.

22.  Student Background Contact the family to receive feedback and information regarding the student’s background, strengths, interests and needs. Who lives in the home Language use at home Early developmental milestones – L1 development Literacy level in the home History of difficulties learning

23.  To Avoid Misdiagnosis/ Disproportionality Involve parents in the pre-referral and in the evaluation process. Collaboration among regular education, ESL, parents and special education staff is critical. Follow RtI model. Compare the student’s performance to “true peers” (students with the same native language and culture and similar educational histories). Gather information from multiple sources (formal and informal) and give equal weight to each of them. Rule out vision and hearing or any other physical condition. Make sure that the student has received an adequate opportunity to learn. When children have not had sufficient opportunity to learn, the determination cannot be made that they have a disability. Know your numbers – Is there an under-representation or over-representation of ELLs in Sped in your school?

24. Determine Eligibility 1. Review data beginning with native language, family background and school history. 2. Score and interpret results of formal assessments with student’s background information in mind. 3. Give equal weight to all data sources. 4. Include descriptive data, family data, observations, supplemental testing, and classroom and ESL teacher information as data points to support your results

25. Determine Eligibility 5. Use professional judgment in reporting scores 6. Rule out English as PRIMARY cause 7. Rule out instruction as the PRIMARY cause

26. Unethical Assessment Practices Waiting 5 years until a child learns English before referring them for an evaluation Putting a child in special education for more support with English language acquisition Just because a child is receiving support from special education or ELA does not mean they wont qualify for the other Asking the child what language they prefer to be evaluated in – get this in a more formal way RTI as a sole method of identification – formal assessment is still best practice Just because you may be bilingual, does not mean you have enough competencies to provide best practice services

27. Ethical Assessment Practices Taking culture and language into account when designing interventions and services Including parents in all decision making and data collection Assisting newcomers and parents – provide information regarding the educational system and provide mentorship opportunities for newcomers Using lots of data when decision making Collaborating with school staff including ESL teachers and SLPs who often have more training in this area Knowing your limitations, continual self-reflection

28. Nondiscriminatory Evaluation Procedures per IDEA Tests and other materials: Are selected and administered so as not to discriminate on a racial or cultural bias Are provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so Are selected and administered to ensure that they measure the extent to which an LEP child has a disability and needs special education rather than measuring the child's English language skills

29. Problematic Assessment Practices Huge variability of practices, limited consistency as well as standards in the field Giving WISC-IV (English) to NEP or LEP No mention of language acquisition or abilities even if child is an ELL Limited to no parental involvement in the evaluation Nonverbal/Performance subtests of assessments are used as a nonverbal assessment (actually it is an assessment of nonverbal abilities) No evaluation of acculturation Limited involvement of the school psych Using translated tests that have not been standardized that way

30. Promising and Strong Assessment Practices Progress monitoring tools that are translated and standardized KABC-2 -Especially for lower SES groups DAS-2 - Reduced discrepancy between diverse groups WISC-IV Spanish - Normed on ELLs, ability to compare two groups Nonverbal assessments such as the UNIT, Leiter – 3 (new), and the Wechsler Nonverbal Measuring acculturation (i.e. AQS or interview) Collecting data that is already there (especially academic achievement data) Developing strong local norms Training programs focused on preparing practitioners for diverse population

31. What your ELL reports should include 1) Cultural, experiential, and language-based factors 2) Incorporation of linguistic information (i.e. language acquisition) and language proficiency 3) The limitations of standardized instruments – disclaimers regarding interpretation 4) The use of translated tests and their pitfalls and questionable validity (you shouldn’t be doing this but might need to comment on another evaluation)

32. Legally Mandated IEP Process for ELL Students Team shall consider Language abilities Whether the child needs specific interventions, accommodations, programming depending on language needs (statement in IEP about this) Comparison between student and ELL peers IEP must stress: acquiring proficiency in English Providing them with meaningful access to the content of the educational curriculum available to all students

33. IDEA Requirements For Nondiscriminatory Assessment Section 614 Was a single measure used as the sole criterion for determining whether a child has a disability or determining the appropriate educational program? Were a variety of assessment tools and strategies used in this assessment? Were technically sound instruments used that may assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors? Were assessments and evaluation materials selected so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural bias? Were assessments provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide this? Are the measures used for purposes for which the assessments or measures are valid and reliable? Are the assessments administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel? Are the assessments administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of such assessments? Has the team considered limited English proficiency before determining if the child has a disability? Has the team considered the language needs of the child as such needs relate to the child's IEP?

34. References & Resources Books: Marjory A. Bancroft, Lourdes Rubio-Fitzpatrick (2011), “The Community Interpreter: Professional Interpreter Training for Bilingual Staff and Community Interpreters” Culture and Language Press. Rhodes, R., Ochoa, S. H. & Ortiz, S. O. (2005). Assessment of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students: A practical guide. New York: Guilford Press.. Networks: CoP Bilingual School Mental Health Network of Colorado Websites: Colorin Colorado Website, particularly this article: www.colorincolorado.org/article/26751/ Center for Applied Linguistics—www.cal.org ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics— www.cal.org/ericcll National Association for Bilingual Education (NABE)— www.nabe.org National Association of School Psychologists, Culturally Competent Practice— www.nasponline.org

35. QUESTIONS ? Remember: It takes time to learn English and adjust to a new culture!!! If you would like a copy of this presentation please email Bryn Harris (bryn.harris@ucdenver.edu)