Learning Disabilities within Cultural & Linguistic Context

Editor's Notes

• #2: Strategies focus but in context of the intervention model
• #4: Here is an example from Washington state in the U.S. of what this looks like. In the table are shown data comparing ELL and nonELL student identification in Special Education categories. As you can see, there is disproportionate representation in specific areas while there is over placement in the specific learning disabilities category for ELL students. Additionally, the data for specific learning disabilities is shown in summary = 5.8% SLD among nonELL but 12.9% among ELL. This is disproportionate without some very outré justification like all of the ELL students were exposed to strange radiation prior to birth or some such.
• #15: “Bricks and Mortar words” is another way to refine our understanding of words in the CALP category. Brick words are the content bearing words. In the above sentence, Scientists, global warming, glaciers, Himalayas and melting are “brick words”. Because of is a mortar word. It connects and established a relationship between the “brick words”. Mortar words include: • Connecting words: for example, however and whereas, although• Prepositions and prepositional phrases: on, in, under, behind, between, before, behind• Academic vocabulary typically found in content area objectives, testquestions and assignments: analyze, plan, compare, evaluate(Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2003)
• #17: These are some of important facts to remember with the ZPD and its implications for teachers. It is very important to be familiar with the concept and especially with the instructional strategies mentioned on the previous slide. When used correctly learners can really benefit from the concepts that Vygotsky mentions, especially the ZPD. (Bockarie, 2002)
• #22: 1) The reality is that many CLD with disabilities must learn a second language. If a child with disabilities speaks a home language other than English, she must acquire a second language to participate in the school environment. Although research does suggest that some children may acquire a second language more slowly, especially if they exhibited language difficulties in their native language (Kessler, 1984), this should not dissuade educators from assisting their students’ second language acquisition as much as possible. Therefore, the real question becomes, should the language of instruction for CLD students with disabilities be the student’s first or second language. Studies suggest that, just as for students without disabilities, a second language is best acquired from a firm and well-developed first language foundation (Perozzi, 1985; Perozzi & Sanchez, 1992). This research suggests that grammatical forms are most quickly and accurately acquired in English when they have first been taught in the student’s native language. This supports a bilingual approach to special education with CLD students. 4) Educators may mistakenly identify students undergoing a “silent period” as demonstrating a lack of ability to communicate. Remember what a child has to know to be able to say even one word in his first language. Even those children who demonstrate little expressive language in the school environment bring with them a wealth of information about their native language.
• #24: Excerpt from the book “Seven Steps for Separating Difference and Disability” , 2010, Corwin Press
• #26: Cultural expectations and understanding underlie intervention focus and selection. Age and developmental appropriateness. The psychological adaptation of the learner in the school and the family and community context.