View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model
Language: English
Authors: Nicholas S. Bell (ORCID 0000-0001-9276-1883), Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott (ORCID 0009-0000-9539-4687), Verónica N. Vélez
Source: Exceptional Children. 2026 92(2):182-204.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 23
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Early Childhood Education
Preschool Education
Descriptors: Special Education, School Resegregation, Racism, Models, Disproportionate Representation, Student Experience, Prevention, Critical Race Theory, Children, Surveys, Longitudinal Studies, African American Students, Hispanic American Students, Intervention, Equal Education, Minority Group Students, Elementary Secondary Education, Preschool Education, Racial Identification, Ethnicity
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey
DOI: 10.1177/00144029251358720
ISSN: 0014-4029
2163-5560
Abstract: The resegregation (i.e., overrepresentation) of Black and Latinx students in special education is a longstanding concern of scholars, researchers, and policy makers in the United States. Therefore, we conducted a critical investigation to better understand the causes of resegregation, student experiences in special education, and anti-racist actions to prevent resegregation. Using critical race transformative mixed methods for the expressed aim of advancing social and political action, we synthesized quantitative and qualitative findings from research studies to develop three well-grounded themes: (a) educators make unjust special education referrals; (b) students experience injustices in special education; and (c) teachers and students exercise resistance and agency. Culminating from this research, we propose an "anti-racist special education model" for teacher educators and policy makers to disrupt resegregation, while providing students with the equitable supports and teaching they need to be successful. Our paper concludes with implications for policy, practice, and research.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1490676
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH49E18MnzR-gKYd9CVEdq3AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDNg55nm53dSgkSaLwgIBEICBmw3SAFX9n-llG5Y3_HbJYkzJiVQq3Jb1NXQasPk0KBvDExdXF8o4-_TGchUJoVaD_2vHsVGlZ4RGJz1nMUjrVKAhbKzt6k8yx3G4PWV6oBYwbwwrqlk0LOiQJ1LOW72ja3NL2Bhem1f1WN2UIvPDiUGTDj_QknbCQQaSVi7vp-23EhQnjlIEX0hzvi-DcJRHw6trmUPws9gl1y7C
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0189687708;exc01jan.26;2025Dec02.05:58;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0189687708-1">Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model </title> <p>The resegregation (i.e., overrepresentation) of Black and Latinx students in special education is a longstanding concern of scholars, researchers, and policy makers in the United States. Therefore, we conducted a critical investigation to better understand the causes of resegregation, student experiences in special education, and anti-racist actions to prevent resegregation. Using critical race transformative mixed methods for the expressed aim of advancing social and political action, we synthesized quantitative and qualitative findings from research studies to develop three well-grounded themes: (a) educators make unjust special education referrals; (b) students experience injustices in special education; and (c) teachers and students exercise resistance and agency. Culminating from this research, we propose an anti-racist special education model for teacher educators and policy makers to disrupt resegregation, while providing students with the equitable supports and teaching they need to be successful. Our paper concludes with implications for policy, practice, and research.</p> <p>Keywords: special education; overrepresentation; resegregation; anti-racist education; equity; critical race theory; QuantCrit; DisCrit; transformative mixed methods</p> <p>The overrepresentation of Black and Latinx students in special education (SPED) is a longstanding concern of scholars, researchers, and policy makers in the United States ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref2">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref3">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref4">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref5">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref6">49</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref7">63</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref8">85</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref9">88</reflink>]). Scholars argue that this persistent phenomenon is a manifestation of systemic racism ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref10">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref11">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref12">23</reflink>]). Deficit thinking, negative stereotypes, and low expectations influence the decisions teachers, school counselors, and administrators make to over-refer Black and Latinx students for SPED and discipline referrals and under-refer them for gifted and talented education ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref13">27</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref14">38</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref15">52</reflink>]).</p> <p>Researchers also document the negative experiences of Black and Latinx students once placed in special education—lowered expectations, placements in lower academic tracks, stigmatizing labels, pull-out placements, higher rates of disciplinary action, placements in correctional facilities, decreased post-secondary opportunities, and higher unemployment following high school ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref16">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref17">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref18">27</reflink>]; Ferri & Connor, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref19">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref20">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref21">63</reflink>]; Schott Foundation, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref22">76</reflink>]). For example, the National Center for Learning Disabilities ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref23">63</reflink>]) released a brief that underscores how Students of Color, who are overrepresented in SPED (e.g., Black, Latinx, Indigenous, and Hawaiian students), experience short- and long-term harm.</p> <p>Drawing from Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit), we boldly use the phrase "resegregation in special education," in place of overrepresentation, to underscore its significance as a civil rights issue at the intersection of race and disability. DisCrit explores how "perceptions of race and ability are built upon each other and how those labels impact the embodiment and positioning of those who are constructed as less than" (Annamma et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref24">1</reflink>], p. 153). Resegregation in special education effectively isolates Students of Color, who have long experienced segregation in the United States (Bell et al., 2024; Blanchett, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref25">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref26">29</reflink>]). The practice of resegregation was originally instituted as a function of SPED to advance and protect white racial interests, under the guise of disability legislation (Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref27">64</reflink>]). While some students—for example, certain Asian students—are less likely to be placed in SPED, Black, Latinx, Indigenous, and Hawaiian students, notably boys, are more likely to experience resegregation ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref28">63</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref29">89</reflink>]; U.S. Department of Education, 2022). Black, Indigenous, and Latinx boys are more than twice as likely, and Hawaiian boys 1.5 times as likely, to be placed in SPED, according to relative risk indices (see Table S1). These students are removed from the general education system and forced to live with another socially constructed label, leading to racist and unjust experiences in SPED ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref30">22</reflink>]). For example, Students of Color may experience further resegregation in the SPED system through restrictive learning environments, outside the general education classroom. In line with principles articulated in [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref31">15</reflink>], resegregation fundamentally denies Students of Color the right to a high quality and equitable education.</p> <p>Complicating policy and practices to prevent resegregation in SPED are conflicting research accounts. Certain researchers have suggested that Black and Latinx students are underrepresented in SPED (e.g., Morgan et al., [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref32">65</reflink>]), which has left the educational community indecisive on how to move forward. Currently, underrepresentation research, which relies on covariates (e.g., achievement and socioeconomic status) in statistical models, signals that resegregation is lawful and justifiable. These claims not only stifle efforts to advance racial justice in SPED, but also support dramatic shifts to current federal policy in IDEA that would eliminate federal actions to address overrepresentation in school districts, for example, as outlined in conservative policy aims (see Chapter 11 of Project 2025, p. 336).</p> <p>Along with other scholars, we argue that the claims advanced in underrepresentation research are devoid of a critical lens and perpetuate harmful SPED policy targeting Students of Color ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref33">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref34">23</reflink>]). Thus, we ground our investigation in critical theory to counter these claims and limit further harm, while simultaneously advancing transformational visions for SPED. Building on decades of quantitative and qualitative research, we propose innovative analytical methods informed by critical race theory (CRT) to formulate anti-racist policy and practice interventions for reducing resegregation in schools.</p> <p>To this end, we conducted a critical investigation of resegregation patterns in SPED. We sought to answer three research questions: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref35">1</reflink>) What are the causes of resegregation in special education for Black and Latinx students? (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>) What are the experiences of Black and Latinx students identified with a disability label? and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref37">3</reflink>) What anti-racist actions are needed to disrupt resegregation and provide Students of Color with equitable experiences in SPED? Our investigation primarily focuses on Black and Latinx students, based on the research team's expertise, P–12 experiences in schools, and racial/ethnic identities. This application is an essential aspect of CRT, specifically quantitative critical race theory (QuantCrit) which relies on the "experiential knowledge of minoritized groups" ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref38">40</reflink>], p. 151). At the same time, we believe that findings from our third research question may apply to Students of Color, overall.</p> <p>We start by situating these questions within CRT in Education, and two theories derived from CRT, namely DisCrit and QuantCrit. Then, we present methods and findings of research studies on resegregation that include the following: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>) an analysis of national, longitudinal data (Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-K 2011 Restricted Data) using structural equation modeling; and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref40">2</reflink>) a meta-analysis of qualitative research. Next, we used transformative mixed methods to synthesize the results of these studies; the meta-analysis provided a comprehensive understanding about the phenomenon of resegregation that, when synthesized with the statistical results, helped us formulate overall findings. The synthesis led us to envision an anti-racist special education model for the purposes of disrupting resegregation, while providing students in SPED the equitable support and teaching they need to be successful. Our paper concludes with a discussion about the practice and policy implications of this model.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-2">Theoretical Framework</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189687708-3">Investigating Resegregation in Special Education With CRT, DisCrit, and QuantCrit</hd> <p>Critical race theory (CRT) centers racism, and its intersection with other injustices (e.g., ableism), to examine historical, legal, and institutional practices that disenfranchise Black and Latinx communities in the United States, including in and through schools ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref41">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref42">58</reflink>]). A core aim of CRT is a critique of liberalism, which maintains the appearance of advancing civil rights for racially marginalized communities but serves white self-interests ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref43">25</reflink>]). According to CRT scholars, liberalism masks—and further entrenches—ongoing projects of white supremacy.</p> <p>CRT provides a structural analysis that underscores how power—white supremacy, in particular—operates to justify practices that lead to the marginalization of students at the intersection of race, gender, and disability. Throughout history, institutional policies and practices in the United States' educational system have, in effect, segregated Students of Color. Current data reveal that schools are more segregated than ever before. According to The Civil Rights Project, one-fifth of schools in 2022 were intensely segregated (Frankenberg & Hawley, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref44">39</reflink>]). Just as concerning are resegregation efforts <emph>within</emph> schools that further prevent integration. Following Brown v. Board of Education (1954), a prominent resegregation effort emerged in the special education system ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref45">11</reflink>]; Ferri & Connor, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref46">35</reflink>]). Lloyd Dunn ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref47">33</reflink>]) argued that Black students were unjustly identified for special education, and subsequently removed from the general education classroom, segregated with substandard instruction. Additionally, courts ruled in favor of plaintiffs who argued that Black and Latinx students were inappropriately placed in special education ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref48">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref49">60</reflink>]), giving credence to the concept of resegregation. Decades later, despite the 70<sups>th</sups> anniversary of Brown v. Board, the injustice of resegregation in special education remains. While federal policy has sought solutions, resegregation is rooted in racist beliefs and practices and reinforced by eugenics ideology ([<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref50">45</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref51">78</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-4">Extending Critical Race Theory to Study the Role of Race and (Dis) Ability</hd> <p>DisCrit grounded this investigation and informed our framing of resegregation, methodological decisions, synthesis of findings, and implications. DisCrit illuminates how race has historically shaped the referral process in SPED. For example, the birth of intelligence testing provided a way to identify students deemed genetically inferior ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref52">29</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref53">45</reflink>]; Nielson, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref54">68</reflink>]; Osgood, [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref55">69</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref56">78</reflink>]). Since then, the reliance on <emph>teachers' deficit-based evaluations</emph> and <emph>inappropriate usage of assessment scores</emph> have become embedded and normative mechanisms to over-identify Black and Latinx students (Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref57">64</reflink>]). The same referral process remains, except now supported by federal legislation (i.e., Individual Disability Education Acts' Child Find Mandate). That is, educators follow the Child Find Mandate to seek out and identify children who may qualify for one of the IDEA disability categories. Following initial referral, usually by the general education teacher, a student is evaluated, based on a variety of data (e.g., achievement and IQ tests and teachers' evaluations), to determine eligibility for disability services under IDEA. We argue that this process has led to the unjust resegregation of Black and Latinx students in SPED and, thus, a further entrenchment of white supremacy within U.S. educational structures.</p> <p>In addition, QuantCrit informed our methodological decisions with the expressed aim of advancing social and racial justice in special education via the use of statistics. CRT scholars have advanced quantitative approaches to study race and racism ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref58">40</reflink>]). These scholars considered the potential utility and value of quantitative research under the right conditions, given the (mis) use of statistics in educational research on Communities of Color and the reliance on numbers in educational policy-making that directly affects these communities. Their proposal—QuantCrit—considers how researchers can purpose statistics for racial and social justice in educational research, using five guiding tenets ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref59">40</reflink>]). We apply these tenets to every aspect of our research investigation. QuantCrit (re) imagines statistics to explain the <emph>structural</emph> relationships among the intersectionality of identities and counter harmful, deficit-based research that has dominated in quantitative research (Gillborn et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref60">43</reflink>]; Pérez Huber et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref61">72</reflink>]). We utilized mixed methods, knowing that "data cannot 'speak for itself,'" to investigate the causes of resegregation, examine student experiences, and advance anti-racist policies and practices in special education ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref62">40</reflink>], p. 151). Table S2 displays the tenets of CRT, QuantCrit, and DisCrit.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-5">Understanding the Role of Anti-Racism in Special Education</hd> <p>CRT stresses the importance of anti-racist actions to challenge injustices. Anti-racism in special education informed our use of DisCrit and QuantCrit—both extensions of CRT—to theoretically anchor our study. Anti-racist teachers use their equity knowledge, skills, and beliefs in classrooms to fight for racial and social justice in schools, thereby taking actions to disrupt injustices and employ equitable practices in special education (Bell & Codding, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref63">7</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref64">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref65">8</reflink>]). Anti-racist teachers disrupt resegregation, understanding that SPED was intended, in part, for this purpose (Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref66">64</reflink>]). These teachers take on the personal responsibility of educating all students in their classrooms and reject culturally deficit-based orientations involving subjective evaluations and biased achievement scores that conceal inequitable structures. Thus, students are seen from an asset-based perspective. Teachers engage in justice-producing pedagogies (e.g., culturally relevant teaching) and high-quality instruction (e.g., conceptually based, rigorous, and ambitious), where students experience success in inclusive classrooms, thus eliminating the need for segregated educational placements (Bell et al., 2024; [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref67">19</reflink>]; Connor et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref68">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref69">56</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref70">90</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-6">Quantitative and Qualitative Research Studies on Resegregation</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189687708-7">Quantitative Research: Applying QuantCrit to Study Resegregation</hd> <p>We applied QuantCrit via critical structural equation modeling (CritSEM) to analyze national, restricted data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten 2011 (ECLS-K). In this study, we explore the extent that anti-racist teachers in U.S. schools can disrupt processes causing the resegregation of Black and Latinx boys and girls in SPED. We provide a summary of the research methods and results below. Additional details can be found in a published manuscript and forthcoming manuscripts elsewhere (Bell et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref71">8</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-8">Description of ECLS-K data</hd> <p>The ECLS-K consists of longitudinal data on elementary (i.e., kindergarten through fifth grade) students and teachers from over 1000 public schools in the United States. We utilized psychometric scales, cognitive assessments, and surveys (e.g., special education survey and composite variables). Additional information about the data can be found online ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref72">67</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-9">Limitations of ECLS-K Data</hd> <p>QuantCrit insists that we interrogate the data, most notably when working with secondary data. We note several limitations. First, scholars have expressed concerns of ECLS-K data, stemming from underrepresentation research studies, related to the sample and data collection (see [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref73">79</reflink>]). For example, Skiba et al. raise concerns about the weighted sample and suggest that the ECLS-K may underreport students identified for certain disabilities. Second, the ECLS-K data was developed without a critical lens. As such, the data precludes critical variables of interest to measure, for example, the impact of anti-racist teachers. We also note limitations in categorical labels, such as Latinx, which we use intentionally (compared to Latino or Latina/o) to reflect what [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref74">71</reflink>] refers to as a linguistic intervention into the Spanish language. We also acknowledge the many diversities that exist within U.S. Latinx communities. Like other pan-ethnic labels, the term "Latinx" can flatten experiences and mislead analysis of material outcomes, such as resegregation patterns. In our investigation, the qualitative meta-analysis included diversities within the Latinx communities.</p> <p>These limitations make certain the importance of applying QuantCrit, when analyzing ECLS-K data, to avoid harmful inferences. We relied on theoretical conceptions of race and disability via DisCrit and used QuantCrit to conceptualize our critical structural equation models and interpret the results. Additionally, we employed a mixed-methods approach to synthesize the statistical results with a qualitative meta-analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-10">Quantitative methods: Critical Structural Equation Modeling (CritSEM)</hd> <p>Structural equation modeling offers researchers the flexibility of testing theory through the examination of statistical effects and model fit (Bollen & Pearl, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref75">13</reflink>]). For this reason, we believe structural equation modeling is an ideal methodological approach for applying QuantCrit, an application Bell et al. (2024) referred to as critical structural equation modeling (CritSEM). "CritSEM offers a framework for applying a critical lens to quantitative research, creating space for a uniquely quantitative approach for a counterstory" (p. 5). Below, we describe our critical structural equation models, including the theory, research, and scholarship underlying those models. Grounded in QuantCrit, we believe such explanations are necessary for our political aim of advancing racial justice through statistics.</p> <p>The reference group in our models is white girls. Historically, white girls have not been considered overrepresented, while white boys have been ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref76">46</reflink>]). From a lens of intersectionality ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref77">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref78">25</reflink>]), we see race, gender, and ability as important social locations that intersect to shape experiences and outcomes for students in SPED. Intersectionality involves a "synergistic relationship" between studying a social phenomenon at the intersection of multiple influences of power and "the ways that explicitly challenge the status quo and aim to transform power relations" (Collins & Blige, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref79">21</reflink>], p. 33).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-11">Studying Causes and Proposing Interventions to Resegregation</hd> <p>Figure 1 shows the path diagrams of our critical structural equation models. The bottom of the figure displays 12 models. First, we examined, via indirect effects, if Black and Latinx boys and girls, in comparison to white girls, had increased probabilities of being resegregated in SPED during early elementary school (i.e., by third grade and fifth grade), due to their teachers' evaluations (academic and behavioral) and usage of early achievement scores (see Models 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10 in Figure 1). From a DisCrit perspective, these causes signify eugenics-based processes in schools, operating under "neutralized and invisible ways, to uphold notions of normalcy," that perpetuate the practice of resegregation at the intersection of racism and ableism (Annamma et al., 2018, p. 153). Additionally, we looked at the impact of monetary resources to understand differences in students' academic scores.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Causes and Interventions to Resegregation</p> <p>Resegregation was measured by third and fifth grade latent response variables (Muthén & Asparouhov, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref80">66</reflink>]). We transformed original categorical variables[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref81">5</reflink>] into latent response variables which represented, on a continuous scale, the underlying construct of the resegregation of students for more restrictive placements in special education. With the latent response variable, we explored how structural and embedded processes (i.e., the causes) in schools permit teachers to segregate students from the general education classroom for more restrictive educational placements via SPED ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref82">37</reflink>]; Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref83">64</reflink>]).</p> <p>The causes underlying our models represented teacher-level constructs—equity knowledge, skills, and beliefs—that influence teachers' evaluations and interpretations of Black and Latinx students' academic success (Bell et al., 2024; 2022; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref84">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref85">48</reflink>]; Lang et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref86">59</reflink>]). Without proficiency in these equity constructs, teachers may harbor biased, culturally deficit interpretations of disparate outcomes, resulting in them seeking to address learning difficulties and behavior via SPED ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref87">38</reflink>]). Learning and behavioral difficulties may result from limited access to academic opportunities, qualified teachers, and culturally relevant teaching, as well as other intersecting structural inequalities (i.e., lack of resources; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref88">17</reflink>]; Stovall, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref89">80</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the next set of critical structural equation models (see Models 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, and 12 in Figure 1), we examined the extent that anti-racist kindergarten teachers can disrupt Black and Latinx students from being resegregated in special education by third and fifth grade. Earlier, we described anti-racist teaching, specifically as it relates to SPED. Now we test these assumptions, using phantom variable modeling, in a SEM framework ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref90">61</reflink>]). The phantom variable approach can be used to quantify the potential impact of unobserved variables in models, capturing unmeasured influences that may impact predictors, such as teachers' evaluations and usage of early achievement scores, and the outcome of resegregation ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref91">61</reflink>]). We conceptualized a phantom variable to represent the construct of <emph>anti-racist teachers</emph>. Although anti-racist teachers are not observed in the ECLS-K data, the phantom variable effectively captures the influence of a theoretical factor related to anti-racist teaching practices in SPED (Harring et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref92">47</reflink>]). This methodological approach strengthens conclusions about the role of anti-racist teachers in classrooms, with the potential to inform policies and practices aimed at promoting racial and social justice in SPED. The path diagram displays direct and indirect effects, involving the anti-racist teaching phantom variable (see Figure 1 and Table S3). We examined the direct effects of anti-racist teachers on reducing resegregation, and changes in the indirect effects of the resegregation of Black and Latinx students, due to teachers' academic/behavioral evaluations and usage of early achievement scores.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-12">Quantitative results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189687708-13">Aspects Causing Resegregation in Special Education</hd> <p>Our analyses revealed that Black and Latinx boys and girls, in comparison to white girls, had increased probabilities of being resegregated in SPED by third and fifth grade, due to their teachers' academic/behavior evaluations and usage of early achievement scores (see Table S3). Additionally, we found that as access to monetary resources increased, students' early achievement increased by 2.95 units (<emph>p</emph> <.001). From a QuantCrit and DisCrit perspective, the normalized and concealed processes of teachers' inappropriate usage of assessment scores and deficit-based evaluations from kindergarten predicted, early on, students' educational trajectory and resegregation in SPED. These causes of resegregation were instituted in schools, during the eugenics movement, as racialized mechanisms to sort, classify, and segregate students (Mayes, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref93">64</reflink>]). Further, economic stratification also predicted students' early achievement, suggesting, indirectly, that the structural inequality of monetary resources also contributes to resegregation.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-14">Anti-Racist Teachers Disrupt Resegregation in Special Education</hd> <p>By employing a phantom variable, we were able to examine the direct and indirect effects of anti-racist teachers (see Table S3). In the phantom variable models, anti-racist teachers reduced resegregation (direct effects), prevented Black and Latinx students from being resegregated for more restrictive placements in SPED by third and fifth grade, and mitigated the hidden processes causing it (indirect effects). The causes, however, were not completely eradicated. Other factors may also be important, such as administrative support and the presence of Teachers of Color ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref94">55</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref95">53</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-15">Qualitative Research: Meta-Analysis on Resegregation in Special Education</hd> <p>In the next part of our investigation, we conducted a qualitative meta-analysis of published scholarship to understand resegregation in SPED from the perspectives of students and educators. A qualitative meta-analysis has the power to shape and influence policy and practice, with a completely different epistemology to quantitative research, which is capable of detailed explanations about a research phenomenon (Horton, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref96">50</reflink>]). We relied on the meta-analysis to develop a contextual understanding about the educational experiences of Black and Latinx students in SPED, the processes within the education system putting Black and Latinx students at risk for being resegregated, and how anti-racist actions disrupt resegregation.</p> <p>In our search, we identified empirical research, qualitative studies and mixed-method studies. During the selection process, the goal was to analyze enough studies that would result in saturation; meaning, redundancies would start showing up in the codes ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref97">62</reflink>]). Studies were selected if they demonstrated appropriate content and rigorous qualitative methods as further described below (Brantlinger et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref98">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref99">62</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-16">Content and quality criteria for selecting studies</hd> <p>For content criteria, we considered empirical research that aligned to at least one of our research questions and included the use of qualitative methods. We only selected published and peer reviewed research. Our process for determining the quality of studies relied on the work of Brantlinger et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref100">14</reflink>]), who examined empirical qualitative studies with the goal of broadening the scope of research considered for developing special education policy and practice. The authors created indicators (p. 202) to analyze the research questions, theoretical and conceptual framework, qualitative methods, data and data collection procedures, coding, and data examples used to substantiate conclusions; for example, "results are sorted and coded in a systematic and meaningful way" (p. 202). We used these indicators to ensure the quality of each study.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-17">Qualifying studies for the meta-analysis</hd> <p>After evaluating each study, our meta-analysis included 20 qualifying studies (see Table S4). A meta-analysis should include at least 12 studies, but this number can range depending on the area under investigation and types of studies ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref101">62</reflink>]; Paterson et al., [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref102">70</reflink>]; Timulak, [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref103">87</reflink>]). Our search resulted in a healthy number of studies. Table S4 provides descriptions of the studies.</p> <p>We reviewed short term and multi-year projects that utililzed various types of qualitative research methods, including ethnography and micro-ethnography, interviewing (e.g., focus groups and individual), document analysis and archival research, narrative, observational, and survey (i.e., open-ended responses). Fourteen studies included more than one source of qualitative data, which allowed researchers to analyze multiple sources of data. For the other studies, researchers analyzed, in-depth, singular sources of data. The setting of the research (where and when it took place) and the participants varied from one study to another. Most of the research took place in school settings. Some studies incorporated participants' perspectives about the consequences of special education following high school. Others collected data on participants to understand overrepresentation in U.S. urban and suburban school districts at the elementary, middle, and high school levels.</p> <p>The qualitative methods employed for data analyses were equally as diverse. Some researchers used inductive and interpretive coding approaches. The majority applied open and axial coding methods, allowing for the emergence of themes in the data. Certain researchers used constant comparative methods, taking a grounded theory approach, where they used the emergent themes from their coding to generate theory about overrepresentation. Lastly, many of the studies explicitly stated or implied a social and racial justice focus to their research. The studies for this meta-analysis encompassed research of multiple viewpoints on overrepresentation from key members in school and home communities.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-18">Meta-analytical methods for data analyses</hd> <p>We conducted multiple readings of the qualifying studies to gain familiarity. Then, we examined findings from each study and developed meaning units from those findings. The meaning units were assigned a descriptive label that represented the original units, often lengthy in nature, while maintaining the integrity and meaning of the original. Descriptive labels made up the qualitative data for our meta-analysis. Each descriptive label was a unit of analysis that would be assigned a code. After reading the data several times, we used open coding methods and an inductive process (Strauss & Corbin, [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref104">81</reflink>]) to allow codes to emerge from the data. The codes were then compared and contrasted to generate broader coding categories, using constant-comparison methods (Glaser & Strauss, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref105">44</reflink>]). The emergent categories were tested through an iterative process. A total of four iterations were needed to finalize the codebook.</p> <p>The codebook consisted of eight coding categories arranged under two themes (see Table S5). Using the codebook, every unit of analysis received one assigned code. The unit had to align with at least one of the descriptors from the category.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-19">Qualitative meta-analysis findings</hd> <p>The first theme, containing five coding categories, captured the intricate processes causing resegregation, which stemmed from educators' lack of preparation in equity. That is, teachers inappropriately referred students to SPED for a multitude of reasons, including insufficient support, unsubstantiated judgements about their students' academic skills and behavior, teachers' failure to explore the causes of behavior, high stakes testing, and teachers' self-preservation. Additionally, educators held deficit-based beliefs about the inferiority of students based on race/ethnicity, class, and/or language status, and they constantly compared students to white middle-class norms. Lastly, educators' limited family and community partnerships in the schools in which they taught resulted in unsubstantiated opinions and stereotypes about students. Once referred, the prereferral, referral and evaluation processes consisted of errors and biases.</p> <p>The second theme reflected unjust experiences in SPED. Black and Latinx students experienced subjugation resulting from their disability labels and SPED placements. This theme also captured how students and teachers pushed back. Students resisted special education services and raised objections to being in special education. Teachers and administrators held the power to change students' predicaments, reduce resegregation, and implement justice-based teaching practices. The meta-analytical analysis of qualitative research elucidated rich findings and research evidence.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-20">Methods: Critical Race Transformative Mixed-Methods Synthesis</hd> <p>We used critical race transformative mixed methods to synthesize quantitative and qualitative findings, following the definition and integration of transformative principles, and CRT tenets outlined by Garcia and Mayorga (2017). These principles include, for example, placing racially marginalized communities at the center of our research and using inquiry to advance social and political action. As a "methodology that challenges normative educational research practices by acknowledging that racism permeates educational institutions and marginalizes communities of color," critical race transformative mixed methods surface and seek to dismantle power where quantitative and qualitative findings meet (Garcia & Mayorga, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref106">41</reflink>], p. 231; Sweetman et al., [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref107">83</reflink>]).</p> <p>From a DisCrit perspective, we felt that using critical race transformative mixed methods was imperative to gain an understanding about the phenomena of resegregation and advance racial and social justice in SPED. Embedded within this framework was a convergent mixed methods parallel design ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref108">26</reflink>]; Garcia & Mayorga, 2017). We conducted quantitative and qualitative research analyses separately. Following analyses, we synthesized findings, giving equal consideration to the findings from each study to determine convergences and divergences between them, with a distinct focus on racial justice when the merging and interpreting the findings.</p> <p>Our synthesis involved a systematic process of rigorous stages to integrate the findings. Johnson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref109">51</reflink>]) created stages to enhance the quality of analyzing and interpreting findings in mixed methods research. Similar to comparing or triangulation ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref110">26</reflink>]), the stages generate, expand upon, and explore new insights.</p> <p>In the first stage, we listed specific elements of each study. This visually presented the sample characteristics, data variables, results of the quantitative study, type of qualitative data, and codes of the meta-analysis. The first stage helped us understand and think about broader categories that could be matched in the next stage. Second, we organized and aligned quantitative and qualitative elements of the studies, signifying points of integration. The third stage of checking required us to reflect on the alignment of elements which meant reexamining and questioning our justification for matching decisions. In certain instances, this meant going back to the original data findings to verify the intent of elements. Matched elements were checked three different times for accuracy. In the final stage, we compared quantitative and qualitative elements from within each matched category for the purpose of developing emergent themes. This process demonstrated convergence at several junctures, while other elements were complementary, but not divergent. At points of convergence, the qualitative elements brought the statistics to life and provided critical insight, amplifying the voice of sample participants.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-21">Results: Critical Race Transformative Mixed-Methods Synthesis</hd> <p>Overall, the synthesis, based on our analysis of data from quantitative and qualitative studies (Garcia & Ramirez, 2021), uncovered three well-grounded themes corresponding to our three research questions. A transformative mixed-methods approach enabled a balanced synthesis, using two distinctly different research epistemologies, that further bolstered our understanding of the phenomena in this investigation, grounded in DisCrit.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-22">Theme 1: Educators Make Unjust Special Education Referrals (Research Question 1)</hd> <p>Flaws in the referral and evaluation procedures created the scenario for educators to over identify Black and Latinx students for SPED. What many perceived to be benevolent processes of identifying students for SPED through achievement measures and teachers' evaluations contributed to upholding concealed forms of racism, illustrating what [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref111">4</reflink>] described as the dual nature of disability, functioning as an object of protection and oppression within the administrative power dynamics of schools.</p> <p>Educators gave undue weight to achievement and psychological assessments in determining students' identification for SPED. Our findings revealed four key factors, often not explored or considered by IEP teams, that could provide alternative rationales for students' academic and behavioral difficulties: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref112">1</reflink>) teachers' skills and effectiveness in the classroom; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref113">2</reflink>) quality of curricular resources; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref114">3</reflink>) students' exposure to traumatic events; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref115">4</reflink>) equitable learning opportunities in lower-socioeconomic and higher-socioeconomic schools. Findings also showed the impact of monetary resources on early achievement, resulting from structural inequalities, as another aspect unexplored by IEP teams. Subjectivity and biases were evident in academic assessments too.</p> <p>Teachers' evaluations of their students—academically and behaviorally—initiated the referral process for SPED identification. Findings demonstrated teachers' negative and deficit-based assessments of their students as a cause for resegregation. Teachers' assessments and judgements of their students usually resulted in a disability label, regardless of the referral process and psychological testing. Yet, teachers made unsubstantiated judgments about their students' academic and behavior skills. They used the influence of their subjective assessments to identify students for SPED. Judgements and assessments were not challenged by other educators but instead supported by teachers' positions of power within a bureaucratic system not attuned to the complexities of students' intersecting experiences of race, disability, gender, and other marginalized differences. Grounded in DisCrit, we claim that educators held (mis) beliefs regarding the inferiority of students, uncritically applying color-evasive norms that perpetuate an "ideology-ontology circuit" ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref116">3</reflink>], p. 134). That is, a racialized, deficit view of disability is reinforced by practices that fail to question the ways that constructions of race and disability are embedded in practice and educational discourse.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-23">Theme 2: Students Experience Injustices in Special Education (Research Question 2)</hd> <p>Analyses revealed a restrictive SPED system full of unjust experiences. Students experienced SPED as devastating, because of poor (low quality) teaching, discrimination, and segregation. The ramifications of disability labels, as underlined by DisCrit, subjugated students and forced them to live with the immediate stigma and subsequent consequences of having that label. Black and Latinx students were more likely to receive restrictive SPED placements due to their teachers' evaluations and usage of achievement scores. Segregated SPED placements isolated students from their peers. In these environments, students experienced increased racism, stigmatization, and low-quality teaching. Black girls especially felt the impact of a socially constructed identity at the intersection of disability, race, and gender. Furthermore, IEP diplomas created lasting barriers. IEP diplomas are assigned to students, sometimes at an early age, when the IEP team feels students cannot meet the objectives in the general education curriculum; students are thus given modified curricula and fail to graduate with a high school diploma.</p> <p>Overall, findings underpin the second theme, showing the injustice of SPED in students' lives. This included students' outlook on what they could accomplish because of ineffective SPED services and placements that created additional barriers, yet at the same time did not promote students' skill development.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-24">Theme 3: Teachers and Students Exercise Resistance and Agency (Research Question 3)</hd> <p>The third theme revealed how educators disrupt resegregation and respond to injustices. According to two different categories, findings showed the power of educators' teaching and agency and students' advocacy and resistance.</p> <p>In the first category, anti-racist teachers showed immense promise in our investigation. Special education teachers were agents for change who fought on the behalf of their students. They had the ability to change the predicament of students (mis) identified and implement justice-based pedagogies. Evidence from phantom variable models also revealed the potential impact of anti-racist teachers on disrupting resegregation, while also mitigating the causes. At the administrative level, institutional changes (i.e., RTI initiatives in Tier 1, effective co-teaching models, and improved communication between home and school environments) were successful in disrupting resegregation. At the same time, qualitative findings pointed to a lack of culturally relevant teaching as a cause of resegregation. These results suggest the need to employ justice-based pedagogies (e.g., culturally relevant teaching), prepare anti-racist educators in general and special education, and develop equitable policies to prevent resegregation. Importantly, we recognize that effectiveness is compromised when teachers (the majority of whom are white) lack preparation. Hence, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref117">75</reflink>] summarized evidence on the effectiveness, the efficacy, of preparing educators in culturally responsive teaching. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref118">28</reflink>] study found that culturally responsive teaching increased first-grade students' engagement. Other studies have found positive outcomes as well, including psychological well-being, not just academic well-being (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref119">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref120">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref121">20</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref122">73</reflink>]).</p> <p>Lastly, students resisted and advocated in response to injustices in SPED. Students advocated for educational placements in the general education classroom. They also expressed opposition to the microaggressions they experienced in SPED. Resistance took on several different forms. Quietly, students were successful in rejecting unwanted disability labels and refusing services. Students also demonstrated remarkable resiliency in SPED because of support from their peers, who were in similar circumstances. In certain cases, students after high school exceeded the modest expectations set forth in special education. Students' resistance and advocacy reveal the need for educators to heighten student voice and input during the prereferral stages and IEP processes.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-25">Discussion</hd> <p>Our investigation comes at a critical time for the field of Special Education. We provide a powerful and robust analysis of resegregation that directly challenges universal claims of underrepresentation. At the same time, this investigation also provides new empirical evidence of anti-racist teaching practices—including justice based and high-quality teaching—to mitigate the causes of and reduce resegregation. In this section, we discuss the context of resegregation in SPED. Then, we conceptualize a transformative vision of special education, by developing a theory of action to disrupt racial and social injustices in SPED with an anti-racist special education model, based on the overall themes from our research synthesis.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-26">Resegregation in Special Education</hd> <p>In our investigation, we reframe overrepresentation to reflect resegregation in special education, which places into context the racialized causes and consequences of this injustice. Special education has evolved legislatively over the years to provide certain students exceptional services and access to public schools. At the same time, there is another dimension of special education steeped in eugenics and white supremacy, causing <emph>resegregation</emph>, hidden behind the benevolent functions of SPED ([<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref123">86</reflink>]). Kohli and colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref124">54</reflink>]) write,</p> <p>We see manifestations in the past decade of a 'new racism' in K–12 schools that is evasive, subtle, and challenging to identify because it is normalized and hidden under the guise of multiculturalism, color-evasiveness, and everyday individualized interpretations of policy and practices. (Kohli et al., 2017, p. 195)</p> <p>This new form of racism was evident in our synthesis. Educators exercised their power to move Black and Latinx students from general education to SPED through normalized processes.</p> <p>Flowing from historically established eugenics-based views of disability, educators employ a medical model, following the Child Find Mandate in IDEA, notably in the early elementary grades (Ferri & Bacon, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref125">34</reflink>]), to diagnose and treat students based on subjective judgements and deficit-oriented perspectives of their students. Baker ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref126">5</reflink>]) describes this process as teachers going on the "hunt for disability<emph>"</emph> (p. 138). However, the model ignores and perpetuates notions of racism through normalized and socially accepted processes in education. Ferri and Bacon (2011) write, "discourses of risk are codified in social policy, early intervention programs, and educational discourse, working together to pathologize children" (p. 139). From a DisCrit perspective, the educational system, by design, has relied on white supremacy to encourage educators to hunt for disabilities.</p> <p>Schools continue to reproduce racial hierarchies through power dynamics that reinforce white supremacy ideology in decisions, practices, and policies (Gillborn, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref127">42</reflink>]). Historically, white supremacy explicitly espoused the inferiority of Students of Color (i.e., segregation, eugenics, cultural deprivation), using education as a tool to enforce and enact oppressive practices and policies. Now, the educational system enacts white supremacy quietly, more implicitly, but still through the same beliefs of inferiority.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-27">Theory of Action for Disrupting Resegregation in Special Education</hd> <p>Figure 2 highlights the causes and consequences of resegregation from the first and second themes and how they are embedded in the current system of identification that moves Black and Latinx students from general education into SPED. The theoretical notions underlying our research are also displayed. In the same figure, we show the "Critical Changes to Disrupt" derived from all three themes of this investigation, with arrows pushing upward on general and special education. The focal point of the first box is the general education classroom to prevent resegregation through justice-based preparation of educators who implement equitable practices in their classrooms. The second box focuses on reforming local policies and practices commonly employed at the referral and identification stages; that is, the second safeguard to prevent resegregation. The last box, pointing solely to the special education system, represents a variety of pedagogical and institutional changes to promote a more just and unified system of supports.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Theory of Action to Advance Racial and Social Justice in Special Education.</p> <p>These changes will take committed and strategic efforts. Therefore, at the bottom of Figure 2, we present an anti-racist special education model<emph>.</emph> We designed five model components to support the actualization of critical changes. The overall investigative themes, resulting from the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research, formed the foundation of the anti-racist special education model—a transformative aim of critical race transformative mixed methods is "how research, in relation to inequities, is associated with political and social action" (Garcia & Mayorga, 2017, p. 241). Our aim with the anti-racist special education model is to make transformational changes that prevent resegregation and provide students with valuable and equitable experiences in SPED. The model (see Table 1) emphasizes services and instruction that produce academic and social growth. Another point of emphasis is the development of educators' equity knowledge, skills, and beliefs. Thus, this model positions the skills and agency of anti-racist teachers as pivotal for enacting justice-oriented changes in their schools. The five components of the model, as outlined in Table 1, work synergistically, creating more closely meshed systems across general and special education. Some of the model's inclusive structures and practices have been proposed by others (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref128">52</reflink>]); here, we emphasize how the elements can work to counter racism and ableism, in ways that can be responsive to local contexts. We believe that this model has implications for teacher educators, schools, local and federal policy makers, and researchers.</p> <p>Table 1. Anti-Racist Special Education Model.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Component</th><th align="left">Description of Component</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><bold>Component 1</bold>Instruction and Services Take Place in the General Classroom Community</td><td>Students identified for disabilities receive instruction and services in the general education classroom. It is a students' fundamental right to be in the general education classroom to avoid segregation and racialized resegregation. All students are seen as valuable members of the classroom community. If students are removed, then the "fragile balance" of the ecosystem is disrupted (Duncan-Andrade, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr32">2009</xref>, p. 190). As explained by one teacher, "All my students are indigenous to my classroom and therefore there are no weeds in my classroom" (p. 190). Students receive what they need inside the general education classroom, within and amidst their community. At the same time, students experience community through opportunities to work with different groups of students daily and time to work independently or cooperatively without the direct influence of adults. General and special education teachers take responsibility for designing and delivering instruction, via flexible co-teaching models, if possible, in collaboration with related service providers (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr19">Choi et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr74">Sailor, 2017</xref>).</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Component 2:</bold> Classroom Instruction and Experiences Embody Culturally Relevant Teaching</td><td>Culturally relevant teaching (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr57">Ladson-Billings, 2014</xref>) is enacted by teachers so all students can thrive and feel empowered in their classroom communities. This pedagogy becomes the identity of teaching and learning in classrooms. Culturally relevant teaching is an asset-based pedagogy, meaning that the instructional vision shifts from a focus on deficit remediation to students learning content and developing their skills because of lesson design and a sense of classroom community. Implementing this justice-based pedagogy requires teachers to assess curricula, lessons, and materials for racial/ethnic and pedagogical biases. For example, teachers may replace lesson materials, incorporate cooperative learning, create motivating and engaging learning opportunities, relate learning to students' identities and interests, show racial/ethnic representation in texts and class, develop understanding and formulate actionable steps for addressing injustices, and amplify student voice in the classroom. For this pedagogy, teachers know their students and work to form strong relationships with all students.</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Component 3:</bold> High Quality Instruction and Supports that Embraces the Spirit of Culturally Relevant Teaching is Delivered to Students in the General Education Classroom by Qualified Educators.</td><td>Educators provide students with high quality academic and behavioral instruction and supports, within a flexible, collaborative system. For students identified, educators write high quality IEP goals to drive students' educational plans. We define high quality instruction and supports as those that focus on developing students' conceptual understanding—for example, in the areas of math and literacy—thereby accomplishing procedural tasks through a conceptual framework, while using and including all aspects of culturally relevant teaching. The goal is to prevent Black and Latinx students from entering the prereferral process by giving students the supports they need to grow in their emerging skill areas and provide students identified for special education high quality, equitable instruction. Selecting and delivering effective supports and instruction require teachers and specialists to collaborate as professional learning communities. High quality supports and instruction are incorporated from the start of the school year; more intensive supports and instruction are delivered when needed. The type and magnitude of instruction and supports is based on evidence, not subjective judgements. Further, instruction and supports are gauged for efficacy by teachers and school teams who systematically monitor and reflect on student progress. Notably, educators and related service providers need extensive training to teach students and deliver supports.</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Component 4:</bold> Sociocultural Approach for Prereferral, Referral, and IEP Processes</td><td>A sociocultural approach changes how educators view and use special education, framing differences among students as a part of human diversity. General and special education pre-referral, referral, and IEP processes are enacted within a meshed continuum of services with attention to the sociocultural contexts of children, family, and school communities.</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Component 5:</bold> Focus on Racial and Social Justice in General and Special Education</td><td>The final component focuses on developing educators' equity knowledge, skills, and beliefs to become anti-racist educators, so that they implement the other model components with integrity. Educators need knowledge of systemic inequities and racism in education; equity and justice-related theory, pedagogies, literature, and strategies in education; and their personal biases, cultural competence, and identity within the larger sociopolitical context. Educators require skills to strategically confront racist and inequitable instruction, practices, and policies; infuse age appropriate, diverse texts into the curriculum that are asset-based and historically accurate; assess curriculum to make sure learning strategies and lessons align with equity and justice-based pedagogies; and foster students' critical consciousness in the curriculum. Educators must hold beliefs in the imperative nature and moral obligation to provide all students with an equitable education based on high quality practices, the value of developing family and community partnerships to learn about the communities they serve, and the importance of continued self-education resulting from their core identity as change agents. When educators support equity, and have the knowledge, skills, and beliefs to focus on racial and social justice in general and special education, school and district level teams are better positioned to assess inequitable and unjust practices, policies, and curricula. For example, schools and the district monitor who is being identified for special education, according to students' intersecting identities (i.e., Black boys). School- and district-level teams monitor the overall progress of students identified for special education, ensuring the instruction students are receiving in the general education classroom helps students grow in their emerging areas. Districts also make recruiting and retaining special education teachers of color (SETOC), who are vastly underrepresented, a priority (Billingsley & Bettini, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr10">2019</xref>) because of the importance of SETOC in providing students with quality, culturally relevant instruction, and their agency on the behalf of students against inequitable practices and policies (Scott et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr77">2022</xref>).</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0189687708-28">Implications of Anti-Racist Special Education</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189687708-29">Teacher Preparation</hd> <p>The antiracist special education model has clear implications for the preparation of teachers. Teacher candidates must learn ways to prevent resegregation, reject deficit-based and eugenics-based conceptualizations of special education (e.g., turning away from a medical model), and enact anti-racist teaching practices ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref129">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref130">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref131">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref132">56</reflink>]). Teachers also need the requisite preparation experiences to enact culturally relevant, high-quality teaching in subject areas, such as literacy and math ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref133">56</reflink>]). Implementing the anti-racist special education model will require that preparation programs integrate a critical disabilities focus, guided by DisCrit and other similar frameworks ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref134">53</reflink>]).</p> <p>In their review of justice-oriented transformative teacher preparation programs, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref135">52</reflink>] identified the power of having teacher candidates engage, across their program and coursework, with critical disability studies materials that make visible the problematic ways that disability and race have been intertwined over time and become unquestioningly embedded in educational practices. Teacher preparation programs must double-down on integrating the historical context of discrimination and resegregation into their curricula. Understanding the historical context with a critical foundation offers learners an opportunity to recognize systemic inequities, identify biases in identification and placement, and implement equitable solutions.</p> <p>Simultaneously, teacher preparation programs must collaborate with local education agencies to develop and deliver ongoing and responsive professional development for special education personnel that focuses on anti-racist and anti-ableist practices, equitable solutions for identifying students, and culturally relevant instructional practices ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref136">53</reflink>]). These efforts are not only essential for addressing resegregation, but are also important for ensuring that marginalized students receive inclusive and equitable educational opportunities.</p> <p>Another critical need is the merger of general and special education preparation programs ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref137">19</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref138">74</reflink>]). Most preparation programs consist of different tracks that train teachers to think of their students as distinct groups. A justice-focused merger of preparation programs could offer candidates the training they need for a variety of future positions, but with a focus on inclusion for students identified. The difference is that candidates are now prepared as change agents to understand and respond to unjust practices underlying SPED.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-30">Educational Policy</hd> <p>Educational policy has mandated action to prevent overrepresentation (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004; [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref139">88</reflink>]). However, these policies have not had the desired impact. Instead, as shown in this investigation, ongoing resegregation and students' reported experiences represent a failure of SPED policy and practice for Black and Latinx communities. It is time to reconsider federal policies that shape state and local policies and practices.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-31">Federal policy</hd> <p>At the federal level, new legislation should include the celebrated services IDEA provides students, while incorporating new policies to prevent resegregation and the unjust experiences students face in special education<emph>.</emph> When it comes to SPED, policy should focus on a sociocultural approach rather than a medical model. A sociocultural approach shifts how educators view and use special education, framing differences among students as a part of human diversity. General and special education pre-referral, referral, and IEP processes are enacted within a meshed continuum of services with attention to the sociocultural contexts of children, family, and school communities. In efforts to fundamentally change special education, we offer areas of focus for future federal legislation, from a DisCrit perspective.</p> <p>First, we believe in reimagining the entire prereferral/referral process for identifying students needing services ([<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref140">82</reflink>]). Strategies in the pre-referral stage should focus on anti-racist practices, including, for example, culturally relevant and high-quality teaching practices ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref141">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref142">84</reflink>]). When making decisions to identify a student for SPED, other considerations should be taken into consideration, such as the quality of the teacher from the current year and prior years, the cultural relevance and responsiveness of classroom practices, prior opportunities determined by resource allocation, and traumatic events. In terms of instrumentation, only culturally responsive tests and assessments should be used to evaluate students. When selecting tests and instruments, policy should be mindful of the American Psychological Association's 2021 apology[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref143">6</reflink>] to people of color regarding their complicity in not admitting test bias throughout its history. Test instruments must not be used to misidentify students, thereby contributing to and exacerbating resegregation.</p> <p>Second, we call for the elimination of pull-out, segregated settings for students identified with high incidence disabilities. This way, SPED does not become a pathway for Students of Color to be removed from the general education classroom; we believe this alone will cut down on referrals.</p> <p>Third, we question the need for categorizing students according to subjective disability categories, which adds another socially constructed identity. Subjectivity and discretion allow too much room for biased perspectives to incorrectly mislabel, mis-serve, and misplace students.</p> <p>Fourth, federal policy should invest in developing, implementing, and evaluating robust multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) that integrate academic and socioemotional supports to reinforce alternate structural mechanisms that minimize deficit orientations and maximize school-wide access to services. <emph>We also believe that this would profoundly reduce resegregation.</emph></p> <p>Fifth, federal policy needs to take strong stances on preventing resegregation, and naming it as such, clearly defining resegregation for school districts around the country and the consequences if violated. We suggest that more stringent measures take effect that examine resegregation, based on students' identities. That is to say that a relative risk index (RRI) greater than 2.0, based on students' race/ethnicity and gender, indicates resegregation; the RRI represents a ratio—the degree of resegregation among socially constructed subgroups of race/ethnicity and gender—computed by dividing the number of students in a subgroup for a disability category by the number of total number of students in the subgroup, and dividing this quotient by the population of students expected to be identified for special education (10%[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref144">7</reflink>]). Finally, we believe it is imperative for legislation to include a focus and monitoring of (a) the frequency and severity with which students are disciplined and (b) the academic and/or social growth of students, once identified for SPED.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-32">Local policy and practice</hd> <p>The components of the anti-racist special education model provide a framework for conversations about school district policy and practice on such issues as the deployment of general and special education teachers, implementation of tiered systems of support, monitoring of student progress, high-quality instruction, and referral processes, among others. In the spirit of this model, we offer local policy and practice suggestions for anti-racist special education.</p> <p>To begin, districts must focus on educators' and administrators' development of their equity knowledge, skills, and beliefs, which becomes necessary for educators to fully implement the model components. Districts also need policy to help teachers implement the <emph>academic success</emph>, <emph>cultural competence</emph>, and <emph>critical consciousness</emph> tenets of culturally relevant teaching. Culturally relevant teaching becomes a way to prevent resegregation and provide students, with and without disabilities, efficacious instruction. We believe high-quality instruction is a critical aspect of the academic success tenet.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-33">Advancing Research on Preventing Resegregation and Providing High-Quality, Justice-Based Expe...</hd> <p>Our investigation shows an example of how research advances social justice by applying CRT, specifically DisCrit and QuantCrit, and rigorous mixed methods ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref145">40</reflink>]). Even so, additional research is needed to confront years of oppressive special education research and policy directed at Black and Latinx students, including research that examines ways to prevent resegregation and provide students with high-quality, justice-based instruction (i.e., culturally relevant teaching) in special education. Researchers could examine the implementation of practices, procedures, and systems embedded in the anti-racist special education model.</p> <p>For example, studies that focus on the effects of anti-racist teachers, who use high quality and justice-based teaching (e.g., culturally relevant teaching), to a) prevent Black and Latinx students from being resegregated in special education and/or b) understand the growth of students, identified for special education, in math and literacy would provide strong evidence for moving forward. This evidence, in turn, could help transform the field of Special Education to focus more on teaching, instead of intervention-based programs that so often lack efficacy and critical elements of high quality and justice-based teaching practices. Currently, evidence of justice-based teaching for students identified for special education has been limited, but shows promise ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref146">52</reflink>]). There is also a need for research that studies the preparation of anti-racist teachers in the development of their knowledge, skills, and beliefs with a focus on SPED.</p> <p>We are hopeful that anti-racist special education policy, practice, and research will serve as a foundation for initiating transformative changes. To the degree that the general and special education components in the anti-racist model work together to support students' academic and social development, the debate of overrepresentation versus underrepresentation becomes trivial.</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-34">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-ecx-10.1177_00144029251358720 for Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model by Nicholas S. Bell, Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez in Exceptional Children</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-35">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-ecx-10.1177_00144029251358720 for Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model by Nicholas S. Bell, Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez in Exceptional Children</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-36">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-ecx-10.1177_00144029251358720 for Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model by Nicholas S. Bell, Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez in Exceptional Children</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-37">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-ecx-10.1177_00144029251358720 for Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model by Nicholas S. Bell, Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez in Exceptional Children</p> <hd id="AN0189687708-38">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-5-ecx-10.1177_00144029251358720 for Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model by Nicholas S. Bell, Donna Y. Ford, Roderick L. Carey, Zachary Collier, Laura Eisenman, LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez in Exceptional Children</p> <ref id="AN0189687708-39"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref24" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Annamma S. A., Ferri B. A., Connor D. J. (2018). Disability critical race theory: Exploring the intersectional lineage, emergence, and potential futures of DisCrit in education. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 46–71. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18759041</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref36" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Aronson B., Laughter J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Artiles A. (2022). Interdisciplinary notes on the dual nature of disability: Disrupting ideology-ontology circuits in racial disparities research. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/23813377221120106</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref16" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Artiles A., Dorn S., Bal A. (2016). Objects of protection, enduring nodes of difference: Disability intersections with "other" differences, 1916 to 2016. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 777–820. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X1668060</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref81" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Baker B. (2002). The hunt for disability: The new eugenics and the normalization of school children. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 663–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9620.00175</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref141" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bal A. (2018). Culturally responsive positive behavioral interventions and supports: A process-oriented framework for systemic transformation. The Review of Education/Pedagogy/Cultural Studies, 40(2), 144–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2017.1417579</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref63" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bell N. S., Codding D. (2024). Equity Scenario Response Survey: Understanding teacher candidates' preparation of their sociopolitical identity. Urban Education, 59(3), 878–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420859211027616</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref65" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bell N. S., Collier Z., Vélez V., Ford D. Y. (2025). CritSEM: Advancing QuantCrit to examine racialized resegregation in special education. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 18(2), 390–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2024.2408538</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref64" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bell N. S., Soslau E., Wilson C. (2022). The student teaching equity project: Exploring teacher candidates' knowledge, skills, and beliefs. Journal of Teacher Education, 73(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248712110398</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Billingsley B., Bettini E. (2019). Special education teacher attrition and retention: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 697–744. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654319862495</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blanchett W. (2006). Disproportionate representation of African American students in special education: Acknowledging the role of white privilege and racism. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 24–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X0350060</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blanchett W. J. (2009). A retrospective examination of urban education: From Brown to theresegregation of African Americans in special education—it is time to "go for broke". Urban Education, 44(4), 370–388.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bollen K., Pearl J. (2013). Eight myths about causality and structural equation models. In S. L. Morgan (Ed.), Handbook of causal analysis for social research (pp. 301–328). Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brantlinger E., Jimenez R., Klingner J., Pugach M., Richardson V. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483. (1954).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Byrd C. M. (2016). Does culturally relevant teaching work? An examination from student perspectives. SAGE Open, 6(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016660744.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carey R. L., Yee L. S., DeMatthews D. (2018). Power, penalty and critical praxis: Employing intersectionality in educator practices to achieve school equity. The Educational Forum, 82(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1381793</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cavendish W., Connor D., Gonzalez T., Jean-Pierre P., Card K. (2020). Troubling "the problem" of racial overrepresentation in special education: A commentary and call to rethink research. Educational Review, 72(5), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1550055</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Choi H., Sailor W., McCart A. (2020). Reshaping educational systems to realize the Promise of inclusive education. Forum for International Research in Education, 6(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.32865/FIRE202061179</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cholewa B., Goodman R., West-Olatunji C., Amatea E. (2014). A qualitative examination of the impact of culturally responsive educational practices on the psychological well-being of students of color. The Urban Review, 46(4), 574–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Collins P., Bilge S. (2016). Intersectionality (Ser. Key concepts). Polity Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. (2009). Breaking containment–the power of narrative knowing: Countering silences within traditional special education research. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(5), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110701789126</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D., Cavendish W., Gonzalez T., Jean-Pierre P. (2019). Is a bridge even possible over troubled waters? The field of special education negates the overrepresentation of minority students: A discritanalysis. Race Ethnicity and Education, 22(6), 723–745. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1599343</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. J., Danforth S., Gallagher D. (2024). An open letter to the field: Contemplating special education's collaborative role in developing inclusive education. Exceptional Children, 91(3), 236–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029241303051</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 8(1), 139–167. <ulink href="http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8">http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Creswell J. W., Creswell J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cruz R., Kulklani S., Firestone S. (2021). A QuantCrit analysis of context, discipline, special education, and disproportionality. AERA Open, 7, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858421</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cuffee D. (2020). The impact of culturally responsive teaching on student engagement. NWCommons. https://nwcommons.nwciowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1255&context=education_masters#:∼:text=Student%20engagement%20was%20observed%20daily,built%20a%20positive%20class%20culture</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Da Silva S., Hubbard K. (2024). Confronting the legacy of eugenics and ableism: Towards anti-ableist bioscience education. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 23(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/0.1187/cbe.23-10-0195</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Delgado R., Stefancic J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. NYU press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diana v. State Board of Education. Civil Action No. C-70-37 (N. D. Cal.1970).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Duncan-Andrade J. (2009). Note to educators: hope required when growing roses in concrete. Harvard Educational Review, 79(2), 181–194.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunn L. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded—is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35(1), 5–22.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferri B. A., Bacon J. (2011). Beyond inclusion: Disability studies in early childhood teacher education. In B. Fennimore & A. Goodwin (Eds.), Promoting social justice for young children. Educating the young child (Vol. 3). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0570-8_12</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferri B. A., Connor D. J. (2005). In the shadow of Brown: Special education and overrepresentation of students of color. Remedial and Special Education, 26(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260020401</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferri B. A., Connor D. J. (2005). Tools of exclusion: Race, disability, and (re)segregated education. Teachers College Record, 107(3), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00483.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fish R. E. (2019). Standing out and sorting in: Exploring the role of racial composition in racial disparities in special education. American Educational Research Journal, 56(6), 2573–2608. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219847966</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford D. Y., Russo C. (2016). Historical and legal overview of special education overrepresentation: Access and equity denied. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 16(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.56829/2158-396X.16.1.50</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frankenberg E., Siegel-Hawley G. (2024). Understanding suburban school segregation: Toward a renewed civil rights agenda. The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, UCLA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garcia N., López N., Vélez V. (2018). Quantcrit: Rectifying quantitative methods through critical race theory. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377675</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garcia N. M., Mayorga O. J. (2018). The threat of unexamined secondary data: a critical race transformative convergent mixed methods. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377415</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gillborn D. (2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness, critical race theory and education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500132346</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gillborn D., Warmington P., Demack S. (2018). QuantCrit: Education, policy, 'big data' and principles for a critical race theory of statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 158–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377417</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glaser B., Strauss A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gould S. J. (1996). The mismeasure of man (Reviewed and expanded). Norton.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grant C. (2014). The boy problem: Educating boys in urban America, 1870-1970. Johns Hopkins University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harring J. R., Mcneish D. M., Hancock G. R. (2017). Using phantom variables in structural equation modeling to assess model sensitivity to external misspecification. Psychological Methods, 22(4), 616–631. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000103</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harry B., Klingner J. (2014). Why are so many minority students in special education? Understanding race & disability in schools (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hines D. E., Bovedo M., Lindo E. J. (2021). Racism by another Name: Black students, overrepresentation, and the carceral state of special education. Information Age Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Horton L. (2020). Making qualitative data more visible in policy: A critical appraisal of meta-synthesis. Qualitative Research, 20(5), 534–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119881953</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson R. E., Grove A. L., Clarke A. (2019). Pillar integration process: A joint display technique to integrate data in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817743108</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ko D., Mawene D., Krichevsky B., Lim S. (2024). Organizing possible futures: A systematic review on dis/ability justice frameworks to design equity-oriented inclusive teacher education programs. Review of Educational Research, 94(6), 883–926. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231212927</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ko D., Mawene D., Lee Y., Lim S., Yoo J. (2025). When good intentions go Awry: A critical policy analysis of equity-focused policies intended to reduce racial disparities in special education. Exceptional Children. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029241292589</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kohli R., Pizarro M., Nevárez A. (2017). The "new racism" of K–12 schools: Centering critical research on racism. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 182–202. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16686949</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulkarni S. S. (2022). Special education teachers of color and their beliefs about dis/ability and race: Counter-stories of smartness and goodness. Curriculum Inquiry, 51(5), 496–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2021.1938973</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulkarni S. S., Miller A. L., Nusbaum E. A., Pearson H., Brown L. X. (2024). Toward disability-centered, culturally sustaining pedagogies in teacher education. Critical Studies in Education, 65(2), 107–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2023.2234952</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ladson-Billings G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the Remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ladson-Billings G., Tate W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97, 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146819509700104</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lang S. N., Tebben E., Luckey S. W., Hurns K. M., Fox E. G., Ford D. Y., Ansari A., Pasque P. A. (2024). Early childhood teachers' dispositions, knowledge, and skills related to diversity, inclusion, equity, and justice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 67, 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.12.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Larry P.v. Riles, 343 F. Supp. 1306 (N.D. Cal. 1972).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leite W. L., Shen Z., Marcoulides K., Fisk C. L., Harring J. (2022). Using ant colony optimization for sensitivity analysis in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 29(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2021.1881786</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levitt H. M., Bamberg M., Creswell J. W., Frost D. M., Josselson R., Suárez- Orozco C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA. Publications and Communications Board Task Force Report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 26–46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Losen D. J., Martinez P., Shin G. H. R. (2020). Significant disproportionality in special education: Current trends and actions for impact. National Center for Learning Disabilities. https://<ulink href="http://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-NCLD-">www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-NCLD-</ulink> Disproportionality_Trends-and-Actions-for-Impact_FINAL-1.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mayes K. (2023). Unteachables: Disability rights and the invention of black special education. University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morgan P. L., Farkas G., Hillemeier M. M., Mattison R., Maczuga S., Li H., Cook M. (2015). Minorities are disproportionately underrepresented in special education: Longitudinal evidence across five disability conditions. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 278–292. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15591157</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Muthén B., Asparouhov T. (2002). Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: Multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. <ulink href="http://www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/CatMGLong.pdf">http://www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/CatMGLong.pdf</ulink> [Google Scholar].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Najarian M., Tourangeau K., Nord C., Wallner-Allen K. (2018). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLSK: 2011), First- and Second-Grade Psychometric Report (NCES 2018-183). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielsen K. E. (2012). A disability history of the United States. Beacon Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Osgood R. (2005). The history of inclusion in the United States. Gallaudet University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paterson B. L., Thorne S. E., Canam C., Jillings C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pelaez López A. (2018, September). The X in Latinx is a wound, not a trend. ColorBloq. https://<ulink href="http://www.colorbloq.org/article/the-x-in-latinx-is-a-wound-not-a-trend">www.colorbloq.org/article/the-x-in-latinx-is-a-wound-not-a-trend</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pérez Huber L., Vélez V. N., Solórzano D. (2018). More than 'papelitos:' a quantcrit counterstory to critique Latina/o degree value and occupational prestige. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 208–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377416</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Portes P. R., González Canché M., Boada D., Whatley M. E. (2017). Early evaluation findings from the instructional conversation study: Culturally responsive teaching outcomes for diverse learners in elementary school. American Educational Research Journal, 55(3), 488–531. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217741089</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sailor W. (2017). Equity as a basis for inclusive educational systems change. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 41(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/jse.2016.12</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sandoval C., Cunningham J., Jacobs J., Warner S. (2023). Research and evidence-based best practices for preparing educators for culturally responsive teaching and leading. WestEd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schott Foundation. (2015). Black Lives Matter: The Schott 50 state report on public education and black males. https://schottfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/blacklivesmatter2015_0.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Scott L. A., Bell N., Dayton M., Bowman R. W., Evans I., Grillo M., Spence C., Layden S. J. (2022). Special education teachers of color retention decisions: Findings from a national study. Exceptional Children, 89(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221109850</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Selden S. (1999). Inheriting shame: The story of eugenics and racism in America. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Skiba R. J., Artiles A. J., Kozleski E. B., Losen D. J., Harry E. G. (2016). Risks and consequences of oversimplifying educational inequities: A response to Morgan et al. (2015). Educational Researcher, 45(3), 221–225. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16644606</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stovall D. (2023). The gradual and immediate violence of an engineered conflict: School closings, public housing, law enforcement, and the future of black life in Chicago. Teachers College Record, 125(5), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681231181804</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strauss A., Corbin J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sullivan A. L., Worrell F. C., Jimerson S. R. (2022). Reconceptualizing school psychology for the 21st century: The future of school psychology in the United States. School Psychology Review, 51(6), 647–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2022.2139131</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sweetman D., Badiee M., Creswell J. W. (2010). Use of the transformative framework in mixed methods studies. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410364610</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tan P., Padilla A., Mason E. N., Sheldon J. (2024). Humanizing disability in mathematics education: Forging new paths. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-022-00428-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tefera A., Artiles A. J., Kramarczuk Voulgarides C., Aylward A., Alvarado S. (2023). The aftermath of disproportionality citations: Situating disability-race intersections in historical and spatial contexts. American Educational Research Journal, 60(2), 367–404. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312221147007</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thorius K. A. K. (2019). Facilitating en/counters with special education's cloak of benevolence in professional learning to eliminate racial disproportionality in special education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 32(3), 323–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2019.1576945</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Timulak L. (2009). Meta-analysis of qualitative studies: A tool for reviewing qualitative research findings in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 19(4–5), 591–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300802477989</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Fact sheet: Equity in IDEA. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-equity-idea">www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-equity-idea</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education. (2020–21). Civil rights data collection office for civil rights. https://civilrightsdata.ed.gov/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Waitoller F. R., Thorius K. A. K. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for disability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0189687708-40"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicholas S. Bell https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9276-1883 LaRon Scott https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9539-4687</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Supplemental material for this article is available online.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Four categories made up the variable, prior to the transformation: general education (students not identified for special education); full inclusion (students identified for and received special education services in the general education classroom); and segregated special education (students were pulled out into segregated learning environments for less than 30% of their day and more than 30% of their day).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> https://<ulink href="http://www.apa.org/about/policy/racism-apology">www.apa.org/about/policy/racism-apology</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The criterion of 10% represents, approximately, the percentage of students aged 6 to 21 identified with disabilities in the United States (see the 43rd Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2021, https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/43rd-arc-for-idea.pdf).</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Nicholas S. Bell; Donna Y. Ford; Roderick L. Carey; Zachary Collier; Laura Eisenman; LaRon Scott and Verónica N. Vélez</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref138"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref140"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref142"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1490676
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nicholas+S%2E+Bell%22">Nicholas S. Bell</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9276-1883">0000-0001-9276-1883</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Donna+Y%2E+Ford%22">Donna Y. Ford</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Roderick+L%2E+Carey%22">Roderick L. Carey</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Zachary+Collier%22">Zachary Collier</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Laura+Eisenman%22">Laura Eisenman</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22LaRon+Scott%22">LaRon Scott</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9539-4687">0009-0000-9539-4687</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Verónica+N%2E+Vélez%22">Verónica N. Vélez</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Exceptional+Children%22"><i>Exceptional Children</i></searchLink>. 2026 92(2):182-204.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 23
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Early+Childhood+Education%22">Early Childhood Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Preschool+Education%22">Preschool Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Education%22">Special Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Resegregation%22">School Resegregation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Racism%22">Racism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disproportionate+Representation%22">Disproportionate Representation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Experience%22">Student Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prevention%22">Prevention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Critical+Race+Theory%22">Critical Race Theory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Children%22">Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Surveys%22">Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Longitudinal+Studies%22">Longitudinal Studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22African+American+Students%22">African American Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hispanic+American+Students%22">Hispanic American Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Equal+Education%22">Equal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Minority+Group+Students%22">Minority Group Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preschool+Education%22">Preschool Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Racial+Identification%22">Racial Identification</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethnicity%22">Ethnicity</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Early+Childhood+Longitudinal+Survey%22">Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/00144029251358720
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0014-4029<br />2163-5560
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The resegregation (i.e., overrepresentation) of Black and Latinx students in special education is a longstanding concern of scholars, researchers, and policy makers in the United States. Therefore, we conducted a critical investigation to better understand the causes of resegregation, student experiences in special education, and anti-racist actions to prevent resegregation. Using critical race transformative mixed methods for the expressed aim of advancing social and political action, we synthesized quantitative and qualitative findings from research studies to develop three well-grounded themes: (a) educators make unjust special education referrals; (b) students experience injustices in special education; and (c) teachers and students exercise resistance and agency. Culminating from this research, we propose an "anti-racist special education model" for teacher educators and policy makers to disrupt resegregation, while providing students with the equitable supports and teaching they need to be successful. Our paper concludes with implications for policy, practice, and research.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1490676
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1490676
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/00144029251358720
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 23
        StartPage: 182
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Special Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Resegregation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Racism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disproportionate Representation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prevention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Critical Race Theory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Longitudinal Studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: African American Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hispanic American Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Equal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Minority Group Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary Secondary Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preschool Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Racial Identification
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ethnicity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Critical Investigation of Resegregation Patterns in Special Education: Toward an Anti-Racist Special Education Model
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nicholas S. Bell
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Donna Y. Ford
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Roderick L. Carey
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Zachary Collier
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Laura Eisenman
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: LaRon Scott
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Verónica N. Vélez
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0014-4029
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2163-5560
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 92
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Exceptional Children
              Type: main
ResultId 1