separating difference and disability: framework & process

Separating Differences and Disabilities: Framework & Process

Dr. Catherine [email protected]

What’s Up Doc??! Introduce yourself to

your immediate neighbors.

Come up with the most pressing question you have for Dr. Collier.

Write these down and hand up to the front.

© 2011 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved

Growth in Native Born LEP

40%

40%

20%First Generation Second Generation Third + Generation


Disability

• Disability cannot be measured solely on the ability to do certain tasks.

• Disability depends also on the ease with which they perform activities that are of central importance to most people’s daily lives.

• The disability must also be permanent or long-lasting.

O’Conner, U.S. Supreme Court (2002)


Difference Vs Disability• Use of words with incorrect meaning.• Incorrect use of plural.• Lack of enunciation of apostrophes and

“s” to indicate possession.• Use of incorrect referent-pronoun

agreement.• Incorrect use of articles and incorrect

agreement with noun.• Omission of preposition and use of “in”

when “on” is needed, etc.• Incorrect word order or verb misplaced.


Disproportionality for ELL 2010

• Underrepresented in special education overall

• Overrepresented in specific categories:– Speech/language

Impairments (SI)– Learning Disabilities (LD)– LD/SI combination


source: 2010 MSP/HSPE Student W file

All students testing Not ELL ELLNo Disabilities 87% 82%Disability identified 13% 18%Total Number of Students 565,368 39,651

Special Education Identified Not ELL ELL01 Developmental Delays 0% 1%02 Emotional-Behavioral 5% 1%03 Orthopedic Impairment 0% 0%04 Health Impairment 23% 7%05 Specific Learning Disability 44% 71%06 Mental Retardation 4% 4%07 Multiple Disabilities 2% 0%08 Deafness 0% 0%09 Hearing Impairment 1% 1%10 Visual Impairment 0% 0%11 Deaf-Blindness 0% 0%12 Communication Disorders 14% 13%13 Autism 6% 1%14 Traumatic Brain Injury 0% 0%Total 100% 100%Number Special Ed Students 75,102 7,243

Not ELL ELL

12.9%

5.8%

Percent of Total Students Identified as

SLDs


ELL Representation Patterns

• Students in English immersion programs are referred at higher rates than those in bilingual programs.

• ELLs who are “parent denials” are the most likely to be referred and placed.

• Students in special education tend to have limited language skills in both L1 and L2– Often this is

pedagogically induced– Inadequate instruction

results in:• Native language loss• Limited English

proficiency


Policy Driving Practice

• The evaluation team may not identify a student as disabled if the discrepancy is primarily the result of an environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

• Tests must be selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis;

• A child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the determinant factor for such determination is--• lack of scientifically based instruction practices and programs

that contain the essential components of reading instruction • lack of scientifically based instruction practices and programs

that contain the essential components of instruction in math; or• limited English proficiency.


Problem Solving with Progress

Monitoring

Identify Problem

Measure the

problem

Set goals

Brainstorm interventions

Plan intervention

setting

Implement intervention

Monitor response to intervention

Analyze response patterns Is there a discrepancy

between current & excepted performance?

Why & to what extent is there a problem?

By how much should the student grow?

What will be done to resolve the problem?

By how much should the student grow?

Did it work? What do we do next?

How & when will the intervention strategy be implemented?


RTI Progress Monitoring

• RTI is a function of regular education that emphasizes preventing learning difficulties before they start and eliminating the need for a student to fail before intervention is available.

• At-risk students are assessed frequently on specific skills throughout the year to determine if the intervention being used is effective and if the student is responding as intended.


TestStaffed

Instructional Intervention Model

Benchmarked Curriculum +

Learning Support

Benchmarked General Curriculum

100

Targeted Interventions



RTI

Tier 1Tier 2

Tier 3

Tier 3

Tier 2

Tier 1© 2011 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved

Lots of models of “RTI” & “RTII”


Literacy Readiness Skills

Oral Proficiency L1

PRISIM: Pyramid of Resilience, Instruction, Strategies, Intervention & Monitoring

Learning created with building blocks for success


Is RTI the answer to disproportionate representation of ELL?

Only if approaches are culturally and linguistically responsive and address both system and student issues.


Eight Challenges to Intervention for EL

1. Difficulties with policy guidelines.2. Different stakeholder views about timing for

referral of students who are English language learners.

3. Insufficient knowledge among personnel involved in identification (culture, acculturation, etc).

4. Difficulties providing consistent, adequate services to students who are English language learners.


Eight Challenges to Intervention for EL

5. Lack of collaborative structures during “pre” referral.

6. Lack of access to assessments that differentiate between culture shock, second language development & learning disabilities.

7. Lack of consistent monitoring for struggling students who are English language learners.

8. Difficulty obtaining students’ previous school records.


Potential Sources of Cultural mismatch

All students do not share the experiences and background knowledge that teachers, textbooks, and curriculum standards may assume.

Children from culturally and linguistically different backgrounds have different experiences and knowledge than mainstream teachers and children.

• Experience• Language• Culture• Child-rearing history• Religion• Socioeconomic status• Urban rural context‐• Risk factors (number/severity)


THE BASICS OF BEING HUMAN Sensory abilities, linguistic wiring, genetic and biologic

heritage, innate abilities, etc.

ENCULTURATIONPerceptions, social and behavior patterns,

language, values, etc. learned from caregivers.

ACCULTURATIONPerceptions, social & behavior patterns,

language, etc. learned from interaction with new group(s).

INDIVIDUALUnique experiences,

insights, personal reflections.

Ways we are less like other people.

Ways we are more like other

people.


THE BASICS OF BEING HUMAN Sensory abilities, linguistic wiring, genetic and biologic

heritage, innate abilities, etc.

ENCULTURATIONPerceptions, social and behavior patterns,

language, values, etc. learned from caregivers.

ACCULTURATIONPerceptions, social & behavior patterns,

language, etc. learned from interaction with new group(s).

INDIVIDUALUnique experiences,

insights, personal reflections.

Ways we are less like other people.

Ways we are more like other

people.

Communicative, ADD/ADHD

Behavioral, linguistic, cognitive, PDD

Organic, physical, motor, sensory, neurological


Common Side-Effects Of the Acculturation Process

Heightened AnxietyConfusion in Locus of ControlWithdrawalSilence/unresponsivenessResponse FatigueCode-switchingDistractibilityResistance to ChangeDisorientationStress Related Behaviors


The Intensity of CultureShock is Cyclical

AnticipationPhase

SpectatorPhase

IncreasingParticipationPhase

ShockPhase

AdaptationPhase

AnticipationPhase

SpectatorPhase

IncreasingParticipationPhase

ShockPhase

AdaptationPhase

Highly Engaged Level

ModeratelyEngagedLevel

Normal Intensity of Emotions

ModeratelyDepressedLevel

Greatly Depressed Level


BICS

CALP


Shared Characteristics of ELLs & Students with Disabilities

• Articulation, pronunciation errors

• Poor comprehension• Forgets easily• Cannot follow directions• Poor oral language skills• Syntactical and

grammatical errors• Low vocabulary• Reading below grade level

• Poor spelling• Short attention span

frequently off-task• Cannot work independently• Does not complete tasks• Anxious• Poor motivation• Distractible• Low self-esteem• Shy, withdrawn


Why do they do that?

• No marker for possessive forms: “my friend’s house”– “house my friend”

• Avoid use of ‘s to describe possession: “my sister’s children”– “the children of my

sister”

Error in English Possessive forms

• Khmer, Vietnamese– A noun’s owner comes

after the object • Navajo, Apache

– Only specific things can be “possessed” or “owned”

• Hmong, Spanish, Tagalog– Use of a prepositional

phrase to express possession reflects a more common structure

Non English language


LANGUAGE AREAS DIFFERENCE POSSIBLE disability CONCERNSPragmatics:The rules governing social interactions (e.g. turn taking, maintaining topic of conversation).

Social responses to language are based oncultural background (e.g., comfort level in asking or responding to questions) Pauses between turns oroverlaps in conversation are similar to those of peers with the same linguistic and cultural background.

Social use of language or lack thereof is inappropriate (e.g., topic of lesson is rocks and the student continues to discuss events that occurred at home without saying how they relate to rocks).

Syntax:The rules governing the order, grammar, and form of phrases or sentences

Grammatical errors due to native language influences (e.g., student may omit initial verb in a question—You like cake? (omission of Do)). Word order in L1 may differ from that of English (e.g., in Arabic sentences are ordered verb-subject-object while Urdu sentences are ordered subject-object-verb).

Grammatical structures continue to be inappropriate in both languages even after extensive instruction (e.g., student cannot produce the past tense in either Spanish or English indicating difficulty with grammatical tenses).

Semantics:The rules pertaining to both the underlying and the surface meaning of phrases and sentences

A student whose native language is Korean may have difficulty using pronouns, as they do notexist in his/her native language. A student may use words from L1 inproductions in L2 because of his inability or unfamiliarity of the vocabulary in L2 (e.g., “The car is muy rapido.” In this case, the student knows the concept as well as the needed structure but cannot remember the vocabulary).

Student is demonstrating limited phrasing and vocabulary in both languages (e.g., his/her sentences in both languages demonstrate limited or no use of adjectives and adverbs and both languages are marked by a short length of utterance).

Morphology:The rules concerning the construction of words from meaningful units

Native speakers of Russian may not use articles as they do no exist in that language. A student whose nativelanguage is Spanish may omitthe possessive (‘s’) when producing an utterance in English (e.g., “Joe crayon broke” or he will say “the crayon of Joe broke,” applying a structure that is influence by the rules of his/her L1. He/she still demonstrates understanding of the morphologic structure for possession but is demonstrating errors in structure that are directly influenced by his/her L1.)

Student’s productions in both languages demonstrate a lack of the possessive form indicating that he/she has not acquired this morphologic structure by the appropriate age. Again, both languages may be marked by a short length of utterance


What we know• We need to know

more than what works…..

• We need to know what works with WHOM


Reminder!

A CLD/ELL student may have learning

and behavior problems due to

language and cultural differences and problems due

to a possible disability.


PRISIM: Building the Foundation of the Pyramid

Systems & policies promote and sustain:• Access to safety, food, clothing, & shelter• Quality preparation of effective education professionals & support

staff• Adequacy of school facilities & resources• Consistent use of culturally & linguistically responsive, evidence-

based practices• Supportive responsive relationships• Other effective practices & procedures


Building Literacy foundation

Facilitating Readiness Skills

Facilitating & Sustaining Readiness to Learn

Sustaining Oral Proficiency L1

PRISIM: Problem Solving & RTI+I at Tier 1

TPR

Bilingual


Two questions you should be able to answer about acculturation at enrollment

1. What is the student’s current level of acculturation?

2. What is the caregiver’s current level of acculturation?


Look at José’s profile and his baseline

AQS.


Look at the Home Language Survey on

José.


What Bilingual Type is José at this point in time?

High L1 Low L1

High L2 Type 1 Type 3

Low L2 Type 2 Type 4


What we recommend prior to beginning problem solving

At enrollment & within a month in school:

1. Have support structures and programs in place to facilitate learning

2. Determine the current/baseline level of acculturation

3. Find out the Home Language(s)4. Language Screening5. Plan for monitoring student progress


Look at the Resiliency

Checklist on José.


Strategy Fitness!


Look at the 1st Classroom Language Interaction Checklist

on José.


Tiered Progress Monitoring

• Tier 1 Progress Monitoring: Students are assessed quarterly to ensure that they continue to perform at benchmark levels.

• Tier 2 Progress Monitoring: Students are assessed regularly determine whether or not the interventions are effective within 8-10 week cycles.

• Tier 3 Progress Monitoring: Students require intensive instruction and are assessed weekly within 2-4 week cycles of focused intervention.

• Tier 4 Progress Monitoring: The cycle of intervention, progress monitoring, and adjustment of the intervention continues within an individual plan or IEP.


TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3

RFBABenchmarkProficiency

Reading Fluency Benchmark Assessor Fall, Winter, Spring •Letter-Naming Fluency— K or early 1st •Oral Reading Fluency— mid 1st–8th



RFPM ProgressMonitoring

Reading Fluency Progress Monitor •Regularly •Oral Reading Fluency— mid 1st–8th

Reading Fluency Progress Monitor •Frequently •Oral Reading Fluency— mid 1st–8th

QPSDiagnostics

Quick Phonics Screener (QPS) Fall, Winter, Spring •K, 1st, and 2nd

Quick Phonics Screener (QPS) Fall, Winter, Spring •K, 1st, and 2nd •3rd–8th as needed

Quick Phonics Screener (QPS) Fall, Winter, Spring •K, 1st, and 2nd •3rd–8th as needed

Example of Tiered Progress Monitoring


What we recommend for culturally & linguistically responsive intervention

at Tier 11. Identify student’s home language proficiency & use to support academic interventions.

2. Measure student’s level of acculturation to school and use to implement appropriate instruction & intervention.

3. Measure the student’s ‘classroom language’ in all communication modes & use to design appropriate instruction & intervention.

4. Develop a resiliency & cognitive learning profile useful in implementing effective instruction & intervention.

5. Implement strength based instruction & language support.6. Monitor effectiveness of instruction & intervention.


What we recommend for culturally & linguistically responsive

intervention at Tier 11. Identify student’s home language proficiency & use to

support academic interventions.2. Measure student’s level of acculturation to school and use

to implement appropriate instruction & intervention.3. Measure the student’s ‘classroom language’ in all

communication modes & use to design appropriate instruction & intervention.

4. Develop a resiliency & cognitive learning profile useful in implementing effective instruction & intervention.

5. Implement strength based instruction & language support.6. Monitor effectiveness of instruction & intervention.



Oral Proficiency L1

Expanded TPR

Transitional Bilingual


Analogies

Visualization

Self monitoring


Strategy Fitness!


Decision Points for Intervention

• Strategy selection• Language support &

intervention• Culture support &

intervention• Sensitivity to level and

rate of acculturation• Appropriate & effective

intervention© 2011 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved

Struggles Strategies

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

_______________

Low motivation Self monitoring

Impulsive

Disorganized thinking

Poor social skills

Low self esteem

Confused locus of control

Limited language skills

Rehearsal strategies

Sorting strategies

Guided practice

Self concept activities

Active processing

L1-L2 transfer strategies


Specific Needs = Specific Strategies

_____________

_____________

_____________

_____________

_____________

____________

_____________

Doesn’t get work in = Self checklist

Does not take time to think

Cannot organize tasks

Makes noises to distract

Says it’s no use to do work

Does not initiate work

Confuses English & Spanish phonemes

= “STOP” strategies

= Graphic organizers

= Guided practice

= Self concept activities

= Active processing

= Compare & contrast, rhymes, games


Five Standards for Effective Instruction

• Joint Productive Activity• Language & Literacy

Development• Contextualize to Make

Meaning• Challenging Activities• Instructional

Conversation© 2011 Dr. Catherine CollierAll Rights Reserved

Two questions you should be able to answer about acculturation when planning intervention.

1. What is the current level of acculturation?

2. Is the rate of acculturation normal?


Look at the 2nd

AQS on José.


Five questions you should be able to answer about instructional needs

1. What are the student’s instructional needs? 2. What interventions are needed?3. In what order should the interventions be

implemented?4. For how long should the interventions be

implemented?5. How will I monitor their effectiveness?


Look at the 1st Sociocultural

Checklist on José.


What we recommend for culturally & linguistically

responsive intervention at Tier Two

1. Implement specific strength & need based interventions that facilitate learning.

2. Monitor effectiveness of instruction & intervention strategies. Modify based upon student’s response to the strategy.

3. Monitor effectiveness of instruction and intervention in relation to student’s home language proficiency.

4. Monitor student’s level & rate of acculturation to school & the effectiveness of instruction & intervention to facilitate.

5. Monitor the student’s ‘classroom language’ in all communication modes & the appropriateness of instruction & intervention to expand.

6. Monitor resiliency & cognitive learning & effectiveness of instruction & intervention.


What we recommend for culturally & linguistically responsive

intervention at Tier Two

1. Implement specific strength & need based interventions that facilitate learning.

2. Monitor effectiveness of instruction & intervention strategies. Modify based upon student’s response to the strategy.

3. Monitor effectiveness of instruction and intervention in relation to student’s home language proficiency.

4. Monitor student’s level & rate of acculturation to school & the effectiveness of instruction & intervention to facilitate.

5. Monitor the student’s ‘classroom language’ in all communication modes & the appropriateness of instruction & intervention to expand.

6. Monitor resiliency & cognitive learning & effectiveness of instruction & intervention.




Manipulating pie charts

Stepped proximics

Miscue analysis


Strategy Fitness!


Four questions you should be able to answer about language

1. What is the student’s current social language proficiency in both languages?

2. What is the student’s current academic language proficiency in both languages?

3. Is the rate of development & acquisition normal?

4. What are the most effective instructional strategies to use?


Look at José’s 2nd language proficiency

information.


Look at the 2nd

Sociocultural Checklist on José.


Prioritization of RTI

Sociocultural Area

Order of Concern

Intervention Selected

Duration of Intervention

Outcomes of Intervention

Acculturation

Cognitive Learning

Culture & Language

Experiential Background

Sociolinguistic Development

Academic Area(s)

Order of Concern

Intervention Selected

Duration of Intervention

Outcomes of Intervention


Initiate

strategy

• Preview, do, review• Stop if no response after 5 days, review

Modify

strategy

• Make minor revisions• Preview, do, review• Stop if no response after 3 days, review

Start new

strategy

• Preview, do, review• Stop if no response after 5 days, review.

Monitor

process

• Measure and analyze• Identify what worked and what didn’t

Initiate

strategy

• Preview, do, review• Stop if no response after 5 days, review.


1. Determine if the rate & level of acculturation to school is normal & analyze pattern of response to intervention & instruction.

2. Determine if language gains are normal & analyze pattern of language acquisition.

3. Determine if student response to interventions & modification patterns resolve problems & are sustainable.

4. Implement & monitor short cycle tightly focused “unanswered” needs based intervention.

5. Monitor the response & effectiveness of intervention.


What we recommend for culturally & linguistically responsive intervention at Tier

Three


Oral Proficiency L1


Accessibility aids

Cochlear implant

Kurtzweil reader

Electronic eye piece

IEP504


First Things First

• There is no such thing as a nonbiased test.• Assessment is more than testing.• Prevention is better than failure.• Measure progress, not ‘achievement.’


Including Diverse Issues on the IEP

• A. Does the student have behavior, which impedes his/her learning or the learning of others? Yes No

• If yes, consider, if appropriate, strategies including positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports to address that behavior.

• Check here if a behavior management plan is developed and attached.

• B. Does the student have limited English proficiency? Yes No

• If yes, consider the language needs as related to the IEP and describe below.


Integrated Services


PreProduction

Early

Production

Speech

Emergence

Intermediate

Fluency

Intermediate Advanced Fluency

Advanced Fluency

Needs total assistance

Needs a great deal of assistance

Needs a lot of assistance

Has a moderate level of needs

Has moderate but specific needs

Has specific need to be addressed

Needs minimal assistance

Pull out for targeted assistance

Pull out/Push in for targeted assistance

Push in for targeted assistance

Total Inclusion

What we recommend for culturally & linguistically responsive intervention at Tier Four

After a formal referral:1. Crosscultural evaluation based upon the outcomes of the

instructional intervention2. Test Evaluation Checklist3. CrossCultural Administration of Standardized TestsIf the student is eligible for SE & ESL services:4. Integrated plan of services.5. Cross-cultural IEP.6. Continued language and acculturation support.If the student is not eligible for SE services:7. Integrated plan of services within the general education

program.8. Continued language and acculturation support.



Oral Proficiency L1

PRISIM: Pyramid of Resilience, Instruction, Strategies, Intervention & Monitoring

Learning created with building blocks for success


Five Things that Work in RTI for ELL

1. Adequate Professional Knowledge2. Effective Instruction3. Valid Assessments & Interventions4. Collaboration Between District

Departments5. Clear Policies


Indicators that validate the need for SPED evaluation

• Poor communicative proficiency in the home as compared to siblings and age peers in bilingual environments, especially when this lack is noticed by the parents.

• English language development that appears to be significantly different than that of peers who are also learning English as a additional language.

• Documentation that student’s acquisition of English is within normal range for his peer group, age, culture/language population, length of time in ESL, etc. but there are specific learning and/or behavior problems unrelated to culture shock or language transition.

• Specific sensory, neurological, organic, motor, or other conditions that impact learning and behavior when having reliable documentation that culture shock or language transition contributes but is not the determining factor for the learning and behavior problems.

• Student is demonstrating limited phrasing and vocabulary in both languages indicating that she has not acquired morphologic structures by the appropriate age. Again, both languages may be marked by a short length of utterance

• Student’s response to specific structured interventions addressing his presenting problem is documented to be more than 40% below ELL/CLD peers within individualized instructional intervention.


RecommendationsAchievement1. Modify format

– Selection Taxonomy for ELL Accommodations (STELLA)

– Bilingual dictionaries– Expand time– Open book

2. Administer in dual/multiple languages

3. Task analysis4. Local norms & benchmarks

Progress Monitoring1. Clear begin/end criteria 2. Peer appropriate

performance outcomes3. Local norms & benchmarks4. Discrete steps5. Strategy fitness6. Consistent & regular

monitoring7. Short cycles


Appropriate Actions to Take

Information gathering Resiliency based

instruction Differentiated learning

support Extensive problem

solving with progress monitoring RTI+I

Intensive RTI over only 1 6-8 week cycle

Focused Referral Adapted Evaluation Integrated Services IEP

for ELL/SEL Expanded Monitoring Cross-training


Contact Information

Catherine Collier, Ph.D.360-380-7513 voice360-650-4673 campus360-483-5658 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Come visit us at www.crosscultured.com!

Over 40 years experience. Research on impact of acculturation on

referral & placement of CLD students. Research on effectiveness of specific

cognitive learning strategies for diverse learners.

Classroom teacher, diagnostician, faculty, administrator.

Social justice advocate, author & teacher educator.


separating difference and disability: framework & process

Education

general education

limited english

communication

english language

acculturation

problem solving

crosscultural

cognitive