Despite evidence of unequal learning opportunities, there is limited understanding of how English learners (ELs) with disabilities are faring academically nationwide in comparison with their EL and student with disability counterparts. In response, we conducted secondary data analyses of the 2009 to 2019 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading assessments. Compared to their peers, ELs with disabilities performed lower in both Grades 4 and 8. There is a visible improvement in this important student population’s performance on the NAEP 2015 reading assessment—a year in which disaggregated reporting for ELs with disabilities performance became mandatory. These findings have implications for improved instructional, assessment, and program supports to serve ELs with disabilities.
AlbusD. A.LiuK. K.ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S. (2019). 2016-17 publicly reported assessment results for students with disabilities and ELs with disabilities (NCEO Report 411). National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.
2.
AnnammaS. A.ConnorD. J.FerriB. A. (2016). A truncated genealogy of DisCrit. In ConnorD. J.FerriB. A.AnnammaS. A. (Eds.), DisCrit: Disability studies and critical race theory in education (pp. 1–8). Teachers College Press.
3.
ArdashevaY.TretterT. R. (2013). Contributions of individual differences and contextual variables to reading achievement of English language learners: An empirical investigation using hierarchical linear modeling. TESOL Quarterly, 47(2), 323–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.72
4.
BerendesK.VajjalaS.MeurersD.BryantD.WagnerW.ChinkinaM.TrautweinU. (2018). Reading demands in secondary school: Does the linguistic complexity of textbooks increase with grade level and the academic orientation of the school track?Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(4), 518–543. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000225
5.
BovedaM.AronsonB. A. (2019). Special education preservice teachers, intersectional diversity, and the privileging of emerging professional identities. Remedial and Special Education, 40(4), 248–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932519838621
6.
Cioè-PeñaM. (2020). Bilingualism for students with disabilities, deficit or advantage? Perspectives of Latinx mothers. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(3), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2020.1799884
7.
Cioè-PeñaM. (2021). (M)othering labeled children: Bilingualism and disability in the lives of Latinx mothers. Multilingual Matters.
8.
CoocN. (2023). National trends in special education and academic outcomes for English learners with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 57, 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669221147272
9.
CrenshawK. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989, 138–167.
10.
CrenshawK. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
11.
CubaM. J.MassaroV. R.WatersC.WatsonS.CodyA. M.StemhagenK. (2021). Beyond the label: Using a multilevel model of intersectionality to explore the educational experiences of Latino English learners. Journal of Latinos and Education, 20(1), 62–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2018.1540351
12.
CumminsJ. (2021). Translanguaging: A critical analysis of theoretical claims. In JuvonenP.KällkvistM. (Eds.), Pedagogical translanguaging: Theoretical, methodological and empirical perspectives (pp. 7–36). Multilingual Matters.
13.
DaiS.HaoT.ArdashevaY.RamazanO.DanielsonR. W.AustinB. W. (2023). PISA reading achievement: Identifying predictors and examining model generalizability for multilingual students. Reading and Writing, 36, 2763–2795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10357-4
14.
DaiS.Higheagle StrongZ. (2021). Educational applications using large-scale assessment and survey data: Opportunities and challenges. In LuhangaU.AllenG. (Eds.), Basic elements of survey research in education: Addressing the problems your advisor never told you about (pp. 747–776). Information Age.
15.
Every Student Succeeds Act Pub.L.No.114-95, 161 Stat. 1177 (2015).
16.
FangZ. (2008). Going beyond the fab five: Helping students cope with the unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate grades. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51, 476–487. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.51.6.4
17.
GiambonaF.PorcuM. (2015). Student background determinants of reading achievement in Italy. A quantile regression analysis. International Journal of Educational Development, 44, 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.07.005
18.
GuzmanG.PoseyK. G.BishawA.BensonC. (2018). Poverty rates higher, median household income lower in rural counties than in urban areas (Defining Rural at US Census Bureau). https://www.census.gov
19.
HelmanA.DennisM. S.KernL. (2022). Clues: Using generative strategies to improve the science vocabulary of secondary English learners with reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 45(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948720929005
20.
HooverJ. J.EricksonJ. (2015). Culturally responsive special education referrals of English learners in one rural county school district: Pilot project. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(4), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687051503400403
21.
HooverJ. J.EricksonJ. R.PattonJ. R.SaccoD. M.TranL. M. (2019). Examining IEPs of English learners with learning disabilities for cultural and linguistic responsiveness. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 34(1), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12183
22.
HopkinsM.ThompsonK. D.LinquantiR.HakutaK.AugustD. (2013). Fully accounting for English learner performance: A key issue in ESEA reauthorization. Educational Researcher, 42(2), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12471426
KangasS. E. N. (2014). When special education trumps ESL: An investigation of service delivery for ELLs with disabilities. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 11(4), 273–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2014.968070
25.
KangasS. E. N. (2017). A cycle of fragmentation in an inclusive age: The case of English learners with disabilities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.016
26.
KangasS. E. N. (2018a). Breaking one law to uphold another: Service provision for English learners with disabilities. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 877–910. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.431
27.
KangasS. E. N. (2018b). Why working apart doesn’t work at all: Special education and English learner teacher collaborations. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451218762469
28.
KangasS. E. N.CookM. (2020). Academic tracking of English learners with disabilities in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 57(6), 2415–2449. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220915702
29.
KangasS. E. N.CookM. (2023). Navigating the multiple policy demands of service provision for English learners with disabilities. Language Policy, 22(3), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-023-09653-8
30.
KannoY. (2021). English learners’ access to postsecondary education: Neither college nor career ready. Multilingual Matters.
31.
KiefferM. J.ThompsonK. D. (2018). Hidden progress of multilingual students on NAEP. Educational Researcher, 47(6), 391–398. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18777740
32.
KlingnerJ. K.ArtilesA. J.BarlettaL. M. (2006). English language learners who struggle with reading: Language acquisition or LD?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390020101
33.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2013). Lack of achievement or loss of opportunity? In CarterP. L.WelnerK. G. (Eds.), Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance (pp. 11–22). Oxford University Press.
34.
LesauxN. K.HarrisJ. R. (2017). An Investigation of comprehension processes among adolescent English learners with reading difficulties. Topics in Language Disorders, 37(2), 182–203. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000120
35.
LiuK.ThurlowM.BarreraM.GuvenK.ShyyanV. (2005). Graduation exam participation and performance (2000-2001) of English language learners with disabilities (ELLs with Disabilities Report 3). University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://ici.umn.edu/products/351
36.
MacSuga-GageA. S.KaplanR.BattonB.EllisK.GageN. A. (2022). Outcomes in rural and urban settings for students with disabilities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 41(2), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/87568705221087678
37.
MillerP.Votruba-DrzalE.ColeyR. L. (2019). Poverty and academic achievement across the urban to rural landscape: Associations with community resources and stressors. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2019.5.2.06
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards.
42.
Noguerón-LiuS. (2020). Expanding the knowledge base in literacy instruction and assessment: Biliteracy and translanguaging perspectives from families, communities, and classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 55, S307–S318.
43.
O’ConnorR. E.SanchezV. M.JonesB.SuchiltL.YoukhannaV.BeachK. D. (2022). Continuing CHAAOS: Vocabulary intervention for students with disabilities in eighth grade who are also English learners. Learning Disability Quarterly, 45(2), 108–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948720922818
44.
OkhremtchoukI. S.SelluG. S. (2019). Teacher readiness to work with English language learners: Arizona context. The Teacher Educator, 54(2), 125–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2018.1533058
45.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework (PISA). https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
46.
OrtizA. A.RobertsonP. M.WilkinsonC. Y.LiuY.-J.McGheeB. D.KushnerM. I. (2011). The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: Implications for response to intervention. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), 316–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2011.628608
47.
ParkS. (2019). Disentangling language from disability: Teacher implementation of Tier 1 English language development policies for ELs with suspected disabilities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 80, 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.02.004
48.
PrzymusS. D.AlvaradoM. (2019). Advancing bilingual special education: Translanguaging in content-based story retells for distinguishing language difference from disability. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 19(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.5555/2158-396X.19.1.23
49.
RamazanO.DaiS.DanielsonR. W.ArdashevaY.HaoT.AustinB. W. (2023). Students’ 2018 PISA reading self-concept: Identifying predictors and examining model generalizability for emergent bilinguals. Journal of School Psychology, 101, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2023.101254
50.
RutkowskiL.GonzalezE.JoncasM.von DavierM. (2010). International large-scale assessment data: Issues in secondary analysis and reporting. Educational Researcher, 39(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10363170
51.
SahakyanN.PooleG. (2023). “Every” student succeeds? Academic trends at the intersection of (long-term) English learner and IEP status. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 28(1), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2022.2123328
52.
SamsonJ. F.CollinsB. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers to meet the needs of English language learners: Applying research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. Center for American Progress.
53.
SaundersW. M.MarcellettiD. J. (2013). The gap that can’t go away: The Catch-22 of reclassification in monitoring the progress of English learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712461849
54.
SchisselJ. L.KangasS. E. N. (2018). Reclassification of emergent bilinguals with disabilities: The intersectionality of improbabilities. Language Policy, 17(4), 567–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-018-9476-4
55.
SetrenE. (2021). Targeted vs. general education investments: Evidence from special education and English language learners in Boston charter schools. The Journal of Human Resources, 56(4), 1073–1112. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.56.4.0219-10040R2
56.
ThomasW.CollierV. P. (2012). Dual language education for a transformed world. Dual Language Education of New Mexico—Fuente Press.
57.
ThompsonK. D. (2015). Questioning the long-term English learner label: How categorization can blind us to students’ abilities. Teachers College Record, 117(12), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681151170120
58.
ThurlowM. L.BremerC.AlbusD. (2011). 2008-09 publicly reported assessment results for students with disabilities and ELLs with disabilities (Technical Report 59). University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/173982
59.
ThurlowM. L.LiuK. K.WardJ. M.ChristensenL. L. (2013). Assessment principles and guidelines for ELLs with disabilities (Improving the validity of assessment results for English language learners with disabilities [IVARED]). University of Minnesota.
60.
ThurlowM. L.ShyyanV. V.LazarusS. S.ChristensenL. L. (2016). Providing English language development services to English learners with disabilities: Approaches to making exit decisions (NCEO Report 404). National Center on Educational Outcomes.
61.
TineM. (2017). Growing up in rural vs. urban poverty: Contextual, academic, and cognitive differences. In StaicuG. (Ed.), Poverty, inequality and policy (pp. 9–22). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68581
62.
TrainorA. A.NewmanL.GarciaE.WoodleyH. H.TraxlerR. E.DescheneD. N. (2019). Postsecondary education-focused transition planning experiences of English learners with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 42(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143418811830
63.
UmanskyI. M.ThompsonK. D.DíazG. (2017). Using an ever–English learner framework to examine disproportionality in special education. Exceptional Children, 84(1), 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917707470
64.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). Measuring America’s people, places, and Economy. http://www.census.gov/
65.
U.S. Department of Justice & U.S. Department of Education. (2015). English learner (EL) dear colleague. http://www.justice.gov
66.
U.S. Office of Special Education Programs. (2022). OSEP fast facts: Students with disabilities who are English Learners (ELs) served under IDEA part B. https://sites.ed.gov
67.
VaughnS.MartinezL. R.WilliamsK. J.MiciakJ.FallA.-M.RobertsG. (2019). Efficacy of a high school extensive reading intervention for English learners with reading difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000289
68.
WanzekJ.SwansonE.VaughnS.RobertsG.FallA.-M. (2016). English learner and non-English learner students with disabilities: Content acquisition and comprehension. Exceptional Children, 82(4), 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915619419
69.
WilkinsonC. Y.OrtizA. A.RobertsonP. M.KushnerM. I. (2006). English language learners with reading-related LD: Linking data from multiple sources to make eligibility determinations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390020201
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
