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.

Public Comment to the Michigan Board of Education forum in Ann Arbor

To: Members,  Michigan State Board of Education
Date:  May 26, 2011                                 

My name is Kathleen Kosobud.  I am a “temporarily retired” special educator working on my dissertation. My research focus is on family-school collaboration in special education. I am one of the first 87 teachers in the country to have achieved the status of National Board Certified Teacher (NBCT-EA/Generalist, 1993).  I am also the immediate past president of the Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan (LDA), an all-volunteer organization; and I am finishing my service as LDA’s representative on MDE’s Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC).  I am here to speak from my experiences as a teacher, parent, and advocate about righting the course for students with disabilities as they are challenged to meet the High School Content Expectations or “huskies” (HSCEs) of the Michigan Merit Curriculum (MMC).

I read the SBE’s recommendations to Governor Snyder: “Education Improvement and Reform Priorities” and heartily endorse your performance focus regarding graduation, and the ability of graduates to “obtain post-secondary credentials that ensure they are well-equipped with skills for work, self-support, starting a business, and contributing to the common good”. This year marks the first graduating class affected by the changes in curriculum requirements through the Michigan Merit Curriculum.  Although the initial legislation was passed in 2006, with additional legislation supporting the development of “Personal Curricula” (PCs) for students with disabilities passed in 2007, it seems that districts across the state are still unprepared or unwilling to implement PCs for students whose identified disabilities interfere with successful completion of the MMC, without such modification.  During the past year I have fielded calls from parents who have encountered varying forms of resistance to their requests for PC plans for their high schoolers.

One parent called me after school personnel at her son’s 9th grade special education planning meeting (IEP), told him that he would not be getting a diploma.  Stunned by this pronouncement, his comment was, “Then why am I bothering to go to school?”

Another parent called me when her daughter, a senior with mathematics learning disabilities, flunked her first semester of Algebra II.  Although this parent had requested a Personal Curriculum for her daughter since her freshman year, the district said that she had to fail courses in order to warrant consideration for a Personal Curriculum. So, until her senior year, she was left to struggle through all of the curriculum requirements at her high school, without PC modifications and lagging in credit. Since she also was having difficulty with the mathematics HSCEs of chemistry, the district suggested that she drop Band (the one course in which she was experiencing success), in order to take a team-taught class in chemistry, and repeat the Algebra II course that she failed.  Finally, because she was going to be short of credits for graduation at the end of the year, the district would not allow her to walk with her graduating class--students with whom she had attended school for all 12 years of her time in this rural district.

A third parent called after a district told her that they “didn’t do” PCs. Period. This troubles me on a number of levels.

First, students with high-incidence disabilities have always had the potential for gainful employment and full participation in the adult world, with appropriate accommodation for their disabilities.  The reluctance of districts to respond affirmatively to requests for Personal Curricula is punitive, and mean-spirited.  Loss of access to a diploma represents, for students with disabilities, lifelong diminishment of opportunity. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics[1] in April of this year, people with less than a high school education experienced a seasonally adjusted 14.6% unemployment rate nationally.  High school graduates for the same time period experienced a seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 9.7%.  This is nearly a 5% difference.  Further, for men with disabilities, ages 16 to 64 years old, the unemployment rate was 16.1%, compared to a 9.2% unemployment rate for those without disabilities[2]  Women in the same age range were unemployed at 15.2% with disabilities and 7.8% without.  We don’t need to “help” our students with disabilities add to these sorry statistical outcomes.

Second, denial of the opportunity to complete high school with the support of a PC reinforces the abundantly-felt lack of self-worth that students with disabilities often acquire as part of their school experiences.  From the time that they begin to show achievement differences, students with disabilities are more likely to be bullied, excluded and devalued.  Denial of opportunity to complete high school with a diploma is, in effect, an institutional validation of everything that students with disabilities have internalized since the early years of their schooling.  Without hope, we see a rise in risky behavior, alienation, and ultimately the justification needed for dropping out.

Third, the failure of districts to appreciate that people ultimately contribute to society in a variety of ways has led to a decrease in the wealth of options for students to be successful in completing “as much as is practicable” of the Michigan Merit Curriculum, in alignment with their talents, interests and career goals.  Many Michigan districts are experiencing, for example, a decrease in enrollment in Career and Technical Education courses, even though there could be many opportunities for the embedding of practical mathematics and sciences in these courses, in fulfillment of the MMC.  Like many of you, I depend on skilled technicians when I need home improvements or repairs. It is a short-sighted form of budget-consciousness that comes out of districts interpreting the MMC as a series of “one size fits all” classes.

I don’t think that the Michigan Board of Education had any intention of increasing the stratification of students by recommending the MMC.  In fact, two years ago, while I was still president of LDA of Michigan, we printed and distributed buttons like the one I’m wearing that reads:  “Rigor, Relevance, Relationships…and ACCESS!”   I adhere to the notion of “assuming competence” in all individuals and so I see the MMC as an opportunity for districts to collaboratively create classes and programs that allow for maximum learning diversity.

Button Design, LDA MI Conference 2009

We have many resources in place to offer technical assistance and support through Michigan's Integrated Improvement Initiatives (MI3)[3] for this work. We can make school a much better environment for students with disabilities, from the time they are identified through the time that they successfully complete high school with the appropriate supports, services, accommodations, and modifications. Districts across the state are using the MMC to develop courses that have the capacity to engage a variety of learners through multiple representations of content, differentiation in the ways that students interact with the content, and opportunities for students to demonstrate their mastery of content in a variety of ways.  These need to be widely shared, and easily accessed by those districts that have fewer resources to devote to the task of curriculum development. Finally, we need to remember that the workforce that will bring Michigan out of its economic slump depends on having diverse enough skills that the collapse of a single industry will not bring us to our knees.

Michigan’s Board of Education has laid the groundwork through the policies that it has crafted to make a more equitable and attainable future. In the words of the late Ronald Edmonds, my former Pioneer High School history teacher (1978 speech):

“We can whenever, and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need, in order to do this. Whether we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.”

Thank you.

-----
About N Kathleen Kosobud:  Kathleen is a member of the Network of Michigan Educators, a group of 500 or so recognized educators in Michigan who are available to state policy-makers for their expert opinions on policies affecting education and children, through the “Ask the Network” program started by Jean Shane at the MDE.  Kathleen blogs for LDA of Michigan at http://ldamiexchange.blogspot.com/, and for her own amusement at http://backburner-nkk.blogspot.com/.  She was one of the contributors to the revamping of the teacher education program at Michigan State University’s School of Education through a project to infuse inclusive content into all teacher education courses for the preparation of new teachers, under the guidance of Susan J. Peters, Ph.D. After achieving National Board Certification as an Early Adolescence/Generalist as a teacher of middle school mathematics in a special education resource classroom, she served as a teacher-in-residence for Assessment Development at the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.  She is the parent of two adult children with learning disabilities, and identifies as a person with learning disabilities, herself.  You can reach her by e-mail.

[1] US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table A4: Employment Status of the civilian population 25 years and over by educational attainment http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm, accessed 5/25/11

[2] US Bureau of Labor Statistics: Table A-6. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, and disability status, not seasonally adjusted, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm, accessed 5/25/11

[3] http://cenmi.org/About.aspx

Michigan Merit Curriculum Update (with added editorial comments)

by N. Kathleen Kosobud, for LDA of Michigan

The purple prose you see here is an addition to this blog post, to show the convoluted process that learning can take.  Sometimes when you think you have learned something new you are merely questioning the rightness of something you previously believed.  I admit to being fallible, gullible, and vulnerable to having my beliefs shaken.  I didn't go in search of a rebuttal or, in an act of revenge, attempt to prove that I was right and "they" were wrong but somewhere, we seem to have meandered into the territory of what Stephen Colbert used to refer to as "truthiness".  "Truthiness" is having an outward appearance of being correct, with an underlying shaky foundation.  I believe that I was taken in by the "truthiness" of the following:

This month's meeting of the Michigan Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC) included a presentation on the Michigan Merit Curriculum (MMC). I learned some new things about how things really work in the world of education.

1. The Michigan Department of Education can only flesh out policy.  It cannot force districts to do anything that is not a matter of law. Because Personal Curriculum options are written into policy as an option (in other words, a school district may offer...) there is nothing to make a district offer a Personal Curriculum as an option.

Now, I believed that I had been corrected; I had been misinformed that districts must offer a Personal Curriculum, and this presentation corrected that bit of misinformation.  And so, to soften the blow to readers, I wrote the following to show that there were many ways to achieve the end of making the Michigan Merit Curriculum more "user-friendly" for students with learning disabilities:

2.  The Personal Curriculum option was envisioned as one of a number of ways to help students with IEPs achieve the needed credits for a diploma.  Other options include: academic content embedded in career and tech education classes, academic courses offered in alternative formats (online courses, self-paced courses offered with online and face-to-face components, courses featuring multiple representations of the content, etc.).

3.  The Personal Curriculum was seen as one component of a range of options.  For students with IEPs, it was seen as a way of documenting modifications to the requirements for attaining a diploma, in recognition of the impact of an individual student's disability on learning in a particular area of academic content.

...and in recognition that not everyone's Educational Development Plan (EDP) would list "theoretical physicist" as their career goal--requiring a high level of achievement in math, science and technology.  The EDP might list "house painter" as a career goal, which might not require as rigorous a curriculum in math or science, even though it might be a good idea to have some solid knowledge of business management, financial planning, cost bidding, materials estimation, and small business tax laws.

4.  Once a diploma is granted or a planned program is achieved, a student still is exited from high school.  Therefore, it may be to a student's advantage to take a longer time in high school to achieve the un-personalized curriculum, in order to take advantage of career-readiness opportunities.

... and here I was thinking of the "late bloomer" who might not have the foggiest idea of what she wanted to be in life, but by taking her time to complete all the requirements of the MMC, would have more options as she entered college.

So, if you ask for a Personal Curriculum for your child, and the school district says they don't offer a Personal Curriculum for students with IEPs, that may be true.  (At least in the opinion of some MDE consultants...but read on).  However, it might be worth your while to encourage the district to consider a Personal Curriculum for your child, if there is data on the impact of your child's disability on academic learning. This data could support needed modifications to an area of the curriculum in order for your child to succeed. ...especially, if your child's career goals may make other areas of learning more important than the standard MMC.

However, if your district says "No", you may also ask the district to explain what they are doing to support the graduation of all students.  If there are alternative courses to help students master content, these should be available to your child, as well.  School districts are still expected to show that they are improving graduation rates, and face a variety of consequences for failing to maintain or increase those rates.  In addition, the State uses the test scores that virtually all high school students in Michigan take to evaluate school effectiveness.  Schools with a record of low scores are likely to be changing what they teach and how they teach it to increase those test scores. Finally, if other district students have been offered the Personal Curriculum as an option, you may be able to appeal ...or legally question... the refusal of a district to consider a Personal Curriculum on the basis of equal opportunity.

This is not a static conversation.  As the state gains experience with a highly prescriptive, outcomes-based curriculum, there may be more and more unintended consequences to be seen.  And, there may be improvements in the preparation of all students to meet the challenges of a rigorous high school curriculum.

Again, this is not a static conversation.  I re-read the box on page 2 of the Parents Guide to the Personal Curriculum: Focus on Students with an IEP:  "Districts MUST offer the PC option and respond to all PC requests but are NOT required to approve all PC requests." I'm pretty sure that MUST still means "is required to".  So, I learned something from "learning something new"--and that is to make sure that you have your information straight when you make a presentation.  I'll be sending a note to all people listed below, to make sure that "MUST" means what I think it means...and not "may".  It's not that I have anything invested in proving someone wrong, but in making sure that I don't misinform families when I make statements about the Personal Curriculum as an option.

In the meantime, if you are interested in becoming better informed about the Michigan Merit Curriculum, the Personal Curriculum option for students with IEPs, and the implications of achieving or not achieving a diploma, here are some additional resources for you to use:

• Personal Curriculum Network (where personal curriculum liaisons share information). To gain access to the Personal Curriculum Network, use this link
• ACTpoint Michigan (a site most districts use to identify key curriculum objectives for a Personal Curriculum)

• General Personal Curriculum questions:

Gregg Dionne
Alternative Education Consultant,
MDE Curriculum and Instruction
Phone 517.241.6895

Mary Head
Department Analyst
MDE Curriculum and Instruction
Phone 517.241.6895

• Students with IEP Questions
  

  Sheryl Diamond
  Policy Consultant
  MDE Special Education
  Phone: 517.335.0442

• Algebra II Questions
  

Dan LaDue
Secondary Mathematics Consultant
MDE, Curriculum and Instruction
Phone: 517.241.6895

For further information, please refer to earlier posts on this same blog.  And I hope to keep learning something new that will help families to make good decisions in concert with their children's needs.

Manipulatives as Standard Accommodation

Okay, I am not as political and sometimes not quite as cerebral as Kath, but my brain does seem to churn out a lot of thoughts. Here's one of the latest:
On standardized assessments, such as our friend the MEAP, some students qualify for a calculator correct? Well, one of our teachers was presenting on Algeblocks last week, and I had a thought: what if Algeblocks or AlgebraTiles were a standard accommodation?

Students would have to know how to use them independently and they have no labels, so there would be no outside assistance or influence. AlgebraTiles or something like them could even be printed as one extra page. Students who operate in the abstract wouldn't need them and wouldn't use them. Those who are not operating at that level may have an actual scaffold and be able to show their comprehension on an assessment.

I am completely aware that this is not a likely reality, but I continue to wander in the world of what if.... on this one!