Mexican American Mothers' Perceptions and Beliefs About Language Acquisition in Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities

Anita Méndez Pérez
Austin, Texas

Abstract

This study examined the perceptions and beliefs about language acquisition of seven Spanish-speaking Mexican American mothers who had young children (age 24-37 months) with language disabilities. These children were served in an Early Childhood Intervention (ECI) program in central Texas. How mothers' perceptions and beliefs influenced their decision as to whether ECI services were provided in Spanish or English was examined, as was their understanding of how to support their children's language development. Data were gathered using a home language questionnaire, a structured interview, and observations of mother-child interactions. Data were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. Themes that emerged from the interviews and mother-child interactions are examined and implications for early childhood intervention are discussed.

Sections of the Article

Introduction

Children from birth to 2 years of age with developmental delays, and their families, are eligible for Early Childhood Intervention (ECI) services through Public Law 105-17, part C, of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. A developmental delay may be present in one or more of the following areas: cognitive, gross or fine motor, language and speech, social or emotional, and self-help skills. ECI services are designed to enhance a child's learning and developmental potential and allow parents to play a major instructional role in the intervention.

ECI services provided to young children with developmental delays and their families must be family centered. The concept of family-centered services in ECI is based on respect and acceptance of each family's ethnicity, language, culture, structure, roles, values, and beliefs (Hartman & Laird, 1983; Shelton, Jeppson, & Johnson, 1987). Parents provide input into the services their children need and in the development and implementation of the Individualized Family Services Plan (IFSP) (O'Connell & Sontag, 1992). This plan describes the child's level of development and need for intervention, the family's priorities and concerns related to enhancing their child's development, and the expected outcomes (Johnson, McGonigel, & Kaufmann, 1989).

One of the major obstacles to providing linguistically and culturally sensitive ECI services is the lack of research in this area. Little is known about the effects of disabilities on the development of native language and English as a second language skills of infants and toddlers from homes where a language other than English is spoken, and even less is known about effective ECI programs and services for this population. Given the lack of research in this area, early interventionists often rely on intervention practices designed for Anglo American infants and toddlers from English-speaking homes (Lynch & Hanson, 1992). As a result, culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children with disabilities and their families are under-served or inappropriately served by dedicated early interventionists. It is thus important to understand the nature of services provided to infants and toddlers who will at age 3 be transitioned to early childhood special education programs in public school.

To begin to address the gap in the literature associated with serving CLD children with disabilities, this study was designed to explore the issues, concerns, and priorities of language minority parents whose young children are enrolled in ECI programs. Because Spanish speakers comprise the majority of this population in Texas and the United States (Han, Baker, & Rodriguez, 1997), the investigation focused on Mexican American mothers' knowledge and beliefs about language acquisition among infants and toddlers, and on their perceptions of how the presence of a disability affected the development of their children's communication skills. Of further interest was how parents decided whether ECI services should be delivered in Spanish, English, or both languages.

Method

Participants

Seven Mexican American mothers whose children were receiving services from an ECI program located in central Texas consented to participate in this study. The mothers, all of whom were native Spanish speakers who spoke little or no English, had an eighth-grade education or less. All participated in public assistance programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Their children had been identified as having a developmental delay or being at risk for such delays. Because the purpose of the study was to explore their beliefs about how disabilities influenced language acquisition, only mothers whose children had communication disorders were eligible for participation. Children with communication disorders (such as auditory impairments, articulation, or language disorders) or with cognitive deficits that affected age and rate of acquisition were included in the study. Also, participation was limited to mothers whose children were at an age when they would be expected to have already developed some verbal skills. The participants' children were between the ages of 24 to 37 months and had been in the ECI program for at least three months. Four of the mothers had older children without disabilities between the ages of 48 to 54 months.

Instruments

The following instruments were used to confirm the mothers' language status and language use in the home, and to guide the interviews conducted by the researcher. The Home Language Questionnaire and the Mother Interview Guide were translated into Spanish.

Language proficiency rating scale

The Language Proficiency Rating Scale (LPRS) was based on the Foreign Languages Services Institute (Educational Testing Service, cited in Oller, 1979) and the Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (California Department of Education, n.d.). The scale consists of five language fluency ratings with a score of 1, indicating that speech is so halting and fragmented as to make conversation virtually impossible, to a score of 5, indicating that everyday conversation is fluent and effortless as is characteristic of native speakers. Each mothers' language proficiency was rated using the Language Proficiency Rating Scale by a bilingual ECI staff member and by the researcher; only those mothers' for whom there was agreement about Spanish and English proficiency levels were included in the study.

Home language questionnaire

The Home Language Questionnaire (HLQ) (Payan, 1989) takes about 15 minutes to administer and consists of eight questions designed to describe the child's home language environment. Respondents are asked to indicate the language(s) spoken in the home, the language(s) their children with disability understand and speak with members of the family and caretakers, and the language(s) the mother typically uses with the child. The HLQ was administered orally by the researcher and responses were recorded on the protocol.

Mother interview guide

This was a structured, open-ended questionnaire designed by the researcher to elicit information in four areas: (a) mothers' perceptions and beliefs about their children's disabilities, (b) similarities and differences in the communication skills of the child enrolled in the ECI program as compared to those of other children without disabilities, (c) the purpose and nature of the ECI services the families were receiving, and (d) the languages in which these services were being provided. Interviews were conducted in Spanish by the researcher.

Procedures

The researcher met with the ECI program director to explain the purpose of the study, the data to be collected, and to obtain permission to invite mothers of children enrolled in the ECI program to participate in the investigation. The director assigned three bilingual professional staff to assist with determining which mothers met the criteria for participation and to assist in obtaining consent agreements. The researcher met with these staff, provided information about the study, and shared the sample selection criteria. Using these criteria (refer to the description of the sample), the staff identified seven eligible participants. The researcher sent these mothers a letter explaining the purpose of the study and invited them to participate. The confirmation letter and consent form sent to the mothers were translated into Spanish. The staff conducted follow-up telephone contacts with mothers who did not return the form within a two-week period. Once the consent forms were signed, the researcher contacted the mothers and set up an appointment to discuss the study further and to schedule interviews.

Both the interviews and the observations were conducted in the participants' homes. The Mother Interview Guide provided the framework within which to ask questions related to the topics of interest to this study. However, the researcher continued probing until she felt she had obtained adequate information in the targeted areas (Patton, 1990). The interviews were audiotaped and then transcribed verbatim for analysis.

In another session, the mothers were asked to select two of their children's toys or games and to interact with their children as they would normally. The researcher took notes describing the communication context, including the activities taking place and the language used by the children and the mothers; she also audiotaped the interactions and then transcribed the tapes verbatim. The observer collected a minimum of 50 utterances (Lee, 1974; Tyack & Gottsleben, 1974) over a 20-minute interaction period.

The researcher also kept field notes related to the administration of the HLQ, interviews, observations, and follow-up contacts. These field notes provided background information not only about the context, but also about parents' reactions to questions and the researchers' own impressions associated with data collection activities and resulting information (Patton, 1990; Yin, 1989).

Data Analysis

The interview data were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The analysis involved: (a) organizing the data; (b) generating categories, themes, and patterns; (c) interpreting the data; and (d) developing alternative explanations and drawing conclusions (Marshall & Rossman, 1989). The researcher first examined the transcripts of each interview line by line and then incident by incident to identify "emerging" themes, concepts, or ideas (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). She focused on what the participants said they believed, the feelings they expressed, and the explanations they gave (Locke, Spirduso, & Silverman, 1993). These themes were labeled and then compared against each other to identify similarities and differences; similar concepts were grouped together. Each of these new categories was organized into subcategories as appropriate. For example, based on the mothers' responses, the topic of Spanish language acquisition was subdivided into importance of acquisition, process of acquisition, context of acquisition, and strategies used to facilitate acquisition. The categories from each of the mothers' interviews were compared, and, again, similarities and differences were identified and regrouped as necessary. After these analyses were completed, the researcher developed narrative descriptions of the major themes that emerged.

The observations of mother-child interactions were analyzed by examining the transcripts and the field notes and labeling the children's receptive and expressive communication acts (e.g., gestured to request an object, labeled a picture, answered a yes/no question) and their verbal responses (e.g., vocalization, label, number of words in an utterance). Secondly, the interactions of the mothers were analyzed with a focus on their communication acts (e.g., giving directions, asking yes/no questions, labeling objects) and how they facilitated their children's communication (e.g., modeling or expanding utterances). The researcher tallied the frequency of occurrence for each act and verbal response for each mother and compared the resulting patterns against the mother's report of her child's communication skills and of her efforts to support language acquisition. Data were then aggregated to identify the most frequent patterns of interaction and support characteristics of this group of mothers.

The researcher shared her findings and interpretations of the data with the mothers and gave them an opportunity to confirm or reject those interpretations and/or to provide additional information or clarification. These "member" or participant checks (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) helped ensure that the mothers' ideas were accurately captured and described. In addition, a fellow speech/language pathologist and the dissertation committee chair, also a former speech/language pathologist, reviewed interview data and the researcher's codes and emerging themes to determine if they agreed with the researcher's categories and subcategories. This was an ongoing process throughout the data analysis phase.

Findings

Language Proficiency of Mothers

Results of the LPRS and the researcher's observations verified that all mothers were fluent Spanish speakers (Level 5) and spoke little or no English (Level 1). In addition, all of the mothers requested that the interviews be conducted in Spanish.

Home Language

The results of a Home Language Survey confirmed that Spanish was the primary language used in all of the homes. Spanish was used by all individuals who interacted with the children, including parents, siblings, grandparents, and caretakers, although the children had some exposure to English. English exposure typically occurred through media (television or radio) or as a result of children's interactions with siblings. Some of the mothers reported they used the limited English they knew in talking with their children. All responded that exposing young children to literature is important and that they read to their children in Spanish.

Perceptions and Beliefs About Disabilities

These mothers did not believe that their children had communication disabilities, nor were they concerned about their children's language development in relation to expected milestones. They noted that their children had limited verbal skills, used nonverbal gestures more often than their peers, had poor retention skills, and were frustrated by their inability to communicate. Yet, the mothers did not associate these characteristics with disabilities. Instead, they felt their children were "slow" but would "catch up" as they grew older. This was surprising because their children had been diagnosed as having a developmental delay or being at risk for such delays and thus eligible for ECI services. Moreover, in the judgment of the researcher, a bilingual speech pathologist certified by the American Speech, Hearing, and Language Association assessed that the children's language skills were significantly deviant from their Spanish-speaking peers.

Age seemed to be the important criterion the mothers used to gauge their children's language development. Since they did not expect their children to comprehend and speak until the age of 3, they were not concerned about their children's communication difficulties. The following excerpts from the interviews illustrate this:

Attribution of Problems to Factors Other Than Disabilities

Since they did not perceive that their children had disabilities, it followed, then, that the mothers attributed the cause of communication problems to a variety of other factors. Unlike findings in previous research (e.g., Maestes & Erickson, 1992), their explanations could not be categorized as folk beliefs. Maestas and Erickson (1992) found that some families believed that susto, a scare during pregnancy, affected their unborn child, or that mal ojo, or evil eye, caused birth defects and other disabilities or illnesses. The mothers in the present investigation attributed communication difficulties to such factors as the child's young age, isolated events (e.g., teething), ear infections, and personality characteristics. For example, Sra. Flores reported that Carlos' communication skills regressed when he began teething:

Sra. Padilla initially thought Adan's communication difficulties were due to numerous ear infections. She took him to an ear specialist who determined that Adan's hearing acuity was normal and, thus, Sra. Padilla ruled out the possibility that those infections might have contributed to Adan's delayed language skills:

Perceptions and Beliefs About Language Acquisition

As a group, the mothers verbalized the importance of facilitating their children's language development. They saw themselves as active participants in their children's language learning and described what they did to facilitate language growth, including listening to their children, interacting with them, labeling objects and ideas, and creating opportunities for interactions with others.

Acquisition of Spanish in the home

The mothers felt that learning Spanish was important for several reasons. For example, Sra. Padilla reported that her husband wanted their children to be able to communicate with them and with other Spanish-speaking relatives. Sra. Padilla and Sra. Ruiz both felt that learning Spanish was an important aspect of maintaining their children's cultural heritage:

The mothers expected their children to be enrolled in bilingual education programs at school entry, which they felt would provide them opportunities to enhance their Spanish skills. In fact, all of the mothers wanted their children to be bilingual. However, when they discussed bilingualism, they did not seem to be aware of the relationship between native language proficiency and the acquisition of English as a second language, although one mother did comment that children who attempt to learn both languages at once do not learn either well.

English as a Second Language Acquisition

The mothers believed that children without disabilities learn English easily, and that those with communication disabilities can also learn English, only later, perhaps at age 4 or 5. The researcher asked the mothers when and how their children would learn English. They thought one way was through exposure to English at home through interactions with siblings and via electronic media (e.g., television and videos). Surprisingly, most of the mothers believed that, even though they spoke little or no English, they nonetheless could help their children learn English or, conversely, that they could learn English from their children:

Only Sra. Lopez reported that she could not help her child learn English because her own skills were too limited:

Home-Based Interventions

The mothers indicated that Spanish was prescribed as the language of intervention by ECI program staff. They agreed with this decision because Spanish was the dominant language of the home and thus was the language that they and their children understood. None of the mothers indicated that the ECI personnel modeled the types of language activities they should use to help their children become more effective communicators, nor did they indicate that the providers had them practice language development strategies with their children during the home visits. Instead, the interviews suggested that the mothers observed as the ECI personnel worked directly with the children. The mothers tended to describe what the interventionists did as simply "playing" with the children:

Or, the mothers indicated that ECI personnel came to their homes to help their children learn to speak a little better:

Although the mothers did give specific examples of recommendations for language stimulation made by ECI staff, these suggestions were not consistently evident in mother-child interactions.

Mother-Child Interactions

As a group, mothers reported that their children demonstrated good comprehension skills, understood yes/no questions, and used nonverbal communication skills such as pointing or crying. The mothers reported that their children used word approximations and single words to communicate their needs, but only three mothers reported that their children combined two-word phrases. In addition, three mothers indicated that their children exhibited articulation difficulties (e.g., omission of the /r/ sound in the Spanish word for hurry, i.e., ponto/pronto or substitution of the /r/ sound in the Spanish word for want, i.e., quielo/quiero). However, these difficulties would be considered developmental errors because of the children's ages.

Interactions between the mothers and their children occurred exclusively in Spanish with two exceptions. Sra. Robles used an English label once, and Sra. Padilla used one- or two-word labels in English and English ritualistic speech (e.g., "Thank you"). The interaction patterns observed by the researcher were similar to those reported by the mothers. The mothers regularly used yes/no questions and requests for labels. Although the mothers indicated that the ECI staff asked them to expand their children's utterances and model short phrases, and the mothers reported that they did so, such patterns were not consistently evident in their interactions.

Discussion

The themes that emerged from the interviews suggest that it is important that ECI personnel examine how well Spanish-speaking Mexican American families understand the nature and purpose of the ECI program and whether IFSPs are culturally responsive. Because this was an exploratory study and involved only a small sample, it would be inappropriate to draw conclusions about the findings or to generalize these to all Spanish-speaking mothers. However, considering possible explanations for the themes that emerged can help inform future investigations related to early childhood intervention.

Alternative Explanations for Communication Difficulties

When parents are initially told their child has a disability, they may not be able to accept the diagnosis (Drotar et al., 1975; Marion, 1981). They expect their children to develop normally and, thus, may feel that the condition is a temporary one (Thurman & Widerstrom, 1990). This seems to be the case for those mothers who felt their children were too young to be talking yet or that they were simply "slow" in developing communication skills. According to Langdon (1992), parents find it easier to understand that their children have disabilities when these are physically apparent, such as a cleft palate, deafness, blindness, etc. Speech and language disorders, whose causes are not always apparent, are more difficult to understand or accept, especially in the early stages of language acquisition. Some researchers (Paul, 1995; Whitehurst et al., 1988) caution that parents may actually be correct. Some children are late talkers and will "catch up," achieving normal expressive vocabulary and generally fluent production, but not until age 5. These children's development would be more accurately described as delayed rather than disordered.

It is also possible, though, that these mothers' parameters of "normal" language development were much broader than those used by the early interventionists (Harry, 1992). Because these children had good comprehension skills and some form of communication (e.g., gestures, single words) to express their needs, the mothers believed their children would eventually learn to talk. In their view, their children were not disabled. Harry (1992) found this to be the case among Puerto Rican parents of children who had difficulty learning to read, write, or speak clearly. The parents understood that their children were having difficulty learning, but did not attribute these problems to disabilities. Rather, the Puerto Rican parents indicated that a number of extrinsic factors in either the home or school environment had interfered with their children's progress. Or, they interpreted behaviors in terms of individual and family characteristics, indicating that it was the child's nature to be slow or shy, or because she is "just like her father."

Language Acquisition

These mothers focused on helping their children develop Spanish language skills, which will make it easier for their children to learn English (Garcia, 1993; Miller, 1984). The literature suggests that children should receive intervention in the native language when it is the predominant language of the home (von Vacano, 1994; Ortiz, 1984), because a strong foundation in the native language is important to development of English skills (Collier, 1995; Garcia, 1993; Miller, 1994). Furthermore, if children are not provided intervention in the native language, they may lose the ability to communicate with family members who are monolingual speakers of languages other than English (Wong Fillmore, 1991).

It was somewhat surprising that the participating mothers believed they could help their children learn English, even though they themselves did not speak English. It appears that even monolingual Spanish-speaking mothers who have limited interactions with English speakers develop a sense that it is important that they and their children learn English and they express a commitment to having this happen. Fortunately for these children, their mothers did not speak enough English to give in to this pressure and, thus, their children benefited from good language models.

Maternal Speech

The interactions of these mothers were consistent with research that shows that matemal speech input for toddlers with expressive language delays is different from the input mothers give normally developing children (Marshall, Hergrenes, & Goldstein, 1973; Rosenburg & Robins, 1988; Whitehurst, et. al, 1988). Parents of language-impaired children use more yes/no questions, labels, and directives to elicit speech than do parents of children acquiring language normally. However, there may be cultural differences in the content and style of interactions. These mothers adapted their interactions to fit the expressive language skills of their children. Their responses were consistent with what they felt their children could do. These interactions were also consistent with patterns observed among other Spanish-speaking mothers. For example, Quinn (1995) found that specific vocabulary that is considered important by English-speaking families may not be part of Spanish-speaking children's semantic knowledge. Moreover, Quinn also found that when Puerto Rican mothers interacted with their children, they focused their infant's attention, demonstrated and directed play, and encouraged turn taking. The mothers and infants did not label objects or actions, and the mothers generally did not request imitation or clarification, or elicit communication with their infants.

Cultural differences may thus explain why the participating mothers' interactions were inconsistent with recommendations for language development found in the literature and why they did not consistently follow the recommendations of the ECI staff. Another explanation may be that the ECI staff was not familiar with the family's patterns of interactions used in the home and the recommendations did not match the mothers' ways of interacting with their children.

Recommendations for Early Childhood Intervention

ECI personnel may need training to ensure that they understand differences in parents' perceptions of their children's problems. At the same time, interventions must be consistent with the family's language, culture, values, beliefs, and expectations, especially if parents are expected to be their children's first or lead "teacher." For intervention to be successful, parents must understand the rationale for services, information they receive from medical personnel, specific data describing their children's functioning, and the significance of the impairment for their children's future development.

In addition to providing direct services to children, ECI personnel should involve parents in addressing IFSP goals and objectives. Identifying how mothers interact with their children is a prerequisite to planning and implementing goals that facilitate language acquisition. Thus, ECI personnel may need to be trained about cultural differences in communication styles and expectations for performance. Recommendations provided to mothers on how to facilitate their children's language skills must be developed within a culturally responsive framework. Parents should be involved in identifying communication goals, interaction styles used in their home, routines, and activities they will use to support language development. They should also be provided specific rationales for the activities being recommended. For Mexican American mothers, demonstrations, guided practice, and opportunities to practice may be needed to increase the likelihood that they implement the recommended strategies and interventions. The strategies need to be culturally appropriate, taking into account the family's styles of interactions. Strategies that match the parents' patterns of interaction and language used in the home will make it easier for them to remember and use these strategies with their children. When early interventionists observe parents using specific strategies, they can reinforce and provide feedback (Cripe & Venn, 1997) and give parents opportunities to discuss difficulties they may be having and to discuss the interventions and their effectiveness (Fey, 1986; Paul, 1995). Lastly, ECI personnel, in collaboration with parents, should monitor the implementation of recommendations and evaluate children's progress on an ongoing basis (Cripe & Venn, 1997; Fey, 1986).

Both ECI personnel and parents must understand the importance of developing a child's native language. Parents should be cautioned against speaking English to their children when they are not proficient English speakers. When parents use a language in which they are not fluent, they offer their children limited or inappropriate language models (Lewitt & Baker, 1994; Ramirez & Politizer, 1976). In turn, children learn inappropriate linguistic structure, incorrect pronunciation, and inexact expression that may further impair their communication development (Baker, 1995). The children in this study had not developed basic communication skills in Spanish and thus may not be ready to acquire English. ECI personnel should focus on supporting the child's native language development. The stronger this foundation, the higher levels of English competence children will acquire (Cummins, 1984).

Summary

As a group, these mothers lacked information about language acquisition, the rationale for ECI services in Spanish, and the relationship between native language and English as a second language acquisition. They also did not consistently implement the strategies recommended by providers to enhance their children's language skills. These findings are surprising because these mothers and their children were being provided ECI services in Spanish. This suggests that services in the family's native language are an important, but not necessarily sufficient factor in making early intervention successful. If the problems noted in this study occur when parents and service providers share the same language, one can only imagine what happens when their languages are incompatible. Future research should focus on developing models to ensure compatibility between the characteristics and needs of CLD children and their families, and the characteristics and needs of the ECI programs and personnel which serve them.

References

Baker, C. (1995). A parents' and teachers' guide to bilingualism. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters, Ltd.

California State Department of Education. (n.d.). Student Oral Language Observation Matrix. Sacramento: Author.

Collier, V. P. (1995). Promoting academic success for ESL students. Elizabeth, NJ: New Jersey Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages-Bilingual Education.

Cripe, J. W., & Venn, M. L. (1997, November). Family-guided routines for early intervention service. Young Exceptional Children, 1 (l), 18-26.

Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In D. Dolson (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 3-50). Los Angeles: California State University, Los Angeles.

Drotar, D., Bashiewicz, A., Irvin, N., Kennel, J., & Klaw, M. (1975). The adaptation of parents to the birth of an infant with a congenital malformation: A hypothetical model. Pediatrics, 56 (5), 7-10.

Fey, M. E. (1986). Language intervention with young children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Garcia, E. E. (1993). The education of linguistically and culturally diverse children. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 372-384). New York: Macmillan.

Han, M., Baker, D., & Rodriguez, C. (1997). A profile of policies and practices for limited English proficient students: Screening methods, program support, and teacher training [SASS 1993-94, NCES 97-4721]. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.

Hanson, M., & Lynch, E. (1995). Early Intervention: Implementation child and family services for infants and toddlers who are at-risk or disabled. Austin: PRO-ED.

Harris, A. C. (1986). Child development. New York: West Publishing Company.

Harry, B. (1992). Cultural diversity, families and the special education system: Communication and empowerment. New York: Teachers College Press.

Hartman, A., & Laird, J. (1983). Family-centered social work practice. New York: The Free Press.

Johnson, B. H., McGoniel, M. J., & Kaufmann, R. K. (1989). Guidelines and recommended practices for the Individual Family Service Plan. Washington, DC: Association for the Care of Children's Health and NEC*TAS.

Langdon, H. (1992). Language communication and sociocultural patterns in Hispanic families. In H. Langdon & L. L. Cheng (Eds.), Hispanic children and adults with communication disorders: Assessment and intervention (pp. 99-129). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.

Lee, L. (1974). Developmental sentence analysis. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.

Lewitt, E. M., & Baker, L. G. (1994). Race and ethnicity changes for children. Critical Health Issues for Children and Youth, 4 (3), 134-144.

Lincoln, Y. S. & Fuba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Locke, L. F., Spirduso, W. W., & Silverman, S. J. (1993). Proposals that work: A guide for planning dissertation and grant proposals (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Lynch, E., & Hanson, M. (1992). Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for working with young children and their families. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Maestas, A. G., & Erickson, J. G. (1992). Mexican immigrant mothers' beliefs about disabilities. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 1 (4), 5-10.

Marion, R. L. (1981). Educators, parents, and exceptional children. Rockville, Maryland: Aspen.

Marshall, N. R., Hergrenes, J. R., & Goldstein, S. (1973). Verbal interactions: Mothers and their retarded children vs. mothers and their nonretarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77, 415-419.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Miller, N. (1984). Language problems and bilingual children. In N. Miller (Eds.), Bilingualism and language disability (pp. 81-103). San Diego: College Hill.

O'Connell, J. C., & Sontag, E. (1992). Parental choice and early intervention: A proactive policy of reform. Special Education Leadership Review, 1, 97-113.

Oller, J. W., Jr. (1979). Language tests at school. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Ortiz, A. A. (1984). Choosing the language of instruction for exceptional bilingual children. Teaching Exceptional Children, 16, 208-212.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Paul, R. (1995). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence: Assessment and intervention. Baltimore: Mosby.

Payan, R. M. (1989). Language assessment for the bilingual exceptional child. In L. M. Baca & H. T. Cervantes (Eds.), The bilingual special education interface (pp. 125-152). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Quinn, R. (1995). Early Intervention? ¿Que quiere decir eso? . . . What does that mean? In H. Kayser (Ed.), Bilingual speech-language pathology: An Hispanic focus (pp. 75-95). San Diego: Singular.

Ramirez, A., & Politzer, R. (1976). The acquisition of English and the maintenance of Spanish in bilingual education programs. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 113-124.

Rosenburg, S. A., & Robinson, C. C. (1988). Interactions of parents with their young handicapped children. In S. L. Odom & M. B. Karnes (Eds.), Early intervention for infants and children with handicaps (pp. 159-177). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Shelton, T., Jeppson, E., & Johnson, B. (1987). Family-centered care for children with special health care needs. Washington, DC: Association for the Care of Children's Health.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Thurman, S. K., & Widerstrom, A. H. (1990). Infants and young children with special needs: A developmental and ecological approach (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Tyack, D., & Glottsleben, R. (1974). Language sampling analysis and training: A handbook for teachers and clinicians. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychological.

U.S. Census (1992). Current population reports: Statistical abstracts of the United States. Washington, DC: Author.

von Vacano, M. (1994). Using the home language in the education of language-minority children. NABE News, 17 (6), 27-29.

Westby, C., & Rouse, G. (1995). Culture in education and the instruction of language learning-disabled students. Topics in Language Disorders, 5 (4), 15-28.

Whitehurst, G., Fischel, J., Lonigan, C., Valdez-Menchaca, M., DeBaryshe, B., & Caulfield, M. (1988). Verbal interaction in families of normal and expressive language delayed children. Developmental Psychology, 24, 690-699.

Wong Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the first. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346.

Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. (Rev. ed.). Newbury, CA: Sage.