A Critical Analysis of State-Level Policies Impacting Racialized Emergent Bilinguals Suspected or Labeled as Dis/abled.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review article is to conduct a critical analysis of state-level policies focusing on the provision of speech-language therapy and special education to children and youth who are racialized emergent bilinguals (REBs) suspected or labeled as dis/abled. METHOD: We analyzed the state-level policies focusing on speech-language therapy and/or special education of California, Kansas, Florida, and New York. We coded content in terms of labels used to describe REBs; the focus of states' policies, whether the policy mentioned the provision of bilingual services, and the orientation toward bilingualism. Thematic analyses and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the policies, and interrater reliability was calculated. RESULTS: The results of this review revealed that most state-level policies contain English-centric, deficit-based labels to describe REBs and that most focus primarily on the classification and eligibility for dis/ability. Only one state addresses the provision of bilingual education for REBs labeled as dis/abled. The bulk of policies are underpinned by an ideology of "bilingualism as a difference," meaning that the main idea of the policies is that emerging English skills does not result in a dis/ability. CONCLUSIONS: Policies do not exist in a vacuum and are influenced by sociopolitical ideologies. The findings of this review highlight the urgency of applying an intersectional, justice-focused approach to the policies and practices impacting REBs suspected and/or labeled as disabled in the fields of speech-language therapy and special education.

Where Do You Anchor Your Beliefs? An Invitation to Interrogate Dominant Ideologies of Language and Languaging in Speech-Language Pathology.

PURPOSE: Ideologies are like rocks onto which individuals and institutions anchor their thoughts about what it means to be an "ideal language user" and what "standardized languaging" is. These deeply ingrained beliefs, influenced by colonial legacies and sociopolitical contexts, invisibly enforce a hierarchical order between people and their access to rights and privilege within societies. They inferiorize, marginalize, racialize, and nullify students and their families. The purposes of this tutorial are to reflect upon common dominant ideologies about language and languaging that are present in definitions, practices, and materials used in school-based settings by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and to offer an invitation to interrupt the practices that are birthed from upholding these beliefs and are dehumanizing to children and families living at the intersections of marginalization. To illustrate how these beliefs about language are enacted in the field of speech-language pathology, a selection of materials and approaches are presented and related to their ideological roots while implementing a critical stance. CONCLUSIONS: Ideologies uphold idealized versions of "normality" and constructions of "deviance." Left unexamined, these beliefs remain encoded in traditionally considered scientific categories, policies, approaches, and materials. Critical reflexivity and action are key in the process of up-anchoring and shifting perspectives for ourselves and our institutions. The hope is that, through this tutorial, SLPs can increase their critical consciousness while envisioning how to interrupt oppressive dominant ideologies and, therefore, conceive of a future path that advocates for liberated languaging.