Disrupting the Criminalization of Students Identified with Emotional Disturbance: A Scoping Review of Theoretical Approaches

Background and Purpose:

Students identified with Emotional Disturbance (ED) have the highest dropout rate of any other disability category, and 60.5% of these students experience carceral contact within eight years of exiting secondary school (DOE, OCR, 2021; Wagner & Newman, 2012). These outcomes are more pronounced for students of color, who are subject to harsher and more frequent disciplinary referrals, suspensions, and expulsions (DOE, OCR, 2021; Losen et al., 2021). There is an urgent need to examine how practitioners and scholars construct ED, and how their approaches shape practices that criminalize students identified with ED. This study utilized a scoping review to explore the following questions: What theoretical and conceptual frameworks have been applied to empirical studies focused on students identified with ED? Which frameworks facilitate a disruption in the criminalization of this population? How does constructing ED through a social model of disability shape practices and interventions differently than constructing ED through a medical model?

Methods:

A systematic search was conducted across 3 databases (Academic Search Complete, ERIC, APAPsycInfo) using key words focused on: emotional disturbance, school, theory. Results yielded 1,213 articles. Studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers for inclusion criteria: 1) questions or purposes focused on “emotional disturbance,” or students “at-risk” for such a label, as defined in federal legislation, and 2) explicitly stated a theoretical framework. The PRISMA-ScR protocol was utilized to ensure rigor and reviewers came to consensus on final articles included (n=24). Data were extracted through a full-text review, identifying the theoretical framework, study design, settings and participants, methods, and major findings of each study. Data were analyzed to determine the study’s disability paradigm (social or medical), and how the framework shaped the study’s construction of ED, and the practices and interventions of focus.

Results:

Of the 24 studies included, 15 utilized theories that followed a medical model of disability. Findings indicated that these studies focused on individual interventions, the most common being self-regulation interventions (n=5). A social model of disability was utilized in 9 studies. Of these studies, 5 utilized a theory rooted in critical race theory and intersectionality. These studies examined interventions that focused on systemic factors impacting ED such as school climate and peer victimization. Disability Critical Race Theory (“DisCrit”) was identified (n=3) as a framework that examined the relationship between ED and practices that propel criminalization.

Conclusions and Implications:

Findings support the need to situate ED on a holistic, multi-level spectrum that examines students’ emotional and behavioral needs rather than a medicalized construction as a binary disability category. Approaching ED through a social model of disability encourages practitioners and scholars to examine how systemic factors and intersectional identities impact emotional disturbance rather than the individual focus of medical model interventions. Utilizing a DisCrit framework appeared to prompt interventions to dismantle school practices and procedures that criminalize students identified with ED, and encouraged a shift toward school-based and systems-based interventions that facilitate wellbeing. Social workers, as interdisciplinary practitioners and scholars, are well-positioned to facilitate such a collaborative paradigm shift.