Early Childhood Education Journal

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 305–311 | Cite as

Culturally Appropriate Context: Unlocking the Potential of Response to Intervention for English Language Learners

  • Yaoying Xu
  • Elizabeth Drame


The number of young children whose home language is not English continues to increase every year in the United States. Challenges for English language learners (ELL) involve low academic achievement related to low expectations and inappropriate instruction, and inappropriate assessment instruments or procedures resulting in overrepresentation of ELL students in higher incidence disabilities. In addition, the lack of effective instructional strategies for teaching ELL students often lead to behavioral problems and poor social interaction skills. The purpose of this article is to examine the learning context of young ELLs relative to culturally and linguistically responsive intervention. Components and potentials of response to intervention model were investigated. Essential factors involved in culturally and linguistically responsive intervention were identified. Finally, challenges in preparing culturally appropriate context were discussed.


English language learners Response to intervention Culturally appropriate context 


  1. Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C. H., & Lord, C. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English-language learners: Implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alder, N. (2002). Interpretations of the meaning of care: Creating caring relationships in urban middle school classrooms. Urban Education, 37, 241–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Artiles, A. J. (2002). Culture in learning: The next frontier in reading difficulties research. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to policy (pp. 693–701). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Artiles, A. J., & Ortiz, A. (Eds.). (2002). English language learners with special needs: Identification, placement, and instruction. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
  5. Artiles, A., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate representation: English language learners in urban school district. Exceptional Children, 71, 283–300.Google Scholar
  6. Collier, C., & Hoover, J. J. (1987). Sociocultural considerations when referring minority children for learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Focus, 3(1), 39–45.Google Scholar
  7. Conway, D. F., Christensen, J. E., Russell, J. F., & Brown, J. D. (2000). Principals’ perceptions of pre-referral student assistance teams. Educational Research Service Spectrum, 18(1), 14–19.Google Scholar
  8. Donovan, S., & Cross, C. (Eds.). (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. I. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 157–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Graner, P. S., Faggella-Luby, M. N., & Fritschmann, N. S. (2005). An overview of responsiveness to intervention: What practitioners ought to know. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(2), 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gresham, F. M. (2005). Response to intervention: An alternative means of identifying students as emotionally disturbed. Education and Treatment of Children, 28(4), 328–344.Google Scholar
  12. Harris-Murri, N., King, K., & Rostenberg, D. (2006). Reducing disproportionate minority representation in special education programs for students with emotional disturbances: Toward a culturally responsive response to intervention model. Education and Treatment of Children, 29(4), 779–799.Google Scholar
  13. Ikeda, M. J., & Gustafson, J. K. (2002). Heartland AEA 11’s problem solving process: Impact on issues related to special education. Research Report No. 2002-01. Available from authors at Heartland Area Education Agency 11, 6500 Corporate Dr., Johnson IA, 50131.Google Scholar
  14. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004). (reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990).Google Scholar
  15. Kindler, A. L. (2002). Survey of the states’ limited English proficient students and available educational programs and services. 2000–2001 summary report. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition.Google Scholar
  16. Klingner, J., Artiles, A. J., & Barletta, L. M. (2006). English language learners who struggle with reading: Language acquisition or LD? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 108–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B., Zion, S., Tate, W., Duran, G. Z., & Riley, D. (2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(38). Retrieved December 28, 2005, from
  18. Lopez-Reyna, N. A. (1996). The importance of meaningful contexts in bilingual special education: Moving to whole language. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 120–131.Google Scholar
  19. McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D’Emilio, T. (2005). Learning disabilities in English language learners. Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). 1999–2000 schools and staffing survey: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  21. Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  22. Ortiz, A. A., & Kushner, M. I. (1997). Bilingualism and the possible impact on academic performance. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinic of North America, 6, 657–679.Google Scholar
  23. Rueda, R., & Windmueller, M. P. (2006). English language learners, LD, and overrepresentation: A multiple level analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sadler, C., & Zinn, P. (2005, July). Early intervention/RTI in Tigard-Tualatin school district: Effective behavior & instructional support (EBIS). Presentation made at Office of Special Education Program’s Project Directors Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. Tilly, D. (2003, December 4). Heartland area education agency’s evolution from four to three tiers: Our journey-our results. Paper presented at the National Research Center for Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium. Kansas City, MO.Google Scholar
  26. Trueba, H. T. (1988). English literacy acquisition: From cultural trauma to learning disabilities in minority students. Linguistics and Education, 1, 125–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. U.S. Department of Commerce. (2005). Language use and English speaking ability. Retrieved April 19, 2005. Available:
  28. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). National assessment of educational progress: The National’s report card, reading 2003 major results. Retrieved April 19, 2005. Available:
  29. Vaughn, S. (2003, December). How many tiers are needed for response to intervention to achieve acceptable prevention outcomes? Paper presented at the NRCLD Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium. Kansas City, MO. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from
  30. Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., & Schumm, J. S. (2007). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  31. Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilkinson, C., Ortiz, A. A., Robertson, P. M., & Kushner, M. I. (2006). English language learners with reading-related LD: Linking data from multiple sources to make eligibility determinations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zehler, A., Fleischman, H., Hopstock, P., Stephenson, T., Pendzick, M., & Sapru, S. (2003). Policy report: Summary of findings related to LEP and SPED-LEP students. Report submitted to U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement of Limited English Proficient Students). Arlington, VA: Development Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Virginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  2. 2.RichmondUSA
  3. 3.University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations