The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act
and California’s Proposition 227: Implications for
English Language Learners With Special Needs
Tracy Gershwin Mueller, George H. S. Singer, and Elizabeth J.
Grace University of California, Santa Barbara
Abstract
California’s Proposition 227 (1998) has affected the education
of many English language learners (ELLs). However, the extent
of Proposition 227’s influence on special education planning and
practice is unclear. ELLs who have moderate to severe
disabilities face major communication obstacles. The present
qualitative study looked specifically at the impact of California’s
Proposition 227 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (1990) on special education teachers’ educational planning,
assessments, and classroom practices for students identified as
ELLs who have moderate to severe disabilities. Findings
indicated teacher misinterpretation of Proposition 227, resource
scarcity, a lack of administrative support, and the exclusion of
parents from decisions regarding which language should be used
to instruct ELLs with moderate to severe disabilities.
Introduction
This article examines special education teachers’ experiences with
Individualized Education Program (IEP) decision making, assessment, and
classroom practices for English language learners (ELLs) who have
moderate to severe disabilities. The decision concerning what language
should be used for instruction is explored in relation to the effects of a
California state law, “English for the Children” (Proposition 227, 1998),
and federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
(1990).
California is a state that continues to grow increasingly more diverse.
People of Hispanic or Latino origin make up 32.6% of the total population
in California (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). Foreign-born individuals in
California make up 26.2% of the total population in the United States
Implications of Laws for Special-Needs 1
Learners
,(U.S. Bureau of the Census). Many of these people come to the United
States knowing little, if any, English. The total number of Latino students in
California’s 2000–2001 classrooms was 2,613,480, totaling 43.2% of the
student population in California (California Department of Education,
2001). These Latino children currently make up the largest minority group
in today’s California classrooms (California Department of Education).
Additionally, 663,220 individuals, ranging from newborns to 21-year-olds,
received special education services in California during the 2000–2001
school year (California Department of Education). Of that population,
281,263 (42.4%) Latino students were identified as receiving special
education services (California Department of Education). The population of
this study includes ELLs with moderate to severe disabilities, representing
roughly 15,600 students during the 2001 academic year (California
Department of Education, Special Education Division, 2001). According to
the categories of disabilities under IDEA (1990), students covered under this
federal law include children and youths who are diagnosed with one or
more of the following conditions: autism, deaf- blindness, deafness, hearing
impairments, mental retardation, traumatic brain injuries, multiple
disabilities, orthopedic impairments, other health impairments, emotional
disturbances, specific learning disabilities, speech or language impairments,
and visual impairments, including blindness.
Children identified as having moderate or severe disabilities typically
display many difficulties with communication and language acquisition.
The majority of these students are diagnosed as having both receptive and
expressive communication and language deficits as well as associated
difficulties with social skills development (Downing, 1999; Hallahan &
Kauffman, 2000). While language skills may be easily acquired for
typically developing children through their daily activities, many children
with moderate or severe disabilities do not acquire language through typical
processes of social and linguistic interaction in early childhood. For
typically developing ELL children, the choice of what language is used in
the classroom is extremely important (Díaz-Rico & Weed, 1995). The
importance is magnified when children face the possibility that they will not
learn any language at all or develop it in small increments over a much
longer period of time.
Individuals with moderate and severe disabilities who come from
homes where languages other than English are spoken may face a major
obstacle when taught to communicate via instruction in English. It is
possible that, in addition to the difficulty of acquiring any communication
that many of these children experience, early language acquisition may
become even more difficult when a child is immersed in the home and
school setting with two different languages simultaneously. It should be
noted that there is no extant research on this issue. However, findings in
neighboring research have led to our belief that ELL students who have not
yet learned a symbolic communication system may have additional
difficulties in acquiring any communication or language system. Research
concerning the academic performance of typically
2 Bilingual Research Journal, 28: 2 Summer
, developing ELL students indicates that they are more likely to learn early
academic skills if they are first taught in the language spoken at home prior
to immersion in an English-only classroom (Cummins, 1991; Donovan &
Cross, 2002).
Federal Law
The federal law governing special education under IDEA (1990) and
Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973 mandates that
children who receive special education services are entitled to a free and
appropriate education. IDEA defines a free and appropriate education as
one that is: (a) funded and supervised through the public school system,
(b) meets the state educational agency’s standards, (c) includes an
appropriate education, and (d) provides an agreement of an individualized
education plan. An appropriate education can be defined as an educational
program designed to meet the individual’s special needs, thereby providing
the child with educational services deemed to be beneficial (Yell, 1998).
In 1975, Public Law 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped
Children Act, later amended and renamed IDEA in 1990, recognized the
growing diversity of children with disabilities. In amending IDEA in 1990,
Congress added a finding to the law regarding its concerns about the growing
diversity of children with disabilities:
The limited English proficient population is the fastest growing in our
nation, and the growth is occurring in many parts of our nation. In
the nation’s largest school districts, limited English students make
up almost half of all students initially entering school at the
Kindergarten level. Studies have documented apparent
discrepancies in the levels of referrals and placement of limited
English proficient children in special education. The Department
of Education has found that services provided to limited English
proficient students often do not respond primarily to the pupil’s
academic needs. These trends pose special challenges for special
education in the referral, assessment and services for our nation’s
student from non-English language backgrounds. (§ 610[i] ,1)
The centerpiece of IDEA mandates that a child who receives special
education services must have an IEP created by a team of teachers, related
service personnel, parents, and the child, if appropriate (Turnbull &
Turnbull, 2001; Yell, 1998). Under the IDEA provisions, teachers and
administrators are required to include the child’s parents in all educational
decisions for the child, including the child’s placement. IDEA places great
emphasis on the importance of parental notification about IEP meetings,
and requires parent participation in and joint team approval of the plan,
although parents do not have an absolute veto over it. However, if parents
do not approve, other due process procedures may be followed. The law
also requires public schools to
Implications of Laws for Special-Needs 3
Learners
and California’s Proposition 227: Implications for
English Language Learners With Special Needs
Tracy Gershwin Mueller, George H. S. Singer, and Elizabeth J.
Grace University of California, Santa Barbara
Abstract
California’s Proposition 227 (1998) has affected the education
of many English language learners (ELLs). However, the extent
of Proposition 227’s influence on special education planning and
practice is unclear. ELLs who have moderate to severe
disabilities face major communication obstacles. The present
qualitative study looked specifically at the impact of California’s
Proposition 227 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (1990) on special education teachers’ educational planning,
assessments, and classroom practices for students identified as
ELLs who have moderate to severe disabilities. Findings
indicated teacher misinterpretation of Proposition 227, resource
scarcity, a lack of administrative support, and the exclusion of
parents from decisions regarding which language should be used
to instruct ELLs with moderate to severe disabilities.
Introduction
This article examines special education teachers’ experiences with
Individualized Education Program (IEP) decision making, assessment, and
classroom practices for English language learners (ELLs) who have
moderate to severe disabilities. The decision concerning what language
should be used for instruction is explored in relation to the effects of a
California state law, “English for the Children” (Proposition 227, 1998),
and federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
(1990).
California is a state that continues to grow increasingly more diverse.
People of Hispanic or Latino origin make up 32.6% of the total population
in California (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). Foreign-born individuals in
California make up 26.2% of the total population in the United States
Implications of Laws for Special-Needs 1
Learners
,(U.S. Bureau of the Census). Many of these people come to the United
States knowing little, if any, English. The total number of Latino students in
California’s 2000–2001 classrooms was 2,613,480, totaling 43.2% of the
student population in California (California Department of Education,
2001). These Latino children currently make up the largest minority group
in today’s California classrooms (California Department of Education).
Additionally, 663,220 individuals, ranging from newborns to 21-year-olds,
received special education services in California during the 2000–2001
school year (California Department of Education). Of that population,
281,263 (42.4%) Latino students were identified as receiving special
education services (California Department of Education). The population of
this study includes ELLs with moderate to severe disabilities, representing
roughly 15,600 students during the 2001 academic year (California
Department of Education, Special Education Division, 2001). According to
the categories of disabilities under IDEA (1990), students covered under this
federal law include children and youths who are diagnosed with one or
more of the following conditions: autism, deaf- blindness, deafness, hearing
impairments, mental retardation, traumatic brain injuries, multiple
disabilities, orthopedic impairments, other health impairments, emotional
disturbances, specific learning disabilities, speech or language impairments,
and visual impairments, including blindness.
Children identified as having moderate or severe disabilities typically
display many difficulties with communication and language acquisition.
The majority of these students are diagnosed as having both receptive and
expressive communication and language deficits as well as associated
difficulties with social skills development (Downing, 1999; Hallahan &
Kauffman, 2000). While language skills may be easily acquired for
typically developing children through their daily activities, many children
with moderate or severe disabilities do not acquire language through typical
processes of social and linguistic interaction in early childhood. For
typically developing ELL children, the choice of what language is used in
the classroom is extremely important (Díaz-Rico & Weed, 1995). The
importance is magnified when children face the possibility that they will not
learn any language at all or develop it in small increments over a much
longer period of time.
Individuals with moderate and severe disabilities who come from
homes where languages other than English are spoken may face a major
obstacle when taught to communicate via instruction in English. It is
possible that, in addition to the difficulty of acquiring any communication
that many of these children experience, early language acquisition may
become even more difficult when a child is immersed in the home and
school setting with two different languages simultaneously. It should be
noted that there is no extant research on this issue. However, findings in
neighboring research have led to our belief that ELL students who have not
yet learned a symbolic communication system may have additional
difficulties in acquiring any communication or language system. Research
concerning the academic performance of typically
2 Bilingual Research Journal, 28: 2 Summer
, developing ELL students indicates that they are more likely to learn early
academic skills if they are first taught in the language spoken at home prior
to immersion in an English-only classroom (Cummins, 1991; Donovan &
Cross, 2002).
Federal Law
The federal law governing special education under IDEA (1990) and
Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973 mandates that
children who receive special education services are entitled to a free and
appropriate education. IDEA defines a free and appropriate education as
one that is: (a) funded and supervised through the public school system,
(b) meets the state educational agency’s standards, (c) includes an
appropriate education, and (d) provides an agreement of an individualized
education plan. An appropriate education can be defined as an educational
program designed to meet the individual’s special needs, thereby providing
the child with educational services deemed to be beneficial (Yell, 1998).
In 1975, Public Law 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped
Children Act, later amended and renamed IDEA in 1990, recognized the
growing diversity of children with disabilities. In amending IDEA in 1990,
Congress added a finding to the law regarding its concerns about the growing
diversity of children with disabilities:
The limited English proficient population is the fastest growing in our
nation, and the growth is occurring in many parts of our nation. In
the nation’s largest school districts, limited English students make
up almost half of all students initially entering school at the
Kindergarten level. Studies have documented apparent
discrepancies in the levels of referrals and placement of limited
English proficient children in special education. The Department
of Education has found that services provided to limited English
proficient students often do not respond primarily to the pupil’s
academic needs. These trends pose special challenges for special
education in the referral, assessment and services for our nation’s
student from non-English language backgrounds. (§ 610[i] ,1)
The centerpiece of IDEA mandates that a child who receives special
education services must have an IEP created by a team of teachers, related
service personnel, parents, and the child, if appropriate (Turnbull &
Turnbull, 2001; Yell, 1998). Under the IDEA provisions, teachers and
administrators are required to include the child’s parents in all educational
decisions for the child, including the child’s placement. IDEA places great
emphasis on the importance of parental notification about IEP meetings,
and requires parent participation in and joint team approval of the plan,
although parents do not have an absolute veto over it. However, if parents
do not approve, other due process procedures may be followed. The law
also requires public schools to
Implications of Laws for Special-Needs 3
Learners
