School Finance Reform--How it Affects the Vulnerable

by Kathleen Kosobud, PhD, ABD
Disclaimer: This is a personal reflection and may not represent the position of LDA of Michigan as an organization.

I'm an advocate for children with special educational needs. I represent children in foster care, probably one of the least empowered groups attending public schools. Current Michigan school code already allows districts and charters to discriminate against children in special education by limiting their choices. Their "home" district must agree to pay for them to attend a school in a different Intermediate School District (essentially a different county or LEA) even if the receiving school is part of a "school of choice" district. The rationale is that it costs more to educate a child with special educational needs. No such restriction exists for children who are considered "gifted" or "athletes" or "talented", although their needs may also cost a district more. This restriction is "enhanced" in the 302 page long Oxford proposal for Michigan School Finance Reform--districts will have the right to accept or refuse students who apply to attend their schools.

I am sick at heart when I think about the children whom I represent. Many have been removed from their homes after severe abuse or neglect. Already hurting, they deserve the very best of care, and the most particularly attentive of educations to help them to recover from their physical and psychological wounds. When a district is given the right of refusal to serve these children, we condemn them to bleak futures. While other, more privileged children may cross boundaries, selling their assets to the highest bidder, these children are left to attend whatever public schools their district assigns them to. For them, there is no choice.

I think of two children I am representing right now: one a traumatized first grader who has already been in five different foster homes, and two different school districts in his short career as a consumer of public education, and the other a teenager approaching his exit from foster care in an institutional setting because no home could be found for him. This older student, discouraged and angry at the lack of concern he has experienced in a bricks and mortar school, is currently taking online classes, isolated from the social milieu of other teens. His special educational needs, learning disabilities in language and literacy, are not being met in this virtual environment, and the virtual charter is not prepared to devote the resources to customize his education in a way that will enable him to access the courses. I despair for both of them. For the first grader, I see a future of rejection by schools unwilling to meet his his greater needs for stability and special care because his coping mechanisms are so fragile. For the older student, I see a loss of any interest in learning, and decreasing hope for any future outside of the institutional setting. He is the face of the "school to prison pipeline", even though the caring adults around him recognize that he is not intrinsically a bad kid.

For these two children, the proposal for "choice" is a sick, sad joke.

SAD NEWS FROM LDA OF MICHIGAN

October 21, 2012

Good Evening All,

It is with great sadness and a heavy heart that I share with you the passing of Flo Curtis, our fearless leader of the LDA of Michigan.

She died peacefully this afternoon, Sunday, October 21, 2012, surrounded by her family and her loving husband, Harley.

Flo worked tirelessly for the LDA. She ran our organization like a superhero! She was working on the conference up until the day she entered the hospital. We all loved and respected Flo. Her spunk and passion will continue to live on in our office, our organization and our hearts.

We plan to honor Flo at this year's conference, so please share a story, a picture, or a special memory that you have about Flo. You can send them to me at coachmecarey@gmail.com .  I'm certain I have not included everyone on this email. If you know of someone who should be informed, please send along.

As soon as I hear of the details of the service, I will let you know.
Thank you and God Bless Flo and her family,
Regina
-- 
Regina Carey, M.Ed.
President-elect, LDA of Michigan

IEP Michigan Pre-Labor Day Rally in Lansing

Today, disability advocates, parents of children with disabilities, students with disabilities and legislators are gathering on the steps and lawn of the Capitol to express concerns about the conditions under which special education programs are operating.  The organizer, Marcie Lipsitt, is a frequent letter-writer to the Detroit News and Detroit Free Press, and an advocate in Southeastern Michigan.  Marcie invited LDA of Michigan to participate.

Source:  Michigan Alliance for Special Education

Often, disability organizations are founded to represent the needs of a particular segment of the disability community, or coalesce around a particular issue that affects a subset of the disability population.  Class size, service availability, teacher qualifications, and supports are issues where we seem to hold common ground.  The devil is mostly in the details.

LDA of Michigan's contribution to the Rally is this statement, to be read by Regina Carey, our current conference chair and president-elect (her term starts in 2014):

Statement of LDA of Michigan for the IEP Michigan Rally

August 29, 2012

The Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan is a 501 3c Non-Profit organization. Most of our work is done by a dedicated group of volunteers. LDA of Michigan is the statewide affiliate of the Learning Disabilities Associationof America.

The mission of LDA of Michigan is to enhance the quality of life for all individuals with learning disabilities and their families through advocacy, education, training and support of research.

If you think that it's harder to be identified with a Specific Learning Disability under IDEA in Michigan, you're right.  Today, one out of three children with IEPs have Specific Learning Disabilities in Michigan.  In 2001, there were over 95 thousand students identified with Specific Learning Disabilities. Ten years later, in 2011, there were only 73 thousand. Since 2001, there has been a decrease of 22 thousand in the number of students with Learning Disabilities. This isn’t because of an educational “miracle” or a massive drop in population-- it’s because the rules changed. The 2004 reauthorization of the IDEA expressly prohibited all states from requiring the “discrepancy model” to identify students with learning disabilities. So, in 2006, the Michigan Rules were made much more stringent. The official numbers are down but we know that a large number of children are simply falling through the cracks.

Source: Annual Special Education Child Count, 2010--MDE

Most students with learning disabilities are in general education classes of 30 or more students, being taught by one general education teacher. With 21^st Century technology, all children with learning disabilities should be able to use accessible instructional materials—with or without IEPs.  A reading barrier should not determine a child’s achievement in social studies, science, math, or the arts. But new innovations in technology will not solve the problem of large class sizes, or completely accommodate children with disabilities. Teachers in the general education classroom can’t do this alone—their districts need the resources to support smaller class sizes, co-teaching, team-teaching and paraprofessional assistants so that all children can be successful in the classroom. 

The "Michigan Merit Curriculum" requirements place a new burden on teens with disabilities. Although the legislature provides for a Personal Curriculum for students with disabilities, implementation has been challenging. Some districts delay Personal Curriculum accommodations until students have failed many courses, and are nearly 18 years old; some use the Personal Curriculum to reduce requirements to unacceptably low levels; and some refuse to implement a Personal Curriculum altogether. The Personal Curriculum is intended to provide some customization of the requirements for graduation. Withholding or delaying the implementation of a Personal Curriculum is yet another barrier to students with disabilities, many of whom have great potential for success.

We believe that children with learning disabilities are capable and competent. Success starts in the classroom, and continues in the workplace and the community. We cannot give up on our children. Education can make a difference. We want our children to achieve maximum independence—through self-determination, with high expectations, and by working on the skills that lead to self-sufficiency. 

What we know is that the number of people requesting help and direction has increased. What we do is provide a helping hand, a listening ear, and a starting point for families navigating the maze of special education. What we want is for individuals with learning disabilities to be recognized for their gifts, talents, and contributions.

Please join us for our conference on November 11^th and 12^th at the Kellogg Conference Center on the campus of Michigan State University.

Source:  LDA of Michigan, 2012

Finally, if you are able, please consider a membership or a donation of your time, talents or treasures to our organization.

We probably have many more concerns than will fit into a 5-10 minute sound-byte, but these concerns--SLD identification, conditions in the classroom, and preparation for life beyond high school--are the essentials.  Unless education addresses the needs of struggling learners, through individualization and personalization, our children will face less access to bright futures as adults.

COMMENTS ON THE DSM-5

Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan Public Comment

June 15, 2012

The Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan is an all volunteer 501(c)3 non- profit organization representing families and educators of persons with learning disabilities. Our offices are located at 200 Museum Drive, Ste. 101, Lansing, Michigan 48933.

Our mission is to enhance the quality of life for all individuals with learning disabilities and their families through advocacy, education, training, service and support of research. Our organization supports initiatives that encompass prevention, early identification, and access to the necessary supports to allow full participation of our constituents as citizens.

Our stakeholders represent a diversity of perspectives regarding the particulars for educating students with learning disabilities, but are unified by the conviction that, despite the range of learning problems subsumed under this category, these problems share the common trait of appearing to be breakdowns in the neurological processes of executive functioning which affect listening, oral expression, reading decoding, reading comprehension, written expression, mathematical calculation or mathematical reasoning resulting in evidence of unexpected underachievement in one or more of these areas.

Picture source: http://www.rainbowreaders.com/

The Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan welcomes this opportunity to publicly comment on the proposed revisions related to Specific Learning Disabilities in the DSM-5.  Although many of our concerns are related to the early identification of these breakdowns in the context of early childhood academic settings, we also recognize that these breakdowns extend into adulthood and affect life activities beyond educational settings.  Therefore, we recognize that a DSM-5 diagnostic code reflects broader parameters than those observed solely in school settings.  Further, we recognize that although these breakdowns exist, the function of diagnosis is to identify these breakdowns while offering beneficial insights about the external and environmental barriers that exacerbate the expression of these neurological breakdowns. Therefore, if medical diagnosis is to be useful, some attention needs to be paid to the educational and functional implications of the existence of these neurological breakdowns. In our society, where a high level of literacy is considered essential for individual success, it is important that we understand and help to improve access for those people identified with “dyslexia”. Access includes early intervention, as well as the provision of alternative forms of access, especially to text, for those identified with “dyslexia”.

In the United States, much of the research on Specific Learning Disabilities has focused on “dyslexia”, which is a specific learning disability that encompasses language processing, multiple aspects of the processes involved in reading, and also may include processes involved in spelling and written expression. Of the roughly one in seven people identified with Specific Learning Disabilities, 70 percent are thought to warrant a diagnosis of “dyslexia” (Lyon, 2001; Lyon, Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 2003; International Dyslexia Association, 2012).  This means that in Michigan, of the over 73 thousand children identified with Specific Learning Disabilities, one can estimate that more than 51 thousand are dyslexic (Michigan Compliance Information System for 2010-2011).  Or, in other words, roughly one out of every four children with special educational needs (n=217 thousand) in Michigan may be considered “dyslexic”.  In the education context, accessible text providers prefer a quasi-medical diagnosis of “dyslexia” as opposed to the more generic term, “specific learning disability” when authorizing the use of their services. Most notably, Bookshare, the largest provider of accessible textbooks, recognizes the term “dyslexia” as a qualifier for its’ services.

A large community of researchers in the neurosciences (c.f.: Bennett and Sally Shawitz, G. Reid Lyon, Jack Fletcher and others) have focused their attention on the causes, traits, interventions, and outcomes for persons with “dyslexia” and attach special meaning to the term as a separate set of conditions from other forms of reading failure because of its’ prevalence and intractability (see for example the comments of Michael Ryan, Ph.D. at http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/, and the statement of the International Dyslexia Association, http://www.interdys.org/).  Internationally, too, the term “developmental dyslexia”, as found in the ICD-10 (WHO, updated 2011), holds special significance.  In order to compare incidence of various disorders and diseases internationally, common terminology with common meaning is required.  To remove the term “dyslexia” from the DSM-5 is to put the U.S. data-reporting out of step with the rest of the world.  Increasing global interdependence requires that we be able to communicate using common terminology in order to share scientific findings, and to work toward overall improvement in the education and lives of all humankind.  

In summary, the use of the term “dyslexia” holds significance as a diagnostic term, in research on its’ causes, characteristics, interventions and outcomes, and as a shared descriptor in the international community.  Therefore, the Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan supports the continued use of the term “dyslexia” in the DSM-5.

Submitted on behalf of the Board of Directors of LDA of Michigan,

Florence Curtis, Acting Executive Director

Board of Directors

President—Byron Vorce, Bellevue

President Elect—Regina Carey, Okemos

Secretary—Betsy Schrage, Grosse Pointe

Treasurer—John Carter, Ann Arbor

Past President—Lori Parks, Plymouth

Newsletter Editor—Kathleen Kosobud, Ann Arbor

Healthy Child Director—Amy Winans, Lansing

Dawn Bentley, East Lansing

Linda Clark, Novi

Renee Craig, East Lansing

Edna Felmlee, Williamston

Glenda Hammond, Lansing

Delia Laing, Ann Arbor

Judith New, Ann Arbor

Annette Puleo, East Lansing

Rosanne Renauer, Lansing

Mary Rivera, Lansing

Kristen Toadvine, Mulliken

Kendra Tobes, West Bloomfield

Annette Lalley Trautz, Lowell

Vicki White, Lansing

URGENT ACTION ALERT on Highly Qualified Teachers

ACTION ALERT
"Highly Qualified Teacher" Provision
Call your Senators TODAY!

Background:

In the dead of night last December Congress passed a bill to fund the federal government for Fiscal Year 2013.  They attached a provision to the bill that allows people who enter an alternate route teacher preparation program to be considered "highly qualified" on the first day they are enrolled in the program.   In other words, your child’s teacher could be called highly qualified while he or she is, at the same time,learning to become a teacher!  Many of these "teachers" are placed as special education teachers and may be teaching your child.

This provision is set to expire at the end of Fiscal Year 2012, or when Congress finally finishes legislation to fund programs for Fiscal Year 2013. Congress is working on funding for Fiscal Year 2013 now!

On Tuesday June 12 the Senate can change this bad policy!   The Labor-Health and Human Services-Education Appropriations Subcommittee will vote on a bill to fund programs for Fiscal Year 2013 and can let this provision expire or vote to continue it.

Let the Senate know our neediest students deserve better!  LDA is part of a coalition of  87 disability, civil rights, parent, principal, rural and education advocacy groups who have banded together to get rid of this provision.  If Congress votes to continue this bad policy, we at least want the federal government to start collecting information from school, districts and states that will let parents know if their child's teacher is credentialed and fully prepared to support their child in the classroom.

Take Action Now:

Call the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee: The list with phone numbers can be found at the bottom of this message.  It is important that you make these calls BEFORE Tuesday June 12. 

Communicate this Message:

§         Identify yourself as a member of the Learning Disabilities Association of America and give your role (parent/teacher/person with a learning disability, etc.).

Then say:

§  "On Tuesday, June 12 at 2 PM, the Senate appropriations subcommittee that funds education is scheduled to consider an important issue to me."  

§  "I ask that your office oppose any effort that will extend a bad federal policy to allow teachers in training to be called “highly qualified.” This is not fair to parents or to students with learning disabilities!"

§  "If the provision must be extended, I request the federal government start collecting information from schools, districts and states that will let parents know if their child’s teacher is credentialed and fully prepared to support their child in the classroom.:" 

§ " Can I count on you to stand up for children with learning disabilities?"

Thanks!!

Each entry, below lists subcommittee members by Senator, State, Education Legislative Aide, and Phone #:

Daniel K. Inouye
HI
D
Anthony Ching
(202) 224-3934

Patrick J. Leahy
VT
D
Kathryn Toomajian
(202) 224-4242

Tom Harkin
IA
D
(202) 224-3254

Barbara A. Mikulski
MD
D
Mario Cardona
(202) 224-4654

Herb Kohl
WI
D
Jessah Foulk
(202) 224-5653

Patty Murray
WA
D
Sarah Bolton
(202) 224-2621

Dianne Feinstein
CA
D
Ashley Eden
(202) 224-3841

Richard J. Durbin
IL
D
Joanna Serra
(202) 224-2152

Tim Johnson
SD
D
Carrie Johnson
(202) 224-5842

Mary L. Landrieu
LA
D
Tasha Hensley
(202) 224-5824

Jack Reed
RI
D
Moira Lenehan
(202) 224-4642

Frank R. Lautenberg
NJ
D
Kyle Brown
(202) 224-3224

Ben Nelson
NE
D
Charlie Ellsworth
(202) 224-5274

Mark Pryor
AR
D
Sarah Holland
(202) 224-2353

Jon Tester
MT
D
Alpha Lillstrom
(202) 224-2644

Sherrod Brown
OH
D
Marjorie Glick
(202) 224-2315

Thad Cochran
MS
R
Will Todd
(202) 224-5054

Mitch McConnell
KY
R
Sarah Arbes
(202) 224-2541

Richard C. Shelby
AL
R
Andrew Newton
(202) 224-5744

Kay Bailey Hutchison
TX
R
Dana Barbieri
(202) 224-5922

Lamar Alexander
TN
R
Peter Oppenheim
(202) 224-4944

Susan Collins
ME
R
Kenneth Altman
(202) 224-2523

Lisa Murkowski
AK
R
Karen McCarthy
(202) 224-6665

Lindsey Graham
SC
R
Courtney Titus
(202) 224-5972

Mark Kirk
IL
R
Jeannette Windon
(202) 224-2854

Dan Coats
IN
R
Casey Murphy
(202) 224-5623

Roy Blunt
MO
R
Kristina Weger
(202) 224-5721

Jerry Moran
KS
R
Brian Perkins
(202) 224-6521

John Hoeven
ND
R
Emily Tryon
(202) 224-2551

Ron Johnson
WI
R
Elizabeth Schwartz
(202) 224-5323 

SENT BY:
Sharon Tanner
Director of Membership & Development
LDA National Headquarters
4156 Library Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15234
412-341-1515 x209
stanner@ldaamerica.org

LDA...Empowering Individuals and Creating Opportunities

Link to the letter from the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities

What are we talking about these days?

by Kathleen Kosobud, past-president, LDA of Michigan

I'm getting ready to share social media ideas with the Learning Disabilities Association state affiliate presidents and executive directors, so I thought I would try out a few new tools.  Here's a "word cloud", a visual analysis of word frequency in posts on this blog from Wordle:

Word Cloud from Wordle

You can change the font, colors and arrangement of the words.  Pretty cool, and free.

True Participation

You may be interested in reading John W. Lloyd's Beyond Access: Improving Success where he says:

On the educational front, one of the factors to which many disability rights organizations regularly point is the poor outcomes for students with disabilities after graduation from high school. The litany of unfavorable comparisons between students with disabilities and their not-disabled peers is familiar to many: higher unemployment, less frequent enrollment in post-secondary schools, more frequent contact with and incarceration by law-enforcement officials, etc. These are clearly outcomes that we would not only like to see improved, but also they are improvements that would auger well for our society (e.g., emphasizing the abilities of individuals) and economy (e.g., lower unemployment).

He goes on to advocate for special education to address success, not mere access to participation in the adult world. I agree that this is the critical issue: Just building the bridges doesn't mean that people will know how to use them. In my own reflections on my past encounters with Michigan Rehabilitation Services, this has been a difficult concept to communicate. I find it puzzling that we (K-12 special educators) often offer accommodations to students with Learning Disabilities without planning instruction on how to use these accommodations to successfully level the playing field.

Picture of Alpha Smart Dana on Renaissance Learning Website

I remember when students with writing problems were offered AlphaSmarts to compensate for poor handwriting, poor spelling, note-taking, a lack of word-processing equipment at home, slow writing production, a lack of written composition skills and so on. Our local county chapter of the LDA held a meeting about tools and accommodations, and one family member told me that her grandchild had been given one of those, but no one at the school had any idea how to download and print what she had written on it. What a total waste of resources!! The student got very little benefit out of the AlphaSmart, even though she'd put the time in on her assignments. But, the staff at her school didn't have the training or information to make this a useful and powerful tool for her.

Around the same time, I had borrowed an AlphaSmart from the county Assistive Technology Consultant and, after playing with it for an hour or so, figured out how to upload files onto my computer, and how to print directly from my dot-matrix printer. I also learned how to spell-check, change fonts and line spacing, and cut and paste text. Here I was, thinking how useful this tool was, while at the same time, a whole school had convinced parents that the AlphaSmart was an anachronism, and chose not to use it (or anything else) that might address the problems of access and successful accommodation.

In the interim, the AT Consultant continued to recommend the AlphaSmart to other students at the same school, resulting in a great deal of acrimony between her and the staff at the school, without any resolution. What started as a small problem of poor communication blossomed into a full-blown bickering match between the school staff, parents, and the county consultant. No gains were made for the kids for whom this could have been most helpful. Most of the students waited until they were in high school to access computers in their computer lab, purchase a low-end computer for home use. The most fortunate of these students were given used laptops that their parents bought for them. This, of course, violates one of the primary tenets of FAPE--that the supports and services provided in a public school would be FREE and appropriate. If, in order to have full-time access to the necessary supports and services, a student has to purchase a laptop, or a calculator, or any other tool: how is that "free"? If special education under IDEA ends upon graduation from high school, how have we fulfilled our obligation to the student to maximize access and participation, if we never show students how to independently use the tools and accommodations we recommend? It's a little like someone throwing a kid into a swimming pool and telling them, "Okay, I provided the water, it's your job to learn how to swim in it!"

Technology seems to progress at the speed of light. Now, an AlphaSmart is truly an anachronism. Tablets such as the iPad2 and the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, with touchscreens, and lightweight, with more bells and whistles than anyone could imagine, make it so much easier for us to get intuitive technology into the hands of young people so that their playing fields are more level now, than ever before.  But, if we only hand them the tools, without showing them what they can do, we might as well just hand them a rock and a stick.

World Languages and Students with IEPs

By Kathleen Kosobud, past president, LDA of Michigan

Many education leaders and policy-makers agree that competency in at least one World Language other than English is important if U.S. citizens are going to compete in a world-wide economy, and promote global understanding.  Multiple language policy has been a hot topic for a variety of reasons. Should we provide bilingual instruction to students who are immigrants? Should we teach World Languages to preschoolers and elementary students, at a time when their brains may be more receptive?  What languages should we be teaching, and why?  Should we shift our emphasis away from French and German in favor of Arabic and Chinese?  Can students with disabilities be expected to learn foreign languages? Are students with disabilities less disadvantaged because all students enter on an equal footing as beginners?

The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) has been an active partner in the development of curriculum for World Language instruction, and has been a strong advocate for increasing participation of all students in learning World Languages. In 1995, as part of a move to develop national standards for schools, ACTFL identified five aspects of World Language that are essential to a balanced World Language curriculum: “The Five Cs”—Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities. (With Nod to History, Foreign-Language Standards Unveiled).  “The Five Cs” offer guidance for instructional planning, as well as setting the foundation for assessing accomplished teaching, through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) (go to NBPTS and search for World Languages Standards). [see endnote 1]

Picture source: http://monsieurdoehla.wikispaces.com

By 2000, developers of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) announced their intention to develop assessments for graduating HS seniors in their grasp of Spanish as a foreign language.  However, by 2004, the effort was tabled: there was insufficient participation in the assessment for the developers to establish test validity (National Foreign-Language Assessment Delayed Indefinitely). Foreign Language instruction remained the only subject identified as a core area in national legislation that was not assessed in the NAEP. In 2005, despite legislative cuts to foreign language instruction budgets, the U. S. Department of Defense intensified its efforts to expand instruction in foreign languages and culture, particularly in Chinese and Arabic (Defense Department Takes the Offense on Languages).  As national, state and local funding of education has continued to focus in on reading and mathematics under No Child Left Behind many efforts to maintain or expand World Language instruction have been curtailed. Yet, in the global education arena, many policy analysts and educational researchers argue that U.S. education suffers from a lack of breadth and rigor, including instruction in foreign languages and culture. In many other countries students graduate from the equivalent of high school speaking two or more languages.

This brings us to the Michigan Merit Curriculum requirement for knowledge of a World Language other than English for all high school students expecting to graduate with a diploma. Here’s my disclaimer: I am not a Personal Curriculum (PC) Liaison, but I am interested in ensuring that students with disabilities do not lose ground under the new Michigan Merit Curriculum (MMC). If you’re not already familiar with the term, PC Liaisons are district employees to whom you can turn with questions about local district practices involving the MMC.  They are the ones who have information about accommodations and modifications for accelerated students, struggling students, transfer students, and students with disabilities. Contact Mary Head for permission to join the Personal Curriculum Ning, a place where PC Liaisons can share what their districts are doing to adjust the MMC for various kinds of students.

I recently participated in a webinar on the World Language requirement for PC Liaisons hosted by Michigan Department of Education staff and local district consultants (view here: World Languages PC Webinar,  January 19, 2012).  Under the MMC, the graduating class of 2016 (this year’s 8^th graders) will need to complete two years of World Language instruction, or demonstrate a Novice-High proficiency in a World Language other than English (through an assessment based on the ACTFL standards for World Languages).

Picture source: http://www.languagetesting.com/scale.htm

This rating covers students’ skills in speaking, writing, listening, and reading a World Language.  In order for students to achieve this level of proficiency, instruction may be at a higher level—Intermediate—so that students’ performances average out to Novice High levels.  There is no state assessment; this is left for local districts to manage, either through assessment of the Michigan benchmarks for World Languages as students progress through World Language courses, or through assessments purchased or created by the district that align with the ACTFL standards. Formal testing is only necessary for students who wish to demonstrate mastery, either because they elect to get credit by “testing out”, or because they want to enter more advanced coursework.

Presenters in this webinar noted that a variety of strategies improve the performance of all students in World Language courses, including students with disabilities: team teaching with a special educators who have a world language background, peer mentors, National Honor Society tutors, test readers, and block scheduling all seemed to be helpful for students who might struggle without additional support.  In addition, for students with IEPs, presenters reported that the same accommodations and supports identified in an IEP for Language Arts or English instruction may be used to promote success in World Language classes. 

For students with IEPs, it is also possible to write a Personal Curriculum, identifying portions of the curriculum that they can be expected to achieve, applying the term “as much as is practicable” as guidance, and individualizing based on a student’s needs.  Personal Curriculum plans are only considered after other interventions have been exhausted, according to the speakers.  This means that your high schooler may be working on “exhausting interventions” until the junior and senior year of high school.  In the process of exhausting interventions, there is also the distinct possibility that your student will be behind in credit.  If at all possible, parents need to make their Personal Curriculum requests early, and make sure that interventions are not used as excuses to delay consideration of a Personal Curriculum plan. 

I have some thoughts about selecting a particular World Language to learn, and some of the ways of accommodating a student with learning disabilities. The choice of language may contribute to a student’s success.  Spanish is considered by many to be the easiest of languages to learn because of its’ simpler grammar.  From a listening and speaking perspective, this may help a student who has difficulty with vocabulary, since fewer word forms need to be learned. French, Italian and German may be slightly more complex, grammatically, but may also have appeal. A note on vocabulary:  if your student has difficulty with new or specialized vocabulary in English, make sure that this is accommodated in the World Language class.

Reading, writing and spelling may be problems, especially for a person who is considered to be dyslexic or dysgraphic. Languages that use a different written system (Arabic, Japanese, Chinese, Hebrew) than our alphabet may not be as good a choice for those with dyslexia either. Emphasis on speaking, conversation, and oral translation is better for students for whom reading and writing in English is already a problem. (One of these days, I imagine, the same suite of tools that students use for speech to text in English, word prediction, and contextual spelling will be as readily available for World Language learners). Closed captioning on television, either in English or in a World Language allows a learner to listen to a language and connect meaning to the written or spoken word.  Having access to this technology may influence your high-schooler’s choice of language.

There are other language options that naturally emphasize one modality over another.  Latin is not primarily a spoken language; students with auditory difficulties may find it more to their liking than learning a language where their pronunciation of words will be a constant challenge.  “Heritage” languages are primarily spoken and gestural languages. These may be better suited for students who are interested in Native American culture, and find their greatest difficulties in reading and writing.  American Sign Language (ASL--the language of the Deaf culture) [see endnote 2] eliminates listening, speaking, reading and writing, and substitutes viewing, signing, gesture and expression.  Students who are visually oriented may find that ASL meets their needs.

As with all accommodations and modifications, it takes effort on the part of parents to help bring about maximum access for a student with a disability.  In some districts, schools allow students to use community resources as alternative classrooms.  If your district is one that will entertain that possibility, you may be able to connect your student to a member of the community for instruction in a language that is not offered in school in exchange for some bartered service. For instance:  learn a “heritage” language from a tribal elder in exchange for doing household chores.  Many community colleges offer ASL courses.  Although they may go too quickly for some students, you may be able to work on an arrangement between your local district and the ASL instructors to offer a slower version of the course for a group of high-schoolers.

LDA of Michigan is interested in hearing from you about your experiences with the new high school diploma requirement for World Languages. Contact LDA of Michigan with your stories or questions.

Resources:

Link to About World Languages

Link to ACTFL Proficiency Standards

Link to Language Links/Special Needs

            Link to NBPTS World Language Standards for Teachers

            Link to the World Language Requirement Power Point (for PC Liaisons)

World Languages Consultants:

            Dr. Millie Mellgren: newlanguagepathways@gmail.com

            Dr. Barbara Appold: appoldb@bangorschools.org

            Lori Flippin: flippinl@e-hps.net

---

Endnotes:

1.  I had the privilege of working as a liaison to NBPTS on the development of the World Languages teacher assessment, and learned a bit about what sets teachers of World Languages apart from teachers in other disciplines, and how instruction in different languages varies—depending on the unique characteristics of each language.  Some languages are only written (e.g. Latin), some are only spoken (e.g. Native American “heritage” languages), some require additional references in order to produce written text (e.g. Japanese and the use of a kanja dictionary), and some are neither spoken nor written (e.g. American Sign Language).


2.  Rosen, Russell S. (2008). American Sign Language as a Foreign Language in U.S. High Schools: State of the Art. Modern Languages Journal 92, 10-38.

----- 

Abstract:  The last 2 decades witnessed a growth in American Sign Language (ASL) as a foreign language in U.S. secondary schools. This overview of the current state of ASL as a foreign language in the schools consists of a history and a survey. The information on history was drawn from a study conducted by Rosen (2006). This history is followed by a national survey compiled by Rosen (2005) on U.S. secondary schools offering ASL for foreign language credit. The survey provided information on the number and distribution of schools, teachers, classes, students, departments, and the process for program implementation. The information is used to ascertain the current breadth and scope of, and to discern trends in, ASL as a foreign language in public high schools nationwide.

###

This study is comprehensive enough to provide some support for offering ASL as a world language, in my opinion.