3Statistics: Why is it important to know how to work with bilingual students? By 2010, it is estimated that NY, TX, CA, and FL will have about 1/3 of the nations minority youth (Hodginson & Outz, 1992)The Hispanic population in US has grown faster than the rest of the population as a whole (Carrasquillo, 1999)Hispanic children, including LEP students, make up a significant percentage of the public school population in US (Carrasquillo, 1999)In 2002, the majority of newborns are Hispanic
4Educational Issues with Minority Children Minority students lag academically behind majority children (Carrasquillo, 1999; Meier & Stewart, 1991)Hispanic students lag behind other minority groups in various areas (Carrasquillo, 1999)As a result, there has been a significant overrepresentation of Hispanic students in special education and other remedial programs (Figueroa & Artiles, 1999)
5Issues with Minority/ Bilingual Students 1) Language Proficiency Issues (Cummins, 1984)2) Low Academic Achievement (Carrasquillo, 1999)3) Overrepresentation special education and other remedial programs (Figueroa & Artiles, 1999; Stewart & Meier, 1991)4) Lack of adequate programs for bilingual students in public schools
7Threshold Hypothesis (Cummins, 1979) BICSBICSCALPCALPCUPL1L2BICS: Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (3yrs)CALP: Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (5-7 years)CUP: Common Underlying Proficiency
8FACTORS INFLUENCING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISTION young second language learners use same part of the brain for both L1 and L2older learners use a different part of the brain for their L2 than they used for their first (Kim, Relkin, Lee & Hirsch, 1997).Younger second language learners don’t necessarily develop accentOlder second language learners (ages 8-12) develop language faster; possibly due to cognitive maturity and L1 competenceChildren older than 12 slow down, probably due to increased academic demands
9FACTORS INFLUENCING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISTION Personalitystrong self-esteem outgoing vs. shy and withdrawnSocial Factorslanguage modelsmotivation
10The Acquisition-Learning Distinction (Stephen Krashen) – Corresponding to Natural Language Approach Language acquisition = “picking up a language”Language learning = learning language in formal mannerAffective filter = emotional barrier to language learningLearning provides a monitor = allows learner to correct language output based on previously learned language rules.In short run, older learners develop competence faster than younger children.Children outperform adults in L2 in the long run
11Bilingual Education Programs Transitional Bilingual Education (transition into English by 3rd grade)Maintenance Bilingual Education (transition into English by 5th grade)Dual Immersion Program (Acquiring both L1 and L2 simultaneously)
12Second Language Acquisition Phases Pre-productionFew oral skills (pointing, gesturing, nodding)Teachers should provide opportunities for active listening, utilize visuals, and real objectsEarly ProductionSome understanding, can produce some social words/sentencesTeachers should ask yes/no or either/or questionsSpeech EmergenceCan understand with concrete contexts/ or range of personal experienceTeachers should focus on communication not language form, and provide meaningful contextsIntermediate and Advanced FluencyDemonstrate increased levels of accuracyTeachers should provide opportunities to create oral and written narratives and continue ongoing language development
13The Connection Between L1 and L2 Literacy Literacy in L1 has been found to be the most stable predictor of English literacy (Pardo & Tinajero, 1993)Students with high literacy in L1 will perform better in English than students with low literacy in L1 (Pardo & Tinajero, 1993)
17Research in L2 ReadingThere are differences in basic underlying cognitive processes during first and second language reading (Koda, 1994; Segalowitz, 1986)Reduced automaticity of word recognition with fluent bilinguals (Hernandez et al, 1996; Segalowitz, 1986)Repetition effects occur more readily within languages than they do between languages, thus L2 reading may be affected (Scarborough, 1984)
19Testing, the Law and LEP Students: Diana v Testing, the Law and LEP Students: Diana v. State Board of Education (1970):Spanish speaking students were being placed in MR classes based on their scores from intelligence tests administered in EnglishImportant results from the case:1) language competence should be assessed2) tests should be administered in students’ L13) emphasis on nonverbal measures4) students placed incorrectly should be re-evaluated
20Public Law 94-142 /IDEA ‘97: Specific Issues with LEP Students *Assessment should be conducted in students’native language or mode of communication*Assessment procedures should be non-discriminatory*Assessment instruments …must measure disability,not child’s English language skills*Tests should be valid for purposes used*Tests are administered by trained andknowledgeable personnel*Single test should not be sole criterion for disability*Areas related to suspected disability should be assessed.
22REFERRALS TO SPECIAL EDUCATION The use of the SSTPre-referral Questions (LEP Questionnaire)Pre-referral Interventions
23Intelligence Testing and Minorities Lower correlations have been found between Performance IQs (PIQ) and achievementLow correlations have been found between Nonverbal Intelligence Tests and achievementLack of English language proficiency significantly and negatively influences test results
241) Intelligence tests have a cultural bias. ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE USE OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS IN ASSESSING ETHNIC MINORITY CHILDREN (Sattler, 1992)1) Intelligence tests have a cultural bias.2) Norms are inappropriate for minorities.3) Belief that Minorities are handicapped in test taking skills.a. Deficiencies in motivation, test practice, and readingb. Failure to appreciate the achievement aspects of the test situationc. Limited exposure to the U.S. culture4) The fact that most examiners are white has the effect of depressingthe scores of ethnic minority children.a. Rapportb. Communication difficulties5) Tests results lead to inadequate and inferior education.a. “Test results are the main reason why ethnic minority children are segregated into special classes.”b. These classes may have inadequate curriculum and provide inferior educationc. Can create negative expectancies in teachers
25ARGUMENTS FOR THE USE OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS IN ASSESSING ETHNIC MINORITY CHILDREN (Sattler, 1992) 1) Useful in evaluating present functioning.a. Cognitive strength and weaknessesb. Helpful in determining certain exceptionalitiesc. Helpful in testing for Brain damage2) Useful in indicting future functioning.3) Useful in evaluating programs.4) Useful in revealing inequalities (i.e. needing specialeducation)5) Useful in providing an objective standard.
26Four Options for the Assessment of Bilingual Students 1) Administer the usual diagnostic battery, but take account students’ bilingual background in interpreting the test profile.2) Delay assessment in the hope that the student’s poor academic performance is the result of normal L2 development.3) Administer only nonverbal measures.4) Do assessment in L1and L2.Adopted from Cummins, J. (2001) Assessment and Intervention with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners. In S. R. Hurley and J. V. Tinajero Literacy Assessment of Second Language Learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
27Usual Diagnostic Battery While Considering Student’s Bilingual Background Use of verbal and nonverbal measures in English, but accounting for students’ bilingual background.Dangers: Mis-interpreting results and over-representation of students in Special Education (Ortiz & Yates, 1983; Mercer, 1973).Tendency to ignore or underestimate the influence of language proficiency on individuals’ performance (Oller, 1997; as cited in Cummins, 2001)
28Administering Only Nonverbal Measures Nonverbal measures not good predictors of academic achievementLanguage competency needs to be assessed (Diana vs. State Board of Ed, 1970)Most learning disabilities are related to languageIf there are visual perceptual difficulties, nonverbal measures will not be valid.
29Assessment in L1 and L2Few Bilingual Psychologists/Speech PathologistsAppropriate use of interpretersQuestionable norms (monolingual norms in Spanish or English)Caution in interpreting languages separately
30Bilingual Assessment Model (Wilda’s model in progress) LEPBilingual*Has had instruction in L1*Uses Spanish to a highdegreeBilingual*Fluent in English*No previous instruction in L1Bilingual Assessment:Assessment in L1 and L2Assessment in English with consideration regarding culture and L2 developmentObservationsInterviews (parents and teachers)Appropriate Norm referenced tests - consider language and standardization.Criterion based testsCurriculum Based MeasurementObservationsInterviews (parents and teachers)Appropriate Norm referenced testsCriterion based testsCurriculum Based MeasurementWilda Laija, Ph.D. 2000
31Assessment of LEP and Bilingual Students in L1 and L2 Language ProficiencyL1 and L2 language proficiency needs to be establishedExamine both expressive and receptive language in L1 and L2Consider BICS and CALPLEP and/orLimited in L1BilingualProficiency in L2INTELLIGENCE/COGNITVE ABILITY(Must be done in L1 as much as possible)Bateria Woodcock-Munoz (limitations)UNITDifferential Abilities Scales (Non-verbal)KABC (old)Nonverbal tests (limitations)INTELLIGENCE/COGNITIVE ABILITY(Can use both L1 and L2,m if needed)UNITDifferential Abilities ScalesKABCNonverbal tests (limitations)Visual and Auditory Processingin Dominant LanguageWilda Laija, Ph.D.
32Visual and Auditory Processing In Dominant LanguageLEP and/orLimited in L1BilingualProficiency in L2ACHIEVEMENTShould be given in L1 and L2Based on language of instructionACHIEVEMENTShould Based on language ofinstructionSOCIO-EMOTIONALIn L1DAP, KSD, KFDRobertsTEMASRorschachSOCIO-EMOTIONALIn Dominant LanguageDAP, KSD, KFDRobertsTEMASRorschachWilda Laija, Ph.D.
33Interpreting Results for Bilingual Students Consider:Whether norms are from students country of originHow long has student been learning EnglishDegree of support for L1 conceptual development at home and schoolSocial and peer pressure to replace L1 with L2Bilingual students have different language/cognitive/academic development than monolingual students
34Test Interpretation with Bilingual Students Consider:Language ProficiencyL2 developmentInstructional ProgramsReading Development in L1 and L2Educational HistoryHealth and DevelopmentFamily HistoryCaution against:Distortion: minimizing or maximizing differences due to stereotypesPathologizing: using inappropriate diagnostic criteria based on culture and language
35Writing the Report State: Language used to test student Examiner’s proficiency or use of interpreterStudent’s language factorsTests used, validity and reliability with this populationEducational and family historyRule in or out exclusionary clause
36Classroom Interventions for Promoting L2 Competencies Reading aloud to the students at their conceptual levelProviding experiences for listening comprehensionEncouraging oral language developmentSharing reading between the teacher and studentsModeling and guiding oral language and reading developmentShared reading: dictating to the teacher and then illustrating booksUsing materials that are socially sensitive and culturally specific