Running Head: CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 1
Culturally & Linguistically Diverse Students:
Lauren A. Bonanno
Molloy College
Summer 2011
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 2
Abstract
The author argues for the ideas of diversity as it pertains to public education in the U.S. and its
implications of quality, equality, and opportunity for all students – including diverse and those
with special needs. Culturally and linguistically diverse students face several unique challenges
that pose threats for their future. Fortunately, there is hope and the author explores these
possibilities in detail as it pertains to the diverse population of elementary and secondary
students today.
Key Words: Education, Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students (CDL), ,
Constructivist, Strategies, Students with Disabilities, Poverty
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 3
Introduction
Marcel Proust is quoted as saying, “The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes, but in having new eyes”. It is with this powerful concept of rediscovery by
means of shifting perspective (having new eyes) that one can understand the process of teaching
our nation’s growing diverse population of students. As a country founded on principals of
freedom by those original immigrants in flea of persecution, one would assume that diversity,
equality, and acceptance would be intrinsically woven into the basic thread of American Culture;
however, our society has, on more than one occasion, slighted, mistreated, and underrepresented
certain groups of Americans.
This unfortunate discrimination has traditionally targeted people in the following five
categories set by the federal government: African American (Black), Hispanic (Latino/a),
Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native (Native American)” (Smith and
Tyler,2010, p.74). Often referred to as the “minority”, these broad and over generalized groups
of Americans have too often been the victims of the perceived majority’s racism, prejudice, and
discrimination.
Furthermore, these injustices have long embattled minority students within our public
education system. Over the course of the past decade, the journey of legislation and reform has
made momentous progress in our nation’s fight for equal opportunities in learning for all
students.
Historical Context of Diversity in Education
Public education is one of our nations most powerful institutions. The themes of
bilingualism and multiculturalism have long played a major role in this system. In the late 19th
Century, immigrants from Southern, central, and Eastern Europe settled here, disrupting the
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 4
heterogeneous communities, systems, and schools that existed at the time. In attempts to
preserve their status quo, known as nativism, foreign language instruction was banned
throughout all schools at the time (Smith & Taylor, 2010).
The next wave of cultural movement came during the WWI era when the country came
together and fostered what is known as “Americanization”, or in other words the traditional idea
of the “melting pot”. This movement fostered the abandonment of all outside cultures and
filtered them into a unified cohesive “American Dream” (Smith & Taylor, 2010). This idea of
the assimilation of culture seemed ingenious at the time, but before it wasn’t before long that this
exclusivity led to racism, segregation, poverty, and aggression among Americans.
In union with the civil rights movement, the 1960’s brought an era of change for not only
American culture, but for society and the education system. The new social philosophy was
known as cultural pluralism. This new vision was guided by the liberties of the civil rights
movement and promote equality for minorities and acceptance of diversity within our nation.
Similarly, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, public education seemed to be following a similar
path towards equal opportunity. Legislation and movement was passed to protect the rights of
and provide an equal opportunity to learn for diverse students.
Outwardly, this movement towards fairness was making an impact in the lives of diverse
students who had previously been inappropriately diagnosed or dismissed because of a cultural
or linguistic barrier. For example, in 1970, Diana v. the State Board of Education found that
using IQ tests to identify Hispanic students as having mental retardation was discriminatory
(Smith & Taylor, p. 75). In 1971, in the case Larry P. v. Riles, the court drew attention to the
overrepresentation of African American students in classes designed for intellectually disabled
students. Additionally, in 1974, a landmark case in the US Supreme Court ruled, in Lau v.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 5
Nichols, that limited-English proficient students have a right to special assistance as part of equal
educational opportunity. These rulings set precedents that opened doors for new equal
opportunities and paved the way for our present day legislation.
Current Legislation
Today, in the pursuit of an equitable education for all students, the federal government
issued two major reforms, the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act of 2004. Despite their critics, these two documents are intended to
serve as manuals of hope and equality for our American students, specifically those
disadvantaged by diversity or disability. This tag team of powerful literature provides structure,
guidance, and expectations for high quality planning and implementation of best teaching
practices for all students, as well as protections and accommodations for specific students so that
they may be afforded an equal opportunity to succeed.
In 2001, NCLB was passed with the intention of reforming the previous Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by means of increasing student achievement and changing the
cultural dynamics of American’s schools. The reform holds educators accountable for providing
highly qualified teachers and instruction in every classroom, proper and effective use of
accommodations, modifications, and alternate assessments for students with disabilities as well
as appropriate assessment of English Language Learners (ELL).
The most innovative and revolutionary decree issued by this document is its
accountability mandate. Educators are to be held fully responsible for the learning of every child
("No Child Left," 2010). The onset of this document quickly changed the face of education from
an instruction-oriented and teacher-focused routine and into a universally designed student-
learning machine, programmed to understand children and meet their individual needs.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 6
Secondly, the 2006 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) effectively
compliments NCLB as it plays a significant role in supporting and meeting the various needs of
students who have been identified as having a disability. Specifically, the document highlights
supports and reinforcements appropriate for culturally and linguistically diverse populations
("Culturally and Linguistically," 2010).
Prevalence of CDL Students
National statistics and data that describe the country’s school-aged population and the
breakdown of these students by race can easily be misinterpreted. First, as previously
mentioned, the federal government filters the country’s “minorities” into five generalized groups:
White (Caucasian), African American (Black), Hispanic (Latino/a), Asian/Pacific Islander,
American Indian/Alaska Native (Native American)”. These categories do not accurately
represent the true diverse backgrounds of most people that supposedly fall into that group.
Secondly, the system that categorizes this diverse group of individuals also makes
significant assumptions about the consistency of characteristics among people within a particular
group. For example, in comparing two Chinese students, one child’s family has lived in the U.S.
for 150 years and the other immigrated to the U.S. with his family when he was five. In this
instance, the cultural attributes are not comparable, yet the federal government places them in the
same broad group of Asian/Pacific Islander.
Finally, one last inconsistency in national data involves the disparity between statistics in
local, state, and regional data that is used to calculate the national numbers. While these
problems with data are important, it is not a priority within the education system; rather a helpful
piece of information to remind educators to use a critical lens when assessing such information.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 7
The National Center for Educational Statistics reports that as of 2009, there was a total of
49,054 students enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Of
these students, 57% were considered White, 17% were considered Black, 20% Hispanic, 5%
Asian/Pacific Islander, and 1% of these students were considered American Indian/Alaska
Native. In certain cities, such as Nashville, Chicago, and New York City, these same minorities
account for an overwhelming majority of the student population in public schools, ranging
anywhere from 66% - 92% (Smith & Taylor, 2010).
Factually speaking, research predicts that by the year 2020, 45% of American school
children will be children of color – as previously noted, it is the white middle class students who
are slowly becoming the minority. Bennett (2011) explains, “current patterns of immigration,
particularly with the influx of people from South East Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean,
ensure that ethnic pluralism will continue to be the American way in the foreseeable future”.
With these predictions in mind, it is evident that our nation is becoming more of a cultural
mosaic, which has significant implications for educators and the approach teachers take in the
classroom.
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse
In today’s public education system, minority children are defined as culturally and
linguistically diverse (CDL). IDEA categorizes these students into one or more of the following
three groups: culturally diverse students, linguistically diverse, and any CLD student who, in
addition to being considered diverse, also has a documented disability, as determined by the
guidelines of IDEA ’04.
Linguisticaly diverse describes those students whose native language is one other than
American English. IDEA refers to this group as Limited English Language Proficient (LEP), but
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 8
more educators more commonly refer to them as English language learners (ELL or just EL).
Also, it is likely that the linguistically diverse student whose native language is not English will
be considered culturally diverse, as these two groups are not mutually exclusive.
Being a diverse student does not automatically qualify a child for special education
services, however, the learning needs of these students are unique and require special attention,
as they are generally directly linked to their diverse cultural and linguistic differences (Smith &
Taylor, 2010).
Characteristics of Diverse Students
Culturally diverse students are defined as a student who is “ not Eurocentric or
mainstream America” (Smith & Taylor, p.77), yet it seems that they are the future American
mainstream. Keen awareness and constant reflection of the specific cultural elements within the
classroom is necessary to identify and effectively manage the varying needs, challenges, and
amazingly rich opportunities associated with a culturally diverse group of students.
It is quite clear that to accurately describe an individual by one trait or characteristic is
impossible, and in some ways, children are more complex than adults. Children, particularly of
school age, are heavily influenced by culture and often find themselves “Caught between two
cultures” (Smith & Taylor, 2010), which has the potential to be a positive or negative situation
depending upon the teacher’s response and classroom strategies.
Cushner, (2010), defines culture as the human-made part of the environment… that which
determines, to a large extent, people’s thoughts ideas, patterns of interaction, and material
adaptations to the world around them. Socialization, he says, is the process by each person
experiences and makes sense of the world. Socializing agents, such as school, community,
family, sports, media, technology, among other elements, are consistently influencing one’s
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 9
cultural identity – the core basis of one’s identity comprised of ethnicity, social class, gender,
health, age, language, ability/disability, etc (Cushner, 2010).
The culmination of these biological and environmental factors greatly affects a child’s
worldview, habits, values, and perhaps their ability to “manifest their mental powers” (Bennett,
2011). How a student best absorbs new complex information, processes the material, and how
well he or she retains the knowledge is reflected in their individual learning style and
preferences. For these reasons, teachers are encouraged to differentiate materials, processes, and
strategies in the classroom as much as possible so that learning occurs for all students.
According to Lynch and Hanson (2004), children come to school with a good
understanding of the norms and expectations of their homes, which is typically developed by the
time they are five years old. The immigration process does not prepare individuals for the
numerous and often overwhelming implications of a new culture, which can include a new
language, landscape, and new definition of “normal”. (qtd. in Smith & Taylor, 2010). Concepts
and beliefs, conscious or not, affect our actions and perceptions of social interactions. For
example, competition is a common American theme, whereas collaboration is emphasized in
other cultures such as Asian and Latino. Eye contact, personal space, relationship between child
and authority figures, as well as perceptions of value, meaning, and priorities will vary
depending upon the student’s specific culture, socialization, and experiences.
Wade Boykin and his associates at Howard University studied African American children
and the effects of the socialization process on cognitive development and learning styles. His
framework was based upon the premise that African American culture encompasses three
different realms of experience: mainstream, minority, and Black cultural or Afro-cultural”
(Bennett, 2011). Bennett (2011) finds the results of his study to “reflect the bicultural nature of
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 10
the African American community and captures the ‘uniformity, diversity, complexity, and
richness of Black family life’. One can conclude from this research the level of complexity of
child’s development and the importance of cultural competence among all educators.
The second group of CLD students includes the linguistically diverse students, or those
who speak a native language other than English. Approximately 10% of the current school
population has limited proficiency in English, which is an alarming increase of 57% over the
course of the past ten years (NCELA, 2008). IDEA ’06 refers to linguistically diverse students
as “limited English proficient” or LEP, but educators commonly refer to them as English
Language Learners or ELL.
As outlined in IDEA ’04, the strengths, abilities, and variables associated with
linguistically diverse children vary considerably and must be assessed strategically and
professionally. Communication between ELLs and the teacher can create considerable confusion
that can later lead to behavioral or academic problems. One major concern for teachers of ELL
students is the teacher’s lack of understanding between language differences, disabilities, and/or
impairments. “One general guideline for determining whether a bilingual student has a language
impairment is to discover whether the impairment occurs in both English and the child’s
dominant language” (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p.79).
Knowledge of various dialects, grammar structures, and the cultural roots associated with
particular languages will help clarify any initial doubts. For example, many consonant sounds in
English do not exist in Chinese and therefore, many Chinese-speaking students are referred for
speech therapy for an articulation concern, which in reality, is unwarranted (Smith & Taylor,
2010). Understanding various language elements is key to avoiding any confusion that might
lead to unnecessary interventions or improper referrals for special education services.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 11
Additionally, many culturally diverse students in the U.S. can speak their native language
as well as English. In the process of mastering the second language, students often use a blend
of the languages when communicating verbally. Referred to as code switching, this interchange
of languages should not be cause for alarm, rather it is “often a sign that dual language
proficiency is developing” (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p. 80).
Moreover, recent language debates have focused on appropriate variations of the English
language. Particularly, many schools do not recognize Ebonics as a proper form of English;
however, many African American children come to school speaking this dialect because it is the
cultural norm at home, but at school, these children are often perceived negatively (Smith &
Taylor, 2010). It is critical for teachers to understand that “the majority of academic learning is
language based: students who struggle linguistically face exceptional disadvantages in the
classroom” (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p. 81), and thus, just as we accommodate and serve
disabilities, teachers must address the learning needs and empower linguistically diverse students
to reach their potential.
Finally, the third group identified through IDEA includes those CDL students who have
been properly identified as having one of the 13 disabilities. It is important to remember that
CDL students do not necessarily have a disability. On the contrary, despite a lack of data, some
research have shown that the majority of culturally diverse students do not have disabilities and
often have potential, but are overlooked for gifted programs. Each CDL student, however, does
have unique learning needs that are inevitably compounded by his or her personal cultural and or
language elements. The secret to success with these students is recognizing and anticipating that
their individual cultural components will likely affect the way in which the disability is
conceptualized, manifested, and managed (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p. 78).
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 12
Lastly, behavioral challenges are common with CDL students as a result of frequent
misconceptions, stereotypes, or misunderstandings on behalf of the teacher. Student behavior and
the boundaries associated with societal norms is linked to biological elements, but more strongly
influenced by his or her socialization experiences and cultural roots. Behavior is a cultural trait
that commonly varies by student, and despite their potentially gifted abilities and often, best
efforts, CDL students often find themselves at the bottom of the class, suspended, or disciplined
for reasons beyond their control at the teacher’s digression.
Cultural misunderstandings or confusion regarding expectations of the teacher and
assignments are to blame for management concerns in a diverse classroom. If the cultures of a
student’s home clashes with the culture of school, the child generally suffers negative
consequences” (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p.83). This clash is known as cultural dissonance and
can usually be avoided if proper classroom management techniques are implemented.
Similarly, stereotypes concerning various cultural groups or linguistic differences can
pose an additional hurdle for CDL students. For example, a study conducted by Neal and
colleagues (2003) found that a significant number of classroom teachers unknowingly held
misconceptions about African American boys’ – subconsciously linking their behavior to their
nonverbal movement styles, such as assuming an assertive or defiant posture, swinging one’s
arms, and walking with a swagger or stroll (qtd. in Smith & Taylor, 2010, p. 83). These unjust
generalizations are formed by prior negative experiences and/or influences of another person’s
attitudes towards an individual. It is imperative that educators disregard stereotypes and personal
bias, specifically in regards to the behavior of a particular ethnic or racial group. These
misconceptions form a rift in the classroom and reflect unwarranted suspicions and pressure on
students.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 13
These examples highlight the importance of taking the time to build an accurate and
comprehensive picture of each child’s abilities and learning needs. Completing a full assessment
of both the student’s personal, academic, social, and cultural factors as well as a personal
inventory, including potential flaws in teaching strategies, will prove more effective in solving
the problem.
Unique Challenges
The problem, Bennet (2010) argues, is rooted in the lingering affects of inequitable
socioeconomic and historical patterns of prejudice and discrimination within our society.
Despite the statistics that Similarly, Harold Cruse, an American writer and civil rights activist,
also shares this historical rationalization. Cruse once said, “America is a nation that lies to itself
about who and what it is. Even today, it is a nation of minorities ruled by a minority of one--it
thinks and acts as if it were a nation of white Anglo-Saxons and Protestants” (Gorski, 2010).
Theoretically, this unjustifiable elitist attitude that maintains a belief in the superiority of a
homogeneous and selective American culture has merit, as it does help explain the denial of our
diverse society and the origin of the fundamental injustices found in our society.
Assuming Bennett and Cruse were correct in their assumptions, the enduring
consequences of such a deep-seated elitist perception are quite obvious. Recent studies (Gordon,
Bridglall & Meroe 2004; HFRP 2005) suggest that the real problem surrounding the nation’s
achievement gap is rooted equally in the learning opportunities available to students, both in and
out of school. Progress has been made to equalize the classroom and provide an fair opportunity
for everyone to learn. Outside the classroom, however, diverse learners are less likely then their
mainstream peers, to compensate for the lack available opportunities at home and in their
communities.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 14
Unfortunately, these historical and societal injustices have led researchers to conclude
that, “culturally and linguistically diverse children (CDL) are more likely to find themselves
challenged by a multitude of factors that put them at risk for unnecessary unsatisfactory
outcomes” (Smith & Taylor, 2010, p.76). Today, we consider these CDL students to be “at risk”
– a phrase acknowledging the high probability of negative outcomes that diverse learners will
face. At no fault of their own, in order to succeed, CDL students must overcome significant
hurdles throughout their life - poor academic achievement, low socioeconomic status, and
significant health related problems - challenges that their mainstream peers are unlikely to ever
face.
Poverty is the most significant force negatively affecting CDL students today. According
to 2009 data from National Council for Educational Statistics (2010), 20% of children under the
age of 18 who live with their family are living below the poverty line – the number jumps to
44% for children under 18 who live with a single mom. Of the 20% of children living below the
poverty line, 11% are white, 35% black, 33% are Hispanic, and 14% are considered Asian. This
socioeconomic disparity of classes has proven to be the single most powerful deterrent of
academic success and literacy among diverse children.
In the unfortunate wake of socioeconomic injustice, according to Smith & Tyler (2010),
children and their families are often limited in their access to health care and have a higher
potential for homelessness. Furthermore, these struggling families are forced to live in
underprivileged neighborhoods, which have been proven to negatively shape a student’s affect
and potential for success.
As of 2009, data from the study concluded that extremely low literacy levels are directly
related to poverty and other socioeconomic disadvantages (Burns, 2000). In extremely poor
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 15
communities across the U.S., little opportunity and minimal resources are available to help foster
growth and learning for our nation’s youth.. Ironically, these poor neighborhoods are the same
areas desperate for quality education. Reality is these neighborhoods are subject to failing
schools, at the expense of the students,. These students battle with unkempt facilities and poor
building conditions, inadequate funds for school programs and technology, as well as
inexperienced or low performing teachers with high turnover rates (Boyd, Lankford, Loeb,
Rockoff, & Wyckoff, 2008).
The 1997 amendments to IDEA (P. L. 105-17) also added the requirement that states
collect data for the purpose of monitoring and reducing disproportionality (Section 674).
Congress found the need to be particularly urgent because the number of children from diverse
backgrounds in the nation’s schools was increasing steadily. According to the National Center
for Culturally Responsive Education Systems (NCCREST, 2006), African American children in
poverty are 2.3 times more likely to be identified by their teacher as having mental retardation
than their White counterpart. As of 2000, one in three children was African American, Hispanic,
Asian-American or American Indian. Children of color now comprise more than 75% of the
enrollment in many large city schools, and White students have become a minority in many
more.
Proactive & Pragmatic Strategies
Highlighted by NCCREST (2006), the ultimate challenge for educators and policymakers
is to address the real underlying problems that produce disproportional (i.e., the unequal
opportunities for many students of color because of the consequences of structural poverty and
the discriminatory treatment of students of color in the general education system) as well as the
referral, assessment, and identification process for Special Education.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 16
The RTI and Special Education referral process is designed to assess and meet the specific
needs of “students who are persistently non-responsive to more intensive and alternative
instructional or behavioral interventions over time…. These students are viewed as the most
likely candidates for special education” (Fletcher, Barnes, & Francis, 2002: Ortiz, 2002). The
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) strongly supports comprehensive
assessment and evaluation of students with learning disabilities by a multidisciplinary team for
the identification and diagnosis of students with learning disabilities. Comprehensive assessment
of individual students requires the use of multiple data sources. These sources may include
standardized tests, informal measures, observations, student self-reports, parent reports, and
progress monitoring data from response-to-intervention (RTI) approaches (NJCLD, 2005).
More culturally and linguistically diverse children continue to be served in special
education than would be expected from the percentage of culturally and linguistically diverse
students in the general school population. Although African Americans represent 16 percent of
elementary and secondary enrollments, they constitute 21 percent of total enrollments in special
education (NCCREST, 2006). There is also an emerging appreciation among policymakers that
culturally and linguistically diverse students are at increased risk for being educated in restrictive
settings and a concern that such restrictive placement may not always be justified on the basis of
student learning challenges and behavior.
Assessment Process
In recognition of these difficulties, a number of solutions and best practices have been
developed. Learning occurs through high-quality instruction; a process that stems from good
assessment. There are five main issues to consider when designing and using an RTI assessment
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 17
system for students who are linguistically and culturally diverse: The importance of multiple
measures; The multi-dimensional nature of language and reading; The importance of academic
language for school success; The role of progress monitoring in an RTI framework; The way in
which the information will be used and who it is shared with (NCCREST, 2010).
In general, these concerns can be effectivly addressed by following the systematic and
proven four-step process of RTI. The first step involves convening a full, multidisciplinary
assessment team including parents, educators, and assessors. Second, using pre-referral strategies
and interventions. If a student is having difficulties, information should be gathered to determine
whether these difficulties stem from language or cultural differences, from a lack of opportunity
to learn, or from a disability. Third, sensitivity to cultural and linguistic diversity in assessments
and assessment procedures is another factor that is receiving attention in reading and literacy
research (Figueroa & Newsome, 2006; Wilkinson, Ortiz, Robertson, & Kushner, 2006). Although
assessment instruments are now translated into Spanish, Chinese, and other languages, particular
care must be taken when assessing ELL students whose native language is not English. Finally,
identifying learning disabilities in such students requires planning, keen observation, and
sensitivity, knowledge, and skill on the part of all team members (Klingner & Harry, 2006;
Macswan & Rolstad, 2006).
IDEA outlines regulations that support appropriate service to culturally and linguistically
diverse populations. Included in this policy is rules of assessment, which prevents radical or
culturally discriminatory evaluation materials from being used, the opportunity for the evaluation
and assessment to be administered in the child’s native language, as well as entitlements for
parents and the rights to an interpreter throughout the IEP process. Additionally, IDEA ’06 sets
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 18
strict criteria for special education eligibility and the assessment process of CLD students.
Significant strides have been made in an effort to prevent, and/or determine the presence of
disproportional number of diverse students within special education (ASHA, 2010).
Determining the language to be used in testing-assessment of language dominance and
proficiency should be completed before further testing is conducted for students whose home
language is other than English (NAEE, 2005). Conducting an individualized and age-
appropriate assessment of the child and his or her home environment can produce valuable
insight. Parents are crucial to understanding the student's background and how the student
functions in the home and in the community. Parents can provide information that forms a
framework for understanding the information about the student, and the parent's perspective can
be invaluable for accurately interpreting data as well as for subsequent planning and instruction.
Along the same thought, recent research has begun to address the importance of
understanding the interactive factors, such as family, community, and the nuances of one’s
particular culture and language. It is critical to understand how a child’s socializing agents affect
the their literacy development, specifically in bilingual students (Petrovic, 2010). For example, if
a student is said to have a problem with "auditory processing," the problem should be evident not
only on tests, but also in the classroom and at home. For students with limited English
proficiency, the auditory processing problem should be evident not only in English, but also in
the student's native language (Leung, 1966).
Ideally, these assessments will be nonbiased, using appropriate methods in combination
with additional personal observations of the child’s performance using various forms of authentic
assessments from an assortment of environments (school, home, community) to produce a
multidimensional assessment. For example, student-learning journals/logs, guided reading, K-
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 19
W-L charts, group projects and presentations, and other forms of multisensory evaluations.
Specifically, graphic organizers have proven to provide teachers with the ability to determine if
the child’s misunderstanding stems from a cultural or linguistic misconception (Ciascai, 2009).
Educators and assessors also need training to ensure accurate placement decisions.
Acquiring a second language can produce complex effects on the child's language, cognitive and
social development (McLean, 2000). Too often, unqualified assessors misinterpret assessment
results and as a result, misidentify and/or misplace a child in a inappropriate learning
environment.
In order to properly assess a CDL student, an assessor must be trained to understand
cultural, linguistic and experiential differences and their impact on a child's development and test
performance. A trained and experienced assessor develops a clinical memory that serves as a
resource of information and wisdom.
A number of team interaction models, such as the Transdisciplinary Team Assessment
model, can be used to help structure and guide the team. One key to reducing inappropriate
placement in special education is to reduce inappropriate referrals for evaluation. Educators
should carefully collect and analyze information on a CLD child prior to making a referral for
special education evaluation.. If the student's learning problems are related to either of these
variables, interventions should be directed to the identified variables (Leung, 1996).
Pre-referral
A variety of pre-referral strategies are available to educators, and techniques such as
curriculum-based assessment can be used to tell if instruction has made a difference. Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires a language assessment of any child who may be limited
English proficient, including an assessment of the child's proficiency in English as well as in his
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 20
or her native language in order to distinguish language proficiency from disability needs. This
act states that an accurate assessment should include objective assessment of reading, writing,
speaking, and understanding.
Further, IDEA requires that "any materials and procedures used to assess a child with
limited English proficiency are selected and administered to ensure that they measure the extent
to which the child has a disability and needs special education rather that measuring the child's
English language skills."The job of the assessment team is to develop a comprehensive,
multidimensional assessment tailored to the child being evaluated. Such an assessment includes
both formal testing (e.g., standardized tests) and informal testing (e.g., interviews and
observations) in a variety of environments (e.g., home and community).
Any formal tests that might be used should be examined for cultural bias by a person
from the cultural group and should be administered by a person who is very knowledgeable
about the child's cultural group and speaks the child's language or dialect (McLean, 2000). If
modifications are required to make the instrument appropriate, the test should be used to provide
descriptive information only (rather than scores), since modifications may invalidate the scoring
of the test.
Monitoring Student’s Current Levels of Performance
Once the assessment is completed, the group of qualified professionals and the child's
parents must determine if the child has a disability, and move on to developing an instructional
plan for the child regardless of whether or not the child is considered disabled. Smith and Taylor
(2010) discuss the common concerns that children who do not have disabilities will be assessed
as having them because of cultural or linguistic differences, but they point out that there are also
cases in which children who do have disabilities have gone unserved because of the difficulty of
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 21
distinguishing between cultural or linguistic differences and disability. According to Leung
(1966), "Assessment must be a means to an end. As such, the ultimate quality indicator of
assessment is how directly the results aid in instructing the student."
Specific steps must be taken to ensure the progress and monitor a student’s current level
of performance upon efforts to remedy a particular skill. The following process must be
followed in sequential order and with optimal accuracy and consistency.
Process of monitoring and assessing current levels of performance (SPAM): 1. Conduct initial screening assessment; 2. Assess students regularly (Progress Monitoring) • Disconfirms risk: responsive students remain in Tier 1 • Confirms risk: unresponsive students move to Tier 2. 3. Compare student performance to an established goal 4. Use results to determine if an instructional change is needed or goals need to be increased
Teaching & Classroom Strategies
Promising research has emerged in many areas, including an integrated model of
differentiated instruction, universal design for learning (UDL), and multicultural pedagody. The
implementation of this blend lends itself to various preventative and response-based problem-
solving models in literacy, complexities of reading, non-cognitive influences, brain function,
genetics, and accountability measures (Garden and Whittaker, 2006). “The individual
components of each of the mentioned strategies have proven to be exceptionally helpful in
meeting the needs of students from diverse backgrounds in the general education curriculum”
Garden & Whittaker, 2006).
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 22
Differentiated instruction enables educators to meet the demanding standard-based
expectations set fourth by education reform, specifically NCLB 2001. UDL has radically
changed the way educators consider education and the learning process. This theory will
revolutionize and significantly improve student learning by taking into account elements such as
school and classroom’s physical environment and atmosphere, learning styles, cognitive
processing preferences, and universal access to the most accurate information, technology, and
innovation available.
Multicultural pedagogy and individual cultural identities are not topics to be entertained
and quickly dismissed; On the contrary, these concepts must be universally accepted and
embraced as core educational themes embedded deep into the credence of every teacher,
administrator, and academic institution. It is not enough to simply introduce the idea of “culture”
in a lesson or discuss accomplishments of selected minorities during black history month – the
occasional celebration and ceremonial consideration of diversity in education is inadequate and a
true disservice to our students.
In pursuit of an equal learning opportunity for all students, ironically, a teacher must take
an unequal approach to teaching. Equity, when employed as a strategy in the classroom,
maintains fairness in its approach to all students, but does not necessarily deliver an equal level
of support.
The idea of equity provides an individualized and needs-based support system that
effectively targets and prioritizes specific needs of each child. Bennett (2011) agrees and takes
the idea a step further when she says, “equity pedagogy envisions teachers who create positive
classroom climates, use culturally responsive teaching to foster student achievement, and
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 23
consider cultural styles and culturally based child socialization, as well as the conditions of
poverty or wealth, in their approach to teaching and learning". Equity, as a teaching strategy, is a
progressive and critical element in the pursuit to achieve success for every child amongst the
diverse population of our nation’s schools.
Earlier, teacher quality was discussed as a significant determent in a child’s academic
successes (Boyd, Lankford, Loeb, Rockoff, & Wyckoff, 2008). The variables that affect a
teacher’s quality include teaching experience, ability to provide clear and explicit instruction and
expectations, teaching style, attitudes and potential personal bias, which can be discovered
through personal reflection of ones cultural identify. This is of particular relevance in regards to
teaching a diverse group of students. A teacher’s choice and successful implementation of
culturally responsive instructional strategies also affects student’s performance.
Culturally competent teachers will exercise a variety of strategies that support the active
involvement of the student. Cooperative multisensory learning environments that target specific
skills and provide appropriate accommodations have proven effective in addressing the learning
needs of diverse students (Schiering, 1999). For example, target skills might include alphabet
awareness, handwriting, phonological prerequisites, test taking strategies, punctuation, and
syntax.
The instructional strategies used to teach these skills should include accommodations
tailored to meet the needs of a specific student. Appropriate “accommodations enable students to
work independently, by changing the setting, requirements, demands, and/or expectations”
(Schiering, 1999). Schiering (1999) offers a extensive list of these accommodations for diverse
learners, which can include slowing down the rate of verbal instruction, increased response time,
preferred seating, alternative directions, frequent opportunities to review, ask questions, and
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 24
clarify information, as well as the flexibility to use various relevant technologies, self-corrective
materials, and any support that will increase the child’s confidence in her or her learning as the
child establishes a pattern in their learning.
Today’s children are students of the 21st Century; facing a future of a globally networked
community that is more diverse and changing at speeds greater than any generation before.
Educators must consider the imminent realities of our evolving world and anticipate the
expectations of the multicultural future our students will face. Regardless of race, color, language,
or ability level it is the responsibility of educators to effectively meets the needs of each child so
they are equipped with the tools necessary tackle the problems of tomorrow.
Using the technology available, educators must plan diverse global learning experiences,
emphasizing a high level of international awareness, encourage and strengthen technology and
critical literacy skills, and support each child as he or she hones-in on their individual strengths.
These points, among others, are part of the training students need to progress, think critically,
and remain flexible in the face of constant change.
Culturally responsive literacy instruction requires relevant multicultural literature and
other reading materials to which the student can personally relate (including youth culture).
Students benefit from “windows, bridges, and mirrors,” windows so that they can see into other
worlds, mirrors so that they can see themselves reflected in what they read, and bridges to
connect the two.
Culturally responsive literacy programs also tap into community resources that promote
children’s literacy, such as by inviting volunteers from the community to serve as reading tutors
or even just “listeners” while students read. Inviting and involving parents and others in the
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 25
neighborhood to share their expertise or “funds of knowledge” about various topics is another
effective and culturally responsive strategy. For example, the results of one effective model
involved local elders helping in the schooling of American Indian youth. Both the students and
the elders benefit as they gain new insight from the perspective of a different culture as well as
generation. Lastly, programs should also focus on developing partnerships with parents,
sometimes including home visits, so that teachers can better understand the multiple and varied
literacy practices already in the home and so that parents can enhance home literacy experiences.
Success in learning should not be measured on a set scale, but on the capacity of each
individual child. Bennett (2011) shares in this view when she wrote, "our goal as teachers is to
foster the intellectual, social, and personal development of all students to each one’s fullest
potential”. In order to reach this goal, Bennett (2011) also argues that in today’s world, it is
imperative for all teachers to pursue cultural competence as a means of understanding our
students on a personal so that we can provide each child with an equal opportunity to learn and
reach their full potential.
Specific Strategies for ELL Students
U.S. schools are rapidly becoming more culturally and linguistically diverse. For example,
between 2000 and 2005, the population of English language learners (ELLs) increased from 3.8
million to 4.5 million, with the largest number of ELL students in urban cities across the U.S.
Data by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center (EPERC) show that “60% of the
nations’ English Language Learners are concentrated in 20 metropolitan areas… Spanish is
spoken by 75% of the ELL population with some 100 other native tongue languages constituting
the other 25%.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 26
Interestingly, “Asian Americans currently represent the most rapidly growing segment of
the population, yet the majority of ELLs speak Spanish, with Latio/a children under the age of
five comprising 22% of the entire U.S. population” (Diaz et al, 2008….. qtd. Smith & Taylor,
2010, p. 87). The data reflects the realities of our country’s increasingly diverse population and
emphasizes the pressing need to provide these students with effective ELL learning
opportunities.
The instruction these children receive, according to 2006-07 Title III data, includes dual
language and two-way programs, transitional bilingual programs (instruction in native language to
support English development), structured English immersion programs, as well as content-based
English as a Second Language support provided in English-only programs. The majority of the
states (36 of 48) participating in the survey reported providing English only as well as programs
that provide native language and instruction.
Regardless of the program, the most crucial element in effective ly teaching ELL students
is the employment of culturally competent and responsive instruction. In a true multicultural
classroom, students will participate in authentic literacy activities in a supportive learning
environment while also experiencing the explicit instruction needed to gain important skill and
strategies. This instruction should include frequent opportunities to practice reading with a
variety of rich materials in meaningful contexts.
Conclusion & Thoughts
Research tells us that this disparity poses a significant threat to our nation’s children and
their ability to compete in the diverse global market and culturally extensive future of the 21st
Century. It is therefore difficult to remain positive in the face of discouraging literacy statistics
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 27
rooted in socioeconomic causes, as it might seem like an unfathomable fatal social problem – but
there is hope! Quality education has proven to improve the outcomes of our diverse student
population. In fact, research (NYSED, 2009) has shown that literacy alone can reverse the
adverse affects of poverty and enabling students to be successful.
Frederick Douglass once said, “Once you learn to read, you will be forever free.”.
Similarly, in regards to our diverse society, James A. Banks, (2010), the director of the Center
for Multicultural Education at the University of Washington also believes that the ultimate goal
of genuine multicultural education is education for freedom. A true and complete education, he
claims, is one that promotes the autonomy, abilities, and skills necessary for our students to
cross ethnic and cultural boundaries to embrace peaceful participation or simply acceptance of
other cultures and groups (Banks, 2010).
These powerful ideas illustrate the importance of literacy and quality education for all
students, but specifically for those with a cultural disadvantage . One can argue that the aim of
education today, with the help of legislation and quality educators, is to empower all students
with the skills necessary to free themselves from injustice and adversity.
Encouraging students to “learn by doing and discovering” (Cooper & Cooper, 2007)
enables the child to make personal connections to the information, and thus retain more
knowledge. Teachers must remain flexible and offer a variety of options to students. Empowered
by the ability to choose, students are likely to develop a sense of responsibility for their own
learning. For a diverse child, the idea of choice is exhilarating (Wallace, 1974 ). Posing even
simple choices that are based on their preferences, such as beanbag or a chair, activity A or B,
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 28
draw or write, as well as the collective democratic feel of a classroom community enables them to
express themselves and ultimately thrive.
Possibly the most vital and beneficial strategy for teachers to follow is to remain curious
and actively engage oneself in the learning process – as the best teacher is also the best student.
Demonstrating one’s ability to stay current, knowledgeable, and also capable of making mistakes
is a refreshingly honest method of connecting with children. Students are comforted by the
realization that mistakes are normal as long as you learn from them; and ultimately, that life is a
learning process. Lastly, teachers that employ these progressive and constructive methods must
be organized by nature and maintain consistency in their practice as these student-centered
strategies can be easily led astray.
The goal of education today is to close this achievement gap by creating a positive,
academic, and creative environment for all children to learn from the past, actively engage in the
present, and think critically about the future. Horace Mann, one of the first advocates for public
education, once argued that school should be “a great equalizer of the conditions of men”, and in
today’s global climate, these words are extremely powerful. John Dewey’s approach to
academia was inspirational as he set out to “make each one of our schools an embryonic
community life, active with types of occupations that reflect the life of the larger society and
permeated with the spirit of art, history, and science” education (Ryan & Cooper, 2010, P. 309).
With these inspiring thoughts in mind, it is imperative that classrooms are seen as a common
ground and “community” where race, socio-economic situations, gender, and bias are all
disregarded for the sake of the students and active learning.
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 29
References
Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 241–247. Banks, J. (2010). Multicultural education: goals and dimensions. Retrieved from
http://education.washington.edu/cme/view.htm Bennett, C. (2011). Comprehensive multicultural education: theory and practice. (7thed.). Burns, M. (2000, May 29). Family literacy: tools that help parents promote reading in the
home. Brain Connection, Retrieved from www.brainconnection.compositscience.com/topics/?main=col/burns00may
Boyd, D, Lankford, H, Loeb, S, Rockoff, J, & Wyckoff, J. (2008). The narrowing gap in new
york. city teacher qualifications and its implications for student achievement in high-poverty schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4), Retrieved from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/34787 doi: 10.1002/pam
Brighton, C.M., (2003). The Effects of Middle School Teachers’ Beliefs on Classroom Practices. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 2/3, pp. 177–206. Ciascai, L. (2009). Using graphic organizers in intercultural education. Acta Didactia
Napocensia,2. Retrieved from http://dppd.ubbcluj.ro/adn/article_2_s1_3.pdf Cooper, R., & Cooper, J., (2007). Those who can, teach. (11th ed.). Boston:
Houghton Mifflin. Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students. (2010).American speech-language hearing
association. Retrieved July 19, 2011, from http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/advocacy/federal/idea/CLDStudentsBrief.pdf#search=%22Culturally%22
Cushner, K.; Muri, A. and Sundh, S (2010). Baltic Sea Regional Cross-Cultural Materials Development Project. Gotland, Sweden: University of Gotland.
Daniels, V. I. (1998). Minority students in gifted and special education programs: The case for education equity. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 41-43. Dunn, R. (2000). Learning styles: Theory, research, and practice. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal. 13, 1, 3-22. Gorski, P. (2010). Social justice quips and quotations. Retrieved from
http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/language/quotes.html Guskey, T.R. (2007). Closing the achievement gap: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s “learning
CULTURALLY & LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS 30
for mastery.” Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, 8-31. Huebner, T. A. (2010). Differentiated Learning: Meeting Students Where They Are. 67, 5, 79- 81. Ortiz, A. A., Wilkinson, C.Y., Robertson-Courtney, P., & Kushner, M I. (1991). AIM for the Best, Assessment and Intervention Model for the Bilingual Exceptional Student: A handbook for teachers and planners. Arlington, VA: Developmental Associates, Inc. Melby, E. O., (1963). The Teacher and Learning. New York, NY: Basic Book Publishers. NCES, Initials. (2010, October). Poverty status of all persons, persons in families, and related
children under age 18, by race/ethnicity: selected years, 1959 through 2009. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_027.asp
No Child Left Behind Fact Sheet on Assessment of ELL. (2010). American speech-language
hearing association. Retrieved July 19, 2011, from http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/advocacy/federal/nclb/NCLBELLAssess.pdf
Ryan, K., & Cooper, M., (2010). Those who can, teach. (12th ed.). Boston:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Wallace, J. (1974). Decision making: the role of education. American Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 56(1),