Overrepresentation of Minority Students in Special Education

Abstract

Approximately 25 years ago, Lloyd Dunn (1968) tal retardation. Unfortunately, this problem conand Evelyn Deno (1970) provided us with analyses tinues to hover over us today and has extended regarding the problems and pitfalls of special eduto other special education categories. Based on our cation. One of the primary areas of focus was the analysis of the problem then and now, we extend overrepresentation of minority and low-income the recommendations provided by advocates, edustudents in programs for students with mild mencators, researchers, and policymakers.In 1968 Lloyd Dunn called our attention to the disproportionate numbers of minority students placed in segregated classrooms for students with educable mental retardation. Just 2 years later, Evelyn Deno (1970) called our attention to what she considered to be a preoccupation with, and use of, a pathological model to place and serve students in special education programs. Both authors presented an analysis of the problems in special education and outlined agendas for change. The contributions made by these child advocates helped to shape special education as we know it today. Their analysis of problems and recommendations contributed to the emergence of litigation, the enactment of legislation, and the creation of current organizational structures and service delivery models in the field. However, even though 25 years have passed, many of the problems stipulated by Dunn and Deno still plague the field today. Arguments about overrepresentation of minority and poor students and the overreliance on the medical model still remain as critical issues to be resolved. Furthermore, these issues have continued to surface as a source of conflict among special educators, advocacy groups, and policymakers.We believe that the arguments presented by these authors were relevant 25 years ago and continue to be relevant in 1993. However, in light of the changes that have occurred in this country since 1968, we need to reexamine the overrepresentation issue from a broader perspective in order to better understand how and why it has stubbornly persisted. Perhaps first and foremost, we need to ask the question, is overrepresentation a problem? We argue that it is, and we maintain Address: Alfredo J. Artiles,

De la Diversidad a la Construcción de las Necesidades Educativas en las Aulas de Primaria: Un Análisis Interseccional desde el Caso Español

“…Pese a que las ideas de raza y discapacidad han sido descritas como "ilusiones biológicas" que surgen de contextos culturales concretos (Everelles y Minear, 2010;McDermott y Varenne, 1995), estas ideas siguen estando firmemente ancladas en nuestras taxonomías cotidianas, en una sociedad siempre dispuesta a discriminar la diferencia (Artiles y Trent, 1994). En este artículo nos centramos en dos de las fuentes más importantes que configuran y nutren el mito del alumnado normal (Baglieri, Bejoian, Broderick, Connor y Valle, 2010) dentro de las escuelas, esto es, los parámetros estándar de funcionamiento considerados como normales (Artiles y Trent, 1994), y el ideal del blanco europeo (Reid y Knight, 2006).…”

“…En este artículo nos centramos en dos de las fuentes más importantes que configuran y nutren el mito del alumnado normal (Baglieri, Bejoian, Broderick, Connor y Valle, 2010) dentro de las escuelas, esto es, los parámetros estándar de funcionamiento considerados como normales (Artiles y Trent, 1994), y el ideal del blanco europeo (Reid y Knight, 2006). A partir de la existencia de estos estándares, se ha sugerido que el sistema de EE permite legitimar la actividad de los profesionales, a través de un discurso psico-médico que localiza la causa de los problemas de aprendizaje dentro del alumnado (Mehan, 2014;Skrtic, 2005).…”

A Preliminary Study of Disproportionate Representation and Response to Intervention

“…Disproportionality is a complex problem and a host of contributing factors has been cited in the literature to include societal factors, racism in education, classroom management failures, cultural unresponsiveness, varied definitions and implementation of special education, as well as biases in the educational and referral process itself (Armor, 2006;Artiles & Bal, 2008;Artiles & Trent, 1994;Coutinho & Oswald, 2000;Evans, 2005;Farkas, 2003;Harry & Klingner, 2007;Miller & Ward, 2008;Monroe, 2005;Patton, 1998;Singham, 2003;Skiba, Poloni-Staudinger, Simmons, Feggins-Azziz, & Chung, 2005;Warner, Dede, Garvan, & Conway, 2002). The negative implications of disproportionality include curriculum limitations, lower academic achievement, decreased participation in postsecondary education, and decreased employment opportunities for those identified and placed in special education (Patton, 1998).…”

“…In exploring this critical question, it is helpful to consider salient characteristics of both the RTI paradigm and the complexities of the disproportionality problem. Unlike the discrepancy model that assume intrinsic problems lessen a student's ability to learn, RTI practices encourage review of external factors contributing to failure to learn, including instructional practices, methods of learning, home-school relations, individual progress, appropriate assessment measures, new classroom procedures, and the environment (Artiles & Trent, 1994;Cartledge, 2005;Harry & Klingner, 2007). Given the complexity of contributing external factors associated with disproportionality cited in the literature, RTI may be a viable approach for helping to reduce achievement deficits and encourage learning opportunities in African American students (Doughty, 2001;Singham, 2003;Townsend, 2002;Young, Wright, & Laster, 2005).…”

Flexible Grouping as a Means for Classroom Management in a Heterogeneous Classroom

“…Education practices have long been based on special needs and labelling. In the European educational context, however, the cultural background of pupils has not been a significant issue, unlike in the United States, where minority pupils have been highly overrepresented in special education programmes over the decades (Artiles & Trent, 1994;Hosp & Reschly, 2004). In the 1960s, however, serious doubts began to be raised about the rationale for separate special education (see, for example, Dunn, 1968), and this debate has continued ever since (see, for example, Fuchs & Fuchs, 1995;Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1997;Espin et al, 1998;Powell, 2009;Zigmond et al, 2009).…”