Using data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten Cohort, this study was designed to investigate proportional representation, identification rates, and predictors of language-minority (LM) learners in special education using a nationally representative sample of kindergarten, first graders, and third graders. The findings indicate that although LM learners were underrepresented in special education in kindergarten and first grade, they were overrepresented in third grade across all disability categories. LM status, teacher ratings of language and literacy skills, and reading proficiency level were significant predictors of placement in special education. Kindergarten teacher ratings of language and literacy skills were highly predictive of subsequent placement in special education. The implications for developing a model of early identification, the response-to-intervention model in particular, for LM learners at risk for academic difficulties are discussed.

No abstract

When a school is implementing a response to intervention model (RTI), what are the special considerations for the assessment of and referral for special education services for English language learners (ELLs) with academic difficulties? An RTI model and evidencebased instruction can inform the three areas of prereferral, referral, and assessment, as well as IEP development, for ELLs-but the assessment team must understand how to use information on oral language proficiency and academic language in the process. There are specific, appropriate action steps for educators during each phase of the process that will ensure that this group of students with unique learning needs are appropriately assessed and serviced.As the number of ELL students in the United States grows, so does the need 6 ■ COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

No abstract

In this article, we critically review the work of Morgan et al. (2015) and offer Disability Studies in Education (DSE) as an alternative conceptualization to traditional research within special education. We first unpack many of Morgan et al.'s (2015) assumptions, which are grounded in deficit discourses about children, family structures, economic status, and home cultures. Next, we identify flaws in their research design and methodology. Finally, we elaborate on how, through naming and making visible the workings of ableism and racism, DSE offers a way to counter the deficit discourses and inaccurate abstractions of lived realities upon which Morgan et al.'s (2015) work rests.