Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

Summary:

Overrepresentation of Minorities in Special Education: A discussion of the faces in special education.

page 1 of 212next »

Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

drsarah 23 May 2007 23:09

For our first "read and respond" type forum, I ask that you read the introductory chapter to a book about minority representation in special education. The chapter is attached to this message in PDF format and available at http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2984(199423)63%3A4%3C602%3ATDPOAA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-D.
The book, published by The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, is a collection of essays by researchers in the field of equity in education. The introductory chapter is written by Dan Losen, who is also the co-editor of the text. Mr. Losen is a lawyer and former teacher, and his publications throughout the field of special education are a good introduction to this issue. The reading selected here is about 16 "easy" pages.
In addition, here is a more recent article titled Representation of Minority Students in Special Education: Complicating Traditional Explanations by Alfredo J. Artiles, Janette K. Klinger, and William F. Tate as guest editors. The article is attached to this message and available at http://www.aladin.wrlc.org/Z-WEB/Aladin?req=db&key=ALADINPROXY&url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1155929351&Fmt=3&clientId=31806&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Once you've read the introduction to the text, please share your reaction to the readings in general, and respond to the following questions.
What do you feel are the key contributing factors to the over-representation of minorities in special education? Are there particular policies or law that appear to have affected this trend? If so, which do you think are the most significant? What recommendations or solutions seem to make sense to you?
Again, I look forward to hearing from you!

Group one users can be found listed on the groups page

Last edited on 24 May 2007 15:42 by drsarah Show more

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

danny1820 24 May 2007 00:47

I read both articles, and I thought that the first one was perturbing, but at the same time it was not a topic that I haven't come across before. I thought it was very informative, considering this situation has not yet been resolved as we can see from the more recent article we read. I think this is a topic that has been overlooked and it should get more attention so that we can provide a proper education to minorities whom are being overlooked.

Questions of my own: What was the basis for changing the cut-off point for being declared "mental deficiency"? It dropped from 85 to 70, and to me that seems like a big drop.
What does "trainable Mental Retardation mean? Consist of, or doesn't consist of?
"Cultural preferences for both physical and verbal behavior have a powerful influence on teachers' perceptions, which are, after all, the source of the initial referral of children for special education evaluation" (610). After reading this sentence I was taken back by how ignorant this classification was, and how anyone could base a their argument for special education placement. I think what people didn't realize is that yes some student act out when they find learning difficult, but there are those that simply act out. I read this sentence as any child having a behavioral or verbal problem was automatically considered L.D.
On page 611, the paragraph right before "The Decision to Refer", is still gong on today. I feel like this needs to change fast in order to see improvement in our school systems all over the country. Why would we spend time and effort to setting up a student to fail? What is the point and whom does it benefit? I think it is something that school administrators should be looking closely at and trying to change.

Below are my answers to each question.

1. What do you feel are the key contributing factors to the over-representation of minorities in special education?

What I thought were some of the key contributing factors were segregation, what labeled a student to have a learning disability, especially being E.M.R., students that came from low-income families, predominantly lower than $25,000. having a well trained teacher to diagnosis a student, and having a preconceived notion of a student. I think if we look at segregation first, we notice that at the time of this data being collected many people were still getting used to African Americans being in the same school as whites. And then we must look at the cultural differences there were, and how these differences were clashing. In This particular situation, only time can make it worse or better, it is truly dependent on dominant ideology. If you weren't white, you were part of the suppressed group, and there wasn't much one could do. In addition, if we look at the parents of these students then we also see a pattern that these are predominately low-income families. Which was seen as, "oh, he or she most likely will have a learning disability". I don't think there is a basis for this assumption by anyone; each child must be evaluated on an individual level. What may apply to one student might not apply to another. This also ties in with many teachers having a preconceived notion of African Americans in his/her classroom. What I gathered from this article is that many teachers were quick to judge and assume, rather than actually differentiating whether or not a student had a L.D. I think that many teachers then and some now are not properly trained to identify when a student might be showing early signs of having a learning disability. I think many teachers do not have the knowledge of what to look for or how to accommodate students. To me it is important for all teachers at any grade level to have a certain amount of knowledge about learning disabilities, not only for a students' benefit but also for their own. Something that I might have read over or didn't gain from this article was how most of these African American males were placed into a special education program. What were the necessary tests, signs that called for certain testing, and who made the diagnosis. What I gathered was that it was all about the classroom teacher and her diagnosis on these students, but how? By personal opinion? A statement by Heller et al. on page 606,"overrepresentation is problematic if the circumstances surrounding it are unfair to students", is absolutely true and is not being addressed.

2. Are there particular policies or law that appear to have affected this trend?

I feel as though at this time, a lot of what affected this trend was bias against African Americans, males in particular. In addition, I think that many people were blindsided. They couldn't or wouldn't see that a student having a learning disability meant he or she was a burden or that it was a handicap to learning, rather than a student having to learn in a non-traditional way. I think that if we look at how far laws have developed in giving students with learning disabilities a proper education and a fair chance at succeeding in school, that only time made it better. I think if we tried to implement the regulations and standards we have today back in the 1970's, it would not have made a difference.

3.If so, which do you think are the most significant?

N/A

4. What recommendations or solutions seem to make sense to you?

I think whether it is back in the 1970's or today in the year 2007, its important to be educated about this topic and all the aspects that play into this trend. It is very easy to judge too quickly and presume that if he/she has this or doesn't have this, comes from here, parents do this, that maybe we can classify him/her as learning disabled. I think the big solution is to educate people, because only uneducated people reject and therefore makes it easier for them to turn away. In addition, all teachers should be required to take classes dealing with learning disabilities so that it isn't unfamiliar territory. Its a topic that people still argue about and what I think some people lose sight of is that every child deserves a chance at an education regardless of skin, socioeconomic status, or cognitive ability. Who does it hurt to give students' an education that isn't appropriate for them? It hurts them, and in turn can hurt us. We need to educate so that when these students grow up they can hopefully make decisions that better them and other people.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

tmgdq86 01 Jun 2007 01:09

I was honestly very surprised after reading both articles; although now that I am reflecting on it, I feel like I shouldn't be. If special education was originally used as a tool for informal segregation, then it would make sense that there would still be vestiges of that history in the current practices. People tend to forget that any societal changes must be long term. Instead, they become impatient for change, and when it doesn't happen, they assume that there is nothing to be done. For example, in our country's history of desegregating schools, there have been many roadblocks. Although de jure segregation became illegal, de facto segregation was still rampant, and people assumed that there was no need for further action, this was just the natural state of things. Since it wasn't permitted by law, then clearly there was nothing more the government could do. However, what these people overlooked was the long history of segregation. If the races were so separated for hundreds of years, how could they expect the government to fix the problem in a ten, or even twenty years? I think this is one of the problems contributing to the over-representation of minorities in special education. People tend to overlook this problem because it is not a policy mandated by law, "it just happens." However, these same people do not stop to consider that our education system was designed for the predominately white population, and has not drastically changed over time. As the introduction to the book mentions, the IQ tests are biased against African American males and, as a result, a higher percentage of those students are placed in special education programs. It is also interested that the reading noted that African American students are most often placed in "judgment" categories of disability. This also reflects the fact that the classroom environment and teaching styles have not been altered to cater to different learning styles. In my opinion, the only way to solve this problem is to reevaluate the tools that are used to test for disabilities. There should be a variety of assessments, not just one test that is the sole indicator. If these different tests were administered in a variety of ways (written, oral, etc.) and were prepared by a committee of concerned educators, the outcome would likely be very different.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

andyspann 09 Jun 2007 01:07

I read both of the articles and I was not competely shock because I have always heard that a disproportionate number of African- Americans expecially males are placed in Special Education. I personally know how it feels to be placed in the lowest group. For the majority of my existance in elementary school I always was in the lowest math and reading groups. As a matter of fact I was in the fourth grade reading on a first grade level. Fourth grade I distinctly remember because my teacher at that time had no patience. I along with others were made to feel stupid. She is actually the person that inspired me to go on to Graduate school because she told me I would be lucky if I ever graduated high school but since I was cute it might be possible. I am not joking people those were her exact words. Luckily I was blessed with parents who believe whole heartedly in education and provided me with support with tutors and homeschooling so that I did have a chance to catch up and go on to be a honor roll student. But this article really made me feel for those who don't have the chance. Who are placed in that horrible cycle for the rest of their elementary, middle and high school years. The placement of African American males article states that only 6% of students ages 14 and over return to regular education programs. Granted that statistic was 1993 but I am going to take a gamble that the statistic now for African American boys transitioning back into the regular school programs is still bitterly grim. It is sad to say that segregration still does exist. This article clearly shows us that. I do feel that alot of authority is given to teachers to make the recommendation to or for Special Education. I don't believe that it is a all out war against the African-American male child but I do believe that there is a lack of understanding of their culture and environment. I think it is important for teachers to understand their students environment and culture. Once you develope an understanding, you will develop a understanding for their personality, learning style, etc. The teacher I currently work with now told me that when she was living in LA, California, one of her first jobs as a teacher was in low economic area. She, within the first three months of school, went around to introduce herself to each one of her students parents/family. She said that within that weekend of making her rounds, she gained better insight into her students. She no longer got that upset when they did not hand in a homework assignment on time and other things because she said she had an understanding that these children faced violence on a daily basis with people getting wounded in front of them or police raiding their homes. She had a better understanding of them. She did reiterate to me that she did not have a lower expectation of them no quite the opposite but a better understanding of their situation. Also she believed that she had more parent cooperation and involvement because she went to their houses and introduced herself. Plus she said the students ,she felt, had more respect for her since she did come into their environment/existance. She said she had fewer behavioral problems because the students knew that she knew where they lived and she had no problems stopping by their homes.

I think that in order to heal this situation some of the recommendations of the article are important like getting rid of the classification system, demanding that teachers need to be highly certified, and creating a unified system of regular and special education with special education being a supportive service rather than a classroom. Also I think that the Special Education laws do need to be reformed because it is obvious that they have be abused and as the article of representation of minority students states it has been used to legitimize the practice of segregation.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

JSweeney 31 May 2007 16:15

Primarily, I was extremely surprised at the over-representation of minority groups, more specifically, African Americans in special education programs. I am from a small town, so my experience with minorities is limited. In fact, in my High school of around 500 students, a minority was the foreign exchange student. However, after reading both articles and thinking about it, I can understand how marginalized groups could be excluded from the whole intentionally and unintentionally.
The key factor in this over-representation of minority groups, I feel is the difference in the culture background of the minority students and the system. Those students who fall outside of the dominant culture are already at a disadvantage within the system. Their families do not hold the culture capital to pass on to their children, so the children are already set up to fail. The cushion between the system and the student’s failure is the teacher. These teachers, however, are from the dominant culture or at least extremely familiar with it, so teachers interpret the actions of minority students differently than the intended meaning. One example from the reading that struck me was that the majority of teachers are white females (70%), which causes African American males responses to be interpreted as being overly abrasive when that is not the intended meaning.

In the article by Harry and Anderson, they site seven solutions: labeling services not students, unifying the educational system, restructuring schools to prevent student failure, assessing students for instruction not eligibility, reforming instruction, cross-age grouping, and better parent teacher communication. All of these seven solutions are united by the common goal multicultural teaching rather than dominant cultural teaching. It is essentially changing everything that is the education system now. Although I agree this is a huge problem and needs to be fixed. I feel as though changing the entire system will cause disgruntled employees and confusion. It gave me the feeling that we are repeating what we are currently doing to students to the school systems. We look at students for what they cannot do; rather than what they can. If we are taking the same approach with education, we will not take the correct steps to fix the problems.

I feel a more positive educational change lies in the second article, more specifically, in the solutions put forth by the National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems. They have three solutions to fix the problem: affirm the problem, create new discourses, extend discourses to oversee other items. The reason I would support this solution is because it does not take giant leaps with the current educational process. It takes baby steps. Just because a problem needs a huge solution does not mean that the process should be short and powerful; instead I would argue that it needs to be incremental in order to better prepare staff, funding, and students for the change. One of the best examples that shows a giant change in curriculum and education without properly preparing funding, students, and teachers is The No Child Left Behind plan set forth by the Bush Administration. By instituting a monumental change, students before the plan were already set up to fail in the program, so the schools are failing. Then, the failing schools (who need money) loose money, and are place in a downward cycle that many times leads to schools closing.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

RFries 05 Jun 2007 00:11

I have to say that I was not at all surprised by the information that was presented in the Harry and Anderson article. It's not that I have personally witnessed this form of segregation but I have noticed similarly disturbing trends in the DCPS schools that surround AU. Has anyone else noticed the terrible reputation that Hardy Middle School (over on Wisconsin Ave. in Upper Georgetown) has? The school is in an affluent area and schools like Key E.S. and Mann E.S. feed right into it. But none of those students attend Hardy. Those affluent students are sent to private schools and Hardy fills its empty seats with students who are bussed in from across the city. As a result of this, the school is seen as a dangerous place where the education is sub par. I have worked at both Key and Mann: no one sends their kids to Hardy willingly. The affluent families that surround the school literally turned their backs on the school and intentionally segregate their children from the Hispanic and African American children who come across the city on Metro busses to Hardy. As I said, I was not surprised by the articles that we read for this discussion but it was interesting and thought-provoking material.

I was particularly interested to read about the high numbers of African American male students who are still considered TMP and EMR students when the category of SLD has become so much more predominant. Not only does the article mention the increasing numbers of children who are identified as SLD students but in the school that I work in now, all of the students that receive Special Education services are considered LD. I was under the impression that EMR and TMR were out!

These readings are of particular importance to me because I currently find myself at a crossroads in terms of my own teaching career. As I mentioned I have now had experience in two lovely, affluent, AYP-meeting schools. As much as I would love to work in one of these schools, I retain some of my altruistic goals for my first years as a teacher. That is to say, I am interested in working in a school that does not have its pick of well-educated and exuberant teachers. I have a job offer at a school in NE DC; the principal is a lovely woman who was completely honest and upfront with me about the situation at hand. She said, "We don't meet AYP and I want you to be sure that you want to work here but if you do I am thrilled because my students deserve excellent teachers as much as students in NW do." I agree with her but what holds me back is the idea that I might be like the culturally irrelevant IQ tests…a fish out of water who doesn't understand her students. I would hate for them to suffer at my expense. I am terrified by the prospect of misreading and misguiding my students because of our cultural differences.

So the question that I had as I read this article was, how can teachers such as myself hope to combat this trend of placing a disproportionate number of African American males in Special Education? There are several answers that I came up with. First and foremost, although I do not support NCLB legislation in its entirety, I do believe that the demand for highly qualified teachers is of paramount importance to public schooling. In the case of African American male students, I hope that well educated teachers will be made aware of this problem by their teacher education programs. Moreover, they will be reflective teachers who carefully consider their students as multidimensional learners before they make reflexive recommendations. Second, I believe that a constructivist approach to learning will help teachers to promote student achievement by building the experiences of the student as opposed to those of the teacher. Finally, I feel that the recent trend toward in-class or inclusionary Special Education programs will be helpful in that they allow students who need SPED services to maintain a connection with their classmates. Further, the incentive for teachers to recommend students for SPED services in order to rid themselves of a "disruptive" or "difficult" student is nullified because in inclusionary systems that student remains a part of the whole group.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

Allison Aboud 11 Jun 2007 03:14

I found this article quite challenging to read because of the layers of complexity within this issue. Oddly enough, while I've heard about disproportionality for many years and even attended a session on the topic in the 2002 OSEP conference, I realized that I really did not understand the issue fully.

In my previous ignorance, it seemed logical (although quite disturbing and unfair) that a disproportionate amount of African American students would be misproperly designated as learning disabled due to cultural bias. The statistical evidence in this article, however, provided a much deeper and more complicated presentation of the problem - citing the rise of SLD designations overall and "categorical drift" away from EMR diagnosis in the overall population, but steady overrepresentation of African American males in the more severe categories, such as EMR. If this overrepresentation served the population, then this issue would not be so hotly discussed. The fact is, as the article says, "along with the stigmatizing effects of special education placement and the liklihood of its depreciatory effect on self-esteem, the effectiveness of special education programs for African American males remains questionable."

//What do you feel are the key contributing factors to the over-representation of minorities in special education?

• Cultural bias in IQ tests leading to lower test scores - as the intelligence test clearly highlighted, culture is reflected in language and can impact student understanding of test questions, thus unfairly lowering their score. A wrong answer based on cultural bias reflects a misunderstanding of language, not content.
• Cultural bias of teachers who feel threatened by the different learning style of African American males and interpret a different learning style as a disability.
• Environmental impact of poverty on learning process - while there exists a correlation between poverty and lower IQ scores, there isn't a clear explanation of the cause.

Are there particular policies or law that appear to have affected this trend?

• According to the article, the EHA and IDEA laws have an "implicit assumption… that the characteristics of students themselves account for their need for specialized instruction." In other words, EHA and IDEA implicitly support the concept of "nurture" - that learning disabilities are inherent to the student (as opposed to environmental factors) and should be able to be identified clearly by experts. However, a contradiction exists between varioius types of disabilities and how easily they can be objectively measured. The difference in disabilities that can be assessed by the more objective "pathological model" and the less objective "statistic model" leave openings to cultural bias in the assessment and diagnosis of learning disabilities. To me, this trend has resulted largely from the policy push to assess and diagnose, but the process of assessing and diagnosing being still somewhat subjective and therefore open to exitisting cultural biases.

If so, which do you think are the most significant? What recommendations or solutions seem to make sense to you?//

• I'm not sure that change would be most effective from a policy or law perspective. It seems to me that more emphasis needs to be placed on the process of assessment and diagnosis and how to make it more objective. If certain disabilities cannot be assessed in a more objective way (such as EMR), then the assessment process needs to be re-evaluated to include a more holistic and flexible approach, including input from parents, teachers, psychologists, and others.
• My fiance works at the Latin American Youth Center in Washington DC and was a founding member of the LAYC Youth Build Charter school which provides resources and instruction to high school dropouts, mostly African American, so they can earn their GEDs. Many of these students dropped out of school becuase of learning disabilities. It's an alternative program and they specifically hire teachers who are culturally sensitive and passionate about the success of the African American and Latino populations. Their lesson plans use a constructivist approach and the teachers also use an interactive and highly auditory style with the students and connect to them on a personal level. While this is a small charter school and cannot necessarily be copied in a public school setting, the program is very successful. One effective solution would be teaching diverse teaching styles to accommodate for cultural learning differences within existing teacher training programs.
• Not only would it help for teachers to be exposed to this issue in training programs on an intellectual level - but I think it would also be helpful to require student teachers to observe and teach in culturally diverse schools as part of their training.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

kw2680a 27 Jun 2007 22:20

After reading both articles, it does not surprise me that minorities or others that are not deemed "normal" or "common" could be placed in such particular categories, such as special education. Everyday, people are trying to fit in and try many different ways to accomplish this. Back then, black males could not find a way to "fit in" to a predominately white society and with that, gave up on trying… they called themselves "failures". Special education classes have become a cover to hide that they are still segregating blacks. It is shocking that the African American males are overrepresented in all disability categories. People find black males to be less achieving and therefore have a bias as to where they should be placed. I think that the key factors which show that blacks are overrepresented in special education is based on their culture, which they do not have control of. Based on their cultural preferences, and preferences of others, due to black people's physical and verbal behavior, teachers question whether they should be in special education classes because of the way they are perceived… they are different. Children do better if they can mold and conform to others and not stand out. They need to be deemed "normal"… when these rules and perceptions were made, black males were not normal.

The most significant law/rule that makes this make sense is that teachers do not take into consideration that all people are different and learn at different levels. When people go to school, teachers think that they should be ready to learn no matter what… and don't consider WHAT they are ready to learn. There are diverse learners and language differences and if they aren't deemed normal, then they are put under evaluation for special education. That is ridiculous. Harry and Anderson showed that "despite the inequalities of schools and the differences in the children's readiness for standard school curricula and behavior, all children are expected to reach within one year, the level of mastery of academic content determined by their teachers." This is wrong. Everyone learns at different levels, and race has nothing to do with this. It all has to do with what is in the minds of the children. Teachers should be able to mold and conform to the needs of their students, not have all of the students conform to the same type with the same readiness to learn.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

Allison Aboud 03 Jul 2007 23:54

I've been reading the responses of my colleagues, who have compelling and fascinating points of view on this issue. It was particularly helpful for me to read Andy's posting from the perspective of someone who has experienced the feeling of bias and low expectations from his teachers. Luckily, he has supportive parents and his own reserve of perseverance to push him forward. He said that a combination of homeschooling and tutoring also helped him considerably!

My fiance directs an Upward Bound program in Washington DC (partnered with GWU) that targets first generation at risk students to help them get into college. The majority of the population they serve are African American males. His program (as I mentioned in my previous post) is quite successful, and one of the ways they reach their students is by teaching to their cultural and learning styles. These students have the benefit of this enrichment program after their regular school hours.
It makes me wonder if the best way to target this problem is through the school system, or through programs and supports outside of the schools? I'm sure a combination of both would be ideal. However, there are limited resources and systemic changes in schools and certainly special education diagnosis processes takes considerable time to take effect. What other programs or ways could we target this population in need in the interim, while we wait for the biases to change and the system to shift?

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

tmgdq86 06 Jul 2007 01:14

I was really interested by Allison's post because she brought up the question about how to best meet the needs of all students- whether or not these programs outside of schools can meet the needs of the students, or if they are just a temporary fix. I think we all agree that there are drastic inequities in our educational system and it is overwhelming trying to see when and how they can be overcome. However, I do think that these out of school programs are a good way to help bridge the educational gap. I work with a non-profit called the Center for Student Opportunity which runs a website that targets high school students that would be first generation college students and minority groups. It is an information database that highlights colleges with specific programs and scholarships designed to meet the needs of this population. It also provides contacts between the students and schools. This is not the same as a program like Upward Board that works one-on-one with students But, I do think that programs like both of these that work from the top down are the way to reform the schools. College bound organizations are now targeting younger students in middle school. I think that eventually these programs will begin as early as elementary school. As long as reforming the education system is not the top priority of the government, then changes from within the system will be slow and difficult. But, changes from outside of the system can also have a positive impact.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

schultnk 10 Jul 2007 01:34

After reading the articles my first question was what are we currently doing or what can we do to change this cycle. I began with a goolge search and came upon this article at http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/FCB60C1D-6CC2-4270-BDAA-153D67247324/11495/AfricanAmericanMaleTaskForceReportDecember06.pdf
The article written in 2006 focuses on changing the education patterns of African American males in Maryland. The article works out solutions and possible changes we need to make in our schools, homes, and communities to help African American males reach educational success. Some of their suggestions include: Place most effective teachers in the highest need classrooms, recruit African American men into teaching, and provide college and career guidance. A few of their suggestions appeared expensive or hard to accomplish yet others seemed as if they may be effective and attainable. Many of their solutions focused on the middle school and high school population. I feel we also need to keep in mind the significance of the preschool and elementary level years.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

Lauren12 08 Jul 2007 23:25

I, unlike most of the previous posters, and unlike most of my peers and friends at school, went to a high school that was incredibly diverse. No racial group was segregated from another; we all interacted inside and outside of class with no difficulty. I don’t even think any of us realized that some of us were the “minority” while others were the “majority.” And I can say with certainty that white males were overwhelmingly represented in special education classes, not African American males. Therefore, I was somewhat shocked and horrified to find that African American males overwhelmingly dominated special education classes in other schools. Reading these articles, and talking to friends who say that busing and racism are still rampant in their high schools, horrifies and concerns me.
*What do you feel are the key contributing factors to the over-representation of minorities in special education?
Like some of the previous posters have mentioned, I feel that a key factor in the problem of minorities becoming majorities in special education classes has to be the fault of teachers or administrators that are parts of the majority. Andy’s post made me realize this all the more; if a white, female teacher has a couple of African American boys in her high school class, for instance, that have not received as good an education in the past as their white classmates (because of social status and geographical location), might she be inclined to become frustrated with them? Might she feel more comfortable (unfortunately) with her white students that have had better educational experiences in the past, and for this reason, might she be tempted to inform administrators that, for fear of holding the other students back, these few students need more help, and could be better educated in a special education class? I can see this happening easily. Teachers forget that their job is to educate ALL of their students, not just the ones that have had to best opportunities or whom they feel more comradery with. This results in selfishness on their part, and in those few under-privileged African American boys being moved into a special education class, when all they might have needed to succeed was some encouragement, someone to believe in them. So what is the source of minority students’ over-representation in special education? Teachers not believing in their students, being too lazy to think of “out-of-the-box” ways to get them interested, refusing to relate to their students on another level, “racial/gender/cultural and linguistic biases” (Harry and Anderson 602), and impatience.
*Are there particular policies or laws that appear to have affected this trend?
I was struck by Harry and Anderson’s belief that “the entire process is seriously biased against African American male students, from their first experiences in regular education through their disproportionate referral to, assessment for, and placement in special education programs” (602). This infers that every policy or law that we have in place, regarding the school system, has affected this horrible trend. Is it possible that America’s entire educational process is to blame for minorities being placed too frequently in special education classes? I find myself agreeing to some extent, although I can’t help feeling sad about going against the system so harshly. I think that because each policy and law was written by, revised by, implemented by, and enforced by people, by humans, each policy and law has some sort of bias written into it, if not hidden for one to find.
*If so, which do you think are the most significant?
I suppose the most significant difficulty that effects minority students is that many minorities live in cities where the schools have under-qualified teachers and not enough supplies or resources because of over-crowding and inadequate funding. I know that this is a problem that is hard to fix; there are too many schools to give more funding to, or to provide with the best qualified teachers, but it is a significant effect, nonetheless.
*What recommendations or solutions seem to make sense to you?
I recently saw two very good movies about inspirational educators: The Ron Clark Story and Freedom Writers. The teachers in both stories were depicted as having an amazing amount of faith in their students, who were all either minorities or of a low social status. They not only believed in ALL of their students, but they took time to search out the students that had the least amount of support at home, and the had the worst educational opportunities in the past. There is one part of Freedom Writers that really stuck with me. Hilary Swank’s character (the teacher, Ms. Gruwell) has been given a class, predominantly of minorities, that the students themselves call the “dumb” class. No one else wants to teach them, so they put them in a faux special education class. At one point, Gruwell says to one of her students (an African American male, who does not believe in himself because he feels that no one else does): “I see you. Do you hear me? I see you.” Such a simple statement, yet so powerful. This student started crying. This seems to me the only solution: teachers have to love their students, all of them, so much that they see them when no one else does or wants to.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

tmgdq86 11 Jul 2007 00:37

Lauren mentioned that the solution lies in teachers who truly care about their students. I agree that this is the ideal solution to the problem. Teachers have more of an effect on their students then laws can. So even if we could reform the laws, there would be no substantial changes without reforming the teacher education system. Teacher preparation programs need to prepare teachers for the classroom; when they have more extensive training, it is more likely that they can handle different ways of learning. For example, teachers will be less likely to refer students to special education programs if they are trained to truly understand symptoms and to address other issues that are not special education issues.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

andyspann 13 Jul 2007 20:48

I agree with Theresa,

Pre-service teacher programs need to be held a little more responsibile for exposing/teaching/training teachers how to teach children with multi-cultural backgrounds. When reading this two articles about African-American boys being placed in Special Education, I never really quite thought that they were placed in Special Education purely out of racism or segregation but now from reading the responses of my collegues, I do see where teachers maybe more likely to place a student in Special Education because of the lack of understanding of that students background. I read a book by Jawanza Kunjufu, an educational consultant, about teachers ,middle class black and white, not having a full understanding of African-American inner city life. His book states that a teacher cannot fully understand how a student learns until she/he immerses herself/himself into their cultural. Not that I am recommending that people should read his book because on a personal note, he does not state his educational background or focus but he does make good points. He points out that working with the inner city African-American child in a cooperative learning group were they can socialize and work on projects together is very beneficial because their environment promotes doing things in a togetherness like manner such as playing together, etc. Also their environment is not quite, so trying to enforce working individually and in silence could be a shock because their environment does not consist of this. A teacher , begining or seasoned, should take account of a students environment. Promote a teaching format that is conducive for his/her students. Some teachers my find that their students work best in cooperative settings and others may find that their students don't. Don't get me wrong, I do believe students should be exposed to different instructional settings but one type may work better than another type so that is why it is important to recognize which type of setting works best and create a balance. Without exposure to learning how to teach children from multi-cultural backgrounds in a teacher program ,teachers could be led to believe that a referal is the best way to handle a particular student.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

JSweeney 24 Jul 2007 17:48

I completely agree that pre-service teaching programs need to be held accountable for the information or lack there of. It is a problem with teacher preparation programs everywhere, because not all teachers are taught in the same manner. Some people walk into the classroom of urban schools without any training at all, because of the high need. Others have minimal training such as Teach for America (although I am not insulting this program by any means), because these highly educated individuals are being thrown into schools without much preparation. There just is not time. Then, there are the certification programs that give the teachers little training before immersing them into the school environment. There are longer training programs as well, such as the traditional four year schools that train the individual in a subject and pedagogy, and there is the fifth year programs that teach an individual how to teach after they know a subject. While the demand for teachers is high, the number of willing participants is not. Urban schools with the most diversity need the best trained teachers to recognize the differences between culture and special education, however, unfortunately these schools are the least likely to hire them. Thus, a change of policy needs to be made. While I do not know what it should be perhaps a start would be to nationalize the necessary teacher training before allowing them to enter the schools.

Footnotes:

Sadker, David Miller & Sadker, Myra Pollack & Zittleman, Karen R. Teachers, Schools, and Society. 8th edition. 2008 McGraw Hill, NY. P. 17-18.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

drsarah 25 Jul 2007 10:46

let me, for a minute, defend the field of pre-service teacher education, and teacher education in general. in high-needs schools, with large numbers of minority students, the teachers are more often than not NOT products of a pre-service teacher education program. the fact that school is identified as high-need in fact has to do with the percentage of un or underprepared faculty.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

JSweeney 30 Jul 2007 22:05

I am not trying to insult all preservice teaching programs nor DC Fellows or TFA (I actually think they are great programs). However, the requirement for TFAs is only two years. They are entering schools with little knowledge and experience, and they are leaving the school when they are starting to understand their position. I have heard throughout my education classes that teachers do not really excel in their position until they have been teaching for 3-5 years. I heard one TFA say that just when he finally was prepared and ready to enter the classroom the experience was over. I definitely respect where you are coming from though, under-prepared teachers without any training are a huge disadvantage/problem in schools. A woman in one of my classes (who works for a high need school) said that nearly 70% of teachers were unqualified to be in the school where she works, but they had so much trouble keeping teachers in PG county that they did not have a choice. While I think that preservice preparation is better than being unqualified, I do feel that the combination of unqualified teachers with the under-prepared, rotating teachers keeps the high need schools in high need with little hope for recovery.

Last edited on 30 Jul 2007 22:06 by JSweeney Show more

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

SGoldstein 15 Jul 2007 20:55

Here is my broad analysis of the issues addressed in these articles:

What do you feel are the key contributing factors to the over-representation of minorities in special education?

One of the largest factors that contributes to the over-representation of minorities in special education is that the methods of assessment for these programs often have a cultural, racial, and linguistic bias. As Anderson and Harry explain, “…they are bound to the parameters of normalcy defined by a given cultural group (607).” Tests also include items that are chosen from the cultural experiences of the majority. The bias doesn’t just go for assessments. The verbal style of African-Americans in the classroom also is frequently misinterpreted, and those children are labeled “emotionally disturbed”
and placed in special ed programs.

One of the things that makes the intention of this tracking very clear is that African-American students tend to receive corporal punishment at a significantly higher rate despite the fact that all evidence suggests they commit “crimes” no more often and no more sever than their white counterparts.

It is also important to remember that we are not just talking about African-Americans, but other minorities as well. The classification of “speech-impairment” presents a problem often to both African-Americans and Hispanics. This classification is often used inappropriately for students whose first language is not English (many Hispanics), and for those who speak a nonstandard version of English (such as vernacular black English).

Are there particular policies or law that appear to have affected this trend?

It is clear that with the integration of schools that began with Brown v. Board of Ed, schools began using special education programs to re-segregate the schools. That argument was contested in the 1974 Johnson v. San Fran Unified School District case. It was clear from the facts presented there that African-Americans were being categorized as EMR (Educable Mental Retardation) at a much higher rate than their population would indicate. In that case the judge correctly recognized that this was an attempt at re-segregation and acknowledged the cultural bias of IQ tests. In his decision he banned the use of IQ tests for African American students in the context of special Ed programs.

Not only laws but policies surely influence the extent of the over-representation. For example, as Harry and Anderson point out, the larger the size of the EMR program, the greater the disproportionate placement (Anderson 604). One policy clearly has a significant impact on classifications. The category of “learning disabled” does not include those who have a learning disability due to environmental factors. In other words, the poor are excluded from this category and given “the more stigmatized label of mentally retarded (608),” says Andreson and Harry. This means that in schools where the cut-off for special education is dividing students who are labeled mentally retarded from those that are simply “learning disabled,” many more African Americans will be tracked into special education programs. In addition, this is also a self-perpetuating problem. Low expectations of students clearly is linked to lower performance. When young African-Americans see their friends going into the **special ed classes, that sets the expectation that they will also fail the tests and are destined for that path.

What recommendations or solutions seem to make sense to you?**

I think this article is correct in pointing out that “teachers are driven by the structure of the schools, which calls for control, homogeneity, and the inculcation of socially sanctioned behaviors and languages (610).” Because of this, teaching methods, decisions about placement, and methods of assessment are all skewed towards either the majority or the background of the teacher. Teachers must approach each student individually, meaning that one of the most important recommendations is not just that teachers be trained to understand different disabilities, learning styles, and cultural sensitivities, but that they are trained to both teach and assess students in a way that can work for everyone. Providing multiple ways to learn and demonstrate knowledge of curriculum is most effective.

In addition, because I believe expectations play such a large role I believe it is important to empower student by setting high yet achievable goals instead of pigeon-holing them with labels and low expectations.

I strongly support removing the labels from students and instead focusing them on the services provided. It is also critical that the assessments should be used to guide instruction instead of lead to placement and labeling. The curriculum should also be made more multicultural to apply more effectively to the broad range of students in our public schools.

Re: Group One Threaded Discussion on Equity

andyspann 27 Jul 2007 01:31

Dr.Sarah's comments about defending pre-service teacher education was very interesting. When I was subtitute teaching in a Title 1 school most of the teachers were not certified and did not major in education. A large portion of them had degree's in other fields. Which is fine because some people do make a career change such as myself and others in this program. I did notice that a large portion of the teachers were not willing to take classes that were offered to them or attend seminars. They simply were not willing to put in the extra time or work the NCLB standards required or get the proper credentials needed to teach. Some were extremely offended because their salaries had been reduced to long term subtitution. I felt bad for them, I really did feel like they were unappreciated. Now that I am in a teacher program, I see a different side. If you enjoy a certain profession, why would you not want to be all that you can be in that profession. Why would you not want to take classes that would benefit your teaching? I understand Dr. Sarah's comment. Not everyone who teaches, was in a pre-service program and a large portion of teachers that teach in high need schools are not qualified. This contributes to many students being thrown into Special Education because some teachers, due to their lack of education in the field, may not understand how children make connections, how to make lesson plans that accomodate differientiated learning styles and ultimately misevaluate a student.

page 1 of 212next »