Federal legislation requires students with disabilities to participate in state assessments, partly because such assessments are important components of educational accountability. These assessments are used to classify students according to their educational needs, provide information regarding the progress of students with disabilities, and identify the extent to which students are attaining state academic standards. The large majority of classified students are classified under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). But classification is highly inconsistent, which should raise concerns about over-, under-, and misclassifying certain types of disabilities. Misclassification can result from failing to identify students with disabilities, from classifying students with disabilities they do not have, and from delaying classifying disabilities in students. Some of this inconsistency is accounted for by teachers and schools (McDonnell, McLaughlin, & Morison, 1997); however, when contrasting state classification data there are striking differences that indicate that state guidelines vary and lead to the majority of misclassifications. Nationally 11.6% of students between the ages of 6 and 17 years were served under Part B of IDEA in the 2003-2004 school years (Data Accountability Center, 2009). Part B of IDEA is Assistance for Education of All Children with Disabilities, which is the core section of IDEA that provides most of the state funding. However, this overall classification percentage has demonstrated a highly inconsistent pattern for years and has ranged from 9.1% to nearly 16%. The reported prevalence rates for specific disabilities are very inconsistent from state to state. Based on the categories required...

However, the percentage of learning disabled students widely varies from 2.39% (Kentucky) to 7.67% (Iowa) across the nation. Discrepancies can be even larger in the case of less common disabilities such as mental retardation with a low of .37% (New Jersey) to a high of 3.06% (West Virginia).
An over-classification of minorities as disabled has been an issue in special education for decades (Harry & Klinger, 2006). The rate of Black and other minority children classified as disabled is much higher than expected given the proportion of minorities to the population. Identifying students as disabled when they are not disabled results in several problems: First, the stigma associated with being labeled and requiring special education can be quite traumatic for students who do not require these services. Such a label can result in lost potential, self-fulfilling prophecies, and emotional problems for students. Second, placing a potentially "normal" student in special education classes can lead to a less rigorous curriculum that can result in poorer secondary and post-educational opportunities. Finally, labeling students as disabled when they are not leads to inappropriate services for mislabeled students and fewer services available for those who need them. Likewise, not identifying students who need special services can lead to distressing effects for a student such as loss of esteem, emotional difficulties, high drop-out rates, high rates of intrapersonal problems, and greater identification with counter-culture alternative life-styles.

Early in…