IDEA

1
IDEA Disproportionality

• Perry Williams, Ph.D.
• Office of Special Education Programs, U.S.
  Department of Education

2
What we will cover

• Extent of the Problem
• IDEA 2004 Policies 2006 Regulations Related to
  Disproportionality
• Requirements for determining disproportionate
  representation
• Requirements for significant disproportionality

3
Why Disproportionality is a Problem
4
Risk Ratio Trends Mental Retardation and
Emotional Disturbance
Disability Area Year African-American of AA Risk Increase White Hispanic Asian American Indian
MR 2002 3.04 38 growth from 1994 to 2001 .61 .60 .45 1.10
MR 2001 2.99 38 growth from 1994 to 2001 .63 .58 .44 1.09
MR 1994 2.20 38 growth from 1994 to 2001 .66 .9 .34 1.13
ED 2002 2.25 41 growth from 1994 to 2001 .86 .52 .28 1.30
ED 2001 2.21 41 growth from 1994 to 2001 .87 .52 .29 1.25
ED 1992 1.60 41 growth from 1994 to 2001 .99 .56 .14 N/A
5
Impact of Disproportionality

• More likely to be assigned to segregated
  classrooms or placements
• Have limited access to inclusive and general
  educational environments
• Experience higher dropout rates and low academic
  performance
• Are exposed to substandard and less rigorous
  curricula
• May be missclassified or inappropriately labeled

6

• May receive services that do not meet their
  needs and
• Are less likely than their white counterparts to
  return to general education classrooms.

7
Post-School Outcomes

• Unemployed 2 years 75 AA students
• Out of high school 47 White
• Still not employed 52 AA young adult
• 3-5 years out of school 39 White
• Arrest rate 40 AA w/disab.
• 27 Whites w/disab

8
Why? Some Hypothesis

• Failure of general education to educate children
  from diverse backgrounds
• Misidentification, misuse of tests
• Lack of access to effective instruction
• Insufficient resources
• Teachers who are less well prepared
• Poverty

9
Reauthorization of IDEA 2004 and its implementing
regulations
10
Priority Areas and Indicatorsin the SPP

• Provision of FAPE in the LRE
• State exercise of general supervision, including
  child find, effective monitoring, the use of
  resolution meetings, mediation, and a system of
  transition services and
• Disproportionate representation of racial and
  ethnic groups in special education and related
  services, to the extent the representation is the
  result of inappropriate identification

11
What States Must Do Regarding Disproportionate
Representation

• 300.600(d)(3)

12
Monitoring

• Identify LEAs with disproportionate
  representation, and of those, the number where
  the disproportionate representation is the result
  of inappropriate identification for
• Indicator 9 - children with disabilities
  including
• Indicator 10 - children with disabilities with
  particular impairments.

13
Measurement Information

• Definition of disproportionate representation
• Exam data for both over- and underrepresentation
• Use OSEP Child Count data
• Racial/ethnic data for children ages 6 through 21
• Description of how DR is calculated
• Analyze data for each district, for all
  racial/ethnic groups, n size

14
Areas for review

• School-wide approaches EIS/RTI
• Referral practices
• Comprehensiveness of evaluations
• Validity reliability nonbiased assessments
• Eligibility determination process
• Suspensions/expulsions
• Graduation and dropout rates
• Student performance

15
If Disproportionality is due to inappropriate
identification, require the LEA to correct the
noncompliance, including revising deficient
policies, procedures, and practices.
16
Reporting

• States must annually report in the Annual
  Performance Report on

in special education and related services
of districts with DR of racial and ethnic groups
that results from inappropriate identification.
in specific disability categories
17
What States Must Do Regarding Significant
Disproportionality

• 300.646

18
Defining Significant Disproportionality
State defines for LEAs and for state in general
State determines criteria for what level of
disproportionality is significant
19
What are the requirements for determining
significant disproportionality and the use of
IDEA funds for comprehensive CEIS?

• States are required to collect and examine data
  to determine if significant disproportionality
  based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the
  state and LEAs of the state with respect to

20

• Identification of children with disabilities
• Identification of children as children with a
  particular disability
• Placement of children with disabilities in
  particular educational settings and
• Incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary
  actions, including suspensions and expulsions.

21
Determining Significant Disproportionality
Is based on collection and examination of data --
-- and not on a districts policies, procedures,
or practices.
22
For Determinations of Significant
Disproportionality

• States must

• Provide for the review and revision (as
  necessary) of policies, procedures, and practices
  used in identification or placement of children

Do these comply with requirements of IDEA?
23
For Determinations of Significant
Disproportionality

• States must

• Require LEAs to use 15 of Part B funds for
  Coordinated early intervening services

particularly, but not exclusively, for children
in those groups significantly overidentified.
24
For Determinations of Significant
Disproportionality

• LEA must

• Publicly report on the revision of policies,
  practices, and procedures