Promoting Equitable Reclassification of English Learners with Disabilities 13 Recommendation 2: Support multi-stakeholder decision-making • Promote team-based approaches: While some states require teams of educators to oversee reclassification procedures, other states have not clarified the stakeholders that should be involved in exiting. For ELs with disabilities, who have multiple learning needs, teambased approaches for reclassification are advisable (Park & Chou, 2019). Because ELs with disabilities already have an IEP that is required to include a language specialist (U.S. DOJ & ED, 2015), future EL and special education guidance from states should clarify the role of IEP teams in monitoring the ELP growth of ELs with disabilities and recommending their reclassification. One possibility identified in research is the integration of reclassification discussions and decision-making into annual IEP meetings when multiple stakeholders are present (Burho & Thompson, 2021). • Engage parents as decision-makers: Parent engagement is a protection afforded to the parents of students with disabilities, including dually identified students, through IDEA (1975). Further, parents have unique insights into the language skills, needs, and goals of their children, and should have a voice in whether their language services are discontinued (Burho & Thompson, 2021). For these reasons, state leaders may want to consider incorporating parent consultation as a criterion for exiting dually identified students. Parent consultation can come in many forms (e.g., meetings, phone calls, written feedback) and thus, states may need to consider what forms of consultation will result in meaningful parent engagement. If recommending reclassification meetings, states may wish to adapt promising practices from special education for engaging culturally and linguistically diverse parents as authentic decision-makers (e.g., EPIC Model – Explain, Provide, Inquire, and Coordinate). • Empower older ELs with disabilities: IDEA (1975) requires students with disabilities, when appropriate, to attend IEP meetings, and for their engagement in their own transition plans. Given the importance of exiting in shaping access to learning opportunities, states should consider how ELs with disabilities in secondary grades would benefit from being involved in their own reclassification. States may want to revise exit procedures to account for students’ needs, interests, and goals for the future. The perspectives of dually identified students regarding their language learning and language services can be integrated into already existing processes, such as IEP meetings or reclassification meetings. To understand the importance of empowering older students with disabilities in the everyday decisions that affect their learning, state leaders may want to consult Minnesota’s resources on a “personcentered” practices. Recommendation 3: Refine policies for alternate ELP assessments • Establish exit criteria: Across the U.S., alternate ELP assessments are in a dynamic state, with more than one assessment undergoing revisions, resulting in new versions of the assessments. Once complete, states will need to establish updated cut score criterion. As recommended above, a cut score should not be the only ELP evidence required for exiting. While revising alternate reclassification policies, states may use the opportunity to incorporate additional criteria that will provide a fuller portrait of the language skills and needs of ELs with significant cognitive disabilities.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTA0OTQ5OA==