Authors Aldridge and Goldman and Anthony Rebora argued that despite tremendous improvements following the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1975, related problems persist to the disproportionate provision of services to minority ethnic groups in special education programs (SPED). While author Rebora, in her article Keeping Special Ed in Proportion, provided an unusual look at how service imbalance is actually determined, authors Aldridge and Goldman expertly described this trend from a multicultural perspective in the article The Over and Underrepresentation in Special Education Programs. . In the same way that both articles examined the consistency of this trend over the past three decades, both articles concluded with a focus on problem-solving measures in the classroom, but also at the school and district levels. As a result of the persistence of this Furthermore, author Anthony Rebora deduced that cultural biases within the classroom perpetuated the consistency of the disproportionate provision of SPED services to minority ethnic groups (2011). Similarly, authors Aldridge and Goldman, in their article The Over and Underrepresentation in Special Education Programs, suggested that misconceptions regarding the design and implementation of multicultural education programs continue to exacerbate this problem equally (2010 ). Initially, Aldridge and Goldman stated that the focus of these programs “is on understanding and learning to negotiate cultural diversity…” but later stated that multicultural pedagogy “seeks to achieve just and equitable educational opportunities for all students, in particularly for minorities and economically disadvantaged people." ” (2010). This last statement, halfway through the paper… Goldman, and author Anthony Rebora discussed various factors that perpetuate the persistence of disproportionate provision of services to ethnic minority groups in special education programs (SPED).over the past three decades. Both articles cited present a myriad of well-written solutions that support the use of culturally responsive curricula to meet the needs of the diverse student populations we now find in our public school systems. if this trend continues, the reader might conclude, as Levy and Murnane did in 1996, that “students who are unable to negotiate the “new basic skills” will be left behind in the new 21st century economy” (as cited in Aldridge and Goldman, 2010). Of course, educators face a monumental task. We will certainly meet the challenge and, with certainty, elect changes to the curriculum for all students.