A Self Assessment of District Policies, Procedures, and Practices
for Addressing Disproportionality in
Arkansas Public Schools
Mike Crowley, Administrator
Beverly Smart, Educational Consultant
Lynn Springfield, Educational Consultant
Susan Shurley, Supervisor
Jody Fields, Director IDEA Data & Research
Arkansas Department of Education, Special Education
Monitoring/Program Effectiveness
Updated September 2007
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Process for Determining That a School District is Triggered in the Area of Disproportionality ............................................................... 4
Identifying and Analyzing District Data on Disproportionality ................................................................................................................. 5
Check list for Five Procedureal Areas: ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
Intervention ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7
Referral .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Evaluation .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Placement ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Procedural Safeguards...................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality ............................................................................................ 12
Attach Evidence to Support Affirmative Responses
2
Addressing the Challenge of Disproportionality in Arkansas Public Schools
Introduction
The major issue surrounding the concept of disproportionality in special education is the probability of discriminating against students based on race,
ethnicity, and special education category. The Arkansas Department of Special Education has long been concerned about the excessive numbers of
students placed in special education programs. More recently there is a growing concern for the under identification of students based on race,
ethnicity, and special education category. In addition to the overall number of children receiving special education services, the number of culturally
and linguistically diverse students placed in special education has been and continues to be of concern.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the No Child Left Behind Act require a state agency to collect program information on
disproportionality in the state’s special education programs, specifically, Section 618 of the IDEA program information.
(C) Disproportionality requires the following:
(1) In general, each state that receives assistance under this part … shall provide for the collection and examination of data to determine if
significant disproportionality based on race is occurring in the State with respect to --(A) the identification of children as children with disabilities, including the identification of children as children with disabilities in
accordance with a particular impairment…; and
(B) the placement in particular educational settings of such children.
An understanding of the distinction between the percent of the program by group and the percent of group in the programs are crucial to
understanding disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education. Some have misunderstood the
“disproportionate representation” phenomenon to mean that large percentages of a culturally and linguistically diverse group, for example, African
American, are placed in a special education program, while in fact, the term means that the percentage of culturally and linguistically diverse students
in the program is larger than the percentage of that group in the educational system as a whole.
When a school district is cited for disproportionality of culturally and linguistically diverse students receiving special education services, being
placed in special education categories of mental retardation or emotionally disturbed and/or being served in pullout educational programs, the process
of self-evaluation should indicate to the district areas in which improvement can occur, as well as, areas in which the district excels. The process of
examining the district’s identification, evaluation, and placement procedures and practices will enable the district to plan and implement effective
interventions to remediate the situation.
The underlying assumptions of discrimination are associated with the normalization construct and the causation of poor performance being inherently
within the child. If children’s educational experiences are going to be affected by how they perform on norm-based assessment instruments, it is
important that these assessments be valid with regard to race and ethnicity. This suggests that culturally and linguistically diverse student
performance should be included in the normative sample of tests being used to determine student eligibility for special education services. Likewise,
before academic performances of students can be judged to be the result of student factors alone, it is important to assess the total learning
environment, which includes curriculum content, instructional materials, quality of instruction, and psychosocial climate of the classroom. It is
3
important to be aware that placing undo importance on norm-reference assessment and child centered constructs will tend to increase the probability
that students will be placed in district special education programs.
The purpose of this self assessment is to assist school districts in determining if identified disproportionality in the district is the result of
inappropriate policies, procedures, and practices. The inappropriate policies, procedures, and practices may cause over or under identification of
culturally and linguistically diverse students (a) being referred for special education services, (b) receiving special education, (c) being placed in
specific disability categories, and/or (d) receiving these services out of general education settings more than eighty percent of the school day.
Process for Determining That a School District is “Triggered” in the Area of Disproportionality
In order to demonstrate educational equity relative to opportunity, services, and decision making, the percentage of any ethnic/racial group of
students receiving special education services in a school district should be proportionally similar to the percentage of ethnic/racial group of students’
district wide. Thus, it is important to ensure that such students in a school district are not disproportionately represented in special education in
contrast with such students in the district.
The benchmark for disproportionality over-representation is the difference between district and special education percent by race/ethnicity. This
calculation is based on those districts with less than 95% and greater than 5% in any such group. For example, the three-year average percent
African American in the district for this subset of districts was 41.09% for the 2005 school year. The difference between district and special
education percent African American was 4.541%, with a standard deviation of 8.611%. These averages and standard deviations may change from
year to year because they are based on the three most recent years of district data.
The trigger for this indicator is 1 standard deviation beyond the difference for the state, or the mean difference (4.541%) plus 1 standard deviation
(8.611%) or 13.152%. Thus, for 2007, any district that had more than 13.152% of the African American ethnic/racial group of students in special
education than in general education triggered in the area of disproportionality.
Formula Example: Percent African American in special education – Percent African American in the district = Difference between special education
and district.
In 2007 if this value was greater than 13.152 for African American, then your district triggered on this indicator. If this value was negative, you
were within the acceptable range (see table below).
Focused Monitoring Disproportionality Over-Representation Trigger Calculation:
Baseline Fiscal Years: 2002, 2003, and 2004
4
Benchmark
Standard
Deviation
Trigger
Value
American Indian/
Alaskan Native
Asian/Pacific
Islander
African
American
Hispanic
Caucasian
0.040%
-0.065%
4.541%
-1.512%
-3.004%
0.451%
0.554%
8.611%
3.875%
9.972%
0.491%
0.489%
13.152%
2.364%
6.968%
The benchmark for disproportionality under-representation is similar to the over-representation calculations. Under-representation is the negative
value of the benchmark plus two-standard deviations (-(4.541% + 8.611% + 8.611%) = -21.763%). The reason for using two-standard deviations for
under representation lie with the implementation of early intervening services which is resulting in fewer referrals to special education and in turn
fewer placements.
Formula Example: Percent African American in special education – Percent African American in the district = Difference between special education
and district.
In 2007 if this value was less than -21.763 for African American, then your district would be identified as under-identifying African American
students for special education services.
Identifying and Analyzing District Data on Disproportionality
In order for interventions to be effective, it is necessary to know why problems are occurring. To discover why problems are occurring, districts
must look at data with regard to school policies, practices, and procedures currently in place in the district. Relevant data to examine may include (1)
district October 1, 2006 enrollment by race, (2) special education December 1, 2006 child count by race, (3) special education December 1, 2006
child count by disability and race, (4) the 2006/07 referrals and placements by race, (5) special education December 1, 2006 child count by
educational placement and race, (6) Focused Monitoring Profile, and (7) other data deemed necessary by the district. The District’s October 1, 2006
(and previous years) enrollment by race can be downloaded from ADE Data Administration website at http://adedata.k12.ar.us. The special education
data, as a series of reports, will be sent to districts required to submit a self assessment.
After an analysis of district data related to problem areas and possible causes have been completed, effective interventions to meet district needs can
be selected. If this analysis is not done, interventions may not be effective. The questions/probes on the following pages are designed to help a
district “drill down” on issues related to disproportionality. “Drilling down” on available information and data may reveal trends or patterns the
district had not been aware of previously, or it may simply confirm what was already suspected.
These questions/probes are not meant to be an exhaustive list, and the district may want to examine other factors. Another source of information to
consider is the district’s “Special Education School Self-Assessment” (SESSA) data completed during the 2003/2004 school year. Remember, the
5
purpose of examining all this information is to help districts discover why problems are occurring in order to provide direction in selecting effective
interventions.
Disproportionate representation is a problem when students receive low-quality instruction. This problem may arise in the regular classroom, where
opportunities for academic success may be restricted, or in the special education classroom, where a student’s educational progress may falter due to
lowered or inappropriate expectations and goals. At a minimum, a self-evaluation of disproportionate representation should include a review of the
district’s policies and procedures in five specific areas. These include general education intervention, referral, evaluation, placement, and procedural
safeguards.
6
Checklist for Review of Five Procedural Areas: Intervention, Referral, Evaluation, Placement, and Procedural Safeguards
Intervention
If no - provide
possible
If yes – provide recommendations
evidence
and solutions
Indicators
Does the district use a specific general education intervention program for students experiencing
difficulty in the regular education classroom? (e.g. peer tutoring, after-school remediation program,
etc.) If yes, identify where teachers and others interested in the process can find a written description
of the program
Does the district (and each building within the district) have a collaborative team structure in place to
engage in problem solving and data-based decision making for both behavior and academics?
Does the district provide assistance to regular classroom teachers in the development of specific inschool regular education program accommodations and interventions? If yes, describe the
activities/professional development conducted to accomplish this undertaking.
Is the effectiveness of the accommodations and interventions reviewed regularly? If yes, describe
when and how this is accomplished.
What does the district use to progress monitor the effectiveness of academic and behavioral
interventions?
Have educational intervention programs been implemented in all district schools? A building-bybuilding review of data may reveal that some school’s programs are not as effective as others as
noted by the disproportionate numbers of culturally and linguistically diverse students enrolled in its
special education program.
If yes, how is the effectiveness of those building interventions reviewed?
7
Personnel
Involved
Referral
Referrals are greatly improved when districts can answer “yes” to each of the following questions.
Indicators
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Does the district ensure consistent application of the referral
criteria? If yes, describe how referrals are monitored.
Does the district randomly review referrals to detect any pattern
that might indicate a problem with disproportionately large
numbers of children of one race referred by a teacher of another
race? If yes, describe how this is accomplished.
Is the effectiveness of the referral policy reviewed?
If yes, describe how that effectiveness is monitored.
Evaluation
This review is intended to provide a greater understanding of the evaluation process and assist district personnel as they monitor their special education culturally
and linguistically diverse enrollments.
Indicators
Identify all tests and other educational materials currently used in
the evaluation process. Has each been validated for the specific
purpose for which it is used?
Are tests and other evaluation materials administered by trained
personnel in conformance with the instructions provided by their
producer?
Are all tests utilized by the district tailored to assess specific areas
of educational need and not merely designed to provide a single,
general intelligence quotient?
8
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Evaluation
This review is intended to provide a greater understanding of the evaluation process and assist district personnel as they monitor their special education culturally
and linguistically diverse enrollments.
Indicators
Does the district have well written criteria for the identification of
special education students in its policy/procedure manual?
Have tests been selected to ensure an accurate reflection of the
student’s aptitude or achievement, or whatever factor the test
purports to measure?
In making placement decisions, does the district use a variety of
informational sources including: aptitude tests, achievement tests,
social or cultural background, adaptive behavior, teacher
recommendations, past educational history, physical conditions
Are all the district personnel who participate in placement
decisions knowledgeable about: the student, the meaning of the
evaluations, placement options, family perspectives
Is all information, regardless of its source, carefully considered and
documented?
Identify all tests and other educational materials currently used in
the evaluation process. Indicate if each been validated for the
specific purpose for which it is used?
Are those conducting the evaluations sensitive to cultural
differences between groups?
9
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Placement
The decision to place students in special education carries with it lifetime implications that are not easily overcome. Questions to address in this area include:
Indicators
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
What steps does the district take to regularly review the ethnic
composition of its special education programs?
When racially disproportionate special education programs are
identified, how does the district determine that students are being
provided appropriate programs and services that meet their unique
educational needs?
When disproportionate representation exists among categories in
special education, how does the district examine its placement
decisions to detect any possible differences by ethnicity/race and
placement?
When racially disproportionate special education programs are
identified, what type of timely action is taken to review the
appropriateness of the program for those enrolled?
Procedural Safeguards
Procedural safeguards provide protection for students, parents, and educators alike.
Indicators
Are all records relevant to the identification, evaluation, or
educational placement of a disabled student made available to the
student’s parents?
Are district parents, staff and the community provided
demographic information about the ethnic/racial make-up of the
special education programs in the district?
10
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Procedural Safeguards
Procedural safeguards provide protection for students, parents, and educators alike.
Indicators
What steps are taken to ensure that parents of culturally and
linguistically diverse children understand the special education
process and potential benefits of participation in special education
services?
Are all evaluations conducted in a timely manner in accordance
with the state’s “Special Education Eligibility Criteria and
Program Guidelines for Children With Disabilities Ages 3-21?
In initiating the Procedural Safeguards required by the IDEA from
referral through developing and implementing IEPs, does the
district ensure that all timelines are strictly adhered to in
accordance with the state’s “Special Education and Related
Services: Procedural Requirements and Program Standards?”
11
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Review of Policies, Procedures, and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
The district provides peer tutoring, learning strategies, or other
similar programs.
1. Of the above programs, which programs are available for
grades K-12?
2. Are the above programs available in all schools within the
district? If no, in which schools are they provided?
Regular classroom teachers and administrators are trained in how
to make adaptations and accommodations within the regular
classroom to assist students who are experiencing problems.
Regular classroom teachers engage in consistent progress
monitoring and documenting the educational interventions and
the effects of such intervention(s) on a child experiencing
academic problems before referring the child for special
education.
The school district offers alternative compensatory programs
available to all students throughout the district, grades K-12.
The district has a systematic program to assist teachers in the
development of intervention strategies for students who are
experiencing problems.
Administrative personnel are involved with the multidisciplinary
team process.
The district reviews achievement scores of all students; scores
are reviewed in conjunction with (a) Identification of teachers
with high referral rates – for all ethnicities and gender; (b)
Population of individual classes by ethnicity; (c) and staffing
ratios.
The district provides internal monitoring for its special education
12
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
programs.
The district provides professional development and training for
changes in instructional techniques that match students’ learning
styles.
The schools evaluate how materials/instructions are presented to
students.
Schools check for mismatches of student skills/deficits to
teaching approaches.
The district keeps data on the amount of progress by students in
special education programs, i.e. pre and post evaluation using
criterion referenced instruments.
Data on student achievement in special education programs are
being kept according to student ethnicity/race, gender, grade,
school, class, and type of placement.
The district uses special education achievement data to identify
problem areas with the learning process.
The district has considered a variety of factors which may be
adversely impacting student learning, such as:
(a) lack of instruction and (b) lack of prerequisites for acquisition
of new skills or social factors such as: (a) the number of schools
attended (i.e. mobility) and (b) the support system
The district provides inservice to:
 review literature and research regarding teacher expectations
for all ethnic/cultural differences especially black males;
 observe/provide feedback to teacher; and
 monitor teacher behavior on an ongoing basis.
13
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
Regular classroom teachers and administrators are trained in the
characteristics of various disabling conditions.
Regular classroom teachers and administrators are trained in
what their responsibilities are prior to referral being made and
after a referral has been made.
The district keeps data that furnishes the following information
related to referrals:
 Number of referrals made by school and individual teacher;
 Number of referrals made according to student age, grade,
gender and ethnicity/race;
 Number of referrals made versus number of placements
made;
 Number of students transferring into the district that are
receiving special education services.
Psychological, Educational Examiners, and Speech/Language
Pathologists employed by or contracted with the district receive
inservice training concerning current best practices in evaluation
procedures.
A multidisciplinary team of professionals with knowledge in the
area of suspected disabilities conducts the evaluation.
Multidisciplinary team members have received training that
delineates for them each person’s specific areas of responsibility.
The district has effective procedures in place for acquiring and
disseminating to teachers and administrators significant
information concerning promising educational practices for
disabled students.
This may include such areas as:
 Identifying and evaluating new assessment instruments and
techniques;
14
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators



Promising educational practices derived from educational
research;
Providing opportunity to attend outside district inservices,
workshops and conventions;
Professional literature accessible to teachers at a central
location.
Multidisciplinary team members are knowledgeable about the
meaning of evaluation data.
The person(s) responsible for interpreting assessment data has
received training concerning the interpretation and use of
assessment results
Assessment results are reported in standard scores for
appropriate comparison.
The multidisciplinary team has considered closely the results of
instruments that measure adaptive behavior when assessing all
students.
The adaptive behavior instruments are normed for the population
for which they are being used.
Adaptive behavior instruments in use provide for measuring
adaptive behavior in the following areas: School; Home; and
Community
Assessment instruments that evaluate speech/language are
normed for the population for which they are being used.
The comprehensive evaluation involves information from an
assortment of sources (classroom teachers, parents, counselors,
others) and utilizes a variety of evaluation techniques
(observation, interviews, informal and formal testing, etc.)
The multidisciplinary team addresses the areas of exclusion
15
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
under 34 CFR 300.309 in the criteria for determining the
existence of a specific learning disability, paying particular
attention to 34 CFR 300.311(a)(6) which addresses
environmental, cultural or economic disadvantages.
The school follows requirements for multidisciplinary team
members for students suspected of having a learning disability as
outlined under 34 CFR 300.308.
The multidisciplinary team considers cultural/ethnic, as well as
dialectal variations in selecting assessment procedures and
analyzing evaluation data, especially for culturally and
linguistically diverse students suspected of being
speech/language impaired.
The multidisciplinary team reviews/considers all school records.
The evaluation report describes the reason for referral.
The evaluation report lists the purpose of assessment and the full
names of all procedures used and who administered each test.
The evaluation report contains the student’s developmental
history.
The evaluation report contains the student’s educational history.
The evaluation report provides relevant and current information
about the student’s family/home environment and functioning
within that environment.
The evaluation report provides a statement of the student’s
current level of educational functioning.
Assessment results are reported as estimates showing standard
error of measurement, rather than exact indicators of skill or
16
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
ability.
Assessment results of standardized tests are reported in terms of
standard scores for appropriate norm groups.
Evaluation reports provide appropriate alternative explanations
of performance.
Evaluation reports indicate the presence of a specific disability(s)
and the basis for that determination.
Specific recommendations for instructional and/or behavioral
interventions are offered.
Persons who conduct evaluations participate in the decisionmaking process.
The district has procedures for exploring adjustments in the
regular education program to meet the student’s needs prior to
referral for special education.
The district provides for the student if he/she is not found
eligible for special education services.
Placement decisions are determined by each child’s individual
needs being met in the least restrictive environment rather than
by the disability.
The district routinely evaluates the effectiveness of special
education programs in relation to other alternatives.
Teachers are using a variety of alternative instructional
approaches appropriate to the varied developmental levels,
learning styles, and current levels of performance of students.
All special education students are accomplishing goals and
17
Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices Effecting Disproportionality
If no - provide possible
If yes – provide evidence recommendations and solutions Personnel Involved
Indicators
objectives on the IEP.
The district has a systematic method for evaluating program
effectiveness, staff behaviors and attitudes, program impact, and
student progress.
IEP goals and objectives are developed which address deficit
skills in the areas of adaptive behavior for children identified as
mentally retarded.
The district has systematic methods for monitoring the
reintegration of special education students into regular education
which insures that:
 Methods are reviewed annually
 Students are considered for lesser restrictive environments at
least annually (i.e. at annual review)
 IEPs of secondary students reflect vocational or transition
needs.
The district keeps data that reflects the movement of special
education students both to a more restrictive environment and to
a lesser restrictive environment according to age, gender, grade,
race, and individual school.
18