1

LAVÍN SECTION 4
Depth of Knowledge Essay

In 2017 English learners with disabilities (ELSWD) in fourth grade scored 68 points below

their general education peers in reading and fifty points below in math (NAEP, 2018). This gap

widened once students entered eighth grade (69 points) and twelfth grade (77 points). Research

on ELSWD is sparse (Baker, Richards‐Tutor, Sparks, & Canges, 2018; Gage, Cook, & Reichow,

2017) and studies that focus on this population often address the topic of

over/underrepresentation as the main point of the research. This essay identifies gaps in the

literature concerning ELSWD as well as addressing these gaps through my work and research

interests.

Gaps in the Literature

There are ethical, systemic, methodological, and theoretical gaps in the research

concerning ELSWD. One ethical concern is the lack of communication between professionals in

special education and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. Even though Individualized

Education Programs (IEP) for ELSWDs are mandated by law to address the language goals of the

student (DCL, 2015), a recent study conducted by Hoover et al., (2018) revealed that this is not

the case. In fact, many districts have a policy stating students may not receive both special

education and ESL services (DCL, 2005). If specialists charged with the education of ELSWD are

not collaborating, how will ELSWD ever receive the services they need?

Theoretical and methodological gaps arise from the way research is conducted is special

education. For the most part, research in special education is about finding evidence‐based

practices (EBPs) that can be generalized to a specific population. These EBPs sometimes use

social validity to establish whether or not participants enjoyed the intervention or if the
2
LAVÍN SECTION 4
intervention procedures are “acceptable to participants and community” (Kadzin, 2011, p. 53).

However, this social validation does not explore the ideas, thoughts, or circumstances of the

participants. There is a gap in the literature addressing the students’ perceptions and

environment in special education, especially for ELSWD.

One systemic concern relates to how schools continue to actively segregate students by

disability and race. It is important to address systemic issues and racial tensions that exist within

the school systems. There is a racial divide between students as teachers in public schools

across the United States. The majority of teachers are white female, and the student population

is becoming more diverse each year (Barrio, 2017). Alfredo Artiles (2011), explained how

disability is racialized. In his article, Artiles explains that the dominant culture has an idea of

what is good, beautiful, and whole. Which means that anything that is not good, beautiful, or

whole is seen as bad, ugly, deficient or incomplete. It also means that as a society, these are

traits we police more severely: “Like ugly laws germane to disabled individuals, the history of

racial segregation is full of codes, regulations, and laws about the surveillance of Black bodies

on sidewalks and in stores, businesses, trains, and other public spaces” (p.434).

Because of this policing on bodies of color by teachers and administrators, people of

color consistently look for places away from the dominant gaze in order to rest, regenerate, feel

whole again, and create knowledge that is not under white scrutiny (hooks[sic], 1990).

Addressing gaps though Xarlas and Refugios

There is research on how culturally sustaining pedagogies can create refugio (i.e.,safe spaces)

for or students to develop their whole person (Paris & Alim, 2017). The creation of such spaces

by students of color is a topic researched in high school through third spaces (i.e., where
3
LAVÍN SECTION 4
teacher and student whole person intersect, creating the potential for authentic interaction and

a shift in the social organization of learning and what counts as knowledge) (Gutiérrez, 2008),

and in college as counter spaces or refugios (i.e., spaces that provide refuge from racism and

discrimination in the college at large; as well as provide a social space where students can

cultivate friendships and develop a sense of community) (Lavín, Mock Muñoz de Luna, & Ender

2018; Yosso, Smith, Ceja, & Solórzano, 2009). These spaces enable students of color to position

their cultural knowledges as a valuable strength. Unfortunately there is not enough research on

using these safe spaces in elementary schools. Through the use of my recent research of

refugios, I would be addressing some of the systemic concerns concerning ELSWD.

I am interested in using action research (AR) in order to address some of the

methodological gaps surrounding ELSWD. My colleagues and I developed Xarlas as an AR

methodology (Lavín, Mock Muñoz de Luna, & Ender, 2018). Xarlas is an AR methodology that

embraces the whole humanity of all the participants and promotes collective knowledge

creation. As an AR methodology, Xarlas also center race, racism and the experiences of students

from marginalized communities as a framework, through Xarlas, participants explore the

experiences of people of color and their experience of being erased in different institutions.

Finally, Xarlas are generative. They focus on create avenues to solve the problems discussed. In

order to create effective EBPs for ELSWD, we need to first understand what ELSWD want, or

need from school personnel. Because of the way in which Xarlas approach problems, I feel they

would provide new insight on ELSWD.

Why Xarlas and Refugios?

As a teacher and a student of color I have experienced the denial of my whole

4
LAVÍN SECTION 4
personhood at different stages in my life. Through personal communications with Robert Rueda

and Alfredo Artiles, I realized that this denial also happens consistently in academia, and that

the idea of building refugios is not new. However, research on counter spaces is still sparse.

These communications inspired me to further develop refugios and Xarlas. Creating a refugio

helped me navigate the dominant culture as a Latino male. I think other students in college and

k‐12 education con benefit from this knowledge. Focusing on the whole person addresses

systemic and theoretical aspects of working with ELSWD and other students of color.

Xarlas are the result of intentional conversations in these refugios. They cover all types

of issues. There are two key points that make Xarlas stand out. The call to be fully human, and

how they are generative. Xarlas involve reflection and deep thought. Participants within a

Xarlas call on their whole human experience in order to participate and create ideas, solutions,

or further questions. Xarlas are also generative in a sense they have a feeling of “happy”. This

feeling comes from the action within Xarlas. Xarlas invite their participants to action. This action

is guided by the conversations in which all participants take part. It is in this way that

participants feel understand that their voice matters. Participants feel validated and empowered

to act upon the objectives outlined through the Xarlas.

Compelled To Action

ELSWD are often marginalized and brushed aside in their schools (Kangas, 2018). The

most recent NAEP data shows that ELSWD are not catching up to their general education peers

(NAEP, 2018). All students should be provided equal opportunities to succeed in school.

Throughout this essay I outlined some of the ethical, systemic, and methodological gaps

concerning ELSWD. I also highlighted how my research interests can help narrow these gaps.
5
LAVÍN SECTION 4
Currently, researchers we are not understanding the needs of ELSWD. We need to change our

approach. I believe Refugios and Xarlas can be that different approach.

References

Artiles, A. J. (2011). Toward an interdisciplinary understanding of educational equity and

difference: The case of the racialization of ability. Educational Researcher, 40, 431–445.

doi:10.3102/0013189X11429391

Baker, D. L., Richards‐Tutor, C., Sparks, A., & Canges, R. (2018). Review of single subject research

examining the effectiveness of interventions for at‐risk English learners. Learning

Disabilities Research & Practice, 33, 64–74. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12160

Barrio, B. L. (2017). Special education policy change: Addressing the disproportionality of

English language learners in special education programs in rural communities. Rural

Special Education Quarterly, 36, 64–72. doi:10.1177/8756870517707217

Gage, N. A., Cook, B. G., & Reichow, B. (2017). Publication bias in special education meta‐

analyses. Exceptional Children, 83, 428–445. doi:10.1177/0014402917691016

Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a Sociocritical Literacy in the Third Space. Reading Research

Quarterly, 43, 148–164.

hooks [sic], bell. (1990). Yearning: race, gender, and cultural politics. Boston, MA: South End
6
LAVÍN SECTION 4
Press.

Kadzin, A. (2011). Single-case research designs (2nd ed.). U.S.A: Oxford.

Kangas, S. E. N. (2018). Why working apart doesn’t work at all: Special education and English

learner teacher collaborations. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54, 31‐39.

doi:10.1177/1053451218762469

Lavín, C.E., Mock Muñoz de Luna, L. I., & Ender, T. (2018) Pedagogy of refugios: Creating critical

spaces in primarily white institutions. Paper presented at American Educational Studies

Association, Greenville, SC.

Lavín, C.E., Mock Muñoz de Luna, L. I., & Ender, T. (2018). Xarlas and globalization: How

intentional conversation can create curricula of defiance in times of crisis. Paper

presented at American Educational Studies Association, Greenville, SC.

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for

justice in a changing world. New York: Teachers College Press.

Yosso, T., Smith, W., Ceja, M., & Solórzano, D. (2009). Critical race theory, racial

microaggressions, and campus racial climate for Latina/o undergraduates. Harvard

Educational Review, 79, 659–691. doi:10.17763/haer.79.4.m6867014157m707l

7
LAVÍN SECTION 4