Search

The identification of specific learning disabilities (SLD) remains fraught with controversy and uncertainty about professionals' capacity to appropriately identify special education eligibility. For students from linguistically minoritized backgrounds, the "exclusionary clause" prohibits the identification of learning difficulties primarily attributable to contextual or linguistic factors. Yet the ambiguity of the federal language may hinder application, making critical states' interpretation and corresponding guidance for professional practice in eligibility determination. In this archival study, we systematically reviewed state departments' education policies and related guidance on the identification of multilingual learners with SLD, with a focus on how states have articulated policies and procedures related to the federal exclusionary clause. Our findings demonstrate variability and depth of information across states pertaining to guidance regarding the exclusionary clause. Implications for practice and policy are provided.

Reflexivity, defined as the critical analysis of how one's identity and values influence their scholarship, has been underscored as a crucial element of antioppressive scholarship. Despite its importance, reflexivity, and particularly its documentation, remains relatively uncommon in school psychology scholarship. In the following commentary, we introduce the need for reflexivity as it relates to the field's commitment to antiracism, followed by a brief review of the literature on reflexivity, including its historical foundations and its previous applications within the fields of psychological research. We conclude with recommendations for the school psychology scholarly community for conceptualizing, conducting, and disseminating scholarship.

Although many disciplines saw increases in manuscript submissions coinciding with lockdown measures, numerous studies have documented widening gender gaps in academic productivity. Chi-squared analyses of gendered trends in first author manuscript submission in three school psychology journals during the initial phase of COVID-19 compared to the same time frame in the preceding 3 years did not reveal any significant associations. There was a significant increase over time in the gender gap, with a trend of more female authors than male authors. Women school psychology researchers may not have experienced similar detriments to productivity as in other disciplines, or such detriments were not reflected in submission patterns during this time frame. Limitations of the study and implications for school psychology are provided.

Disproportionality research has been subject to multiple reviews, but there has been less critical examination of the policy dimension of this enduring educational problem. Given the relevance of federal policies, and interpretations thereof, to educators' and scholars' conceptualization of disproportionality and schools' resultant policies and practices, we provide a brief overview of disproportionality scholarship before focusing on its policy dimensions. We describe the role of federal policy and resultant interpretations to how disproportionality is addressed and our approach to identifying and synthesizing these interpretations. We then analyze the themes apparent in these interpretations: requirements for states' numerical analysis of "significant disproportionality," parameters for school systems' allocation of resources for early intervening services when significant disproportionality is found, and schools' obligations for nondiscriminatory application of policies and procedures. Finally, we distill implications for school policies, practices, and procedures. We close with discussion of implications for how disproportionality is conceptualized and studied.

Empirical investigations have found trauma to be disproportionately concentrated in and experienced by minoritized communities (Gherardi et al., 2020; Muldoon et al., 2021). Although trauma also occurs as a result of natural disasters or accidental events, the effects of these traumas tend to be less severe than those resulting from events of human design (Muldoon et al., 2021). The genocide of Indigenous people and the colonization of their lands, the legacy of chattel slavery and ongoing state-sanctioned violence against Black people, the gendered interpersonal violence against women and LGBTQ people, the forced sterilization of disabled people, and chronic poverty are all reflections of a White supremacist, ableist, gendered, and materially exploitative system that has traumatized many. Thus, a commitment to trauma-informed practice necessitates reckoning with the social conditions which produce and perpetuate trauma. In Part 1 of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Social Justice Committee's (SJC) series on trauma as a social justice issue, Parris (2021) had noted the complexities of disparate exposure to trauma and access to related care, emphasizing the imperative for equity-centered trauma-informed practices. In this article, the authors further explore trauma as a social justice issue, starting with a synthesis of key trauma concepts and research on the developmental impacts of trauma, followed by a discussion on what it means to center equity in trauma-informed practice. [For Part 1 of the series, "Social Justice Committee 2021-2022 Focus: Trauma as an Issue of Social Justice," see EJ1311282.]

Children's low academic skills are associated with a variety of behavior problems and maladaptive outcomes throughout childhood and adulthood. Given the prevalence of behavioral disorders is approximately 19% of all US children, understanding of the mechanisms through which academic achievement and externalizing behavior problems interact can inform effective intervention to prevent persistent academic failure, chronic behavioral difficulties, and related negative long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to systematically review research on the association between low academic achievement and externalizing behavior problems, as well as evaluate the research indicating causal linkages, if any, between the two domains. Five databases were searched, including OVID Medline, PsycInfo, Academic Search Premier, ERIC, Education Resource, and PROQUEST. Search terms included statistical designs that could support a hypothetical causal association (e.g., structural equation modeling). We screened a total of 1990 studies, of which 26 met the final inclusion criteria. In total, ten studies reported significant negative effects between the two domains, of which only six reported effect sizes that could be considered meaningful. All but two reported these effects in the direction of early externalizing behavior problems to later academic achievement. Overall, there was inconclusive evidence for either causal or predictive relations. Implications for future research and educational practice are discussed.

The health, economic, and social challenges associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) present a range of threats to students' well-being, psychoeducational experiences, and outcomes, spurring fears for a "lost generation." In this article, we present COVID-19 as a large-scale multisystemic disaster causing massive disruptions and losses, with adversities moderated by the intersectional nature of systemic inequity. We first synthesize the broad effects of COVID-19 as they relate to equity and social justice, followed by the major implications for students and schools, with a focus on intersectional systemic issues. We then propose foundational considerations and resources intended to usher a paradigm shift in how school psychologists' roles and activities are conceptualized in the years to come, ending with key imperatives for practice and graduate education in school psychology.

Youth with disabilities are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, but few studies have investigated the mechanisms by which this occurs. In this study, we considered how juvenile court adjudication and length of commitment in secure facilities contributed to disproportionality in court involvement and detention, addressing an important gap in the intersection of disability and juvenile justice literature. Using linked educational and juvenile justice records of 41,812 youth, we sought to ascertain whether, among juvenile offenders, youth with disabilities had higher likelihood of adjudication as delinquent or placement in secure facilities for longer periods of time compared to youth without disabilities. Results indicated that youth with and without disabilities were adjudicated and placed similarly, suggesting that disparities contributing to overrepresentation of youth with disabilities in detained populations may manifest earlier in youths' involvement in the justice system. We conclude with implications for research, policy, and practice.