Inquiry Oasis Season 2: Kirsten Lansey

Join us in learning about Dr. Kirsten Lansey's research and what brought her into her research in today's episode of the Inquiry Oasis podcast.

Dr. Lansey is an Assistant Professor in special education at the College of Education.  Her overarching goal is to conduct research, teaching, and service that contributes to systemic educational change so that students with complex support needs receive inclusive and equitable learning opportunities that support them in reaching their goals.

In today's episode, Dean Berry and Dr. Lansey dive into her research, discussing intersectionality, education policy and the impact on special education, multi-tiered systems of supports, and disability studies and critical race theory (DISCRIT).

Dr. Lansey recommends the following reading in today's podcast:
Julia White et al. (2019)  - Same as it Ever Was: The Nexus of Race, Ability, and, Place, and One Urban School District  

Transcript

Jeffrey Anthony:

Welcome to the Inquiry Oasis, the University of Arizona College of Education's podcast here in the heart of the Sonoran Desert. We bring you conversations with our esteemed faculty members and staff, whose research impacts lives from Southern Arizona to the far reaches of the globe. We explore the transformative power of education in this border town, where diverse cultures and ideas converge, weaving a tapestry of innovation with compassion and a sense of wonder.

So, join us as we journey through the sands of curiosity, unearthing insights that enrich and inspire. Sit back and relax. As we invite you to dive into the Inquiry Oasis. 

Dean Berry:

Hi, I'm Robert Berry. I'm the Dean of the College of Education, and welcome to the Inquiry Oasis. Today we'll be talking with Dr. Kirsten Lansey.

Dr. Lansey's work is really focused on these issues around, you know, the intersection between students educational placement and special education. Her work is described as the intersection between social justice, uh, humanization, and the idea of seeing students with special needs being in places and spaces where they can have opportunities to grow, learn, and engage.

And so, when we think about her work, we think about this notion of how placement influenced decisions about students placing special needs. We also think about this idea of disrupting the educational system so that students are not in segregated spaces, but in spaces where they can thrive and feel supported and grow and learn.

So, I look forward to learning a lot from Dr. Lansey and her work, and how her work has impacted this notion about students’ placements, particularly students with special needs and their placements in schools and classrooms. I want to start with this question, and I want you to share a few words that represent why you are passionate about the work that you do.

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

I think the words that describe why I'm passionate is, uh, social justice, that's two words, but really a sense of justice for students with disabilities and intersecting identities. Dehumanization, because I think that's sort of the root of why social justice is needed. Um, and then also inclusion, which is the sort of primary focus in relation to what I do in regards to placement of students with disabilities in general education settings.

Dean Berry:

Well, well, thank you for that. There seems to be a thread across those three words. And so this idea of social justice, dehumanization, and how those things are connected to the work that I've read, the articles I've read here. So, tell us more about the focus of your research, you know, and talk a little bit about that.

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

Yeah, so like you said, there's sort of a common thread across the research that I do and, um, primarily I focus on identifying inequities in segregated educational placements for students with complex support needs and multiply marginalized students. And so, um, students with complex support needs are those who, oftentimes have a disability label of intellectual disability, multiple disabilities, or autism.

They need support across multiple domains, like academics, behavior, communication perhaps. And they oftentimes take the state alternate assessment. So, they might be part of that 1 percent of students who, uh, an IEP team or an educational, um, program team define as the student having significant cognitive disability, which is supposed to represent 1 percent of the student population.

And so, those are the students that I, you know, have a background in as far as, uh, educating and supporting. And then also, you know, molding the worlds of, and the theories looking at students who are multiply marginalized. And so, you know, students of color with disabilities and how that, um, plays into placement.

So those are sort of the, the broad categories of, um, of students that I'm sort of looking at in regards to how student identities, intersecting identities, uh, impact educational placement. And so, the reason behind sort of exploring disparities in educational placement among these students is because students’ educational placement directly impacts students’ experiences and outcomes.

So students who are educated in segregated placements, uh, so self contained schools, or self contained classrooms on general education campus schools, have poorer outcomes. And we know this from over 40 years of research. that students have poor short and long term outcomes across domains, across academics, behavior, communication, and also long term outcomes, employment, post-secondary education, quality of life.

So why aren't things changing? And so really the intent to sort of identify these inequities and how they manifest within our society, within different levels of our educational system, is to figure out how we can contribute to systemic educational change across These levels. 

Dean Berry:

So, let's talk about this placement, uh, and the idea of placement. Can you talk a little bit how the placement process worked and then, and, and how this process then contributes to the inequities that you just described. 

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

As I mentioned, each student with an IEP or an individualized education program, or each student with a disability has an IEP team. That consists of special education teachers, general education teachers, related service providers, their parents or family, and ideally themselves in that team.

And that team ultimately decides whether a student will be and where a student will be placed. And placement right now, in regard, in uh, sort of federal policy describes placement as a percentage of time in general education. So, they might be what we consider general education placement would be over 80 percent of the time.

In general education, 80 percent of their school day, it might be 40 to 79%. So that might be historically like thinking about a resource setting where they might be pulled out during certain classes. And then there's less than 40%. And that's, you know, you can think of like a self-contained classroom.

There's also self-contained schools for students with disabilities. So that would be like 0 percent of the time in general education. So those are the four sort of primary placements. Uh, there's also homebound and other things like that, but those are the four primary, especially for students with more complex support needs, they might be placed, for example, in homebound.

Uh, self-contained school or separate school for disabilities, students with disabilities. And so, the IEP team ultimately gets together and decides where the students should be placed. So which one of those categories should the student be in? And federal policy right now states that students should be educated in the least restrictive environment, which would be, uh, over 80 percent in general education, to the greatest extent appropriate, uh, alongside their peers without disabilities.

The problem is that even though the policy clearly has a sort of equity focus and inclusion focus, the way that it's being implemented in practice is it changes. It changes by school, it changes by district, uh, different states. And so, uh, what we see is that these IEP teams make decisions based on external factors, oftentimes, instead of what's individualized for the student and driven by federal policy.

So, they might bring in their own assumptions about the student sitting in front of them. So, for example, if this student doesn't use verbal speech to communicate. There might be these biases and assumptions that they bring into this decision, saying, well, they don't use verbal speech to communicate. They have an intellectual disability label. It makes most sense for them to be in a more segregated setting. 

It also is driven by sort of localized policies within the school and district too. A lot of times students will come in kindergareten into a school, and that school will say, oh, you know what? They go to their IEP meeting before the school starts, and they say, we have a wonderful self-contained classroom that will really meet the needs of your child with Down syndrome.

And that placement just is sort of automatic, and parents trust those, those, uh, perspectives, and they, they allow that, right? And, and the student's placed in a self-contained classroom, and the likelihood of them, leaving that placement ever again is very minimal. So, once they're placed in the segregated setting, they're likely to stay there for the rest of their educational experience.

Dean Berry:

Wow, so this is interesting. So, the idea of educational segregation for students with special needs really impacts students’ longevity as they persist through school or through their schooling. And so, what policy recommendations might you have? Or practices, best practices that might have an impact on disrupting, uh, segregation in the ways that you just described.

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

Yeah, I mean it's a very complex subject. Um, I think in regards to practices, you know, we, there's evidence to support practices such as multi-tiered systems of support. So instead of focusing on an educational placement by a percentage of time in general education, instead of focusing on, what supports and services does that student need to be successful within general education contexts?

So for example, you know multi-tiered systems of support allow for continual assessment of students and allow for practices to be implemented across time so that they're able, you know, as they change and need different supports and it really focuses on the supports and services that the student needs rather than, okay, once they're placed in a placement, let's say they're in segregated, uh, self-contained classroom.

Instead, what we're doing is really focusing on sort of this remedial or teaching sort of basic functional skills and they're kind of stuck there focusing on like skills such as tying their shoes or writing their name. And so, practices that focus on the supports and services that students need, I think, is really what should be the foundation.

But it can't just be, okay, schools need to implement these practices. We need to have sort of larger change to be able to have that as a requirement. So, for example, we know universal design is really important. Um, so teaching to all students versus, uh, teaching to a, you know, subset of students. Also culturally responsive practices, you know, ensuring that, that the student's background and culture is a valued part of their education and incorporated within it.

And so, combining these practices is really important. As far as including students within general education context. 

Dean Berry:

I want to step back a little bit, and I want to ask you this kind of broader question. So, when you look at the broader community, why should this research be valued? How, you know, why should your work be valued?

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

That's a great question. So, first off, I think it needs to be valued because we're dehumanizing and devaluing a large population of our community. And that, to me, is an innate problem. You know, the norms around segregation are so innate for students with disabilities. People think, well, they have complex needs, they have disabilities.

This separate setting makes sense to meet their individualized needs. So, no problem. We know, though, from research, that that's not the case, at all.

And so the community, I think, in, in Arizona and broadly really needs to think about, okay, wait, if that's not the case, then what are we doing to these students or these people by segregating them in self-contained schools and classrooms after they, you know, graduate, for example, segregated in, in day programs instead of, you know, being employed, being my coworkers, being my friends, right?

It's very, you know, isolating. And I think that's an innate problem that we all should be concerned with. You know, thinking more like practically, for example, these are people who can be contributing members of society. That is just this assumption that they can't and they can. So, if we look at it through like a value perspective, not only through the humanizing part of, of people and saying this is just wrong, but also it's like, well, what about in society?

Like, these are diverse perspectives from people that need to be heard and need to be valued. And as a community, you know, locally in, you know, at the U of A and largely as a large community in Arizona and the United States, like, we need to value diverse perspectives and that includes people with disabilities.

Dean Berry:

As I was reading your work, I know there were some, for me, there were some surprising outcomes. And when I say surprising outcomes, really how you push in on least restrictive environment, challenging this notion of percentage of time and thinking about. Access. And so I'm going to pose this question to you.

Across your work, what's, what's been some surprising outcomes for you? 

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

I think for me, speaking about one, uh, research article in particular, um, looking at, we did a, a statistical analysis of students who receive special education services in Utah. So all students in public school, uh, across a six year period who receive special education services.

It was over 170, 000 students. And we found, we looked at how, um, student characteristics impact their educational placement and intersecting characteristics. And we found that, I guess, no surprise, first off, we found that students who take the alternate assessment and students who have disability labels associated with complex support needs, multiple disabilities, intellectual disability and autism, the likelihood of them being included in general education classrooms for over 80 percent of the day significantly dropped, purely just by having that disability label or designation.

What was also surprising was looking at the intersecting identities of students. And so, we found that the placement patterns of students of color and white students across autism and intellectual disability labels were reversed and disproportionate. And so that was really interesting to find as well because it sort of suggests that there might be underlying factors such as family privilege and influence or IEP team sort of bias in these placement decisions of over labeling students, white students with autism, that is linked to more services, more funding, less stigma, historically. And labeling more students of color with intellectual disability, which has historical roots in eugenics, feeble mindedness, and there's, there's a, it's not by chance.

And this also has implications for placement. And so, I think those are sort of the big sort of factors that I think are important to look at and not necessarily surprising in that sense, but when they manifest in different placement outcomes. So, for example, more students of color with intellectual disability were placed in more inclusive settings.

That's a bit surprising, right? You would think it would be opposite, but we also know there's a way disproportionate number of students of color with intellectual disability. So how does ableism play into that? Well, ableism plays into that because there's more students of color labeled with intellectual disability with less complex needs.

And so, they might have disability, or placements of 40 to 79 percent. Uh, versus the white students with intellectual disability with more complex needs who may be more segregated. And so, there's this interplay between race and disability that is playing out differently across different contexts. In this case, we're looking at Utah, but it doesn't necessarily mean that that's the same across states.

There's huge discrepancies in placement of students with intellectual disability across states. 

Dean Berry:

Surprising to me as well. So, thank you for that. I, I have another question that kind of touches on your work and others. So, if you could think about a book or a paper that is meaningful to you to recommend to the audience, what would that be?  What would you recommend? 

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

Yeah, that's a really hard question because there's so many good ones. But I, I took this question as like, what was most meaningful to me at a time when I was seeking more knowledge. 

And so, I recommend a paper by Julia White et al. (2019) it's called Same as it Ever Was: The Nexus of Race, Ability, and, Place, and One Urban School District. And, this came out when I was in my doctoral program and really looking at trying to understand, like, these dynamics that existed that I didn't know a lot about.

And she incorporated critical race spatial analysis and DISCRIT, or disability studies and critical race theory. And looking at how, not only does race and disability sort of overlay, but also location and place. And she found that the trends within this school district when looking at sort of the intersections of those student characteristics, their placement within the district mirrored historical redlining practices.

And so, there's a dynamic of place and location that also is influencing educational placement, and disparities that exist because we know obviously that, that impacts student outcomes. 

Dean Berry:

Is there anything I didn't ask you that you want to bring up, or is there something that you want to touch in on that we have not yet touched in on?

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

No, I think, I mean, you asked really a lot of, of what I, I think is really important to share. Um, so no, I, I don't. 

Dean Berry:

All right. Well, so I, I do have one more question. One more question. Is there a story or a narrative that you, that, that, that's been a part of your experience that really just kind of touched in on you, that, that really kind of propelled your work?

Is there some type of influential thing that really propelled you to engage in this kind of work? A person or a situation or something that kind of impacts you in that way?

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

Yeah, definitely. I have a couple that come into mind. One is positive in the sense that like got me into it teaching and continuing the work and one is kind of negative. Do you have a preference? 

Dean Berry:

No, you decide. Totally up to you.

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

I think I'm going to talk about the negative one because I think it's important for people to sort of understand why this is such a dire need to focus on this. During my doctoral program, I, um, I was a research assistant in an IES grant, and I went around and collected data on students in different educational placements.

You know, all sorts of data, uh, regarding, like, their engagement, um, interactions with teachers, like, everything. We observed them for hours, collecting data to see sort of what students experienced within these different contexts, or different educational placements. And I was in a self-contained setting in a, in a different state, observing a student who was part of this study.

This student had multiple disabilities and a communication device, so he didn't use verbal speech to communicate, he had an alternative communication device, I think it was an iPad, uh, with a communication system. And I remember, you know, sitting in this, in this self-contained classroom, I think grades spanned of at least three years, so third to sixth graders within one classroom, and they start off and they do circle time, third to sixth graders, right?

So, circle time, what you would see in kindergarten, where you do the days of the week, you point at the numbers, you sing a song. And then transitioned to centers. 

And the student that I was watching, his communication device was on his desk and the, the teachers in the classroom sort of supported him to walk over to a carpet where they dumped out blocks, Legos, large Legos.

And he sat there with one other student, disengaged from that other student. They were sort of doing their own thing for almost, I'd say an hour and a half doing absolutely nothing. The communication device was not even accessible. And that really resonated with me. They then sort of transitioned back to his seat with his communication device.

And the teacher said, you know, you didn't do this thing yesterday. I can't remember exactly what it was, but you didn't do, you didn't follow directions yesterday, so you can't go to lunch with your peers. So, you have to eat lunch in here, and he starts crying. 

And we sat there after circle time, sitting on the carpet with no academic engagement whatsoever for an hour and a half, and then having some sort of punishment from a previous day's behavior. It was just, to me, it was just unethical. 

And I was like, these are the settings that people assume are ethical. And I'm not saying all segregated classrooms have this type of context, right, but this is the context in which I observed along with others. People assume that this context leads to individualized support and, you know, better outcomes and things like that.

But if you were to see oftentimes what occurs within these settings, you'd be shocked. 

Dean Berry:

Wow, wow, a very powerful story and the idea of how it impacts students. So, when you humanize the situation and you see the person, the individual, you see their experiences. So, thank you so much for sharing that because I think that sometimes we miss that.

We miss the, the, the experiences and being seen. Who's seen, who's heard, who's engaged, and I think that's significantly important, um, when we think about children and students in classrooms. Thank you, Dr. Kirsten Lancey for, uh, being with us, uh, today. Sharing your stories, sharing your research, and sharing your work has been significantly important as we think about students with disabilities.

And we think about dehumanization, the social, social justice, and the idea of the experiences that students may receive in segregated spaces. Uh, and, and thinking about, you know, the possibilities, how we can think about policies, practices, that can provide, you know, opportunities. You know, not this kind of trajectory that leaves students behind, but a trajectory that sees, have students to see the possibility of who they are and who they can come, come to be.

And I think this is part of the goal that we want, as we talk about the research of faculty in Inquiry Oasis, really thinking about how our work has the impact to move us to spaces that are equitable for all people within our communities and our shared spaces. So, thank you so much for your work. I've learned so much from you.

Dr. Kirsten Lansey:

Thank you. Thank you for having me.