22
Chapter 4
FINDINGS
The findings of this meta-analysis of research will be presented by a
chronological summary of each study analyzed (see Table 2), followed by an analysis and
discussion of the quantitative variables and qualitative variables (see also Table 3).
Chronological study-by-study description
Leone (1994) examined the procedural and substantive aspects of special
education services for incarcerated youth with disabilities in a large midwestern state.
The purpose of this study was to examine the special education services being provided
within the youth correctional facility and determine the factors that might be impeding
the facilities ability to provide the needed, appropriate educational services. In his study
he observed, sat in on case management meetings, interviewed 15 incarcerated youth and
15 staff members, and reviewed 154 youth files. In addition, he examined current and
archival documents including information on federal and state statutes and the special
education regulations for the state. Leone (1994) found that the Department of Juvenile
Services only provided special education services to those youth who had been identified
as having a disability within the public schools prior to their entry into the facility.
Therefore, about 20% of the population were receiving services whereas professional
literature suggested that the percentage should have been much higher. In addition, there
was more than a 4-month backlog of files of students who did receive special education
services prior to incarceration. These students had yet to be placed appropriately within
the facility.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Findings revealed that students IEPs were not being held and they were receiving three
times fewer services while incarcerated. It was thought that parental consent had to be
given for the exchange of records so the public schools were not releasing special
education files to the Department of Juvenile Services. Although they had been receiving
counseling within their public schools, no youth were getting counseling while in
Department of Juvenile Services. Youth with or suspected of having disabilities received
disciplinary action and spent more time in confinement than those without disabilities.
Archwamety and Katsiyannis (2000) wanted to know whether the remedial group
an incarcerated youth is placed in correlates with their recidivism or parole violation rate.
In addition, they looked to identify predictors of incarcerated youth being placed into a
remedial group and whether there were factors associated with recidivism or parole.
Archwamety and Katsiyannis examined the files of 505 incarcerated male youths in a
Nebraska correctional youth facility. Using a Chi-square analysis they found a
relationship between recidivism and academic achievement, especially in the area of
mathematics. There were significant differences between all three groups, math, reading,
and control, in the variables: recidivism, parole violation, and race. Although the control
group had a significantly lower rate of recidivism, no significant difference was found
between the reading group and the math group in recidivism or parole violation. Further,
academic achievement was a significant factor with the association of youth delinquency
as well as recidivism. Incarcerated youth within the remedial math or reading groups
were nearly twice as likely to experience recidivism or have a parole violation. Within
this study, the math group had the highest likeliness of problems (younger age, lower
29
achievement in all areas, and lower cognitive functioning). The researchers noted that
cognitive factors (IQ) were the most important predictor of a youth’s group. The second
most important predictor was race, followed by factors such as recidivism, parole
violation, age at first offense, and age at first commitment. Archwamety and Katsiyannis
(2000) went further to hypothesize that although IQ was not that surprising as having
such an implication on predicting a youth’s status, but that verbal IQ actually predicts
academic remediation better than performance IQ, which in turn notes the importance of
language acquisition.
Foley (2002) conducted a meta-analysis of research studies reviewing the data on
the academic achievement of incarcerated youth who were 21 years old or younger, and
the educational programs implemented in the detention or correctional center. After
examination it was determined that the percentage of youth receiving special education
services while incarcerated was between 20% and 40% percent across the nation. The
research on academic achievement of incarcerated youth consistently noted that
incarcerated youth were one to several years below the youth’s current grade level.
Looking specifically at reading, incarcerated youth on average scored below grade level
in the area of reading and that the population experience significant reading deficits.
Writing skills of delinquents and youth with learning disabilities were more notably an
issue with the skills required and therefore had more errors in writing, than nondisabled
youth. The analysis conducted on the academic achievement rates in the area of math
reported that incarcerated youth receiving special education services had significantly
lower scores when compared to youth without disabilities. The meta-analysis revealed
30
that in comparison of non-delinquent youth, incarcerated youth have significant deficits
of academic achievement levels in reading, math, and written and oral language. There
was also a correlation between academic achievement rates and recidivism.
Baltodano, Harris, and Rutherford (2005) studied the relationship between the
academic achievement of incarcerated youth and the variables of ethnicity, disability, and
age. The population for this study included 174 incarcerated male youth from the ages of
13 to 17 years housed in a juvenile correctional facility in Arizona. They found that
approximately 31% of youth in corrections were identified as special education. The
breakdown of special education categories for this population was: 32% emotional
disturbance (ED), 28% specific learning disability (SLD), 12% ED as the primary and
SLD as the secondary disability. When looking at the demographics, of the students
receiving services, 44% were Caucasian, 21% were Hispanic, 12% were African
American, and 5% were Native American. Baltodano et al. (2005) found that on average,
the male youths had scores at a grade equivalency of eighth grade. The average age
equivalency in reading was at eighth grade, except for letter-word identification, which
was at the ninth grade level. The reading fluency for the male youths was above the
benchmarks established for the third, fourth, and fifth grade level. The findings when
reviewing at the relationship between youth demographics and academic achievement
were significant. Native American youth had the lowest standard scores, while the
highest scores were either the Caucasian or the “Other” youth. There was also a
significant difference between the fluency scores with Native American students reading
the fewest words per minute. Reviewing the results of the relationship between age and
31
academic achievement indicated no significant differences between any of the academic
achievement variables and the youth’s age. Finally, when comparing the relationship
between the youth’s special education eligibility and academic achievement with those
students who did not qualify for special education, the researchers found significance on
the WJIII standard scores, as well as significance in the number of words read on the
fluency scores. Youth identified as special education scored considerably lower on
academic achievement assessments than peers not qualified for special education. The
indication was that incarcerated youth are functioning below the mean of all measures of
academic achievement.
A national survey conducted by Quinn, Rutherford, Leone, Osher, and Poirier
(2005) was done to gain a better understanding of the overwhelming number of
incarcerated youth who received special education services within a youth correctional
facility in comparison to the national average. Researchers had a 76% response rate from
survey participants, bringing the total number involved in this survey to 33,831 juveniles
who were incarcerated. Of the total number of incarcerated youth, 81% were enrolled in
some type of educational program. The breakdown of youth eligible for special education
services of the total was 8,613 youth. The two special education categories with the
highest prevalence among incarcerated youth were emotional disturbance (ED) and
specific learning disability (SLD).
Krezmien, Mulcahy, and Leone (2008) investigated the intake process of 521
detained or incarcerated male youths and determine whether their special education status
and placement into a detention or commitment setting can be predicted with the
32
information obtained. They found that about 45% of the participants were enrolled in
special education, of this group, 45% were identified with an emotional or behavioral
disorder, 26.4% were identified with a learning disability, and 17% were identified with
an Other Health Impairment (including ADHD). The mean standard scores for math and
reading assessments were low for youths in both settings (special and general education),
although even lower for the special education participants. Mean scores were low across
racial groups; however, the lowest scores were from the African American participants.
When compared to the same-aged peers, all detained and incarcerated students were
about four years behind in reading and math. It was also found that prior therapy, prior
psychotropic medication use, and the achievement were each predictive of special
education status. The outcomes for achievement were significantly lower for special
education students than for general education students. It was noted that age, race, and
placement were not predictive of special education status. When comparing the setting of
detention center (a temporary placement) and commitment facility (a long-term secure
placement), age and race were predictive of placement. The odds for age were significant.
When reviewing the variable of race as a prediction of placement, it was significant for
African American participants. The statistics indicated odds were 2.14 times greater for
African American than White students being placed in a detention center. Additionally,
African Americans were more likely to be placed in a commitment facility than that of
their White peers. Krezmien et al. (2008) concurred with current research that found
serious academic and mental health problems among the incarcerated youth population.
The percentage of incarcerated youth receiving special education services while in such
33
settings is extremely high in comparison to youth in public schools, which typically serve
10% of students.
For the final study included in this meta-analysis, Harris, Baltodano, Bal,
Jolivette, and Malcahy (2009) assessed the reading achievement of 447 youth, ages 12 to
21 years, incarcerated in one of three juvenile correction facilities. There was a facility in
a Southwestern state, in a Southeastern state, and in a Mid-Atlantic state. They wanted to
determine the current reading achievement levels for incarcerated youth and then
investigate the correlation between their achievement and the variables, age, ethnicity,
and disability. When conducting a cross comparison of the three regions, Harris, et al.
(2009) started with age and found that although the age ranges did vary, the average age
was similar across the three, roughly 16 years old. The ethnicity breakdown was 51.8%
African American, 23.9% Hispanic, and 23% European American, the remaining
categories of ethnicity made up for only 1% of the participants and were not included.
Distinct differences were found when examining the ethnic composition by location.
Both the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic populations were predominantly African American
(86.8% and 73.3%). The Southwest facility had a large percentage of Hispanics (54%)
followed by European Americans (34.5%), and African Americans (10.2%). In reviewing
special education statistics, 151 of the 455 youth were indentified as receiving special
education services. The mean percentage across all the sites was 33.3%. The majority,
49.3% of the youth were indentified under the classification of ED or a SLD (24.3%),
with 11% being classified as MR, and 8.8% under Other Health Impairments (OHI). The
remaining 6.6% were identified as having a Speech and Language Impairment (SLI). The
34
three sites had a similar percentage of youth identified as receiving special education
services. When comparing reading achievement, youth at all three sites performed one
standard deviation score below the mean on the word identification, word attack, and
passage comprehension subtests of the WJIII. Further investigation yielded no correlation
between achievement and age. However, when looking at the correlation between
achievement and ethnicity, the researchers found significant differences among the three
ethnic categories on all measures. On letter word identification, significant differences
were found between African Americans and the other two groups. On word attack
significant differences were found between European Americans and African Americans.
In passage comprehension significant differences were found between European
Americans and the other two groups. A review of special education statistics found a
significant difference between all three subtests of the WJIII between special education
and non-special education students. However, there was no significant correlation
between ethnicity and special education status. Looking further, those youth under the
special education classification of SLI performed better on the word identification and
passage comprehension subtests those students with other disability categories. On the
word attack subtest those students with an ED classification scored higher. Youth labeled
MR had the lowest scores on all subtests of achievement. This study confirmed that male
students in juvenile correctional facilities have below-average reading achievement when
compared to the general education students in public schools. Furthermore, current
research provided evidence that students with disabilities are over-represented in juvenile
correctional facilities, as was indicated in previous research. Although it should be noted
35
that in this study, European Americans identified as receiving special education services,
on average scored higher than those in other ethnic groups who were also in special
education.
Summary analysis of key variables
Data from this analysis is reported within Table 3.
Demographics. Of the four studies, which reported the percentage of youth
receiving special education services, the percentages staggered from 32% to 44.7%. The
average was 35.8%. The special education categories reported were: SLD, ED, MR, OHI
(including ADHD), and SLI. In the four studies that categorized the youths’ special
education classification, emotional disturbance was the highest percentage (54.5%,
47.7%, 44%, and 49.3%) followed by specific learning disability (40.4%, 38.6%, 26.4%,
and 24.3%). All demographics reporting the special education category were based on the
incarcerated youth’s primary diagnosis; therefore no secondary diagnoses were included
in percentages. The reason for reporting this data was to ensure each incarcerated youth
would only be counted once and the only study that indicated a further breakdown on
multiple disabilities was Baltodano et al. (2005). Although the ethnicity of the youth
receiving special education fluctuated within the different studies, the three prominent
groups were Caucasian with an average of 32.5%, Latino with an average of 34.6%, and
African American with an average of 29.1%. Only one study, Baltodano et al. (2005)
included the numbers for Native Americans and Mexican Nationals and Krezmien et al.
(2009) were the only ones to report categories of mixed and other within their ethnicity
numbers.
36
Correlations. Of the total seven studies included in this meta-analysis, four had
quantitative data reported. Three out of these quantitative studies showed a significant
correlation in the ethnicity of an incarcerated youth and their academic achievement
scores. The academic achievement scores in these studies were derived from the
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJIII) and Dynamic Indicators of Basic
Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) and noted. Three out of four studies showed a correlation
between incarcerated youth receiving special education services and their academic
achievement scores. Three out of four studies examined whether there was a significant
correlation between the age of an incarcerated youth and his academic achievement.
However, only Archwamety & Katsiyannis, 2000 found a significant correlation between
an age and academic achievement scores. One study showed a significant correlation
between an incarcerated youth’s cognitive abilities and the likelihood of recidivism
(Archwamety & Katsiyannis, 2000). The incarcerated youths’ cognitive abilities were
measured using pretests from the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT) within
their files and given the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children- Revised (WISC-R) at
time of study.
37
38