Bilingualism and learning disabilities
Bilingualism refers to the ability to communicate fluently in two languages, which can present unique challenges, particularly for children who are also learning English as a second language. Learning disabilities, which encompass a range of cognitive and developmental challenges affecting processing, can be misidentified in bilingual children due to cultural and linguistic differences. Many educators struggle to accurately assess these children, often mistaking language acquisition difficulties for learning disabilities, particularly when they are inadequately trained in recognizing the nuances of bilingualism. Historical attempts to create culturally fair testing methods have faced challenges, leading to ongoing misinterpretations of assessment results. For hearing-impaired children, sign bilingualism represents an approach that integrates sign language with spoken languages, allowing them to thrive in both deaf and hearing communities. The accurate differentiation between language differences and actual learning disabilities necessitates comprehensive assessments that consider multiple contexts and perspectives. Ultimately, understanding the intersection of bilingualism and learning disabilities is crucial for ensuring that all children receive appropriate educational support without being miscategorized.
Bilingualism and learning disabilities
- DATE: 1920s forward
- TYPE OF PSYCHOLOGY: Intelligence and intelligence testing; language; learning
- The practice of placing bilingual students (those whose second language is English) into special education classes has a controversial history. Originally, it was considered a simple act of discrimination; however, as time passed, it became clear that unintentional bias, based on cultural and linguistic misunderstandings, led to placing many bilingual students into special education programs.
Introduction
The issues of bilingualism and disability intersect in the limitations inherent in testing culturally and linguistically diverse children, many of whom are English language learners. To prevent linguistic problems from being incorrectly interpreted as learning disabilities, experts continually work to improve the diagnostic methods used in children who speak English as a second language or who are deaf or hard of hearing. Additionally, the movement toward sign bilingualism will enable children with hearing impairments to fully integrate into society.
English Language Learners
Educators have become increasingly aware of the difficulties faced by culturally and linguistically diverse children, many of whom are either recent immigrants or are raised by first-generation American parents who speak little or no English. Bilingualism has also been found to cause speech delays in some children and stuttering in others. Because many are either or still learning English when they enter a school system, their scores on placement testing can also be misinterpreted, either unintentionally or as a product of testing bias, resulting in their being inappropriately placed in special education classes. Early problems of this nature were often a result of discriminatory practices in testing, so in the 1950s, Robert Eels developed tests that he felt lacked cultural bias and were, thus, free of the traditional weaknesses associated with intelligence tests. However, some psychometricians questioned his efforts.
By the 1960s, federal courts had become involved in the testing of minority children for special education placement, and an attempt was made to determine whether cultural and linguistic differences did indeed make tests biased. In 1978, Jane R. Mercer and June F. Lewis developed the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment (SOMPA), based on the idea that diverse tests from various assessment models could negate the effect that different cultural experiences in a test taker’s background had on scoring, but it was unsuccessful in garnering support. Like Eels’s testing, SOMPA did not address linguistic differences nor did it provide for any controls for bilingualism.
The literature chronicles the main reasons that English language learners are sometimes mistakenly thought to be students with learning disabilities and, therefore, placed into special education. The most obvious culprit is inadequately trained school personnel. If testers and assessment administrators are not trained to use multiple variables, their assessment instruments are limited and, therefore, flawed. Researchers in the field also cite problems in the referral process, wherein educators discount or are unaware of the impact on learning of cultural and linguistic variables. Inconsistencies in the interpretation of assessment results are also problematic because many of the behaviors associated with the problems of English language learners are similar to those used as markers for learning disabilities. To complicate matters, assessing whether an English language learner has a true learning disability could lead to a student being kept out of special education when the child actually should be placed in the program. In short, the assessment of English language learners may not be accurate because the primary problem is the number of variables at play (for example, environmental issues, such as low-income students lacking sufficient nutrition, can adversely affect student learning).
The best method of differentiating between language differences and learning disabilities involves gathering and integrating from multiple sources (such as the student, parents, caretakers, service providers, and therapists) and multiple contexts (informal settings and formal settings), while using multiple methods (formal, informal, and alternative assessment procedures). One of the key reforms initiated by the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 and continued through the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is nondiscriminatory assessment. Federal specifications require that tests be selected and administered so as not to be racially, culturally, or sexually discriminatory. However, one 2006 study by Richard A. Figueroa and Patricia Newsome found that school psychologists typically continue to include an intelligence test, a standardized achievement test, and a test of perceptual or processing, and that bias among school psychologists continues to result in some English language learners being mistaken for children with learning disabilities. Though testing and assessments improved in the first decades of the twenty-first century, the complex issue remained.
Sign Bilingualism
The central issue regarding bilingualism and individuals with hearing impairments is that sign languages used in different countries (such as American Sign Language, Auslan, and British Sign Language) have distinct features despite their similarities. The concept of sign bilingualism, or “bimodal bilingualism,” which emerged in the 1990s, involves incorporating both the native sign language of the individual with the hearing impairment and spoken and written languages.
As researcher Miranda Pickersgill argued, this enables students who are deaf to become “bilingual,” allowing them to fully communicate with individuals who are deaf and individuals who are not. Bilingual children who have a hearing impairment are typically first taught the language of their country of origin (which would naturally be their first language), and are later taught English (as a second language), perhaps beginning at school. The problem is that these students who are deaf then become English language learners, and their problems in learning English could be misinterpreted as cognitive learning disabilities. Some services and schools that use a total communication philosophy most likely adopt sign bilingualism as a teaching approach for educating students who are deaf. A sign bilingual approach may also involve the systematic use of both British Sign Language and American Sign Language. Overall, the desired outcome of sign bilingualism is a lifelong learning outcome—that all children attain levels of competence and proficiency that will be sufficient for them in both their student and adult lives.
Bibliography
Bursztyn, Alberto M. Praeger Handbook of Special Education. Greenwood, 2007.
Figueroa, Richard A., and Patricia Newsome. “The Diagnosis of LD in English Learners: Is It Nondiscriminatory?” Journal of Learning Disabilities, vol. 39, no. 3, 2006, pp. 206–14.
Grosjean, Francois. “Sign Language and Bilingualism.” Psychology Today, www.psychologytoday.com/za/blog/life-bilingual/201103/sign-language-and-bilingualism. Accessed 15 Dec. 2024.
Kohnert, Kathryn, et al. Language Disorders in Bilingual Children and Adults. 3rd ed., Plural Publishing, Inc., 2021.
Langdon, Henriette W. Assessment and Intervention for Communication Disorders in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations. Thomson Delmar Learning, 2008.
"Learning Disabilities in English Language Learners." LD Online, www.ldonline.org/ld-topics/english-language-learners-ld/learning-disabilities-english-language-learners. Accessed 15 Dec. 2024.
Pickersgill, Miranda. “Bilingualism: Current Policy and Practice.” Issues in Deaf Education, edited by Susan Gregory, et al., Fulton, 1998.
Shenker, Rosalee. “Stuttering and the Bilingual Child.” Stuttering Foundation of America, www.stutteringhelp.org/stuttering-and-bilingual-child. Accessed 15 Dec. 2024.