Disproportionality of African American Children in Special Education: Definition and Dimensions

Abstract

iscussions and considerations about the disproportionality of students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds in special education have persisted for more than four decades. Since the publication of Dunn's groundbreaking paper in 1968, scholars have formulated wellgrounded theories, followed by rigorous inquiries into the meaning and impact of disproportionate representation of particular students in special education. The special education label suggests that there is some disorder within the child and, accordingly, a need for more resources such as specialized instruction and other therapeutic interventions. Ideally, special education will improve pupil performance; however, positive outcomes have been seriously questioned for many students (e.g., Donovan & Cross, 2002; Dunn, 1968). Some authorities posit that disability diagnoses are likely to result in lowered expectations, thereby reducing special education simply to a place where students are sent when they do not perform (Meyer & Patton, 2001) rather than a service elevating learners to higher levels of performance. Children with disabilities may be viewed according to two major categories: (1) high incidence and (2) low incidence. High-incidence disabilities are also referred to as mild disabilities and include the subcategories of learning disabilities (LD), emotionally disturbed (ED), mild mental retardation (MMR), and speech and language disorders. Low-incidence disabilities are more severe in nature and include conditions such as sensory disorders (visual and hearing impairments), moderate to severe mental retardation, physical disabilities, and autism. The high-and low-incidence categories might also be distinguished, respectively, by "clinical judgment" and biological factors (Harry & Klinger, 2006). That is, the diagnosis for mild disabilities is relatively subjective, while low-incidence disabilities are based on medical assessments. Harry and Klinger further offered the opinion that high-incidence 383 24 DISPROPORTIONALITY OF AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN IN SPECIAL EDUCATION

Reducing Risk through a Supplementary Reading Intervention: A Case Study of First- and Second-Grade Urban Students

“…Students who present reading and behavior problems are perhaps the most vulnerable youngsters in our schools and this risk is further aggravated among minority and low-income students. The professional literature repeatedly documents the disproportionate placement of African American students in programs for behavior disorders (Cartledge & Dukes, 2009). We know that students with behavior disorders not only experience more school failure than their peers with or without disabilities (Bowman-Perrott et al, 2011), but they also have poorer postschool outcomes (Zigmond, 2006).…”

African American Homeschooling as Racial Protectionism

“…Many have noted how, through tracking, schools effectively structure and maintain social and racial inequality (Gamoran, 1992; Oakes, 1985). Nowhere, maybe, is this more glaring than in the overrepresentation of Black students in special education classes, that is, classes reserved for children with mental defects (Cartledge & Dukes, 2009; Chinn & Hughes, 1987). African American students are more than twice as likely to be labeled “mentally retarded” as European American students, and although they make up only 17% of the student population, they nonetheless represent 33% of those enrolled in programs for children with mental retardation (Donovan & Cross, 2002).…”

“…African American students are more than twice as likely to be labeled “mentally retarded” as European American students, and although they make up only 17% of the student population, they nonetheless represent 33% of those enrolled in programs for children with mental retardation (Donovan & Cross, 2002). In some states, such as Virginia, those numbers are even higher, with African American pupils composing 51% of special education classes (Cartledge & Dukes, 2009, p. 383). In a study conducted a few years ago, Mandell, Davis, Bevans, and Guevara (2008) unmistakably revealed the existence of racial bias in the referral process as they exposed ethnic disparities in special education labeling among children with identical clinical profiles.…”

Special considerations with response to intervention and instruction for students with diverse backgrounds

“…An important question to ask in evaluating the efficacy of such models as RtI is whether outcomes in general and special education (often in RtI Tier 3) for CLD students are improving. Artiles et al (2010) and Cartledge and Dukes (2009), in reviewing special education outcomes for CLD children and African Americans, respectively, paint a glum picture of outcomes. Achievement, completion of school, and participation in post‐high school opportunities continue to be challenges for students who are given a special education label in the school setting.…”