Factors That Determine the Increasing Number of African-American Children in Special Education

¶ … African-American Children in Special Education Programs

The large amount of minority children, specifically African-American children, who have ended up in special education programs for students who have learning disabilities, behavioral disabilities, emotional disabilities, or mental disabilities, has remained a very strong reality even though it has been recognized for more than 20 years (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). After looking at many of these patterns and how often they recur, it is important to look at the assumptions, beliefs, worldviews, and epistemologies that are often used by many who work in special education in order to determine what is causing the disproportionate amount of these individuals in special education programs throughout the country (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

This problem, being extremely persistent, is affecting large groups of African-American individuals and their families in a negative way (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). It also affects society in general and the field of special education and research (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). There are sociopolitical and historical roots that are attached to this representation issue and many of these predate the actual field of special education (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Some of these origins go back as far as 1619 (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Many of these are traced to the arrival of African individuals in this country and the unequal treatment that most of them have had to deal with since that time (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

Currently, much of the reality of overrepresentation in these types of special education programs where African-Americans are concerned comes from opinions and beliefs that were held many years ago and are still held quietly by many individuals in this country today (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Because of the amount of African-American individuals that were placed in special education classes, the life chances and abilities of many of these individuals are jeopardized (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). In other words, they are made to feel stupid and as though they are incapable of accomplishing very much because they are placed in classrooms that are assumed to be for students who are indeed incapable of accomplishing a great deal (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Large numbers of African-American children and youth are being diagnosed as mentally disabled or challenged in some way and are therefore placed in these special education programs (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

Many of these students are placed there inappropriately and this constitutes a very large problem for them and their families (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). The consequences of this misdiagnosis are often hard to determine because there are other factors working against African-Americans in this country today (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Much of this has to do with the fact that a great number of African-American individuals today do not receive good education or any type of life enhancing skills in these special education programs and they often should not have been placed in these programs in the first place (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

There is also a certain amount of stigma attached to the label of being in special education programs and when this label is attached to African-American youth today there are negative effects not only on the individual who bears this label that also on those who interact with this person and their families as well (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Many of these students who reside in special education programs often miss out on many of the social and general education opportunities that are seen as being essential for a good education and a higher quality of life in the future (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Because they have such limited exposure to much of the academic curriculum that is seen as the core of teaching for other individuals they continue to have much lower levels of academic achievement (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

These lower levels of achievement then lean toward a much more limited opportunity for employment and a strong likelihood that these individuals will not continue on to receive a college education (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). There are larger issues here as well, such as violations of civil rights acts and racial discrimination (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). This comes from the misidentified African-American youths that are consistently and disproportionately placed into various special education programs around the country (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). A great deal of renewed attention has recently been given to this issue in hopes of determining what has caused it and how it can be stopped (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996; Patton, 1995; Scheurich & Young, 1997). Some of this heightened awareness can be noticed in many recent reports that have gone to Congress and various initiatives that have been funded by the U.S. office of education (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

The first one of these initiatives was a study that was conducted by the National Academy of Sciences of the national research council (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). This study was strongly critical of various intelligence testing that was utilized in determining whether someone belonged in a special education classroom (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). In addition to criticizing these tests alternatives to these were also explored (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). The lack of benefits that were received from utilizing these tests and the lack of ability to accurately determine whether someone belonged in a special education program was at the heart of this discussion (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). There was also a second initiative proposed and this involved funding the national association of state directors of special education so that it can examine many of the policy issues that surround the problem of the disproportionate number of African-American students been placed in special education programs (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993).

This funding would also allow for individuals to come up with solutions that were considered practical in the hopes of solving the problem (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). Even though this area has come under scrutiny recently and more interest has been shown, renewing this interest without utilizing different voices and a different analysis will not work to resolve or correct the problem in any kind of timely manner (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993). It is, therefore, the purpose of this paper to look behind what is going on with special education and look at the factors that are causing this strong overrepresentation of African-American youths in many of the special education classes across this country today. There are many important insights that can come from looking at not only the assumptions and beliefs of many individuals but also their worldviews, their ways of knowing and understanding things, and the cultural inclinations that many of these special education scriptwriters appear to have (MacMillan & Hendrick, 1993).

There are many persistent patterns that are involved in this overrepresentation of African-American youth when it comes to placing them in emotionally disturbed or mildly disabled programs (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996). This pattern is the one that is looked at most strongly because it provides much information about the factors that are utilized what it comes to determining why so many of these individuals are placed in special education programs (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996). As has been mentioned, this issue of overrepresentation has been noted for more than 20 years and even though it has been pointed out there continues to be a disproportionate number of African-American youth placed in special education classrooms (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996).

There are many factors and one of the most strongly noted throughout the literature is a general failure of the education system (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996). There are also inequities noted within the special education process of referral, assessment, and placement (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996). However, there are other problems that have often not been discussed in literature and continue to persist even after many of these various causes have been pointed out (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996; Skrtic, 1991; Hilliard, 1992; Gordon, Miller, & Rollock, 1990). For example, it has been known for quite some time that even though this issue has been brought to light and many concerns have been pointed out, the percentage of African-American students that are being identified as mentally disabled has not changed a great deal (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996).

In 1975 the percentage of mentally disabled African-American students was 38% (Starratt, 1991). However, these students only made up of 15% of the population of the schools (Starratt, 1991). In 1991, the African-American community made up 16% of the school population but still they made up 35% of the population in special education classrooms (Starratt, 1994). This is a strong indicator that little has been done to correct this problem despite it being pointed out (Starratt, 1996). There is also strong documentation indicating that African-American individuals, especially males, are strongly overrepresented not only in disciplinary practices but in specific areas of special education as well (Morrison, White, & Fever, 1996).

Many of these individuals also receive their special education classes in buildings or classrooms that are segregated (Nobles, 1991). It is also important to note that the labeling that comes along with various categories of learning disabilities has very strong negative implications for many African-American youth (Nobles, 1991). These can include labels of emotional and behavioral disabilities, learning disabilities, and mild mental disabilities (Nobles, 1991). There are both validity problems and definitional problems with these issues because there are disagreements as to what exactly make up these problems and how exactly individuals who appear to have these difficulties should be categorized (Nobles, 1991). It has also been noted by researchers that there have been different and seemingly arbitrary shifts in much of the diagnostic criteria and frequency rates for the label of serious emotional or behavioral disability (Nobles, 1991).

This, when coupled with a great deal of variability in rates of placement across the country, brings the validity of the serious emotional or behavioral disability category into question (Nobles, 1991). The concerns that come from this and the variability of many students behavioral attitudes and policies on a cultural level place many African-American children at a very strong risk of being labeled, albeit falsely, as having a serious emotional or behavioral disability (Nobles, 1991). Some of this is also related to the judgment of teachers as they may not understand the cultural differences of their students (Nobles, 1991; Patton, 1992; Reschly, 1996).

There have been similar arguments made for the category of specific learning disability and for the category of educable mentally retarded (Nobles, 1991). Much of the literature about the subject is very clear in that there is subjectivity and ambiguity embedded very strongly in many of the categories that deal with mild disabilities, as well as the referral process that is utilized and the judgment that teachers make about these individuals in their care (Nobles, 1991). There also some inherent biases that come into the assessment process and these help to contribute even more strongly to the disproportionate amount of African-American youth that are referred and placed in special education programs (Nobles, 1991; Harry & Anderson, 1994, Hilliard, 1991).

The assessment aspect has received the greatest amount of attention in not only the types of research literature that have been conducted but also in the courts in this country as well (Irvine, 1990). This has much to do with the overrepresentation of African-American youth in special education programs in this country but it still appears that little has been done to correct it (Nobles, 1991). It would also appear that there is a great deal of statistical and theoretical evidence which would suggest that many of the intelligence tests that are created and utilized today are very biased and that they can be extremely harmful to a great deal of African-American students (Nobles, 1991).

The effects of many standard intelligence tests are also made stronger by the fact that many of these tests are used not for prescriptive or diagnostic reasons but actually for purposes of classification (Apple, 1990). Looking at these tests in that light, they contribute to curriculum or validity in a very small way (Apple, 1990). Recently, the board of assessment and testing of the national research council created a report which concluded that IQ tests, when utilized to determine whether a child should be placed in special education classrooms, needed to be strongly reevaluated (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). The report cited as their main reason a lack of connectivity between the effective treatments and the assessment practices that were being utilized (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

In spite of the fact that there has been a great deal of convincing and strong data on the disproportionate issue of African-Americans in special education and despite the fact that there has been a great deal of literature which challenges the processes that lead to special education training and identification of these individuals, as well as placement, the problem continues (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). It is likely that the problem will not leave on its own and the work that is being done now to create new premises for special education are extremely important (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

Also important is analyzing some of the structural foundations of the special education system in order to come to a clearer understanding of why this issue has become so problematic (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). One of the difficulties for special education is that it has often utilized a functionalist approach which deals with tradition and looks at the development, paradigm construction, research approach, research applications, and the use of methodology (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

Functionalism as its worldview looks at an objective, rational, and theoretic interpretation of social reality and any type of deviations that occur based on this view are placed under various pathological headings (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). This framework is very strict and rigorous and draws to its natural conclusion the fact that schools exist to transmit prescribed skills, values, knowledge, and norms that are deemed to be essential for functioning in society (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

Individuals who believe in this then look at practices and discussions that help them to continue to search for the appropriate diagnosis, the right kind of test, and the right way to label and teach various students (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). However, they are looking at these within the restraints of the worldview that they have developed and this worldview quite often is not challenged or contested in anyway (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). Because deviations from what is considered to be the norm are considered pathological in some way students who are not capable of performing general education tasks in some way allow teachers and others to think that they should our deemed as defective, and there are determinations made as to how to fix these students (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). This is where special education comes into it (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991) because it is considered the way to fix the students and correct the problems that they may have.

Not only did this help remove the idea of how to fix these students when special education was created, but also took these students and compartmentalized them into a separate type of education which everyone understands is not equal (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). By doing this, there are four assumptions that have been created (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). These include:

That disabilities that students are seen to have are considered to be pathological conditions (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

Creating a differential diagnosis is both useful and objective (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

The special education program has been conceived rationally and has been coordinated as a system of services that has been designed to benefit students diagnosed in this manner (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

That there is a great deal of progress which will result from technological improvements created rationally in both instructional and diagnostic practices (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

This is the type of language used by many individuals who belong to the special education curriculum and these individuals continue to create the opinions and beliefs that others will follow as they attempt to help these students (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991). Unfortunately, a great deal of what is done to allegedly help these students is actually causing them more difficulties than they would have had had they remained in standard educational curriculums (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991).

There are some researchers who still ask themselves whether disproportionate representation of African-American students in special education programs is actually a problem (Artiles & Trent, 1994). However, African-American sociologists, educators, and others do not ask these questions (Artiles & Trent, 1994). Instead, they believe that the answer to this is a resounding yes (Artiles & Trent, 1994). The challenge and where the analysis should come into play with this issue is not whether this problem is actually a problem but how it can be fixed and why the individuals who ask this question continue to ask it and do not seem to see the obvious (Artiles & Trent, 1994).

Many researchers struggle to understand what is behind the asking of this question because African-American youth in this country are clearly in special education programs in much larger numbers than other ethnicities and this is something that is generally obvious not only two professionals but to laypeople as well (Artiles & Trent, 1994). This is particularly true for categories of students with emotional or behavioral disabilities or with mild disabilities (Artiles & Trent, 1994).

It seems as though research into this issue indicates that many of these learners are not only misplaced but are also mislabeled in this diagnosed which is something that could stick with them for the rest of their lives and cause them a great deal of difficulty as they get older (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). One of the other factors that many individuals also consider as a problem when looking at this issue is the fact that those who create the testing and knowledge production for special education testing and placement have a very strong underrepresentation of African-American and other minority individuals (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996).

Many of these individuals are relatively absent from the determinations that are made when looking at how best to test individuals and how to place them (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Another problem with the functionalist view that was mentioned earlier is that it does not strongly recognize the political and socioeconomic nature of the school system (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Nor does it look toward the role that is often played by schools and also the special education system in maintaining an existing economic and social order (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). In other words, much of the literature links the processes and structures of schooling, including those processes that are utilized in special education, with the attitudes, values, and needs that are reflected in the dominant economic, political, and social groups within this country (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996; Nobles, 1991).

Theorists that look at this issue indicate that education is designed only to serve dominant interests in this country and the dominant interests are not African-American (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Therefore African-American students are placed in a system where they are strongly disvalued and not seen as being capable of performing many of the things that their are Caucasian counterparts are capable of (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996). Because of this, the assumptions, beliefs, structures, and processes of the dominant classes in this country are embedded in special education and the schooling system in general very strongly and because of this the research, practice, and theory has not changed to look at those who may need more help and assistance (Townsend, Thomas, Witty, & Lee, 1996; Hilliard, 1992).