Overrepresentation of minority students in special education has been a concern for more than 3 decades. Such overrepresentation has triggered a number of legal challenges, educational reforms, and legislative actions. However, a question still remains in the field: Have there been any recent changes or improvements? We addressed this question by analyzing data published by the federal government. Racial representation along with regional variations and state poverty rates were examined. The results indicated that American Indian/Alaskan Native and African American students were overrepresented in high-incidence disabilities (i.e., emotional and behavioral disorders, learning disabilities, and mental retardation); that significant regional variations existed in minority representation, but that these variations were not correlated with state poverty rates; and that racial representation in certain disability categories was negatively correlated with state poverty rates for certain racial groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Artiles, A.J., & Trent, S.C. (1994). Overrepresentation of minority students in special education: A continuing debate. The Journal of Special Education , 27, 410—437.
2.
Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal post school outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudinal transition study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399—414.
3.
Chinn, P.C., & Hughes, S. (1987). Representation of minority students in special education classes. Remedial and Special Education, 8(4), 41—46.
4.
Danielson, L.C., & Bellamy, G.T. (1989). State variation in placement of children with handicaps in segregated environments. Exceptional Children , 55, 448—456.
5.
D'Amico, R., & Blackorby, J. (1992). Trends in employment among out-of-school youth with disabilities. In M. Wagner, R. D'Amico, C. Marder , L. Newman, & J. Blackorby (Eds.), What happens next? Trends in postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities. The second comprehensive report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students (pp. 4-1—4-46). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
6.
Doren, B., Bullis, M., & Benz, M.R. (1996). Predicting the arrest status of adolescents with disabilities in transition. The Journal of Special Education , 29, 363—380.
7.
Dunn, L.M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded: Is much of it justifiable?Exceptional Children, 23, 5—21.
8.
Gottlieb, J., Alter, M., Gottlieb, B.W., & Wishner, J. (1994). Special education in urban America: It's not justifiable for many. The Journal of Special Education, 27, 453—465.
9.
Hodapp, R.M., & Krasner, D.V. (1995). Reflections on using large, national databases in special education research. Exceptionality, 5(2), 109—112.
10.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1415 et seq.
11.
Katsiyannis, A., Conderman, G., & Franks, D. (1995). State practices on inclusion: A national review . Remedial and Special Education, 16, 279— 287.
12.
Lambert, N.M. (1988). Perspectives on eligibility for and placement in special education programs. Exceptional Children, 54, 297—301.
13.
Larry P. v. Riles, 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir. 1986).
14.
Maag, W.J., & Katsiyannis, A. (1998). Challenges facing successful transition for youths with E/BD. Behavioral Disorders, 23, 209—221.
15.
Marder, C. (1992). Education after secondary school. In M. Wagner, R. D'Amico , C. Marder, L. Newman, & J. Blackorby (Eds.), What happens next? Trends in postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities. The second comprehensive report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students (pp. 3-1—3-39). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
16.
MacMillan, D.L., & Reschly, D.J. (1998). Overrepresentation of minority students: The case for greater specificity or reconsideration of variables examined. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 15—24.
17.
MacMillan, D.L., Widaman, K.F., Balow, I.H., Borthwick-Duffy, S., Hendrick, I.G., & Hemsley, R.E. (1992). Special education students exiting the educational system. The Journal of Special Education, 26, 20—36.
18.
McLesky, J., Henry, D., & Axelrod, M.I. (1999). Inclusion of students with learning disabilities: An examination of data from reports to Congress. Exceptional Children, 66, 55—66.
19.
Patton, J.M. (1998). The disproportionate representation of African Americans in special education: Looking behind the curtain for understanding and possible solutions. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 25—31.
20.
Reschly, D.J. (1988). Minority MMR overrepresentation and special education reform. Exceptional Children, 54, 316—323.
21.
Serna, L.A., Forness, S.R., & Nielsen, M.E. (1998). Intervention versus affirmation: Proposed solutions to the problem of disproportionate minority representation in special education . The Journal of Special Education, 32, 48—51.
22.
Scott, T.M., & Nelson, C.M. (1998). Confusion and failure in facilitating generalized social responding in the school setting: Sometimes 2+2 = 5. Behavioral Disorders, 23, 264—275.
23.
Valles, E.C. (1998). The disproportionate representation of minority students in special education. The Journal of Special Education , 32, 52—54. U.S. Census Bureau. (1999). Poverty in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.
24.
U.S. Department of Education. (1997). Nineteenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
25.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000a). Twenty-second annual report to Congress on the implementations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author
26.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000b). National Center for Education Statistics: Statistics in brief. Washington, DC: Author.
