Appendix A: Lozano Smith Opinion Letter Propriety of Administering I.Q. Tests to African American Students
CURRENT LAW AND POLICY XX. XXXX XXXXXXXXXX, Director March 18, 2002 Page 4 Federal and State Law
Both federal and state laws prohibit the use of evaluation materials that are racially or culturally biased for assessing special education eligibility. (See 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(6)(B); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a)(1)(i); Educ. Code § 56320(a) .) The laws further require that any standardized tests be validated for the specific purpose used. (See 34 C.F.R § 300.532(C)(1)(i); Educ.Code § 56320(b)(2) .) Crawford v. Honig In the Crawford case, a group of African American students challenged the 1986 modification to the 1979 Larry P. injunction. The district court vacated the 1986 modification, leaving the original Larry P. injunction intact. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to vacate the 1986 modification because there were no factual findings to support the expansion of the injunction. The circuit court noted that the original Larry P. injunction was limited to a ban of I.Q. testing for placement of African American students in EMR classes and was not a determination of the validity of I.Q. testing for other purposes. The district court had also ordered further proceedings to determine the “substantial equivalent” to EMR classes. However, those proceedings were either not completed or did not result in a published opinion. CDE Analysis of Crawford v. Honig Shortly after the Crawford decision was rendered in 1994, the CDE issued a memorandum reaffirming the 1992 Advisory and the CDE’s position prohibiting intelligence testing for assessing special education eligibility of African American students. The CDE confirmed that the original Larry P. injunction remained intact and was unchanged by the Crawford case. The memorandum emphasized that American versions of standard I.Q. tests had been found racially and culturally biased by the Larry P. court and that parental consent could not overcome the inherent bias in the tests. The CDE further asserted that, under state and federal law, it has the authority to prohibit the use of tests not validated for the purpose used and made clear that no standardized intelligence test has been validated for determining special education eligibility for placement. The CDE views the statutory ban on use of discriminatory testing materials very broadly and not limited by the terms of the Larry P. injunction. Thus, the CDE’s position is that I.Q. tests may not be used to identify African American students as either mentally retarded or learning disabled.
BP 5002 – Assessment and Evaluation
Page 23
Desert Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (DMCS) (rev. 11/16)
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online