This case highlights the moral and ethical dilemmas that principals and educators confront when making decisions about special education classification and placement, particularly in the context of racial disproportionality. These decisions are complex, influenced by the requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the sociocultural and historical contexts that school leaders work within. In addition, the case delves into the relationship between general education instruction and special education referral processes in the context of a multi-tiered system of supports, exploring the delicate balance principals must maintain between adhering to special education laws and exercising professional judgment.
AhramR.FergusE.NogueraP. (2011). Addressing racial/ethnic disproportionality in special education: Case studies of suburban school districts. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 113(10), 2233–2266. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301004
ArtilesA. J. (2019). Fourteenth annual Brown lecture in education research: Reenvisioning equity research: Disability identification disparities as a case in point. Educational Researcher, 48(6), 325–335.
4.
BalA.SullivanA. L.HarperJ. (2014). A situated analysis of special education disproportionality for systemic transformation in an urban school district. Remedial and Special Education, 35(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513507754
5.
BottianiJ. H.BradshawC. P.RosenbergM. S.HershfeldtP. A.PellK. L.DebnamK. J. (2012). Applying double check to response to intervention: Culturally responsive practices for students with learning disabilities. Insights on Learning Disabilities: From Prevailing Theories to Validated Practices, 9(1), 93–108.
6.
BrayL. E.RussellJ. L. (2016). Going off script: Structure and agency in individualized education program meetings. American Journal of Education, 122(3), 367–398.
7.
CarterP. L.WelnerK. G. (Eds.). (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Oxford University Press.
8.
CAST. (2024). Universal design for learning guidelines version 3.0 [Graphic organizer].
9.
ContopidisE.LerouxJ. M.HalpernD. (2007). A closer look: Disproportionality among rural school districts. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 10(1/2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.56829/muvo.10.1-2.k21m742716288550
10.
DeMatthewsD. E.SerafiniA.WatsonT. (2021). Leading inclusive schools: Principal perceptions, practices and challenges to meaningful change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 57(1), 3–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20913897
11.
DeMatthewsD. E.WangY. (2023). How can principals lead in the school improvement planning process? Reducing biases in shared decision making. The Clearing House, 96(2), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2022.2163971
12.
DonovanS.CrossC. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. National Academy Press.
GrinerA. C.StewartM. L. (2013). Addressing the achievement gap and disproportionality through the use of culturally responsive teaching practices. Urban Education, 48(4), 585–621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912456847
15.
HarryB.KlingnerJ. K.HartJ. (2005). African American families under fire: Ethnographic views of family strengths. Remedial and Special Education, 26(2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260020501
16.
HartJ. E.CramerE. D.HarryB.KlingnerJ. K.SturgesK. M. (2010). The continuum of “troubling” to “troubled” behavior: Exploratory case studies of African American students in programs for emotional disturbance. Remedial and Special Education, 31(3), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327468
17.
HernándezM. G.LopezD. M.SwierR. (2022). Dismantling disproportionality: A culturally responsive and sustaining systems approach. Teachers College Press.
18.
HooverJ. J.EricksonJ. (2015). Culturally responsive special education referrals of English learners in one rural County School District: Pilot project. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(4), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687051503400403
19.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
20.
JordanK. A. (2008). Teachers’ discursive constructions of disability: Implications for Black urban youth. International Journal of Learning, 14(10), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v14i10/45504
21.
JordanK. A. (2016). The practice of special education referral: Teachers’ discursive assumptions. International Journal of Learner Diversity & Identities, 23(3), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-0128/cgp/v23i03/33-54
KlingnerJ. K.HarryB. (2006). The special education referral and decision-making process for English language learners: Child study team meetings and placement conferences. Teachers College Record, 108, 2247–2291.
24.
KnotekS. (2003). Bias in problem solving and the social process of student study teams: A qualitative investigation. The Journal of Special Education, 37(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669030370010101
25.
KozleskiE. B.ArtilesA. J.SkrticT. M. (2014). What are high quality instruction and support in high need and culturally diverse schools. In McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L.SpoonerF.AlgozzineB. (Eds.), Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice (pp. 118–135). Routledge.
Kramarczuk VoulgaridesC.AylwardA.TeferaA.ArtilesA. J.AlvaradoS. L.NogueraP. (2021). Unpacking the logic of compliance in special education: Contextual influences on discipline racial disparities in suburban schools. Sociology of Education, 94(3), 208–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380407211013322
28.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in US schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
29.
MayesK. A. (2023). The unteachables: Disability rights and the invention of Black special education. University of Minnesota Press.
30.
MilnerH. R.IV (2010). Culture, curriculum, and identity in education. In MilnerH. R. (Ed.), Culture, curriculum, and identity in education (pp. 1–11). Palgrave Macmillan.
31.
ParkS. (2020). Demystifying disproportionality: Exploring educator beliefs About special education referrals for English learners. Teachers College Record, 122(5), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200510
32.
RogersR. (2002). Through the eyes of the institution: A critical discourse analysis of decision making in two special education meetings. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 33(2), 213–237. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.2002.33.2.213
33.
SullivanA. L.SadehS.HouriA. K. (2019). Are school psychologists’ special education eligibility decisions reliable and unbiased? A multi-study experimental investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 77, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.006
34.
TeferaA. A.FischmanG. E. (2020). How and why context matters in the study of racial disproportionality in special education: Toward a critical disability education policy approach. Equity & Excellence in Education, 53(4), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2020.1791284
35.
TeferaA. A.ArtilesA. J.Kramarczuk VoulgaridesC.AylwardA.AlvaradoS. (2023). The aftermath of disproportionality citations: Situating disability-race intersections in historical, spatial, and sociocultural contexts. American Educational Research Journal, 60(2), 367–404.
36.
ThoriusK. A. K.TanP. (2016). Expanding analysis of educational debt. In ConnorD.FerriB.AnnammaS. A. (Eds.), DisCrit—Disability studies and critical race theory in education (pp. 87–97). Teachers College Press.
WaitollerF. R.ArtilesA. J.CheneyD. A. (2010). The miner’s canary: A review of overrepresentation research and explanations. The Journal of Special Education, 44(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466908329226
