Across the last century, the condition known as (ID) has been labeled by assorted terms, its key features have varied, and recommendations for its identification have been divided. In light of recent changes to the diagnostic criteria for ID and to federal legislation, this study was designed to compile and summarize information about the state special education criteria for this condition and its associated assessment process, as they guide school-based and associated practices. Authors independently double-coded components of all ID regulations and guidelines from the 50 United States and the District of Columbia in pairs, which was then checked and corrected for inconsistencies. A total of 10% of states provided only the federal definition of ID. Intellectual disability was the most common term used across states, but it was used by only 63% of them. To meet the intellectual deficit criterion, 37% of states referenced a fixed IQ cutoff, and 49% referred to a flexible IQ cutoff. In contrast, most states did not refer to what score types or criteria should be referenced when identifying adaptive behavior deficits. The influence of the recently updated diagnostic criteria for ID and federal legislation was evident, as several patterns of changes were apparent since the last studies of this type. The assessment in intellectual functioning was more well defined than the assessment of adaptive behavior. Health-related features associated with ID were not commonly referenced. These results can inform school psychology practice, training, and related research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Objective: Using a constructivist-interpretivist paradigm and a Black feminist qualitative framework, this study investigated how Black students at a predominantly White university in the southeast defined racial trauma. Method: A purposive sample of 26 participants (10 men and 16 women, aged 18-27) participated in a semistructured interview about their definitions of race-based stress and racial trauma. Data analysis consisted of a six-phase inductive, latent thematic analysis. Researcher reflexivity, interviews, observations, and research memos contributed to trustworthiness. Results: Participants' understandings of race-based stress and racial trauma-informed two composite definitions of racial trauma. Participants conceptualized racial trauma and race-based stress as related and identified three salient components of racial trauma: (a) "Sticking with": temporal component, (b) "Suffering severely": intensity component, and (c) "Repeating regularly": frequency component. Conclusions: The findings of this study contribute to the existing literature by providing an academic and community definition of racial trauma grounded in the voices of Black collegians. These definitions of racial trauma may be used to inform future research, clinical services, and outreach.

In response to national attention regarding issues of racial injustice facing Black Americans, education has been highlighted as a field that has systematically operated in a way that has been detrimental to Black children in the form of underfunding, segregated schools, discriminatory discipline policies, and disproportionate placement in special education. While current estimates indicate a narrowing of the achievement gap, also referred to as opportunity gap, a large difference remains regarding how Black students perform on standardized tests when compared to their White counterparts. According to the Education Opportunity Project at Stanford University (Reardon et al., 2019), the differences in standardized test scores are reported to amount to a deficit of approximately two academic years for Black students. While racial disparities in education are a longstanding issue, greater focus on dismantling structural inequity is required for Black students to have equal access to quality education. To accomplish this goal, educational professionals across all disciplines must examine their practices through an

The representativeness, recency, and size of norm samples strongly influence the accuracy of inferences drawn from their scores. Inadequate norm samples may lead to inflated or deflated scores for individuals and poorer prediction of developmental and academic outcomes. The purpose of this study was to apply Kranzler and Floyd’s method for estimating norm block sample sizes via a review of the most prominent, individually administered intelligence tests. A rigorous, double-coding process was used to obtain these estimated sample sizes for 17 intelligence tests (10 full-length multidimensional tests, 4 nonverbal intelligence tests, and 3 brief intelligence tests). Overall, 47% of the tests failed to meet the minimum standard of at least 30 participants per norm block across age groups, and estimated norm block sizes were smallest for elementary school–age children. These results can inform intelligence test selection by practitioners and researchers, and they should be considered by test publishers when developing, revising, and reporting information about their tests.

No abstract