District-Level Achievement Gaps Explain Black and Hispanic Overrepresentation in Special Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 374-392
Author(s):  
George Farkas ◽  
Paul L. Morgan ◽  
Marianne M. Hillemeier ◽  
Cynthia Mitchell ◽  
Adrienne D. Woods

To examine whether special education racial risk ratios reported by U.S. school districts are explained by district-level confounds, particularly, racial achievement gaps, we analyzed merged data ( N = 1,952 districts for Black–White comparisons; N = 2,571 districts for Hispanic–White comparisons) from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, Stanford Educational Data Archive, and Common Core data sets. Regression analysis results indicated that Black– and Hispanic–White district risk ratios were strongly related to Black– and Hispanic–White district achievement gaps. These results reconcile findings from district-level data with those from student-level data and support the finding that, when compared to otherwise similar White students by controlling for group differences in achievement, non-White students are on average underrepresented in special education. That is, non-White overrepresentation in special education in most districts is explained by racial achievement gaps in these districts. Residuals from the regressions provide a more accurate way to monitor for outlier districts than the current practice required in federal regulations of using unadjusted risk ratios.

AERA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 233285841987544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis A. Pearman ◽  
F. Chris Curran ◽  
Benjamin Fisher ◽  
Joseph Gardella

There is growing interest in the relation between the racial achievement gap and the racial discipline gap. However, few studies have examined this relation at the national level. This study combines data from the Stanford Education Data Archive and the Civil Rights Data Collection and employs a district fixed effects analysis to examine whether and the extent to which racial discipline gaps are related to racial achievement gaps in Grades 3 through 8 in districts across the United States. In bivariate models, we find evidence that districts with larger racial discipline gaps have larger racial achievement gaps (and vice versa). Though other district-level differences account for the positive association between the Hispanic-White discipline gap and the Hispanic-White achievement gap, we find robust evidence that the positive association between the Black-White discipline gap and the Black-White achievement gap persists after controlling for a multitude of confounding factors. We also find evidence that the mechanisms connecting achievement to disciplinary outcomes are more salient for Black than White students.


2015 ◽  
Vol 117 (8) ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad A. Khalifa ◽  
Felecia Briscoe

Background Racialized suspension gaps are logically and empirically associated with racial achievement gaps and both gaps indicate the endurance of racism in American education. In recent U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Office of Civil Rights data, it was revealed that nationally, Black boys are four times more likely to be suspended than White boys. In some geographic areas and for certain offenses, some intersections of race, class, and gender are dozens of times more likely to be suspended for than others. Although most educational leaders and district-level official express disapproval of racism in schools, racialized gaps in achievement and discipline stubbornly persist. Purpose/Objective The purpose of this study was to examine how school district-level administrators react to investigations and indications of racism in their school districts. It is relevant because in many school districts that have disciplinary and achievement gaps, the administrators ostensibly and publically express a hope to reduce or eliminate the racist trends. Yet, one administration after another, they seem unable to disrupt the racially oppressive discipline and achievement gaps. In this study, we examined administrators’ responses to our requests about their districts’ racialized disaggregated disciplinary data, and their responses to our sharing of our findings with them. We use counternarrative autoethnography to describe that school district administrators play a significant role in maintaining practices that reproduce racial oppression in schools. Setting This study was conducted in large urban school districts in Texas. The profiled districts were predominantly Latino; however one district was over 90% Latino and the other just slightly more than half with sizable White and Black student populations in some schools and areas. Participants As this is an autoethnography, we are the primary participants of this study; we interrogate our experiences with school district administrators in our investigations of racial disciplinary gaps. Research Design Our autoethnography is counternarrative, as it counters bureaucratic narratives of impartiality, colorblindness, and objectivity espoused by school districts. In addition to our own self-interviews, we base our counternarrative on the examination of 11 phone calls and 35 email exchanges with district administration, and on field-notes taken during seven site visits. These collective experiences and data sources informed our counternarratives, and led to our findings. Our research encompasses three phases. The initial phase was our attempt to obtain disciplinary data from various school districts in Texas. Only two school districts made the data accessible to us, despite being legally obligated to do so. For the second phase of our study we calculated risk ratios from those two school districts to determine how many more times African Americans and Latinos are suspended than Whites in all of the schools of TXD1 and TXD2. The third phase was the district administrators’ reactions to our presentation of our findings in regards to their district schools with the most egregious disciplinary gaps. Based on the administrative responses to them, we thought that it was important to highlight our experiences through a counternarrative autoethnography. Conclusions From our qualitative data analysis we theorize three bureaucratic administrative responses contributed to the maintenance of racism in school—(1) the administrators discursive avoidance of issues of racial marginalization; (2) the tendency of bureaucratic systems to protect their own interests and ways of operating, even those ways of operating that are racist; and (3), the (perhaps inadvertent) protection of leadership practices that have resulted in such racial marginalization. These responses were enacted through four technical–rational/bureaucratic administrative practices: subversive, defensive, ambiguous, and negligent.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaitlin P. Anderson ◽  
Gary W. Ritter

There is much discussion in the United States about exclusionary discipline (suspensions and expulsions) in schools. According to a 2014 report from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, Black students represent 15% of students, but 44% of students suspended more than once and 36% of expelled students. This analysis uses seven years of individual infraction-level data from public schools in Arkansas. We find that marginalized students are more likely to receive exclusionary discipline, even after controlling for the nature and number of disciplinary referrals, but that most of the differences occur across rather than within schools. Across the state, black students are about 2.4 times as likely to receive exclusionary discipline (conditional on reported infractions and other student characteristics) whereas within school, this same conditional disparity is not statistically significant. Within schools, the disproportionalities in exclusionary discipline are driven primarily by non-race factors such as free- and reduced-price lunch (FRL) eligibility and special education status. We find, not surprisingly, that schools with larger proportions of non-White students tend to give out longer punishments, regardless of school income levels, measured by FRL rates. Combined, these results appear to indicate multiple tiers of disadvantage: race drives most of the disparities across schools, whereas within schools, FRL or special education status may matter more. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
David C. Coker

Many researchers report risk ratios of White students to Black students with disabilities to show disproportionality and draw the conclusion discrimination exists. Risk ratios, upon further inspection, have methodological and philosophical problems which challenge the usefulness. A qualitative literature review provides a framework for understanding disproportionality and the use of risk ratios. Four themes underpin disproportionality findings, and a theory for future action was derived from the literature review. Recommendations to improve special education services are presented: universal screening, a standardized process, fidelity and research, and a focus on academic achievement.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 154
Author(s):  
Maithreyi Gopalan

This study estimates racial/ethnic discipline gaps, using multiple measures of school discipline outcomes, in nearly all school districts in the United States with data collected by the Office of Civil Rights between 2013 and 2014. Just like racial/ethnic achievement gaps, discipline gaps also vary substantially, ranging from negative to greater than two standard deviations, across districts. However, unlike the correlates of racial achievement gaps, the extensive set of district-level characteristics available in the Stanford Education Data Archive (SEDA) including economic, demographic, segregation, and school characteristics, explain roughly just one-fifth of the geographic variation in Black-white discipline gaps and one-third of the variation in Hispanic-white discipline gaps. This study also finds a modest, statistically significant, positive association between discipline gaps and achievement gaps, even after extensive covariate adjustment. The results of this analysis provide an important step forward in determining the relationship between two forms of persistent inequality that have long plagued the U.S. education system. 


2021 ◽  
pp. 003804072110133
Author(s):  
Catherine Kramarczuk Voulgarides ◽  
Alexandra Aylward ◽  
Adai Tefera ◽  
Alfredo J. Artiles ◽  
Sarah L. Alvarado ◽  
...  

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ([IDEA] 2004; IDEA Amendments 1997) is a civil rights–based law designed to protect the rights of students with disabilities in U.S. schools. However, decades after the initial passage of IDEA, racial inequity in special education classifications, placements, and suspensions are evident. In this article, we focus on understanding how racial discipline disparities in special education outcomes relate to IDEA remedies designed to address problem behaviors. We qualitatively examine how educators interpret and respond to citations for racial discipline disproportionality via IDEA at both the district and the school level in a suburban locale. We find that educators interpret the inequity in ways that neutralize the racialized implications of the citation, which in turn affects how they respond to the citation. These interpretations contribute to symbolic and race-evasive IDEA compliance responses. The resulting bureaucratic and organizational structures associated with IDEA implementation become a mechanism through which the visibility of race and racialization processes are erased and muted through acts of policy compliance. Thus, the logic of compliance surrounding IDEA administration serves as a reproductive social force that sustains practices that do not disrupt locally occurring racialized inequities.


2021 ◽  
pp. 001312452198944
Author(s):  
Huang Wu ◽  
Jianping Shen ◽  
Jessaca Spybrook ◽  
Xingyuan Gao

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of school background and school process in closing achievement gaps between White and non-White students in science. To answer the research questions, a series of two-level hierarchical linear models (HLM) was performed on the fourth-grade U.S. portion of the 2015 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) data. Results indicate that (a) the science achievement gap between White and non-White students is 0.21 standard deviation, holding student and school background constant; (b) the science achievement gap varies across schools; (c) none of the school background variables are associated with the achievement gap in a school; and (d) school emphasis on student academic learning is not only associated with higher school-level science achievement, but also with a narrower science achievement gap between White and non-White students. However, teacher collaboration is not associated with school-level science achievement but is associated with a larger achievement gap. Implications, limitations, and recommendations for further research are discussed.


2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 201-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew M. Singer

In districts where only one seat is contested, the electoral formula (plurality or majority) should be a major determinant of the number of parties that receive votes. Specifically, plurality rule should generate two-party competition while other institutional arrangements should generate electoral fragmentation. Yet tests of these propositions using district-level data have focused on a limited number of cases; they rarely contrast different electoral systems and have reached mixed conclusions. This study analyses district-level data from 6,745 single-member district election contests from 53 democratic countries to test the evidence for Duverger's Law and Hypothesis. Double-ballot majoritarian systems have large numbers of candidates, as predicted, but while the average outcome under plurality rule is generally consistent with two-party competition, it is not perfectly so. The two largest parties typically dominate the districts (generally receiving more than 90 per cent of the vote), and there is very little support for parties finishing fourth or worse. Yet third-place parties do not completely disappear, and ethnic divisions shape party fragmentation levels, even under plurality rule. Finally, institutional rules that generate multiparty systems elsewhere in the country increase electoral fragmentation in single-member plurality districts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document