Minnesota Adult Basic Education Disabilities

During 2004-2006, LDA Minnesota completed 28 LD/ELL assessments for non-native English speakers. Initially, the reason for referral was a significant lack of progress in English literacy skills compared to English oral language acquisition and use. Most of the referred students were “stuck” in Pre-literate to Beginning ELL levels and not making progress as measured by CASAS, despite at least 160 hours of classroom instruction and often individual tutoring. Later on, after LDA made the professional decision to not assess students with limited formal education in their native language, the reason for referral became a lack of progress in intermediate to advanced ELL levels or difficulties transitioning to GED preparation.

The majority of all referrals were ELL adults born in African countries who immigrated to the United States, often as refugees. The represented native countries and corresponding number of referrals included: Somalia (12), Ethiopia (3), Eritrea (2), Oromo (1), Liberia (1), Burkina Faso (1), Sierra Leone (1), Nigeria (1), Mexico (3), Cambodia (1), Laos (1), and Haiti (1). The students ranged in age from 23 to 52, with educational experience ranging from none to high school completion. They had been in the United States between one and twenty years. Most had not received any English instruction prior to immigrating. Two reported a head injury occurring during a violent confrontation and many of the Somali adults reported witnessing violence following the outbreak of civil war in 1991.

LDA Minnesota implemented a model of assessment that included:

1. Screening interview of learning difficulties
2. History of English Language Learning and instruction
3. Additional personal interview
4. Formal testing of non-verbal intelligence
5. Formal and selective testing of basic reading, writing, and math skills
6. Scoring, interpretation, written reporting, and a feedback conference to explain the results and recommendations to the ELL teacher and student

Although this model of assessment was well researched and thoughtfully developed, it presented numerous challenges.

First of all, the required forms (1 and 2 above) were very comprehensive and involved the assistance of the teacher, tutor, and sometimes an interpreter. Some referrals may have been interrupted by the length of the forms and/or surprising responses received through the questioning that documented the impact of other significant personal, educational, medical, or emotional factors on learning and performance.

Secondly, the formal standardized testing situation (4 and 5 above) was unfamiliar to most ELL examinees. Some felt uncomfortable being alone in a room with the examiner. Others were confused by the test’s directions, which protocol states aren’t to be repeated. Often the required entry into frustration levels was distressing to examinees, and consequently testing was difficult for the examiners to complete. And finally, the carefully selected nonverbal intelligence and achievement tests proved not to be truly “language and culturally sensitive.”

There were major challenges related to scoring, interpreting, and written reporting (6 above). Most of the referrals received low nonverbal intelligence scores (a standard score of < 70), although their reported and observed social, adaptive, and functional behavior suggested at least average ability. It became very difficult to interpret and report low scores to ELL teachers and students. After further research into the norm group of the nonverbal test standardization sample, which did include non-native English speakers, LDA realized that the referral group was likely not well represented. This is the reality of Minnesota’s immigrant population as compared to ELL adults from across the United States. It also spoke of the need to be very cautious when applying Western testing standards and procedure to a non-Western sample of examinees.

Despite the challenges, there were many positive outcomes to the LD/ELL pilot.

Most participants (especially LDA staff and referring teachers) came to understand the huge challenges of acquiring English literacy skills when other interfering factors are present. Reporting shared with ELL teachers, county financial workers, county social workers, and medical doctors resulted in greater understanding, additional support, and several waivers or extensions.

LDA staff also gained considerable insight into the realities of social and academic language acquisition. According to long-standing research based on children receiving exposure and instruction under the best of circumstances, it takes six months to three years to acquire social language or Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS). In contrast, it takes between five and 10 years to acquire academic language or Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) (Cummins, 1981).

Most of the adults in ABE programs are not receiving exposure and instruction under the best of circumstances. The hours of service are limited, their attendance may be irregular, and they are dealing with many outside stressors related to family, community, or work. In addition, the age of English exposure and instruction (for most, beyond 12 years of age) is a significant factor. Although many observant and caring teachers reported processing difficulties with written English, “slower processing of written or content English is often a cognitive characteristic of bilingualism rather than a processing deficit that indicates a learning disability” (Figueroa, 2005). In other words, slower processing in the less dominant language is typical for most adults.

A very important outcome for LDA staff was gaining understanding of the crucial role alphabetics plays in the acquisition of English reading and writing skills. According to national ELL experts, “All English language learners, regardless of the type of L1 literacy in their background, need direct teaching in the English language symbol system and English sound-symbol correspondences” (Burt, Peyton, Adams, 2003).

This knowledge led to the research, development, publication, and trainings on The Adult Reading Toolkit (The ART) – Editions 4 and 5.  The ART covers all four components of the reading process identified by the Report of the National Reading Panel (2000): alphabetics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. It includes six chapters and within each chapter is a case study or practitioner research summary, key vocabulary terms, research findings from K-12, adult literacy, and adult ELL, key ideas for instruction and assessment, instructional activities, instructional decisions, and suggestions for using authentic materials, published curriculum and software.

Many ELL teachers and tutors have shared that the Story by Story model and curriculum is appropriate and motivating for Pre-literate/Beginning/Intermediate ELL adults learning to read or for improving basic reading and writing skills.

To request printed copies of either Story by Story, a contextual phonics model and curriculum for adults learning to read or The Adult Reading Toolkit (The ART), contact LDA at www.ldaminnesota.org or call (952) 582-6007. Printed copies are available at discounted rates for ABE educators. You can access both resources online by sending an email to request@ldaminnesota.org. Include your name, mailing address and name of your ABE consortium. Online access is free to Minnesota ABE educators, funded by Minnesota Supplemental Services.