The relationship between states' interpretation of the IDEA (1997) and rates of identification for children with emotional disturbance: A grounded theory comparative analysi

The problem considered by the study was states' interpretation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (1997) and variation in the rates of identification for children with emotional disturbance (ED), in the 6 to 17-year-old range, for special education services in school systems. Variation may indicate that children with ED are at risk for inequity in their rights and protections as children with disabilities. Previous research suggests that the inequity may be based, in part, on their state's interpretation of the IDEA (1997).;This study examined states' interpretation of the federal definition of ED and states' assessment procedures for the identification of children with ED. The ATLAS.ti textual analysis software was used to compare states' regulations, for the fifty states and the District of Columbia, using a grounded theory methodology.;Results indicate considerable variation in states' regulations. Twenty-three states (45.1%) used the federal definition of ED. Six states' definitions (11.18%) omit one or more of the characteristics or clauses specified in the federal regulations. Eighteen states (35.3%) provide more elaborate guidelines on the characteristics of ED, while four states' regulations (7.8%) were conceptually alternative to the federal definition of ED.;Comparative findings of states' assessment procedures for children with ED indicate that a majority of states specify procedures beyond the general provisions required for all children with disabilities under the IDEA (1997). States' regulations frequently require that, among other measures, functional behavior assessment be used in the identification process.;The findings of the study do not suggest a clear relationship between states' definitions of ED, assessment procedures, and rates of identification for children with ED. However, states that use the federal definition of ED were more likely, than states with alternative definitions, to identify fewer children. States that identify more children tended to omit or interpret the federal social maladjustment exclusionary clause than states with lower rates. States with higher identification rates tended to broadly interpret the federal requirement that the characteristics of ED should adversely affect a child's educational performance to mean more than academic performance.