Making Visible the Invisible: Multistudy Investigation of Disproportionate Special Education Identification of U.S. Asian American and Pacific Islander Students

Abstract

Although disproportionality has been a focus of special education research for more than 50 years, relatively few researchers have addressed potential inequitable or inappropriate treatment of Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) students in the United States, particularly in quantitative research. This multistudy investigation explored patterns and predictors of AAPI representation in special education using (a) data from states’ federal child count reports and (b) a subsample of 4,290 participants from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K:2011). Descriptive analysis of states’ child count data indicated that, compared to White students, Asian and Pacific Islander students’ relative risk of identification differed for most disabilities, with Pacific Islanders generally demonstrating higher relative risk. Multivariate analysis of the ECLS-K:2011 subsample indicated that ethnic group differences in risk of special education identification were not robust to sociodemographic and performance controls. We discuss potential contributors to these patterns and implications for research.

Applied machine learning to identify differential risk groups underlying externalizing and internalizing problem behaviors trajectories: A case study using a cohort of Asian American children

“…The composition of race/ethnicity, which has been published elsewhere [19], suggests that the Asian race in ECLSK-2011 included seven subgroups within the Asian American community: Indian, Chinese, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other Asian. Thus, the cohort of Asian Americans for this analysis consisted of diverse representative groups, also including Pacific Islanders and multiethnic Asians, irrespective of ethnicity [20].…”

A call for QuantCrit methodologies: Unpacking the need for a critical lens in school psychology research

“…More broadly, any study on disproportionality must frame the problem within the local context (Cooc & Kiru, 2018) as well as the historical underpinnings of categories chosen to be represented. For example, though South Asian students are underrepresented in special education both in the United States (Sullivan et al, 2020) and in England (Dyson & Gallannaugh, 2008), such underrepresentation is heavily impacted by the immigration history of South Asian families to these countries (Gabel et al, 2009), thus changing the way their race, and thus their experiences with racism, intersects with the education system. Simply collecting demographic information for disaggregation purposes does not allow a social scientist to draw broad, generalizable conclusions about the implicit bias, anti-Blackness, and white supremacy that influences special education referrals (Crossing et al, 2022).…”

“…For example, ignoring how socioeconomic status, academic outcomes and race are historically connected due to enslavement and racism. Pretending that an "all else equal" model that controls for a multitude of variables when examining the effects of a single factor like race represents reality, when it actually reflects an artificial environment devoid of any historical context or real world implications (Sullivan et al, 2020).…”

Cultural considerations for conducting autism assessment with Asian American and Pacific Islander students

“…In schools, the MMS contributes to AAPI students' educational and psychological needs often being overlooked, increasing their risk for depression, anxiety, and even suicide (Wyatt et al, 2015). Worse, voices of AAPI persons are often excluded in discussions of culturally responsive practices in educational and psychological contexts (Sullivan et al, 2020). Such patterns of failure to adequately include AAPI persons in both practice and research undoubtedly also undermines accurate identification of AU among AAPI students, which subsequently contributes to missed or inappropriate educational support opportunities and may negatively affect long-term outcomes for AAPI students.…”

“…Moreover, appropriate school-based programming for students with autism requires accurate identification of a disabling condition and related educational need, regardless of having a clinical/medical diagnosis (Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 2004), which emphasizes the importance of school psychologists' (SPs') school-based assessment practices. Culturally responsivity in SPs' work is a core ethical principle (National Association of School Psychologists [NASP], 2020), yet, AAPI students are often invisiblized in special education research due to a variety of factors (Sullivan et al, 2020). Such patterns increase risk of inadequate and inappropriate educational support, as well as contribute to ongoing stigmatization and marginalization of AAPI students.…”