This study tackled the overrepresentation of students with a Turkish migration background in special education referrals in the Austrian context. The overrepresentation of minority pupils in special education referrals can be tracked in many countries, and the lack of transparency and uniformity in referrals is a hot topic to discuss. The disproportioned distribution of students with a migration background in special education schools is a topic that has been tackled with different perspectives for decades (Dyson & Gallannaugh, 2008; Harry, 2014; Reichenberg & Berhanu, 2017). As Skiba et al. (2008, p.264) put it, the disproportionate placement of immigrants and minorities is one of the “most long-standing and intransigent” problems of the special education research field. However, despite the years of research and discussion, we have limited understanding of the complex issue of overrepresented special education referrals of immigrant groups (Sullivan & Artiles, 2011; Sweller, Graham & van Bergen, 2012). However, forming a coherent explanation of this issue is challenged by several factors such as; dependency on the available data sets, divergent or contradictory research findings, linear explanations, too much attribution to some certain variables (Sullivan & Bal, 2013), culture-specificity, nation-specificity (Gabel, Curcic, Powell, Khader & Albee, 2009), or various definitions across educational systems (Berhanu & Dyson, 2012). With this research, I tried to defeat the challenges for a comprehensive understanding by embracing an innovative stance, by tackling the interaction of diverse variables, by drawing the data from first-hand experiences, and by not denying the co-construction of the researcher. The target was to ask and look for what we can learn about the overrepresentation by relying on the experiences of the parents, teachers, school directors, school psychologists, and school inspectors. The study avoided the oversimplifications and did not focus only on certain background variables.

With this study, an innovative stance was adopted by not attributing such a manifold issue only to socio-demographic or individual factors. The aim was to come up with sophisticated research by giving participants an active voice, drawing data from first-hand experiences, and accepting the co-construction of the researcher. The study had a holistic perspective and included various stakeholders affected by or affecting the same process, namely; the special education referral of students with Turkish background in the Austrian school system. Asking and looking for what we can learn about the overrepresentation and relying on the interpretation of experiences required a flexible epistemological stance. As the method, constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2014) was recruited. Teachers, parents, school inspectors, school directors, school psychologists, and special education teachers were the data sources. Narratives via intensive interviews were the main data collection tools supported with researcher diary, memos, group discussion, and extant texts, such as educational statistics, newspaper articles, reports, and school policy statements. The data collected from 25 participants were analyzed with the guidelines of constructivist grounded theory in an iterative way. By following the guidelines of constructivist grounded theory, the data was analyzed through initial, focused, and theoretical coding in a constant comparative way. The data collection and analysis were also conducted concurrently. Through excessive memoing, diagramming, and commenting, the coding and categorizing steps led to the formation of a core category that could relate to all other categories. The core category showed what was happening in other categories. The next step was the theory generation. By asking the question of ‘why’ to the core category, the study came up with a theory that could explain why the observed actions were happening. The main criteria of sampling were also shaped by the country context about special education. As Austria accepts the mother tongue as the criterion in defining the students with a migration background, this study used the reported colloquial language of the families regardless of their citizenship. The focused students in this study were schooled in special education schools and diagnosed with one of the eight eligible special education need categories suggested by the national ministry.

The findings of the study showed that special education referral means different practices and experiences for different groups of participants. The referral process is experienced with challenges, suspicion, and ambiguity, which is a reflection of the mutual distrust that the people have in this process. The distrust is the core of the experiences, relationships, interactions, and thoughts about not only special education but also larger dimensions, such as educational equity, parental and teacher competencies, immigrants, the Turkish community, and the school system. Special education was a distrusted and rejected concept for the parents. Being referred to special education was related mainly to the burden of negative outcomes such as hindrance of language learning, good employment, and economic integration which are expected from immigrants. On the other hand, special education was a label of abnormality for the families or their social and cultural groups which points to the embeddedness in social and cultural groups. Besides, the distrust was found to be within the school and among school authorities. The guidelines and rules that lead the special education referral are distrusted as they yield to power clash, ambiguity, and challenges among teachers, school directors, and regional inspectors. The experiences of these groups during special education referral could show how power is exercised and experienced in the school settings as well as how and under which conditions family involvement takes place for immigrant families. Cultural responsiveness of schools and teacher education is another important point that will be discussed in relation to the findings of the study.

Berhanu, G., & Dyson, A. (2012). Special education in Europe, overrepresentation of minority students. In J. Banks (ed.), Encyclopedia of diversity in education. pp- 2071-2073. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory. SAGE: London. Dyson, A. & Gallannaugh, F. (2008). Disproportionality in special needs education in England. The Journal of Special Education, 42(1), 36-46. Gabel, S. L., Curcic, S., Powell, J. J. W., Khader, K., & Albee, L. (2009). Migration and ethnic group disproportionality in special education: An exploratory study. Disability & Society 24, 625-639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09687590903011063 Graham, L. & Slee, R. (2008). An illusory interiority: Interrogating the discourses of inclusion. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40(2), 277-293. Harry, B. (2014). The disproportionate placement of ethnic minorities in special education. In Florian, L. (Ed.) The Sage Handbook of Special Education. London: SAGE. Hosp, J. L., & Reschly D. J. (2004). Disproportionate representation of minority students in special education: Academic, demographic, and economic predictors. Exceptional Children, 70, 185-199. Sullivan, A. L. & Bal, A. (2013). Disproportionality in special education: Effects of individual and school variables on disability risk. Exceptional Children, 79 (4), 475-494. Sweller, N., Graham, L.J., & van Bergen, P. (2012). The minority report: Disproportionate representation in Australia’s largest education system. Exceptional Children, 79(1), 107.125. Valenzuela, J. S., Copeland, S. R., Huaqing Qi, C., & Park, M. (2006). Examining educational equity: Revisiting the disproportionate representation of minority students in special education. Exceptional Children, 72, 425-441.