CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Revisiting Larry P. v. Riles Holly Evans-Pongratz [email protected] & Bernard Yaklin [email protected]
Jul 19, 2020
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONJack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Revisiting Larry P. v. Riles
Holly [email protected]
&Bernard Yaklin
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 2
•Began in 1971
•Five African American children in EMR class
•San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD)
•Filed in Federal Court
•Claim-wrongly placed in EMR classes
•IQ tests were racially biased and discriminatory
•African Americans disproportionately EMR-28.5% in General Education vs.-66% in EMR
What is the Larry P. v. Riles case?
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 3
•SFUSD was prohibited from using IQ tests to place students in EMR classes or their “substantial” equivalent
•The decision was upheld on appeal in 1984
•The Court expanded the ruling by banning the use of IQ testing for all African American students for any special education purpose
Findings
In 1979, the Court ruled in favor of the students
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 4
•Crawford v. Honig 1992
•September 10, 1992, CDE Legal Advisory
•Compliance Report by CDE on January 28, 1993
•October 11, 1994, CDE issued a new Legal Advisory exercising its regulatory authority
Findings
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 5
Key Components of the Directive Include
1. LEAs are not to use IQ tests with African-American students
2. In lieu of IQ tests, LEAs should use alternative means of assessment
3. An IQ test may not be given even with parental consent
4. IQ scores contained in the records shall not become a part of the student’s current school records
5. There are no special education related purposes for which IQ tests shall be administered to African-American students
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 6
Key Components (cont.)
6. IQ tests shall not be used to determine whether an African-American student is learning disabled
7. The prohibition on IQ testing applies even though students are no longer placed in EMR classes
8. This directive supersedes all previous notices
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 7
IDEA 2004
SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES
• LEAs shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and ability.
• LEAs may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation procedure.
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 8
EVALUATIONS
• Use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academicinformation.
• Do not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion.
• Use technically sound instruments.
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 9
EVALUATIONS (cont)• Must not be discriminatory on a racial or
cultural basis.
• Must be provided and administered in the language and form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to do so.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONJack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Disproportionality and IDEA 2004:
Disproportionate Representation of Racial and Ethnic Groups in Special
Education
CASPFebruary 2006
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 11
State Education Agencies are Required to
• Collect Data
• Examine Data
• Determine significant disproportionality
- Disability- Educational Setting- Discipline
• Identify Disproportionate Districts
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 12
Categories of Disproportionality
•Overall enrollment
•Disability category
•Education environment
•English learner
•Gender
•Achievement data
Examples:
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 13
Why is Disproportionality a Problem?
•Access to core curriculum may decrease
•Peer relationships may be compromised
•Students may not benefit from services -poor academic outcomes-poor discipline outcomes
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 14
Determination not allowed
A child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the determination is due to:
– a lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, or
– Limited English proficiency
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 15
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
Asian White All OtherEthnicities
Hispanic CA AfricanAmerican
Female All SE Male
Percent of Special Education Students Suspended ≥ 10 days by Ethnicity
California 2003-04
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 16
Disproportionality Measures
• E-Formula
• Risk Index
• Composition Index
• Disparity Index
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 17
E-Formula
E=A+Sqrt[A*(100-A)÷N]
• E=maximum percentage of total special education enrollment allowed for a racial/ethic group
• A=percentage of racial/ethnic group in total school enrollment
• N=total number of students in special education
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 18
Risk Index
Percent of students in a given ethnic group identified as receiving special education services.
For example, in California• 4.99% of Asian American students receive special education services, as do• 14.92% of African American students
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 19
Percent of General Education Students Receiving Special Education
by Ethnic Category
14.9%
10.8%9.8% 9.7%
6.6%
5.0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
African American White All Students Hispanic All OtherEthnicities
Asian
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 20
Percent of General Education StudentsIdentified with Specific Learning Disorder
by Ethnic Category
8.83%
5.59%5.02%
4.68%
2.66%
1.55%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
African American Hispanic CA White All OtherEthnicities
Asian
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 21
Percent of General Education StudentsIdentified with Emotional Disturbance
by Ethnic Category
1.26%
0.68%
0.44%
0.24% 0.23%0.10%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
African American White CA All OtherEthnicities
Hispanic Asian
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 22
Percent of General Education StudentsIdentified with Mental Retardation
by Ethnic Category
0.90%
0.62% 0.57%0.51% 0.48%
0.39%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
African American Hispanic CA White All OtherEthnicities
Asian
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 23
Percent of General Education StudentsIdentified with Speech or Language Impairment
by Ethnic Category
2.80%
2.30% 2.19% 2.07% 1.96% 1.83%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
White CA Hispanic African American All OtherEthnicities
Asian
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 24
Percent of General Education StudentsIdentified with Autismby Ethnic Category
0.62%
0.52%0.49% 0.47%
0.41%
0.24%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
White Asian All OtherEthnicities
African American CA Hispanic
Source: CBEDS December 2004;CASEMIS June 2005
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 25
IDEA 2004 and Early Intervening Services
LEA Pre-referral activities to reduce misidentification
LEA use up to 15% of funds
•Provide early intervening services to children, •Particularly in groups significantly overidentified
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 26
• IDEA Addresses the Issue• Included in Federal and State Monitoring • A Multifaceted Issue• Multiple Contributing Factors • Early Intervening Strategies hold Promise• Cross-Systems Solutions Required
Disproportionality
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 27
Educational Benefit
• What is meant by Educational Benefit?
• How is Educational Benefit Reasonably Calculated?
• How does this relate to Larry P.?
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 28
Rowley
• “It would do little good for Congress to spend millions of dollars in providing access to public education only to have the child with a disability receive no benefit from that education.”
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 29
Rowley (cont.)
• “Such instruction…if the child is being educated in the regular classrooms of the public education system, should be reasonably calculated to enable the child to achieve passing marks and advance from grade to grade.”
(Justice Rhenquist)
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 30
Educational Benefit
-Achieving passing marks
-Advancing from grade to grade
-Making progress toward meeting goals and objectives
-Improved scores on statewide or district assessments
-Passing the CAHSEE and Graduating with a diploma
•Programs should be reasonably calculated to result in educational benefit
•Can be measured in a variety of ways:
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 31
Reasonable Calculation
- Progress toward all goals
- Progress in the general curriculum
- Participation in extracurricular activities
- Education with non-disabled children
- The assessment was complete
- The IEP team identified needs and established goals related to: the child’s disability and involvement and progress in the general curriculum
• Based on procedural requirements of IDEA and means that:
• Services were planned to support:
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 32
Definitions
• Cognition - Measures any one of the processing areas seen separately.
• Intelligence - The ability to learn or understand from experience; acquired learning potential; mental ability; global ability.
WEBSTER’S New World Dictionary
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 33
Cognitive Processing MayInclude:
MemoryAttentionPerceptionKnowledge RepresentationReasoningCreativityProblem SolvingThinkingDeciding
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 34
Conceptual Strategies suggested through the work of the Larry P. Task Force:
• Developmental Assessment• Dynamic Assessment• Ecological Assessment• Information Processing• Neuropsychological Assessment• Psychological Processing• Skills Within Subjects
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 35
Foundations for Learning include:
•Executive Functioning•Attention•Memory
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 36
Executive Functioning:
– Take in new information, – Interpret information, and – Make decisions based upon our
perceptions.
• Is one of the many areas assessed through the use of neuropsychological testing instruments.
• Involves the ability of the brain to:
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 37
Executive Functions include but are not limited to:
• Working Memory• Goal Planning• Planning• Sequencing• Prioritizing• Organizing• Initiating• Inhibiting
• Pacing• Shifting• Self-monitoring• Emotional
Control• Completing
Tasks
JACK O’CONNELLState Superintendent of Public Instruction
February 16, 2006 38
Prohibited Assessments: Decision Making Framework
• Is the measure a standardized IQ test (does it measure mental ability, aptitude, or global ability)?
• Are results reported in the form of IQ or mental age?
• Is the test correlated with an IQ test (construct validity)?