Barriers to Success: Examining Students with Disabilities who
are LTEL Shannon Wells Ph.D. 1
Slide 2
Guidelines for Reclassification Assessment of language
proficiency on CELDT Teacher evaluation Parent opinion and
consultation Performance on a statewide assessment of basic skills
in English 2
Slide 3
Reclassification Criteria Language Proficiency Early advanced
or higher overall No lower than intermediate on each domain
Listening Speaking Reading Writing Performance on Basic Skills
Objective test of basic skills Such as CST/CMA basic or higher Page
18 specifies Statewide Assessment 3
Slide 4
Reclassification of ELs with Severe Cognitive Disabilities Same
opportunities to RFEP as those without disabilities IEP team may
determine appropriate measure of English language proficiency and
performance in basic skills EC sections 56342 and 56345[b] When
assessed with alternate, receive LOWEST OBTAINABLE SCORE (LOS)
4
Slide 5
Possible Alternate Assessments 5
Slide 6
There is no provision that allows an LEA to use alternative
criteria to classify a student as EL even upon entry if it is
deemed that the student is an English learner based on the home
language survey. The IEP team may determine if the student needs an
alternative assessment to CELDT and what that alternative will be
(this must be an IEP team decision). 5 CCR 11303 6
Slide 7
Research Questions 1.What are RFEP rates overall and by
disability? 2.Are there any differences in RFEP rates by
disability? 3.How do RFEP rates for students with disabilities
compare to students who do not have a disability? 4.What are the
differences in CELDT performance level and domain by disability?
5.Which domains do students with disabilities typically struggle
with the most? 7
Slide 8
Research Questions cont. 6.Are there any differences in
performance by domain and disability? 7.How do students with
disabilities compare to students who do not have a disability, in
each CELDT domain? 8.What does CELDT movement (overall and by
domain) look like for students with disabilities in comparison to
students who do not have a disability? 9.How do students with
disabilities who have not reclassified during the seven year study
period perform on the CELDT in relation to the CST ELA? 8
Slide 9
WHAT ARE RFEP RATES OVERALL AND BY DISABILITY? Research
Question #1 9
Slide 10
10 Frequency of Disability Codes in Sample
DisabilityCodeCountPercentCumulative Percent Mental
Retardation210903.8 Hard of Hearing220371.55.3 Deafness23030.15.4
Speech or Language Impairment24048920.425.8 Visual
Impairment25070.326.1 Emotional Disturbance260210.927 Orthopedic
Impairment270261.128 Other Health Impairment28071331 Specific
Learning Disability290159566.597.5 Deaf-Blindness3001097.5 Multiple
Disabilities31040.297.7 Autism320522.299.8 Traumatic Brain
Injury33040.2100 Total2400100 The most common disability
designation in the sample was specific learning disability,
followed by speech or language impairment.
Slide 11
Specific Learning Disability Disorder in one or more of the
basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using
language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in
the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell,
or do mathematical calculations. perceptual disabilities, brain
injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental
aphasia. Does not include a learning problem that is primarily the
result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental
retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental,
cultural, or economic disadvantage. 11
Slide 12
12 RFEP Rates by Disability Code DisabilityCodeCountRFEPRFEP
Rate (%) Mental Retardation2109066.7 Hard of Hearing22037616.2
Deafness230300.0 Speech or Language Impairment24048922646.2 Visual
Impairment2507114.3 Emotional Disturbance26021419.0 Orthopedic
Impairment270261142.3 Other Health Impairment280711622.5 Specific
Learning Disability290159520212.7 Deaf-blindness300100.0 Multiple
Disabilities3104125.0 Autism320521426.9 Traumatic Brain
Injury330400.0 Total2400487 Disabled students with speech or
language impairment had the highest reclassification rate (46.2%)
during the study period, followed by students with orthopedic
impairments (42.3%).
Slide 13
ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES IN RFEP RATES BY DISABILITY? Research
Question #2 13
Slide 14
14 n = 4* n= 52 n = 4* n = 1* n = 1595 n = 71 n = 26* n= 21* n
= 7* n = 489 n= 3 * n = 37 n = 90 Students with orthopedic
impairments and speech or language impairments were more likely to
reclassify within the study period than students with a specific
learning disability. * Caution should be taken when interpreting
results of groups with less than 30 students.
Slide 15
HOW DO RFEP RATES FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES COMPARE TO
STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE A DISABILITY? Research Question #3 15
Slide 16
16 The reclassification rate for students with disabilities
within the study period was much lower (20%) than for students with
no disabilities (55%). On average, students with disabilities took
6.7 years to reclassify relative to 5.98 years for students with no
disabilities. Table 4: RFEP Summary by Student Status Student
StatusHas DisabilityNo Disability Just Speech/Language and Ortho
Count240017055 515 RFEP4879386 237 RFEP Rate20.355.0 46.0 Typical
Years to RFEP Mean6.75.98 5.63 Std Dev0.7461.243 1.092 Min31 3
Max77 7 Median76 6
Slide 17
17 N = 1 As can be seen in the graph, few students with
disabilities were able to reclassify in three or four years, while
more than a quarter of students with no disabilities were able to
do so.
Slide 18
4. WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES IN CELDT PERFORMANCE LEVEL AND
DOMAIN BY DISABILITY? 5. WHICH DOMAINS DO STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES TYPICALLY STRUGGLE WITH THE MOST? 6. ARE THERE ANY
DIFFERENCES IN PERFORMANCE BY DOMAIN AND DISABILITY? Research
Question #4-6 18 * Caution should be taken when interpreting
results of groups with less than 30 students.
Slide 19
19 Students with visual impairments performed well on the
listening portion of the CELDT. Students with traumatic brain
injuries and autism tended to not perform as well in this
domain.
Slide 20
20
Slide 21
HOW DO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES COMPARE TO STUDENTS WHO DO
NOT HAVE A DISABILITY, IN EACH CELDT DOMAIN? Research Question #7
21
Slide 22
22 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities
scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater
frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the
CELDT overall. This is the trend for all domains, though with
slight variations in some areas.
Slide 23
23 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities
scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater
frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the
CELDT Listening portion of the assessment, though presence in the
top two categories is greater in this domain relative to overall
performance.
Slide 24
24 N No Sped = 79642 Sped = 13567 Students with disabilities
scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater
frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the
CELDT Speaking portion of the assessment, though a larger
proportion scored in the top two performance levels, relative to
the overall and listening portions.
Slide 25
25 N No Sped = 67896 Sped = 11918 Students with disabilities
scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater
frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the
CELDT Reading, and this tended to be the most challenging portion
of the assessment for them.
Slide 26
26 N No Sped = 66046 Sped = 11673 Students with disabilities
scored in the bottom three performance levels with greater
frequency than students who do not have any disabilities, on the
CELDT Writing, and this domain also appeared to be a
challenge.
Slide 27
WHAT DOES CELDT MOVEMENT (OVERALL AND BY DOMAIN) LOOK LIKE FOR
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN COMPARISON TO STUDENTS WHO DO NOT
HAVE A DISABILITY? Research Question #8 27
Slide 28
28 PL Overall F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0300674 EI 1177771555 I 34631342570 EA
376900426 A 991610 Total 9385272522511435 Total % 8.246.145.7100.0
DisabilityB 0463315 EI 111300237 I 88267116 EA 21227 A 560 Total
22510586751958 Total % 11.554.034.5100.0 PL Overall G-H 2008
Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB
096353 EI 313451162 I 10921842640 EA 2971035482 A 1342150 Total
571387546379083 Total % 6.342.751.1100.0 DisabilityB 0272304 EI
69261291 I 64353143 EA 323412 A 550 Total 1709257501845 Total %
9.250.140.7100.0 PL Overall H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement
Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 02697 EI 20185407 I
12316961599 EA 3281169469 A 1642320 Total 635330825726515 Total %
9.750.839.5100.0 DisabilityB 0186154 EI 56253230 I 95407165 EA
416012 A 670 Total 1989135611672 Total % 11.854.633.6100.0 PL
Overall I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01935 EI 20125216 I 11811781013 EA
3661152344 A 1772460 Total 681272016085009 Total %
13.654.332.1100.0 DisabilityB 0125113 EI 47194183 I 118371165 EA
4810321 A 650 Total 2197984821499 Total % 14.653.232.2100.0
Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative
movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to
students without disabilities on the CELDT Overall.
Slide 29
29 PL Listening F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0150629 EI 1466241367 I 83717332322 EA
805736981 A 6724330 Total 24603676529911435 Total %
21.532.146.3100.0 DisabilityB 0184263 EI 119229255 I 218215185 EA
975957 A 200 Total 4917077601958 Total % 25.136.138.8100.0 PL
Listening G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 045432 EI 463361402 I 27010871881 EA
573879631 A 9085930 Total 1797294043469083 Total %
19.832.447.8100.0 DisabilityB 0125217 EI 61223328 I 117212200 EA
1038950 A 91290 Total 3726787951845 Total % 20.236.743.1100.0 PL
Listening H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01895 EI 29149613 I 18410041213 EA
655965570 A 6024180 Total 1470255424916515 Total %
22.639.238.2100.0 DisabilityB 087120 EI 61131254 I 125287188 EA
15210057 A 86240 Total 4246296191672 Total % 25.437.637.0100.0 PL
Listening I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01548 EI 20110260 I 194720994 EA
572866354 A 5852710 Total 1371198216565009 Total %
27.439.633.1100.0 DisabilityB 06992 EI 38121149 I 147248224 EA
14213840 A 64270 Total 3916035051499 Total % 26.140.233.70.0
Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative
movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to
students without disabilities in the CELDT Listening domain.
Slide 30
30 PL Speaking F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 096347 EI 313341045 I 37117382282 EA
9041208979 A 11659350 Total 24714311465311435 Total %
21.637.740.7100.0 DisabilityB 095150 EI 33151264 I 133365248 EA
14812863 A 117630 Total 4318027251958 Total % 22.041.037.0100.0 PL
Speaking G-H 2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 022136 EI 28200736 I 17610952130 EA
58112061050 A 8348890 Total 1619341240529083 Total %
17.837.644.6100.0 DisabilityB 05682 EI 30135223 I 121347285 EA
14515299 A 110600 Total 4067506891845 Total % 22.040.737.3100.0 PL
Speaking H-I 2009 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 01345 EI 574384 I 1026771142 EA
5351218735 A 8667190 Total 1508270123066515 Total %
23.141.535.4100.0 DisabilityB 04455 EI 26102177 I 97267250 EA
16820785 A 123710 Total 4146915671672 Total % 24.841.333.9100.0 PL
Speaking I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0524 EI 942183 I 101471838 EA
462859864 A 4666850 Total 1038206219095009 Total %
20.741.238.1100.0 DisabilityB 03943 EI 2183135 I 80242208 EA
160200124 A 86780 Total 3476425101499 Total % 23.142.834.00.0
Students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative
movement and less positive movement from year-to-year relative to
students without disabilities in the CELDT Speaking domain.
Slide 31
31 PL Reading F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 015981866 EI 3356111709 I 31128341339
EA 139236139 A 59720 Total 8445351505311248 Total %
7.547.644.9100.0 DisabilityB 01102319 EI 907080 I 5511340 EA 773 A
210 Total 15412934421889 Total % 8.268.423.4100.0 PL Reading G-H
2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No
DisabilityB 07781292 EI 2263211245 I 36723341639 EA 168306227 A
711090 Total 832384844039083 Total % 9.242.448.5100.0 DisabilityB
0896356 EI 12267113 I 7312567 EA 8114 A 110 Total 20411005401844
Total % 11.159.729.3100.0 PL Reading H-I 2009 Negative Movement No
Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0351677 EI 144226744
I 32616051305 EA 203418270 A 711750 Total 744277529966515 Total %
11.442.646.0100.0 DisabilityB 0613403 EI 84105134 I 8013560 EA
20239 A 240 Total 1868806061672 Total % 11.152.636.2100.0 PL
Reading I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 0269342 EI 134286376 I 4441675739 EA
3581230233 A 1486260 Total 1084408616906860 Total %
15.859.624.6100.0 DisabilityB 0501267 EI 120148156 I 14021763 EA
415013 A 7220 Total 3089384991745 Total % 17.753.828.60.0 Students
with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative movement and
less positive movement from year-to-year relative to students
without disabilities in the CELDT Reading domain. The gap between
groups seems to widen further with this domain in particular.
Slide 32
32 PL Writing F-G 2007 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 06451126 EI 1418481952 I 35828752017
EA 280459267 A 1491310 Total 9284958536211248 Total %
8.344.147.7100.0 DisabilityB 0813321 EI 72209194 I 4515561 EA 664 A
120 Total 12411855801889 Total % 6.662.730.7100.0 PL Writing G-H
2008 Negative Movement No Movement Positive MovementTotal No
DisabilityB 0255617 EI 864961353 I 25422811919 EA 419584446 A
1771960 Total 936381243359083 Total % 10.342.047.7100.0 DisabilityB
0554371 EI 67203230 I 6421978 EA 221514 A 340 Total 1569956931844
Total % 8.554.037.6100.0 PL Writing H-I 2009 Negative Movement No
Movement Positive MovementTotal No DisabilityB 097226 EI 50371623 I
29117011316 EA 382631333 A 2452490 Total 968304924986515 Total %
14.946.838.3100.0 DisabilityB 0381238 EI 63270175 I 10426197 EA
35253 A 1370 Total 2159445131672 Total % 12.956.530.7100.0 PL
Writing I-J 2010 Negative Movement No Movement Positive
MovementTotal No DisabilityB 045120 EI 36207555 I 16110531079 EA
279714283 A 2402370 Total 716225620375009 Total % 14.345.040.7100.0
DisabilityB 0237191 EI 57209272 I 65252111 EA 344810 A 1120 Total
1677485841499 Total % 11.149.939.00.0 Students with disabilities
tended to demonstrate less positive movement from year-to-year
relative to students without disabilities in the CELDT Writing
domain. In 2007 and 2008, students with disabilities tended to
demonstrate less negative movement, but this may be due to floor
effects.
Slide 33
HOW DO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES WHO HAVE NOT RECLASSIFIED
DURING THE SEVEN YEAR STUDY PERIOD PERFORM ON THE CELDT IN RELATION
TO THE CST ELA? Research Question #9 33
Slide 34
34 CSTPLELA2007 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallFB
69.226.04.50.30.0100.0 EI 49.832.816.70.70.0100.0 I
32.540.020.05.81.7100.0 EA 10.030.020.0 100.0 A 0.0 100.00.0100.0
60% of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced on the
CELDT in 2007 scored Basic or Below on the CST ELA that year.
Slide 35
35 CSTPLELA2008 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallGB
70.517.14.83.44.1100.0 EI 57.135.17.10.00.6100.0 I
31.337.528.62.70.0100.0 EA 25.0 50.00.0 100.0 A 0.0 50.0 100.0 50%
of students with disabilities who scored Early Advanced or Advanced
on the CELDT in 2008 scored Basic or Below on the CST ELA that
year.
Slide 36
36 CSTPLELA2009 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallHB
40.239.212.74.83.2100.0 EI 23.531.625.414.35.1100.0 I
13.120.429.122.514.9100.0 EA 6.321.934.421.915.6100.0 A
0.014.328.642.914.3100.0 63% of students with disabilities who
scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2009 scored Basic or Below on
the CST that year. 43% of students with disabilities who scored
Advanced on the CELDT in 2009 scored Basic or Below on the CST that
year.
Slide 37
37 CSTPLELA2010 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallIB
8.152.524.26.19.1100.0 EI 4.548.633.611.41.8100.0 I
4.519.637.023.515.4100.0 EA 5.23.434.536.220.7100.0 A
0.012.550.025.012.5100.0 43% of students with disabilities who
scored Early Advanced on the CELDT in 2010 scored Basic or Below on
the CST that year. 63% of students with disabilities who scored
Advanced on the CELDT in 2010 scored Basic or Below on the CST that
year.
Slide 38
38 CSTPLELA2011 FBBBBBPATotal PLOVerallJB
42.229.714.110.93.1100.0 EI 28.138.424.16.92.5100.0 I
11.126.334.214.913.6100.0 EA 2.112.836.220.228.7100.0 A 0.0
55.622.2 100.0 51% of students with disabilities who scored Early
Advanced on the CELDT in 2011 scored Basic or Below on the CST that
year. 56% of students with disabilities who scored Advanced on the
CELDT in 2011 scored Basic or below on the CST that year.
Slide 39
Summary of Findings Among students with disabilities the RFEP
rate was the highest for the students with speech or language
impairments (46.2%) followed closely by students with orthopedic
impairment (42.3%). When looking at the percent of students who
reclassify within 7 years it was found that students with
orthopedic impairments (42.3%) and speech or language impairments
(46.2%) were more likely to reclassify than students with a
specific learning disability (12.7%). If you compare RFEP rates for
students with disabilities with students who do not have a
disability it was found that the reclassification rate for students
with disabilities was much lower (20%) than for student with no
disabilities (55%). On average, students with disabilities took 6.7
years to reclassify relative to 5.98 years for students with no
disabilities. For overall CELDT scores it was found that students
with visual impairments and orthopedic impairments tended to earn
the highest performance. Across all domains, students with visual
impairment tended to earn the highest performance. The Reading and
Writing domains tended to be the most difficult domains for all
students with disabilities. 39
Slide 40
Summary of Findings cont. When comparing students with
disabilities to those without it was found that students with
disabilities scored in the bottom three performance levels with
greater frequency than students who do not have a disability, on
the CEDLT overall as well as within each domain. It was found that
the Reading domain was the most difficult for students with
disabilities. When comparing students with disabilities CELDT
movement to those students without disabilities, it was found that
students with disabilities tended to demonstrate more negative
movement and less positive movement from year-to- year relative to
students without disabilities. This trend was seen throughout the
domains, but the gap between the groups seemed to widen within the
Reading domain. When looking at students with disabilities CST ELA
and CELDT scores it was found that in 2011 students who scored
Early Advanced (51%) or Advanced (56%) on CELDT scored Basic or
below on the CST ELA. 40