The Role of Data Skepticism in Reclassifying English Learners with Disabilities

• In Event: Educators’ Decision Making for Multilingual Learners With Disabilities

Abstract

Objectives/Purposes
English learners (ELs) with disabilities are disproportionately less likely than ELs without disabilities to be reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (Burke et al., 2016; Slama et al., 2017; Umansky et al., 2017) and are therefore at greater risk for adverse outcomes associated with delayed reclassification (Callahan & Shifrer, 2016; Dabach, 2014; Menken et al., 2012; Thompson, 2015). Scholarship has begun to explore how reclassification policies, including reclassification criteria, may create inequities for ELs with disabilities (Park & Chou, 2019; Sahakyan & Poole, 2023; Umansky et al., 2017) but has yet to examine how teachers make sense of English Language Proficiency (ELP) data—key reclassification evidence—and ultimately make reclassification recommendations. The purpose of this qualitative case study is to investigate the data interpretation and decision making of teachers.

Perspective(s)/Theoretical Framework
To understand data interpretation and decision making of teachers, this study drew upon local capacity and will (McLaughlin, 1987) as its theoretical framework. Positions educators as on-the-ground policymakers, McLaughlin (1987) postulates that educators’ capacity and will shape policy implementation in schools. Applied to this study, the will and capacity of teachers informs their reclassification of ELs with disabilities.

Methods/Data Sources
We conducted a qualitative case study (Yin, 2018) in one Pennsylvania school district. The participants were 17 of the 20 members of the district’s EL Department. They each participated in one 45-to-60-minute semi-structured interview. The data also included the longitudinal standardized ELP assessment data and reclassification reports of current and recently reclassified ELs with disabilities (n=120). To analyze these distinct data sources, we completed three separate, complementary analyses: (1) growth gradients of standardized ELP scores, (2) partially ordered meta-matrix, comparing teachers’ reclassification decisions and data used, and (3) hybrid inductive–deductive coding of interviews.

Results and Significance
The data analysis indicated that teachers experienced what we call data skepticism, a distrust in the construct validity of standardized ELP assessment data for ELs, especially those with disabilities (i.e., will). Additionally, teachers had limited resources and training to monitor and interpret both summative and formative ELP data (i.e., capacity). Teachers’ beliefs about standardized ELP data, coupled with a scarcity of resources and training, contributed to reclassification decision making based on anecdotal evidence. The anecdotal evidence included teachers’ gut instinct about whether language or disability influenced ELs with disabilities’ ELP skills and personal determinations of equitable learning opportunities, highlighting further the complexities of teacher bias during reclassification (Estrada & Wang, 2018; Hill et al., 2014; Marvrogordato & White, 2017).
Reclassification remains a critical issue in the education of ELs with disabilities, as their chances for reclassification are alarmingly slim. This study was the first to explore how teachers interpret data and make reclassification decisions for ELs with disabilities. The results reflect the need for districts to (a) expand their teachers’ capacity to make data-informed decisions for ELs with disabilities and (b) to promote reclassification decision making that is based on multiple stakeholders’ perspectives and multiple data sources.

Authors

• Sara E.N. Kangas, Lehigh University

• Molly Jones Ruiz, Lehigh University