Blog Post #4: Richard Wilkins

           Throughout the journey of human civilization, education has been considered a privilege—not a right. There are many debates as to the rational of such a notion; however, the underlying fact is knowledge is empowerment. Thus, one who holds the knowledge wields power. Consequently, withholding intelligence was a societal injustice and an act of subjugation. Throughout the following text we discuss how this thesis is still relevant in contemporary society and outline several ideas to combat the disproportionalities minorities endure within the special education population.

Before we continue, it important to mention that bigotries of judgment that have been present in the public education system for generations. In Education for All, we find that minority cultures such as the African-Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian-Americans were routinely segregated despite ratification of various amendments to end its practice. Additionally, we also discover that these intolerances were fueled by a skewed defense of nationalism, xenophobia, and national identity. It was not until a series of court rulings that individual recognition was achieved (but socially and educationally). However, the larger issue of cultural acceptance loomed and will prove to be a major part of our discussion.

According to an article entitled, Promising Practice for Curbing Disproportionate Representation of Minority Students in Special Education, the authors Echevarria and Powers discuss issues surrounding the culture of public education. They argue that the after the 1954 decision of Brown vs. the Board of Education, the subsequent foundations of educational professionals and institutions continued to emulate the values of the suburban middle class Americana and did not adapt to the growing urban influence. Therefore a lack of diverse professionals, and progressive thought/training, actually aggravated issues of representation and led to many of the disproportionalities witnessed throughout the latter half of the twentieth century.

As we crossed the threshold of a new millennium, a recognition of these concerns led to a changing narrative. The conversation shifted from the exclusion of these individuals, to embracing their presence, to finally developing and implementing strategies to deal with their exceptionalities—one of these is Response to Intervention. RTI is the ‘practice of providing high-quality instruction and interventions matched to the student’s need’. Matched is the key phrase within that statement as placement is no longer arbitrary. RTI has three main subsections—focusing on a broad range of outcomes (which allow for a greater sampling of information to be analyzed), focusing on the individual (which tailors a person’s education specifically to their needs), and embracing tangible data sets (which seeks to eliminate much of the subjective nature and inconsistencies of placement by corroborating each educational decision with substantiated statistics). By collaborating with a series of professionals, RTI can be a useful tool to purge disproportionalities throughout special education.

In conclusion, we must be mindful that many students face a multitude of issues including socio-economic factors, the crossroads of cultures (sometimes positive and sometimes negative) throughout the classroom setting, and various domestic trials and tribulations that can culminate in multitude of behavior scenarios. Therefore, the inclusionary landscape must be ever-adapting. Thus, we must strive to be curious—we must strive to be inquisitive. By doing so, we will develop a relationship, rapport, and most importantly, trust that will not only bridge the gap of exclusion; but also, reduce the cultural misunderstandings of diversity and empower a new generation to embrace their purpose.