Our website is www.crosscultured.com. You can reach us by phone or y pfax at 360-380-7513 or through email. Dr. Collier’s email is catherine@crosscultured.com. Also the central email for CCDES is info@crosscultured.com. We check this address for messages everyday.

1

2

The upper figure illustrates the drop in placement rates among mainstream “white” pp g p p gstudent enrollment in 2006 after the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act of 2004 put even more pressure upon districts to tighten up their identification and assessment procedures within the public K-12 system, especially those involving at-risk, diverse and limited English proficient students with learning and behavior problems. The lower figure illustrates the contrasting placement discrepancies found among minority populations in 2006.

3

U.S. federal law requires that school districts demonstrate that they are doing everything possible to facilitate the effective participation of CLD students in their programs. This is compounded by recent research showing that districts have steadily under counted the rate at which students have left or dropped out of the instructional program altogether.

4

Students coming to our schools now have more complex language profiles. This figure illustrates data from 2006 which shows the number of LEP families where English is also used in the home. By the third generation over 95% of LEP families use English in the home in comparison to less than 8% of the first generation. This is made more challenging as more and more of the LEP students in our schools are native born and not immigrants or refugees.

5

The Nature/Nurture triangle is a foundation for a common vocabulary. The bottom tier represents all the things we share as human beings and the place where differences and disabilities become most fundamentally apparent; variations in height, color, gender are differences while variations in sensory, linguistic and cognitive processing abilities may be seen as ‘disabilities’ in some cultures. Cultural differences in what is/is not a disability are learned not inherent in humanity. The next tier Enculturation is where we learn how to interpret the world which beginsEnculturation is where we learn how to interpret the world, which begins from the moment of birth, and includes beliefs, tastes, humor, language, behavior expectations, etc. This diversity makes our mainstream standardized educational processes challenging, language and culture issues compound the range of diverse abilities we must accommodate within our schools. Another factor in this process is acculturation, tier 3. Acculturation is a natural human process, everyone experiences, it is the adaptation to a new cultural, language, interaction environment.

6

Assessment of disa bilities among LEP students is additionally extensive because you cannot use just one factor in measurement or monitoring of progress, i.e. reading or writing.

7

True. If the native language or other mode of communication of the parent is not a written language the public agency must take steps to ensurewritten language, the public agency must take steps to ensure...

• that the notice is translated orally or by other means to the parent in his or her native language or other mode of communication;

• that the parent understands the content of the notice; and• that there is written evidence that these two requirements have been met.

[§300.503(c)]

8

9

There is ample evidence that cultural, linguistic, and psychological changes occur among populations undergoing acculturation. The usefulness for education personnel of acculturation theory and the measurement of acculturation has been well-established. This is of particular concern for educators since the effects of acculturation are similar to and may be confused with some of the behaviors for which children are referred to special education. Knowledge about these characteristics and needs of the CLD population is incomplete without knowledge of the effects of acculturation upon this population and how these acculturationof the effects of acculturation upon this population and how these acculturation factors relate to exceptionality.Berry, 1980; Berry, 1994Atkinson et al., 1998

10

Each phase delineated by the graph is marked by a number of characteristic features, one of which is usually predominant. The first, or Preliminary Phase, includes the initial awareness of the future host culture, the decision to leave the home culture, preparations for the sojourn, farewell activities and ceremonies, and the effects of the trip from the home to host culture. This phase is generally marked by a rising sense of anticipation tempered by, or alternating with, regret at leaving. The second phase begins with the foreigner's arrival in the new setting and ends when the early experiences there begin to pall. Arrival is usually accompanied by a rising tide of emotions among which the foreigner is likely to careenaccompanied by a rising tide of emotions, among which the foreigner is likely to careen erratically. Initial impressions, which at first convey a sense of the monumentality of the experience, later tend to well inward at an increasingly unmanageable rate and to devolve at times into barely distinguishable blurs. Throughout this stage the foreigner can be characterized as a largely passive, but intensely alert, spectator. This Spectator Phase usually comes to an end when it becomes no longer feasible to maintain the passive stance toward the host culture and when the intensity of the new impressions subsides.

11

It means "to be in the middle“ or “to be between”. Actually estar is a Spanish word, but Nepantla is a Nahuatal

12

Hang in there!

13

14

The Instructional Intervention model also has teachers, parents, or others identifying an LEP student as having some sort of learning and behavior problem. Rather than taking this focus of concern to a traditional Child Study Team (the presence of either the Special Education Teacher or the School Psychologist is key distinction of this group), the concern is addressed to an Intervention Team (sometimes called Teacher Assistance Team, Student Assistance Team, Instructional Support Team, etc.) for evaluation of the problem. This group is composed of instructional personnel (classroom teachers, ESL/bilingual teachers, learning support specialist (Title I), instructional assistants, etc.) and in fully functioning

d i l d h h d h Th h/l i li hgroups does not include the psych or spec ed teacher. The speech/lang specialist or other specialist may be included to provide information or make suggestions about interventions, but the focus is on instructional options and the implementation of specific problem solving interventions. The Intervention Team uses specific screening and monitoring tools to guide them through the intervention and progress monitoring process. Based upon these tools, they provide guidance and direct assistance to classroom personnel working with the student for 6 to 8 weeks. Team members, including the classroom teacher, report and document the response of the student to the interventions At the conclusion of the intervention periodresponse of the student to the interventions. At the conclusion of the intervention period, they make a decision whether to formally refer the student for evaluation and staffing. With Intervention, nationally the average is 60%-80% who have their learning and behavior needs addressed with only 20%-40% being referred on to formal evaluation and staffing. With very intensive, fully implemented models, we see 80% having their needs met through intervention and only 20% going on to formal referral. Out of those referred, about 80% will be found eligible for special services and about 20% will be returned to the regular program with suggestions for instructional modifications regarding language and

15

program with suggestions for instructional modifications regarding language and acculturation.

With the emphasis on response to intervention (RTI) for learning disabilities, special education is undergoing a fundamental change in the way we do business. That change is extending to our work with students with emotional/behavior disorders (E/BD). Instead of immediately referring a student who is having difficulty meeting social expectations to special education, some schools are implementing RTI for E/BD. As with RTI for academics, struggling students receive support as soon as possible; multiple tiers of progressively intensive support are provided to students based on need; a problem-solving data-driven process is used to determinebased on need; a problem-solving, data-driven process is used to determine interventions; interventions are research-based; and students are monitored to determine progress.

16

10 November 2008

These are typical 3 Tier models for RTI

Oregon Department of Education 17

It is all in how you see yourself and your program!

18

I prefer to use a four tier model for reasons that will follow. If you have trouble seeing this as an expansion of the 3 tier model, think of lines going across the figure as indicated. I prefer to break Tier 1 up a bit to more clearly illustrate the impact of differentiation within the general education program in Tier 1`and also because some elements of RTI (usually Tier 2 alone) are becoming parts of Special services, i.e.. the top tier. Let me show you with my building blocks model.

19

Another way to look at instructional intervention and RTI problem solving is to think of the id f i i b il f ifi bl k h bl kpyramid of interventions as built up of many specific strategy blocks. Each block represents a

specific strategy or approach that may or may not work well for an individual student. As various approaches are used with each individual student, they fill in that particular tier of the pyramid. A teacher may end up using all of these strategies, but differentiate them for different student needs and issues. Her strategy set at Tier 1 will be comprehensive but geared to the larger group process and based on resiliencies of her students. She will use strength based strategies at Tier 1. As she sees that some students need more differentiation, she moves to the strategy set at Tier 2 and focuses on smaller group interventions for particular students She maystrategy set at Tier 2 and focuses on smaller group interventions for particular students. She may use many different approaches at this level and many will be successful for the majority of her students. However, some of her students will need even more individualization and some of her students will require assistance from other education personnel. At this point she will move the student into a Tier 3 mode of problem solving. At tier 3 the student is more tightly monitored and more intensity in individual intervention is used. It is at this point that the six to eight week highly intensive process of monitoring the student’s response to intervention will be implemented.implemented.During this intensive RTI Tier 3 process, it is extremely important that specific cultural and linguistic issues are addressed as well as the specific learning and behavior that are part of the teacher’s concern. Before school personnel can move to formally evaluate and consider placement in special education services, they must document that the presenting problems are not principally due to language and culture issues. They must document that the primary cause of the presenting problem is not due to the student’s English proficiency or level of culture shock. Language and culture issues will always be part of serving a CLD student but under theLanguage and culture issues will always be part of serving a CLD student but under the reauthorized IDEA of 2004, the team must document the extent to which these are part of the presenting problem and that they are not the most significant determining factor.

20

As students are served at the various tiers, the intensity of intervention and instruction increases as illustrated by the arrows going up the left side of the pyramid. As services move up the pyramid and intensity increases, the number of students served at each tier decreases. This is shown by the arrows going up the right side of the pyramid. In some school districts students will be moved upward until their needs are met and then moved back down to the lower tier to solidify this problem resolution. Not all students return entirely to Tier 1 but need to continue some form of Tier 2 differentiation their entire school careercareer.

21

The traditional Referral process involved a number of specialists in the building to whom a teacher could turn. These folks still exist within the building or district but are not usually focused directly on building instruction or monitoring curricular progress of individual students on a daily basis. For this reason, they are not the ideal group to design and manage the RTI process. This does not mean they are not helpful in the general problem solving process, but they must take a back seat to the instructional team in this process.

22

The Instructional eam is not a “child study” team per se. It is a teacher assistance team and is usually called:Teacher Assistance TeamStudent Assistance TeamInstructional Intervention TeamTeacher Assistance Child Intervention Team Or……take your pickIt must be primarily composed of instructional personnel and focused on instructional interventions for problem solving. Progress monitoring is a critical part of RTI and is best measured and maintained within the instructional process and daily delivery of instruction and intervention. Special may help with implementing or with ideas, but “ownership” is best left in instruction. There are l l ti hi d d i i i l d i thi th t talso power relationship and group dynamic issues involved in this process that must

be considered.

23

Direct = work personally with studentIndirect = work through another who works personally with studentAll instructional intervention models should focus on finding out what the student responds to for effective instructionAll instructional intervention models require team planning & coordination

24

10 November 2008

These are the results from a national study done in 2007 regarding what has been happening with ELL students during the RTI process. Done by Yvonne Bui, Rosalind Simpson, of Univ of San Fran and Jose Luis Alvarado at San Diego State UnivI am not giving you this as an example of best practice nor did the researchers!They concluded that although this showed what was being done, it was not very effective and raised more questions than it answered. As you will come to see the l h f i i id b ilength of time is way outside best practice.

Oregon Department of Education 25

10 November 2008

The grouping structure is about as expected.

Oregon Department of Education 26

10 November 2008

Unfortunately still involving specialist personnel.

Oregon Department of Education 27

And most distressing of all is the limited range of interventions used. Think a minute about how long they said they did this…40 minutes a day, four days a week, for 28 weeks…How long would it take you to figure out if your student of issue had the capacity to identify /k/ /a/ /t/

28

29

So what should be happening during RTI for our students?

30

Look at your case study on Jose. We will use this student as an example of how the RTI process works for an ELL and LEP student.

31

Look at Jose’s strengths. What would an appropriate instructional model be for him. How about his initial level of acculturation and language proficiency?

32

33

Identify his strengths and needs as if you were his classroom teacher.

34

Differentiated instruction is a way of thinking about teaching and learning. It is also a collection of strategies that h l h h b dd d h i f l i d i h l Diff i d i ihelp the teacher better address and manage the variety of learning needs in the classroom. Differentiated instruction is not a new trend. It is based on what we know about best practices in education. It puts students at the center of teaching and learning. It lets their learning needs direct the instructional planning. Differentiated instruction enhances learning for all students by engaging them in activities that better respond to their particular learning needs, strengths, and preferences. With diverse learners, these needs, strengths and preferences include accommodations and individualization for diverse culture and language backgrounds as well as differing levels and rates of acculturation. A basic premise of differentiation is that one type of instruction does not necessarily work for all students, i.e. one size does not fit all. Teachers are advised to begin where their students are, with their learning differences and their learning strengths. Instructional personnel are to build upon learners’ differences and learners’ strengths by developing instructional activities based on essential topics and concepts, significant processes and skills, and multiple ways to display learning while providing flexible approaches to content, instruction, and outcomes. It is critical to engage students through different learning styles and use varied rates of instruction as well as respond to students' readiness, instructional needs, interests, and learning preferences. An additional component in differentiation is to meet curriculum standards and IEP requirements for each learner while having each student compete against himself rather than others. Guidance to teachers in regard to differentiation also includes suggesting strategies that provide specific ways for each student to learn, develop challenging and engaging tasks for each learner, and provide opportunities for students to work in varied instructional formats. (Tomlinson, 2003)Differentiating instruction means changing the pace, level, or kind of instruction the teacher provide in response to individual learners' needs, styles, or interests. Differentiated instruction specifically responds to students' progress on the learning continuum what they already know and what they need to learn. It responds to their best ways of learning and allows them to demonstrate what they've learned in ways that capitalize on their strengths and interests. The teacher can differentiate instruction if the curriculum is district mandated, if it is directed by state standards, and even if learning is measured by statewide basic skills exams or performance assessments.

35

Here is my basic strategy for all ELL instruction, including games, content, role-plays, direct instruction, etc. PREVIEW every thing using comprehensible input strategies. EMBED all instruction in context rich activities. ATTACH to what has already been learned at home and in previous schooling. Always connect learning to prior lessons and knowledge then extend and build upon the learning like cogs in a gear mechanism to RATCHET up learning – skills in L1 strengthen L2 learning, skills in L2 strengthen L1, etc. After every lesson, LOOK BACK at what was learned and how learning occurred Review content as well as strategies used tolearned and how learning occurred. Review content as well as strategies used to learn.

36

Look at his strengths and needs again. Where will he need differentiation and what will it mean in terms of setting, strategies, and content modification?

37

The instructional team monitors and evaluates the implementation of each transition differentiation for their effectiveness with this particular ELL/LEP student. The student’s response to each differentiated strategy within the particular context and language in which it is carried out is recorded and observed patterns are noted. For example, changing the composition of the peer team in which an ELL/LEP student is working, e.g., including two bilingual students proficient in the student’s native language, may result in more consistent success in completing assignments. This would be done in a variety of subject areas and its success or failure in producingwould be done in a variety of subject areas, and its success or failure in producing differences in the student’s behavior would be noted. It could indicate that the ELL/LEP student needed additional assistance with language acquisition and academic language in English, it could indicate that the student felt more comfortable working with these peers, or it could mean something else. The positive results achieved by this beginning level problem solving would be noted on instructional documentation forms.

38

This basic instruction and differentiation process would continue for Jose as long as it is effective, i.e. he is successful in learning and behaving in school.

39

Of course, you may have your own learning and behavior problems within the problem solving process!

40

False.

41

False. LEP students may be referred for special education and/or related services at any time (no minimum time period). Denying LEP students needed special education services is illegal under federal law and not effective practice.A child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the most

significantly contributing factor for such eligibility is--• lack of scientifically based instruction in reading instruction; • lack of scientifically based instruction in math; orlack of scientifically based instruction in math; or• limited English proficiency.

42

Many schools and education professionals are just beginning to establish instructional intervention teams. It takes time and effort to build a smooth instructional intervention team, including the building of good interpersonal communication among team members. An instructional intervention team's effectiveness relies on getting to know one another, planning for everyone’s schedules, and collaborative, consistent self-reflection upon the instructional intervention team process itself. The instructional intervention team needs to establish clear expectations for each team member and monitor and document eachestablish clear expectations for each team member and monitor and document each member’s contributions to the instructional intervention team process. The team should monitor the effectiveness of the case management process and document the collaborative activities implemented with each ELL/LEP student as well as the results of these activities and interventions. The information obtained about the most effective teacher/student interactions and the variation in student response to different teacher styles will be important contributing information in planning further interventions and in obtaining a comprehensive profile of the ELL/LEP student’s learning needs.

43

The decision to move on to another need area on the instructional intervention team team's priority list may occur after two weeks or less. During the instructional intervention team process and within the average 6 to 10 week instructional intervention team period, whenever the ELL/LEP student needs further assistance in additional learning or behavior areas, the team should return to step 4 in the instructional intervention team process: Identify and intervene for level, areas, and rate of language development and acquisition, and select the next need on the priority listpriority list.After at least 6 –8 weeks, certainly no longer than 12 weeks, the instructional intervention team should reach a decision about exiting the student from the instructional intervention team process. There are two likely decisions at this point:The instructional intervention team intervention succeeds and the student exits instructional intervention team monitoring. The student may continue to receive appropriate first language development and second language acquisition assistanceappropriate first language development and second language acquisition assistance.The instructional intervention team decides to refer the student to the MDT. The instructional intervention team determines that the student’s learning and behavior needs are not due to cultural or linguistic difference; or that the student has some other learning and behavior need, in addition to learning and behavior needs related to second language acquisition, acculturation and sociocultural adaptation. Therefore, a formal referral to special education is justified and the student is exited

44

, p jfrom the instructional intervention team process.

The essence of the RTI problem solving process at this point is to determine the degree to which the student’s sociocultural background and language is having an impact upon their learning or behavior problem in the school in addition to specific academic learning and behavior issues. These may include determining if something other than the normal side effects of acculturation and second language acquisition are a factor. Because this is limited to 6 to 8 weeks, the focus of the RTI must be tight and a

i i i i f iprioritization of issues occur.

45

Identify specific performance issues for Jose that could be implemented over a short period of time in individualized or small group settings to see if he has the capacity to learn or if something is preventing his ability to respond to instruction and intervention.

46

Short focused strategies and interventions are called for in this process.

47

Here is an example of what this might look like over 6 to eight weeks of time.

48

Maybe you will resolve the problems for this learner!

49

Six to eight weeks no longer than 12 – within one grading period preferrably.

50

51

What might integrated services look like for Jose?

52

Here is an example from our actual case study.

53

54

55

56

Remember the process of problem solving is dynamic and interactive.

57

58

….and remember that it takes TIME to do all this.

59

Dr. Catherine Collier has over 35 years experience in cross-cultural, bilingual, andspecial education. She completed her Ph.D. with research into the referral ofHispanic students to special education programs. For eight years, she was aclassroom teacher, resource room teacher, and diagnostician for the Bureau ofIndian Affairs in Arizona and Alaska. She was the director of a teacher-trainingprogram for the University of Alaska for seven years, preparing Yup’ik Eskimoparaprofessionals for certification as bilingual preschool, elementary, and specialeducators For eight years Dr Collier worked with the BUENO Center foreducators. For eight years. Dr. Collier worked with the BUENO Center forMulticultural Education, Research, and Evaluation at the University of Colorado,where she created and directed the Bilingual Special Education curriculum/Trainingproject (BISECT), a nationally recognized effort. She continues to present at theannual Bilingual Special Education Institute sponsored by the BUENO Center aswell as to the Bilingual School Psychology summer program sponsored by FordhamUniversity in New York City. She was the Director of Resource and ProgramDevelopment for the American Indian Science and Engineering Society as well asbeing a Sequoyah Fellow. Dr. Collier is the author of several books and articles oncross-cultural and multilingual special education. She works extensively withschool districts on professional and program development for at-risk diverselearners. Dr. Collier provides technical assistance and process/performanceevaluations to departments of education regarding programs serving diverselearners. She is the principal developer of the screening and software program

60

learners. She is the principal developer of the screening and software program“Acculturation Quick Screen” and many assessment and intervention instrumentsand materials. Her most recent book is Cognitive Learning Strategies for DiverseLearners, a chapter on acculturation for the Multicultural Handbook for SchoolPsychologists, and three chapters in the third edition of The Bilingual SpecialEducation Interface, published by Merrill Publishing.CrossCultural Developmental Education Services