|
Article Excerpt
Abstract. This article provides a commentary on issues regarding the use of response to intervention (RTI) with English language learners (ELLs). The commentary draws on current literature on reading instruction, ELLs, RTI, and students with learning disabilities and highlights key points from the articles in this special issue. The discussion includes future directions for research.
*********
Using a response-to-intervention (RTI) approach to identifying students with learning disabilities has been a welcome shift in policy and practices that have otherwise largely relied on arbitrary discrepancy criteria in determining eligibility for special education. Several potential benefits of RTI hold promise for improving educational outcomes for children. First, early screening assessment and intervention for struggling readers raise the possibility of identifying learning disabilities early and avoiding a prolonged wait for students to qualify for special education services. Second, early identification may lessen the impact of a learning disability by keeping the achievement gap as narrow as possible. Third, the use of RTI may contribute to improving literacy rates by providing intervention for all students who experience difficulty with reading, not just those whose difficulties are severe enough to warrant special education. How we define learning disabilities and operationalize the criteria for eligibility has been a controversial topic for decades. Consider, for example, how many times a multidisciplinary panel such as the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities has raised critical issues in connection with defining learning disabilities (e.g., National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, 1987, 1991, 1998). Prominent authors and other panels have frequently raised similar definitional and procedural concerns (see, for review, Kavale & Forness, 2000; Keogh, 1987).
Several critical issues have been discussed at length in proceedings of the President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002) and a summit of learning disabilities researchers (Bradley, Danielson, & Hallahan, 2002), both of which contributed greatly to recent changes in federal law. Subjectivity in teachers' referral of students, inaccuracy in assessment practices, and lack of consistency in the nature and quality of general education instruction prior to placement often result in a "wait-to-fail" phenomenon, whereby students who qualify for special education are placed long after entry to school (Gresham, 2002; Vaughn & Klingner, 2007).
Problems with a discrepancy approach are well documented, and the concept of RTI holds promise for addressing these problems (e.g., Gresham, 2002; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003). The use of discrepancy criteria is dependent on accurate and valid measurement, an issue of particular concern when applying discrepancy criteria to English language learners (ELLs). Linan-Thompson and colleagues (this issue) suggest that other factors, such as language of instruction and the school context in general, need to be considered as well. Under the reauthorized IDEA legislation, P.L. 108-446, and accompanying federal regulations, a state may not require the use of discrepancy criteria to identify students with learning disabilities and must permit the use of a RTI approach. A multidisciplinary team that includes the child's parents must examine evidence regarding the child's progress toward grade-level standards and the child's responsiveness to scientifically based instructional practices. The team should examine evidence to identify patterns of strength and weakness in the child's academic or behavioral competence and use multiple measures and a comprehensive evaluation to make the final determination.
When the students under consideration for eligibility are also classified as ELLs, there may be additional factors to consider in determining eligibility, but these are not specified in the federal guidelines. The articles in this issue examine some of these factors, including the nature and quality of the general education reading program, the assessments used to determine students' responsiveness to instruction, and the content and procedures of follow-up intervention. In this commentary, I first provide an overview of critical issues in reading instruction and special education for ELLs and then attempt to draw from these articles some key principles regarding the use of RTI models with ELL students.
English Language Learners, Reading Instruction, and Learning Disabilities
The number of ELL students in schools...
|
