Culturally Biased Testing

SPED 443
Elizabeth Sparkes
 Discriminatory testing has been an issue that has plagued the education system for

many years. This has been a problem not only in general education classrooms, but in

special education classrooms as well. Many standardized IQ tests are both culturally and

racially biased. These biases can cause the results of testing to show IQ or learning

deficits that the student does not truly have. The skewed results of these tests can be

critical when a student is being evaluated for special education services.

There have been many times that students have been evaluated for eligibility for

special education, and have been placed into the special education program solely based

on the fact that they don’t speak English as their primary language. One instance of this

was brought to courts in the case of Larry P. versus Riles in 1981. This case was in New

York where black elementary school students were being placed in educable mental

retardation classes (EMR classes). The argument was that the placement in these classes

was based only on an IQ test. Not only should there be more than one evaluation to place

a student in special classes, but the one test they were given was racially and culturally

biased. Many black students did not have the same life experiences as the students

considered to be the “norm” elementary school students. This might cause students to

answer questions incorrectly, not because they have a lower IQ, but due to the fact that

they have not had the experiences to understand the material in the question. Allowing

these biased tests violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. The court

found that the IQ test was racially and culturally biased and schools should no longer be

allowed to use it as a test for special education placement. “IQ tests bear little relationship

to the intelligence they are supposed to measure in the event of language or cultural

unfamiliarity” (Larry P. Vs. Riles). Now, in many states IQ tests are barred from being
used in evaluations for placement, however a few states allow the IQ test to be used as a

part of a larger and more comprehensive evaluation of a student.

Because nondiscriminatory testing is one of the six major principles of IDEA,

there are many places in the federal regulations that protect people who do not speak

English as their primary language. This is stated in paragraph 300.532 of the federal

IDEA regulations. This states that “Each public agency shall ensure, at a minimum, that

the following requirements are met: Tests and other evaluation materials used to assess a

child under Part B of the Act—are selected and administered so as not to be

discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; and are provided and administered in the

child’s native language or mode of communication, unless it is clearly not feasible to do

so; and Materials and procedures used to assess a child with limited English proficiency

are selected and administered to ensure that they measure the extent to which the child

has a disability and needs special education, rather than measuring the child’s English

language skills” (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 300). These regulations mean that all

placement evaluation tests must be given to children in their own native language so they

are accurately able to show their strengths and weaknesses.

The definition of native language according to IDEA is stated in paragraph

300.19. It states “As used in this part, the term native language, if used to reference to an

individual with limited English proficiency, means the following: 1) The language

normally used by that individual, or, in the case of a child, the language normally used by

the parents of the child” (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 300). This way, the tests

show only the child’s abilities and disabilities and not just the lack of familiarity with the
English language. That lack of proficiency with English should not be the criteria used to

place a student in special education services.

This new regulation had, and still continues to have a large effect on the field of

special education today. When IQ testing was allowed to be the basis for special

education placement, there was a disproportionate amount of non-English speaking

children as well as students of other races and cultures in special education. During these

times, in the EMR classes, Hispanic and Latino students were very overrepresented. This

could fuel the debated that white students were smarter, and superior to children of other

races. This also created a special education field that classified students as disabled

because they did not have the same life experiences as the normal student.

Many times, placement in special education services led to a child being placed in

a lower ability track. I know from my own experiences in schools, that once a student is

placed in a certain ability track, it can be very hard to move either up or down. So these

invalid test results could mark a student as having a lower IQ or needing special needs for

his whole life, when all they might have needed was some remediation with the English

language. If a student comes into a classroom as a non-English speaking student they are

already going to feel as if they stand out from the rest of the students. If they are

mislabeled as a student with special needs it will only make them stand out more. If

given the appropriate testing they would not be forced to be in that situation.

The new regulations concerning non-discriminatory testing can help relieve a lot

of frustrations both in and out of the classroom. As a special education teacher, I think it

would be frustrating to have a student in my class because of invalid tests. If the student

did not have special needs it would be hard to serve them in a special needs classroom. It
is not the job of a special educator to teach a student English, but to help modify a

program or provide accommodations to help a student with a disability be successful.

Although not having English as your primary language can be a disability in the United

States, it is not evidence that a student should be placed in special education. This can

also be frustrating for the student and their family. Because many tests did not test what

they actually said they were testing, many people were mislabeled as disabled. It must be

frustrating for a parent to have their child in a program that is not going to serve their

needs. For example, if a student moved from another country and needed some

remediation with the English language they would necessarily get that in a special

education classroom. To have to watch your child struggle, and not get the services to

make them successful has to be extremely frustrating. So, with the federal regulations

about testing in IDEA this kind of thing should never happen again.

These regulations about evaluation have also changed the makeup of special

education classrooms. The more comprehensive testing has allowed for a more diverse

group of students to be considered as students with special needs. Students are no longer

placed into special education classes solely based on their racial or cultural differences.

This will allow for general education classrooms to also become more diverse which

benefits not only the students who are not misplaced, but also the general education

students. These students with different backgrounds can learn from each other and have

a more beneficial educational experience. Now students can be in the correct placement,

which will ease the stresses and frustrations of both the educators and families of students

with special needs.

 Works Cited

Larry P. v. Riles 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir.1984). Retrieved October 7, 2003, from the world
wide web: http://www.findlaw.com

Wright, Peter W.D., and Pamela D., (1999). Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, Harbor
House Law Press.