Silvia Soderberg, Ed.S.
Bryn Harris, Ph.D.
Angela Restrepo, Ed.S.
Margarita Cordero, Ed.S.
Working with Culturally and
Linguistically diverse Students
As a Mental
Health provider
About ELLs
Students
About building a
body of evidence
• Language Acquisition
• Language proficiency assessments and
interpretation
• Working with Interpreters
• Awareness of Cultural Differences
• Background Student and Family History
• Educational History
• History of ESL services
•
•
•
•
RTI process for ELLs
Formal Assessments
Informal Assessments
IEP Documentation
Stages of Language Acquisition
Pre-production
• This is also called” the silent period,” when the student
takes in the new language but does not speak it. This
period often last six weeks or longer, depending on the
individual.
Early Production
The individual begins to speak using short words and
sentences, but the emphasis is still on listening and
absorbing the new language. There will be many errors in
the early production stage.
Speech Emergent
• Speech becomes more frequent, words and sentences are
longer, but the individual still relies heavily on context
clues and familiar topics. Vocabulary continues to increase
and errors begin to decrease, especially in common or
repeated interactions.
Stages of Language Acquisition
Beginning Fluency
Speech is fairly fluent in social situations with minimal errors.
New contexts and academic language are challenging and the
individual will struggle to express themselves due to gaps in
vocabulary and appropriate phrases.
Intermediate Fluency
• Communicating in the second language is fluent, especially in social
language situations. The individual is able to speak almost fluently in
new situations or in academic areas, but there will be gaps in vocabulary
knowledge and some unknown expressions. There are very few errors,
and the individual is able to demonstrate higher order thinking skills in
the second language such as offering an opinion or analyzing a problem.
Advanced Fluency
The individual communicates fluently in all contexts and can maneuver
successfully in new contexts and when exposed to new academic
information. At this stage, the individual may still have an accent and use
idiomatic expressions incorrectly at times, but the individual is essentially
fluent and comfortable communicating in the second language.
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)
ACCESS for ELLs Scores
Examples of Parent & Teacher Reports
WIDA Can do Descriptors
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 [email protected]
Working with Interpreters
Parent-Teacher
Conference
Son:
Fantastico
(Great)
Teacher:
Your child is
getting F’s
Parent:
Que es F?
(What is an F?)
Community Interpreters
Contract
Interpreters
Bilingual
Staff
Volunteer
Staff
Interpreters Interpreters
The Community Interpreter: Professional Interpreter Training for Bilingual Staff
and Community Interpreters by Marjory A. Bancroft, Lourdes Rubio-Fitzpatrick
Interpreter Code of Ethics
Accuracy
Cultural
Sensitivity
Confidentiality
Disclosure
Proficiency
Compensation
Nondiscrimination
Self-evaluation
Impartiality
Professional
Demeanor
Scope of
Practice
Reporting
Obstacles to
Practice
Ethical
Violations
Professional
Development
Awareness of Cultural Differences
Communication is
verbal from person
to person.
Communication is
written through letters
that are send home
Awareness of Cultural Differences
When communicating
greetings take longer
and then you present
the intended message.
Greetings is brief and
communication is direct
to the point.
Awareness of Cultural Differences
Children are often told
to look down while
being admonished by
their parents.
At school students are told
to give eye contact when
addressed by a teacher.
Awareness of Cultural Differences
Parents entrust their
children to the educational
system and even though
they consider the school as
their second home and
family they do not get
involved.
Parents consider the school
as part of their community
in which they can be active
therefore, they are usually
involved.
Building a Body of Evidence
Before a Referral for Evaluation of
Special Education Eligibility
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.
 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.
 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.
 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
 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?
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
Determine Eligibility
5. Use professional judgment in reporting scores
6. Rule out English as PRIMARY cause
7. Rule out instruction as the PRIMARY cause
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
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
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
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
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
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)
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
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?
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
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 ([email protected])