DOCUMENT RESUME EC 305 302 ED 403 726 Allen, Norma N.; And Others AUTHOR The Parent Professional Partnership: African American TITLE Paients' Participation in the Special Education Process. Final Report. Maryland Univ., College Park. Inst. for the Study of INSTITUTION Exceptional Children and Youth. Department of Education, Washington, DC. SPONS AGENCY 28 Jan 93 PUB DATE CONTRACT H023C901254 NOTE 84p. Research/Technical (143) PUB TYPE Reports MF01/PC04 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE Black Students; Decision Making; *Mild Disabilities; DESCRIPTORS *Parent Attitudes; *Parent Participation; *Parent School Relationship; *Parent Teacher Conferences; Preschool Education; Primary Education; Student Evaluation; *Student Placement *African Americans; Baltimore City Public Schools IDENTIFIERS MD ABSTRACT This report describes a project that sought to ascertain the educational expectations and actual levels of participation by Black, low to low-middle income parents of 36 regular and special education students entering three Baltimore (Maryland) public schools. The parents' initial expectations and the development of these expectations over the first 3 years of schooling were examined. The study used a qualitative design that employed interviews, participant observations, and a focus on the process of a series of interpersonal interactions. A central finding was that initial expectations were high for both groups of parents, but that, as time went on, participation became increasingly pro forma for the parents of children receiving special education. These parents experienced increasing difficulties in understanding and negotiating effectively with the special education system. Recommendations of the (1) inclusion of parents in the study include the following: assessment process and explicit explanation to parents of the possible implications of the students' classification and placement; (2) pre-conference meetings before initial and triennial reviews; (3) flexible scheduling and timing of Assessment, Review, and Dismissal meetings with adequate notice to parents including a proposed agenda; and (4) neighborhood or modified neighborhood placement of students. Appendices include the interview protocol and the parent consent form. (DB) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office Educational R search and Improvement EDUC IONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) is document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. FINAL REPORT THE PARENT PROFESSIONAL PARTNERSHIP: AFRICAN AMERICAN PARENTS' PARTICIPATION IN THE SPECIAL EDUCATION PROCESS (N3 Grant No: EDUC. H023C901254 c) (*() and Harry, Elizabeth Report prepared by: Norma Allen, G. N. () ) Margaret J. McLaughlin Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children & Youth, University of Maryland, Department of Special Education, College Park, MD 20742-1161 January 28, 1993 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 Introduction 1 Method 4 Data Collection 10 21(a) Data Analysis (Figure 10) 0 Findings Objective 1 26 Objective 2 32 Objective 3 39 Objective 4 50 Professional Perspectives 52 Conclusion 62 Recommendations 66 S Appendices Parent Interview for Interview: Appendix A Questions Guideline Parent Consent Form Appendix B INTRODUCTION In July, 1989, the Office of Research in the Education of the Handicapped of the U.S. Office of Education, funded a longitudinal three year study, the "Parent-Professional Partnership: Minority Parents' Participation in the Educational Process." This study was conducted by the Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children and Youth (the Institute), of the Special Education Department, of The Co-Principal the University of Maryland, College Park (UMCP). Investigators (CO-PI) were Dr. Margaret J. McLaughlin and Dr. G. The Project Coordinator (PC) was Norma Allen. Elizabeth Harry. The study was conducted in the Baltimore City Public Schools (BCPS). The Parent-Professional Partnership Study: Minority Parents' (Parent-Professional Process Educational Participation the in Study) sought to discover the expectations and actual levels of low to low-middle income, parents participation of of Black, thirty-six (36) regular and special education students, entering The purpose of the study was to public school for the first time. their roles expectations investigate initial as parents' of and to trace the in their children's schooling, participants actual their expectations and these development of of participation, between preschool or kindergarten entry and the end of first or second grade. The research was designed to add two dimensions to existing knowledge regarding parental participation in special education. it was designed to contribute to understanding of the First, 1 reasons for minority parents' low level of participation in special education. Second, the research was designed to contribute to the building of a data base comparing parent participation in regular and special education. This information was perceived as especially important, since increased parental participation in regular education could help to mitigate the disproportionately high rates of referral of such students to special education. Overview of Findings Overall, the Parent-Professional Partnership project has discovered that the parents in the study are concerned about their children's progress and do attempt to be active participants in, monitors and their children's of, education. A central observation was that initial expectations were high for both groups of parents, but that, time went on, participation became as increasingly pro forma for the special education parents. The quality of parental input for this group is of great concern: These parents experienced increasing difficulties negotiating in effectively with, and understanding the processes of, the special education system, and were often deterred by the way parent participation is conceptualized and provided for in the school district. Parents of regular education students depended largely on report cards and other formalized documents for feedback from the school; in the early years, especially, they also utilized classroom observations and regular, informal contacts with the classroom teachers. None of the 18 regular education children studied were deemed "at risk" for special education by the end of 2 the regular education parents each Finally, the study. of continued to have high expectations for their children, while 16 of 18 special education parents' focus became having their children recommended for mainstreaming and dismissal from special education. These general findings, and others, will be discussed in greater 0 depth later in this report. Format of Report The remainder of this report will describe sampling, data collection procedures, data analysis, and findings of the study. The four stated objectives of the research proposal will provide They follow. the format for describing the findings. 1) To find out what low-income, Black parents of 5-6 year old children, entering regular and special education for the first time, expect regarding parental participation in educational decision-making. 2) To discover how these expectations change or develop over the course of three years and how parents explain these developments. To observe the extent and quality of these parents' 3) participation in educational decision-making during the first, second and third years of their children's schooling. 4) To observe similarities and differences in expectations and participation, between parents of children in special education and in regular education. METHOD Qualitative Design During the conceptualization of the project design, it was determined, based on a search of prior research in the field, that a longitudinal study, grounded in a qualitative research approach, would produce the most meaningful data. A longitudinal approach with the same sample of parents, clearly, was critical to any discussion of a process that was expected to show change. Most earlier studies on this subject had utilized single interviews, based on structured questionnaires, which provided parents only a single opportunity to state an opinion on what is essentially a dynamic process of interpersonal interaction (for example, Lynch & Thus, with a longitudinal study, the Stein, 1987; Lowry, 1983). qualitative research approach considered critical was if researchers were to discover parents' real opinions and potential for participation and advocacy. Qualitative research, offers three advantages over the survey First, the traditional close-ended questions used in most model. questionnaires may yield information of a limited and stereotyped nature, as compared to the results expected from more informal, open-ended interviews. Second, through participant observations, parents could be seen responding to the typical demands of a naturalistic context, rather than to the presence of a researcher in an artificial or contrived setting. Further, the researcher had opportunities to compare the information gathered during interviews with actual events. Third, since the purpose of the project was to 4 discover the dynamics of a series of interpersonal interactions, then it was required that the design attempt to focus on that emerging process. Sampling The project personnel had their initial meeting with staff in the BCPS Office of Special Education, in November, 1989. At this point, the Program Coordinator had just been hired, so the purpose of the meeting was twofold: to familiarize the BCPS personnel with the study and the people who would be conducting it (and vice versa), and to obtain information about the city and the BCPS special education program that would be of assistance in choosing During this the three schools where the study would be conducted. meeting, it was also learned that, for BCPS, special education children usually enter school for the first time at the preschool completion of in that classroom until and remain the level in Baltimore has a not every school kindergarten. Moreover, If the preschool program, either regular or special education. neighborhood school does not have a special education preschool, Thus, while the regular the children are bused to the program. the special education preschoolers are neighborhood children, I education children may come from other areas of the city, albeit, close proximity to Special the schools. those usually, in education preschool classes are operated for children with various hearing/visual impairments, multiple disabilities disabilities For purposes of this study, the target population was and so on. drawn from children in preschool classes in the mild disability 5 classifications. Choice of schools. After discussion with BCPS personnel, three schools and alternates were chosen. The three schools targeted for the study are in different geographical areas of the city; have both regular and special education preschool programs; and have predominantly Black student populations. Two are in lower income areas, while the third is in a low-to-middle income area. The principals of the three schools were sent a letter, in January, I In late explaining the project and inviting them to participate. December, the BCPS Superintendent had provided the UMCP with a letter officially endorsing the study; a copy of this was included Follow-up telephone calls were made, with each principal's letter. Meetings and each of the three principals agreed to participate. were held in which each principal received further information regarding the study and assurances of minimal intrusiveness of At that time, project staff into their daily educational programs. staff arranged further appointments to meet the preschool teachers and the ARD (Assessment, Review and Dismissal) Managers, as well as to gain access to the class lists for the actual drawing of the sample. Selection of sample: 36 families. In January, the sample This was a random selection (every nth name), focusing was drawn. on those children who had entered school for the first time in Each school was to have a total of 12 children, September, 1989. The random six regular and six special education, in the study. sample drawn included three alternates from each group in each 0 school, to allow replacement of any of the original families who might not choose to participate. One factor that did impact on the selection's random nature was: no family was chosen that did not have a telephone, as it was decided that regular communication with families with no telephone would be virtually impossible. Letters were sent to 12 families from each school in late January, explaining the project and inviting their participation. This mailing included a form to be returned to the child's teacher, agreeing or not agreeing to participate. After 10 days, follow-up phone calls were made, responding to those who had sent in forms Of the original 36 parents and again inviting those who had not. only two chose not to participate, at this point. contacted, However, there were seven parents who either changed their minds or did not respond to repeated attempts to contact them, so a total of seven alternates had to be utilized. Of the 18 children, seven were girls; the remainder were boys. The actual interviews began in March, 1990, and by July, 1990, 36 interviews had taken place and staff had also attended five ARD meetings. New cohort of six families. At the end of School Year 1990, a new cohort of six families was added to the special education First, it became apparent that the Reasons for this were: group. populations in two of the schools were quite transient, and staff was encountering difficulties maintaining contact with some parents in the original group; because of disconnected phones or moves out of the city; further, the late start of the project, in the first meant recollections their initial that year, parents' of 7 10