Abstract
Students who are limited English proficient (LEP) and disabled are legally entitled to services that address both needs. The purpose of the study was to determine: (1) how severely disabled students who are also LEP are acquiring a second language without direct English language development (ELD) instruction, primary language support, or bilingual services; (2) techniques used by bilingual and special education teachers; and (3) similarities and differences between special education and bilingual education techniques used in schools which are intended to produce learners of English. The researcher used descriptive research. The sample consisted of three school districts in Orange County with the highest percentage of limited English proficient students enrolled in the county. The schools selected served both special education and LEP students. The special day classes studied met the dual criteria of serving students in the severe to profound range of intellectual functioning, and which had LEP students where Spanish was the first language heard. Descriptive data portrayed the practices of special educators who serve bilingual-special education students. The study identified the following: (1) Special educators used special and bilingual education techniques interchangeably. Primary language support was available to LEP special education students via bilingual staff and material. (2) Bilingual education resources and training were available to special educations. (3) There were more similarities found between the techniques than differences. While the terminology was different, techniques were similar. (4) The emphasis of bilingual education classes was to teach ELD while teaching the core curriculum. The emphasis of special education was to teach language while teaching a functional skills curriculum. (5) Lack of collaboration between disciplines was evident. It was concluded that teachers are attempting to meet the dual needs of severely disabled-LEP students. They desire assistance in developing linguistically appropriate goals and objectives. The students studied in this project were getting their ELD needs met within special education classes, as all teachers used special education language development techniques which were similar to bilingual education techniques. It was recommended that training in meeting the needs of this dual at-risk student population be made available.