TY - JOUR
T1 - Education Federalism and Minority Disproportionate Representation Monitoring
T2 - Examining IDEA Provisions, Regulations, and Judicial Trends
AU - Strassfeld, Natasha M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2019.
PY - 2019/12/1
Y1 - 2019/12/1
N2 - States have been granted increasingly greater agency both to determine standards for minority disproportionate representation (MDR) monitoring in special education placements and to set the relevant cutoffs and sanctions when significant disproportionality is found. State authority has been bolstered by an education federalism framework, case law, and updated legislative and regulatory guidance under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Using legislative and judicial analysis to both examine education federalism and its impact on state and federal authority and analyze the legislative history associated with MDR monitoring and recent judicial trends within federal case law regarding equal protection constitutional challenges brought by plaintiff parents and students with disabilities in MDR litigation, this article finds that states are increasingly granted greater authority from judicial opinions and policy to monitor states’ practices. Legal and policy implications for stakeholders (e.g., parents, students, school districts) are also discussed.
AB - States have been granted increasingly greater agency both to determine standards for minority disproportionate representation (MDR) monitoring in special education placements and to set the relevant cutoffs and sanctions when significant disproportionality is found. State authority has been bolstered by an education federalism framework, case law, and updated legislative and regulatory guidance under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Using legislative and judicial analysis to both examine education federalism and its impact on state and federal authority and analyze the legislative history associated with MDR monitoring and recent judicial trends within federal case law regarding equal protection constitutional challenges brought by plaintiff parents and students with disabilities in MDR litigation, this article finds that states are increasingly granted greater authority from judicial opinions and policy to monitor states’ practices. Legal and policy implications for stakeholders (e.g., parents, students, school districts) are also discussed.
KW - disproportionate representation
KW - federalism
KW - minority students
KW - policy
KW - special education
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063318624&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063318624&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1044207319835185
DO - 10.1177/1044207319835185
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85063318624
SN - 1044-2073
VL - 30
SP - 138
EP - 147
JO - Journal of Disability Policy Studies
JF - Journal of Disability Policy Studies
IS - 3
ER -