ABSTRACT
In the United States, The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142) was passed in 1975, requiring states to provide “a free, appropriate public education for every child between the ages of 3 and 21 regardless of how, or how seriously, he may be handicapped.” In 1990 the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was passed as an amendment to Public Law 94-142. The amendment extended services for students with disabilities. For example, it provided services for students with ADHD; and it replaced the word “handicapped” with “disabled.” These laws were intended to address the educational rights of children long neglected by our public school system. However, these federal guidelines have unintended consequences. Minority students are over-represented in special education programs throughout the United States. Misdiagnosis is a widespread practice (Harry & Anderson, 1994). Policymakers assume that “clinical” decisions that label children for special education services come about in some rational way. In fact, the decision-making processes are far less clinical than many of us care to acknowledge. Case 1 is about Benjamin, an African American boy in the 3rd grade. It illustrates how his teacher’s beliefs about race, class, and gender interact in ways that produce labels that may not operate in Benjamin’s best educational interests.
