Transcript Slide 1

Understanding Disproportionality
New York University
Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity
and the Transformation of Schools
Technical Assistance Center on
Disproportionality
ENTER DISTRICT NAME
ENTER DATE
ICEBREAKER: Getting to know
each other
Overview of the Day
• Part 1: Establishing Norms Within the Root Cause
Process
• Part 2: Defining Disproportionality
• Part 3: Looking at Ourselves
• Part 4: Looking at the Data Around Disproportionality
• Part 5: Looking at Disproportionality in our District
• Part 6: Reflection, wrap-up, and debriefing
Objectives
• Develop a framework for understanding how
disproportionality relates to special education and
school discipline both at the national and local level
• Identify policies, practices and beliefs that may
contribute to disproportionality in your district which
will be examined in the root cause process
PART 1: Establishing
Norms Within the Root
Cause Process
Contract
• Push your growing edge
• Consider what’s in it for you
and where you’re going
• Listen with respect and stay
engaged
• Struggle together and expect
to experience discomfort
• Speak your “truth” and
respect the “truth” of others
“As we struggle
together, we will have
hit the growing edge—
push your growing
edge!”
-The People’s Institute for Survival and
Beyond
Discussing the Elephant in the Room
Our educational systems
have disproportionate
negative impacts on
particular students:
• Males
• Students of color (particularly
Black and Latino students)
• Students of low socioeconomic backgrounds
• LGBTQ
• Students with Disabilities
What to Expect: The Three Core Tensions
What can I do? (PERSONAL)
•
Each teacher routinely questions his or her own personal
readiness to become the type of professional who can
successfully engage issues of race and racism in his or her life
and classroom practice.
What can I do? (STRUCTURAL)
•
Teachers routinely question the power of the individual educator
to counteract structural or societal problems of racial and raceclass inequality via the classroom.
What can I do? (STRATEGIES)
•
Teachers routinely search for concrete actionable steps they can
take in their classrooms and schools, questioning how abstract
ideas of theories about racial inequality and difference can help
them.
From Pollock, Deckman, Mira, & Shalaby (2010, p. 211).
Critical Questions:
•
What is disproportionality?
•
Who is affected by
disproportionality?
PART 2: Defining
Disproportionality
What is the Purpose of…
Special Education
• Provides intervention services
• Provides equal opportunity for all learners to
access educational services
• Ensures equal opportunity and access for
every child to be academically successful
Think-Pair-Share
1. In small groups, take 5
minutes to define the
following terms:
Equality, Equity,
Access, Opportunity,
Fairness, and Culture.
2. As your group defines
these terms, discuss
examples of these
terms in your district.
Equality
Equity
Fairness
Culture
Access
Opportunity
Equality
General Equality
• The state or quality of
being equal;
correspondence in
quantity, degree, value,
rank, or ability.
Educational Equality
• The principal of allocating
educational resources with
an emphasis on the equal
distribution of inputs
without attention given to
the corresponding outputs.
Equity
General Equity
Educational Equity
• “The principle of
• “The principle of altering
supplementing the law to
current practices and
perspectives to teach for
ensure equality or justice.”
social transformation and
to promote equitable
learning outcomes for
students for all social
groups.”
From: Lee, E. (2002)
Access
• The right or opportunity to
use or benefit from
resources
• Educational access:
means the right to the
resources for success.
• Access scenarios:
– Affirmative action, quotas,
etc.
– GI bill for housing and
college
– Fair criteria for gifted and
talented/AP/honors
Opportunity
• General opportunity: an
• Opportunity scenarios:
amount of time or a
– AP/honors courses
situation in which
– Affirmative action, quotas,
etc.
something can be done
– GI bill
• Educational opportunity
means equitable inputs in
order to attain equitable
outputs.
From: Lee, E. (2002)
Fairness
• The chance of getting what we want in life.
• How our chance for success compares with others (may
not always look the same).
From: Mithaug, D. E. (1996)
Fairness is the
process through
which equity is
achieved.
Disproportionality is…
• The over-representation of a specific group in special
education programs or disciplinary outcomes relative
to the presence of this group in the overall student
population, and/or
• The under-representation of a specific group in
accessing intervention services, resources, programs,
rigorous curriculum and instruction relative to the
presence of this group in the overall student
population
SOURCE:U.S. Department of Education
Who is affected by disproportionality?
WHY SHOULD WE PAY
ATTENTION TO
DISPROPORTIONALITY?
Why Should we be Concerned about
Disproportionality?
Special Education
Discipline
•
•
Students in special education
programs are likely to encounter a
limited, less rigorous curriculum
(Harry & Klingner, 2006)
•
Students in special education
programs can have less access to
•
“academically able” peers
(Donovan & Cross, 2002)
•
Once students are receiving
special education services, they
tend to remain in special
education classes (Harry &
Klingner, 2006)
•
Students with discipline issues are
less likely to complete high school
and discipline issues in earlier
grades are predictive of discipline
issues in latter grades (Tobin &
Sugai, 1999)
Students in schools with stricter
discipline policies (e.g., zero
tolerance) are less attached to their
school (McNeely, Nonnomaker, &
Blum, 2002)
Black and Latino students are more
likely to be given out of school
suspensions or expulsions for the
same behavior than their White
peers (Skiba et al., 2011)
Think-Pair-Share
Video - Melissa Harris-Perry
Based on the clip, how would you answer the question:
Why should we be concerned about disproportionality?
Disproportionality DOES NOT Just Happen
Disproportionality is often times NOT a special education issue
Defining Disproportionality within the
Root Cause Process
Disproportionality DOES NOT Just
Happen
Compounding
Factors
Root Cause
The initial start
of the problem
Policies,
practices, and
beliefs that
magnify,
maintain, or fail
to address the
root cause
Disproportionality
The racialized
outcome that is
ultimately
measured
Disproportionality is often times NOT a
special education issue
District/
School
Wide
Interventions
and
Supports
Special
Education
While disproportionality
citations come from special
education laws, the factors
that lead to it are
oftentimes outside of the
realm of special education
Throughout the Root Cause process we
are going to understand how:
Disproportionality manifests in beliefs, policies
and practices (BPP)
—and—
How changing beliefs, policies and practices can
positively affect student outcomes.
Factors that Influence Disproportionality
(Causes and Solutions)
• Policies: the written guidelines that frame these
domains within or in relation to school
• Practices: the activities in these domains (formal and
informal)
• Beliefs: the ideas held by school personnel in
engaging in specific practices or implementing school
policies
Disproportionality has more than one cause and
more than one solution
Disproportionality is a
result of the interactions
between policies,
practices, and beliefs
that manifest in various
areas
Policy
Practice
Belief
Disproportionality Is Complex
Educational
Opportunity
Family and
Community
Teacher
Expectations and
Misconceptions
Instruction and
Assessment
Interventions and
Referrals
Discipline Policies and
Practices
Cultural Dissonance
Disproportionality
Sociodemographics
Organizing Schools For Improvement (Bryk
et al. 2010)
Key Concepts
5 Essential Supports for
School Change
-“ it’s like baking a cake”
1) school leadership
-Leadership is the “catalyst
for change” across all
2) parent and community
essential supports
ties
-The supports continuously
3) professional capacity of
interact and influence each
staff and faculty
other in complex ways
4) student centered
- Relational Trust--or the
learning climate
quality of relationships–
5) instructional guidance
strengthens the school
system.
change process
Moving from Root Causes to Solutions
Root Causes
Beliefs, Polices and Practices influence both the Root Causes
and Solutions
Leadership
Family and
Community Ties
Student Centered
Learning Climate
Professional Staff
Capacity
Instructional
Guidance
Take a moment to jot any new
ideas onto your “IDEAS” sheet
Critical Questions:
•
What interventions do we have in
place in our classrooms and in
our schools?
PART 3: Looking at
Ourselves
ACTIVITY: The School Early Intervention and
Classification Process
Stage 1: Student exhibits
problem behavior/need
Stage 2: A school
committee considers the
student referral
• Please discuss this student’s
journey through the
intervention and classification
process and record the
following:
1.
Stage 3: The student is
evaluated by a specialist
depending on the need that
is exhibited
2.
Stage 4: The student
receives an individual
education plan (IEP)
3.
key policies and practices
that may affect or determine
the student’s outcome at each
of the stages
critical questions that should
be considered at of the stages
possible outcomes.
ACTIVITY: The School Discipline Process
Stage 1: Student exhibits
problem behavior/need
Stage 2: Teacher submits a
referral to the building
administrator for her/him to
consider
Stage 3: The school
administrator receives and
considers the disciplinary
referral
Stage 4: The school
administrator recommends
student be suspended
• Please discuss this student’s
journey through the
discipline process and
record the following:
1.
2.
3.
key policies and practices
that may affect or
determine the student’s
outcome at each of the
stages
critical questions that
should be considered at of
the stages
possible outcomes.
Reflection Questions
• Who are the students that are classified as disabled
in your school?
• Who are the students that are being suspended or
disciplined the most?
• What grades are students referred to special
education?
• What are the reasons they are referred to special
education? Or for a disciplinary referral?
• What has been provided for them prior to their referral
to special education? Or prior to a disciplinary
consequence?
Take a moment to jot any new
ideas onto your “IDEAS” sheet
Critical Questions:
•
Are there any patterns that we
can draw from this data?
•
What questions are posed by this
data?
PART 4: Looking at
the Data Around
Disproportionality
THE NATIONAL
PUBLIC SCHOOL PICTURE
National Public School Achievement
4th Grade NAEP (2011)
Math
Reading
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
Advanced
0%
Advanced
0%
All Students
All Students
Proficient
-20%
-40%
Proficient
-20%
Basic and
Below Basic
-40%
-60%
-60%
-80%
-80%
From: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Basic or
Below Basic
National Public School Achievement
4th Grade NAEP, by Race/Ethnicity (2011)
Math
Reading
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
Advanced
0%
White Black Latino Asian
-20%
-40%
Proficient
Basic or
Below Basic
Advanced
0%
White Black Latino Asian
-20%
-40%
-60%
-60%
-80%
-80%
-100%
-100%
From: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Proficient
Basic or
Below Basic
National Public School Achievement
8th Grade NAEP (2011)
Math
Reading
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
Advanced
0%
Advanced
0%
All Students
All Students
Proficient
-20%
-40%
Proficient
-20%
Basic or
Below Basic
-40%
-60%
-60%
-80%
-80%
From: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Basic or
Below Basic
National Public School Achievement
8th Grade NAEP, by Race/Ethnicity (2009)
Math
Reading
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
Advanced
0%
White Black Latino Asian
-20%
-40%
Proficient
Basic or
Below Basic
Advanced
0%
White Black Latino Asian
-20%
-40%
-60%
-60%
-80%
-80%
-100%
-100%
From: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Proficient
Basic or
Below Basic
The National Achievement Gap
Math (2011)
Reading (2011)
• 8th Grade: Black students
on average scored 31 points
lower than White students
and Latino students on
average scored 23 points
lower than White students
• 8th Grade: Black students on
average scored 25 points
lower than White students
and Latino students on
average scored 22 points
lower than White students
• 4th Grade: Black students on • 4th Grade: Black students on
average scored 25 points
average scored 25 points
lower than White students
lower than White students
and Latino Students on
and Latino Students on
average scored 20 points
average scored 24 points
lower than White students
lower than White students
BY THE END OF HIGH SCHOOL
Black and Latino 17-Year-Olds Perform as well as
White 13-Year-Olds in Math (2008)
Percent of Students
70
60
50
17-year-old Black
students
40
30
17-year-old Hispanic
students
20
13-year-old White
students
10
0
200
250
300
Performance Level
350
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
Black and Latino 17-Year-Olds Perform as well as
White 13-Year-Olds in Reading (2008)
Percent of Students
60
50
40
17-year-old Black
students
30
17-year-old Hispanic
students
20
13-year-old White
students
10
0
200
250
300
Performance Level
350
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
CONTROLLING FOR POVERTY
(NATIONAL)
National Public School 4th Grade NAEP Scores by
Race/Ethnicity and Eligibility for Free or Reduced
Lunch (2009)
Unclassified
American Indian
Asian/Pacific Island
Black students
who do not qualify
for the National
Lunch Program
score as well as
White students who
do qualify for the
National Lunch
Program
Hispanic
Black
White
175
185
195
205
Not eligible Average scale score
215
225
235
Eligible Average scale score
245
255
THE NEW YORK STATE
PUBLIC SCHOOL PICTURE
The New York State Achievement Gap
New York State trends reflect national
patterns. There are prevalent disparities
by race and ethnicity in both Math and
English
CONTROLLING FOR POVERTY
(NEW YORK STATE)
New York State 4th Grade NAEP Scores by
Race/Ethnicity and Eligibility for Free or Reduced
Lunch (2009)
Asian/Pacific Island
Hispanic
Black students
who do not qualify
for the National
Lunch Program
score as well as
White students
who do qualify for
the National Lunch
Program
Black
White
175
185
195
205
Not eligible Average scale score
215
225
235
Eligible Average scale score
245
255
Critical Questions:
• What are some key
disproportionality indicators in your
district and what do they mean?
PART 5: Looking at
disproportionality in
our district
SCHOOL LEVEL DATA:
Tools We Can Use to Better Understand
Disproportionality
• School Level Data Book: the resource
provides practitioners the opportunity to
explore school level data and to understand
disciplinary patterns in their schools
• Equity Calendar: the resource provides a
framework for practitioners to critically think
about school level data, disaggregated by
race, to address disparate outcomes
ACTIVITY
Citation Data Book and Mapping Root
Causes
Exploring Trends in Your District
What does your data say?
How do the trends in data relate to common root causes of
disproportionality?
ACHIEVEMENT AND
ENROLLMENT DATA
Enrollment Data Over Time-SAMPLE
80%
2500
70%
60%
American
Indian
2000
50%
Black or
African
American
40%
1500
30%
20%
10%
Hispanic or
Latino
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Asian
1000
White
0%
500
Multiracial
0
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
3rd Grade Math and ELA-SAMPLE
Grade 3 Mathematics
Grade 3 ELA
100%
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
Level 4
20%
Level 3
0%
Black
-20%
Hispanic White
Level 1 or Level
2
40%
Level 4
20%
Level 3
0%
Black
-20%
-40%
-40%
-60%
-60%
-80%
-80%
Hispanic White
Level 1 or Level
2
8th Grade Math and ELA-SAMPLE
Grade 8 Mathematics
Grade 8 ELA
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
Level 4
40%
Level 4
20%
Level 3
20%
0%
Black
-20%
Hispanic White
Level 1 or Level
2
Level 3
0%
Black
-20%
-40%
-40%
-60%
-60%
Hispanic
White
Level 1 or Level
2
Reflection Questions
• How does your enrollment data relate to common
Root Causes of Disproportionality?
• Are there disparities in achievement? How do these
relate to common Root Causes of Disproportionality?
Take a moment to jot any new
ideas onto your “IDEAS” sheet
How do we measure
disproportionality?
Methods of Data Analysis
Three main data tools (calculations) are used to
explore special education data: classification rate,
composition index, and relative risk ratio.
Methods for Identifying Disproportionality
Risk Index/Rate
Composition Index
Relative Risk Ratio
The risk index identifies at
what rate, or percentage of
risk, students of a
particular racial/ethnic
group have in a particular
outcome.
The composition index
gives the proportion of
students by race/ethnicity
in a particular outcome.
Relative risk ratios are
comparisons of the risks of
a particular outcome of
one group to the risk of the
remaining group(s)
experiencing the same
outcome.
Composition indexes are
used to determine if a
particular group is over- or
underrepresented in a
particular outcome.
A risk ratio of 1 indicates
that there is equal risk. An
increase in risk ratio is
indicative of increased risk.
Calculating Relative Risk:
Classification (SPP Indicator 9)
The Idea
The Formula
The Risk of Black Students
Being Classified SWD
Compared to
The Risk of All Other
Students Being Classified
SWD
(Black SWD ÷ Black
enrollment)
÷
[(Total SWD – Black SWD) ÷
(Total enrollment – Black
enrollment)]
New York State Citation Information
Indicator 4
Refers to discipline and suspension or
expulsion of students with disabilities
for greater than 10 days (4a) and by
race/ethnicity for greater than 10 days
(4b)
[20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A); 1412(a)(22)]
Indicator 9
Discrepancy:
4a: 2.7%
4b: 2.3%
* review of students records to see if positive behavioral supports have been
used
* review of Individual Education Plans to see if they reflect the use of
behavioral supports and interventions prior to suspension.
Disproportionality: * review determining whether or not Behavioral Intervention Plans have been
2.0
developed and utilized
*review determining if Manifestation Determination hearings occurred prior
to suspension or expulsion
*review determining if a proper interim alternative educational setting was
provided if a student was suspended.
Disproportionality:
2.5
*review of school wide approaches and pre referral interventions
*review of the referral process for students to special education
* review of the evaluation of practices for students with disabilities
*review of evaluation of the districts eligibility determinants for special
education
Disproportionality
10a: 4.0
10b: 2.0
*review of how students are evaluated for special education
*review of the content of student Individual Education Plan
*review of how special education problem solving teams recommend
students for classification
Refers to disproportionate identification
of racial and ethnic groups for special
education and related services as a result
of inappropriate identification.
[20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C)]
Indicator 10
Refers to disproportionate
representation of students with
disabilities by classification in specific
disability categories (10a) and by
placement (10b) by race/ethnicity
[20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C)]
[20 U.S.C. 1418(d)(1)]
ACTIVITY
Citation Data Book and Mapping Root
Causes
Exploring Trends in Your District
What does your data say?
How do the trends in data relate to common root causes of
disproportionality?
SPECIAL EDUCATION DATA
SAMPLE-Classification Rate (Judgmental
Categories)
20%
18.14%
18%
16%
14%
12%
Black
10.78%
10%
8.21%
Hispanic or Latino
8.82%
8%
White (not of
Hispanic Origin)
Total
6%
4%
2%
0%
Classification Rate
• Fewer than 9% of all students
in Elwood are classified as
students with disabilities in
the “judgmental categories” –
i.e., ED, LD, ID, OHI, SLI, and
Autism.
• Over 18% of all Black
students in Elwood are
classified as students with
disabilities in the “judgmental
categories.”
SAMPLE-Relative Risk of Being Classified
Disabled (Judgmental Categories)
2.40
2.27
2.20
2.00
1.80
Black
1.60
Hispanic or Latino
1.40
1.26
White (not of
Hispanic Origin)
1.20
1.00
Risk Ratio
0.80
0.79
0.60
0.40
• Black students are more than
twice as likely to be classified
as students with disabilities
(in the judgmental categories)
compared to all other
students.
SAMPLE-Classification Rate by Disability
Category
8%
7%
6%
5%
Black
4%
Hispanic or Latino
3%
White (not of
Hispanic Origin)
2%
1%
0%
ED
LD
ID
OHI
SLI
AUT
• Black students have elevated
classification rates in the
categories of learning
disability and speech/
language impairment.
• White and Hispanic and
Latino students have elevated
classification rates in the
categories of other health
impaired.
SAMPLE-Relative Risk of Being Classified
Speech/ Language Impaired (SLI) (SPP Indicator
10a)
5.00
4.73
4.50
4.00
3.50
Black
3.00
Hispanic or Latino
2.50
2.00
White (not of
Hispanic Origin)
1.70
1.50
1.00
Risk Ratio
0.50
0.00
0.36
• Black students are nearly five
times as likely to be classified
as students with a speech/
language impairment
compared to all other
students.
SAMPLE-Relative Risk of Being Classified
Learning Disabled (LD) (SPP Indicator 10a)
3.50
• Black students are more than
three times as likely to be
classified as students with
learning disabilities compared
to all other students
3.32
3.00
2.50
Black
2.00
Hispanic or Latino
1.50
1.36
White (not of
Hispanic Origin)
1.00
Risk Ratio
0.50
0.00
0.66
Reflection Questions
• How does your special education data relate to
common Root Causes of Disproportionality?
• Are there disparities in your special education data?
How do these disparities relate to common Root
Causes of Disproportionality?
Take a moment to jot any new
ideas onto your “IDEAS” sheet
PART 6: Reflection,
wrap-up, and
debriefing
Critical Questions:
• What is disproportionality?
• Who is affected by disproportionality?
• What interventions do we have in place
in our classrooms and in our schools?
• Are there any patterns that we can draw
from this data?
• What questions are posed by this data?
• What are some key disproportionality
indicators in your district and what do
they mean?
Homework Assignment
• Reading:
– White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack
• What is the invisible knapsack?
• What is in your invisible knapsack?
• How might our “knapsack shape our view of the world?
• Share your Knowledge:
– Share with a colleague what you have learned about
disproportionality
• Exploring Root Causes:
– Continue to work on your districts Root Cause Chart
Wrap-up and Debriefing
• Trainings meeting expectations
• Further areas of interest based on today’s training
• Potential barriers
• What are some things we learned?
• What are some questions we still have?
Evaluate Training
Questions, Comments, or Concerns:
ADD NAME AND EMAIL
Ms. Sutton’s Dilemma:
a need for special education
Ms. Sutton moves about her fourth grade classroom checking to see which of
her students continues to have difficulty with the newly introduced math process
of long division. Suddenly, a loud crash draws her attention away from helping
students to the commotion in the center of the room. Fallen desks and papers
cover the floor. Andy stands in the middle of the havoc.
Ms. Sutton breathes deeply. She thinks, “When will somebody do something
for this child? After all, his test scores show he has difficulty with reading and
mathematics. Hasn’t this child struggled long enough to be considered for special
education? Can’t the special education classes in this school give him more
attention than he can possibly get in a general education class of 30 students?”
When Andy engages in class discussions on topics he enjoys, his comments
and contributions reflect his regular viewing of educational programs on TV, but
his overall performance is low. Ms. Sutton desperately wants to help him, but
what are her options? Determined not to let him fail, Ms. Sutton decides to refer
him for a special education evaluation. She sees this as her only option to get
help for him.
From: Truth in Labeling: Disproportionality in Special Education
Think-Pair-Share: Ms. Sutton and Andy
•
•
•
•
What are Ms. Sutton’s options?
Who knows a student similar to Andy?
What are the problems?
What’s going to happen to Andy?
Looking at the situation from multiple
perspectives
Student (Andy)
Teacher (Ms. Sutton)
Administrative
What could Andy have done in
order to prevent this incident
from occurring?
What could have been done
for Andy prior to incident in
order to prevent it?
What supports could the
administration/school put into
place to support Ms. Sutton
and Andy prior to this incident
in order to prevent it?
What is the function of Andy’s
behavior?
Based on this situation, what
are some possible problems
that Andy could be
experiencing?
How might you confirm and
address them?
Based on this situation, what
are some possible problems
that Ms Sutton could be
experiencing?
How might you confirm and
address them?
What additional supports are
needed?
What additional supports are
needed?
What additional supports are
needed?
What is going to happen to Andy?