Job Discussion Forums

[Chancellor]

I'm taking a couple of special education courses (as in courses in aspects of teaching special education) and I've talked to a few people who teach ESL here in the states. One of my textbooks lumps ESL in with special education while ESL teachers I've talked to have said they were lumped in with special education by general education teachers, with the implication that they're somehow not real teachers.

Anyone else come across this strange phenomenon?

[johnslat]

Dear Chancellor,
In the States, we're often "lumped in with" Adult Basic Education departments at colleges/universities, along with such others as GED and Developmental Education.
But no - I've never seen ESL and Special Ed lumped together. However, why would Special Ed teachers not be considered "real" teachers? In my opinion, they are, if anything, even "more real" than "regular" teachers. They certainly have a tougher job on their hands much of the time.
I admire them no end.
Regards,
John

[chinagirl]

In smaller districts, if there are few ESL students and no separate ESL department, it is possible to find ESL teachers lumped in with Special Education for the purpose of budgeting and coordination. For example,at

http://www.avonmaitland.on.ca/ourschools/speced.htm (a district in Ontario)

the ESL teacher is grouped with teachers of the Gifted, Blind, Deaf and other teachers of students with IEPs.

[rusmeister]

Absolutely they are lumped in together! (broadly speaking)

At all the teacher meetings - Foreign languages, over here, ESL+Special Ed - over here...

The objectional thing, John, is not that the teachers are not "real teachers", but that it displays an attitude that people who have come to learn English are people who have something wrong with them. It is generally acknowledged that Special Ed students have problems that actually are disorders, things gone wrong (and THAT system is horribly abused), and people who can't speak English are seen the same way. The people who do this lumping - and it is so both in the colleges and in the teacher cert programs and is widespread practice in the districts that I saw - would certainly object if the shoe were on the other foot, only they have no idea what the other foot looks like. I found it quite offensive - I took offense both for myself and my students, and it wound up being one of the reasons I ultimately left. This subtle attitude of: "Oh! You teach...them." (I could almost hear the "Eeuw!")

[johnslat]

Dear rusmeister,
This is news to me. And I've taught ESL in Florida, New Mexico, Colorado, California and Missouri.
Regards,
John

[DrVanNostrand]

I wouldn't say that ESL and EC are lumped together, but I would say they're fairly similar. As far as schools are concerned, I'd assume they are typically regarded as different entities or departments. That's the case in my district anyway.

ESL and EC (can) receive special modifications and resource (pull out) classes. Both have needs that must be met by EC, ESL, and reg. ed. teachers. If I'm not mistaken, students of each classification have to score into their particular departments as well by means of specialized testing.

So, they're different in the sense that they "treat" different types of deficiencies (cognitive and language), and are typically regarded as different entities, but both are approached somewhat similarly.

[DrVanNostrand]

Regarding EC teachers being "real" teachers, they absolutely are.

They have real teaching degrees, get paid on a normal teacher's scale, and in many cases have to be more adept at teaching than their regular ed counterparts.

Now there may be some regular ed folk that work with inclusion teachers that question the merit of inclusion in the regular ed classroom, and their points may be valid depending on the working relationship between the reg ed and inclusion teacher, but resource EC teachers manage classrooms just like any other teacher. That's not to say that inclusion teachers aren't real teachers, but inclusion is a whole different animal. It's still teaching, but in many cases there isn't a whole lot of teaching going on.

You have to experience it to really understand. Inclusion can be a wonderful thing when lead and inclusion teacher are working hand in hand to serve the needs of the children involved. Conversely, it can be a huge waste of county money in cases where the inclusion teacher stands in the back of the classroom for 30-45 minutes and then goes on about his/her day elsewhere around the school.

[rusmeister]

Personally, I taught in NY and CA.

Talking about what we ESL teachers do is one thing (and the variations between teaching at home (US/UK..) vs teaching abroad are also significant), and talking about how ESL is organized and treated is altogether something else.

Those of us who are serious professionals know that we are real teachers, and don't need any 'self-esteem' on that count. It's how the administration, especially on county, district and local school levels perceives us and what we do. They don't ask us how things ought to be organized and run. They tell us, even though we are ostensibly the experts. Of course this can vary, but I'm describing the organization I saw at the schools/districts I was at. It is certainly administrated by people who know little about foreign language acquisition(FLA).

All I'd say on DVN's comments is that our job, especially when there is strong necessity to assimilate/include kids that need to be taught things and are not going to get that instruction in their native language is to teach them English and get them 'kicked upstairs' as fast as possible. (One of the reasons I was always opposed to "bilingual ed" was that it leaves non-Hispanics high and dry. The only reasonable alternative is rapid assimilation.)
The trouble is, a great many of their teachers have little/no experience in FLA, both in ESL and CA's SDAIE program and its equivalents.

Lastly, I'd say there is a distinction between mere personal experience and statewide organization. You can talk about "good" schools and "bad" schools, but when something is arranged/organized statewide, then its part of a plan and not up to individual schools. I think that the lumping of ESL and Special Ed for admin purposes is a matter of practical, rather than formal policy. (They're not ordered to sit ESL and Special ED teachers together sat staff meetings, but it sure is convenient for admin.)

[johnslat]

Dear rusmeister,

"Lastly, I'd say there is a distinction between mere personal experience and statewide organization."

Perhaps I'm wrong, but aren't you basing these posts on "personal experience?"

If there is a written "code" for such organization in certain states, could you provide a link to those codes?

Regards,
John

[rusmeister]

[Chancellor]

What's interesting about all this is that it doesn't seem to cross anyone's mind that ESL would have more in common with foreign language instruction. Yet, at least one of my textbooks puts ESL in with special education as if to suggest that methodologies (among other things) are related. Then, of course, there was the professor in my differentiated instruction class who said specifically that ESL is not a subject that one teaches.

I've seen some of the certification requirements for some states with regard to special education teachers and ESL teachers: both require additional training and certification beyond those for general education teachers.

[rusmeister]

[Jetgirly]

My school board has ESL teachers as well as ESL Teaching Assistants. You don't need teaching certification for the latter position, and the pay and benefits aren't comparable to that of teachers. However, as a TA you're not expected to plan lessons, mark, attend parent-teacher interviews, etc. Recently I taught at a school with a large ESL department (about eight full-time teachers plus about six full-time assistants) and we were not lumped in with special education, however at schools that are smaller or that have smaller ESL populations I've seen it happen. It's unfortunate, especially when (as in the case of the high school I graduated from), ESL students are pulled out of regular classes and brought to tutorials with students with cognitive disabilities, where everyone is taught the same thing by the same teacher. That, to me, is entirely inappropriate.

[rusmeister]

[timothypfox]

The current school I work at in New York is a special education high school, and I am the only ESL teacher. Some of the special education teachers see me the same way as they do an ELA teacher and in fact I found myself teaching two ELA classes this year in my schedule. My AP suggested that ESL has many methodologies that are similar to special education.

Others at my school lump me in with the related service providers because some of my 5 day a week - regularly scheduled classes mind you - are pull out classes. But technically ESL teachers are subject area teachers - instructing one or more subjects - usually ELA - although I find myself doing mainly ELA and social studies - and a bit of math - embedded in ESL classes.