Advancement to postsecondary education for English language learners (ELLs) can be seriously constrained by a lack of academic preparation during high school. Currently, ELLs lag behind their non-ELL peers in their level of access to advanced college-preparatory courses. Through a qualitative case study of ELL education at a large public high school, we examine the educational practices that result in ELLs’ restricted curricular choices. The findings expose the way in which ELLs’ chances for rigorous academic preparation are systematically reduced and point to the importance of providing ELLs with high-level academic curriculum while also supplying linguistic scaffolding that makes such learning possible.

No abstract

Inadequate and incomplete educational services for English learners (ELs) with disabilities is a common civil rights issue in the U.S. K-12 education system. Although the federal government has documented that schools are instituting policies of providing only one set of services, such as special education or EL supports, there is little understanding as to why this practice persists in spite of educational laws and policies. Through a qualitative comparative case study that draws on two complementary theories, intersectionality and the language planning and policy onion, this study examines two schools' service provision practices for ELs with disabilities. The findings reveal that educators' beliefs about the differential weight of federal special education and EL laws and policies resulted in practices that bar ELs with disabilities from receiving the dual services to which they are legally entitled. The findings underscore the significance of bolstering school leaders' knowledge of federal language education laws and policies, while also instituting greater protections for ELs with disabilities, to safeguard these learners' educational opportunities and rights.