Evaluating English learners for special education fairly

By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated November 1, 2026

Short answer

To evaluate an English learner fairly, gather a full language and schooling history, compare the student with true peers who share a similar language background, and test in the language most likely to give accurate results, usually both languages. Look for weaknesses that show up in the home language too. Limited English proficiency cannot be the main reason for an eligibility decision.

English learners get misidentified in both directions. Some are placed in special education because their English is still developing. Others with real disabilities wait years because the team assumes every difficulty is about language. A fair evaluation is built to tell the two apart.

The rules are clear on the basics. Assessments must be chosen and given so they do not discriminate on a racial or cultural basis. They must be given in the student's native language or other mode of communication most likely to give accurate information on what the student knows and can do, unless that is clearly not feasible.^[1] And a student cannot be found eligible if the determinant factor is limited English proficiency.^[2]

What you need before you start

Home language survey and the student's enrollment history
English language proficiency scores for every year available, by domain
Records of English language development services: model, minutes, years
Schooling history in any other country, including gaps
Intervention records with progress data, and the language of instruction
Parent interview, with a qualified interpreter if needed
Names of bilingual evaluators or trained interpreters available to the team

Step-by-step

Step 1: Build the language and schooling history

Find out when the student started hearing and using each language, which language is used at home and with whom, and how many years of schooling the student has had in each language. Interrupted schooling, frequent moves and late arrival all affect what you should expect. Ask the parent how the student's development compares with siblings in the home language.

Step 2: Look at English proficiency growth over time

A single proficiency level says little. Growth does. Lay out the student's proficiency scores by year and by domain (listening, speaking, reading, writing). Compare that growth with other English learners in the district who started at a similar level. A student whose scores stall for three years while similar peers move up a level or more is showing a pattern worth investigating.

Step 3: Check the instruction the student received

Confirm the student had language development services and core instruction designed for English learners. Practice guidance for teaching English learners stresses academic vocabulary, structured oral and written language practice and small-group support for students who are behind.^[5] If the student never got that instruction, the team has a lack-of-instruction question to answer first, though it should still evaluate if a disability is suspected.

Step 4: Compare the student with true peers

A true peer is a student with a similar language background, similar proficiency level and similar time in the school system. If most true peers read 60 words correct per minute in English and this student reads 25, that gap means more than a gap against native English speakers. If the school has few similar students, look at district or state data for English learners at the same level.

Step 5: Test in the right language, usually both

Decide the language of testing from the data, not from what is convenient. Most English learners need some assessment in both languages. Use bilingual evaluators when you can. When you use an interpreter, choose one trained in assessment, brief them before the session and note their role in the report. ASHA's guidance on multilingual service delivery describes these practices for speech-language evaluation, and they apply to the rest of the team too.^[4]

Step 6: Use tools that fit and read norms with care

Check whether a test's norm group included students like this one. Most English-normed tests did not include many English learners. Nonverbal tests reduce the language load but do not remove cultural content. Report scores with that caution. Where norms do not fit, lean on curriculum-based measures, language samples in both languages, criterion-referenced tasks and dynamic assessment.

Step 7: Look for the problem in both languages

A disability usually shows up across languages. A student with a language disorder will have trouble learning words and grammar in the home language as well as in English. A student acquiring English typically shows typical development in the home language, given exposure. Dynamic assessment helps here: teach a new skill briefly and measure how quickly the student learns it. Slow learning with good teaching points toward a disability; quick learning points toward a lack of exposure.^[4]

Step 8: Write the exclusionary factor finding

State in the report why limited English proficiency is or is not the determinant factor, with the evidence. Include a validity statement for every test given in English or through an interpreter.

Worked example from start to finish

Luis is a fictional third grader. Spanish is the main language at home. He started kindergarten in the district and has had English language development services for 30 minutes a day since then. He was referred in September 2026 for reading.

Language history. His mother reports that he spoke later than his two older brothers, used short sentences in Spanish until about age 4, and still mixes up words for family members. The family speaks Spanish at home and Luis watches English cartoons.

Proficiency growth. On the state English proficiency test (6 levels), Luis scored 1.8 in kindergarten, 2.1 in first grade and 2.2 in second grade. District English learners who started at a similar level averaged 3.4 by the end of second grade.

True peer comparison. On a fall English oral reading fluency probe, Luis read 21 words correct per minute. Six classmates with similar backgrounds and proficiency averaged 58.

Testing in both languages. A bilingual SLP gave a Spanish language measure and a story retell in each language. His Spanish retell was 4 events with frequent grammar errors; three classmates with similar backgrounds, retelling the same story, told 7 to 9. On a Spanish early reading measure he named 31 of 52 letter sounds.

Dynamic assessment. Over three 15-minute sessions in Spanish, the SLP taught 6 new words with pictures. Luis learned 2 of the 6, needed many repetitions and did not keep them a week later. The SLP rated his response to teaching as low.

Decision. Luis showed weak language and early reading skills in both languages, stalled English growth compared with similar peers, a family history of later speech, and slow learning during dynamic assessment despite years of consistent services. The team concluded that limited English proficiency was not the determinant factor. He was found eligible under specific learning disability in basic reading, with speech-language services for language. His IEP keeps his English language development services, since an English learner with an IEP still has the right to language support. All numbers here are illustrations.

Common mistakes

Weak: "His scores are low on the English test, so he qualifies." Better: "His scores are low in both languages and below true peers, and the history supports a disability."

Weak: "He is still learning English. Let's wait two more years." Better: Evaluate when a disability is suspected. Waiting for full English proficiency is not a requirement.

Weak: Using a classroom aide who speaks Spanish as the interpreter with no briefing. Better: Use a trained interpreter, brief them on the test rules and record their role.

Weak: Giving a nonverbal test and calling the result culture-free. Better: Report it as reduced language demand, with cultural content noted.

Weak: Comparing the student only with native English speakers. Better: Compare with true peers who share the language background and proficiency level.

Templates and tools

Goal templates written for this group are in IEP goals for English learners. The glossary entry on English learner with an IEP explains how both services fit together.
To write present levels that show both language and disability needs, see present levels for English learners.
For interventions before or during the evaluation, see reading intervention for English learners.
Enter the consent date in the IEP due date calculator. Scheduling interpreters takes time, so book them in the first week.
The eligibility categories are in the 13 categories of special education, and the full process in the IEP evaluation process.

Families must also receive notices in their native language unless that is clearly not feasible.^[3]

Frequently asked questions

How long should an English learner be in the country before a special education evaluation?

There is no required waiting period. Evaluate when a disability is suspected. The team then uses the student's language history, true peer comparisons and testing in both languages to judge whether language exposure explains the difficulty.

Does an English learner lose English language services after getting an IEP?

No. A student can receive both. The IEP addresses the disability, and English language development continues. The IEP team should plan how the two fit together in the schedule.

What if no bilingual evaluator is available?

Use a trained interpreter, adapt the plan to rely more on curriculum-based measures, language samples and dynamic assessment, and note the limits in a validity statement. Some districts contract with outside bilingual evaluators.

Use it in IEP Atlas

Sources

34 CFR §300.304: Evaluation procedures, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
34 CFR §300.306: Determination of eligibility, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
34 CFR §300.503: Prior notice by the public agency; content of notice, U.S. Department of Education (IDEA website)
Multilingual Service Delivery in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, ASHA
Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle School, What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences

Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.