The Intersections and Limitation of Charter School x Special Education Policy: A DisCrit Analysis

• In Event: Intersections of Race and Ability: Examining the Education of Students of Color With Dis/abilities in Charter Schools

Abstract

Objective
This presentation examines to what extent, if at all, the relationship between charter school statutes and special education policy address the equitable treatment of students of color with disabilities.

Theoretical Framework
This presentation is grounded in an understanding that educational policy reduces bodies to singularities, stripping them in ways that perpetuate the privileges associated with normalized notion of ‘being’—an inherent confluence of physical and cognitive normalcy defined by the construction and perpetuation of a mythical good, acceptable, whole person. This color evasive policy stance shields the processes through which students are not only marked as dis/abled but also stigmatized across other intersecting identities. In special education, these identifications work interdependently to mark the dis/abled person as doubly less-than normal; moreover, this intersectional interdependence tends to be cloaked beneath a discourse of erasure.

Methods & Data sources
We used qualitative methods to capture what state charter policies and statutes say about identifying, serving (educating), accommodating, and disciplining students with disabilities. Data analysis focused on identifying themes and developing rich descriptions to understand how, if at all, charter policies and statutes addressed charter schools’ responsibilities to address the needs of students of color with disabilities. Data sources included a comprehensive range of policy documents (nationally but with a focus on CA, FL, TN, TX, and WA), and interviews with state policymakers, disability rights advocates, state government representatives, higher education researchers, and nonprofit representatives.

Findings
We found that charter statutes and policies omitted explicit discussion of race x ability. Instead, charter statutes and policies employed color-evasive language, opting for indirect ways of focusing on students of color with disabilities (e.g., charter statutes emphasizing serving “at risk” students). Although there are some emerging efforts within state departments of education to address disproportionality, implementation of these efforts in charter schools appeared to be mixed and dependent on a productive relationship between the charter school and its home school district.

Additionally, though charter authorizers play an important role in holding charters accountable to equitably serving students with disabilities, we found that policies guiding authorizers’ oversight efforts similarly lacked specificity regarding the intersection of race and ability. More often, these policies focused on legal compliance with federal special education and nondiscrimination laws, rather than on addressing disproportionality. According to one informant: “[The charter statute] is not broken down to students with disabilities of certain racial or ethnic [backgrounds], but there are provisions in the statute that talk about [how] the school has to have a process that they will achieve, or attempt to achieve, a racial/ethnic balance that reflects the community that they serve.” Another informant said: “The problem is a finger-pointing kind of thing.”

Given an absence of explicit attention to equitably serving students of color with disabilities, these policies give charters tremendous capacity to be selective, as charters had discretion in deciding if a school was “right” for a student. The legal rights of parents seemed limited, and policy to help parents of students of color with disabilities seemed even more limited.

Authors

• Elise Castillo, Trinity College

• Michelle Oliva, EduDream