English language learners with visual impairments: An exploratory literature review

Abstract

English language learners with visual impairments (ELLVIs) are a low incidence population with unique learning needs. The purpose of this review was to identify the existing literature specifically examining ELLVIs. As no literature review examining ELLVIs could be located, this review synthesizes what we know about the population and provides a starting point for future research. The authors reviewed all titles found across four databases ( n = 658 articles) and included only articles addressing English language learners with visual impairments in educational contexts. A total of 24 articles were included in the review. The following four themes emerged: assessment, family perceptions, teacher perceptions, and instructional strategies. Findings are discussed generally and by theme. Assessment reports revealed common accommodations for English language proficiency tests, but decision-making criteria for whether ELLVIs participated in assessments were unclear. Parent/guardian perceptions largely revealed dissatisfaction with school communication. Teacher perception studies revealed a need for more training and support. Common instructional strategies were identified by researchers and teachers in the field, but only one article examined instructional strategies experimentally. Therefore, there is limited evidence of the efficacy of any particular instructional strategy. Analyzing the research, the results show the majority has been conducted by the same research teams. More research needs to be conducted across all themes. Commonly accepted/validated assessment accommodations are discussed, allowing practitioners to identify which accommodations they might be able to implement. In addition, this review alerts practitioners to common parental concerns. This review also uncovers commonly used instructional strategies although these are not necessarily research based within the population. Commonly used instructional strategies are discussed, which, although not evidence-based, identifies potential areas for future research.