ABSTRACT
As compelling as the argument for supporting the home language of emergent bilinguals (EBs) with disabilities is (Kay-Raining Bird, Trudeau, & Sutton, 2016; Peña, 2016), administrators, educators, and parents often rely on beliefs that undermine abilities and expectations for these children to learn bilingually. One trend is to remove students from dual-language classrooms to focus on the development of English skills (Kay-Raining Bird, Genesee, & Verhoeven, 2016; NASEM, 2017; Paradis, 2016). This can result in loss of bilingual identity and peer social networks and can have a negative psychological and academic impact (Parra, Evans, Fletcher, & Combs, 2014). This practice can stem from a lack of understanding of translanguaging in the assessment and instruction of EBs and the tendency of leaders to understand bilingualism through a monolinguistic paradigm, leading to the “language-as-problem” orientation (Martínez-Álvarez, 2014; Przymus, 2016). A partial solution can come from recognizing this orientation in school discourse and countering the following common myths regarding the placement of EBs with disabilities in dual-language classrooms (NASEM, 2017):
Exposure to or learning more than one language will overwhelm and confuse children with disabilities.
Code-switching practices of EBs are evidence of confusion.
Existing learning and language deficits will be worsened by exposure to more than one language, limiting the ability of these students to successfully learn English.
EBs should stop using their first language (L1) at home and school, in order to learn English.
