scholarly journals English Language Learners and Special Education in Ontario Schools

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 31
Author(s):  
Stacey Robert-Tobin

A discussion paper on English language learners who are also special education students.

Author(s):  
Jonathan Rosa

This chapter links the ethnoracial constructions detailed in the first half of the book to an analysis of language ideologies and linguistic practices associated with Latinx identities. It begins by arguing that monolingual ideologies produce a profound transformation in which bilingualism comes to be equated with the category of “Limited English Proficiency.” Meanwhile, students designated as English Language Learners are positioned alongside special education students as second-class educational figures. It shows how this situation can be productively understood in relation to what is described as a racialized ideology of “languagelessness” that positions students as incapable of using any language legitimately. The double stigmatization that results from standardizing forces surrounding English and Spanish demonstrates how ideologies of languagelessness operate in powerful ways to racialize students as inherently linguistically deficient.


2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Audrey Amrein-Beardsley ◽  
Tray Geiger

Houston’s experience with the Educational Value-Added Assessment System (R) (EVAAS) raises questions that other districts should consider before buying the software and using it for high-stakes decisions. Researchers found that teachers in Houston, all of whom were under the EVAAS gun, but who taught relatively more racial minority students, higher proportions of English language learners, higher proportions of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunches, and higher proportions of special education students, had significantly lower EVAAS scores than colleagues teaching elsewhere in the Houston district. Hence, results suggest that the EVAAS does not, at least in Houston and perhaps elsewhere, offer states, districts, and schools the precise, reliable, and unbiased results that go far beyond what other simplistic [value-added] models found in the market today can provide, as the software owner, SAS Institute Inc., claims. Rather, evidence shows that EVAAS estimates in Houston, and likely elsewhere, may be biased against teachers who teach disproportionate percentages of certain type of students in their classrooms.


Author(s):  
Penelope Debs Keough

Alarming statistics presented by the United States Department of Education reveal a disproportionate number of students of minority language (English language learners) qualify for special education. As far back as 2007, the DOE recognized there was a concerted effort needed to reduce racial and ethnic disproportionality in racial and ethnic identification, placement, and disciplinary actions for minority students' representation in special education. This chapter will examine and address solutions to prevent the over identification of English language learners in special education specifically in the area of identification. As a further objective, the ramifications of this over representation will be examined, and the authors hypothesize about why the over representation occurs. Confusion over the Unz Initiative (1998, Proposition 227) may have inadvertently led to the over identification. A case study, leading to case law, concludes the chapter.


2005 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo J. Artiles ◽  
Robert Rueda ◽  
Jesús José Salazar ◽  
Ignacio Higareda

A weakness of research on minority placement in special education is the tendency to overestimate the homogeneity of populations by failing to disaggregate factors such as language proficiency or to consider other relevant variables, for example, social class or program type. Similarly, certain groups have been understudied, such as English language learners (ELLs). We addressed these gaps by examining ELL placement patterns in California urban districts. Disproportionate representation patterns were related to grade level, language proficiency status, disability category, type of special education program, and type of language support program. Students proficient in neither their native language nor in English (particularly in secondary grades) were most affected. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document