Tamara Mosar
In the state of Washington if you are an English Language
Learner in-country for less than three years you cannot be considered for
special education services. Unless there is written documentation (key word
there being written)of special education services having been received in the
country of origin or if qualifying tests can be administered in the student’s native
language. There is very good reason for this: English Language Learners often seem
slow to make progress in comparison to their grade level peers. They often
display behaviors inappropriate to the classroom: refusing to answer questions
or make eye contact, hiding under desks, violating other student’s personal
space. All of which should be expected from students not yet able to
communicate in English, who come from cultures where eye contact with adults is
not acceptable, have a different definition of personal space, and often have
post traumatic stress syndrome. So the policy is there to attempt to recognize
this reality for ELLs. To give them time to acquire language and acclimate to
our culture, rather than write them off as SPED.
However the policy can backfire. For example I have a student from Bhutan who in infancy was relinquished by her mother to another family in order to keep her from starving to death like two older siblings. Severely malnourished, this child was taken by the new family to a Nepali refugee camp where after care from camp doctors,the adoptive family notes significant developmental delays. Eventually, according to the family, the camp school places this child in special education courses. When the family arrives in the U.S. the child is placed into an age appropriate grade per policy. Parents alert school personnel to the child's history, request grade level retention, and special education services. ELD and Special Ed staff attempt to start the identification process but hit a dead end because there are no written records from the refugee camp school-just the parent’s word- that
the student received special education services, and there is no Nepali version of the qualifying tests. Policy regarding qualifying ELLs for special ed apparently cannot take ancdotal evidence from parents in place of written documentation or test in the primary language. Thus, the child was left with only ELD services much to the consternation of the family.
I now have this student in middle school. A notoriously difficult time to qualify even an English speaking student for SPED services. Especially as this child is studious and compliant-you know, the kid who quietly fails. We may be able to squeak in through a Health Impairment qualification because we still can't get around the primary language testing issue. But it will take time. Time we are running out of. And this is how well meaning policy quietly fails.
Where is the policy written? I’m not sure it exists at the state level. In my district we have qualified ELLs for Sp Ed within their 1st year in the states, usually for more significantly delayed students.
I don’t entirely disagree with the policy on holding off for SPED until the child has had time to adjust. When I child has PTSD, or is just frustrated from trying to understand what is happening in another language, or is simply exhausted from listening in their second language for six hours, the behaviors and lack of progress can be almost impossible to differentiate, no matter how much we want to think we can “just tell”. That being said, I don’t think providing them with no services is the right response. There needs to be something between SPED and ignoring them. Something more substantial than “monitoring” them through the ELL department (which is understaffed and overloaded).
On another point you made: it’s ridiculous to not listen to the parents when they say their child qualifies for services. We need to honor the role of the family and move forward if that is their wish. Expecting documentation is a ridiculous and arrogant policy. That part definitely needs to change.
This is terrible! Why do we need teachers involved in making policy decisions? For reasons like this.
I have to work hard to see this policy as “well meaning.” I don’t know any special education teachers who couldn’t observe and evaluate a child, and separate out learning disabilities from language barriers or cultural differences.
This policy is just one more example of a group of people who are far, far away from the inside of a classroom deciding that they are better at deciding what kids need than the teachers who work with kids.
Why not allow the people who are working with this child determine what she needs? It’s crazy.
I actually didn’t know this policy existed. Thank you for sharing it, and with such an excellent real-world example.