This paper addresses three contested, interrelated aspects of the current U.S. special education systems in place in California, under federal and state law: (a) the limited extent to which assessment for special education eligibility meaningfully informs daily instructional service delivery; b) burdens on educators to deliver personalized education without adequate time and tools to craft learning designs calibrated to individual student needs; and (c) ineffective approaches to measuring special education system outcomes at the local, intermediate, and state-wide system level. These issues surface throughout California’s multi-layered special education system.
Together, these dynamics expose a central tension in special education policy and practice: substantial public investment in diagnostic assessment yields relatively little instructional value for students or educators. This misalignment is evident throughout California’s multilayered special education system, particularly at the local education agency (LEA) level, where instructional decisions are made and legal accountability is borne.
While the costs of special education continue to rise, the population of students entering special education continues to grow. The National Center for Education Statistics (2024) indicated that approximately 15% of the school-age population (6-21 year olds and 5 year-olds in kindergarten) received special education services in the 2022-23 school year. This was an all-time high. The percentage of students identified and served with special education varies by state from about 21% in Pennsylvania, New York, and Maine to 12% in Idaho and Maine. The same year, California reported that 14% of its students received special education services. As of the 2024-25 school year, California served 15% of its students with special education services.
There is evidence that special education services can and do benefit students in the long-term, improving high school graduation and employment rates for students with disabilities (Ballis & Heath, 2021). NCES reported that the cost of special education across the U.S. and its 10 territories is estimated at about $40 million. Specific learning disabilities remains the most prevalent disability category followed by speech or language impairment. Other health impairment and autism round out the top four categories.
Ballis and Heath (2021) analyzed special education data from Texas over a 10 year period of time during which Texas implemented policy to hold district-level Special Education enrollment 8.5% of district enrollment. Over the 10 years before the US Department of Education determined that the Texas Special Education enrollment target was illegal, statewide special education enrollment declined by 4.5 percentage points, meeting the Texas benchmark. Ballis and Heath analyzed the impact on the Special Education population during the time that the reduced benchmark was in place in Texas. They found that students de-enrolled from special education services experienced a 2.7% decline in high school completion and 3.6% decrease in likelihood of high school completion. Most of these declines came from Special Education students who spent the majority of their day in general education. Subsequent opportunities for full employment as adults were likely compromised. This policy brief underscores the importance of providing special education services and supports through early intervention and continued services that continue over time as students with disabilities navigate the learning contexts and content they encounter in school.
If special education makes a difference in special education student outcomes, what are the opportunities for strengthening services and outcomes in an economy that is rapidly retooling in the context of expanding population diversity and technology complexity. Eligibility for special education, highly personalized education plans, and difficulty in measuring special education outcomes complicate California’s special education delivery.
