Living in poverty increases the likelihood that students with disabilities will experience poor postschool outcomes, including unemployment, underemployment, and limited postsecondary education. The effects of the intersection of poverty and disability persist into adulthood where the employment rate for adults with disabilities is only one fourth that of individuals without disabilities. For close to 50 years, federal legislation has attempted to address the educational and economic disparities faced by students with disabilities and those growing up in poverty. In keeping with the focus of the civil rights movement and the Occupy Wall Street protests on the social and economic inequalities prevalent in the United States, policy directly addressing educational inequities is recommended to improve the daily lives and postschool outcomes of students with disabilities and those who are living in poverty.
BalfanzR.LegtersN. E. (2004). Locating the dropout crisis: Which high schools produce the nation’s dropouts? In OrfieldG., (Ed.), Dropouts in America: Confronting the graduation crisis (pp. 57–84). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
3.
BraultM. W. (2008). Current population reports: Americans with disabilities: 2005. Household economic studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
4.
BrillS. (2011). Class warfare: Inside the fight to fix America’s schools. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
5.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012, January6). News release: The employment situation December 2011. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
6.
Darling-HammondL. (2012, January17). Why is Congress redlining our schools?Washington Post. Available from http://www.washingtonpost.com
7.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.
8.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. §§ 241 et seq.
HughesC.AvokeS. K. (2010). The elephant in the room: Poverty, disability, and employment. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 35, 5–14.
11.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.
12.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.
13.
LaddH. F.FiskeE. B. (2011, December11). Class matters. Why won’t we admit it?The New York Times. Available from http://www.nytimes.com
14.
LevineP.MarderC.WagnerM. (2004). Services and supports for secondary school students with disabilities. A special topics report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://www.nlts2.org/reports/2004_05/nlts2_report_2004_05_complete.pdf
15.
McDonaldK. E.KeysC. B.BalcazarF. E. (2007). Disability, race/ethnicity, and gender: Themes of cultural oppression, acts of individual resistance. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 145–161.
16.
MetzelD. S.BoeltzigH.ButterworthJ.SulewskiJ. S.GilmoreD. S.WarfieldM. E. (2007). Achieving community membership through community rehabilitation provider services: Are we there yet?Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 149–160.
17.
MincyR. B. (Ed.). (2006). Black males left behind. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://www.nlts2.org/reports/2009_04/nlts2_report_2009_04_complete.pdf
21.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C.§§ 6301 et seq. (2002).
22.
OrfieldG. (2009). Reviving the goal of an integrated society: A 21st century challenge. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles at UCLA. Retrieved from http://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/
23.
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007).
24.
ParishS. L.RoseR. A.AndrewsM. E. (2010). TANF’s impact on low-income mothers raising children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76, 234–253.
25.
ParishS. L.RoseR. A.Grinstein-WeissM.RichmanE. L.AndrewsM. E. (2008). Material hardship in U.S. families raising children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 75, 71–92.
26.
RavitchD. (2010, December). PISA: It’s poverty, not stupid. The Principal Difference. Available from http://nasspblogs.org
27.
RothsteinR. (2011, September1). Grading the education reformers: Steven Brill give them much too easy a ride. Education Review, 14(8), 1–10. Retrieved from http://www.edrev.info/essays/v14n8.pdf
28.
RuschF. R.HughesC.AgranM.MartinJ. E.JohnsonJ. R. (2009). Toward self-directed learning, post-high school placement, and coordinated support: Constructing new transition bridges to adult life. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 53–59. doi:10.1177/0885728809332628
29.
ShiplerD. K. (2004). The working poor: Invisible in America. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
30.
StapletonD. C.O’DayB.LivermoreG. A.ImparatoA. J. (2005). Dismantling the poverty trap: Disability policy for the 21st century. Ithaca, NY: Rehabilitation Research and Training Center for Economic Research on Employment Policy for Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/edicollect/124
31.
SuittsS. T. (2007). A new majority: Low income students in the South’s public schools. Atlanta, GA: Southern Education Foundation. Available from http://www.southerneducation.org
32.
SuittsS. T. (2010). A new diverse majority: Students of color in the South’s public schools. Atlanta, GA: Southern Education Foundation. Available from http://www.southerneducation.org
33.
TestD. W.MazzottiV. L.MustainA. L.FowlerC. H.KorteringL.KohlerP. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181. doi:10.1177/0885728809346960
34.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2010. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-239.pdf
35.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). 29th annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 2007. Washington, DC: Author.
36.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Comparability of state and local expenditures among schools within districts: A report from the study of school-level expenditures. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/title-i/school-level-expenditures/school-level-expenditures.pdf
37.
U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Education. (2011, December2). Guidance on the voluntary use of race to achieve diversity and avoid racial isolation in elementary and secondary schools. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/edu/documents/guidancepost.pdf
38.
WashingtonB. H.HughesC.CosgriffJ. C. (2012). High-overty youth: Self-determination and involvement in educational planning. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 35, 14–28. doi:10.1177/ 0885728811420135.
