Minority Disproportionality In Special Education Essay ⋆ Education Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

In the United States, minority disproportionality refers to a pattern in which certain minority groups are placed in special education programs at rates disproportionately higher or lower than their presence in the student population as a whole. Special education programs are conceptualized as specialized instructional programs designed to meet the needs of students with disabilities. Thus, minority disproportionality suggests that certain ethnic groups display disabilities in unexpectedly high proportions. This pattern has been seen as problematic because it raises concerns about equitable conditions and/or educational treatments for children from historically oppressed or marginalized groups. This entry examines the data and their social and cultural context.

Representation Data

Both over and underrepresentation patterns have been noted in special education, indicating that some groups may be at particular risk for being falsely identified as having a disability (false positives), and others may be at risk of having disabilities that go unnoticed and untreated (false negatives). For example, whereas African American students are overrepresented in programs for mental retardation and emotional disturbance, and Native Americans in programs for learning disability, Asian students have been underrepresented in all disability categories and overrepresented in programs for the gifted. White students are underrepresented in programs for mental retardation but generally proportionately represented across the other disability categories. Although both over and underrepresentation may indicate inequitable circumstances, overrepresentation has generally received more attention because of its potential for undue stigmatizing of already stigmatized groups and because special education programs have not consistently proven to be effective.

There are two kinds of scores used in determining disproportionality—a composition index and a risk index. The composition index compares the group’s proportion in the entire population with its proportion in special education programs. For example, as African American students represent approximately 17 percent of the entire school population, they represent approximately 33 percent of the population of programs for mental retardation. The risk index examines the rate of placement within an ethnic group and compares it to the rate of placement within another group. For example, 2.64 percent of all African American students are in mental retardation programs, compared with 1.18 percent of all White students.

There are two key aspects of disproportionality that present importance nuances of the overall picture: Variability in patterns of placement across disability categories and variability across place and time.

Variability in placement rates across disability categories highlights the role of professional judgment in disproportionality. Of thirteen disability categories used in the United States, minority overrepresentation has been noted consistently in three categories— mental retardation at the milder end of the spectrum, learning disability, and emotional disturbance. These categories are determined mainly by the clinical judgment of psychologists and educators, as opposed to those categories that represent verifiable biological anomalies or physiological impairments. The latter types occur much less frequently, for example, hearing, visual, or physical impairments, and multiple disabilities marked by severe cognitive limitations. The subjective nature of the clinical judgment categories suggests the possibility of biases resulting from historically based negative stereotypes of marginalized groups, which may be compounded by continuing inequities in educational opportunity.

The validity of the categories themselves is called into question by the widely varying rates of disability designation over time and across school districts and states. For example, in the learning disability category, the risk index for African Americans in 1998 ranged from 2.33 percent in Georgia to 12.19 percent in Delaware, whereas the index for Hispanic students in these two states ranged from 2.43 percent to 8.93 percent. In a similar vein, the overall use of these disability categories for all students has changed dramatically over time. For example, the risk index for a designation of learning disability increased from 1.21 percent in 1974 to 6.02 percent in 1998, while the risk index for mental retardation diminished from 1.58 percent to 1.37 percent. To summarize, there is considerable overlap in the definitions of these disabilities and much room for ambiguity and variable interpretation.

Social And Cultural Context

The issue of disproportionality in special education reflects both historical and geographical dimensions. In many developed societies, the low educational achievement of historically oppressed or marginalized minority groups is notably problematic. In these educational systems, a pattern of low performance often intersects with the line drawn for the designation of disability. In other words, for those disabilities that have no biological proof and that are manifested mainly in academic achievement and behavioral patterns that lie outside of the society’s norms, the line between low performance and disability is elusive. Nevertheless, a designation of disability, no matter how socially constructed, can seriously limit children’s educational and social careers and can do irreparable damage to their sense of identity.

Cross-cultural comparisons suggest that in societies where specialized services are based on a strictly categorical framing of disability, disproportionality may be more likely. For example, it is much more noticeable in the United States than in Spain, where the categories are more fluid. Nevertheless, what is consistent is that overrepresentation generally occurs in regard to ethnic minorities with a history of explicit marginalization. One such group is Gypsies, whose history of exclusion across Europe is well known. Identified in Eastern European countries as the Roma, these groups have charged educational authorities in the Czech Republic and Slovenia with discriminatory placement of their children in special education programs. In the former case, in 1995, although the Czech courts ruled that discrimination could not be proven, it was established that 50 percent of Romani children were in special schools as compared with 1.80 percent of non-Roma students.

The concept of disability seems to be a human universal by which individuals are compared to normative patterns of development and learning. However, societies vary in their cut-off points for normalcy and in the social value accorded to individuals who fall outside the norms. In the United States, the centrality of schooling for individual success and social status has resulted in a form of disability categorization that is likely to affect those at risk of academic failure. It is not surprising that those who have been the most disenfranchised are at the greatest risk. Indeed, the intersection of minority status and school-based disabilities represents but one of many detrimental arenas in which minorities are overrepresented in the United States. Disparities in health care, housing, and employment are all part of the portrait of inequity of which special education is but one slice.

Bibliography:

Donovan, S., & Cross, C. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
European Roma Rights Center. (2005). The ERRC legal strategy to challenge racial segregation and discrimination in Czech schools. Retrieved from http://www.tolerance.cz/english/sem2000/ecmi07.htm
Harry, B. (2007). The disproportionate placement of minorities in special education. In L. Florian (Ed.), The Sage handbook of special education (pp. 67–84). London: Sage.
Harry, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education? Understanding race and disability in schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
Luciak, M. (2004, August). The educational situation of migrants and ethnic minorities in 15 EU member states in comparative perspective. University of Vienna, Austria. Retrieved April 3, 2005, from http://www.inst.at/trans/ 15Nr/08_1/luciak15.htm
Skiba, R. J., Knesting, K., & Bush, L. D. (2002). Culturally competent assessment: More than nonbiased tests. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 11(1), 61–78.
Wilson, W. J. (1998). The role of the environment in the Black-White test score gap. In C. Jencks & M. Phillips (Eds.), The Black-White test score gap (pp. 501–510). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

This example Minority Disproportionality In Special Education Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.