Transcript Moving Towards Equity

Moving Towards Equity
Shana Ritter
Indiana Disproportionality Project
Initiative on Equity and Opportunity
Center for Evaluation & Education Policy at
Indiana University
NCCRESt Conference, February 17, 2006
Leaving No Child Behind…
“The purpose of schooling – no matter how
daunting that purpose may be – is to struggle with
the tensions that will always exist around the twin
goals of providing learning opportunities that are
excellent and equitable for all, not some,”.
(Cochran-Smith, 2001, 93)
Equity in education
A principle that guides policy and practice holding
high expectations and providing appropriate
resources so that all students can achieve at a
rigorous standard.
Diversity & Cultural Competence
Valuing Diversity is a necessary step along the
continuum of cultural competency and culturally
responsive pedagogy, but it is not enough.
Cultural Competency requires knowledge, skills and
experience and the ability to transform these into
practice which results in improved services and
outcomes.
Cultural Competence
A developmental process.
A set of congruent behaviors, attitudes and policies
that come together in a system, agency or among
professionals to work effectively in cross-cultural
situations.
Having the capacity to function effectively in cultural
contexts that differ from your own.
Cultural Competence Continuum
Community Anti-Drug Coalitions
Destructiveness
Pre-Competence
Incapacity
Competence
Proficiency
Profoundly Multicultural QuestionsSonia Nieto
“Multicultural education needs to be accompanied
by a deep commitment to social justice and equal
access to resources…, in short it needs to be
about much more than ethnic tidbits and cultural
sensitivity.”
“It is easier to adopt a multicultural reader than to
assure all children learn to read, to have a concert
of ethnic music than to give all children
instruments.”
Profoundly Multicultural Questions
Who’s taking calculus?
Which classes meet in the basement?
Who’s teaching the children?
How much are children worth?
IN OTHER WORDS
AS R.D. Laing stated crazy is believing that you
can continue to repeat the same actions and
arrive at different results.
Lenses of Inequity
Disproportionality in Achievement
Disproportionality in Discipline
Disproportionality in High School Graduation
Disproportionality in Special Education
National NAEP Percent Scoring Basic or
Above: 2003
Percent Basic and Above Grade 4
Reading
80
80
Percent Basic and Above Grade 8
Mathematics
78
79
74
69
70
70
60
60
47
50
54
46
50
42
40
39
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
Black
Asian
Latino
Native Am
White
Black
Asian
Hispanic
Native Am
White
National Disproportionality
Discipline Rates: 1972-2000
Percent of Students Suspended
14
12
13.2
Relative Risk Ratios:
1972: 1.94
2000: 2.59
10
8
6
5.09
6
White
3.1
4
2
0
1972
African
American
2000
USDOE, Office of Civil Rights (2000)
Incident Rate Per 100 Students
Discipline Rates by Race
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
40.47
18.77
14.87
16.89
10.11
4.93
0.5
White
1.17
Black
0.74
Hispanic
0.13
Asian
0.48
MultiRacial
Racial Category
0.67
Native
American
OSS
EXP
National Graduation Rates:2001
90
79
80
72
70
Percent
60
54
52
51
50
40
30
20
10
0
Native Am
Asian
Hispanic
Manhattan Institute (2004)
Black
White
Disproportionality in Special Education
In addition to the problems the students experience in their
personal lives away from school, the schools create a whole new
set of problems for children they deem different. As schools
become more wedded to psychological models, students are
recruited into new categories of pathology. Students who do not
conform to particular behavioral expectations may be labeled
"disabled" in some way, that is, suffering from attention deficit
disorder, emotional disability, or cognitive disabilities. Students do
in fact confront real mental and emotional problems, but we need
to consider the way students' racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and
socioeconomic characteristics are deployed to make their
assignments to these disability categories more likely.
Gloria Ladson Billings
How Much More Likely Are African
American Students to Be in Special
Ed.?
• Relative Risk for Indiana’s AA students:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Mild Mental Disability
3.29 x more
Emotional Disturbance 2.38 x more
Moderate MD
1.91 x more
Communication Disorder 35% less
Learning Disabled
6% less
Regular Class Placement 35% less
Separate Class Placement. 2.84 x more
Relative Risk in MIMD
Community Schools: Trends in Relative Risk for Special Education, MIMD, & MOMD 19982004
4.50
4.00
3.50
Relative Risk
3.00
African American
Students in Special
Education
2.50
African American
Students Labeled
MIMD
2.00
1.50
African American
Students Labeled
MOMD
1.00
0.50
0.00
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
School Year
2002-2003
2003-2004
Composition Index of AA students in
general and special education
Community Schools: General vs. Special Education 1998-2004
36.0%
34.0%
32.0%
Percentage
30.0%
African American Student in Corporation
28.0%
African American Students in Special
Education
26.0%
24.0%
22.0%
20.0%
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
School Year
2002-2003
2003-2004
LRE
• Not only are African Americans being placed in
special education at disproportionate rates but,
they are also being disproportionately placed in
more restrictive settings.
• Consequently, they are being denied access to
some of their deserved educational opportunities.
Responses to Inequity
• Blaming the Victim: Disproportionality due primarily to
characteristics of minority populations (e.g. Herrnstein & Murray)
• Critical Race Theory: Disproportionality as a decision to
maintain the structure of white privilege (e.g. Bell, Delgado)
• Cultural Reproduction: Racial/economic inequity maintained by
roles and actions of individuals within institutions, perhaps
unconsciously (e.g., Bowles & Gintis, Oakes)
• Maybe We Shouldn’t Talk About It...
OR TAKE ACTION
Data driven decisions
Research based approaches
Cultural competence
The Indiana Disproportionality
Project
• Collaboration of IDOE and The Center for
Evaluation and Education Policy at I. U.
• Document status of minority disproportionality in
Indiana
• Use that information to guide remediation
Project History and Timeline
• Phase I (1999-2000):
– Developing Measures of Disproportionality
• Phase II (2000-2001):
– Understanding What Contributes to Special Ed.
Disproportionality
• Phase III (2002-2006):
– Addressing Disproportionality in Local School
Districts
– Develop New Measures
Ownership, RER, Cultural Competence
Qualitative Study –
The Context of Disproportionality
• Interviewed across 7 corporations:
–
–
–
–
28 teachers
14 principals, 8 assistants (deans)
9 school psychologists
7 directors of special education
• 7 African American, 59 Caucasian
• 12 male, 54 female
The Effects of Poverty
“Is the ethnicity the problem or is poverty the problem?”
--Principal
“You look at the students that we are identifying and for some reason
they are disadvantaged.”
--Principal
The Effects of Poverty on
Classrooms
“There are days that I walk away with like 200 pounds
on my shoulders thinking ‘it keeps getting worse.’ The
stories are more bizarre, more traumatic; how can we
possibly meet all these needs?”
--Classroom Teacher
“I’m tired. It gets harder and harder and there is less
and less help for us.”
--Classroom Teacher
What the Data Say: IDP Analyses
• Conducted analysis of Indiana’s disproportionality
data controlling for poverty
• Found that economic disadvantage does not
account for racial disparities
– In some cases low poverty predicts increased AA
overrepresentation
– Poverty seems to magnify racial disparity
0
2
4
6
8
Race and SES: Identification of MIMD
0
20
40
Percent Receiving Free Lunch
African American Children
60
Other Children
80
School Factors: Resources &
Classroom Management
Sometimes we tend to put middle class values and
expectations on another group, another culture. And
when you look at the school setting the majority of
teachers are Caucasian, middle class, I find a lot of my
African American boys need movement. I’ve talked with
teachers about that, it isn’t ADHD or any of those
things, this is just a kid who has to move and you need
to provide them with the opportunity to do that. –
Principal
School Factors:
High-Stakes Testing
“Our expectations for youngsters have sky-rocketed, more
and more aren’t attaining the standards the feds and state
think should occur. A lot of stressed teachers feel
tremendous pressure to get kids to a certain level and if I
don’t then by gosh I better [get them tested] and find a
reason why.”
--Special Ed. Director
“This year we were told that we had to refer anyone who
didn’t pass ISTEP. So I had to refer 13 kids to [the
prereferral team] and I don’t really need that…I know what
their problem is.”
--Classroom Teacher
Problems with Referral and Decision
Making
“I think because they know that something is not working for
a child and they feel that they can’t tap into some resources.
One stable resource that they have to tap into is special
education. It has funding to support it, it’s a process that is
in place. So it is an easy tap into subsystem.”
--Special Ed. Director
Referral and Decision Making
Teacher Perspective
“I am pretty open to referring any child that is not finding
success. My goal is for every child to be successful.”
--Classroom Teacher
“If there’s a chance they might qualify, it’s always to their
benefit to have them checked.”
--Classroom Teacher
The Difficulty of Talking About Race
““When you say minorities, are you, what are you speaking
of?...[INTERVIEWER: Ethnic and racial
minorities]...Oh....OK...Alright...We have like...I guess we
have about half and half. I don’t know that I’ve ever really
paid attention to it .”
--Classroom Teacher
Local Equity Action Development:
The LEAD Projects
• Recognize that mistakes will be made
• Difficult conversations must take place
• The process of change can only be clearly
mapped in retrospect.
The LEAD process
Developed as a result of the collaboration of those districts with the
Indiana Disproportionality Project, enables school personnel at the
local level to make use of their own data and resources to better
understand and address issues of disproportionality and equity. The
model is based upon four assumptions:
All plans must be local, addressing local realities and local needs. In
order to address the complexity of disproportionality issues for
culturally and linguistically diverse students in a way that is
meaningful and appropriate to the culture of that district, plans
must originate from within the district. While IDP staff provide
guidance and technical assistance, decisions on plan design and
implementation are made by the district planning team.
LEAD
• Planning and evaluation must be based upon local data.
Local data on equity provide a framework that can motivate
and guide local remediation efforts, and the success of any
systems change efforts can be judged only by changes in
those data.
• LEAD must be a collaborative effort
• Conversations about race, disproportionality, and equity
are awkward and sometimes difficult, but necessary. Part
of the role of the team is to ensure that team meetings are a
safe place for having honest and “courageous” conversations
LOCAL EQUITY ACTION DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
ONGOING QUEST IONS
 What do we know about disproportionality in our district?
 What changes in school-based processes will have the greatest impact on disproportionality in our
schools?
 How do we involve others in the process of creating ownership for and bringing about change?
 How will we know if our efforts are working?
 What impact will this have on other issues of equity?
PROCESS STEPS
Form a
Planning Team
Form a
preliminary
planning team
Review existing
data
Name the issue
Expand the
planning team to
include other
key district
stakeholders
Gather and
analyze new
information
Identify the Action
of Greatest
Potential Impact
Develop
a Plan
Design a LEAD pilot
Hold focus groups to
examine the issue
and possible actions
Examine and discuss
input from the focus
groups
Gather research and
information on best
practices and models
Engage in honest
conversations
about expectations
for ALL students
and staff
Implement, Assess, Adapt
Expand the team to include
representatives fro m all sites to
assure two-way communication
Provide professional
development, time,
and other supports
Provide professional development as
needed for best practice
Develop an Action
Plan for
Implementation
Clarify links and communicate with
other district initiatives andELL,
T itle, School Improvement etc.
Pilot in afe w places
Use data consistently
Gather feedback
Deepen conversations about equity
and culturally responsive pedagogy
Adapt the pilot
Include parents and community
Plan for expanded
implementation
Ongoing assessments continue to
inform implementation
Ongoing Questions
• What do we know about disproportionality in
our district?
• What changes in school-based processes are
perceived to have the greatest impact on
disproportionality in our schools?
Ongoing questions
• How do we involve others in the process of
creating ownership for and bringing about
change?
• How will we know if our efforts are working?
• What impact will this have on other issues of
equity?
What do you know about your
district?
The LEAD Process
Form a preliminary planning team
key leaders in the district
general & special education
building level & central office
• Ask what are our greatest areas of concern with
respect to equity in our district?
– What practices might contribute to disproportionality?
Examine the data
ASK:
 What do we know?
 What else do we need to know to understand
and apply the data?
 How will we find out more?
 How do we share what we know?
Identify the action of greatest potential
impact
ASK: What actions, programs or interventions do we
believe would be the most promising in addressing the
potential causes of disproportionality?
What have others done to address these issues?
What impact do we expect this action to have, how will
we measure it?
Expand the planning team
ASK:
•
•
Is the team representative of your district?
How can we find ways to continually incorporate other
voices into the planning? (focus groups, surveys, site
based meetings)
Develop a plan
•
•
That will meet the needs and culture of the schools
Reflect best practices
•
Identify data that will assess the impact of the project
•
BEGIN SMALL
ASK: What support do we need (Professional Dev., time,
materials?)
How will incorporate a focus on cultural competence?
How will we know the effect on disproportionality?
How will we encourage ownership and involvement?
Develop an Action Plan for
Implementation
include as many voices as possible
And necessary professional development
–
–
–
–
–
cultural responsiveness
leadership
family involvement
differentiated instruction
using data effectively
Implement, Assess, Adapt
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Pilot in a few locations
Gather data
Gather feedback
Adapt
Re- Assess
Use evaluative measures
Continue conversations
ASK:
How will we incorporate feedback?
How will we share information about our LEAD project
with others in the district?
How do we ensure that the project continues to
address the org9nal question of ethnic disproportionality?
What does it look like in the
districts?
• Ten districts currently participating in Local Equity Action
Development Projects
–
–
–
–
–
Reform the GEI Process
Peer Coaching
K-2 Instructional Project
Family Involvement
Cultural Competence
• Develop Standardized Measure to Track Disproportionality
– Referral Assessment  Placement
The Referral to Eligibility Ratio
• Tracks 3 steps of the referral to eligibility process.
– Referral, assessment, eligibility
• Data Entered Into Excel Worksheet
Three Uses of the RER
•
•
•
Measure the effectiveness of the GEI (or other
intervention) process
Where in the process is disproportionality most
likely to occur?
Track short term (e.g. yearly) changes in
disproportionality
GEI
Districts addressing minority disproportionality through the
General Education Intervention Process are:
• Researching best practices
• Developing a “Flexible Template” which includes case
manager, regular meetings, advance paper work, family
involvement, follow up, and research based strategies
• Or adapting an approach, such as Creative Problem
Solving
Family Involvement
• Creating a strategic plan for involving
all families
• Action research by teachers
• Cultural Competency for building administrators
• Community Wide Task Force on the Achievement
Gap
AND DIRECT INSTRUCTION- Early Intervention
Our LEAD Project is
• Implementing an early reading intervention based
on scientifically based reading research and
information gained from DIBELS assessments
• Including special education and other at-risk
students in the intervention
3 Successes
• Students receiving the intervention performed
better than comparison group students on DIBELS
measures.
• CIMS indicators showed positive early trends in
LRE participation and the Sp. Ed./Gen. Ed.
achievement gap.
• Collaboration between Gen. Ed./Sp. Ed. teachers
3 Lessons Learned
• Anxiety for educators lessens as results are
obtained from assessments.
• On-going monitoring is critical to prevent “drift.”
• Unexpected responses need to be addressed.
One thing we will do next year
is:
• We will expand the K-2 Reading Intervention
Project to other grade levels in order to build on its
success. Instruction at all grade levels will be
reviewed and adjusted based on DIBELS results.
Our LEAD Project
is addressing disproportionality by:
Utilizing Creative Problem Solving for General
Education Intervention
3 Successes
• Trained Six of our Elementary schools, and the
two Sixth grade Academy schools
• Use of data to support Learning
• Discussions on Cultural Competence, and initial
stages of planning to address needs in this area.
3 Lessons Learned:
• Need to be creative on Time needed for teams
• Need for additional strategies for Follow up meetings for
teachers, after GEI
• Need better teacher buy-in at some of the schools
Three things we will do next
year is:
• Train four remaining elementary schools and
possibly one high school
• Laying of groundwork for three other secondary
schools
• Expand and deepen discussions dealing with
cultural competence and disproportionality
Our LEAD Project
is addressing disproportionality by
• K-6 SOS (Saving Our Students) Teams use the Creative
Problem Solving process to develop action plans to
improve students achievement.
• We use the Professional Learning Community process to
support students before they are referred to the SOS
Team
3 Successes
• Better student goals and follow up on interventions
• Addressing issues that impact many students as
well as individual student needs
• More staff members involved in the process
3 Lessons Learned
• Our achievement gap is real and we need to continue to
address cultural competency
• Administrators need to be knowledgeable and supportive
regarding research-based strategies and the SOS process
• We need better student assessment data prior to and after
the SOS meetings
One thing we will do next year
is:
• Begin district-wide training and implementation of
DIBELS to ensure consistent assessment data
across the district
• Focus on cultural competency
• Train more SOS teams
LESSONS FROM THE FIELD
Create a Culture of Inquiry
• Relevant data
• Probing questions
• Examining beliefs about school culture and equity
– Issues of access
– Opportunities to learn
– Expectations of students, staff and community
DATA
Data is an integral part of the process when a
school is willing to ask itself about the
expectations it holds for children and about culture
and power it begins to bring accountability for
equity inside.
Key Roles for Data
1. Improving the quality of criteria used in problem solving
and decision making
2. Describing institutional processes, practices and
progress in schools and districts
3. Examining institutional belief systems, underlying
assumptions, and behaviors
4. Mobilizing the school or district community for action
5. Monitoring implementation of reforms
6. Accountability
-Using Data to Close the Achievement Gap
DIFFICULT DIALOGUES
Conversing about issues of equity, especially
race, is a developmental process; ample time
to build trust is necessary.
This is an essential step in becoming culturally
responsive and gaining an understanding of
IDENTITY, POWER & PRIVILEGE, CHANGE and
the application in creating equitable access for all
students.
OWNERSHIP
Ownership of the process grows through action:
ongoing dialogue with colleagues, gaining a
deeper understanding of the issues, design,
implementation, and assessment.
Sustainability
Addressing issues of equity is more likely to be
ongoing:
• When it is viewed as an effort that benefits all
children.
• When incorporated into the district’s overall plans
for school improvement and other initiatives.
• When the community is involved.
LEADERSHIP
It is by questioning assumptions that a leader is
able to influence change. Leadership that is willing
to examine their own beliefs, and empower those
they work with to do the same, is essential to the
process of creating equitable change.
Disproportionality must be
understood contextually
The disproportionality of students of color in
educational programs cannot be fully
comprehended as long as it considered a
singular event, somehow divorced from the
broader context of American education and
American society.
Whether you call it multicultural education, a
diversity perspective, cultural competence or
culturally responsive pedagogy the elements
are the same
Content
Integration
Belief
in your
students
Knowledge
Construction
EQUITY
An
Empowering
School
Culture
Prejudice
Reduction
Culturally
Responsive
Pedagogy
Indiana Disproportionality Project
Initiative on Equity & Opportunity
Center for Evaluation and Education Policy
Indiana University
Dr. Russ Skiba – Director
[email protected]
Shana Ritter – Coordinator
[email protected]