Upload
todd-lambert
View
217
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Overrepresentation of Minority Students in Special Education
Anthony GregoryJocelyn HoyEmily Rolling
Nathan Weatherup
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Formally known as the Education for all Handicapped Children Act, most recently amended in 2004
Covers students between the ages of birth - 21
A student is eligible for services only if their disability adversely affects the student’s education progress and performance
Students must receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) that prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living
IDEA
Components:
Individualized Education Plan (IEP)
Related Services (transportation, OT, PT, social work, parent services, etc)
Least Restrictive Environment
Behavior Manifestation clause
Child Find
Procedural Safeguards
Activity
WOO!
The Evolution of Overrepresentation
Historical Context, Professional Authority, and Discourse of Risk: Child Guidance and Special Educationby John G. Richardson
The Beginning: The Child Guidance Movement
Due to extreme juvenile delinquency affecting society during the early 1920’s, Max Farrand, one of the top directors of the Commonwealth Fund of the Rockefeller Foundation established the Program for the Prevention of Delinquency.
In conjunction with the National Committee for Mental Hygiene ((NCMG) established in 1909), created proposals that would fit with the aims of “scientific philanthropy” that would reach beyond delinquency, encompassing the health and welfare of all children.
Delinquency Expanded The book, Individual Delinquent, written by
William Healy, established the professional relevance of psychiatry to the diagnosis of delinquency.
Thus, at the beginning of the movement, the population of children conceived as at-risk encompassed
Delinquent behavior Emotional Disturbance Dependency
Soon the term socially maladjusted became the accepted description of these symptoms.
Unclear Assessments By the end of the decade, between 1930 and 1932,
the Division on Community Clinics of the NCMH conducted a series of conferences to access the treatments of these clinics and to evaluate their performances.
Because of disparate and conflicting evidence, the conferences failed to reach any clear assessment.
Result? Due to the stressed importance of proclaiming successful outcomes, the Child Guidance Movement was narrowed to focus on the internal, emotional well-being of the individual child; thus as a way of individual assessment, TESTING became the tool of accomplishment.
Bringing Attention to the Problem
Lloyd Dunn, a prominent figure in special education, wrote an article in 1968 that questioned the placement of so many minority students in classes for the mildly retarded.
Coincidently a soon-to-be landmark case, Hobson v. Hansen would be won that would confirm that black and Hispanic students were disproportionately placed in classes for the educable mentally retarded (EMR).
Years later, two other cases would further confirm the problem of overrepresentation: Diana v. Board of Education – suing based on
the fact that Mexican children were placed in EMR classes based on test not given in primary language
Larry P. v. Riles – suing on behalf of black children placed in EMR classes based on IQ test that were culturally biased.
Jumping on the Bandwagon
Due to the success of cases like Larry P. v. Riles, over the next ten years several lawsuits modeled after the Larry P. case appeared, thus, causing heated debates over the actual defining of overrepresentation.
Result? Placements in social maladjustment and EMR categories declined and a new category emerged, Learning Disability (LD).
A national report on overrepresentation commissioned by the National Academy of Sciences declared, “Overrepresentation could not be placed simply at the doors of discriminatory IQ test or teachers; rather, overrepresentation was symptomatic of ‘deeper failings’ in the educational system.”
Explaining Overrepresentation
Race, Class, and Disproportionality: Reevaluating the Relationship Between Poverty and Special Education PlacementBy Carla O’ Connor and Sonia DeLuca Fernandez
Two Views on Overrepresentation
The National ResearchCouncil contended: Poverty impaired
children’s development; minority students are more likely to be poor and “being” poor heightens social risks that compromise early development and need for special services.
O’Connor and Fernandez
contended: That the NRC’s theory,
the Theory of Compromised Human Development (TCHD) offers an oversimplified conceptualization of “development” and consequently misspecifies that which places minority students at heighten “risk” for special education.
O’Connor and Fernandez further explains the definition of TCHD with this summary:
1. Minorities are more likely to be poor.2. “Being” poor increases exposure to risk
factors that compromise early development.3. Compromised early development impinges on
school preparedness and suppresses academic achievement, heightening the need for special education.
4. Thus minorities are more likely to warrant special education.
The Theory of Compromised Human Development
Countering TCHD O’Connor and Fernandez argue against
TCHD by pointing out these factors: Most minority children that are considered at
risk are measure against unfair norms, namely “white middle children.”
Schools fail in practical and pedagogical terms to build on the capacities with which children enter school.
Minority underachievement is further amplified in an educational system that is riddle by inequities.
The expression of minority students cultures are often interpreted as hostile.
Teacher Bias
How cultural/racial/language differences affect
recommendation and placement
Your Average American Teacher
86% off teachers are European-American (White)
>75% of teachers are Female Roughly 2/3 of all teachers in
America are white women. The median age is 46 So your average student is dealing
with a white, female teacher pushing half a century
2003 National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future Report
Of the remaining 14% of K-12 teachers, 6% are African American (down from 8% during the 1990-1991 school year)
8% of all teachers in America represent all other racial backgrounds
These same groups make up 36% of all students
In large, urban schools these groups make up 69% of all students, but still only 35% of teachers
So what does this mean? Teachers are the first line of determining
LD/MMR/ED/etc. Most students will not be tested until after they
have failed and a teacher recommends them for screening
Cultural differences lead to misunderstanding Eye contact Vocalization
“The estimated magnitudes of these effects are quite large. For example, [Other Race] increased the odds that a student would be seen as disruptive and inattentive by 89% and 61% respectively.” (A teacher Like Me, Thomas Dee)
Statistics% of Disabled Students within Race
European-American – 8.8% African-American – 12.6% Hispanic – 8.4% Asian/Pacific Islander – 4.6% Native American/Alaskan Native –
14.1%
DisparityPercentage of total
population: Native
American/Alaskan Native – 0.98%
Asian/Pacific Islander – 4.10%
African American – 15.08%
Hispanic – 17.65% European American –
62.19%
Percentage of Intellectually Disabled Students:
Native American/Alaskan Native – 1.21%
Asian/Pacific Islander – 1.98%
African American – 33.36%
Hispanic – 12.35% European American –
51.00%
Statistics (cont’d.)% of disabled students (by race) who graduate
African-American - 37% Native American/Alaskan Native –
45% Hispanic – 48% European-American – 61%
Overrepresentation of Minority Students
Linguistically and culturally bias testing
Disproportionately placing of Minority students in special ed
Testing Bias Culturally competent Teaching Bias
Testing Bias: Problems with Construction Design Administration Interpretation High Stakes
Testing
Construct validity Content of item
bias Inappropriate
standardization samples
Examiner and language bias
Regulations of test
Administered in the students native language
Administered not to be racially or culturally discriminatory
Measure the extent of disability or special ed needs not English proficiency
Role of Culture 15-20% of our
students speak foreign language
Evaluating and selecting tests
Determining the validity and administration
Reviewing of test questions
Document effective use of test
Understand the culture of the test-taker
Disproportionate study Afro-Amer.
Students 3x’s more likely labeled mentally retarded
Isolated and restrictive special ed settings
Many states rate disproportionate placing
Cause: growing use of high stakes tests
Inappropriate and inadequate special ed programs
Special ed provides service for 11% of students nationwide
High Stakes Testing
Used to make important decisions about students
Promote, graduate, placed in next level or special ed
Goal: make students and teachers responsible for standard of learning
No Dentist Left Behind
Solutions for ELLS Provide extra time
for testing Read test
instructions aloud Comprehension of
instructions Provide extra breaks Fewer students and
distractions
Check wording of test
Multidisciplinary administrators w/ students language and culture
Primary language used
Assessment tailored to students
Solutions for Minority Testing Expanding
teacher education programs
Less reliance on intelligent tests
More reliance on other types of assessment
Family status
Increasing involvement of parents
Improving teacher expectations, school discipline and Instructional Quality
Extent of Disproportionately
Damage beyond special ed. Preparedness and performance of
minority students Minorities more than 2x’s likely to
live in single-parent households Increasing low socioeconomic
disadvantage
Legal Aspects of Overrepresentation
Champaign Consent Decree
Sa’da and Tyjuan Johnson represented by Felicia Johnson vs. Board of Education Champaign Unit School District #4
Filed in 1996- complaints about the one-way busing of African-American students and the services that they were receiving – system-wide discrimination in student assignment, within school segregation practices, tracking, discipline, staffing, etc
Office of Civil Rights found statistical disparities between majority and minority students in the areas of gifted, upper-level courses, within-school integration, discipline, and special education
Champaign Consent Decree
Implementation Plan- “seek to eliminate, to the greatest extent practicable, unwarranted disparities in the assignment of minority students to special education and gifted programs, and to operate such programs in an educationally sound and non-discriminatory manner”
Expires at the end of the 2007-2008 school year
Questions
Will hiring more minority teachers solve this problem?
Is the problem really racial or social/cultural?
What are some other possible remedies?