Disenfranchisement Within the Special Education System

In 1975, President Gerald Ford signed into law the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, more commonly known today as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This act was ground-breaking within the disabilities community; IDEA aimed to provide public education to millions of children living with a variety of disabilities who previously had not been guaranteed access to a free and appropriate education. Before the legislation, 1.8 million children were excluded from public schools. Public schools now provide education to more than 6.9 million students living with a variety of disabilities. The profound impact on the lives of many of the most unseen members of our population by this legislation cannot be understated.

Although these numbers are encouraging on the surface, vast disparities exist within the diagnostic process and access to quality education. Black students are 40 % more likely than white students to receive services under IDEA, and Native American students are 70 % more likely. These numbers indicate a further segregation of the education system. To further that segregation, white students comprise 67% of the private school population. As will be shown, private schools are at times the only path to providing a quality special education. Although IDEA went a long way in advocating for the rights of people with disabilities, it is inherently flawed, and gives a glass form for the ever-pouring water of white supremacy in the United States to take shape. It is imperative for the United States to recognize the changing flow of white supremacy in all areas of policy, however in this piece its effect on education and in particular the segregation of special education will be examined, and potential solutions will be explored. It is imperative that these inequities be addressed for both their social and ethical implications, as well as their public and private financial burdens.

Discrepancies in Diagnosis

The racial discrepancies that exist are clear civil rights and education issues. In most settings, the diagnostic process begins with the teacher, who has the most face-to-face interaction with students and is the most likely to notice difficulties a student is having. The teacher then will make a recommendation to the family of the student and the school to have an evaluation done. However, teachers often lack appropriate training in identifying a learning disability as compared to a behavioral or emotional issue with their students. From identification by the teacher or parent, the process then moves to a school psychologist. However, many higher income families opt for a private evaluation as opposed to the public school option. In addition, although the federal government has outlined thirteen types of learning disability diagnoses (far too few), the criteria for meeting each of these diagnoses varies between state and local education systems. Therefore, there is no standardized or objective form of identification and diagnosis in the country; the process is highly subjective, and it has been used as a broad way for “special education programs (to) become dumping grounds for difficult-to-educate students”.

Although bureaucratic structures exist through which one can claim diagnostic discrimination through IDEA, those structures are complex and difficult to navigate. Faced with the often life-altering news that their child has a learning disability, parents are thrust into a vast legal and bureaucratic nightmare. Although these structures are in place to supposedly benefit the families, they often put parents in situations that only benefit some and disadvantage most. In order to effectively claim discrimination in the diagnostic process, parents first need to know their own, and their child’s rights under IDEA. Most often, a lawyer and a tremendous amount of time are required for that process; two privileges that many families cannot afford. Because of that discrepancy, parents frequently feel isolated and unable to advocate for their child and their specific needs.

Where then do these discriminating diagnoses stem from? These practices did not emerge in a vacuum, and they are in fact deeply and (one would hope) unconsciously linked to post-Brown vs. BOE attempts at continued segregation. In their study, Tobias et al. found that white teachers were more likely than their co-workers of color to refer their non-white students for disability evaluation. Although this study is now almost forty years old, it demonstrates the longevity and origins of the discriminatory practice.

It is within the recent racial make-up of the educator body that we can begin to illuminate the scope of the issue. In 2017 White teachers comprised 79% of the nation’s public school system. The next highest representation was of the Hispanic community at 9%. These staggering figures are in no way representative of the student body. In 2020 White students comprised 44% of the public school student body, while Black, Hispanic, and Native American students comprised 15%, 28%, and 1% respectively. Non-White students do not see themselves represented in the racial make-up of the people they depend on for their education. This lack of representation has several profoundly negative effects on students of color, however in this case they demonstrate that a lack of understanding and problem identification is inherently present from the start of the diagnostic process.

Looking at the demographics of the special education population, the issue begins to reach full illumination. Although Native American students comprise 1% of the nation’s public student population, they comprise the largest group served under IDEA at 18%. Black and Hispanic students comprise 16% and 13% respectively. Asian-American students comprise equal representation in both the general and special education demographics. Lastly, white students represent only 14% of the special education student body. It is clear that there are discriminatory practices within the diagnostic process through the lens of these numbers alone. Non-White students, particularly Native American and Black students are far over-represented in the special education system; both of these groups have been specifically targeted by educational injustice throughout the history of The United States’ occupation and oppression.

According to polling data by the National Association of School Psychologists, 87% of school psychologists were white in 2015. However, further future information and data must be gathered on racial representation within school psychology departments, as well as the various bureaucratic structures in place through IDEA. Information is also lacking in federal policy on clear guidelines for the diagnostic process, and the diagnoses themselves.

The Financial Cost

One essential component of IDEA is the requirement that every student be educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE). The LRE for many students is a general education classroom setting. Although it is often assumed that inclusion in the general education setting is an ideal to strive for, it is not a reality for all students. For some students the LRE is an integrated co-teaching (ICT) classroom. Still for others, it may be in an isolated special education classroom. Yet, in many districts, even these isolated classrooms do not meet students’ LRE. In New York City, the nation’s largest public school system, the Department of Education spends $52,959 a year per student in a Special Education setting. However, the city does not provide a quality education for many of its students in the public school setting by providing them their LRE. As a result, the city spent an additional $325 million in reimbursements to families who sent their child with disabilities to a private school in 2017.

This issue is not specific to New York. In Los Angeles — the second largest educational district in the country — similar legal cases are on the rise. Citing data from The Office of Administrative Hearings, Taketa of The Los Angeles Times found that there was an 85% increase in cases from 2007 to 2017. Funding to fight these cases, and to pay the subsequent settlements is derived from federal, state, and local governments. Although it is clear that exorbitant amounts of money are being funneled into the Special Education system in LA, Harr et al. analyzed data on delivery of required services under students’ Individualized Education Plans (IEP) in Los Angeles. IEPs are a mandatory procedure for any child diagnosed with a learning disability as required by IDEA. Harr et al. found that service delivery in public schools varied dramatically depending upon the diagnosis for the child. For example, children with visual impairments received the highest rate of delivery at 93% . However, when it came to mental health and health services 1 in 5 children did not receive their required services. These numbers indicate a vast inconsistency within the public school system between what is required, and what is truly happening.

The issue of privatization is also not specific to major cities, although information on this front is not as abundant as it is in the nation’s larger school districts. In a study by a Tennessee private school Principle, Taylor outlined that there were a growing number of private schools for special education in her district, and that these private schools in effect were less regulated than the public schools. In her mixed qualitative and quantitative research, Taylor found that the surveyed principles noted an uptick in private school growth, and expressed desires for increased attention toward public schools, and better regulation of private school programs. Given that 67% of the nation’s private school system is composed of white students, it is clear that although flawed the pathway of private education specifically advantages white students. This data indicates a similar trend as to what has been observed in New York and California.

Although there is far more money spent on students with IEPs than not, the evidence of later academic achievement fluctuates variably based on socio-economic status (SES) and the education level of the students’ parents. In their study, Ehrhardt et al. found generally that the earlier IEPs are formed for students, the better the outcome of later academic achievement, specifically in reading. This is encouraging, however students with higher SES tended to perform better in reading assessments after several years of intervention as opposed to their lower SES counterparts. A similar positive correlation was noted in the education level of parents. Although there is an increasing amount of money being poured into the Special Education system, full required services are not being administered, and academic and developmental achievements are benefited by some over others. This money can and should be more equitably and logically used. Should the nation be spending money on law-suits, strengthening the private school system, and disadvantaging millions of its most vulnerable populations? That money can and should be spent effectively within the public school system. The following proposals will outline possible directions for spending and regulation.

Possible Solutions

I will preface this section by making it plain that this author is in no way involved in policy making, and has no experience in that field. The following proposals are concepts alluded to in and based on the research presented above.

Federal funding is needed to provide racially conscious hiring practices in schools. In conjunction, a federal increase in teacher salary is necessary to attract more candidates. Given the clear lack of racial representation in the field of education and the previously noted impact of that on student diagnoses, the most straightforward path to addressing the issue is to change hiring practices; the educator profession must be representative of the student body it serves. However, one of the biggest deterrents to potential non-white candidates is the notoriously low pay of the teaching profession. A federally mandated pay increase for teachers would go a long way in addressing the issue of race.

Federal funding is needed to promote equitable access to higher education for school positions in the form of scholarships and loan forgiveness. In addition to the low pay mentioned above, another obstacle is the need for a post-graduate degree for most opportunities within school systems. Be it Teachers, Administrators, Psychologists, Social Workers, Nurses, etc., a graduate degree is understandably required to qualify for the positions. However, many entering the field of education are faced with crippling student loan debt, and they emerge from their graduate programs to a low paying job which does not help pay off loans.

There is a need for federal funding to increase the number of Teaching Assistants and Paraprofessionals in public school special education classrooms. One of the largest advantages private schools have in their ability to provide an LRE for their students is an abundance of staffing. Any student requires individualized or small group support, but this is essential in the special education setting. Having extra sets of hands within the classroom at the public school level would greatly diminish the need for private school reimbursement.

Federal funding needs to be provided to ensure that students and schools have access to the appropriate sensory equipment required to keep students engaged in class. Herein lies another discrepancy between public and private education. Supplies such as adaptive seating, and sensory stimulation are essential for many students with IEPs, although some plans provide for federal funding for these items, many needs are unrecognized or not received in the public school setting. Providing funding and regulation in this area would also go a long way to reduce the cost of private school reimbursements across the country.

Federal funding is needed to increase the number of IEP service providers in public schools. Examples of services are Speech-Language Pathology, Occupational Therapy, Mental Health Counseling, Nurses, and Physical Therapists. This suggestion will yet again go a long way to reduce the number of private school suits and reimbursements. In addition, it would also help to provide the services that are required, but that are not always implemented as was previously demonstrated in the Los Angeles school system. Some of the services mentioned are not specific to students with IEPs; every school in the country should have Mental health Counseling, a Social Worker, and a Nurse.

Federal funding and regulation must be provided to ensure the implementation of required IEP services. Strict adherence to provide federally mandated services is essential to the development of every child served under IDEA. No child should ever go without the needed services for their developmental and academic success. Strict regulation would again go a long way to reduce the number of private school reimbursement cases.

Lastly, a federal task force must be implemented in order to examine discriminatory practices within the diagnostic process, to provide a clear and accessible path through which one can appeal unjust diagnoses, and to codify at the federal level regulations for the diagnoses themselves. This task force will go a long way in holding the systems that are currently in place accountable. It will also help reduce the mentioned over-representation of non-white students served under IDEA. Misdiagnoses and over-diagnoses disadvantage both communities of color, as well as those within the disabilities community.

Concluding Remarks

In their longitudinal study, Hernandez et al. implemented and evaluated an intervention system within the Los Angeles school system. This system was specifically designed to target the over-representation of Black students in the Los Angeles special education system. They included intervention before referral, and at every step of the referral process. The aim of this process was to identify underlying issues that could be hindering the students’ academic success aside from learning disabilities. Another intervention was the inclusion of multiple disciplines within the assessment process, and the inclusion of that multi-disciplinary consideration of supports for the student before the creation of a formal IEP. After the implementation of these interventions for three years, the researchers found that there was a significant drop in the number of students diagnosed with a learning disability. They also found that although the racial breakdown of diagnosis was still over-represented by non-white students, it was significantly lower than before the intervention. Lastly, they found that the number of students placed in private schools was also reduced over this three year period. This research clearly demonstrates the positive effects of even modest intervention over a short period. Addressing these issues directly with targeted interventions has the imperative effect. Intervention works, and the outlined options in this piece must be implemented.

Although the issue is clear, further research and information must be gathered to understand the full depth and scope. Information must be gathered on racial representation within school psychology departments, and the bureaucratic structures in place through IDEA. Understanding the racial demographics at every level of the diagnostic process will go a long way in informing racially conscious hiring practices and the diagnostic appeal process. Information is also lacking on clear guidelines for the diagnostic process, and the diagnoses themselves. An understanding of diagnoses is codified within the field of psychology, and the federal government must work to research that codification and create regulation at the federal level. Future research is also needed to examine the differences between public and private special education. Lastly, it is imperative that further monetary and demographic information described in this brief be gathered nationwide and across all swaths of United States life, be it rural, urban, or suburban.

Learning and physical disabilities exist in every community around the world and always have. There are a vast number of schools, programs, organizations, and people who do incredible work within the special education system as it exists and provide excellent services to those in need. This article is in no way meant to overshadow or downplay that work. Their stories must be glorified and amplified, because they are certainly underappreciated in this country. Although there are people doing incredible work, a better and more equitable system can and should be in place for that work to be seen and more effective. The discrepancies and lack of information outlined in this article are abhorrent and demonstrate yet another need for systemic upheaval in the United States.

Like what you just read?

• Please share if this piece resonated with you or with someone you care about.
• Support further content from this creator on Ko-fi here.
• Follow on Instagram @threads_of_illumination.