In this article, Ford brings forward a frequently identified root cause of inequity in society and in school discipline, implicit bias. He acknowledges that all people, including educators, are raised in context of social situations and conditioning. Ford refers to methods for raising the issue of implicit bias with teachers, guiding them to introspection and leading them toward individual and systematic change.
Ford, James E. 2016. “The Root of Discipline Disparities.” Educational Leadership. 3:42-46.
This article discusses the moral and ethical issues of disproportionate disciplinary practices in schools (exclusion, special education identification, and restrictive educational placement) and provides ways schools can begin to address or prevent this kind of disproportionality.
Green, Ambra L., Daniel R. Cohen, and Melissa Stormont. 2019. “Addressing and Preventing Disproportionality in Exclusionary Discipline Practices for Students of Color With Disabilities.” Intervention in School and Clinic 54 (4): 241–245.
This article examines how a comprehensive plan for early identification and screening of students with social, emotional, and behavioral concerns can reduce disproportionality.
Bradley Williams, Rachel, Deitra Bryant-Mallory, Kenya Coleman, Douglas Gotel, and Carla Hall. 2017. “An Evidence-Based Approach to Reducing Disproportionality in Special Education and Discipline Referrals.” Children & Schools 39 (4): 248–251.
As discipline continues to be a primary indicator of inequity in schools, NYU provides this assessment measure to help educators identify discipline outcomes in relationship to positive behavioral support systems.
NYU Steinhardt. nd. Behavioral Analysis Workbook. New York University: Metropolitan Center for Urban Education.
School districts aim to create equitable learning environments that reflect the diversity of their students, staff, and community, including those with disabilities. This research brief examines two processes that frequently lead to disproportionality—special education identification and disciplinary referrals for special education students. These processes have significant academic and behavioral impacts on students, and understanding them is crucial for school districts working to eliminate disproportionality.
To achieve more equitable outcomes, special education identification processes should avoid racially, culturally, or sexually discriminatory methods. If an analysis of classification data and risk ratios indicates disproportionality, districts should establish a stakeholder group to perform a root cause analysis, develop an improvement plan, and create a blueprint for implementation and evaluation. To address disciplinary disproportionality, the U.S. ED's Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) advises districts to:
Establish clear priorities.
Confront explicit bias.
Eliminate practices leading to inequitable outcomes.
Implement evidence-based interventions.
Additionally, OSEP recommends that policies include seven key elements:
Specific Commitment to Equity
Family Partnerships in Policy Development
Focus on Implementing Positive, Proactive Behavior Support Practices
Clear Objective Discipline Procedures
Removal or Reduction of Exclusionary Practices
Graduated Discipline Systems with Instructional Alternatives to Exclusion
Procedures with Accountability for Equitable Student Outcomes
Citation: Hanover Research. 2018. “Best Practices in Addressing Disproportionality for Students with Disabilities.” https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bxs72tmqck7zkcw79iov4/Best-Practices-Georgia.pdf?rlkey=ciz1ja0u09x53u4wqyj6dx3lz&st=n0cp1wtj&dl=0 (accessed, June 14, 2024).
After a full year of "Delay Regulation" the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the implementation of 2018 federal significant disproportionality regulations.
United States District Court for the District of Columbia. 2019. Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc. v. Elizabeth (Betsy) DeVos, Secretary of Education; Johnny W. Collet, Assistant Secretary for Rehabilitative Services; U.S. Department of Education. Civil Action No. 18-cv-1636 (TSC). https://youthlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/031-Memorandum-Opinion-re-Defendants-Motion-to-Dismiss-14-Plaintiffs-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-16-and-Defendants-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-22-1.pdf.
This research study provides an overview of trends and issues in both underrepresentation and overrepresentation of English learners in special education. Contributing factors for variability, as well as recommendations for future research and improved practice are provided.
Counts, Jennifer, Antonis Katsiyannis, and Denise K. Whitford. 2018. “Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners in Special Education: English Learners.” NASSP Bulletin 102 (1): 5–21.
The author offers an overview of the impact of suspensions on students with disabilities, particulaly African American students and male students.
Williams, V. C. (2023). Department of Education Calls on Schools to Limit Suspensions of Students with Disabilities. Exceptional Parent, 53(2), 8–9.
This research study found that teachers gave African American students significantly higher statistical ratings for hyperactive behaviors than did the children’s mother or the children themselves.
Linton, Kristen F. 2015. “Differential Ratings of Specific Behaviors of African Americans Children in Special Education.” Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 32 (3): 229–235.
Losen and his colleagues at the Civil Rights Project at UCLA provide readers with an analysis of current national and statewide data on continuing disparities in rates of punitive discipline for students with Individual Education Programs (IEPs) based on race and ethnicity. Their recommendations define the critical changes needed to eliminate the inequities as part of a pathway to reformation.
Losen, Daniel J. 2018. “Disabling Punishment: The Need for Remedies to the Disparate Loss of Instruction Experienced by Black Students with Disabilities.” Los Angeles and Houston: The Center for Civil Rights Remedies at the Civil Rights Project Proyecto Derechos Civiles and Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice.
