## Facts

- A class action was brought on behalf of Black children in Chicago public schools who had been or would be placed in “educable mentally handicapped” (EMH) special classes.
- Black students were about 62% of the district’s enrollment but about 82% of students placed in EMH classes.
- Chicago used a multi-step EMH placement process involving teacher referral, principal and screening committee review, Special Education Bureau evaluation, psychologist assessment, and a multidisciplinary staff conference.
- Standardized IQ tests were frequently administered as part of the evaluation; plaintiffs alleged the tests were culturally biased against Black children and drove disproportionate EMH placement.
- Parents had procedural opportunities to contest placements, including hearings and judicial review.
- After extensive discovery, the court conducted a three-week bench trial with expert testimony, including item-by-item review of test questions.

## Issues

1. Whether the standardized IQ tests used in Chicago’s EMH identification process were unlawfully culturally biased against Black children under constitutional or federal statutory protections.
2. Whether the disproportionate placement of Black students in EMH classes, combined with use of the tests, established unlawful discrimination.
3. Whether Chicago’s EMH placement procedures, viewed as a whole, unlawfully relied on IQ scores without adequate safeguards.

## Decision

- The court entered judgment for defendants and upheld continued use of the challenged IQ tests in EMH placements.
- The court found only a small number of test items were culturally biased or sufficiently suspect, and those items would not significantly affect any Black child’s score.
- The court concluded the tests, considered as a whole, were not shown to be generally invalid or unlawfully biased against Black students.
- The court held EMH placement decisions did not rest solely on test scores, but on a multi-factor process involving professional evaluation and review with procedural protections for parents.
- Statistical disproportionality alone was held insufficient to prove unlawful discrimination absent stronger proof of biased instruments or discriminatory application.

## Legal Principles

- A generalized claim that intelligence tests are inherently biased is insufficient; plaintiffs must provide specific, empirical proof that the challenged instrument is unlawfully biased in a way that materially affects results.
- Identifying a limited number of problematic items does not invalidate a standardized test absent a showing that the items significantly affect scores or placement outcomes.
- Racial disproportionality in special-education placement, without proof that the criteria or their administration are unlawfully discriminatory, does not by itself establish a constitutional or statutory violation.
- A placement system that uses IQ scores as one factor within a layered decisionmaking process, supported by professional judgment and procedural opportunities to contest placement, is less likely to be found unlawfully discriminatory.

## Conclusion

The court rejected a broad challenge to Chicago’s use of standardized IQ tests for EMH placements, finding that only a few items were problematic and did not materially affect scores, and that the district’s multi-step, multi-criteria placement process with parental review mechanisms did not establish unlawful discrimination despite substantial racial disproportionality.


Parents in Action on Special Education (PASE) v. Hannon, 506 F. Supp. 831 (N.D. Ill. 1980)