State Policy and the "Forever EL" Problem for English Learners With Disabilities

• In Event: Examining Opportunity to Learn for Multilingual Students

Abstract

Purpose: Prolonged English learner (EL) status hinders students’ opportunity to learn (OTL), as long-term ELs have limited access to peers and experiences associated with higher achievement (Callahan & Shifrer, 2016; Estrada, 2014; Kim & Herman, 2009; Menken, Kleyn, & Chae, 2012; Olsen, 2010; Thompson, 2015, 2017). ELs with disabilities are particularly prone to remaining in EL status long-term (Motamedi, Cox, Williams, & Deussen, 2016; Umansky et al., 2015). State education agencies (SEA) are in a unique position to influence OTL for ELs with disabilities. SEA policies dictate when and how these students can exit EL status. In this study, we examine how such exit policies facilitate or hinder OTL for ELs with disabilities in 24 SEAs.

Theoretical Perspectives: This paper draws on Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) and the OTL concept. According to DisCrit, disability and race – and proxies of race, like “English learner” – are socially co-constructed through the collusive forces of ableism and racism (Annamma, Ferri, & Connor, 2013). Educational policy is dominated by the medical model, which pathologizes disability and race, and seeks to classify, categorize, and normalize multiply-marginalized students (Annamma & Morrison, 2018; Drake, 1999). Such policies influence OTL – any factor impacting access to learning and achievement (Darling-Hammond, 1997; McDonnell, 1995; Oakes, 1989; Oakes, 1990) – for ELs with disabilities, as they determine how long these students remain in EL status.

Methods: We used case study methodology (Merriam, 2009) to explore how 24 states’ policies co-construct “English learner” and “disability” and determine OTL for ELs with disabilities. For each state case, we employed a combination of interview and document analysis methods. We applied a constant comparative approach (Creswell, 2014) to compare and synthesize across cases.

Data Sources: The data for this study included 45-60 minute interviews with leaders from each of the 24 SEAs. Participants answered questions pertaining to current policies, challenges, and desired guidance on exiting ELs with disabilities from EL status. We also gathered 2-3 documents from each state.

Results: Our analyses revealed that the requirement in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA 2015) for SEAs to have standardized, statewide exit procedures led 11 participating states to establish a single exit criterion for all ELs, including ELs with disabilities – scoring “proficient” on the state English language proficiency assessment. Seven states expressed that single-criterion procedures conflicted with the individualization mandated in the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA 2004); their procedures involved a multiple measures, team-based approach. The remaining states fell somewhere between these extremes. All states reported difficulty developing policies that addressed the “forever EL” problem, as ELs with disabilities were unable to exit because of their disabilities, not their English proficiency.

Significance: Our findings highlighted a tension between the standardization of ESSA 2015 and the individualization of IDEA 2004 for states developing exit procedures for ELs with disabilities. The resulting “forever EL” problem is evidence of how policies co-construct “English learner” and “disability” in ways that limit these students’ OTL. SEAs require flexibility and guidance to create policies that prevent such marginalization in school.

Authors

• Soyoung Park, Bank Street College of Education

• Alexandrea Peña, The University of Texas at Austin