Special Education
ELLs have consistently been overrepresented in Special Education, as shown by a research tradition going back to the 1960's. The level of representation varies among grade levels, and in a 2002 analysis of 11 California schools, researchers found that the overrepresentation of ELLs was greater after beginning in the 5th grade and continued to increase into secondary school. They suggested that this might be explained by a lack of language support, as students with less acess to language support were more likely to be in special education. Later research supported the existence of a trend in which ELLs are underrepresented in the first few grades and overrepresented later on. Other explanations for this overrepresentation include ineptitude in accounting for cultural and linguistics differences when administering tests for educational disability, and schools placing ELLs in special education becuase they have no other effective way to deal with them. [15]
As an example, a 2006 study on Spanish language testing found an astoundingly high rate of students were identified as less than fluent in thier native languages.13 states, accounting for around a quarter of the nation's ELL students at the time of the study, either required or encouraged this native-language testing. A 2005 study found that children who did poorly on assements of both thier native language and English had the highest rate of participation in special education. The two most popular tests for Spanish ability were the Language Assesment Scale and the Idea Proficiency Test. These two tests, as well as a "test" designed by the researchers, based in solid linguisitic theory, were administered to a group of students. The LAS classified around 75% of students, and the IPT around 90% of students, as either limited or non-speakers of Spanish. However, in the natural language test administered by researchers, which mainly consisted of recording students telling a story based on pictures and then analyzing thier speech for mistakes, the researchers found that only about 2% of students made more than the normal number of speech errors. They suggest that the tests used in schools are rooted in an elitist ideology that priviledges academic language as more complicated and more valuable. [14]
As an example, a 2006 study on Spanish language testing found an astoundingly high rate of students were identified as less than fluent in thier native languages.13 states, accounting for around a quarter of the nation's ELL students at the time of the study, either required or encouraged this native-language testing. A 2005 study found that children who did poorly on assements of both thier native language and English had the highest rate of participation in special education. The two most popular tests for Spanish ability were the Language Assesment Scale and the Idea Proficiency Test. These two tests, as well as a "test" designed by the researchers, based in solid linguisitic theory, were administered to a group of students. The LAS classified around 75% of students, and the IPT around 90% of students, as either limited or non-speakers of Spanish. However, in the natural language test administered by researchers, which mainly consisted of recording students telling a story based on pictures and then analyzing thier speech for mistakes, the researchers found that only about 2% of students made more than the normal number of speech errors. They suggest that the tests used in schools are rooted in an elitist ideology that priviledges academic language as more complicated and more valuable. [14]