1

Supporting English Language Learners with Multiple Needs

Jennifer Kim

American College of Education

RES 5153

Dr. Guykesha Gardner

May 9, 2021
 2

Supporting English Language Learners with Special Education Needs

The United States is one of the most diverse country making up of people from a wide

range of backgrounds and cultures, which makes it arduous to define the country with one

distinct culture or society. This popular country is still considered a dream land that many people

see themselves striving for. Schools in the US have had a 57 % increase in English language

learners (ELLs) in the last 20 years and around 400,000 ELL students were identified as needing

special education services in 2002 (National Education Association, 2015; Dussling, 2020). With

this in mind, there are growing numbers of ELL students with special education needs, many

unidentified. Research related to the topic is limited and unapplicable as there are many

complications related to recognizing ELLs with special education needs as one subgroup. 

Through the ever-changing demographics, Asian Americans are the fastest-growing

group in the US from 0.7% in 1970 to 6% in 2015 and by 2065, Asian Americans will constitute

14% of the US population (Lee & Zhou, 2017). Although it has enhanced, the special education

services in Asian countries are underdeveloped. The Asian culture views having special needs as

an abnormality and often seen as a shameful factor. People are uneducated with accurate

information on these types of issues and problems that arise in schools. As a result, some

students go through their school years without getting any support or intervention either because

they refused to accept the services provided by the school or were unidentified from lack of

information. Hence, their academic and social skills continue to fall behind and often, grow

without properly obtaining the appropriate skills to live in society independently. In this paper,

the researcher will explore the implications of Korean ELL students with special education needs

such as learning disabilities, behavioral disorders, and social skills deficit. After analyzing the

needs of the students, the researcher will conduct research on effective research-based strategies
 3

in evaluating the efficiency in the strategies to better support all student needs for academic and

social improvement.

Purpose

Most general education teachers do not receive proper training in instructional strategies

for ELLs and special education students and may feel inadequate to teach them (Dussling, 2020).

This causes instructional and learning gaps that may result in serious academic and/or social

deficits in the future. The problem starts in data collection because there are many holes in

accurate measures of numbers for students that overlap in many subgroups. Further research

must be conducted and evaluated in discovering best practices for ELL students with special

education needs. Through credible data, educators can get proper training and professional

development to enhance their instructions. This study examines Korean middle school ELL

students that have unidentified special needs in a small international school. The researcher

hopes to share the findings with the administrators, teachers, and staff.

Problem Statement

Schools fail to recognize and understand students as unique individuals with their own

needs and support system (Pak et al., 2014). ELL students with special education needs such as a

learning disability are common, yet there are very little data on it as they are not classified as a

separate subgroup. These overlapping needs that students have become a challenge for teachers

to how to better help them. They are either placed in ELL support or special education support,

rarely in both. The major problem comes in is when educators have difficulty distinguishing

students that need language support from disability when explaining the academic struggles that

they face and lack data, tools, or qualified staff to help these students and their needs (Nguyen,
 4

2012). Many research has shown that effective strategies and intervention for English speakers

might work similarly to English language learners. 

Further problems are seen in the lack of research conducted for students with various

cultures and backgrounds. As most of the ELL research studies focus on Spanish-speaking ELLs,

it makes it difficult to generalize the findings especially when there are over 400 languages

represented in US schools (Dissling, 2020). For example, how Spanish-speaking ELL students

react to an instructional strategy will be different compared to how Korean-speaking ELL

students might react. Cultural knowledge and background of learners are essential for ELL

students as culture shapes the way people think, interact, communicate, and transmit knowledge

(Lin & Scherz, 2014). Culture plays a big factor in how learners acquire language or perceive

certain instructional strategies and interventions. Teachers need to take their time in becoming

knowledgeable of the cultural characteristics of their students and understand how culture affects

learning and teaching (Lin & Scherz, 2014). Additionally, how the student’s culture view special

education can aid teachers grasp the information needed in finding the most appropriate

strategies and approaches to help students.

Research Questions

Through the problem that was analyzed, research questions were written to assist the

researcher in aiming the research in an accurate direction. Three questions were written below

and will be investigated deeply throughout the paper. The paper will mainly focus on finding

best evidence-based strategies in helping ELL students with special education needs.

 What are the current effective evidence-based strategies to help ELL students with

special education needs?

 How do culture influence language acquisition and special education needs?

 5

 Does continuous use of the first language in class assist in comprehension and English

acquisition?

Literature Review

Teachers Collaborate to Support ELLs with Learning Disabilities

The first article by Nguyen (2012) argues the need for attention towards ELL students

needing special education services. Lack of research makes it perplexing to conclude whether

ELLs struggle to develop literacy because of their limited English language skills or because of

their learning disability. Throughout the article, Nguyen (2012) emphasizes that teachers must

use cultural sensitivity. It is vital that teachers are culturally responsive to their students’ needs

and it should impact the development of curriculum, pedagogy, and assessments. The increasing

demands of ELL students needing special education services are forcing educators to recognize

the seriousness of the problems in schools. With this in mind, the article suggests collaboration

between general education, special education teachers, specialists, and staff work together and

recommends various research-based methods and strategies that teachers can use in the

classroom for a wide range of learners and needs.

Nguyen (2012) shares many evidence-based methods and strategies such as making

adaptations and modifications, scaffolding, pacing instruction, reviewing note-taking and

organization skills, and parent involvement. A few of the suggestions will be discussed and

incorporated into the research study. First, it talks about the significance of encouraging students

to use and read in their first language as it promotes increased levels of reading achievement and

clarifies abstract concepts in English. In addition, teachers should adopt preventive rather than

corrective discipline such as promoting a natural progression of language development that does

not focuses on “drill-and-kill” exercises and error-correcting and be more proactive instead of
 6

reactive in tackling behavioral issues. To do this, teachers should follow the same routines, use

familiar procedures, and write out the agenda daily to provide ELLs with special needs with

predictability that reduce anxiety factor (Nguyen, 2012). During instruction, teachers must

demonstrate and model in simple and clarified step by step both orally and visually. Using

gestures, body language, tier one and two vocabulary words, fewer idioms and slang can help

teachers communicate clearer with students. In written instructions, typographical aids such as

underlining, boldface, or italic prints can help students focus on particular words and support

visual learning for memory recall. Nguyen (2012) states that it is impossible to address every

single range, type, and severity, and scope of learning disabilities across the disciplines. Rather,

these are just some suggestions that the author shares in hopes to encourage teachers to emerging

research. Additionally, the main point that the article encourages is to collaborate between

teachers to design appropriate learning experiences for students with unique needs.

Contention Between English as a Second Language and Special Education Services

Research on this topic is limited due to the diversity of the learners’ profiles and needs as

well as the different approaches used by schools to identify, label, and place them in special

education classrooms. In these limited studies, it has been identified that the learner’s disability

needs are prioritized over their language support needs and are often resulting in the neglect of

the latter. Around 33% of the special education students are those with a specific learning

disability and are defined as learners that do not have understanding and ability to use the

language verbally and in written form. This is similar to the initial stages of acquisition in a new

language which makes it subjective when assessing ELL students for disabilities. Hence, it

results in under and over representation of ELL students in special education programs. Lopes-

Murphy (2020), emphasized the seriousness of the imbalanced support that ELL students with a
 7

disability receive and proposes instructional recommendations that address both the language

and special needs of this population. Additionally, the author criticizes the insufficient

knowledge of educators on the process of language acquisition that prevents students from

receiving services for all their needs. Proper training and professional development in language

acquisition and culture issues for special educators are essential in providing all the opportunities

that students with multiple needs deserve.

Lopes-Murphy (2020) recommends twelve practices that support students’ multiple

needs: using a multimodal representation of concepts, using multiple means of expression,

encouraging sufficient processing time, incorporating images to build meaning and

comprehension, activating prior knowledge, repeating key words and phrases, using sentence

frames, providing stress management devises, using colored transparency overlays, incorporating

multiple color papers, modifying font and paper format, and accommodating with assistive

technology. Some of these practices are well known methods for ELLs or special education

students. Special emphasis was made for the delivery and representation method on providing a

variety including listening, speaking, showing, seeing, reading, writing in both nonverbal and

verbal format. An interesting suggestion was adjusting the lighting in the classroom because

lighting can affect how learners perceive written information and colored overlays can help relax

their eyes, neck, and shoulders while reading. Such recommendations can conclude that there is a

wide range of integrated pedagogical practices to help support students’ multiple needs.

English Language Learners Who Struggle with Reading: Language Acquisition or LD? 

In this article, Klingner et al. (2006) discuss the implications in identifying and providing

services for ELL students who struggle with reading. The article claim that ELL students with

disabilities are overidentified in just the special education categories which are similar to what
 8

Lopes-Murphy (2020) mentioned in the above article. To ensure that students are placed

correctly and receiving all the support services, educators must make sure that the student has

received culturally responsive instruction for ELLs before deciding to place them in special

education. It mentions the critical need in accurately differentiating between subgroups of ELL

students with and without disabilities on referrals, assessments, and identification processes for

valid and reliable data collection. Research and practice need to be more precise and detailed

with information about ELL students’ language proficiencies, ethnicity, socioeconomic level,

school history, and family circumstances as well as the instructional programs, learning contexts,

quality of interventions, services received, and student characteristics.

Klingner et al. (2006), argue that educators should consider the students’ primary

language in the determination of learning disabilities to understand the students’ limitations as

well as their strengths. Studies have shown that ELL students that had strong basic knowledge in

their native language were able to transfer effective cognitive strategies from their native

language to English. Greater attention is needed in the students’ native language and to the role

of language acquisition in determining whether a student may need special support services.

Overall, Klingner et al. (2006) has pointed out that much is already known about teaching,

assisting, and assessing ELLs with disabilities but not enough is used in practice. Therefore,

educators need not only basic research but more field-based research to help us better understand

the complications associated with applying what we know and to use the resources efficiently to

carry out the appropriate practices.

Literature Review in Relations to Action Research

There are many complications in implementing the above research studies into the

researcher’s action research. As mentioned before, every single student has unique sets of
 9

knowledge, abilities, backgrounds, and needs that make it challenging for research to be proven

effective for all students. One of the main implications is that most of the research was

conducted for Spanish speaking ELL students and transferring English from Spanish might be

less complicated than other languages that have a completely different structure and characters.

What might have been an effective method for the Spanish speaking ELL student might not be

much effective for the Korean speaking ELL student. Additionally, the perspective on how each

culture view education is drastic and can influence how the ELL acquire language and get

special needs services. Unfortunately, many special education students in Korea do not receive

the services that they deserve as it is often not recognized and diagnosed from lack of training

and professional development related to special education. Further studies need to be conducted

with various subgroups and broad delivery approaches and practices. In sum, educators must

continue to work to provide ELLs with instruction that is culturally and linguistically responsive

to their interests and needs.

Research Methodology

The three formative data sources will be an interview, a survey, and an analysis of

student work. As descriptive research, a teacher will be interviewed to understand the current

state of affairs. The student survey and an analysis of student work allow data collection of

correlational research in assessing the relationships between variables and making predictions.

Collection and analysis of these data will help determine if the current research-based strategies

are appropriate and effective methods for the researcher’s set of students. A special note must be

made that the research was conducted for Korean ELL students that have not been officially

identified with special education needs. Disabilities such as learning disability, social deficit, and

behavioral disorder have been unofficially recognized by the researcher through observation.
 10

With this in mind, the correlation between the cultural influence on the overall English education

system and their learning will be analyzed.

Data Collection

The first formative data was an interview of an ELL English teacher from the

researcher’s school. A set of questions related to ELL use of their native language was asked.

This interview helped the researcher to understand one of the teacher’s perspective on the active

promotion of students’ native language in class. The result of the survey will assist

comprehension of the researcher’s school setting and teacher’s view on the current research

findings. With this data and information, future action plans and analyses can be conducted on

the appropriate research on solving the problem.

Table 1

Questions Answers
Do you allow students to use Korean (native No, I do not allow students to use Korean in

language) in their classrooms? and outside of class. I am very strict about

this compared to other teachers.

How do you enforce the English-only rule? I give out pink slips (disciplinary referrals) to

those who speak Korean. Students tend to be

extra careful around me and make sure I am

not around when they want to speak Korean

during break time.

What benefits do you think comes from It forces them to use English which can help

having students use only English? them improve their English skills through

practice. If they continue to use Korean, they

will get in the habit of using Korean and will

not get enough practice to use English.

 11

Parents also like teachers who enforce

English-only rules throughout the school.

The second data collection was conducted through student survey. This data collection

also includes descriptive research on the students that describe the background information of

each student for better understanding of their unique needs. The researcher’s school is a

secondary international school with Korean ELL students from various backgrounds. There are

total of seven students that the researcher conducted data from and each student had extremely

different background, interests, abilities, knowledge, and needs. The table below has survey

results on the students’ after school supplementary academy or private tutoring help, time spent

on homework, opinion on Korean use in class, favorite subject, and learning style.

The first student has the lowest English skills among the students and when she first

transferred into this school, she showed lack of motivation as she did not do any work even with

assistance, blaming her lack of English skills. Her performance in class has progressed and has

become more motivated to do work. The second student has average English skills with a lower

end of comprehension. The third student is a high performing student but has social deficit. In

the beginning of the school year, he showed high anxiety during group work and emphasized

“my performance” instead of the overall group. He has a hard time concentrating or getting

started in class and needs at least 10-15 seconds before answering a question. In addition, he

lacks in controlling his emotions and often stomps his feet and bangs his hands on the desk to

show his anger. The fourth student has average English skills with behavior problems of blurting

out answers, unable to focus on work, and needing constant reminders. When he is not

interested, he opts out and falls asleep in class. The fifth student has low English skills and rarely

turns in homework. It seems like the supplementary classes after school are interfering with her
 12

performance in the actual classes at school. She also used to go to an art school before

transferring to this school. The sixth student is a high performing student and has shown good

understanding of the content in class. However, she shows signs of a perfectionist as she easily

gets upset for not getting perfect scores on tests and assignments. Her parents are concerned and

agreed to help her realize that the score is not important and that grades show what the learner

can improve from. The last student is a high performing student with high comprehension, but

lacks in speaking ability and overall motivation for learning. He turns in his assignments half of

the time with incompetence. However, there are a few times when he does turn it in, he shows

that he can use higher order thinking skills well. He is able to explain complex information to

other low performing students with examples, and this shows that he is a high performing student

but with lack of motivation.

Table 2

Time
Academy / Useful to use Favorite Learning
Student spent on
Tutoring Korean in class subject style
homework
- English (private 3 hours a Yes, I can Art Visual
tutoring 3 hours day understand the
Student a week) meaning better
1 - Math (private when I use
tutoring 2 hours Korean.
a week)
- English 2 hours a Yes, it is easier PE Kinesthetic
(academy twice day to use Korean
a week for 3 still.
Student
hours)
2
- Math (academy
twice a week for
3 hours)
- English 3 hours a No, I feel more Computer/IT Visual
(academy twice day comfortable to
Student a week for 3 use English.
3 hours)
- Coding (once a
week)
 13

- English 1 hour a Yes, I feel Science Auditory

(academy twice day comfortable to
a week for 3 use Korean and
hours) try to
- Math (academy understand in
Student
once a week for class.
4
2 hours)
- Chinese
(academy once a
week for 2
hours)
- English 3 hours a Yes, it helps me Art Kinesthetic
(academy once a day to understand.
week for 3
hours)
- Math (academy
four times a
week for 2
Student
hours)
5
- Korean
(academy twice
a week for 2
hours)
- Science (once a
week for an
hour)
- English (private 2 hours a Sometimes it Art Visual
tutoring once a day helps me but I
week for an don’t need to
hour) use Korean in
Student - Math (private class.
6 tutoring twice a
week for 2
hours)
- Music (private
tutoring classes)
- English 1 hour a Yes, I think we PE Kinesthetic
(academy twice day should learn in
a week for 2 Korean more.
Student hours)
7 - Korean
(academy twice
a week for 2
hours)
 14

The last data was collected through student work. It compared two vocabulary quizzes

that the students have done. For both quizzes, the students did vocabulary practice on each word

through writing definition, identifying parts of speech, brainstorming synonym, finding the

Korean meaning, locating the sentence in the story, and writing their own sentence. In class, the

students practiced more through visual by having each student chose a word and drawing a

picture on the board explaining what they drew related to the vocabulary word. The first quiz had

fill in the blank with word bank as their main part of the assessment. The second quiz was

focused on multiple choice with four choices. The multiple choice questions were more situation

based which required students to apply the vocabulary words with the given situation. As seen

below on table 3, overall, the students performed worse on the second quiz except student 7 who

performed better. This shows that the students are not ready to apply and use the vocabulary

words in situations which involve them in using higher order thinking skills such as analyzing,

evaluating, and synthesizing.

Table 3

Quiz 1 Quiz 2
Student
Fill in the blank & short answer Fill in the blank & multiple choice
Student 1 90% 70%
Student 2 90% 65%
Student 3 100% 85%
Student 4 100% 60%
Student 5 65% 30%
Student 6 100% 80%
Student 7 35% 85%

Data Analysis
 15

The teacher’s interview had the following three questions related to ELL students using

their native language. Interestingly, the teacher was against allowing students to use their native

language in class even for emergent ELL students. This teacher believed that students should

practice their English speaking skills and work around using words that they do not know as

much as possible. Through the interview, the researcher was able to conclude that the teacher

promoted more of a natural progression of language development through constant opportunities

to practice English in and outside of class. Interview with other teachers and staff in school

should be conducted to get valid data results on the school-wide perspective related to letting

students use their native language in school. Then, the school should come to a common

consensus in enforcing whether or not students should use their native language in school as

consistency is a vital part of promoting school-wide implementation.

The student survey had interesting responses from the participants for each category.

Surprisingly, many students attend an academy or have private tutoring after school. The content

and learning vary from academy to academy and do not match the contents learned in school.

Because of these supplementary classes after school, students do not have the time, energy, and

motivation to practice the skills they learned in school and complete their homework properly.

Homework has become another busy work for them to do and they work for completion instead

of mastery. Further research should be conducted on if these after school supplementary classes

have a negative or positive effect on the students’ learning. Almost all the students wish to speak

and use Korean in class because they feel that it helps to support their learning. Their favorite

subject and learning styles all varied which shows that a variety of teaching styles and strategies

need to be implemented to stimulate student interest and meet their needs. Through the survey,
 16

the researcher was able to conclude that the seven students have different sets of unique needs

and need different interventions that are tailored to them.

Finally, the student work comparison of their two assessments showed that students need

various methods of vocabulary practice. According to Coleman and Goldenberg (2010), students

may know the meaning of the individual content-specific words, but still not be able to

understand the words in a larger context like using it in a sentence correctly or reading the word

in a sentence and comprehending the sentence as a whole. In this case, students need more

examples and practice on how to accurately apply the vocabulary words. The second quiz on the

data had more situational questions that required students to understand and apply the vocabulary

words in a larger context. Most of the students did worse on the second quiz which lets the

researcher know that various vocabulary strategies should be implemented in the instruction and

the students should be given more time to practice the vocabulary words in context. Vocabulary

development is crucial in language acquisition since we acquire language through experiencing it

in the context we understand (Himmele & Himmele, 2014). Hence, strong vocabulary

development will lead to reading comprehension and improvement in the language domains.

More research on identifying and implementing effective vocabulary development strategies

needs to be conducted.

Future Action Plan and Force Field Analysis

Through the collection and analysis of data on the researcher’s students, a future action

plan can be established. The main problem that the researcher wanted to conduct research on was

identifying current evidence-based practices for students with multiple needs such as ELL

students with disabilities and behavior problems. Since the school does not have appropriate

services and resources to identify, accurately diagnose and provide support for these students, the
 17

administrators, teachers, and staff need to collaborate and find effective strategies. Consistency is

the key in implementing new strategies school-wide. All the educators in the building must agree

in enforcing the same policies and strategies to help students with multiple needs. The

inconsistency of teachers enforcing the English only rule and effective literacy strategies in the

class is causing complications in student learning. A force field analysis must be carried out to

identify the driving forces and restraining forces in solving the problem. Below are the driving

forces that can help to solve the problem and the restraining forces that can be the barriers to

successfully solving the problem. The forces that cannot be controlled are crossed out and the

forces that are in hopes for elimination are discussed.

Table 4

Goals of Action Plan:

- Recognizing the problems of the students with multiple needs
- Finding current effective research-based strategies for students with multiple needs
- School-wide agreement on implementing a common program/strategy

Objectives: Teachers and staff will collaborate in researching and implementing effective
research-based strategies for students with multiple needs.
Driving Forces Restraining Forces

(needs/supports making success more likely) (barriers to success)

- Increase in numbers of students with - Teachers and staff with a different
multiple needs perspective
- School modifying courses to offer various - Cultural differences in special education
levels of literacy classes services
- Active parent involvement - Lack of teachers and staff
- Weekly teacher meetings - Lack of teacher professional development
for students with multiple needs
- No specialists (social worker, psychiatrist,
and special education specialist) to
support students
- Inconsistency between teachers and staff
- After school supplementary help
- Standardized assessments
 18

The driving forces such as offering various levels of literacy classes and active parent

involvement can support in making the plan successful. However, the restraining forces need to

be eliminated for the action plan to be achieved. The No Child Left Behind Act had a

tremendous impact on student achievement and school data collection. Schools use more

assessment data to modify instruction, improve strategies in the classroom, train more teachers

through professional development, and provide more intensive instructions to low-achieving

students (Jennings & Rentner, 2006). Although there are various professional developments

available for teachers, specific problem related topics should be provided for teacher training.

Many educators do not know the difference between students that struggle with the language or

learning itself so students are not getting the support that they deserve. Furthermore, they lack in

knowledge of recognizing and providing the right support for special education students. When

the appropriate intervention and services are not offered to the students in need, they will

continue to fall behind creating larger gaps that are hard to fill. This barrier can be eliminated by

creating an action plan through collaboration between all teachers and staff. After identifying the

problem, they can work together to find a solution and implement the common strategy for

consistency. For the after school supplementary help, the school can work out a system to

provide mandatory classes after school for struggling students.

Potential Evaluation Data Sources for Future Action Plan

To evaluate the effectiveness of the action plan, data needs to be collected before

implementing the plan and the data needs to be compared during and at the end of the school

year. This data will be concentrated on the effectiveness of the research-based strategies in the

class. During this time, both quantitative and qualitative data should be collected from students

and teachers. The number representation from the quantitative data can have numerous factors
 19

that do not show an accurate representation of the data. Therefore, gathering qualitative data

from students are teachers through surveys and descriptive research will determine the

effectiveness of the plan.

Conclusion, Discussion, or Summary

The researcher recognized the inadequacy of school programs in providing services and

support for students with multiple needs. Through the data collection from the researcher’s

school, it can be concluded that these rising problems need serious attention as the numbers of

students with multiple needs are increasing which is leading to poor student performance. Their

needs must be met quickly because interventions for older grades become ineffective and more

expensive. From these problems identified, current effective evidence-based strategies were

researched for school-wide implementation. The future action plan was written in providing rich

professional development to help teachers deepen their understanding of ELL students and

special education students and promoting a school-wide program for students with multiple

needs.

Ironically, students learn much throughout the school years, but there are still

underdeveloped skills significant for living productively in society. Further research can be

conducted on promoting ways to enhance the students’ essential life skills in school. Our goal as

educators is to teach, provide, and train students to master the necessary skills so they can

independently understand life, make connections to others, and efficiently criticize the world as

active citizens. Therefore, we must continue to find better ways to meet the needs of our unique

students and recommence in our journey as lifelong researchers.

 20

References

Dussling, T. (2020). English language learners’ and native English-speakers’ spelling growth

after supplemental early reading instruction. International Journal of Education &

Literacy Studies, 8(1), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.8n.1p.1

Himmele, P. & Himmele, W. (2014). Total literacy techniques: Tools to help students analyze

literature and informational texts. ASCD.

Lee, J., & Zhou, M. (2017). Why class matters less for Asian-American academic

achievement. Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies, 43(14), 2316–2330.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1315851

Lin, S. Y., & Scherz, S. D. (2014). challenges facing Asian international graduate students in

the us: pedagogical considerations in higher education. Journal of International

Students, 4(1), 16–33.

Lopes-Murphy, S. (2020). Contention between English as a second language and special

education services for emergent bilinguals with disabilities. Latin American Journal of

Content & Language Integrated Learning,  13(1), 43-56.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2020.13.1.3

Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., & Barletta, L. M. (2006). English language learners

who struggle with reading: language acquisition or LD? Journal of Learning

Disabilities, 39(2), 108-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390020101

Jennings, J. & Rentner, D. (2006). Ten big effects of the no child left behind act on

public schools. Phi Delta Kappan. 88. 110-113.

National Education Association. (2015). How educators can advocate for English language

learners. Washing- ton, DC: National Education Association.

Nguyen, H. T. (2012). general education and special education teachers collaborate to

 21

support English language learners with learning disabilities. Issues in Teacher

Education, 21(1), 127-152. 

Pak, Y. K., Maramba, D. C., & Hernandez, X. J. (2014). Asian Americans in higher

education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(1), 1–136.

https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20013