PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 1

PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education

Eric Kursman
March 30, 2014
George Mason University
EDUC 615
Dr. Nancy Holincheck












PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 2
Abstract
Across the country, schools and districts have been reporting disproportionate enrollment
numbers of English Language Learners (ELLs) who are also in Special Education (SpEd)
programs. A variety of factors, everything from eligibility tests to teacher efficacy to abuse of
SpEd referrals, may contribute to the inequitable population numbers. This overrepresentation
underscores the research detailing one of the most significant injustices incurred by non-native
English-speaking students, raising questions about underlying assumptions of ELLs and the
capability of the United States public school system to provide equitable access to appropriate
educational services. A recent equity audit at Blue Ridge Middle School in Loudoun County,
Virginia showed a similar overrepresentation of ELLs in its SpEd program; this issue now rests
in our own backyard. There are, however, a variety of strategies and programs, such as Natural
Language Sample testing and RTI-like referral systems, that could remedy these injustices and
cultivate more responsive and equitable educational opportunities. The following policy brief
and action plan seek to explore the most current literature, school-based findings, and
recommended actions to restore equitable educational practices to Blue Ridge Middle School and
countless other public schools throughout the United States.





PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 3
Policy Brief
CONTEXT AND IMPORTANCE
Millions upon millions of young people rely on the public education system each year for
everything from college preparation workshops to after-school care to a hot breakfast.
Undeniably, two of the most important services provided to young people in this country include
English Language Learner (ELL) programs and Special Education (SpEd) services; according to
the National Center for Education Statistics, 4.7 million students receive ELL services and 6.4
million students receive SpEd services. These statistics do not cause alarm by themselves, but
they do elicit a cause for concern if there is an overrepresentation (or an underrepresentation, for
that matter) of ELLs receiving SpEd services.
In the past 15 years, researchers have begun to study concerning correlations and trends
that have been anecdotally noted by classroom teachers for years: when it comes to dual-labeled
students, more ELL students qualify for SpEd services than any other reporting category (FRL,
gender, ethnicity). In a notable study, Sullivan (2011) found a striking overrepresentation of
ELLs receiving SpEd services, more so in district reporting that in state reporting. (The category
of a Specific Learning Disability (SLD) was the most frequent overrepresented reporting
category.) Sullivan (2011) also found that districts with higher proportions of students
identified as ELLs were less likely to have disproportionality in SpEdwhereas districts with
high proportions of teachers with ESL certificates were more likely to place students identified
as ELLs in (SpEd). In short, districts with smaller ELL populations reported dual eligibility
(ELL and SpEd) than districts with larger ELL populations.
Given these potentially worrisome conclusions, many possible explanations surface to
shed light on the disproportionalities uncovered by Sullivans study. One potential rationale
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 4
comes from testing for eligibility. When referring students to SpEd eligibility testing, language
is a key component to the testing process: if the students first language (L1) is not English, they
must be tested in their first language. Many such tests exist in multiple languages and in many
commercially-available forms, however many of these tests measure students L1 in an academic
dialect instead of conversational dialect. According to Macswan and Rolstad (2006), many of
these commercially-available tests find more false positives in academic language
comprehension than accurate measures of a non-linguistic disability; in their study, more than
75% of ELLs who have never even been considered for SpEd services tested low enough on two
commercially-available tests to require SpEd services. On the other hand, when using Natural
Language samples instead of the commercial tests, only 4% of all ELLs were found eligible for
SpEd services. The accuracy and capability of L1 tests has not been the most reliable indicator
of whether an ELL should qualify for SpEd services.
Another potential rationale for an overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd is the timing of
when eligibility testing occurs. Hibel and Jasper (2012) found that many children (with an L1
other than English) were referred to ELL programs in grades one through three instead of SpEd
services. SpEd identification and intervention is most effective in grades one through three;
when potentially-eligible students are referred to ELL programs instead of SpEd services, they
miss the window that can greatly reduce the hazard of future academic risk. This study
suggests that the timing and placement of eligibility testing has an enormous impact of whether
students should receive dual labels (ELLs in SpEd).
A final potential rationale explored in literature of the sad notion that SpEd services can
be viewed as a fix-all by educators and education systems. Maxwell and Shah (2012) explore
how SpEd became a dumping ground of sorts in western states; many students were referred to
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 5
SpEd services with concerns unrelated to cognitive ability and incorrectly identified as SLI when
a more meaningful and accurate assessment of their learning struggles revolved around first and
second language navigation, not SLD.
The problem of overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd has far-reaching ramifications. First,
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that eligibility testing be
administered in a students L1; if the test is administered in an academic dialect of a students L1
instead of a conversational dialect, not only will the test yield inaccurate results, but it will also
create a deeper discrepancy in equity when it comes to accessibility of fair testing. These
inequities are echoed by de Valenzuela et al (2006) who found a rising rate of ELLs in SpEd; the
study promptly raised questions about underlying assumptions regarding placement of ELLs.
Second, ELLs are protected under the Civil Rights Act, which requires schools to improve
language deficiencies of students (NCES, 2010). If schools are not accurately measuring and
attending to students language and/or cognitive disabilities, this yields yet another equity
concern for public education of whether the services students receive are precise and fair.

WHAT IS BEING DONE
Concerns regarding overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd yields a thorny, complicated
issue. Not only are educators faced with the reality that testing resources are not significantly
reliable or capable yet of determining language deficiencies or cognitive disabilities, but this
issue intersects with fluid cultural differences and the underlying equity of the service our public
education systems provides to our young people. On the bright side, however, there are a
number of actions taking place across the country that address the concerns on two fronts: testing
and teacher efficacy.
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 6
The first of the two-pronged approach is to reform the eligibility testing system. As
Macswan and Rolstad (2006) suggested, a number of districts are moving away from
commercially-available eligibility testing in a students L1 and shifting towards Natural
Language Samples (conversations in lay terms) administered by speakers of a students native
language. Although these tests are understandably more expensive and logistically difficult to
administer, they have yielded much more accurate results of a students language ability versus
potential cognitive disability.
In addition, districts are also combating the missing window in service referrals with
RTI-like screening procedures. The critical time frame for service referrals, cited by Hibel and
Jasper (2012), has in part prompted districts in California to develop and administer
response-appropriate studies of student performance to better determine a more accurate
placement for services for the child. A large team of stakeholders come together for each student
of concern to create a series of techniques that allow stakeholders to gain a better picture of a
students deficiencies and, in turn, provide a more accurate placement for services (if they are
needed).
The second of the two-pronged approach to overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd
addresses classroom concerns for students who are already dual-labeled: teacher efficacy. A
study from Barbetta and Paneque (2006) found that teachers who were even minimally proficient
in a students L1 reported higher efficacy ratings on their ability to reach dual-labeled
(ELL/SpEd) students. (Naturally, higher efficacy ratings resulted in higher student academic
achievement.) In the time since, districts with high ELL populations have begun to provide ELL
and ESL professional development for faculty, especially SpEd educators, with the hopes of
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 7
providing better services to dual-labeled students (some of whom were incorrectly dual-labeled)
including improving communications between the school, families, and the community.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the research on the overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd and the actions being
taken across the country to combat the problem, the following are further recommendations to
better serve students in our region:
I. District Level Recommendations
a. Provide funds to hire new testing specialists who are proficient in many languages. This
will enable increased access to Natural Language samples and more reliable testing
procedures.
b. Provide training for ELL teachers to administer Language Sample tests. While testing
specialists are trained to examine all aspects of a students learning deficiencies, ELL
teachers primary role is to assess language processing and growth. If ELL teachers
helped administer eligibility testing, they would be better positioned to differentiate
between language deficiencies and cognitive disabilities than traditional testing
specialists.
c. Develop a district-wide task force to scrutinize eligibility referrals from grades one
through three. An additional task force would be able to provide greater study of
students whose L1 is not English to better determine whether academic deficiencies are
related to language concerns or potential SpEd disabilities.
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 8
d. Create a new position in testing services whose focus is language development. This
individual would be an integral player in the aforementioned task force to more
accurately determine a students placement based on their observed needs.
e. Develop RTI-like screening programs for early grades. By involving all stakeholders to
develop techniques to address students deficiencies, the accuracy of service placement
will increase.
II. School
a. Provide incentives for all teachers to seek ESOL training/certification. By encouraging
all teachers to become more knowledgeable in addressing student concerns, efficacy (and
subsequent academic achievement) will increase.
b. Create a position on the eligibility testing team for an ELL teacher. As mentioned in the
district recommendations, ELL teachers are well-versed in assessing language
deficiencies; their effort would be invaluable when determining the placement of a
student.
c. Provide TESOL training for all SpEd teachers. If SpEd professionals are trained in
TESOL, they have a better opportunity to support dual-labeled students.
d. Create school-based PD on minimum language proficiency for most represented L2s. If
all faculty (including general education teachers) received even minimal proficiency
training in L2s, their efficacy ratings may improve in the classroom setting.
III. Classroom
a. Allow students to complete some academic coursework/assessments in L1. Language
should not be a barrier to demonstrating comprehension; if a dual-labeled student can
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 9
only provide answers in their L1, we as teachers should not block access for student
demonstration of mastery.
b. Create personalized L1-to-Academic-English cards for question comprehension. By
providing each dual-labeled student a laminated card that translates tasks from
Academic English to their L1, they have a better opportunity to comprehend the task and
better demonstrate their understanding.
c. Use voice recording software for students to record essay answers that will later be typed
in ELL setting. Similar to the first suggestion, if dual-labeled students can demonstrate
mastery in their L1 but not the Academic English expected in classroom settings, they
should be provided the opportunity to showcase their understanding of the content,
(initially) regardless of language.

Action Plan
MY CURRENT SITUATION AND IMPORTANCE
In 2012, Principal Brion Bell earned Blue Ridge Middle School (BRMS) the distinct
honor of hosting the Western Loudoun hub for English Language Learners through Loudoun
County Public Schools. The move was carefully designed to rely on a number of key
components: community, developing the Parents as Educational Partners (PEP) team (for which
I was a part of) to serve as an intermediary body to empower non-native English-speaking
parents; scheduling, hiring a new English Language Learner (ELL) teacher (to be shared between
Blue Ridge and our feeder high school, Loudoun Valley); and public relations, taking to various
news outlets to show the Purcellville community that the oldest middle school in the county was
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 10
still capable of learning new tricks. As the 2012-13 school year wore on, however, staff
struggled to meet the needs of the new student population; in the programs infancy, staff
training had yet to begin. Slowly, staff members (myself included) noticed that what seemed
like a large population of our ELL program was also receiving Special Education (SpEd)
services in addition to their ELL classes. Curious as to whether this anecdotal observation bore
fruit, I focused part of my Equity Audit (Appendix) on the proportion of ELL students dual-
labeled as SpEd students. Not only did my findings support my suspicion, it showed that 83% of
our ELL students were also receiving SpEd services. The analysis was clear: Blue Ridge Middle
School over-represents English Language Learners in Special Education more than any other
subgroup.
The findings of this equity
audit were significant as it shined a
light on the issue of minority
overrepresentation in SpEd services,
especially at Blue Ridge. In his
work, de Valenzuela (2006)
explored the gross social injustices
raised by disproportionate
enrollment of minority students in
SpEd programs across the country
Blue Ridge seemed to be no different. At BRMS, 28% of the current SpEd population consists
of students or color; in contrast, only 19% of the student body is non-white. This indicates that
although BRMS does not possess an atypical overrepresentation of minority students in SpEd,
16
36
10
35
21
83
WHITE BLACK ASIAN HISPANIC OTHER ELL
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

o
f

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
h
o

q
u
a
l
i
f
y

f
o
r

S
p
e
c
i
a
l

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
Reporting Groups
Special Education Breakdown
by Reporting Group
Students from grades 6-8
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 11
enrollment is higher than that of non-white students in the entire student body. Looking closer,
one needs to consider the work of Sullivan (2011) that investigates an overrepresentation of
ELLs in both district and state reporting of SpEd populations. This is where the issue became
abundantly clear: 83% of Blue Ridge Middle Schools ELLs are also dual labeled for Special
Education. On the surface, this finding may simply raise questions about the new ELL program,
but below the surface, this finding could suggest the prevalence of significant inequity in
Loudoun Countys newest ELL hub.
If the latter holds to be true, Blue Ridge Middle School may be the all-too-common ill-
equipped system providing students with an education that does not meet their needs as learners.
SpEd eligibility testing at BRMS for non-native English speakers is delivered in paper and pencil
assessments in the students native language (L1). Macswan and Rolstad (2006) explored how
this very type of commercially-available, paper-pencil test is nowhere near as accurate in
distinguishing language difficulties from learning disabilities as Natural Language samples; Blue
Ridges current testing methodology is simply inadequate. In addition, Blue Ridge Middle
School may be abusing Special Education referrals as Maxwell and Shah (2012) discuss: by
enrolling ELLs in SpEd to supplement language services from an underfunded and under-
resourced ELL program, Blue Ridge may be using the SpEd program as a fix all. Considering
these early developments in the schools new ELL program, BRMS may be on track to do more
harm than good for these students.
DESIRED OUTCOMES
Just as in backwards planning during classroom curriculum development, one needs to
consider what a fix to this overrepresentation of dual-labeled students would look like.
Numerically speaking, the answer is simple: one would hope for a more normed representation
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 12
of ELLs in SpEd, numbers that would be similarly comparable to those of any other subgroup of
the SpEd population. Given current enrollment numbers, that would mean a drastic 60%
decrease in dual-labeled students.
How would the school achieve these numbers? Through a reformation of SpEd
eligibility testing for non-native English speakers and increased teacher training for dual-labeled
students. With regards to eligibility testing, the school would first abandon their current
commercially-available paper-pencil eligibility tests in favor of Natural Language Sample
assessments. Next, the school would include the ELL instructor as a member of the SpEd
eligibility testing team for all referrals of non-native English-speaking students. Finally, the
school would rely on our ELL instructor or language experts hired by the county to accurately
administer and analyze Natural Language Sample assessments.
The school would also see an uptick in teacher efficacy due to enhanced professional
development. First, SpEd teachers would earn dual-certification in TESOL, and our ELL teacher
would earn a SpEd endorsement. By equipping SpEd and ELL teachers with the necessary
training to better understand and support our current dual-labeled students, teacher efficacy
would rise, just as indicated by Barbetta and Paneque (2006) in their study of teacher efficacy of
dual-labeled students. Second, the faculty would be trained on how to deliver support and
monitor interventions for ELL students who may be referred to SpEd for testing. This training
would help the staff distinguish between language difficulties and learning disabilities, not to
mention how to support students who are suspected of exhibiting struggles with both.


PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 13
ACTION PLAN
What should be done and why
The first thing Blue Ridge Middle School needs to do is overhaul the SpEd eligibility
testing process. To begin, Natural Language Sample assessments need to replace the
commercially-available L1 eligibility tests that current assess students in the academic dialect of
their native language; this current measure has the tendency to result in false positives,
incorrectly identifying non-native English speakers for SpEd services when the test only
measures unfamiliarity in an academic dialect, not comprehension and processing of the more
common conversational dialect.
Second, more staff needs to be included on the eligibility testing team. Our ELL teacher
should hold a spot on the team as she is the classroom professional who works with ELLs every
day and has vast experience identifying and supporting non-native English speakers. Also, the
eligibility testing team also needs to include a language professional from the county who can
speak a students native language; this individual will be able to administer and more accurately
assess Natural Language Sample assessments.
Third, specialized training should be provided for all SpEd and ELL teachers. Special
Education teachers should receive TESOL training, and our ELL teacher should receive SpEd
professional development. In doing so, the school would better support its specialists to meet the
needs of its dual-labeled students and increase their efficacy in being able to do so.
Finally, Blue Ridge Middle School should develop an RTI-like referral program for all
ELL students being considered for SpEd services. As Maxwell and Shah (2006) note, similar
referral programs currently help teachers in California to better support potentially dual-labeled
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 14
students in their classroom. By training the BRMS faculty in a similar RTI-like program that
specializes in support strategies and classroom interventions, staff efficacy would increase with
regards to identifying, supporting, and referring ELL students for possible SpEd services.
Specific steps and a corresponding timeline
To enact such a bold and comprehensive overhaul, the following steps would need to take
place:
Date Action
4/7/14 Meet with principal Brion Bell, present these findings, and convince the BRMS
administrative team to take action
4/14/14 Write a grant to cover the additional expenses of Natural Language Sample tests
5/1/14 LCPS hires 20+ language experts as consultants, fluent in more than 60 different
languages, to administer Natural Language Sample tests
6/2/14 LCPS provides funding for ELL and SpEd teachers to receive additional
certification, endorsements, and/or training through George Mason University
8/4/14 Train ELL teacher to become member of eligibility testing team
8/5/14 BRMS SpEd eligibility testing team redesigns procedures to utilize Natural
Language Sample tests, ELL teacher expertise, and language expert consultants to
better distinguish between specific learning disabilities and language difficulties
8/7/14 BRMS admin team and eligibility testing team convene to use outcomes of 8/5/14
meeting to create an RTI-like referral system for SpEd services for ELL students
8/18/14 More than half of the SpEd department signs up for TESOL certification through
George Mason University; ELL teacher signs up for SpEd endorsement through
George Mason University
8/20/14 Deliver professional development to BRMS faculty on how to utilize RTI-like
referral system
9/1/14 BRMS hires Sullivan as consultant to visit school and provide feedback on new
system

PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 15
Resources and Permissions Needed
This audacious and wide-reaching plan would require the following resources and
permissions:
Resources Permissions
Funding for Natural Language Sample testing Principal to proceed with this
plan
Funding for 15+ new county-employed language experts as
consultants
School Board to approve
increased spending
Full day of training for ELL teacher to become part of
BRMS eligibility testing team
Loudoun County Board of
Supervisors to approve increased
spending
Full day (time, funding for time worked, computer access,
teleconferencing access) retreat for eligibility testing team
to redesign testing process for non-native English speakers
Personnel Services for hiring

Full day (time, funding for time worked, computer access)
training to use outcomes of aforementioned retreat to
design RTI-like referral system
Professional Development
committee at BRMS

Funding for ESOL/SpEd certs/training for ELL/SpEd staff
Half-day training for faculty to learn new RTI-like referral
system
Funding to hire Sullivan as consultant

Anticipated obstacles
There are a number of hurdles that the above plan would need to clear to lift off the
ground. First and foremost, funding. Currently, the budget of Loudoun County Public Schools
is already stretched too thin to provide some of the services that are already established
throughout the school system. With the Board of Supervisors currently threatening to slash the
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 16
LCPS budget below its current operating level, the district might not be able to finance new
personnel hires, even as consultants.
Another obstacle would be community buy-in. The Purcellville community has exhibited
tendencies in the past to reject new programs or initiatives that the general public does not find
value in. Educating the BRMS community about the benefits, including the potential long-term
cost savings in more accurately providing SpEd services, would be a challenge.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, one must consider the issue of teacher buy-in. In
the current climate of education, there seems to be a never-ending flow of new initiatives, extra
trainings, and additional exercises trickling down from the federal, state, and local levels; the
overabundance of teacher responsibilities has led to increased push back against these new
programs. In order to prove to the BRMS faculty that this new RTI-like referral program is not
just one more thing on their plate, the staff would need to understand the grave inequity that
currently exists in our most underrepresented population and how this inequity impacts everyone
at the school in multiple ways. Although selling the staff on this plan may not be as difficult as
convincing the community, the persuasion of the staff must be resolute in order to more
meaningfully meet the needs of our dual-labeled ELL/SpEd population.

Reflective Narrative
WHAT I LEARNED THROUGH THIS PROCESS
Out of everything that I learned throughout my data gathering, my research, and my
analysis, one common phrase stood out to me: sunshine is the best disinfectant. As a member of
my school for the past five years, I have always been cognizant that Blue Ridge Middle School
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 17
could be more equitable (especially with regards to minorities and non-white students), but this
concept was always more ethereal than tangible. That is, until I conducted this equity audit. I
found that just the simple process of collecting and disaggregating a quantitative (or qualitative,
for that matter) audit can not only highlight key points of interests, but it can also transform
perceived discrepancies to be much more tangible and concrete. Furthermore, I realized that
audits such as this are not confined to school-wide levels with deeply impactful findings: I can
also use audits with my students to help inform classroom-based decisions.
MY ROLE AS A TEACHER
Most importantly, this process reinforced my awareness of my role as an advocate for all
of my students, most especially for those who cannot or do not advocate for themselves.
Teachers are often the last line of offense for students who struggle to speak up for a myriad of
reasons, from language barriers to innocent ignorance to a lack of confidence. I can continue to
be that last line of offense, but in order to be an advocate, I need to be aware of the issues
facing my students on a daily basis. This process showed me that through teacher-led action
research (such as this equity audit) and frequent review of current literature (such as this policy
brief), I can stay better informed of the hurdles my students face but may not be able to clear all
by themselves. A simple example that arose from this process is my new awareness of the
concept of academic English as a third language for some of my ELLs (Zwiers, 2004). This new
idea also dovetailed in my research: non-native English-speaking students may also face an
academic dialect of their L1 on eligibility tests a fourth language! By recognizing the hurdles
of academic dialects in eligibility testing and classroom culture, I can more appropriately meet
the needs of my dual-labeled students by working to create meaningful interventions (such as
Natural Language Sample testing for eligibility assessments).
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 18
MY NEXT STEPS AS A TEACHER LEADER
With regards to this study, my first step is to bring this research to my schools Equity
Team. Again, sunshine is the best disinfectant; the Blue Ridge Equity Team needs to recognize
and be aware of the gross overrepresentation of ELLs in SpEd and its ramifications with regards
to our schools equitable services for our dual-labeled students. On a larger scale, however, my
next step is to become even more mindful of my students struggles, especially those that are not
easily visible or audible. This approach will require more reflection on my part as an educator, a
professional, and as an advocate for young people. I will need to question more, to investigate
more, to reflect more, and to engage with my colleagues and peers about these issues.
Throughout all of my studies in teacher leadership and administrative leadership, I have
found that often times, it can be more difficult to inspire others in a top down fashion than on a
grassroots level. I believe that my role as a teacher not an administrator provides me with the
opportunity to motivate my peers on the same level, eye to eye; my work as a teacher leader can
inspire the grassroots action that comes from being a change agent.
Considering my role, my power, and my responsibility as a teacher leader, I am reminded
of Michie (2010) when he discusses avoiding the undertow of teaching and, as a teacher,
keeping your eyes on the shore as a guidepost. In the current era of countless new initiatives
and policy-driven directives, one can easily lose sight even if just for a moment of their role
as an educator, a mentor, a coach in their students eyes. I believe our students are the shore.
They are the goal we fight for, the guidepost to swim towards. Even if all our students can do is
trace a simple SOS in the sand, we need to keep our eyes fixated on them so we can eventually
ride out the rip current and crawl ashore.
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 19
References
Barbetta, P. & Paneque, O. (2006). A Study of Teacher Efficacy of Special Education Teachers
of English Language Learners with Disabilities. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(1), 171-
193.
de Valenzuela, J. S., Copeland, S. R., Huaging Qi, C., & Pack, M. (2006). Examining
Eeducational Quity: Revisiting the Disproportionate Representation of Minority Students
in Special Education. Exceptional Children, 72(4), 425-441.
Hibel, J. & Jasper, AD. (2012). Delayed Special Education Placement for Learning Disabilities
among Children of Immigrants." Social Forces, 91(2), 503-529.
Macswan, J. & Rolstad, K. (2006). How Language Proficiency Tests Mislead Us About Ability:
Implications for English Language Learner Placement in Special Education. Teachers
College Record, 108(11), p. 2304 - 2328.
Maxwell, L.A. & Shah, N. (2012). Evaluating ELLs for Special Needs a Challenge. Education
Week, 32(2), 1-12.
Michie, G. (1993). Teaching in the undertow: Resisting the pull of schooling-as-usual. In W.
Ayers (Ed.), To Teach: The Journey of a Teacher. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Sullivan, A.L. (2011). Disproportionality in Special Education Identification and Placement of
English Language Learners. Exceptional Children, 77(3), 317-334.
Zwiers, J. (2004). The third language of academic English. Educational Leadership, 62(4), 60-
63.
PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 20
(2010). Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010015/indicator2_8.asp.




PBA: Overrepresentation of English Language Learners in Special Education 21
Appendix
(double click to view)