Racial Differences in Special Education Identification and Placement: Evidence Across Three States

Abstract

In this article, Todd Grindal, Laura Schifter, Gabriel Schwartz, and Thomas Hehir examine race/ethnicity differences in students' special education identification and subsequent placement in segregated educational settings. Using individual-level data on the full population of K–12 public school students in three states, the authors find that racial and ethnic disparities in identification persist within income categories and are stronger for those disabilities that are typically identified in a school setting, such as learning disabilities or emotional disabilities, than those more often identified by a health-care provider, such as blindness or deafness. Also, Black and Hispanic students with disabilities were more likely to be placed in a substantially separate setting, compared to white students, regardless of income status. These results suggest that low-income status is insufficient to explain observed inequalities in the rate at which students of color are identified for special education and placed in substantially separate settings. A better understanding of the ways income status and race contribute to students' interactions with the special education system are critical for building a more equitable and just K–12 education system.

Pursuing Justice-Driven Inclusive Education Research: Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) in Early Childhood

“…Although not recommended by many in the field, such research indicates these practices continue to happen. In addition, once labeled as disabled, Black and Latinx children are disproportionately placed in segregated settings compared to white children with dis/abilities, regardless of family income (Grindal et al, 2019). Segregated placements often limit children to curriculum focused on their perceived deficits which may lead to their future exclusion as the gap between them and “normal” expands (Dudley-Marling & Burns, 2014; Ferri & Bacon, 2011).…”

“…The singular use of race, home language, and/or socioeconomic status to label children as “at risk” is evidenced in some research examining the effects of comprehensive or multi-tiered intervention models and language interventions (e.g., McLeod et al, 2017; Pentimonti et al, 2017). While such research provides useful information about potential ways to provide and structure supports, by operationalizing “risk” as being static and inherent in the child and/or family (as opposed to social systems and institutionalized practices), it can perpetuate disproportionate labeling of children of Color as having dis/abilities and their subsequent placement in segregated classrooms (Grindal et al, 2019; Wright & Ford, 2016). The latter is allowed by the legal ambiguities imbued in IDEA’s mandate that children be placed in the least restrictive environment (LRE) to the “maximum extent appropriate” (Grindal et al, 2019).…”

“…While such research provides useful information about potential ways to provide and structure supports, by operationalizing “risk” as being static and inherent in the child and/or family (as opposed to social systems and institutionalized practices), it can perpetuate disproportionate labeling of children of Color as having dis/abilities and their subsequent placement in segregated classrooms (Grindal et al, 2019; Wright & Ford, 2016). The latter is allowed by the legal ambiguities imbued in IDEA’s mandate that children be placed in the least restrictive environment (LRE) to the “maximum extent appropriate” (Grindal et al, 2019). Justice-driven inclusive education research necessarily considers how systems contribute to findings and the practical implications for institutional changes.…”

“…Importantly, inclusion is still legally defined based on percentage of time in the general education classroom (Grindal et al, 2019). Yet, such a legal conceptualization of inclusive education obscures the fact that children of Color with dis/abilities may be included into general education classrooms with exclusionary practices and structures (Brown et al, 2010; Watson, 2018).…”

Youth Voices in Education Research

“…1 We analyze young people's test scores, measure their beliefs about themselves, and observe their behaviors and comments in classrooms. In the pages of recent issues of Harvard Educational Review (HER) alone, scholars have investigated which youth get identified as gifted (Grindal, Schifter, Schwartz, & Hehir, 2019), how immigrant African youth navigate the college application process (George Mwangi, 2019), and the multiple ways kindergarten teachers respond to student mistakes (Donaldson, 2020). These studies and many others have built crucial knowledge and scholarship about youth and education, and, in line with the particular aim of our journal, helped scholars, practitioners, and policy makers work toward creating a society where all young people have equal opportunities to learn, grow, and thrive.…”