Assignment introduction Early Childhood Teachers_ Experiences with Overrepresentation of.pdf

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

In this study, I focused on the overrepresentation of English language learners

(ELLs) in kindergarten through second grade (K-2) special education programs. The

study is important because of the gap in the literature on the overrepresentation of ELLs

in early childhood special education programs. Researchers have suggested that research

is needed on teachers' experiences with student placements and that this research is

important because the overrepresentation of students in special education can be

academically and psychologically harmful to students (Burr, 2019; Karvonen et al., 2021;

Murphy & Johnson, 2020; Tankard Carnock et al., 2019). This study has the potential to

create positive social change by providing educators with insight into experiences about

the overrepresentation of ELLs in special education. Chapter 1 includes a review of the

background literature, problem statement, purpose of study, and the research questions.

There is an overview of the conceptual framework, nature of the study, assumptions,

limitations, significance of this study, scope, and delimitations. There is also a section on

definitions of important key concepts related to this study. I conclude with a summary of

key points.

Background

The percentage of enrollment of ELLs in public schools in the United States

increased in the fall 2019 (10.4%, or 5.1 million students) from fall 2010 (9.2%, or 4.5

million students). Researchers found that 792,000 ELLs enrolled in the United States

between 2019 and 2020 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022). The population

of ELLs enrolled in primary-grade schools has increased recently (Ramírez et al., 2019).

The increase in the ELL population leads to an increase in the placement of ELLs in

special education, but teachers' experiences on whether this has created an

overrepresentation is unknown. Hulse (2020) suggested further research to explore the

overrepresentation of bilingual students and what resources are available for them.

Jozwik et al. (2020) found that further research is needed to understand how special

education serves ELL students who may or may not have a disability placed in the special

education class. Cioe-Pena (2020) said further research is needed into why ELL minority

students are placed into special education and the way schools make decisions regarding

the linguistic placement of these ELL students.

There is a lot of information about the increase of ELLs but little information

about the early childhood education teachers' experiences with the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education (Barrio, 2021). The gap requires more research into rural

counties early childhood education teachers' experiences of overrepresentation and what

should be implemented to change this. Karvonen et al. (2021) stated the need for further

research on the evaluation and identification methods used for identifying ELLs for

special education and using teachers' experiences on how they can be improved. This

study contributes to literature and potential social implications to improve the applicable

placement of ELLs in special education and limit the potential of overrepresentation. The

study contributes to literature related to the study's scope and creates positive social

change within schools. The study allows the teachers' experiences to lead to more

significant needs of ELLs being met in an appropriate manner that best suits them.

Problem Statement

The problem in this basic qualitative study is that K-2 teachers are challenged to

serve ELLs in the general education classroom, and students are being referred for special

education services. Researchers have noted that a growing number of ELLs are

overrepresented in special education programs throughout the United States (Hulse,

2020; Karvonen et al., 2021; Murphy & Johnson, 2020; Ortogero & Ray, 2021). There

needs to be more literature on the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education

programs. The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. The

overrepresentation of ELLs was noted by teachers in a rural southwestern district in the

southern region of the United States. Based on the school grades report, 41% of the

student population are identified as ELLs, with 8% of these ELLs receiving special

education services. Hispanic students are the fastest-growing enrollments in rural

counties over the last 3 years . Student demographics have increased from 2% to 4%,

with one local school population rising from 23% to 25% Hispanic and another school

from 36% to 40% Hispanic population.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. The

study has potential social implications for the appropriate identification and professional

development challenges teachers face when working with K-2 ELLs. This would also

determine what teachers need to help those ELLs to be placed successfully or given

appropriate interventions within the classroom. To fulfill this purpose and address the gap

in research on the overrepresentation of ELLs for special education services, I conducted

interviews with 12 K-2 teachers in 12 different rural schools in the Southern United

States.

Research Questions

Two research questions guided this study as follows:

RQ1: What are K-2 teachers’ experiences regarding the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

RQ2: What do early childhood teachers need to address the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for this qualitative study is Cummins's (2010) theory

of language acquisition and the multitiered system of supports for ELLs by Hoover et al.

(2020). Cummins’ theory looks at language broken down into categories to help teachers

understand where students have language-learning needs. However, Hoover et al. pointed

out how important it is to differentiate between learning differences and disabilities. The

logical connections between the conceptual framework and the nature of my study

include a look at how the multitiered system of supports (MTSS) for ELLs in rural

schools does the following: (a) emphasizes the use of ELLs’ native language, especially

in the schools that teach through an ESL model; (b) gives increased attention to family

and community values and teachings in referral and instructional decision making; (c)

increases attention is given to data and data teams influence instructional adjustments that

benefit students; and (d) provide increased examples of school-wide cultural and

linguistic responsiveness that extends beyond bulletin board displays of student learning.

The theory of language acquisition was also be used to guide the study’s methodology

and address specific research questions related to the needs of ELLs in addressing their

learning needs. As I explored teachers’ experiences with the overrepresentation of ELLs

for special education programs in rural schools in the southern United States, the

conceptual framework guided the design of the interview instrument and analysis of data

collected from 12 K-2 teachers.

Nature of the Study

To address the research questions in this qualitative study, I used a basic

qualitative study design with interviews that included collecting data through interviews

with 12 K-2 volunteer participants from12 different rural schools that enroll a highly

bilingual student population in the southern United States, where I am not employed or

known to potential participants. Ravitch and Carl (2021) stated that people use their

experiences to understand people with self-reflection on different phenomena. I collected

interview data on the experiences of teachers who work with ELLs identified as special

education students making this qualitative research methodology the appropriate option

for the study. Rubin and Rubin (2012) discussed interviews as a naturalistic research

method because the researchers engage in dialogue with people with knowledge and

experience in the researched area. I followed the Rubin and Rubin interview protocol for

using open-ended questions that lead to further questions to gather as much information

as possible. I explored teacher experience based on their work with the

overrepresentation of ELL students in special education, which makes a qualitative

methodology the best fit.

Definitions

The definition of key concepts or constructs related to my topic is as follows:

Early childhood education (ECE): A group setting intended to effect

developmental changes from birth to age eight (National Association for the Education of

Young Children, 2022).

Early childhood educator: A person who provides learning opportunities and

supports the development and well-being of young children from birth through age eight

while meeting degree requirements (National Association for the Education of Young

Children, 2022).

English For Speakers of Other Language (ESOL): English for Speakers of Other

Language (ESOL) is teaching English to students whose first language is not English but

who live in an English-speaking country. Most school districts have ESOL teachers

working with the classroom teacher to support ELL students (Tuttle et al., 2021).

English language learners (ELLs): According to Byfield (2019ELLs are students

who are speakers of languages other than English. The United States Department of

Education (2002) defined ELLs as “students whose language is a language other than

English and whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing or understanding the English

language may deny the individual the opportunity to participate fully in society” (p. 69).

Special Education: Specially designed instruction, at no cost to the parents, to

meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including— (i) Instruction conducted

in the classroom, in the home, in hospitals and institutions, and other settings; and. (ii)

Instruction in physical education (Individuals Disability Education Act, 2004).

Students with Disabilities: Students with learning disabilities need assistance with

special education and programs identified as having a disability (IDEA, 2004).

Assumptions

This study is based on my assumptions. According to Burkholder et al. (2020),

assumptions are needed to ensure that there is valuable research because of the study. The

interviews with early childhood education teachers provided open, honest, reliable insight

into their experiences of the overrepresentation of ELLs in Special Education. With well-

written interview questions and being aware of my assumptions, my questions were

reliable and free of bias. I kept a reflective journal to make sure no bias was involved.

Ravitch and Carl (2016) suggested that it is important to identify one’s assumptions when

analyzing data and reporting findings. I am aware of my assumptions and reduced the

influence of those assumptions on my study’s findings.

Scope and Delimitations

The prupose of this qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’ experiences

with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs and what

teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. The scope

included K-2 teachers from general education and special education classrooms in 12

different schools responded to interview questions related to the study. ELLs are

evaluated and placed in Special Education, which may lead to overrepresentation and

misplacement. I interviewed 12 K-2 teachers from twelve different schools with high

ELL populations. During the interviews, I asked participants questions regarding their

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELLs in special education programs.

Volunteers were recruited through email addresses that are publicly available and found

on school websites that indicate the teacher positions. A delimitation was the limited

sample size due to the type of teacher used in the study. The study may contribute to

qualitative research on the ways teachers can effectively teach ELLs who do not have

disabilities by providing intervention strategies in the regular education classroom.

Limitations

The limitations, challenges, and barriers addressed while conducting this study

included limited access to participants, ethical issues, and personal bias. To address the

limited access to participants, I reached out through social media groups and other group

sites with a pool of several teachers with publicly available email addresses. Working

with teachers on their schedule and being available after school hours and on weekends

allowed further access to a larger pool of teachers to interview. To address the ethical

issues, I used an alphanumeric system to identify each participant, and only I have access

to the names of the participants. I did not include demographic data on my participants in

a chart, other than how they meet the criteria for participation in the study. I used audio

recordings of the interviews and carefully transcribed the data myself by listening to the

recordings, using iTranscribe, and checking the transcripts multiple times to make sure

the information is complete and accurate. Lastly is the limitation of my bias with my

years of working with special education and ELLs. I have been a passionate educator and

advocate for those students with disabilities and language barriers for many years. To

address any bias, I kept a reflective journal of my thoughts, opinions, feelings, ideas, and

experiences (see Ravitch & Carl, 2021). Burkholder et al. (2020) found that when

keeping a reflective journal, a researcher is aware of their personal biases and find ways

to avoid them.

Significance

This study is significant in that it identifies the experiences of teachers regarding

the overrepresentation of ELLs in special education programs. Burr (2019) stated that

when ELL students are placed in special education programs without needing those

services, the students will often suffer because they lose out on receiving the ELL

services they need. The findings of this study have the potential to change how teachers

approach the future evaluation, training, and processing of students eligible for English as

a secondary language. Becker et al. (2019) suggested making sure students who need

further assistance are referred and placed in a class according to those needs is vital to the

success of the student and program. Deepening learning will result from the study and

help create a positive approach to what needs to be established or changed with the goals

and design of the ELL program.

Summary

In Chapter 1, I introduce the topic and basis of my qualitative study. This chapter

provides background for the problem explored, its purpose, the research questions

addressed, the framework, and the impact of social change creates. The chapter also

provides the nature of the study and definitions of key concepts related to my topic.

Limitations were included with assumptions, scope, and delimitations to examine the

study's boundaries and significance. In Chapter 2, I provide the literature relevant to the

study in a comprehensive literature review. This includes synthesizing the studies related

to my topic, framework, and problem.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

The problem that I investigated in this basic qualitative study was that a growing

number of ELLs are overrepresented in special education programs throughout the

United States (see Hulse, 2020; Karvonen et al., 2021; Murphy & Johnson, 2020;

Ortogero & Ray, 2021). The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2

teachers’ experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education

programs and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the

classroom. In Chapter 2, I address the literature search strategy to clearly understand the

study problem and framework that grounds the study. I completed an extensive search to

ensure saturation was met.

Literature Search Strategy

This literature review was conducted through an extensive search from Walden

University’s research database, which included Education Source, ERIC, Sage Journals,

Academic Search Complete, Psychology, and Google Scholar, and met with the Walden

Librarian. Articles were chosen from the database for this literature review from the last

five years and were all peer reviewed. The search terms include different variations of

keywords-special education, early childhood, EL, ELL, English Language Learner,

overrepresentation, overrepresentation, Special Education Placement, Evaluations, and

culturally diverse learners. In addition, I used Google Scholar to search for additional

articles on the various topics of placement of ELLs in special education. Studies were

published in the previous 5 years in peer-reviewed scholarly journals.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for this qualitative study was a combination of

Cummins’s (2000) theory of language acquisition and Hoover’s (2020) MTSS for ELLs.

The theory of language acquisition outlines the differences in two types of language:

basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language

proficiency (CALP)(Cummins, 2010). BICS examines social language, such as linguistic

skills needed in everyday social interactions. CALP is the academic language that is used

in the classroom across various contents. BICS is the language that is focused on at a

younger age, usually between 6 months to 2 years old. CALP is the language that is

focused on 5—7 years old once children start school. According to Cummins (2010),

CALP is higher-level vocabulary and advanced skills used for listening, speaking,

reading, and writing, where BICS is not cognitively challenging. The MTSS for ELLs is

based on a tiered system to drive instruction and assist with ongoing assessment to

monitor a student’s progress and growth (Hoover et al., 2020). Tier 1 is implemented in

the general classroom, Tier 2 requires more intense support to meet the academic needs,

and Tier 3 in small group interventions to increase their learning needs. The MTSS model

is meant to help ELLs with language proficiency because that impacts their ability to

understand instruction and gain academic needs. Cummins (2010) examined language in

categories to help teachers understand where their students are in their needs. He

identified how ELLs become proficient in BICS years before they are proficient in

CALP. Understanding communication requires minimal thinking whereas cognitively

demanding communication requires a lot more and can show a learning need they may

not have but just need more time to learn. Hoover et al. indicated how important it is to

differentiate from learning differences and disabilities. He stressed the importance of

response to interventions being applied in the ELLs’ first language to see where their

abilities are, as well as tracking progress in the second language. The MTSS delivers a

data-based response to intervention model provided at the school level. This model is

layered and increases as the learner's ability grows. The logical connections between the

framework presented and the nature of my study include a look at how the MTSS for

ELLs in rural schools (Hoover et al., 2020) does the following: (a) emphasizes use of

ELLs’ native language, especially in the schools that teach through an ESL model; (b)

gives increased attention to family and community values and teachings in referral and

instructional decision making; (c) increases attention is given to data, and data teams

influence instructional adjustments that benefit students; and (d) provides increased

examples of school-wide cultural and linguistic responsiveness that extends beyond

bulletin board displays of student learning.

Cummins (2010) discussed how ELLs need access to extensive higher order

thinking reading of written text because that is where academic language is found. He

considers the BICS which uses Anglo-Saxon words that are one to two syllables in

length, versus CALP, which includes words that have three to four syllables in thinking

about the extensive reading. He believed a less teacher-centered approach with language

could lend to a high achievement and lead to a smaller gap that could potentially reduce

the number of ELLs referred to special education.

Other Frameworks Considered

I considered several other theories before selecting the conceptual framework for

my study. This included Vidal et al.’s (2023) bioecological model of human

development. The bioecological model of human development includes the proximal

processes, person, context (microsystem, mesosystem, ecosystem, macrosystem), and

time (Vidal et al, 2023). The model looks at students' interactions with their peers (Vidal

et al., 2023). Vidal et al. (2023) further explored the complexities of social interactions,

identified that social interactions suffer when there is a language barrier. The

sociocultural perspective on learning and teaching is a joint activity with a variety of

methods such as; zone of proximal development, more knowledgeable other peers,

interaction, guided participation, and apprenticeship (Xu et al., 2022). The sociolinguistic

view of second language learning includes variability, language in use, community of

practice, repertoires of negotiable resources, and situated second language learning. Like

sociocultural theory, which conceptualizes learning as “stretching across social and

material environments” (Roth & Lee, 2007, p. 189), the bioecological framework

systematically considers individual characteristics of the developing person, contexts

(e.g., classrooms, homes, communities, and societies) and their relationships in providing

resources for child development. The bioecological model of human development

involves the proximal presses, person, context, and time, which also augments

sociocultural theory in that it illustrates how child development takes place through

“processes of progressively more complex reciprocal interactions between the person and

its environment” (Vital et al., 2023, p. 38). Sociolinguistics, in turn, offers an even

narrower lens to examine the proximal processes from the trans-language strategies

perspective (Roth & Lee, 2007). Considering teachers’ interpretation and enactment of

classroom ELL accommodations through the bioecological, as well as sociocultural and

sociolinguistic, experiences might offer more profound insight into potentially long-

lasting effects these enactments have on children’s literacy and language development.

For this study exploring teachers’ experiences with the overrepresentation of ELLs for

special education programs in rural schools in the southern United States, the conceptual

framework needed was one that examined language versus disability and supports for

those ELLs. The framework was used to guide the design of the interview instrument and

analysis of data collected from 12 K-2 teachers.

Literature Review Related to Key Concepts

In this section, I present research that relates to the challenges and experiences

identification of ELLs and special education programs. The exhaustive search and review

of current literature with some past literature helped my approach to addressing the

existing gaps in the literature by data collection aimed at answering the research

questions in this study:

RQ1: What are K-2 teachers’ experiences regarding the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

RQ2: What do early childhood teachers need to address the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

A search of specific literature on current standards, qualifications, and research-

based articles on identifying ELLs for special education. Researchers have found that

identifying ELLs for special education has been a struggle in the school systems (Hulse,

2020; Karvonen et al., 2021; Murphy & Johnson, 2020; Ortogero & Ray, 2021). Some of

the challenges encountered in the literature are related to laws concerning special

education and ELL, student background knowledge, programs available to support ELLs,

teacher preparations, professional development, special education support, and parent

engagement.

English Language Learners

ELLs are those learners whose primary language in the home is not English. The

United States Department of Education (2002) states ELL is a student who has difficulty

reading, speaking, writing, or comprehending of English due to their native language

being something other than English. The number of ELLs in the United States increased

from the fall of 2010 to the fall of 2019. According to the National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES, 2022), in the fall of 2010 9.2% of students in the United States were

ELL; this increased to 10.4% by fall 2019. The higher percentage rates were found in

lower grades, with the highest number being 15% of kindergarteners. The NCES (2022)

found Spanish was the home language for 3.9 million students identified as ELL, making

up 75.7% of all the ELLs in the fall of 2019. The increase in ELLs in the classroom

means that teachers need to be prepared and knowledgeable about supporting them to

limit the chance of overrepresentation (Li & Peters, 2020; Okhremtchouk & Seelu, 2019).

Immigrant Population

In the state in the Southeastern United States where this study was conducted,

there is a large immigrant population where one in 10 individuals were born in another

country (American Immigrant Council, 2021). This immigrant population was reported as

502,347 women, 493,737 men, and 67,989 children. According to the U.S. Department of

Education (2023), there were more than 840,000 immigrant students in the United States.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) cares for unaccompanied

children who are taken while crossing the border. Those children do not officially

become enrolled in local schools but are provided educational services by the HHS (U. S.

Department of Education, 2023). However, many immigrants in the state are documented

workers or intend to become citizens of the United States and enroll their students in the

public school system (State Department of Education, n.d.).

Education of English Language Learners

When it comes to educating ELLs, guidelines must be followed and laid out by

the education departments nationally and by individual states. According to the U.S.

Department of Education (2022) language assistance must be provided till the student is

considered proficient in English. School districts can choose from programs designed

from theory and research showing what is effective in practice. Some programs designed

to help ELLs include social-emotional learning (SEL), research-based virtual educational

programs for ELLs, the trans-language writing program, pull out, push-in program, and

language assistant program. Li and Peters (2020) stated the importance of equipping

educators with skills to effectively educate ELLs so that interventions are in place to

address the language need and be able to identify if there is a learning delay. Ridley et al.

(2019) pointed out the importance of getting to know each student their strengths and

building solid relationships with their parents to help them socially and educationally.

When further educating ELLs or those who have a disability, there is a correlation found

between the students' language development and their ability to learn material or how

they learn information (Peng, 2022).

Social Emotional Learning

Olivo (2021) stated that culturally and linguistically diverse learners face

challenges of complex social-emotional and socio-cultural needs than their peers. SEL

focuses on five core ideas: relationship skills, self-awareness, responsible decision

making, social awareness, and self-management (Becker & Deris, 2019). These focuses

are beneficial in the academic and social success of diverse learners. Educators feel they

are more helpful in meeting the needs of ELLs when more programs that cater to their

unique cultural/linguistic needs are offered in the school (Becker & Deris, 2019). It was

stated by Fettig et al. (2022) that additional research needs to be conducted on the social-

emotional teaching approaches and how they change outcomes.

Translanguaging Writing Program

Williams (1980) first used the term “trans-languaging,” which is the strategy of

allowing ELLs to write in two or more languages. It allows ELLs to capitalize on their

existing skills and not hold them to just a single language (Williams, 1980). This enables

those learners to use all their language skills to express themselves fully during the

writing process. ELL learners are able to draft and figure out exactly what they want to

say and gather feedback to build their confidence before writing the final draft. When

students can use their entire language repertoire, it empowers them to reach their full

potential and facilitate critical thinking. The Northwestern Evaluation Association

(NWEA, 2022) believed that students within the classroom can benefit from using trans-

language strategies, which teachers should encourage as part of their writing program

(Parmegiani, 2022; Sembiante et al., 2023).

Push-in and Pull-out Program

The push-in and pull-out models allow for the support of ELLs within the

classroom or a smaller setting (Portela-Pruaño et al., 2022). Push-in is where an ELL

specialist or certified educator goes into the general education classroom to provide

additional support. The push-in model is successful when expectations are clear and

transparent. Pull-out services are where an ELL specialist or certified educator pull ELLs

to work individually or in a small group. Pull-out often provides a safe space for ELLs to

receive more minutes of instructions from the ELL specialist than during push-in service

(Lehman, C., & Welch, B.; 2022). Pull-out programs are great for additional support of

English Language Learners and those with a disability, but often they are pulled during

vital instruction time, which causes other issues (Cho et al., 2021).

Language Assistant Program

The language assistant programs allow ELLs to receive assistance to help ensure

they attain English proficiency and help them gain knowledge to meet all academic

content and achievement standards that all students are expected to meet (National Center

for Education Statistics, 2022). These programs improve English proficiency, allowing

students to achieve higher educational outcomes (National Center for Educational

Statistics, 2022). Many schools have implemented technology as a language assistant for

ELLs (Weihong, 2022). Godwin-Jones (2022) found research on language assistance

programs using artificial intelligence to assist with ELLs writing and interpreting things

given to them in English to their native language.

Migrant Education Program (Title I, Part C)

Migrant education programs are designed to help migrant children achieve a

diploma through rigorous academic standards (Department of Education, n.d.). This

program allows migrant children as they move between states to get the same rigorous

academic standards and curriculum while providing services to meet each one's unique

needs. This program provides direct instruction, online instruction, graduation planning

assistance when time, health and dental care, clothing, transportation, and more as a

migrant child progresses and succeeds in school. A software platform called Migrant

Student Information Exchange (MSIX) is set up so that their information can be shared as

the children move from state to state to ensure appropriate enrollment and placement

(Office of Elementary & Secondary Education, 2021). The migrant education programs

focus on students and parents, helping the parents' efficacy, behaviors, relationships with

their child, and everyday stress (Lee, In-Sook & Kim, Eunjung, 2022). According to

Zholdoshalieva et al. (2022), migrant education is essential because this population has

grown over the past 10 years, and that at the end of 2021, the United Nations showed 27

million refugees and 53 million internally displaced persons. This growing population of

immigrant people increases the number of those students in the classroom from those

families.

Student Motivation

With all learners, it is important to build a relationship, but that becomes a higher

importance when working with a learner with a language barrier. When building and

developing a relationship with ELLs, show an interest in their lives and background to

motivate them to be engaged in learning English (Bulazik & Boglages, 2020). Motivation

is an essential factor in the success of learning. According to Bularzik and Boglages

(2020), when students’ were taught by a teacher who understood the importance of task-

based instruction due to the relationships they built, it yielded higher motivation and

confidence in students. Researcher Gao (2021) suggested the teacher-student relationship

is an important foundation for creating motivation and an effective learning environment.

There are two reasons that researchers Morgan et al. (2023) found this strategy

motivational for ELLs to learn English. ELLs learn English to be academically

successful, and the other is to understand the English culture. Creating motivation for

ELLs to learn English will make it easier for educators to have a clear idea if a student is

behind due to language or because some other issues or needs should be addressed

(Morgan et al., 2023).

Language Education

There are several components when it comes to evaluating and teaching ELLs,

according to the U.S. Department of Education (2022). The Equal Education

Opportunities Act of 1974 prohibits states from refusing support or help to students due

to race, color, sex, or national origin. This act mentions that schools are to overcome

language barriers that impede a student’s ability to participate within the classroom or

school. Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) The Bilingual

Education Act looks at the potential disadvantages for non-English speaking students.

The Bilingual Education Act began in 1968 to help schools by providing support and

funding to provide services to students with limited English (National Association of

Bilingual Education, 2022). Title VII was added to support professional development and

increase the state’s role in 1994. A section on the Improving America’s Schools Act in

1994 addressed eligibility for services under Title I and gave an equal opportunity for

those with limited English to gain eligibility the same as their English-speaking peers.

Special Education

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a law that began in 2004

through the Department of Education to ensure that all students receive a free,

appropriate public education regardless of disability. According to the Department of

Education, as of the 2020-2021 school year, 7.5 million children were eligible to receive

services through this program. Children 3-21 are served under part B of the IDEA. IDEA

was amended in 2015 with the Every Student Succeeds Act to state how disability does

not take away from the rights of students to participate or contribute to society. It added

that it is essential to ensure those with disabilities receive equality with opportunities,

participation, living independently, and a chance for self-sufficiency. The Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, Section 504, protects programs rights to receive Federal financial assistance.

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 protects state and local

government services whether they get Federal aid or not.

Special Education Laws

Laws in the education field help guide curriculum and instruction in the classroom

as well as the school. Education laws cover everything from the Every Student Succeeds

Act (ESSA) 2017, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Family

Educational Rights and Policy Act (FERPA), and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of

1964. Each law protects the rights of students and their families to receive the best

education possible (Department of Education, n.d.). The Department of Education was

established in 1979 to set up programs through laws to support all students in school

(Federal Education Laws Administered by the Department of Education, 2023). Storey

(2023) points out how special education laws have changed through the years and that

having laws that change as our learners' needs change has taken schools from segregating

learners to finding ways to work with all learners in the general classroom. Other laws

that the Department of Education handles are the ones pertaining to ELLs. Flores et al.

(2023) discuss the importance of accountability for the educational laws when working

with ELLs by considering specificity, consistency, authority, power, and stability.

Special Education Services

In Southern states, under IDEA, there are several services offered. Officials with

the state's departments of education often point out there is difficulty in determining if a

learning or behavior delay exists due to disability or language barriers (GaDOE, 2023).

According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2022), 792,00 ELLs enrolled

in school in the United States were students identified with a disability. This represents

15.5% of the total ELL enrollment from the 2019-2020 report. 12 disability categories

qualify for services in Southern states; those are: autism spectrum disorder, deaf or blind,

emotional and behavioral disorder, intellectual disability (mild intellectual disability,

moderate intellectual disability, profound intellectual disability, and severe intellectual

disability), orthopedic impairment, other health impairment, significant developmental

delay, specific learning disability, speech-language impairment, traumatic brain injury,

and visual impairment. Accommodations and interventions must be provided to ELLs

who show the possibility of delay in assessing where they are. Services are offered to

those who show a delay and could be identified under FAPE (Free Appropriate Public

Education), but the student’s language and cultural background should be attentively

considered. The services offered under the federal special education law, IDEA, are

related services that can vary and be individualized to each kid who needs them. Some

services include speech-language and audiology, interpreting, psychological,

occupational, and physical therapy, therapeutic recreation, counseling, medical, social

work, parent counseling and training, and early identification and evaluation. It is

important to know the difference between supports and services; supports change how

and what students learn to help them succeed in school at the same learning level as their

peers, and services are for students who need additional or extra help outside the general

education which are provided through an IEP or 504 plan. While services are available,

teachers have found it difficult to implement them due to their ability to access material

and resources (Suhrheinrich et al., 2021).

Early Interventions with ELLs

Early intervention in the years before kindergarten can affect the placement in

special education classes in the early elementary years and potentially impact the

misplacement that could occur. Research has stated the importance of interventions with

ELLs establishing early literacy skills to enhance the chances for higher levels and delays

(Hee Hur et al., 2020). Wackerle-Hollman et al., 2020 found methods used in preschool

with ELLs to develop early literacy skills and when to intervene with interventions

limiting learners that could be at risk later when they progress through school with higher

literacy skills. Understanding the growth in bilingual ELLs across domains helps fill in

learning gaps that could develop and lead to overrepresentation. High-quality

interventions in their preschool years have been shown to directly impact their early

elementary years (Odom et al., 2019). According to Nesbitt et al. (2022), the executive

function skills in inclusive pre-kindergarten classrooms where copy design intervention

skills were used showed significant increases in those executive functioning skills.

Assessing ELLs

Cho et al. (2020) studied how schools assessed ELLs in only English, even

though that was their second language, not their primary one. When researching, they

also found that the school was assessing using a psychologist who did not speak Spanish

and no translator was used to help with any portion of the assessment. Roseberry-

McKibbin et al. (2021) saw as the number of ELLs was increasing in schools, it increased

referrals of those for special education. They examined how the assessment was biased

because a pre-assessment of the students' language equivalency was never discussed.

Research also considered RTI (response to intervention) involved in supporting the ELL

to see if higher academic achievement could be made before just referring to special

education (Roseberry-McKibbin et al., 2021). With the growing culturally and

linguistically diverse students and families, Lim et al. (2021) discussed how parents are

to be involved in the decision-making process of identification, evaluation, and

placement of students in special education classes according to the IDEA but that it is not

being done as much as it was envisioned due to the language barriers. Cho et al. (2020)

looked at how dynamic assessments had more value than traditional assessments for

identifying ELLs who could be at risk for being identified with a disability when it is just

a language barrier. An ELL student who is assessed an English assessment for special

education and is placed in a special education class with services not needed reduces the

ELL services they receive that are necessary (Burr, 2019). Barrio et al. (2020) looked at

how the validity of the test and process lacked cultural understanding, accountability, and

misinterpretation of policies that often affect the results and placement of ELLs in special

education programs. Assessment and placement can often be affected by variables such

as language that impact results and limit the support of those individual needs that could

be addressed through interventions (Agran et al., 2020). Park (2020) found that when

referring ELLs for special education services, it is more accurate when educators work

and collaborate to limit the barriers of language and cultural misunderstandings that could

arise.

Separating Language from Disability

When looking at disability versus a language struggle, various tasks should be

considered that address the diverse linguistic, academic, cultural, emotional, and

intellectual needs (Lopes-Murphy, 2020). Hulse (2020) considered how resources

available for teachers to access when educating ELLs impact the amount of remediation

that is given, which can lead to higher referral rates and overrepresentation in special

education. Karvonen et al. (2021) stated that their research found many teachers did not

view language and disability as two separate things and that their approach to instruction

tends to follow that perception. When considering students, especially ELLs, it should be

through the standard special education assessment and the lens of social, cultural, and

historical (Conner et al., 2019). Farkas et al. (2020) examined how overrepresentation can

be attributed to cultural differences. An asset-based approach, as stated by Park (2020),

looks at a more accurate portrayal of what the student can do, and the deficits that arise

can be attributed to some of the cultural misunderstandings in the school. It was

considered by Cruz et al. (2022) that understanding the risk of disproportionality changes

over time by considering the student's cultural background as it influences the assessment

process. When looking at students with dual social identities and classifications, the

school can inadvertently create a larger English struggle or create a disability that may

not have been there before (Cooc, 2023). Cooc (2023) continued to say the inability to

learn received ELL services can lead to a learning challenge requiring additional services.

Culturally Responsive

The U.S. Census Bureau (2019) stated one in every 4 children in the United States

is of Spanish or Latin descent and this number represents about 23% of the school age

population. Looking at culturally responsive teaching we connect a student’s language,

culture, and life with what they are learning at school. Making connections that mean

something to the student improves the students depth of knowledge and understanding.

When we consider cultural responsive approaches the impact of family interactions

during meal times is a vital opportunity for improved vocabulary (Leyva et al., 2022).

Yoon (2023) found 5 key principles of culturally responsive teaching: foundational

knowledge of the student’s home language; translanguaging space for the students to

process information; implementing integrated approaches for content and language by

making learning more active; multimodality for engagement allowing communication

through verbal, visual, non-verbal, and auditory; and collaboration for the diverse needs

by meeting with the bilingual teacher. Idrus and Sohid (2023) stated being culturally

responsive goes beyond the education classroom or school but extends to other social

contexts. The culturally responsive teaching approach looks to improve the whole student

by enhancing their self-esteem, critical thinking, and their academic success (Yu, 2022).

Classroom Environment

When helping culturally and linguistically diverse students like ELLs, it is

essential to have a welcoming classroom environment. As a teacher takes the time to

know the learners and their background, it makes a big difference in the students

learning. Gupta (2019) stated that bringing a student’s culture into the classroom by

presenting information from their culture with various visuals and labeling them in

multiple languages. Hence, they feel valued in the school creates a positive environment.

One approach that has been researched is called code switching, where the teacher creates

a supportive classroom environment, talking to the ELLs in their native language and

English opening up opportunities for ELLs to be active participants in classroom

discussions (Suh, 2020). When a teacher draws from the students' background, it creates

an environment that can separate what is a language challenge and what goes beyond that

to a greater need (Owens & Wells, 2021). Researchers Chahin et al. (2023) stated a

classroom that builds on the cognitive strengths and social capabilities of the ELLs

encourages the developmental stages of language acquisition to limit what may appear as

a delay as they progress through school—creating a welcoming environment by knowing

what pedagogical approaches to try within the classroom can help a teacher separate a

language delay from a more significant issue requiring intensive interventions.

Resources

The increasing growth of ELLs in schools results in more resources and needs for

the school to address the challenges that come with it. Evans et al. (2021) found that this

increase in culturally and linguistically diverse learners requires culturally sensitive

educational interventions. Efficacy within the schools for culturally responsive teaching

was a struggle that Chu found due to limited opportunities and material offered for

teachers as well as community members to promote successful ELL learning (Cho et al.,

2021). Barrio (2021) considered how the lack of resources provided to teachers on

understanding the knowledge and skills of culturally responsive practices and pre-referral

models for special education can create disproportionality. Graves and Bahous (2021)

showed a need for professional learning on socio-emotional teaching and disciplinary

efficacy to support teachers on effective approaches to working with ELLs. How ELL is

defined within a school can impact the approach to the priority of special education over

language, where clear resources for teachers on what to expect or look for can limit the

inconsistency (Cooc, 2023). When teachers are provided with material to lead to

classroom success and growth with ELL students, it can close gaps in the academic

deficits that arise.

Multiple Modality Approach to ELLs

Multiple Modality is the three main ways students learn: visual, auditory, and

kinesthetic. When it comes to addressing ELLs needs, using multiple modalities is

essential to address all their needs. All students have different learning needs, but

challenges arise and are more prevalent when the learning needs of ELLs still need to be

addressed. It is important when working with ELLs or the ELLs you believe might have a

learning delay to take the time to learn them, understand their specific learning style, and

teach using a variety of learning styles to meet the different needs of all (Beisly et al.,

2023; Hsu et al., 2022).

Visual representation greatly impacts the cognitive and construction of

knowledge, providing new thoughts or ideas for education (Zhang, 2022). The researcher

went on to state an auxiliary and alternative communication approach could improve

English teaching and change the traditional way English teaching has been. Using

multiple modalities during instruction can significantly impact what the students absorb

and show where actual struggles might be instead of the struggles that come from not

understanding the language. The use of multiple modalities extends to every content with

a variety of different uses in each setting. Some of the main examples of the use of

multiple modalities in English is producing digital texts, math constructs arguments using

a variety of symbolic representation, and science will use models as visual

representations (Grapin & Llosa, 2022).

Parent Engagement

When considering parent engagement, it is important to remember the success of

any learner, but especially an ELL, is creating a partnership between the school and the

parents. Parent engagement means working together to create a positive, goal-oriented

relationship with shared responsibility and mutual respect (Administration for Children

and Families, 2020). That partnership will promote equity, inclusiveness, and cultural and

linguistic responsiveness when working with the English Language Learner. Parent

engagement helps build a safe, welcoming, and trusting environment that fosters

successful learning outcomes and finds new approaches to working with each student.

When considering ELLs with disabilities, those relationships are vital because they can

limit some biases that may exist in the dominant culture (Thurlow et al., 2022). A key

factor when engaging parents of ELLs with disabilities is ensuring they have resources

provided to them. Researchers state a few possible barriers they perceive to engaging

parents: a) lack of communication, b) mutual respect, c) distrust, d) inadequate

professional skills, e) lack of parity in power dynamics, f) low socioeconomic status

(Thurlow et al., 2022). Understanding that while a family may be culturally or

linguistically diverse does not mean they do not know what is going on with their child;

their voice is just as important to consider in discussions regarding the child’s education.

To allow all families to feel they are a part of their students' educations, schools need to

make sure they have interpreters, written communication translated into multiple

languages, and parent help and involvement programs (McCarthy et al., 2020; Sommer et

al., 2020; Stauss et al., 2021).

Educator Preparation

Teachers are continuous learners from when we start school, and it continues long

after graduation. Once a teacher begins working, it becomes known as professional

development to improve and grow as professionals in the education field. The teacher

preparation varies from university to university, with different approaches from hands-on

in the field to reading and assignments within a classroom. The national average of

teachers remaining in the field after five years is 50% because most become

overwhelmed and unprepared (Morgan et al., 2020). Li & Peters (2020) said that

educators in the general education classroom do not feel they are prepared with training

or ongoing professional development opportunities to assist the needs and growing

number of ELLs in the classroom. The growing demand for professional development to

work with ELLs is a struggle because this population of students continues to increase,

and they have a unique educational need. Educating ELL students requires effective

training that supports and guides teacher approaches to creating inclusive learning

environments to accommodate all needs of ELLs or ELLs with disabilities (Larios &

Zetlin, 2023).

Summary and Conclusion

In Chapter 2, I provided an exhaustive literature review addressing the research

related to the challenges and experiences in identifying English Language Learners for

special education programs. Some topics discussed are student motivation, classroom

environment, student background knowledge, assessing, interaction and discussion,

multiple modalities, review and assessment, English language learners with disabilities,

different resources available to ELLs, strategies for working with ELLs, teacher

preparation, the role of the English for Speakers of Other Language (ESOL) teacher, and

parent engagement. My rationale for selecting these variables is related to the

phenomenon of interest: what are early childhood teachers’ experiences on the

overrepresentation of ELLs in special education programs, and what practices do early

childhood teachers need to intervene in the overrepresentation of ELLs in special

education programs.

Chapter 3: Research Method

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. Two

areas of interest in this study are (a) K-2 teachers’ experiences with the

overrepresentation of ELLs in special education programs in the Southern region of the

United States and (b) what they need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the

classroom. In Chapter 3, I describe the research design and rationale, explain my role as

the researcher, and address the methodology I used. I also discuss the recruitment of

participants, the instrument used for data collection, the data analysis, and issues of

trustworthiness.

Research Design and Rationale

Two research questions based on the conceptual framework and relevant literature

in the field guide this study:

RQ1: What are K-2 teachers’ experiences regarding the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

RQ2: What do early childhood teachers need to address the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs?

The central concept I investigated is the perception of the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education and how practices need to change to intervene in identifying

ELLs in special education programs. Researchers have suggested that teacher experiences

on student placements are important because the overrepresentation of students can be

academically and psychologically harmful for students (Burr, 2019; Karvonen et al.,

2021; Murphy & Johnson, 2020; Tankard Carnock et al., 2019). In the review of the

literature, Karvonen et al. (2021) found teachers generally do not view disability and

language needs as separate, and due to that, the approach that instruction/identification

takes follows that thought process. Without support from educators in the classroom to

meet some of the language needs, the delays can become greater and present as a

disability that may not be genuinely there (Karvonen et al., 2021).

The Research Tradition

The research tradition or design for my study is a basic qualitative study using

semistructured interviews with 12 K-2 teachers from general and special education

classrooms in 12 different schools. The rationale for choosing the basic qualitative

research design approach was it best aligned with my research problem, purpose, and

research questions (see Burkholder, 2020). This design focuses on the person's interest

and how they view things (see Burkholder, 2016). Since the purpose of a qualitative

research design is to explore the experiences and views of others, it was the most

appropriate for this study because it allowed me to acquire information and understanding

of the experiences of early childhood education teachers who work with ELLs and

students with disabilities. Understanding the world and how people make sense of the

experiences they have in the world is what researchers Merriam and Tisdell (2016) have

found is the purpose of qualitative research. This type of research is used to help

understand human actions through open-ended questions (Schwandt, 2015). A basic

qualitative approach is the researcher using the participant's situation or phenomenon,

meaning it is used as an instrument to gather more profound understanding, inductive,

and the results are descriptive (Merriam, 2018). When using a basic qualitative approach,

Merriam (2018) points out that the researcher seeks to understand a phenomenon,

process, perspective, and views of those involved in each or all areas. Researchers

suggest that to reach data saturation, it is best to have between 12 participants in a

qualitative study (see Creswell, 2013).

My rationale for choosing a basic qualitative research design using semistructured

open-ended interview questions is that it offered more significant opportunities for in-

depth results on experiences of early childhood education teachers on the identification of

ELLs for special education programs than other designs. As Turner (2010) discussed, this

approach is slightly structured but still allows for some flexibility to have informal

conversations. Since I am looking at participants' experiences, this allowed for more in-

depth discussion in a more relaxed format. This format also allowed me to take the

questions that have been formatted and adapt them when needed to address the

participants personally and get a greater depth of knowledge. The data collection method

and open-ended interviews were aligned. Other qualitative designs I considered were

ethnography, phenomenology, and grounded theory. Ethnography looks at the cultural

meaning and focuses on an in-person field study with immersion through participant

observation (Ravitch & Carl, 2021). This type of research uses interviews and informal

conversations to study social/cultural groups that seek to understand those groups better.

With ethnography, the researcher also participates in the group to better understand an

insider perspective of those groups. This approach does not apply to my study or the

basic qualitative research because I am using open-ended questions to gather information

and am not an active participant in the study myself. Phenomenology looks at lived

experiences and phenomena and collects data through interviews (Ravitch & Carl, 2021).

The phenomenology approach is good at looking at what an experience means to a

specific group but could be better for a more comprehensive picture of understanding

(Ravitch & Carl, 2021). Grounded theory would not work for my study since it does not

use descriptive approaches as a basic qualitative design with open-ended interviews (see

Creswell, 2013). Grounded theory is not the best fit because it is designed to help develop

theory and does not use open-ended interviews like the basic qualitative design (see Yin,

2014). The basic qualitative research allows focus on a small sample size of 12

participants, with data being collected until saturation is reached.

Role of Researcher

As the researcher, I am responsible for all facets of the study: interviewing,

recording, journaling, transcribing, coding, and analyzing data provided by 12 early

childhood teachers from 12 different rural school districts in the United States. According

to Rubin and Rubin (2012), researchers are active participants in their research; their

personalities, knowledge, curiosity, and sensitivity all impact the quality of the work and

perceptions. The role of the researcher in qualitative research is to assess the experiences

and feelings of study participants and understand people's feelings regarding their

experiences (Sutton & Austin, 2015).

Researcher Bias

I have a personal bias because I am passionate about providing appropriate,

effective support to multilingual learners. Merriam and Tisdell (2015) stated that humans

have a natural bias, but as researchers an obligation to recognize and monitor those

biases. As the primary instrument for data collection was interviews, my role and

experience could have impacted my judgment when asking for and analyzing the data

results. Honesty is critical in collecting data from various sources; I put aside what I

already know to create an effective data analysis process and avoid bias (see Islam et al.,

2022).

Methodology

To address the research questions of this basic qualitative study, I interviewed 12

K-2 special education and ESOL teachers until saturation was reached. Volunteers were

recruited from rural school districts where I am not employed in the United States with a

high enrollment of bilingual students and special education programs.

Participant Selection

Interviews included collecting data through interviews with 12 K-2 volunteer

participants from 12 different rural schools with an enrollment of 15-20% of bilingual

students in the southern United States. I am not employed at any of the schools were

participants teach nor was I known to potential participants. I used publicly available

emails and social media groups to post a flyer asking for participants interested in being

interviewed for my study to reach out to the email on the flyer. Ravitch and Carl (2021)

stated that people use their experiences to understand people with self-reflection on

different phenomena. My study collected interview data on the experiences of teachers

who work with ELLs identified as special education students made qualitative research

methodology the appropriate option for this study. Rubin and Rubin (2012) discussed

interviews as a naturalistic research method because the researchers engage in dialogue

with people with knowledge and experience within the researched area. I followed the

Rubin and Rubin interview protocol for using open-ended questions and questions that

lead to further questions to gather as much information as possible. I explored teacher

experiences based on their experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in

special education, which made a qualitative methodology the best fit. I recruited

kindergarten, first, and second-grade teachers, including multigrade level teachers of

ESOL from different rural school districts in the United States. Recruitment was

conducted through publicly available emails. Volunteers were asked to respond to a flyer

by email if they were interested in participating in my study.

Data Analysis Plan

Data was analyzed by coding to identify patterns, categories, and themes that

address early childhood teachers’ experiences on the overrepresentation of ELLs in

special education programs and practices early childhood teachers need to intervene in

the identification of ELLs in special education programs. I used a reflective journal to

document the interviews. Each interview was recorded and transcribed using iTranscribe

online software to clearly reflect what the interviewee stated. In my first data analysis

phase, I used descriptive coding, which involves reading through qualitative data and

coding it according to the topic (see Saldaña, 2021). I designed a table for interview data

and assigned an alphanumeric code to each educator. Rubin and Rubin (2012) noted that

coding is finding and labeling the concepts, themes, events, and examples in your

transcripts that speak to your research questions. I manually coded the data using Braun

and Clarke’s (2006) step-by-step data analysis approach to analyze the interview

transcripts. The steps include: (a) becoming familiar with the data by reading and

understanding exactly what is stated, (b) generate initial codes for organizing data and

keeping personal information separate, (c) search for themes by finding common ideas

throughout each interview to group thoughts, (d) review themes, (e) define and name

themes using the common ideas found throughout the interviews, and (f) produce a

scholarly report.

Issues of Trustworthiness

With a basic qualitative study, it was important to establish the validity or

trustworthiness of the findings to ensure rigor and truth in the study's research. Ravitch

and Carl (2016) stated when multiple methods of data collection are used; it affirms the

findings are faithful and honest to the participants' experiences. To address the issue of

trustworthiness, the study was carefully aligned with well-established research methods,

conducting interviews with a variety of educators across different organizations,

becoming familiar with each educator, including relevant and grounded research

questions, and debriefing with peers and peer feedback (Ravitch & Carl, 2016).

For this study, I recorded the interviews and took anecdotal notes to ensure the

information shared was captured accurately with what each participant said. I had

member checking at the end to check the interview summary to ensure that the data

collected is valid and is interpreted clearly without bias. Member checking allows the

participant to ensure throughout the process that the information they shared was

interpreted accurately, portraying their point of view (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). This

process allowed them to read over the summary of their interview for accuracy, and I

reviewed any feedback they provided and reflected on making the changes needed to

keep the results accurate to their point of view while maintaining contact with them to

inform them of the outcomes of the analysis of the data. This process enhances the

validity and trustworthiness of the research study results.

Trustworthiness has four elements to establish confidence in the results of the

qualitative study: Credibility, Transferability, Dependability, and Confirmability

(Shenton, 2004). These strategies give insight to help guide researchers to ensure

trustworthiness in a study. Each area provides another layer in the qualitative research to

have credibility and rigor.

Credibility

Credibility is how much truth is in the research findings. Credibility is the

researcher's ability to take the complexities within a study and deal with those patterns

that aren’t easy to explain (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Research by Merriam looked at the

credibility in comparing how aligned the data is collected to reality (Shenton, 2004). For

ensuring credibility, the area that should be considered the highest priority is creating

trustworthiness. Things a researcher should consider in making sure the research method

fits with the concept being studied, establishing familiarity with the persons or

organizations from whom the data will be collected, careful selection of participants to

limit researcher bias, triangulation, finding a way to create honesty with participants

being interviewed, open-ended questions to not lead a participant to a response,

debriefing, peer review, and reflection.

Credibility is examining the truth in what is measured through research findings.

Establishing credibility through debriefing after the interviews, engagement throughout

the interview, recording the interview, reflective journal, and interview transcription.

Credibility in this research study was created by interviewing 12 K-2 early childhood

education teachers from different rural school districts in the United States while

recording, transcribing, and keeping a reflective interview journal. Before the interviews

were conducted, I provided participants with interview questions to review. After the

interviews, I arranged a time to meet and debrief with each participant.

Transferability

According to Guba (1981), transferability is developed by descriptive and

context-relevant statements. The basis of qualitative research is fidelity to the

interviewees' experiences and cannot be directly applied to other settings or contexts.

Research shows that some transferability to different contexts is supported. To work

toward transferability, I worked with an expert panel who reviewed my interview

questions to check for validity and reliability to address the research questions.

Dependability

Dependability is about the stability of data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Miles et al.

(2014) discussed how dependable qualitative research is when it becomes consistent and

stable over time. Dependable research requires reasonable arguments, data collection for

your argument, and then presenting data consistent with your argument. To create

dependability within this study, I explained the steps through each process to explain why

my method was chosen, the context, and the study population.

Confirmability

Guba (1981) quantitative research has a level of objectivity but does not claim to

be objective. Qualitative research seeks to find research that is more confirmable data that

is free from researcher bias. Qualitative research understands that there is some

subjectivity but that it should be able to be confirmed. With confirmability, we

investigate how our bias influences our interpretations of the data collected. To ensure

confirmability within the study, I kept a reflection journal to address potential biases and

help avoid them.

Ethical Procedures

An informed consent (Appendix D) is an agreement to gain access to participants'

data. To further inform consent each participant was provided an explanation of the

purpose of the study, interview questions, and all ethical procedures in place, including

confidentiality. The informed consent outlined the goals, amount of time, methodology of

the study, an explanation that participation is voluntary, participant's right to no longer be

involved at any time, list risks and benefits, and cover how the data collected will be used

and shared. Additional permission to record and transcribe the interview was collected

before the start of any interview, and a copy was shared at the conclusion. The consent

was emailed to participants ahead of time and reiterated throughout the interview process.

I took steps to ensure participants were treated respectfully and valued. Walden

University guidelines stated by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) were followed using

the designated consent forms provided through Walden. I worked with Walden

University for approval before interviews began. I do not have any ethical concerns about

data collection because participant selection was from areas I have no affiliation with. All

data collected through email with personal information or responses to interview

questions was kept confidential. The data will be discarded after the Walden requirement

of 5 years is met, with information remaining confidential until then. After approval of

the dissertation, material used to collect information during the interview, such as

reflective journal, notes, recordings, and transcriptions will be destroyed.

Summary

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. In

Chapter 3, I describe the research design and rationale, explain my role as the researcher,

address the methodology I use, and discuss the process that I followed to recruit

participants, instrumentation, data collection and analysis, and the issues of

trustworthiness. In Chapter 4, I present my data collection, processing, and analysis

process and give my study findings.

Chapter 4: Results

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. I

recruited 12 early childhood education teachers from different schools: five special

education teachers, six ELL teachers, and one early intervention practices (EIP) teacher.

All teachers were recruited from rural counties in the southern region of the United

States. Teachers were recruited through various platforms (email, LinkedIn, Facebook).

As required by Walden University, I sent out an email, and if a teacher responded with

the words “I consent” I responded with another email following up on participant

requirements and asked for the best dates and times for the interview. I sent an email

thanking them with the Zoom link for the meeting. Interviews were conducted via Zoom

with an audio recording that was then transcribed using the iTranscribe processing

program. I analyzed the transcripts for open codes, patterns, and categories to identify

themes (see Braun & Clarke, 2006). In Chapter 4, I provide study results, describe the

teacher demographics, and explain data collection and analysis. I also outline the results

and provided evidence of trustworthiness.

Setting

I conducted Zoom meeting interviews using an open-ended approach from my

personal office. During the interviews the door was closed to ensure participants’

confidentiality and that there were no interruptions. I used alpha numeric codes to

identify participants, Interview Participant 1 (IP1) and so on for all 12 participants.

Interviews were recorded and transcribed using word processing software, then data was

coded. To my understanding, no outside conditions influenced participants or their

experiences during the study. I created a code book, which was a compilation of

interview data collected from participants during the interviews.

Demographics

In this section, I present the demographic data for the 12 participants in

this study. Table 1 shows the collected demographic data for the participants.

Table 1

Research Participant Demographics

Participant

Years in Field

Grade Level

Type

Sex

IP1

IP2

IP3

IP4

IP5

IP6

IP7

IP8

IP9

IP10

IP11

IP12

7 years

9 years

14 years

8 years

9 years

10 years

15 years

10 years

19 years

7 years

4 years

K-5

K-1

K-2

Sped/EL

Sped

EIP

Gen Ed w/EL

Sped

EL/Sped

Sped

Five special education teachers, six EL teachers, and 1 EIP teacher were

interviewed using an open-ended approach. Teachers were from 12 different schools in

rural counties in the southern United States. Teachers met all qualifications for this study,

including working with ELLs and special education students.

Data Collection

After obtaining approval from the Walden University IRB (Approval No. 12-07-

23-1000099), I recruited 12 early childhood education teachers through teacher contacts,

social media teacher groups, and professional organizations from 12 different schools. To

collect data in this study, I conducted a basic qualitative study with interviews using an

open-ended method. I conducted about three interviews a week for 4 weeks. Before each

interview I would log on to the Zoom session about 15 minutes early to test all

technology and have everything prepared. I used the Interview Protocol for Teachers (see

Appendix B) to ensure I followed the approved process. I informed all participants I

would be recording on a tape-recording software app from my phone to ensure privacy

and confidentiality. Once I began the interview and I started recording I asked

participants to state if they still consented to the interview and reminded them the

interview was voluntary so it could be stopped at any point. I explained I would be taking

the recording and transcribing them to download and analyze, using code techniques to

ensure confidentiality.

Each interview was approximately 45-60 minutes uninterrupted using the

questions approved by Walden IRB. At the end of each interview, I reminded participants

that at any point if they had questions to contact me, and I thanked them for their

participation. There were no variations in my data collection process from the original

plan presented in Chapter 3. I did not encounter any unusual circumstances during the

data collection process.

Data Analysis

To conduct data analysis, I followed the process recommended by Rubin and

Rubin (2012), noting that coding is finding and labeling the concepts, themes, events, and

examples in the transcripts that speak to the research questions. It is the job of the

researcher to make sense of the information shared by the participants. For this study, it

was the process of creating categories and themes from the responses participants gave

when answering the interview questions. I manually coded the data using Braun and

Clarke’s (2006) step-by-step data analysis approach to analyze the interview transcripts.

The six steps recommended by Braun and Clarke are described below.

Step 1: Becoming Familiar with the Data

When becoming familiar with the data first I started by transcribing the interviews

from the recordings. Once the interviews were transcribed I took the time to read and re-

read the responses to the interview questions to get ideas for possible codes that could be

used or expanded upon.

Step 2: Generate Initial Codes

After each interview I downloaded the recording to transcribe them for analysis. I

was then able to organize each transcript into a word document table for thematic

analysis. As I became familiar with the data collected through the interviews I was able to

notice patterns from multiple participants. These patterns allowed me to begin the open

code process with supporting information shared from the participants through the

research questions found in Table 2. After a few interviews were inserted into the word

document, I began going through pulling out important points shared and highlighting

keywords. I then went through bolding important phrases that reflected the thoughts

shared by the participant’s perspectives, looking for similarities or patterns. It was easier

to do a couple interviews at a time to analyze the data than wait till all 12 interviews were

completed and try to analyze it at that point.

Table 2

Examples of Open Codes

Sample Code

Participant

Sample Excerpt

Anchor Charts

IP5

“I always have anchor charts, because I always like to point back, and

even just as a visual of the poster, but also of where it's located, because

then I'll see kids while they're working immediately shift their heads to

it.”

Scaffold

IP8

“Kids are getting an opportunity to talk to multiple students throughout

their lesson and then again, those sentence stems I think that to me that is

the easiest way to scaffold for EL students, for students with IEPs, for

shy students I mean even students who, just are afraid of talking but

really moving away from that raise your hand to answer thing and more

elbow partners discussed with your neighbor and using strategic

placements of students, so these kids have an opportunity to talk to each

other without feeling on the spot.”

Co-Teaching

IP4

“We do a lot of scaffolding, a lot of station teaching, rotation teaching,

splitting up with my co teacher and making sure that they're differentiated

based on their skills, and making sure we give them the materials that

they need to be successful.”

Self-Contained

IP3

“Some students are put in self-contained as early intervention and exit by

2nd grade which makes it questionable if they needed special education to

begin with.”

Access Test

IP9

“They are grouped based off their access score, which they can have a

level between zero and six, and based off the access for determines need

of their can-do indicators.”

Google Translate

IP1

“The EL teacher uses Google Translate, which I do too, but, she will pull

them, to the back table, and she will use Google Translate to translate the

lesson, to them about what they should be doing. At the same time, she

will have them to use Google Translate to ask any questions that they

have about the language. When they first got to my classroom, she would

take pictures using a group Google Translate to translate what we were

reading to Spanish so they could read it in Spanish.”

Visuals

IP3

“The visuals are a huge part, especially with communication, trying to do

speaking and communicate their wants and needs.”

Pull Out

IP8

“She's got resources and co-taught for reading, writing, and math, and she

has an EL segment, so the argument is looking at this poor child spending

so much time out of the classroom she's not, being immersed in the

language around her peers.”

Push In

IP10

“The push in is only provided at the request of administrators and the

district in our county because intensive pull-out services is what is more

focused on otherwise.”

Translator Service

IP12

“In order to communicate with the parents, you have to request the

translator. Sometimes that takes a couple days. And if it's like an

assignment that's time sensitive, it's kind of hard to get that information

out in a timely matter.”

Pictures

IP6

“In the classroom, we would make sure that we had readily available any

vocabulary, content, vocabulary that might be new. We would have

access to that with pictures and different ways for them to look at

resources to kind of help them bridge that gap with what we were

learning.”

Chunking

IP7

“I am going to make the information as bite size as possible using a

variety of differentiation and assessing in their native language to see

where they truly are.”

Step 3: Search for Themes

When looking at the data collected after being organized into open codes I noticed

categories to organize the data and began to find emerging themes. This approach

allowed for me to create a map of ideas with the entire data grouped in a clear organized

manner. I would step back and look at my study with the codes and data shared by the

participants continuing to highlighting and bold key phrases. I took the time to look at the

responses and how they fit with the research questions of the study to see what categories

would emerge to find possible themes and document them in the table below.

Table 3

Examples of Open Codes and Categories

Categories

Themes

Services

Theme 3: Early childhood teachers need

English as a Second Language and

Special Education Services to support

ELLs in the classroom.

Miriam and Tisdell (2016) pointed out the importance of comparing the codes into

smaller groups of categories to attempt to find the themes to answer the research

question.

Step 6: Produce a Report

My data analysis began with each of these steps referring to the data shared from

each participant, using the data to identify codes, comparing the codes and data to find

categories, and then further examining all the information to find the emerging themes

that share a clear understanding of what the participants shared. The data collected was

examined numerous times and reflected upon to avoid missing any important or valuable

information shared. Reflection, member checking, and continuous examination of the

data were used to ensure credibility in the evidence presented. During the analysis of the

data in this study, no discrepant cases were found.

Evidence Of Trustworthiness

With this qualitative study, it was important to establish the validity or

trustworthiness of the findings to ensure rigor and truth in the study's research. Ravitch

and Carl (2016) stated that when multiple methods of data collection are used it affirms

the findings are faithful and honest to the participants' experiences. Trustworthiness is

important to how the research was conducted and how it impacts the credibility,

transferability, dependability, and confirmability of the data.

Credibility

Credibility is how much truth is in the research findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Credibility is the researcher's ability to take the complexities within a study and deal with

those patterns that are not easy to explain (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Research by Merriam

looked at the credibility in comparing how aligned the data is collected to reality (as cited

in Shenton, 2004). The credibility was ensured by using established research methods,

interviewing multiple participants from a variety of backgrounds in K-2 settings, creating

familiarity with the participant, using appropriate questions, and constantly reviewing

data through the process (see Shenton, 2004). To ensure credibility in this study, I

conducted a basic qualitative study with 12 early childhood education teachers from 12

different schools: five special education teachers, six EL teachers, and one EIP teacher in

different rural counties in the southern region of the United States. Before each interview,

I thanked them for their participation and I reviewed the consent form with them again

and their right to stop the interview at any point or ask questions, and informed them the

interview would be audio recorded to ensure their comfort with me and the process. I

then began asking a series of interview questions that aligned to the research questions of

the study and offered prompts for further clarification and details when needed. At the

end of each interview, I thanked them again for their participation and made sure they

knew to reach out at any time if they had further questions or something they felt they

wanted to add. I kept a journal of notes during the process to use for reflection for the

purpose of the study.

Transferability

According to Guba (1981), transferability is developed by descriptive and

context-relevant statements. The basis of qualitative research is fidelity to the participants

experiences and cannot be directly applied to other settings or contexts. In this study, I

interviewed a group of early childhood education teachers working with ELLs, Special

Education, or both who may be able to relate to the findings of the study. Ravitch and

Carl (2016) stated the importance of creating transferability with in-depth descriptions of

the data and variations in the participants selected which I strive to do in my research. I

provided clear detailed accounts of the perceptions of early childhood education teachers

who work with special education and ELLs. Using the detailed description of the data

and analysis for how it will support future research and how the themes from the data

correlate to the responses of the participants.

Dependability

Dependability is about the stability of data (Ravitch & Carl, 2016). Miles et al.

(2014) discussed how dependable qualitative research is when it becomes consistent and

stable over time. To ensure dependability in this study, I interviewed early childhood

education teachers from different rural counties in the southern United States working

with special education or ELLs. Participants were recruited from twelve different schools

across the rural counties of the southern United States with a minimum of 5 years

teaching experience in public schools.

Confirmability

Guba (1981) quantitative research has a level of objectivity but does not claim to

be objective. Qualitative research seeks to find research that is more confirmable data that

is free from researcher bias. To ensure confirmability in the study, I reviewed the

interview questions and kept a reflective journal to keep my bias from influencing any of

the research. I ensured that the findings were supported by data and my views did not

influence any results by reflecting on whether the findings were based on my interest and

bias or shaped by the participants responses.

Results

The results of this study are based on data analysis of 12 audio recorded

interviews using 9 interview questions with the tenth question asking participants for any

additional information they would like to include (see Appendix A). Interview questions

one through five answered research question 1, and interview questions six through nine

answered research question 2. Interview questions were formed to align with Cummins’s

(2010) theory of language acquisition and Hoover’s (2020) multitiered system of

supports for English language learners.

Theme 1: Parent-Teacher Communication has an Influence on Student Placement

in Special Education Programs.

Theme 1 answered research question 1 by suggesting that parent teacher

communication is instrumental in the impact on student appropriate placement and

success. Participants in this study describe the various methods of communication with

students and families whether that is in the classroom or in meetings with parents. There

are various forms of communication from online, google translate, or translators.

Communication

Participants discussed various means of communication and the importance it has

on student placement and success. Some of the forms of communication discussed by

participants were online modes, google translate, and translator services. IP6 shared her

experiences with the challenges lacking fluid communication with the parents on student

success stating, “It would have been a lot better if they were able to have the support at

home to kind of reiterate what we were doing in class, or support what we were doing in

class on their success.” IP4 shared her challenge when sending work home with families

of native language speakers because translation services are available for calls and

meeting its not there when they have homework to do. She stated, “When I send

homework to do with them, they don't understand it because it's not their native

language.”

Communication is key to a student’s success and appropriate placement within a

variety of services. IP12 talked about the challenges with the translation services that are

available within her school, explaining:

In order to communicate with the parents, you have to request the translator.

Sometimes that takes a couple days. And if it's like an assignment that's time

sensitive, it's kind of hard to get that information out in a timely matter. While

some people in the school could translate they prefer us go through the proper

channels to use the translation service they provide through the county.

IP1 stated one support she tries is:

Students will use Google translate when they come up to the desk and point to let

me know that he needs to see the iPad and he knows how to get on translator and

have the language go from Spanish to English to assist with his communication.

He will then stand there and wait for me to answer him by switching the iPad,

back to translate English to Spanish.

IP6 attempts using an online approach stating:

I communicate with the parents through the class dojo, so they're able to interpret

our different messages, and they can see me online, but that's our main source of

communication with the families but with the student, I don't feel like I've been

doing a lot of remediation with them at all.

IP11 talked about how the communication is important in IEP meetings because to

understand what is being explained to a parent about their learner and placement can be

difficult to anyone but especially those with a language barrier. She continued to state:

An IEP in general, there's a lot of terminology that English speakers don't

understand, and so it was hard for them to understand. Or even if, you know,

when she was picking her child up, trying to talk to the mom, trying to relay

everything that was going on, she would mostly just smile and say, okay, thank

you, or just say yes.

Theme 2: Teacher Strategies Have an Effect on Student Achievement and Growth

in Different Environments.

Theme 2 answers research question 1 by suggesting the need for a variety of

strategies and approaches to working with ELLs and ELLs with IEPs on student growth.

When using effective strategies it can impact potential challenges they could face.

Participants identified several strategies used when working with ELLs on IEPs and those

who aren’t yet on the achievement and growth the learners have. According to

participants, achievement can be impacted on the services, strategies, and environments

they are in.

Strategy

When working with ELLs it is vital to think about the impact that appropriate

strategies can have on learner success. Looking back to research by Vygotsky (1978) to

more current research by Alghamdy (2024), understanding strategies when working with

ELLs and the approach to using them are key parts of student success. IP2 shared,

Teachers must intentionally plan the lesson to reach all learners, so it requires a

lot of thinking ahead on vocabulary and building background looking at various

strategic approaches.

IP8 explained:

Kids are getting an opportunity to talk to multiple students throughout their lesson

and then again, those sentence stems I think that to me that is the easiest way to

scaffold for EL students, for students with IEPs, for shy students I mean even

students who, just are afraid of talking but really moving away from that raise

your hand to answer thing and more elbow partners discussed with your neighbor

and using strategic placements of students, so these kids have an opportunity to

talk to each other without feeling on the spot.

IP7 continued the same theme by stating, “I am going to make the information as bite

size as possible using a variety of differentiation and assessing in their native language to

see where they truly are.” Looking further at strategies within the classroom, teachers

discussed the different approaches to the strategies to use within their classrooms. There

are various classroom strategies to support the different needs of ELLs and students with

IEPs. Many of the participants talked about how important visuals are to help her learners

be successful.

IP1 stated:

My former principle he had us to make cards to label around the classroom, like

the door. And so we would have it in several languages plus the English and the

desk and the board, just the common things that we have around the room we

have in English and then we also have it translated into the other main languages

that we have besides Spanish.

IP2 shared, “I use visuals they can relate to like measuring cups in math so they see

objects they recognize and see the different sizes as we talk about it.” Following the

same thought a key visual discussed by IP5 was the use of anchor charts. She continued:

I always have anchor charts, because I always like to point back, and even just as

a visual of the poster, but also of where it's located, because then I'll see kids

while they're working immediately shift their heads to it.

The participants discussed how a main strategy they used within their classrooms to

ensure better understanding for the learning of the ELLs in their classes were creating

hands on approaches. This strategy will allow teachers to see where the students

understanding is and where a delay could possibly be. IP2 talked about the success in

classroom in the following way: “Success in my classroom is about hands on versus just

giving it all to them as a whole group and hoping that they get it.” Continuing with

strategies, IP11 stated:

We did do a lot of acting things out, hands on videos, songs, dances, pictures. It

was very much like the whole brain learning. The visuals would sometimes have

both English and Spanish on them but often there is just English.

Theme 3: Early Childhood Teachers Need Schoolwide English as a Second

Language and Special Education Services to Support ELLs in the Classroom.

Theme 3 addressed research question 2. Participants discussed how access testing

impacts the services that are provided to ELLs and ELLs with IEPs. Participants found

that the various services provided to ELLs can often be determined by the assessment or

evaluation that the assessor uses with them.

Assessment

Participants discussed the influence state access testing has on the services ELLs

can receive. When an ELLs access score is received by a school, do those scores

influence the type of services they are eligible for or consider looking beyond language to

a learning delay if problems persist.

IP5 discussed assessment stating, “The ELL teacher will try to push in to work with

higher level EL students when they can and will pull out newer or lower access scored

Els.” IP9 continued the thought stating:

They are grouped based off their access score, which they can have a level

between zero and six, and based off the access for determines need of their can-do

indicators.

Evaluations

Participants discussed the evaluations that help get some learners ELL support but

they also have evaluations for assessing student’s for special education. The evaluations

can determine the special education support and placement the students can receive.

Schools have psychologist that come in to complete student evaluations. IP1 discussed

the criteria of her county on referring for evaluations stating:

The county ask us not to refer any new to the country students for evaluation for

the first 2 years they are in school. After the 2 years we would meet with a

counselor to come up with a plan to address the students deficits. Then we will

meet back after 30 more days to look at evaluation and getting a psychologist

involved.

IP9 stated:

The school psychologist have evaluations in Spanish and can speak Spanish but

the low incident languages is a bigger concern because there is no one that can

evaluate them in their native language. They also have no evaluation available for

those low incident languages and have to give the English evaluation.

Services

All 12 participants discussed the different options offered within their schools for

working with ELLs and ELLs with IEPs to help their growth and success. Participants

saw everything from the way they were assisted to the classroom setup they were placed

in.

IP1 stated:

I have an EL certified teacher who comes to my room, my building actually has a

total of five certified EL teachers who all day they provide services to a certain

grade level so kindergarten has their own EL, first second third and fourth grade

each has their own EL teacher and so the EL teacher goes to classes throughout

the day to support English Language learners and they sometimes will pull out,

sometimes they will pull students out of the classroom to provide services as well.

IP10 discussed the push in model in her school stating, “The push in is only provided at

the request of administrators and the district in our county because intensive pull-out

services is what is more focused on otherwise. “The other popular model discussed by

participants was pull out model. IP8 talked about the impact it had on one of her students,

she said:

She's got resources and co-taught for reading, writing, and math, and she has an

EL segment, so the argument is looking at this poor child spending so much time

out of the classroom she's not, being immersed in the language around her peers.

IP4 stated:

We do have an ESOL teacher who pulls students who are identified in receiving

those ESOL services each week. She pulls them once a week for usually 30-to-45-

minute segments to work with them.

The participants also discussed the different classrooms that their schools use to

enhance the success of the ELLs in their school. They discussed two styles of classrooms

a self-contained class and a coteaching model class. IP3 stated, “Some students are put in

self-contained as early intervention and exit by 2nd grade which makes it questionable if

they needed special education to begin with.”

IP4 discussed the co-teaching model stating:

We do a lot of scaffolding, a lot of station teaching, rotation teaching, splitting up

with my co teacher and making sure that they're differentiated based on their

skills, and making sure we give them the materials that they need to be successful.

Discrepant Cases

Merriam and Tisdell (2016) wrote about the data that challenge a researcher’s

expectations or that oppose a researcher’s ideas as being discrepant. Researchers should

seek data that challenges the contributions of others in helping to rule out discrepant

cases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). During the analysis of the data in this study, no

discrepant cases were found.

Summary

In Chapter 4, I introduced the qualitative study providing the results of the data

collection analysis including participant demographic and teaching assignment, their

years of experience, and affiliation with ELL or special education. Data collection steps

and analysis were modeled after Braun and Clarke (2006). The 12 participants data was

analyzed noting emerging codes, patterns, categories, and themes. Three themes emerged

through the process of analyzing the data and identifying categories. Theme 1 and 2

addressed RQ1: What are K-2 teachers’ experiences regarding the overrepresentation of

ELLs in special education programs? Theme 1 suggested that Parent-teacher

communication has an influence on student placement in special education programs.

Theme 2 suggested that teacher strategies have an effect on student achievement and

growth in different environments. Theme 3, addressed RQ2: What do early childhood

teachers need to address the overrepresentation of ELLs in special education programs?

Theme 3 is early childhood teachers need schoolwide English as a Second Language and

Special Education Services to support ELLs in the classroom. Teacher-school support

and services given to ELLs in the classroom are paramount to student success. Teachers’

responses in this study overwhelmingly indicated strong commitments to serving ELLs

regardless of the educational programs they were in.

Theme 1, emerged from teachers’ responses to interview questions about

communication between teachers and EL students and their parents. Teachers indicated

the inability to clearly communicate due to language barriers creates problems with

achieving clear understanding about what each learner needs. Teachers explained the

importance of communication with parents which can, when effective, leads to the

success and growth of ELLs in the classroom. Parents, not being able to understand the

information shared by the teacher, leads to gaps and the inability of the parents to offer

support to the learner at home. The second theme to emerge is that teachers' intentional

planning and use of strategies can impact the gaps that present themselves to separate the

language from the disability. According to the teachers, when various strategies were in

place, it allowed more growth and learning for the students on their level in a way they

understand while removing some of the barriers from not knowing the language.

Teachers saw using the various strategies they could impact the possible identification for

a service that may still need to be needed or identify when a service could be needed

sooner. Theme 3 that emerged was the way access testing impacted services provided to

ELLs and how services needed could require more intensive support then the school was

able to identify. Teachers described how the ELL services and special education services

can often impact each other. The influence of ELL services can limit that time it takes to

assess a learner for special education or place them in the wrong environment to soon.

In Chapter 4, I addressed what measures were taken to ensure trustworthiness

within the research, including credibility, transferability, dependability, and

confirmability of the research data. I presented the results with quotes from specific

participants to justify the selected themes. In Chapter 5, I review the interpreted findings

of the study, limitations, make recommendations for future research, and discuss the

potential for positive social change.

Chapter 5: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom. I

interview 12 early childhood education teachers from different schools: five special

education teachers, six EL teachers, and one EIP teacher in rural counties southern region

of the United States. Interviews were conducted via Zoom with an audio recording that

was then transcribed using iTranscribe processing program. During the data analysis

process three themes emerged to address the two research questions: (a) parent-teacher

communication has an influence on student placement in special education programs, (b)

teacher strategies have an effect on student achievement and growth in different

environments, and (c) early childhood teachers need English as a Second Language and

special education services to support ELLs in the classroom.

I chose to study this topic because of my passion for ensuring the needs of all

learners are met. I shared my concerns with the growing number of ELLs and it being the

fastest growing number of enrollments in counties over the last 3 years. I began

specifically concerned with the placement of those with language barriers in special

education classrooms and the interventions given to them. In Chapter 5, I present the

interpreted findings, limitations of the study, recommendations for future research, social

change, implications, and my conclusions.

Interpretation of Findings

After IRB approval, I conducted 12 interviews using open-ended interview

questions. I interviewed five special education teachers, six EL teachers, and one EIP

teacher with a minimum of 3 years teaching experience. Interviews were conducted

through Zoom and were each a minimum of 45 minutes.

Teachers were interviewed using nine open-ended interview questions to give

insight into K-2 teachers’ experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in

special education programs and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions

within the classroom. Teachers agreed to be interviewed giving insight into their work

with special education and ELLs. After analysis of the codes, categories, and themes,

findings show a correlation to Cummins's (2010) theory of language acquisition and the

MTSS for ELLs by Hoover et al. (2020), the conceptual framework for the study, and

research presented in the literature.

Theme 1: Parent-Teacher Communication has an Influence on Student Placement

in Special Education Programs.

Theme 1 emerged from participants’ responses that communication struggles

between teachers and EL students and parents creates problems with clear understanding

of what each learner needs. Teachers explained the importance of communication with

parents on the success and growth of ELLs in the classroom. Parents not being able to

understand information shared from the teacher leads to gaps and the inability for the

parents to offer support to the learner at home. Teachers’ explanation of the

communication, specifically between families and teachers, align with that of Cummins

and how language is broken down with student language learning needs with support

from parents. Parent engagement means working together to create a positive, goal-

oriented relationship with shared responsibility and mutual respect (Administration for

Children and Families, 2020). To allow all families to feel they are a part of their

students' educations, schools need to make sure they have interpreters, written

communication translated into multiple languages, and parent help and involvement

programs (McCarthy et al., 2020; Sommer et al., 2020; Stauss et al., 2021). IP1

explained,

The main challenge is the lack of support from the parents. A general education

child can go home, and their parents can help reinforce what we've done in the

day and help with homework and read to the student. A family that does not speak

English, and they can't support the child at home and reinforce what you've done

in school is a large challenge.

IP4 provided a similar explanation,

A big challenge is parent communication and is being able to really work together

with parents to make sure that we're on the same page. I think a lot of times, one

of my toughest students to deal with and to get through to is an ELL student, and

mom and dad don't understand what I'm trying to tell them.

Cummins (2010) MTSS identified how ELLs become proficient in BICS years

before they are proficient in CALP. Understanding communication requires minimal

thinking whereas cognitively demanding communication requires a lot more and can

show a learning need they may not have but just need more time. This communication

skill is built beginning with communication with the families. IP5 explained,

I always feel bad after a conference or meeting with a parent, feeling like, I know

that was interpreted, but do they really understand what some of that means. I

mean, it's our teacher jargon that we're around it all the time, but even if it's put in

a different language I don't know if they really understand.

Parents cannot help their child if they do not understand their needs or the teacher’s

concerns.

According to Terantino (2024), communication creating parental involvement is

what will lead to positive outcomes for students with rising academic achievement,

literacy proficiency, and math growth. Because communication is such a vital part of all

areas of growth for ELLs the tools a teacher uses such as class Dojo can be instrumental.

IP6 explained how she uses the software by stating,

I communicate with the parents through the class dojo, so they're able to interpret

our different messages, and they can see me online, but that's our main source of

communication with the families but with the student, I don't feel like I've been

doing a lot of remediation with them at all.”

The communication is a vital part in the success in the classroom and the growth a

student has and their future. This finding was supported by Lim et al. (2021) in the

discussion of how parents are to be involved in the decision-making process of

identification, evaluation, and placement of students in special education classes is

needed but not done often due to these communication barriers. Teachers shared the

challenges of communication with families and the influence it has on the students

learning. Teachers’ communication with families has a large impact on what happens in

the classroom and possible delays an ELL could face. When considering ELLs with

disabilities, those relationships with parents and teachers are vital because they can limit

some biases that may exist in the dominant culture (Thurlow et al., 2022).

Theme 2: Teacher Strategies Have an Effect on Student Achievement and Growth

in Different Environments.

Working with ELLs and ELLs with IEPs the use of strategies can influence the

success across all environments. It is important when teachers are working with ELLs or

the ELLs they think might have a learning delay that they take the time to know the

student, understand their specific learning style, and teach using a variety of learning

styles to meet the different needs of all (Beisly et al., 2023; Hsu et al., 2022). Visual

representation greatly impacts the cognitive and construction of knowledge, providing

new thoughts or ideas for education (Zhang, 2022). IP1 stated:

We make cards to label around the classroom, like the door. And so, we would

have it in several languages plus the English and the desk and the board, just the

common things that we have around the room we have in English and then we

also have it translated into the other main languages that we have besides Spanish.

IP1 identified how the visual are important but it is also important to not just use them in

Spanish but prepare for all language learners that could be in the classroom. According to

Zhang (2024), working with ELLs is a multimodal activity focusing on areas such as

speech, writing, gesture, gaze, movement, and visual. Many teachers shared their varying

uses of strategies within their classroom to work with ELLs to decipher between the

language and possible learning needs. IP5 stated,

I always have anchor charts, because I always like to point back, and even just as

a visual of the poster, but also of where it's located, because then I'll see kids

while they're working immediately shift their heads to it.

Different kinds of learners need different methods of support and finding what works is a

key component in the success of those learners.

The use of strategies across different environments is supported by Hoover et al.’s

(2020) theory using differentiated supports and interventions in their first language so

you know where they are and can help them grow. Cummins’s (2010) supported the idea

of understanding the difference in basic communication language and helping ELLs learn

a deeper understanding of academic language through various supports. Gupta (2019)

stated that bringing a student’s culture into the classroom by presenting information from

their culture with various visuals and labeling them in multiple languages is a good way

for the ELLs to grow. Visual representation greatly impacts the cognitive and

construction of knowledge, providing new thoughts or ideas for education (Zhang, 2022).

Theme 3: Early Childhood Teachers Need English as a Second Language and

Special Education Services to Support ELLs in the Classroom.

According to participants, providing the appropriate supports to ELLs can make

all the difference in the success and placement of students. Hoover et al.’s (2020) MTSS

is a leveled model that supports the learning with a variety of services depending on the

tier of support they need. IP5 shared, “The ELL teacher will try to push in to work with

higher level EL students when they can and will pull out newer or lower access scored

Els.” Additionally, IP7 explained:

A lot of times they're pulled out of class, or they're getting extra resources to help

with their language acquisition, as English is usually their second language, but

it's not a lot of emphasis by teachers to address their teaching needs as part of

their pedagogy in class.

According to the research, pull-out programs are great for additional support of

ELLs and those with a disability, but often they are pulled during vital instruction time,

which causes other issues (Cho et al., 2021). IP8 noticed:

She's got resources and cotaught for reading, writing, and math, and she has an

EL segment, so the argument is looking at this poor child spending so much time

out of the classroom she's not being immersed in the language around her peers.

With the unique educational needs, the struggle for ELLs to access the curriculum in the

general classroom can be a struggle (Li & Peters, 2020). IP8 shared, “They're putting

them into Tier 2, or Tier t3 through our MTSS process, and they're not necessarily

addressing the EL needs first.”

When separating the language from the need, it can impact when a student is then

evaluated and what service they would receive. Barrio et al. (2020) looked at how the

validity of the test and process lacked cultural understanding, accountability, and

misinterpretation of policies that often affect the results and placement of ELLs in special

education programs. IP7 shared his thoughts stating:

A teaching knowing the student to know how much of it is a cognitive thing, how

much of it is a learning thing and how much of it is a language thing. I don't think

teachers all the time have the patience to be able to dive into being able to assess

and pull apart, which is which, which really goes into knowing your students and

when to take next steps.

Researcher Park (2020) found that when referring ELLs for special education

services, it is more accurate when educators work and collaborate to limit the barriers of

language and cultural misunderstandings that could arise. IP3 shared, “Some students are

put in self-contained as early intervention and exit by 2nd grade which makes it

questionable if they needed special education to begin with.” When we look at assessing

students for special education services different schools have different approaches and

ideas on when to assess and when it is time. Research shows when looking at students

with dual social identities and classifications, the school can inadvertently create a larger

English struggle or create a disability that may not have been there before (Cooc, 2023).

IP5 shared:

I do feel like placement can come too quickly, especially situations where you

don't know exactly what's going on at home, like they might speak English very

clear like you wouldn't even realize that they can speak in a other language or

another language is spoken at home.

Researcher Nicolaescu (2024) discusses strategies to adapt skills in educational

subjects that support all learners to grow with variety of choices, responsibility, and

critical thinking. Various teachers shared the importance of implementing strategies and

placement of ELLs in the appropriate environments to support their growth. Additionally

they discussed the importance of placement with the services in place that will build on

the students success and not limit them from their potential by placing them in a service

that is not needed.

Findings and Conceptual Framework

The findings of this study are supported by the conceptual framework. Cummins’s

(2010) theory of language acquisition looks at the importance of separating the academic

language and the social language to help students advance their skills. Supported further

by Hoover et al (2020). theory for the multitiered system of supports to meet the needs of

ELLs where they are. Teachers suggested the importance of communication, strategy,

and services are important in the development, growth, and evaluation of ELLs. This

follows the thoughts of Cummins’s theory of communication enhancing academic

proficiency with the support of Hoover et al. theory of the multitiered system of supports

in giving the ELLs the services they need to be successful in the school environment.

Teachers shared that the process for communication with families, strategies used

within the classroom, and the services that are offered to ELLs directly affects the growth

and success of those learners with the referral process of further services and evaluations

needed. The teacher strategies that are used each day in the classroom build on the delays

that a language barrier could have and begin to separate the language delay from the

cognitive delay. Based on Cummins’s and Hoover et al. conceptual theories, providing

communication support to families, implementing various strategies within the

classroom, and providing appropriate level of services to ELLs can separate the language

delay from the cognitive delay.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations of this study include the researcher bias and small sample size. I

am passionate about providing appropriate, effective support to multilingual learners and

this can create a bias but with being aware of that possibility I was able to use a reflective

journal to ensure data was not influenced by researcher bias. The sample included five

special education teachers, six EL teachers, and 1 EIP teacher. While the interviews with

the 12 participants from different schools met saturation further interviews could have

provide more insight. The findings of this study may not apply to all schools throughout

the United States because early childhood education students may not lack English

language development skills in other regions of the United States. This may limit some of

the transferability.

Recommendations

There are several recommendations for further research resulting from the data

collection and analysis. Teachers expressed concern for training and relevant professional

development opportunities in the counties with growing ELL populations who may have

not have a ELL population before. Li & Peters (2020) discussed a greater effort needs to

be placed on how teachers are prepared with supporting the growing ELL populations

learning through professional development. Nicolaescu (2024) emphasized how

important training is for adapting material, changes in diversity, supporting

communication, motivation, and applying knowledge. IP2 shared his concern stating, “I

think there needs to be more professional development because things and approaches are

always new and changing but where I teach is more concerned about making teachers

happy and they complain if they have too much professional development.” Further

professional development can help teachers understand the separation between the

language and cognitive needs. Hulse (2020) considered how resources available for

teachers to access when educating ELLs impact the amount of remediation that is given,

which can lead to higher referral rates and overrepresentation in special education.

Implications

There are social and educational implications for this study related to teachers

preparation for addressing ELLs and ELL programs. Teachers provided insight into their

experience and challenges with working with ELLs and supporting their families.

Teachers discussed the communication, service, strategies, and support they have when

addressing those with English as a second language. There are educational implications

because the information from this study is a starting point for conversation for the

approach of professional development, resources, and strategies to be used in schools.

Additionally, information on services and the approaches to placing ELLs on IEPs could

change the number of students evaluated and what the guidelines are for evaluation. The

study also has social implications for stakeholders suggesting they may consider teacher

perceptions of their challenges to meet the needs of the ELLs and communicate

effectively with the families and the stakeholders can then support the learner's language

and educational needs. In addition, further research on the ELLs families' feelings of

evaluations, assessment, and placements should be considered. Families' feelings and

considerations have both social and educational implications.

Conclusion

The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to explore K-2 teachers’

experiences with the overrepresentation of ELL students in special education programs

and what teachers need to facilitate appropriate interventions within the classroom in the

rural southern region of the United States. This study addresses the gap in current

research. While some research has been conducted on the increase of ELLs little

information about early childhood education teachers' experiences of overrepresentation

and what should be implemented to change this. Teachers explain that communication

and service has created a discrepancy between identifying students with a language delay

versus a cognitive disability. Teachers also identified strategies they use within their

classrooms but the need for further resources and support.

As presented in the literature review in Chapter 2, and the seminal work by

Cummins (2010) and Hoover et al (2020). that follow the work on tier support, language

broken down into various categories, and differentiating between learning differences and

disabilities. Through a variety of resources including technology, training, and inclusive

teaching strategies teachers can more effectively separate the language need for the

learning need. Larios and Zetlin (2023) further discussed the effective education of ELLs

comes from additional training and support to create a better understanding of what

delays exist. The teacher participants interview for this study outlined the issues they

face: the communication with students and their parents, services in and out of the

classroom, and strategies being implemented each day to help ELLs be successful but

despite these challenges each teacher strive to develop inclusive lessons to facilitate the

needs of all ELLs with or without IEPs.

Students also viewed