The influence of diagnostic labeling on special education placement decisions

The present study investigated the possible bias of diagnostic labeling on special education placement decisions. Two groups of child study team members were given the task of either placing or both labeling and placing ten exceptional children. Results showed that the labeling process did not lead diagnosticians to place children in more restrictive educational programs. A comprehensive assessment-intervention-follow-through model that would minimize some of the potential dangers and abuses of labeling is proposed.     

Gender bias and special education referrals

Referrals for special education determine who receives special education services. The most common referring agents are regular education teachers. Today, there is a large discrepancy between the number of females to males found in learning disabilities programs. However, studies have found the number of female and male students with learning disabilities in schools is more proportional than enrollment in special education suggests. The position of this paper is that gender bias among referring agents is a major factor in the unequal distribution of males and females in learning disabilities programs.     

Ethical and legal landmines: Causal inference in special education decisions

In this article, we discuss conflict between law and science relative to the presumption in special education law that multidisciplinary teams and others identify the causes of problems giving rise to special education needs. First, we explain eligibility criteria, highlighting ambiguities therein and why criteria constitute a mandate for causal inference, and present illustrative examples of how judges have interpreted this mandate. Second, we discuss as a counterpoint school psychologists’ ethical duties to conduct evaluations based on the best available science, and highlight the clear conflicts between the law, ethics, and research. We present the biopsychosocial model of development as a potential framework for reconciling one's legal duty to infer causation with the current evidence base. We conclude with implications for policy and practice and suggestions for future research.     

Special education placement decisions made by teams and individuals: A cross-cultural perspective

The present study looked at whether special education placement decisions made by teams are superior to those made by individuals. The investigation was conducted in Puerto Rico to determine whether the benefits of the cooperative group process exist in another culture. Results indicated that teams in Puerto Rico generated significantly less variability (i.e., errors) in their placement decisions than did the same specialists acting independently.     

Special education placement decisions as a function of professional role and handicapping condition

The restrictiveness of special education placements was examined by profession (administrators, school psychologists, and special education teacters) and by type of handicapping condition (mental retardation [MR], emotional disturbance [ED], and learning disability [LD]). A total of 66 professionals (22 in each profession) assigned placement scores, using the Rucker-Gable Educational Placement Scale, on the basis of three psychological reports (one MR, ED, and LD case per professional). Results indicated that the average placement scores for the three cases combined did not differ significantly by profession. However, a significant interaction occurred, with administrators assigning the MR and ED cases to more restrictive placements than both the school psychologists and special educators, only to shift to a relatively less restrictive approach with the LD case. Implications of these findings are discussed, including a discussion of the multidisciplinary approach to clinical decision making.     

Positivity bias in higher education research

Many forms of bias have been identified in higher education research, and in educational and social research in general. This article identifies a further form of bias, positivity bias, and places it in this broader context. Positivity bias is the tendency, in some forms of published higher education research, to only or chiefly report examples of initiatives or innovations that worked and received positive evaluations. Empirical evidence of positivity bias, in the form of an analysis of a sample of published articles from selected higher education journals, is presented and discussed. Suggestions as to the causes of positivity bias and how it might be handled are presented.     

Experiencing special education

Abstract

In this study 23 former students of special classes for the emotionally and behaviorally disordered (EBD) located in mainstream school were interviewed about their school experiences. The qualitative data were gathered in two in-depth interviews in 1991 and 1995 in southern Finland. The pros and cons of special education are presented as positive and negative elements of special class treatment.The most positive elements were the special teacher and the small teaching group. The most common and signi?cant negative element was the experience of being labeled. The placement of students with special needs in special classrooms has been criticized during recent years. The positive experiences of former EBD pupils shows that there is still need for this kind of intervention for some pupils and in certain phases of their school careers. However, the quality of education must be guaranteed with the help of individualized education plans (IEPs) in cooperation with the regular class teachers.     

Profiles of Asian American students with LD at initial referral, assessment, and placement in special education

Alhough Asian American students are underrepresented in special education, recent studies have highlighted concerns about the cultural and linguistic appropriateness of the identification and placement process. This study examined the characteristics of Asian American elementary students with learning disabilities (LD) in a school district in the Southwest that was selected because it served the largest number of Asian American students with LD in the state. Due to the small numbers of students served, the sample included all Asian American students with LD in Grades K to 5 (N = 26). Variables of interest included students' demographic characteristics, factors associated with referral, assessment practices and student profiles, and instructional recommendations for special education services. The results suggest that the experiences of Asian American students with LD are similar to those of Mexican American students with LD reported in earlier studies. These findings also reflect the challenges faced by educators in providing appropriate educational services for language minority students.