"Larry P. vs. Riles": IQ Testing in Classrooms Term Paper by scribbler

"Larry P. vs. Riles": IQ Testing in Classrooms
An explanation of a legal case that took place in California in 1975.
# 152508 | 1,927 words | 5 sources | APA | 2013 | US
Published on Feb 28, 2013 in Education (Education Psychology) , African-American Studies (Racism) , Law (General)

$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now


This paper discusses a California class-action case that focused on IQ testing of young black children, that stated the results caused those children to be unfairly placed in educable mentally retarded (EMR) classrooms. The paper also looks at the role and responsibility of educational psychologists, particularly in the use of diagnostic tools.

Statement of Legal or Ethical Issue
Impact on School Psychologists
External Factors

From the Paper:

''In 1971, six black elementary students challenged the constitutionality of the use of standardized intelligence tests to place black children in classes for the educable mentally retarded (EMR). The district court certified the name plaintiffs as a class of all black San Francisco school children who were classified as mentally retarded on the bases of IQ test results, and this class was later expanded to include all California school children who had been or in the future could be so classified. In 1975, the state of California placed a moratorium on IQ testing for EMR placement. The trial court determined that the use of IQ tests to place black children in EMR classes violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, and the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions. The trial court enjoined use of standardized IQ tests to identify black EMR children or to place black children into EMR classes, and ordered the re-evaluation of every black child that was identified as EMR . The defendants (school superintendent and school districts) were also ordered to eliminate disproportionate placement of black children in EMR classes. Riles, the California Superintendent of Public Instruction, appealed the trial court's decision. The appellate court affirmed on the statutory grounds and reversed on the federal and state constitutional issues. What the appellate court determined was that IQ could not be used to place black students in special education classes, and, expanding upon the trial court's decision, that IQ should not be used in placement decisions for black students.''

Sample of Sources Used:

  • California State Dept. of Education. (1989). Larry P. Task Force Report. Policy and Alternative Assessment Guideline Recommendations. Resources in Special Education. Sacramento, CA.
  • Evans-Pongratz, H. and Yaklin, B. (2006). Revisiting Larry P. v. Riles. Retrieved May 24, 2010 from California Association of School Psychologists Surveys website: http://www.caspsurveys.org/NEW/pdfs/lp1.pdf
  • Larry P. v. Riles, U.S. Court of Appeals, 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir.) (1984).
  • Paris, D. (1997). Race and testing. Retrieved May 24, 2010, from Hamilton College website: http://academics.hamilton.edu/government/dparis/govt375/spring97/Race&Testing/rt6.html
  • Silva, A. (2003). What is a school psychologist? Retrieved May 24, 2010 from National Association of School Psychologists website: http://www.nasponline.org/about_sp/whatis.aspx

Cite this Term Paper:

APA Format

"Larry P. vs. Riles": IQ Testing in Classrooms (2013, February 28) Retrieved August 18, 2022, from https://www.academon.com/term-paper/larry-p-vs-riles-iq-testing-in-classrooms-152508/

MLA Format

""Larry P. vs. Riles": IQ Testing in Classrooms" 28 February 2013. Web. 18 August. 2022. <https://www.academon.com/term-paper/larry-p-vs-riles-iq-testing-in-classrooms-152508/>