English Language Learners: The Impact of Language and Socio … · 2017-07-26 · Who are English...
6
Our daily educational experiences can be enriched by learning in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms because we learn from others whose experiences and beliefs are different than ours. We learn to communicate effectivelyand respectfully with individuals of varied backgrounds and may then think twice about stereotypes, prejudices, and discriminatory behaviors because we grow as individuals, as stewards of knowledge, and as change agents. We become good citizens in a pluralistic society. Our fastest growing diverse population in prek-12 is English language learners (ELLs) from diverse cultures and socio- economic backgrounds. The number of ELLs that were enrolled in public schools in the 2012-13 school year was 9.2 percent, which has increased compared to 2002-03 (8.7%). Students who are learning English as another language are spread throughout the country with their proportion of the total public school enrollment varying greatly by state. In 2013, of the six states with the highest density of ELL enrollment, California had 22.8%, followed by New Mexico (15.8), Nevada (15.7%), Texas (15.1%), Colorado (12%), and Alaska (11.3%) (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). Furthermore, to help ensure ELLs attain English proficiency and high levels of academic achievement, they are enrolled in appropriate language assistance programs. For example in Texas, of the 739,639 ELLs, 17% are enrolled in Bilingual programs, 18% are enrolled in ELL programs, 1.4% are enrolled in immigrant programs, 0.6% are enrolled in migrant programs. Furthermore, according to the Texas Education Agency (TEA; 2015), there are 70,510 ELLs who qualified for special education in Texas, highlighting the ongoing debate on the correct identification of learning disabilities among ELLs and the need for adequate programs to address the needs of ELLs with disabilities. Who are English language learners? Almost half of all culturally and linguistically diverse PreK-12 students have limited English language proficiency and are classified as ELLs, formerly known as limited English proficient (LEP). An ELL is one who has to acquire a second or additional language and culture, a process that can be very challenging. The degree of challenge willdepend on the personal, experiential, and contextual factors students bring to the process as well as how wellthey regulatethelinguistic,cognitive, social, and emotional tasks required in language and cultural acquisition. The ELL population is not only culturally and linguistically diverse, but also socioeconomically diverse.Some students come from families withhigh levels of income and schooling, while others live in poverty or below poverty and have little formalschooling. This is important too because family socioeconomic status and education level influence theacademicachievement of students. Research indicates that low-income ELL students are usually behind their peers from higher socioeconomic backgroundsin language and readiness skills. Therefore, they especially need empirically validated and culturally responsive instruction. The Difference between First and Second Language Acquisition Our understanding of the nature of the first and second language, how they develop and how they are used by different individuals at different times and in different settings, continues to evolve. Cummins (1984) stated that compared to the first language, learning a second language can be an arduous andslow process.He differentiated between social and academic language acquisition and identified different timelines for each. Under ideal conditions, it takes the average ELL 2 years to acquire Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS). BICS involves the context–embedded, everyday language that occurs between conversational partners. On the English Language Learners: The Impact of Language and Socio-Cultural Factors on Learning
Transcript of English Language Learners: The Impact of Language and Socio … · 2017-07-26 · Who are English...
Ourdailyeducationalexperiencescanbe enrichedbylearninginculturallyand linguisticallydiverseclassroomsbecausewelearnfromotherswhoseexperiencesandbeliefsaredifferentthanours.Welearnto communicateeffectivelyandrespectfullywith individualsofvariedbackgroundsandmaythenthinktwiceaboutstereotypes,prejudices, anddiscriminatorybehaviorsbecausewegrowasindividuals,asstewardsofknowledge,and aschangeagents.Webecomegoodcitizensin apluralisticsociety.
Ourfastestgrowingdiversepopulationin prek-12isEnglishlanguage learners(ELLs) fromdiverseculturesandsocio-economic backgrounds.ThenumberofELLsthatwereenrolledinpublicschoolsinthe2012-13schoolyearwas9.2percent, whichhasincreasedcomparedto2002-03(8.7%).Students who are learning English as another languagearespreadthroughoutthe countrywiththeirproportionofthetotalpublic schoolenrollmentvaryinggreatlybystate.In 2013,ofthesixstateswiththehighestdensityofELLenrollment,Californiahad22.8%,followedbyNewMexico(15.8),Nevada(15.7%),Texas(15.1%),Colorado(12%),andAlaska(11.3%)(U.S.DepartmentofEducation,2015).Furthermore,tohelpensureELLsattainEnglishproficiencyandhighlevelsofacademicachievement,theyareenrolledinappropriatelanguageassistanceprograms.ForexampleinTexas,ofthe739,639ELLs,17%areenrolledinBilingualprograms,18%areenrolledinELLprograms,1.4%areenrolledinimmigrantprograms,0.6%areenrolledinmigrantprograms.Furthermore,accordingtotheTexasEducationAgency(TEA;2015),thereare70,510ELLswho qualified for special education inTexas,highlightingtheongoingdebateonthecorrectidentificationoflearningdisabilitiesamongELLsandtheneedforadequateprogramstoaddress theneedsofELLswithdisabilities.
WhoareEnglishlanguage learners?Almosthalfofallculturallyandlinguistically diversePreK-12studentshavelimitedEnglish language
proficiencyandareclassifiedas ELLs,formerlyknownaslimitedEnglishproficient(LEP).AnELLisonewhohasto acquireasecondoradditionallanguageand culture,aprocessthatcanbeverychallenging. Thedegreeofchallengewilldependonthe personal,experiential,andcontextualfactorsstudentsbringtotheprocessaswellashow welltheyregulatethelinguistic,cognitive, social,andemotionaltasksrequiredin languageandculturalacquisition.
TheELLpopulationisnotonly culturallyandlinguisticallydiverse,butalso socioeconomicallydiverse.Somestudents comefromfamilieswithhighlevelsofincomeandschooling,whileothersliveinpovertyor belowpovertyandhavelittleformalschooling. Thisisimportanttoobecausefamily socioeconomicstatusandeducationlevel influencetheacademicachievementofstudents.Researchindicatesthatlow-incomeELLstudentsareusuallybehindtheirpeers fromhighersocioeconomicbackgroundsin languageandreadinessskills. Therefore,theyespecially need empiricallyvalidatedandculturallyresponsiveinstruction.
TheDifferencebetweenFirstandSecondLanguageAcquisitionOurunderstandingofthenatureofthefirstandsecondlanguage,howtheydevelopandhowtheyareusedbydifferentindividualsatdifferenttimesandindifferentsettings,continuestoevolve.Cummins(1984)statedthatcomparedtothefirstlanguage,learningasecondlanguagecanbeanarduous andslowprocess.Hedifferentiatedbetween socialandacademiclanguageacquisitionandidentifieddifferenttimelinesforeach.Under idealconditions,ittakestheaverageELL2years toacquireBasicInterpersonalCommunicationSkills(BICS).BICSinvolvesthecontext–embedded, everyday languagethat occurs between conversational partners. On the
EnglishLanguageLearners:TheImpactofLanguageand
Socio-CulturalFactorsonLearning
otherhand,CognitiveAcademicLanguage Proficiency(CALP),orthecontext-reduced languageofacademics,takes5to7yearsunder idealconditionstodeveloptoalevel commensuratewiththatofnativespeakers.
Often,manyeducatorsassumethatbecauseELLshaveachievedorallanguageproficiencyin theirsecondlanguagetheydonotneed supportinschool.However,researchhas consistentlyaffirmedthatittakestimeforstudentstoacquireasecondlanguage,atboth theBICSandCALPlevels,andtocatchupwith theirmonolingualpeers.Studentsmustbeexposedto richlearningenvironmentswithregularopportunitiestopracticelanguageandliteracy skillsinthenewlanguage.
Collier(2007)developedThePrismModelthatexplainsthecomplexinteractingfactorsthatELLsexperienceintheprocessofacquiringasecondlanguagewithintheschoolcontext.Thisconceptualmodelhasthefollowingfourinterdependentandcomplexcomponents:
• SocioculturalProcesses.Thesocialandcultural surroundingofELLsisattheheartoftheprocessof acquiringasecondlanguage.ForELLsthesocialand culturalprocessesoccurthrougheverydaylifewithin thehome,school,andcommunitycontext.These processesmayhaveapositive(i.e.,byproviding a socioculturalsupportiveenvironment)ornegative (i.e.,bycreatingsocialandpsychological distancebetweentheELLsandnon-ELLs)effect onELLs.
• LanguageDevelopment.Inadditiontothe metalinguisticandformallanguageinstruction,this componentconsistsofthesubconsciousaspectsof languagedevelopment(theinnateabilitythatall humanspossessforacquiringorallanguage). Linguisticdevelopmentincludestheacquisitionofthe oralandwrittensystemsofthestudent'sfirstand secondlanguagessuchasphonology,vocabulary,
morphologyandsyntax,semantics,pragmatics,paralinguistic,anddiscourse.
• AcademicDevelopment.Academicdevelopmentincludesdifferentsubjectmatterstaughtinschoolsuchaslanguagearts,mathematics,thesciences,andsocialstudiesforeachgradelevel.Thisknowledgetransfersfromthefirstlanguagetothesecondlanguage,makingitmoreefficienttodevelopacademicworkthroughELLs’firstlanguage,whileteachingthesecondlanguagethroughmeaningfulacademiccontentinstruction.
• Cognitivedevelopment.Thisdimensionisanaturalsubconsciousprocessthatoccursdevelopmentallyfrombirthtotheendofschoolingandbeyond,andplaysacriticalrolebothinthefirstandsecondlanguagedevelopment.Ingeneral,studentsbring5-6yearsofcognitivedevelopmentintheirfirstlanguagetothesecondlanguageeducationalsetting.Thisknowledgebaseisanimportantsteppingstonetobuildonasthe cognitivedevelopmentof ELLscontinues. WhenELLsusethesecondlanguageatschool,they functionatalevelcognitivelyfarbelowtheirage. Thus,anELL'scognitivedevelopmentshouldcontinue throughhis or herfirstlanguageatleastthroughthe elementaryschoolyears.
LanguageAcquisitionversusLanguage-BasedLearningDisabilityELLsenterschoolneedingtolearnorallanguageandliteracyinEnglishinanefficientmannertobeabletocatchupwiththeirmonolingualEnglish-speakingclassmates.Unfortunately,duetoa lackofappropriateassessmenttoolsfordistinguishingbetweenan ELL’sdifficultytoacquireasecondlanguageoralanguage-basedlearningdisabilityas well as a lackofprofessionalpersonnelthatareawareoftheuniqueneedsofELLs, manyELLsareinappropriatelyoveridentifiedashavinglearningdisabilitiesandplacedinspecialeducationprograms.Specifically,fivepercentofallschool-agechildreninpublicschoolshavealearningdisability.Overhalfofallstudentswithalearningdisabilityhavea language-basedlearningdisability,manywith challengesinreading(Pierangelo&Giuliani, 2010).Often, ELLswhoareintheprocess ofacquiringasecondlanguagewillexperiencelanguageandliteracydevelopmentchallenges similartotheirpeerswithalanguagelearning disability.Therefore,itiscriticalthatschool personnelareabletopredictwhenanELLmightbeexperiencingalearningdisability.
Although,thereisnosingleeffectivemethodforidentifyingELLswhohavedifficultyacquiringlanguageskillsandthosewhohavelearningdisabilities,thefollowingquestionsmay
helpdeterminethesourceofELL'sdifficulty(Burr,Haas,&Ferriere,2015):
1. IstheELLreceivinginstructionofsufficientqualitytoenablehim or hertomaketheacceptedlevelsofacademicprogress?
2. HowdoestheELL's progressinhearing,speaking,reading,andwritingEnglishcomparewiththeexpectedrateofprogressforhis or her ageandinitiallevelofEnglishproficiency?
3. Towhatextentarebehaviorsthatmightindicatealearningdisabilityconsideredtobenormalforthechild’sculturalbackgroundortobepartoftheprocessofU.S.acculturation?
4. Howmightadditionalfactors,suchassocioeconomicstatus,previouseducationexperience,fluencyin his orherfirstlanguage,attitudetowardschool,attitudetowardlearningEnglish,andpersonalityattributes,impactthestudent’sacademicprogress?
Furthermore,withintheschoolcontext,informationaboutthenormaldevelopmentaltrajectoriesofELLs’literacydevelopment(i.e.,theirreadingandwritingskills)mayalsohelpdifferentiatelanguageacquisitionversuslanguage-basedlearningdisability,suchas:
• Orallanguageproficiency.Orallanguageproficiencyincludesreceptiveskills,expressiveskills,andtheabilitytousespecificaspectsoftheorallanguage,suchasphonology,vocabulary,morphology,grammar,discourse,andpragmaticskills.
• Phonologicalprocessing.Phonologicalprocessingistheabilitytousethesoundsofthelanguagetoprocessoralandwrittenlanguage.Phonologicalprocessingincludesphonologicalawareness(theabilitytoconsciouslyattendtothesoundsofalanguageasdistinctfromitsmeaning),phonologicalrecoding(theabilitytoconvertnonphonologicalstimulus,suchasapictureorawrittenword,tophonologicaloutput),andphonologicalmemory(theabilitytotemporarystorephonologicallycodedinformationintheshort-termmemory).
• Workingmemory.Workingmemoryactivelymanipulatesthepresentedinformationwhilesimultaneouslyholdingtheinformationinthememory.Workingmemoryisvitalforreadingcomprehensionasreadersneedtosimultaneouslydecodewords,activelyprocessandrememberwhathasbeenread.
• Word-levelskills.Word-levelskillsincludea
combinationoftheknowledgeofletter-soundrelationshipstodecodeprint(phonologicalskills),andknowledgeofsightvocabularyofwordsthatarefrequentlyencounteredintext(visualskills).Decodingskillsenablestudentstoreadcomplexandunfamiliarwordswhilevisualskillscontributestostudents’readingfluencyandreadingcomprehension.
• Text-levelskills.Readingcomprehensionandwritingareintegratedtext-levelprocesses.Readingcomprehensioninvolvesacombinationoflexicalknowledge,semanticknowledge,syntacticknowledgeandbackgroundandtextualknowledge.Writinginvolvesword-levelskills,cognitiveabilities(suchasworkingmemory,linguisticawareness,andattention),andmetacognitiveskills(suchasplanning,strategyuse,andself-regulation).
Educatorsneedtousevariousstrategiesandassessmenttools,suchastheresponsetointerventionapproach,toidentifyELL'ssourcesofdifficulty(formoreinformationpleaserefertoLesauxetal.,2008).
ReferralofanELLforSpecialEducationAssessmentTheincreaseinthenumberofELLsinour nation’sschoolsrequirestheretobeastructureinplacewhenreferring,assessing, andidentifyingELLsforspecialeducationservices.Eachschoolshouldhavewell developedreferralguidelinesandprocedures aswellasknowledgeableprofessionalswho canexamineacademicandbehavioralconcerns fromthecontextoflanguage,culture,anddisability.Manyschoolslackacomprehensive approachwhenassessingthesestudents,and educatorshavedifficultiessortingoutthe multipleoverlappingcharacteristicsofELLsand studentswithlearningdisabilities.ItisimportanttorememberthatELLsare entitledtothesameservicesandinterventions astheirnon-ELLpeers.Responseto Intervention(RTI),acriticalcomponentofspecialeducationlaw,ensuresequityand accesstoeducationforallstudents.RTIisa processthatschoolscanusetohelpchildren whoarestrugglingacademicallyor behaviorally.Oneofitsunderlyingpremisesis thepossibilitythatachild’sstrugglesmaybe duetoinadequaciesininstructionorinthe curriculumeitherinuseatthemomentorinthechild’spast.Schoolsidentifystudentsat riskforpoorlearningoutcomes,monitorstudentprogress,provideevidence-based interventionsandadjusttheintensityand natureofthoseinterventionsdependingona student’sresponsiveness,andidentifystudents withlearningdisabilitiesorotherdisabilities(CPRI,2013).
TheRTIinstructionalmethodsand interventionsshouldbeculturallysensitiveand addressthechild’slanguageneeds.Ifafter receivinghigh-qualityinstructionandinterventiontheELLstudentdoesnotdemonstrateimprovement,thestudentshould bereferredtoascreeningorinterventionteam togatherthefollowinginformation:
• Thestudent’slevelofEnglish languageproficiency.
• Thestudent’srateofEnglish acquisition.
• Theextentthatthestudentisstrugglingwithculturaland affectiveissues.
• Theamountofinstructionthat addressesthestudent’slanguageandcultural needs.
• Thestudent’sacademicproficiency levelcomparedtosame-agepeers.
• Theamountofinstructionandinterventiontomeetthestudent’s academicneeds.
• Objectiveevidenceofstudent’sfailuretorespondtointervention.
Iftheinterventionteamdeterminesthe ELL’sdifficultiesarenottheresultoflanguageacquisitionoracculturationissues,itwouldbe appropriatetoreferthestudentforfurther assessmentinordertodetermineeligibilityfor specialeducationservices.
Oncetheinterventionteamformallyrefers thestudent,afullpsychoeducationalevaluationmustbeconducted.ThefollowingguidelinesandrequirementsundertheIndividualswithDisabilitiesEducationAct (IDEA-04),PartB(U.S.Departmentof Education,2006)mustbemet:
1. Amultidisciplinaryteamthatincludesparents, generaleducators,specialeducators,andan English as a Second Language educatorshouldassesswhetherthestudent’s weaknessesareattributabletoinadequateinstruction, limited Englishproficiency,ortoalearningdisability.
2. Avarietyofassessmenttoolsandstrategies shouldbe employedwhengatheringrelevant functional, developmental,andacademic informationaboutthe student.Thisincludes informationprovidedbytheparent onhowthe childfunctionsathome,developmental milestones,andphysicalandsocialbehaviors compared tosiblingsandpeers.
3. Nosinglemeasureorassessmentcanbeu s e d asthe solecriteriontodeterminewhether a childhasa disabilityorfordeterminingan appropriateeducational program.Teamsshouldgathermultiplesourcesof
ThefollowingisalistofinformalassessmentsfordeterminingEnglishlanguageproficiencyandacculturationstatusofELs.
• AcculturationQuickScreen.(2003).PublishedbyCrossCulturalDevelopmentalEducationService,Ferndale,WA.Availableatwww.crosscultured.com
• ChecklistofLanguageSkillsforUsewithLimitedEnglishProficientStudents.Availableat:http://www.davis.k12.ut.us/cms/lib09/UT01001306/Centricity/Domain/93/SPELL%20forms/Checklist%20of%20Language%20Skills%20BICS%20CALPS%20fillable.pdf
• SocioculturalChecklist.(2002).PublishedbyCrossCulturalDevelopmentalEducationService,Ferndale,WA.Availableat:www.crosscultured.com
• StudentOralLanguageObservationMatrix(SOLOM).(1985).DevelopedbySanJoseU.S.D.,SanJose,CA.Availableat:http://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/LangAssessmtMMdl
• LanguageDevelopmentforEnglishLanguageLearnersProfessionalDevelopmentModule.(2009).DevelopedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/language-development-for-english-language-learners-professional-development-module
• TheEnglishLanguageLearnerKnowledgeBase.(2011).PublishedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/the-english-language-learner-knowledgebase
• AccommodationsforEnglishLanguageLearnerStudents:TheEffectofLinguisticModificationofMathTestItemSets.(2010).PublishedbyCentersonInstruction.Availableat:http://www.centeroninstruction.org/accommodations-for-english-language-learner-students-the-effect-of-linguistic-modification-of-math-test-item-sets
ResourcesforTeachers
information aboutthestudentbecauseofthechallengesassociatedwithdifferentiatingbetween languageacquisitiondifficultyanddisability-relatedcharacteristicswhendeterminingthe causeforlowachievement.
4. Theinstrumentsusedintheassessment mustbe technicallysoundandhelpindetermininghow cognitive,behavioral, physical,ordevelopmental factors contributetothechild’slearning.Thisrequires thatthe teammembersbeknowledgeableaboutthe instruments andtheirusefulnesswhen assessingELs.
5. Teammembers alsoensurethattheassessments andother evaluationmaterialsselectedand administeredarenotraciallyorculturallybiased.Team membersshouldgatherinformationfrom parentsand othersfamiliarwiththestudentso theycanbetter understandthefamily’sracialandculturalbackground, andthusruleout assessmentsandmaterialsthatare inappropriate.
6. Assessmentandotherevaluationmaterials mustbe providedandadministeredinthe child’sfirstlanguage or othermodeof communication(e.g.,sign language)andinthe modalityandlanguagemostlikely toyieldaccurateinformationaboutthechild’sabilities.
7. T eammembersshouldensurethatthe assessments andmeasuresareusedforthe purposes forwhichthey aredesignedandthus arereliableand valid.For example,averbalintelligencemeasure administeredin Englishshouldnotbeusedtoassess intelligenceifthe studenthasnotyetdeveloped adequateverbal skillsin English.
8. Teammemberswhohavebeentrainedandare knowledgeableofboththeinstrumentsandthenuances associatedwithassessingELLs,mustadministerall assessmentsandevaluationmaterials.
9. Thestudentshouldbeassessedinallareasof suspecteddisability includinghealth,vision, hearing, general i intelligence, academic performance, communicationskills, and motor abilities.The assessment is a collaborationamong all team members, each contributinguniqueinformationabout the studenttohelpdetermineeligibilityandan appropriateeducationalprogram.
DeterminingEligibilityOncetheassessmentiscomplete,theteammustdetermineiftheELLmeetsthecriteriafor specialeducationservices.Thesecriteria include:
• Havingadisability,
• Experiencing adverseeducationaleffectsasaresultofthedisability,and
• Requiringspecialized instructionthatcannotbeprovidedwithina generaleducationprogram.
Ifthechildis eligibleforspecialeducationservices,theteammustbegintostructureaprogramthatmeets thechild’sacademicneedswhilestillproviding accesstothegeneralcurriculum.Thismeans theteamwilldiscussthebestinstructionalmethodsthatwillhelpthechildtocontinuetodevelopEnglishproficiencyaswellasimproveacademicskillsthatwillensurethatthechildmeetsthegeneraleducationcurriculum standardstothegreatestdegreepossible.Once thisinformationisdetermined,anIndividualizedEducationProgram(IEP)willbewritten.
DevelopinganIEPInformationthatwasgatheredduringtheevaluationphaseshouldbeusedtodescribe presentlevelsofperformance,areasof strengthsandweaknesses,thenatureofthedisability,anditsimpactonthestudent’s education.ForELLs,theassessmentsresults shouldalsoprovideeducatorswithaccurate diagnosticinformationaboutthedegreetowhichtheELL’slevelofEnglishproficiencyandrateofacquisitioncannegativelyimpact performanceinthegeneraleducation classroom.Furthermore,itshouldprovide informationonthestudent’sacademicand abilitylevelsinhisorherprimarylanguageandhowthesecomparetothoseinEnglish.This shouldresultindevelopingaprogramthatwillmakeuseofthestudent’sstrengthsinhisor hernativelanguageandskillsinordertofacilitatethedevelopmentofthesecond language.EachcaseofanELLwillbeuniqueandtheIEPwillbeindividualizedforassessmentandinstructionandwillinclude clearlydocumentedgoalsandobjectivesaswell astheeducatorsresponsibleforprovidingthe services.
InstructionalConsiderationsELLs withLDcanbenefit frominterventionsknowntobenefittheirELLpeerswithoutlearningdisabilities.Theseinterventionsinclude,butarenotlimitedto, buildingbackgroundknowledge,explicitphonemicawarenessandphonicsinstruction,explicitinstructionincomprehensionstrategies,direct-instructioninvocabulary, context-embedded instruction,andpeer-assistedlearning.ELLs requireadditionalshelteredinstruction techniquessuchasgraphicorganizers, gestures,visualaids,andmemorystrategiestofacilitateEnglishcomprehension(Spear-Swerling,2006).
References
Burr,E.,Haas,E.,&Ferriere,K.(2015).IdentifyingandsupportingEnglishlearnerstudentswithlearningdisabilities:Keyissuesintheliteratureandstatepractice.U.S.DepartmentofEducation.Retrievedfrom:http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED558163.pdf
Collier,V.P.,&Thomas,W.P.(2007).PredictingsecondlanguageacademicsuccessinEnglishusingthePrismModel.InJ.Cummins&C.Davison(Eds.),TheinternationalhandbookofEnglishlanguageteaching(pp.333-348).Norwell,MA:Springer.
CPRI(2013).Responsetointervention.Retrievedfromhttp://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/rti/
Cummins,J.(1984)Bilingualismandspecial education:Issuesinassessmentand pedagogy.Clevedon,England:Multilingual Matters.
Lesaux,N.K.,Geva,E.,Koda,K.,Siegel,L.S.,&Shanahan,T.(2008).Developmentofliteracyinsecondlanguagelearners.InD.AugustandT.Shanahan(Eds.),Developingreadingandwritinginsecond-languagelearners:lessonsfromthereportofthenationalliteracypanelonlanguage-minoritychildrenandyouth(pp.27-60).NewYork,NY:Routledge.
Pierangelo,R.,&Giuliani,G.(2010).Prevalenceof learningdisabilities.Retrievedfromwww.education.com/reference/article/prevalence-learning-disabilities
Spear-Swerling,L.(2006).Learningdisabilitiesin EnglishLanguageLearners.Retrievedfromwww.ldonline.org/spearswerling/Learning_Disabilities_in_English_Language_Learners
TexasEducationAgency.(2015).Retrievedfromhttp://tea.texas.gov/Reports_and_Data/
U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2006).Assistanceto statesfortheeducationofchildrenwith disabilitiesprogramandpreschoolgrantsfor childrenwithdisabilities:Finalrule.Federal Register,34,CRFParts300and301
U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2015).Englishlanguagelearners.Retrievedfromhttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp
CouncilforLearningDisabilitiesCLDgrantspermissiontocopythisarticleforeducationalpurposes.OtherInfoSheetsareavailableonourwebsite(http://www.cldinternational.org).
Recommendedcitation:Khalaf,S.&Santi,K.L.(2016)EnglishLanguageLearners:TheImpactofLanguage andSocio-CulturalFactorsonLearning.CLDInformationSheet.Retrievedfrom:http://www.council-for-learning-disabilities.org/infosheets-supporting-translation-of-research-to-practice.
Kristi
Typewritten Text
*Updated and Adapted from Navarrete, L. & Watson, S.M.R. (2013) Infosheet.
