A multi-site review of policies affecting opportunities for children with developmental disabilities to become bilingual.

This review of special education and language-in-education policies at six sites in four countries (Canada, United States, United Kingdom, and Netherlands) aimed to determine the opportunities for bilingualism provided at school for children with developmental disabilities (DD). While research has demonstrated that children with DD are capable of learning more than one language (see Kay Raining Bird, Genesee, & Verhoeven, this issue), it was not clear whether recent policies reflect these findings. The review, conducted using the same protocol across sites, showed that special education policies rarely addressed second language learning explicitly. However, at all sites, the policies favoured inclusion and educational planning based on individual needs, and thus implied that students with DD would have opportunities for second language learning. The language-in-education policies occasionally specified the support individuals with special needs would receive. At some sites, policies and educational options provided little support for minority languages, a factor that could contribute to subtractive bilingualism. At others, we found stronger support for minority languages and optional majority languages: conditions that could be more conducive to additive bilingualism.

Access to Opportunities for Bilingualism for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities: Key Informant Interviews.

The purpose of this article is to describe the results of a thematic analysis of 79 semi-structured interviews collected at six research sites in four countries in relation to the inclusion and exclusion of students with developmental disabilities (DD) in and from special education and bilingual opportunities. The participants were individuals with expertise either in special needs and/or language education to support bilingualism (e.g., second language (L2) instruction), who served as key informants about service delivery and/or policy in these areas. Six themes emerged as salient during the analysis: we include all kids, special needs drives it, time/scheduling conflicts, IEP/IPP/statement drives it, it's up to the parents, and service availability. The results suggested that access to language programs and services is limited for children with DD, even though participants at all sites reported adherence to a philosophy of inclusion. A priority on special education services over language services was identified, as well as barriers to providing children with DD access to programs and services to support bilingual development. Some of these barriers included time and scheduling conflicts and limited service availability. Additionally, the role of parents in decision making was affirmed, although, in contrast to special education services, decision-making about participation or exemption from language programs was typically left up to the parents. Overall, the results suggest a need for greater attention to providing supports for both first (L1) and L2 language development for bilingual children with DD and greater access to available language programs.