Part 1: Detailed findings comparing the identification, placement and performance of Massachusetts students with disabilities with students in the rest of the country Question 1: How do the identification, placement and performance of students with disabilities in Massachusetts compare to students with disabilities across the United States.? Finding 1a Identification: – Massachusetts identifies students as eligible for special education and related services at rates substantially higher than the rest of the country. More than 17% of Kindergarten through 12th grade students in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are eligible for special education services. This rate of identification for special education service eligibility is the second highest in the country, behind Rhode Island (~19%). In Figure1 (on the following page), we display a comparison of identification rates in Massachusetts and the rest of the United States., by disability category. We interpret Figure 1 as indicating three general patterns. In the first pattern, which applies to categories whose designations have relatively strict and narrow definitions (Vision, Hard of Hearing/Deaf-Blind and Physical Disabilities), rates of identification in Massachusetts look very similar to national averages. In the second pattern, we find disabilities (Intellectual Disabilities, Autism, Emotional Disturbance, where Massachusetts rates of Multiple Disabilities and Developmental Delay) identification, while high relative to the national average, may be more in line with recent research findings (e.g., Bhasin,2006; Rice, 2009, Sheldrick, 2011; 2010) regarding true incidence in the population of school age children. The pattern, which will be the focus of the majority of the analyses presented in this report, is applicable to disability categories whose definitions may be more subject to interpretation (Specific Learning Disability, Communication and Other Health Impairment). Nearly two out of every three Massachusetts students with a disability are identified as belonging in one of these three categories and due to the potentially subjective nature of their diagnosis, rates of identification for these categories may be more sensitive to policy decisions than rates for the more strictly defined categories. Further, we see evidence throughout the commonwealth that indicates that children with similar profiles may fall differentially into one of these three categories, depending on the designation conventions of different school districts. For these reasons, we combine students in the Specific Learning Disability, Communication and Other Health Impairment categories for many of our analyses and we refer to this combined group as the Incidence’ disability categories. We ‘High
Part 1: Detailed findings comparing the identification, placement and performance of Massachusetts students with disabilities with students in the rest of the country Question 1: How do the identification, placement and performance of students with disabilities in Massachusetts compare to students with disabilities across the United States.? Finding 1a – Identification: Massachusetts identifies students as eligible for special education and related services at rates substantially higher than the rest of the country. More than 17% of Kindergarten through 12th grade students in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are eligible for special education services. This rate of identification for special education service eligibility is the second highest in the country, behind Rhode Island (~19%). In Figure1 (on the following page), we display a comparison of identification rates in Massachusetts and the rest of the United States., by disability category. We interpret Figure 1 as indicating three general patterns. In the first pattern, which applies to categories whose designations have relatively strict and narrow definitions (Vision, Hard of Hearing/Deaf-Blind and Physical Disabilities), rates of identification in Massachusetts look very similar to national averages. In the second pattern, we find disabilities (Intellectual Disabilities, Autism, Emotional Disturbance, Multiple Disabilities and Developmental Delay) where Massachusetts rates of identification, while high relative to the national average, may be more in line with recent research findings (e.g., Bhasin,2006; Rice, 2009, Sheldrick, 2011; 2010) regarding true incidence in the population of school age children. The pattern, which will be the focus of the majority of the analyses presented in this report, is applicable to disability categories whose definitions may be more subject to interpretation (Specific Learning Disability, Communication and Other Health Impairment). Nearly two out of every three Massachusetts students with a disability are identified as belonging in one of these three categories and due to the potentially subjective nature of their diagnosis, rates of identification for these categories may be more sensitive to policy decisions than rates for the more strictly defined categories. Further, we see evidence throughout the commonwealth that indicates that children with similar profiles may fall differentially into one of these three categories, depending on the designation conventions of different school districts. For these reasons, we combine students in the Specific Learning Disability, Communication and Other Health Impairment categories for many of our analyses and we refer to this combined group as the ‘High Incidence’ disability categories. We
2012-04sped.docx