Disproportionality in special education

Disproportionality for special education insyd dey refer to de unequal representation of certain demographic groups for restrictive placement den discipline insyd, particularly for United States' public school system insyd. Disproportionality be often dey display as de under- anaa overrepresentation of specific racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, anaa culturally den linguistically diverse (CLD) groups for special education insyd compared to demma presence for de overall student population. Sam kiddie ein race den ethnicity go fi significantly influence de likelihood of say dem no go fi identify am as say edey hia special education services, wey dey raise concerns about fairness, equity, den de potential impact for students' demma educational outcomes top.

 Identification 
Various concerns wey dey regard de identification of students for special education dey. De over-identification of students dey refer to de concern say students of color, particularly African American students, say dem dey place dem for special education top for sam higher rate pass demma white student peers, wey go fi lead go potential stigmatization den negative impacts for demma educational experiences top."Core principles: Disproportionality in identification for special education". Learning Disabilities Association of America. 2020. Retrieved November 12, 2023. Student under-identification dey refer to de situation wer students of color be less likely say dem go be identified den receive special education services pass demma white peers wey dey demonstrate similar behavior, wey go fi lead go say students no go receive de necessary support dem dey hia say dem go succeed for school insyd.

Students of color sana be at risk for misidentification for special education secof dem incorrectly dey identify dem as say dem get socially undesirable classifications such as emotional disturbance den intellectual disabilities if maybe dem get undiagnosed disabilities, wey go lead go ineffective interventions den supports give dese students.

 Monitoring 
Dem design Section 300.646 of Part B of de Individuals plus Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) say ego ensure say each state wey dey receive funding be required say ego determine if disproportionality wey dey based for race anaa ethnicity top wey dey occur for de state den Local Education Agencies (LEAs) of de state dey concern de identification of kiddies as kiddies plus disabilities, de placement in particular educational settings of dese kiddies, den de incidence, duration, den type of disciplinary removals from placement, wey dey include suspensions den expulsions.

For part B of IDEA insyd, each state dey receive funding, wey de United States Secretary of de Interior for provide de collection den examination of data so say ego determine if significant disproportionality wey dey base for race den ethnicity top dey occur for de State den de LEAs of de State." For Section 300.64 of de Act, ebe required say States go examine data give significant disproportionality for de following areas:

1.     Identifying kiddies plus disabilities den demma impairment,

2.     De kiddie ein placement for educational setting, den

3.     Any suspensions anaa expulsions from school den for how long

IDEA dey mandate say states dey collect den examine special education data for race den ethnicity for de district level."Sec. 300.646 Disproportionality". IDEA: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. December 19, 2016. Retrieved November 11, 2023.

 State monitoring 
States monitor den enforce disproportionality for special education through requirements set in IDEA den de Annual Performance Reports (APRs). At the district level, states ein mandate be say ego take den examine special education data for race den ethnicity top. Esana be required say dem go report for specific indicators wey dey relate plus disproportionality for students plus disabilities den de proportion of districts exhibiting disproportionate representation of racial den ethnic groups for special education insyd.Albrecht, S.F.; Skiba, R.J; Losen, D.J.; Chung, C-G; Middelberg, L. (May 31, 2012). "Federal Policy on Disproportionality in Special Education: Is it Moving us Forward?". Journal of Disability Policy Studies. 23 (1): 14–25. doi:10.1177/1044207311407917. S2CID 143936340 – via JSTOR.

States are not required to identify an LEA with significant disproportionality if the LEA has exceeded the risk ratio threshold but has demonstrated reasonable progress in lowering the risk ratio for the group and category of analysis in each of the two prior consecutive years.

 Measurement 
Dem use Analytical techniques research disproportionality for special education, wey dey include risk ratio, regression, den multilevel regression. Risk ratio dey include exposure plus odds, odds ratios, relative risks, den risk indices ratios. Regression models estimate de probability of placement anaa special education service as sam function of independent variables. Multilevel regression dey nest students wey dey within schools, districts, anaa communities so say dem go account for within- den between-cluster estimations. Study findings for disproportionality top for special education insyd dey vary widely across studies secof factors wey dey include de use of different data sets for different levels, wey dey include samples of students for different grades den ages, den say dem go apply different analyses wey go fi produce conflicting results.

Qualitative research involve deductive den inductive methods, wey dey include de development of codebooks wey dey focus for de conceptual framework top den existing literature for education policy den disproportionality top. Quantitative research get coded articles wey dey base for de analysis wey dem use for each study insyd, such as risk ratio, regression anaa multi-regression.

 Effectiveness of current practice                                                               
Several areas for improvement for current practice of monitoring disproportionality dey der. Inconsistency for interpretation den implementation of de IDEA provisions by de U.S. Department of Education den Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) dey der, wey dey lead go confusion for de state den local levels wey dey hinder de progress for addressing de issue. State den district compliance plus procedural aspects of special education identification rather pass addressing de systemic factors wey dey contribute give de disproportionality, wey go fi underestimate de true extent of de problem den hinder interventions give students wey dey hia dem. Although research dey document de overrepresentation of students of color for chaw restrictive environments, de OSEP no dey include educational environments for de monitoring den enforcement of disproportionate representation.

De federal interpretation of IDEA statutory language dey contradict consistent findings for special education research. Amendments to IDEA for 1997 den 2004 insyd acknowledge de extent of racial den ethnic disproportionality, but federal interpretations of de 2004 requirement create confusion for de State den LEA levels. Data dey suggest say de federal interpretation of IDEA 2004, regulatory guidelines, den de design of indicators for monitoring den enforcement cam make ineffective for addressing racial den ethnic disproportionality insyd.

 Significant disproportionality 
If dem find significant disproportionality wey dey base for race anaa ethnicity top, then according to Section 300.646 of Part B of IDEA, de states for provide sam annual review of revisions of policies, practices, den procedures wey dey regard de placement of dese kiddies for educational settings insyd (wey dey include disciplinary actions so say ego ensure say dem go comply plus de act wey dem dey require say de LEA go report any revisions.

IDEA's section 618(d) dey require states say dem go take den examine data so say ego determine if significant disproportionalitywey dey base for race den ethnicity top dey occur for de state den de LEAs of de state plus respect go de identification of kiddies plus disabilities, de placement for de particular education setting insyd, den de incidence, duration, den type of disciplinary actions, wey dey include expulsion.

If states identify significant disproportionality wey dey base for race den ethnicity top, dem for take several actions according to Section 300.646 of Part B of IDEA:

1.     Provide for sam annual review den revision of policies, practices, den procedures dem dey use identify students plus significant disabilities so say ego ensure say dem go comply plus de requirements of de Act.

2.     Require LEA say dem go publicly report for de revision of policies, practices, den procedures top.

3.     Implement comprehensive, coordinated intervening services, wey dey include professional development den educational den behavioral evaluations.

4.     De LEA for identify den address de factors wey dey contribute give de significant disproportionality.

5.     De LEA for address de policy, practice, anaa procedure edey identify as say edey contribute give de significant disproportionality.

 Racial/ethnic disproportionality 
De root wey dey cause racial den ethnic disproportionality for special education referrals insyd go fi attribute plus deficit thinking wey dey relate plus conceptions of race den socioeconomic status, inadequate institutional safeguards, teachers' perceptions of students' ability, den lack of policies den interventions for schools insyd. Economic den demographic variables, cultural mismatch, unequal opportunities for general education, den racial discrimination sana go fi contribute to de disproportional representation of minority students. Students from racial, cultural, ethnic, and linguistic minority backgrounds be more likely say dem go label dem as disabled for sam higher frequency den dem go komot dem from mainstream education. In addition, students wey dey komot from disadvantaged backgrounds den students of color be more likely say inexperienced teachers go teach dem for poorly funded schools.

 Teacher bias 
De relationship between families den schools go fi look different from one school go anoda, wey dey contribute to inconsistencies for findings for disproportionality top. Educator bias go fi contribute to disproportionality by say teachers go misinterprete cultural, language, den dialectical differences as deficits, wey go lead go say students of color go be misidentified as say dem get learning disabilities. Dese biases go fi shift attention away from oda social inequities wey go fi impact de learning rate den oda disabilities among specific populations.

Interpretations of behaviors by teachers from different cultural backgrounds go fi disadvantage students of color secof edey lead go subjective disciplinary actions by staff. In addition to students of color wey be over-identified, de under-identification of dese students go fi occur despite say ego demonstrate similar academic performance to white students. Teachers for take sam intersectional view of students, use restorative justice strategies for demma classrooms, dem for educate for students' demma cultural practices top, den increase parent den community involvement for education insyd.

 School policies den procedures 
De processes of referral den identification of students for special education go fi influenced by biases den judgements wey go lead go de overrepresentation of students of color. You sana go fi see Disproportionality for school discipline policies insyd by say ego subject harsher disciplinary actions plus students of color wey get disabilities. Instructional practices den academic expectations set by de school go fi contribute by say ego expect lower den less rigorous instruction for students of color, wey go lead go de underperformance of dese groups of students den referrals plus special education. Additionally, de way schools allocate resources go fi contribute to disproportionality for schools plus fewer resources, often for underserved neighborhoods insyd plus kiddies of color, go fi be more likely say ego place students for special education insyd as sam means say ego secure additional funding. Chaw schools sana dey focus for compliance plus laws top, especially those for IDEA insyd, wey go fi lead go sam narrow focus for procedural aspects of special education identification top, rather pass say ego address systemic contributions of disproportionality.

 Environmental factors 
Chaw students of color wey dem identify give special education services dey comot from disadvantaged communities wey dem be more likely say dem go be exposed to environmental toxins (i.e., lead, mercury, den oda harmful chemicals), wey dem link plus learning disabilities wey ego fi impact demma learning den development negatively. Access give resources wey dey contribute give healthy brain development (i.e., healthcare, good nutrition, high-quality early childhood education, den early childhood intervention) be often inequitable, wey lack of access give dese resources go fi compound learning difficulties later for life insyd, wey ego lead go overrepresentation of students of color for special education insyd.

 Systemic issues 
Systemic inequalities dey place students of color for sam heightened risk for special education placement. De overrepresentation of students of color for special education insyd go fi be secof say edey contribute give systemic issues. Schools often dey use sam white middle-class referent as de norm for evaluating student behavior den achievement, wey go fi disadvantage students of color secof dem go fi view am as more aggressive, wey ego lead go chaw disciplinary referrals den special education placements. 

Concerns dey say students of color for low economic areas insyd go fi be more likely say dem go receive special education services for segregated settings insyd wey ego create barriers give typical academic success. Students for dese low economic areas be more likely say dem go attend schools plus inadequate funding, teacher training, den overall low expectations of de students.

Although race den poverty dey de heart of systemic issues, wey dey address systemic inequities within de education system go fi get chaw of sam impact of disproportionality den de overrepresentation of students of color for special education insyd.

 Policies wey dey contribute 
Specific education policies den laws wey dey contribute give racial disparities often dey embed for school disciplinary actions den special education assignments insyd. For example, Zero-tolerance policies, wey ein mandate predetermine punishments for specific offenses, disproportionately dey affect students of color. Dese policies often dey result for suspensions den expulsions give dese students, wey be one of de most prominent indicators of placement for special education insyd. Institutional racism often dey influence implementation of dese education policies den laws, wey dey lead go sam disproportionate impact for students of color top.

 Factors wey dey influence special identification 
Gender, race, socioeconomic status, den de number of suspensions be de most consistent predictors of special identification placement. Specifically, male students from low-income family backgrounds dey de highest risk for chaw disability categories insyd. Additionally, de number of suspensions sam student get go fi influence demma risk say dem go identify dem give special education.

 Role of historical inequality 
Historical inequality for America insyd dey play sam significant role for current educational inequality insyd. De historical legacy of racism den white supremacy dey persist plus segregation wey dey occur within den between schools, wey dey shape racial disparities, wey dey include racial disproportionality for special education. De history of racial segregation dey process say situate minority groups contrast plus de dominant majority culture. Dese issues dey take into account de historical patterns of racial den socioeconomic segregation of de United States den how de patterns go fi reinforce perceptions of "de other." 

 Strategies for reducing disproportionality 
IDEA dey aim say ego protect de rights of students plus disabilities. Yet despite dese explicit goals wey de Act set, significant inequities dey persist, particularly give racially, linguistically, den economically diverse students plus disabilities. Therefore, de pursuit of equity den justice for education insyd dey involve critically examining policies den how dem dey enact for practice by say dem go bab dese policies across deferent menners den contexts.

 Early intervention 
De U.S. Department of Education dey state say edey emphasize de importance of providing individualized den appropriate supports so say ego ensure say kiddies plus disabilities go get access plus high-quality early childhood programs. De Department dey presume say first placement option wey dem consider give sam preschool kiddie wey be diagnosed plus sam disability be de regular public preschool program de kiddie go attend, given say de kiddie no get sam disability. 

 Inconsistencies for disproportionality insyd 
Discrepancies den challenges dey characterize disproportionality studies across school districts den states, wey dey reveal de inconsistencies for understanding den addressing de issue. Technical, compliance-oriented approaches for policies insyd dey wey dey attempt say ego address racial disparities without say ego consider de ways dem dey entangle policies plus complex contextual factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, den language status for students of color insyd. 

 Stigmatization den disproportionality 
As special education identification be say ego allocate support services give students plus disabilities, de intersection of stigmatization den disproportionality for special education insyd dey accentuate de negative consequences of labeling den segregation, particularly give students of color. De act of labeling den assigning intellectual, physical, anaa emotional disabilities no only dey stigmatize students socially but esana get profound implications give demma families, especially within certain cultural communities.

De labeling process, along plus de segregation go separate classrooms, dey exacerbate de identifiability of dese students, perpetuating stigmatization. Beyond de social aspect, dis stigmatization go fi hinder post-school outcomes den limit de potential of students of color.

 Intersectionality den disability 
Dem dey position students wey get disabilities within society for de intersection of race, ethnicity, class, language, den sexuality. Since chaw frame students wey get disabilities from sam deficit perspective, de intersectionality of disability plus race, ethnic, class, language, den sexuality go fi lead go chaw layers of discrimination by race den disability. Additionally, de intersection of disability plus oda social identities go fi influence students demma educational experiences den outcomes. Institutional expectations wey dey base for inappropriate non-intersectional contexts go fi limit de opportunities for meaningful intervention give dese students.

 References 
Category:Special education
Category:Segregation

Category:Education insyd de United States
Category:Disability insyd de United States
Category:Special education insyd de United States